content
stringlengths 1
15.9M
|
|---|
\subsection{Power System Model}
We consider a connected power network composed of $n$ buses indexed by $i \in \mathcal{V} := \{1,\dots, n\} $ and transmission lines denoted by unordered pairs $\{i,j\} \in \mathcal{E}$, where $\mathcal{E}$ is a set of $2$-element subsets of $\mathcal{V}$. As illustrated by the block diagram in Fig. \ref{fig:model2}, the system dynamics are modeled as a feedback interconnection of bus dynamics and network dynamics.
The input signals $p_\mathrm{in} := \left(p_{\mathrm{in},i}, i \in \mathcal{V} \right) \in \real^n$ and $d_\mathrm{p} := \left(d_{\mathrm{p},i}, i \in \mathcal{V} \right) \in \real^n$ represent power injection set point changes and power fluctuations around the set point, respectively, and $n_\omega := \left(n_{\omega,i}, i \in \mathcal{V} \right) \in \real^n $ represents frequency measurement noise. The weighting functions $\hat{W}_\mathrm{p}(s)$ and $\hat{W}_\omega{}(s)$ can be used to adjust the size of these disturbances in the usual way. The output signal $\omega:=\left(\omega_i, i \in \mathcal{V} \right) \in \real^n$ represents the bus frequency deviation from its nominal value. We now discuss the dynamic elements in more detail.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{power_network_model_F_copy.eps}
\caption{Block diagram of power network.}\label{fig:model2}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Bus Dynamics} The bus dynamics that maps the net power bus imbalance $u_\mathrm{P} = \left( u_{\mathrm{P},i}, i \in \mathcal{V} \right) \in \real^n$ to the vector of frequency deviations $\omega$ can be described as a feedback loop that comprises a forward-path $\hat{G}(s)$ and a feedback-path $\hat{C}(s)$, where $\hat{G}(s) := \diag {\hat{g}_i(s), i \in \mathcal{V}}$ and $\hat{C}(s) := \diag {\hat{c}_i(s), i \in \mathcal{V}} $ are the transfer function matrices of generators and inverters, respectively.
\paragraph{Generator Dynamics}
The generator dynamics are composed of the standard swing equations with a turbine, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sw}
m_i \dot{\omega}_i = - d_i \omega_i + q_{\mathrm{r},i} +q_{\mathrm{t},i} + u_{\mathrm{P},i} \,,
\end{equation}
where $m_i>0$ denotes the aggregate generator inertia, $d_i>0$ the aggregate generator damping, $q_{\mathrm{r},i}$ the controllable input power produced by the grid-connected inverter, and $q_{\mathrm{t},i}$ the change in the mechanical power output of the turbine.
The turbine does not react to the frequency deviation $\omega_i$ until it exceeds a preset threshold $\omega_{\epsilon}\geq0$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:turb}
\tau_i\dot q_{\mathrm{t},i}=\varphi_{\omega_\epsilon}(\omega_i) - q_{\mathrm{t},i}
\end{equation}
with
$$\varphi_{\omega_\epsilon}(\omega_i):=
\begin{cases}
-{r_{\mathrm{t},i}^{-1}}(\omega_i+\omega_{\epsilon}) & \omega_i \leq -\omega_{\epsilon}\\
0 & -\omega_{\epsilon} < \omega_i < \omega_{\epsilon}\\
-{r_{\mathrm{t},i}^{-1}}(\omega_i-\omega_{\epsilon}) & \omega_i \geq \omega_{\epsilon}
\end{cases}\,,
$$
where $\tau_i>0$ represents the turbine time constant and $r_{\mathrm{t},i}>0$ the turbine droop coefficient.
Two special cases of our interest are:
\begin{dyn-g}[Standard swing dynamics] \label{dy:sw}
When $|\omega_i(t)| < \omega_{\epsilon}$, the turbines are not triggered and the generator dynamics can be described by the transfer function
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dy-sw}
\hat{g}_i(s) = \frac{1}{m_i s + d_i}
\end{equation}
which is exactly the standard swing dynamics.
\end{dyn-g}
\begin{dyn-g}[Second-order turbine dynamics]
When $\omega_{\epsilon} = 0$, the turbines are constantly triggered and the generator dynamics can be described by the transfer function
\begin{equation} \label{eq:dy-sw-t}
\hat{g}_i(s) = \frac{ \tau_i s + 1 }{m_i \tau_i s^2 + \left(m_i + d_i \tau_i \right) s + d_i + r_{\mathrm{t},i}^{-1}}\;.
\end{equation}
\end{dyn-g}
\paragraph{Inverter Dynamics}
Since power electronics are significantly faster than the electro-mechanical dynamics of generators, we assume that each inverter measures the local grid frequency deviation $\omega_i$ and instantaneously updates the output power $q_{\mathrm{r},i}$. Different control laws can be used to map $\omega_i$ to $q_{\mathrm{r},i}$. We represent such laws using a transfer function $\hat{c}_i(s)$. The two most common ones are:
\begin{dyn-i}[Droop Control]
This control law can provide additional droop capabilities and is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:dy-dc}
\hat{c}_i(s) = -r_{\mathrm{r},i}^{-1}\;,
\end{equation}
where $r_{\mathrm{r},i}>0$ is the droop coefficient.
\end{dyn-i}
\begin{dyn-i}[Virtual Inertia]
Besides providing additional droop capabilities, this control law can compensate the loss of inertia and is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:dy-vi}
\hat{c}_i(s) = -\left(m_{\mathrm{v},i} s + r_{\mathrm{r},i}^{-1}\right)\;,
\end{equation}
where $m_{\mathrm{v},i}>0$ is the virtual inertia constant.
\end{dyn-i}
\subsubsection{Network Dynamics}
The network power fluctuations $p_\mathrm{e} := \left(p_{\mathrm{e},i}, i \in \mathcal{V} \right) \in \real^n$ are given by a linearized model of the power flow equations~\cite{Purchala2005dc-flow}:
\begin{align}
\hat p_\mathrm{e}(s) = \frac{L_\mathrm{B}}{s} \hat \omega(s)\;,\label{eq:N}
\end{align}
where $\hat p_\mathrm{e}(s)$ and $\hat \omega(s)$ denote the Laplace transforms of $p_\mathrm{e}$ and $\omega$, respectively.\footnote{We use hat to distinguish the Laplace transform from its time domain counterpart.} The matrix $L_\mathrm{B}$ is an undirected weighted Laplacian matrix of the network with elements
\[
L_{\mathrm{B},{ij}}=\partial_{\theta_j}{\sum_{j=1}^n|V_i||V_j|b_{ij}\sin(\theta_i-\theta_j)}\Bigr|_{\theta=\theta_0}.
\]
Here, $\theta := \left(\theta_i, i \in \mathcal{V} \right) \in \real^n$ denotes the angle deviation from its nominal, $\theta_0 := \left(\theta_{0,i}, i \in \mathcal{V} \right) \in \real^n$ are the equilibrium angles, $|V_i|$ is the (constant) voltage magnitude at bus $i$, and $b_{ij}$ is the line $\{i,j\}$ susceptance.
\subsubsection{Closed-loop Dynamics}
We will investigate the closed-loop responses of the system in Fig.~\ref{fig:model2} from the power injection set point changes $p_\mathrm{in}$, the power fluctuations around the set point $d_\mathrm{p}$, and frequency measurement noise $n_\omega$ to frequency deviations $\omega$, which can be described compactly by the transfer function matrix
\begin{equation}\label{eq:closed-loop}
\hat{T}(s) := \begin{bmatrix}\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{p}}(s) & \hat{T}_{\omega \mathrm{dn}}(s):=\begin{bmatrix}\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{d}} (s) & \hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{n}} (s)\end{bmatrix}\end{bmatrix}\;.
\end{equation}
\begin{rem}[Model Assumptions]
The \emph{linearized} network model \eqref{eq:closed-loop}
implicitly makes the following assumptions which are standard and well-justified for frequency control on transmission networks \cite{kundur_power_1994}:
\begin{itemize}
\item Bus voltage magnitudes $|V_i|$'s are constant;
we are not modeling the dynamics of exciters used for voltage control; these are assumed to operate at a much faster time-scale.
\item Lines $\{i,j\}$ are lossless.
\item Reactive power flows do not affect bus voltage phase angles and frequencies.
\item Without loss of generality, the equilibrium angle difference ($\theta_{0,i}-\theta_{0,j}$) accross each line is less than $\pi/2$.
\end{itemize}
For a first principle derivation of the model we refer to \cite[Section VII]{Zhao:2013ts}. For applications of similar models for frequency control within the control literature, see, e.g., \cite{Zhao:2014bp,Li:2016tcns,mallada2017optimal}.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}[Internal Stability of \eqref{eq:closed-loop}]
Throughout this paper we consider feedback interconnections of positive real and strictly positive real subsystems. Internal stability follows from classical results~\cite{khalil2002nonlinear}. Since the focus of this paper is on performance, we do not discuss internal stability here in detail. We refer to the reader to \cite{pm2018tcns}, for a thorough treatment of similar feedback interconnections. From now on a standing assumption --that can be verified-- is that feedback interconnection described in Fig. \ref{fig:model2} is internally stable.
\end{rem}
\subsection{Performance Metrics} \label{ssec:metrics}
Having considered the model of the power network, we are now ready to introduce performance metrics used in this paper to compare different inverter control laws.
\subsubsection{Steady-state Effort Share}
This metric measures the fraction of the power imbalance addressed by inverters, which is calculated as the absolute value of the ratio between the inverter steady-state input power and the total power imbalance, i.e.,
\begin{align}\label{eq:ES}
\mathrm{ES} := \left|\frac{\sum_{i=1}^n \hat{c}_i(0) \omega_{\mathrm{ss},i}}{\sum_{i=1}^n p_{\mathrm{in},i}(0^+) }\right|\;,
\end{align}
when the system $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{p}}$ undergoes a step change in power excitation.
Here, $\hat{c}_i(0)$ is the dc gain of the inverter and $\omega_{\mathrm{ss},i}$ is the steady-state frequency deviation.
\subsubsection{Power Fluctuations and Measurement Noise}
This metric measures how the relative intensity of power fluctuations and measurement noise affect the frequency deviations, as quantified by the $\mathcal{H}_2$ norm of the transfer function $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}}$:
\begin{align}
&\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 \label{eq:h2_def_E}\\&:=\!\begin{cases}
\!\displaystyle\frac{1}{2\pi}\!\!\int_{-\infty{}}^\infty{}\!\!\!\tr{\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}}(\boldsymbol{j\omega})^\ast \hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}}(\boldsymbol{j\omega})}\mathrm{d}\boldsymbol{\omega}&\!\!\textrm{if $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}}$ is stable,}\\
\!\infty&\!\!\textrm{otherwise.}\nonumber\footnotemark
\end{cases}
\end{align}
The quantity $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}$ has several standard interpretations in terms of the input-output behavior of the system $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}}$~\cite{g2015tran}. In particular, in the stochastic setting, when the disturbance signals $d_{\mathrm{p},i}$ and $n_{\omega,i}$ are independent, zero mean, unit variance, white noise, then $\lim_{t\to \infty}\mathbb{E} \left[\omega(t)^T \omega(t)\right]=\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$.
This means that the sum of the steady-state variances in the output of $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}}$ in response to these disturbance equals the squared $\mathcal{H}_2$ norm of $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}}$. Thus the $\mathcal{H}_2$ norm gives a precise measure of how the intensity of power fluctuations and measurement noise affects the system's frequency deviations.
\footnotetext{$\boldsymbol{j}$ represents the imaginary unit which satisfies $\boldsymbol{j}^2=-1$ and $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ represents the frequency variable.}
\subsubsection{Synchronization Cost}
This metric measures the size of individual bus deviations from the synchronous response when the system $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{p}}$ is subject to a step change in power excitation given by $p_\mathrm{in} = u_0 \mathds{1}_{ t \geq 0 } \in \real^n$, where $u_0 \in \real^n$ is a given vector direction and $\mathds{1}_{ t \geq 0 }$ is the unit-step function \cite{p2017ccc}. This is quantified by the squared $\mathcal{L}_2$ norm of the vector of deviations $\tilde{\omega} := \omega - \bar{\omega} \mathbbold{1}_n \in \real^n$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sync_cost}
\|\tilde{\omega}\|_2^2 := \sum_{i=1}^n \int_0^\infty \tilde{\omega}_i(t)^2 \mathrm{d}t\;.
\end{equation}
Here, $\bar{\omega}:= \left(\sum_{i=1}^n m_i\omega_i\right)/\left(\sum_{i=1}^n m_i\right)$ is the system frequency that corresponds to the inertia-weighted average of bus frequency deviations and $\mathbbold{1}_n \in \real^n $ is the vector of all ones.
\subsubsection{Nadir} This metric measures the minimum post-contingency frequency of a power system, which can be quantified by the $\mathcal{L}_{\infty}$ norm of the system frequency $\bar{\omega}$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Nadir}
\|\bar{\omega}\|_\infty := \max_{t\geq0} |\bar{\omega}(t)|\;,
\end{equation}
when the system $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{p}}$ has as input a step change in power excitation \cite{p2017ccc}, i.e., $p_\mathrm{in} = u_0 \mathds{1}_{ t \geq 0 } \in \real^n$. This quantity matters in that deeper Nadir increases the risk of under-frequency load shedding and cascading outrages.
\subsection{Diagonalization}
In order to make the analysis tractable, we require the closed-loop transfer functions to be diagonalizable. This is ensured by the following assumption, which is a generalization of \cite{pm2019preprint,p2017ccc}.
\begin{ass}[Proportionality]\label{ass:proportion}
There exists a proportionality matrix $F := \diag {f_i, i \in \mathcal{V}} \in \real_{\geq 0}^{n \times n} $ such that
\[ \hat{G}(s) = \hat{g}_\mathrm{o}(s) F^{-1} \qquad \text{and} \qquad \hat{C}(s) = \hat{c}_\mathrm{o}(s) F\]
where $\hat{g}_\mathrm{o}(s)$ and $\hat{c}_\mathrm{o}(s)$ are called the representative generator and the representative inverter, respectively.
\end{ass}
\begin{rem}[Proportionality parameters]
The parameters $f_i$'s represent the individual machine rating. This definition is rather arbitrary for our analysis, provided that Assumption \ref{ass:proportion} is satisfied. Other alternatives could include $f_i=m_i$ or $f_i=m_i/m$ where $m$ is, for example, either the average or maximum generator inertia. The practical relevance of Assumption~\ref{ass:proportion} is justified, for example, by the empirical values reported in \cite{oakridge2013}, which show that at least in regards of order of magnitude, Assumption \ref{ass:proportion} is a reasonable first-cut approximation to heterogeneity.
\end{rem}
Under Assumption~\ref{ass:proportion}, the representative generator of \eqref{eq:dy-sw} and \eqref{eq:dy-sw-t} are given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:go-sw}
\hat{g}_\mathrm{o}(s) = \frac{1}{m s + d}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:go-sw-tb}
\hat{g}_\mathrm{o}(s) = \frac{ \tau s + 1 }{m \tau s^2 + \left(m + d \tau \right) s + d + r_\mathrm{t}^{-1}}\;, \footnote{We use variables without subscript $i$ to denote parameters of representative generator and inverter.}
\end{equation}
respectively, with $m_i=f_im$, $d_i=f_id$, $r_{\mathrm{t},i}=r_{\mathrm{t}}/f_i$, and $\tau_i=\tau$.
Similarly,
the representative inverters of DC \eqref{eq:dy-dc} and VI \eqref{eq:dy-vi} are given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:co-dc}
\hat{c}_\mathrm{o}(s) = -r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:co-vi}
\hat{c}_\mathrm{o}(s) = -\left(m_\mathrm{v} s + r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}\right)\;,
\end{equation}
with $m_{\mathrm{v},i}=f_im_{\mathrm{v}}$ and $r_{\mathrm{r},i}=r_{\mathrm{r}}/f_i$.
Using Assumption~\ref{ass:proportion}, we can derive a diagonalized version of \eqref{eq:closed-loop}. First, we rewrite
\[\hat{G}(s) = F^{-\frac{1}{2}} [\hat{g}_\mathrm{o}(s)I_n] F^{-\frac{1}{2}} \quad\text{and}\quad \hat{C}(s) = F^{\frac{1}{2}} [\hat{c}_\mathrm{o}(s)I_n] F^{\frac{1}{2}}\]
as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:diag1}, and after a loop transformation obtain Fig. \ref{fig:diag2}. Then, we define the scaled Laplacian matrix
\begin{equation}\label{eq:scale-L}
L_\mathrm{F} := F^{-\frac{1}{2}} L_\mathrm{B} F^{-\frac{1}{2}}
\end{equation}
by grouping the terms in the upper block of Fig. \ref{fig:diag2}. Moreover, since $L_\mathrm{F} \in \real^{n \times n}$ is symmetric positive semidefinite, it is real orthogonally diagonalizable with non-negative eigenvalues~\cite{Horn2012MA}. Thus, there exists an orthogonal matrix $V \in \real^{n \times n}$ with $V^T V = V V^T = I_n$, such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ortho-diag}
L_\mathrm{F} = V \Lambda V^T\;,
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda := \diag{\lambda_k, k \in \{1,\dots, n\}} \in \real_{\geq0}^{n \times n}$ with $\lambda_k$ being the $k$th eigenvalue of $L_\mathrm{F}$ ordered non-decreasingly $(0 = \lambda_1 < \lambda_2 \leq \ldots \leq\lambda_n)$\footnote{Recall that we assume the power network is connected, which means that $L_\mathrm{F}$ has a single eigenvalue at the origin.} and $V := \begin{bmatrix} (\sum_{i=1}^n f_i)^{-\frac{1}{2}} F^{\frac{1}{2}} \mathbbold{1}_n & V_{\bot} \end{bmatrix}$ with $V_{\bot} := \begin{bmatrix} v_2 &\ldots & v_n \end{bmatrix}$ composed by the eigenvector $v_k$ associated with $\lambda_k$.\footnote{We use $k$ and $l$ to index dynamic modes but $i$ and $j$ to index bus numbers.} Now, applying \eqref{eq:scale-L} and \eqref{eq:ortho-diag} to Fig. \ref{fig:diag2} and rearranging blocks of $V$ and $V^T$ results in Fig. \ref{fig:diag3}. Finally, moving the block of $\hat{c}_\mathrm{o}(s) I_n$ ahead of the summing junction and combining the two parallel paths produces Fig. \ref{fig:block-diag}, where the boxed part is fully diagonalized.
Now, by defining
the closed-loop with a forward-path $\hat{g}_\mathrm{o}(s) I_n$ and a feedback-path $\left(\Lambda/s - \hat{c}_\mathrm{o}(s) I_n\right)$ as
\begin{equation*}
\hat{H}_\mathrm{p}(s) = \diag{\hat{h}_{\mathrm{p},k}(s), k \in \{1,\dots, n\}}
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation} \label{eq:hp-s}
\hat{h}_{\mathrm{p},k}(s) = \frac{\hat{g}_\mathrm{o}(s)}{1+\hat{g}_\mathrm{o}(s)\left(\lambda_k/s-\hat{c}_\mathrm{o}(s)\right)}\;,
\end{equation}
and $\hat{H}_\omega(s) = \hat{c}_\mathrm{o}(s) \hat{H}_\mathrm{p}(s)$, i.e.,
\begin{equation*}
\hat{H}_\omega(s) = \diag{\hat{h}_{\omega,k}(s), k \in \{1,\dots, n\}}
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation} \label{eq:homega-s}
\hat{h}_{\omega,k}(s) = \hat{c}_\mathrm{o}(s)\hat{h}_{\mathrm{p},k}(s)\;,
\end{equation}
the closed-loop transfer functions from $p_\mathrm{in}$, $d_\mathrm{p}$, and $n_\omega$ to $\omega$ become
\begin{subequations}\label{eq:T-diag}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Tp}
\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{p}} (s) = F^{-\frac{1}{2}} V \hat{H}_\mathrm{p}(s) V^T F^{-\frac{1}{2}}\;,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Td}
\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{d}} (s) = F^{-\frac{1}{2}} V \hat{H}_\mathrm{p}(s) V^T F^{-\frac{1}{2}}\hat{W}_\mathrm{p}(s)\;,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{n}} (s) = F^{-\frac{1}{2}} V \hat{H}_\omega(s) V^T F^{\frac{1}{2}}\hat{W}_\omega{}(s)\;,
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
respectively.
Note that depending on the specific generator and inverter dynamics involved, we may add subscripts in the name of a transfer function without making a further declaration in the rest of this paper. For example, we may add 'T' if the turbine is triggered and 'DC' if the inverter operates in DC mode as in $\hat{h}_{\mathrm{p},k,\mathrm{T,DC}}(s)$.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfigure[]
{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{diag_step1_F_copy.eps}\label{fig:diag1}}
\hfil
\subfigure[]
{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{diag_step2_F_copy.eps}\label{fig:diag2}}
\hfil
\subfigure[]
{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{diag_step3_F_copy.eps}\label{fig:diag3}}
\caption{Equivalent block diagrams of power network under proportionality assumption.}
\label{fig:block-diag-process}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{block_diag_F_copy.eps}
\caption{Diagonalized block diagram of power network.}\label{fig:block-diag}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Generic Results for Performance Metrics}
We now derive some important building blocks required for the performance analysis of the system $\hat{T}$ described in \eqref{eq:T-diag}. As described in Section \ref{ssec:metrics}, the sensitivity to power fluctuations and measurement noise can be evaluated through the $\mathcal{H}_2$ norm of the system $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}}$, while the steady-state effort share, synchronization cost, and Nadir can all be characterized by a step response of the system $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{p}}$. There are two scenarios that are of our interest
\begin{ass}[Proportional weighting scenario]\label{ass:noise}\
\begin{itemize}
\item
The noise weighting functions are given by
\begin{equation*}
\hat{W}_\mathrm{p}(s) = \kappa_\mathrm{p} F^{\frac{1}{2}} \qquad \text{and} \qquad \hat{W}_\omega(s) = \kappa_\omega F^{-\frac{1}{2}},
\end{equation*}
where $\kappa_\mathrm{p}>0$ and $\kappa_\omega>0$ are weighting constants.
\item
$|\omega_i(t)| < \omega_{\epsilon}$, $\forall i \in \mathcal{V}$ and $t\geq0$ such that turbines will not be triggered.
\end{itemize}
\end{ass}
\begin{ass}[Step input scenario]\label{ass:step}\
\begin{itemize}
\item
There is a step change as defined in Section \ref{ssec:metrics} on the power injection set point, i.e., $p_\mathrm{in} = u_0 \mathds{1}_{ t \geq 0 }$, $d_\mathrm{p}= \mathbbold{0}_n$, and $n_\omega = \mathbbold{0}_n$ with $\mathbbold{0}_n \in \real^n $ being the vector of all zeros.
\item
$\omega_{\epsilon} = 0$ such that turbines are constantly triggered.
\end{itemize}
\end{ass}
\begin{rem}[Weighting assumption]
As a natural counterpart of Assumption~\ref{ass:proportion}, we look at the case when the power fluctuations and measurement noise are weighted directly and inversely proportional to the square root of the bus ratings, respectively. In the case of $\hat W_\mathrm{p}(s)$, this is equivalent to assuming that demand fluctuation variances are proportional to the bus ratings, which is in agreement with the central limit theorem. For $\hat W_\mathrm{\omega}(s)$, this is equivalent to assuming the frequency measurement noise variances are inversely proportional to the bus ratings, which is in line with the inverse relationship between jitter variance and power consumption for an oscillator in phase-locked-loop \cite{Weigandt1994}.
\end{rem}
\subsubsection{Steady-state Effort Share}
As indicated by \eqref{eq:ES}, the key of computing the steady-state effort share lies in computing the steady-state frequency deviation $\omega_{\mathrm{ss}}$ of the system $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{p}}$. When the system synchronizes, the steady-state frequency deviation is given by $\omega_{\mathrm{ss}} = \omega_{\mathrm{syn}} \mathbbold{1}_n$
and $\omega_{\mathrm{syn}}$ is called the synchronous frequency. In the absence of a secondary control layer, e.g., automatic generation control \cite{d1973tran}, the system can synchronize with a nontrivial frequency deviation, i.e., $\omega_{\mathrm{syn}} \neq 0$.
The following lemma provides a general expression for $\omega_{\mathrm{syn}}$ in our setting.
\begin{lem}[Synchronous frequency]\label{lem:syn-fre}
Let Assumption~\ref{ass:step} hold.
If $q_{\mathrm{r},i}$ is determined by a control law $\hat{c}_i(s)$, then the output $\omega$ of the system $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{p}}$ synchronizes to the steady-state frequency deviation $\omega_{\mathrm{ss}} = \omega_{\mathrm{syn}} \mathbbold{1}_n$ with
\begin{equation}
\omega_{\mathrm{syn}} = \dfrac{\sum_{i=1}^n u_{0,i}}{\sum_{i=1}^n \left( d_i + {r_{\mathrm{t},i}^{-1} - \hat{c}_i(0)} \right)}\;. \label{eq:ome-syn}
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Combining \eqref{eq:sw} and \eqref{eq:N} through the relationship $u_\mathrm{P} = p_\mathrm{in} - p_\mathrm{e}$,
we get the (partial) state-space representation of the system $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{p}}$ as
\begin{subequations}\label{eq:ss}
\begin{align}
\dot{\theta} =&\ \omega \,,\\
M \dot{\omega} =& -D \omega -L_\mathrm{B} \theta + q_\mathrm{r} + q_\mathrm{t} + p_\mathrm{in} \,, \label{eq:ss-fre}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $M := \diag{m_i, i \in \mathcal{V}} \in \real_{\geq0}^{n \times n}$, $D := \diag{d_i, i \in \mathcal{V}} \in \real_{\geq0}^{n \times n}$, $q_\mathrm{r} := \left(q_{\mathrm{r},i}, i \in \mathcal{V} \right) \in \real^n$, and $q_\mathrm{t} := \left(q_{\mathrm{t},i}, i \in \mathcal{V} \right) \in \real^n$.
In steady-state, \eqref{eq:ss} yields
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ss-pf1}
L_\mathrm{B} \omega_{\mathrm{ss}} t = -D \omega_{\mathrm{ss}} -L_\mathrm{B} \theta_{\mathrm{ss}_0} + q_{\mathrm{r},\mathrm{ss}} + q_{\mathrm{t},\mathrm{ss}} + u_0 \,,
\end{equation}
where $(\theta_{\mathrm{ss}_0} + \omega_{\mathrm{ss}} t, \omega_{\mathrm{ss}}, q_{\mathrm{r},\mathrm{ss}}, q_{\mathrm{t},\mathrm{ss}})$ denotes the steady-state solution of \eqref{eq:ss}. Equation \eqref{eq:ss-pf1} indicates that $L_\mathrm{B} \omega_{\mathrm{ss}} t$ is constant and thus $L_\mathrm{B} \omega_{\mathrm{ss}} = \mathbbold{0}_n$. It follows that $\omega_{\mathrm{ss}} = \omega_{\mathrm{syn}} \mathbbold{1}_n$.
Therefore, \eqref{eq:ss-pf1} becomes
\begin{align}
\mathbbold{0}_n =& -D \omega_{\mathrm{syn}} \mathbbold{1}_n -L_\mathrm{B} \theta_{\mathrm{ss}_0} + q_{\mathrm{r},\mathrm{ss}} + q_{\mathrm{t},\mathrm{ss}} + u_0\;, \label{eq:synsw1}
\end{align}
where $q_{\mathrm{r},\mathrm{ss}} = \left( \hat{c}_i(0) \omega_{\mathrm{syn}}, i \in \mathcal{V} \right)\in \real^n$ and $q_{\mathrm{t},\mathrm{ss}} = \left(-r_{\mathrm{t},i}^{-1} \omega_{\mathrm{syn}}, i \in \mathcal{V} \right)\in \real^n$ when $\omega_{\epsilon}=0$ by \eqref{eq:turb}. Pre-multiplying \eqref{eq:synsw1} by $\mathbbold{1}_n^T$ and using the property that $\mathbbold{1}_n^T L_\mathrm{B} = \mathbbold{0}_n^T$, we get the desired result in \eqref{eq:ome-syn}.
\end{proof}
Now, the theorem below provides an explicit expression for the steady-state effort share.
\begin{thm}[Steady-state effort share]\label{thm:ss-es}
Let Assumption~\ref{ass:step} hold. If $q_{\mathrm{r},i}$ is determined by a control law $\hat{c}_i(s)$, then the steady-state effort share of the system {$\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{p}}$} is given by
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{ES} = \left|\frac{\sum_{i=1}^n \hat{c}_i(0)}{\sum_{i=1}^n \left( d_i + {r_{\mathrm{t},i}^{-1} - \hat{c}_i(0)} \right) }\right|\;.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
It follows directly from Lemma~\ref{lem:syn-fre} that $\omega_{\mathrm{ss},i}=\omega_{\mathrm{syn}}$ and $\sum_{i=1}^n u_{0,i}=\omega_{\mathrm{syn}} \sum_{i=1}^n \left( d_i + {r_{\mathrm{t},i}^{-1} - \hat{c}_i(0)} \right)$. Plugging these two equations to the definition of ES in \eqref{eq:ES} yields the desired result.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{Power Fluctuations and Measurement Noise}
We seek to characterize the effect of power fluctuations and frequency measurement noise on the frequency variance, i.e., the $\mathcal{H}_2$ norm of the system $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}}$.
We first show that the squared $\mathcal{H}_2$ norm of $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}}$ is a weighted sum of the squared $\mathcal{H}_2$ norm of each $\hat{h}_{\mathrm{p},k}$ and $\hat{h}_{\omega,k}$ in the diagonalized system \eqref{eq:T-diag}.
\begin{thm}[Frequency variance]\label{thm:h2-sum}
Define $\Gamma := V^T F^{-1} V$. If Assumptions~\ref{ass:proportion} and \ref{ass:noise} hold, then
\begin{align*}
\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn} }\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 = \sum_{k=1}^n\Gamma_{kk}\left(\kappa_\mathrm{p}^2 \|\hat{h}_{\mathrm{p},k}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 + \kappa_\omega^2 \|\hat{h}_{\omega,k}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2\right)\;.
\end{align*}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
It follows from \eqref{eq:closed-loop} and \eqref{eq:h2_def_E} that
\begin{align*}
\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn} }\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 \!=&\ \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\infty{}}^\infty \tr{\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{d}} (\boldsymbol{j\omega})^\ast \hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{d}} (\boldsymbol{j\omega}) }\,\mathrm{d}\boldsymbol{\omega} \nonumber\\&+ \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\infty{}}^\infty \tr{ \hat{T}_{ \omega\mathrm{n}} (\boldsymbol{j\omega})^\ast \hat{T}_{ \omega\mathrm{n}} (\boldsymbol{j\omega})}\,\mathrm{d}\boldsymbol{\omega}\\=:&\ \|\hat{T}_{ \omega\mathrm{d}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}+\|\hat{T}_{ \omega\mathrm{n}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}.
\end{align*}
We now compute $\|\hat{T}_{ \omega\mathrm{d}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}$. Using \eqref{eq:Td} and the fact that $\hat{W}_\mathrm{p} (s) = \kappa_\mathrm{p} F^{\frac{1}{2}}$ by Assumption \ref{ass:noise}, we get $\hat{T}_{ \omega\mathrm{d}}(s)=\kappa{}_\mathrm{p}F^{-\frac{1}{2}} V \hat{H}_\mathrm{p}(s) V^T$.
Therefore,
\begin{equation*}
\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{d}} (\boldsymbol{j\omega})^\ast \hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{d}} (\boldsymbol{j\omega}) =\kappa{}_\mathrm{p}^2 V \hat{H}_\mathrm{p}(\boldsymbol{j\omega})^\ast V^T F^{-1} V \hat{H}_\mathrm{p}(\boldsymbol{j\omega}) V^T.
\end{equation*}
Using the cyclic property of the trace, this implies that
\begin{equation*}
\tr{\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{d}} (\boldsymbol{j\omega})^\ast \hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{d}} (\boldsymbol{j\omega}) }=\kappa{}_\mathrm{p}^2 \tr{\hat{H}_\mathrm{p}(\boldsymbol{j\omega})^\ast \Gamma{} \hat{H}_\mathrm{p}(\boldsymbol{j\omega}) },
\end{equation*}
where $\Gamma:=V^TF^{-1}V$. Therefore, it follows that
\begin{align*}
\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{d}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}&=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\infty{}}^\infty{}\kappa{}_\mathrm{p}^2 \tr{\hat{H}_\mathrm{p}(\boldsymbol{j\omega})^* \Gamma{} \hat{H}_\mathrm{p}(\boldsymbol{j\omega}) }\,\mathrm{d}\boldsymbol{\omega}\\
= \sum_{k=1}^n \frac{\kappa_\mathrm{p}^2\Gamma_{kk}}{2\pi}&\int_{-\infty}^\infty \left|\hat{h}_{\mathrm{p},k}(\boldsymbol{j\omega})\right|^2\, \mathrm{d}\boldsymbol{\omega} = \kappa_\mathrm{p}^2 \sum_{k=1}^n \Gamma_{kk}\|\hat{h}_{\mathrm{p},k}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2\;.
\end{align*}
The result follows from a similar argument on $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{n}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}$.
\end{proof}
Theorem \ref{thm:h2-sum} allows us to compute the $\mathcal{H}_2$ norm of $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}}$ by means of computing the norms of a set of simple scalar transfer functions.
However, for different controllers, the transfer functions $\hat{h}_{\mathrm{p},k}$ and $\hat{h}_{\omega,k}$ will change. Since in all the cases these transfer functions are of fourth-order or lower, the following lemma will suffice for the purpose of our comparison.
\begin{lem}[$\mathcal{H}_2$ norm of a fourth-order transfer function]\label{lm:h2-4th}
Let
\[
\hat{h}(s)=\frac{b_3s^3+b_2s^2+b_1s+b_0}{s^4+a_3s^3+a_2s^2+a_1s+a_0}+b_4
\]
be a stable transfer function.
If $b_4=0$, then
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4throderh2}
\|\hat{h}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 =
\displaystyle{\frac{\zeta_0 b_0^2+\zeta_1 b_1^2+\zeta_2 b_2^2+\zeta_3 b_3^2+\zeta_4}{2 a_0 \left(a_1 a_2 a_3 -a_1^2 -a_0 a_3^2\right)}}\;,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align}\label{eq:zeta}
\zeta_0:=&\ a_2 a_3-a_1 \,,\qquad \zeta_1:=\ a_0 a_3\,,\qquad \zeta_2:=\ a_0a_1\,,\\
\zeta_3:=&\ a_0a_1 a_2 - a_0^2 a_3\,,\qquad
\zeta_4:=-2a_0(a_1 b_1 b_3 +a_3 b_0 b_2)\,.\nonumber
\end{align}
Otherwise, $\|\hat{h}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 = \infty$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
First recall that given any state-space realization of $\hat{h}(s)$, the $\mathcal{H}_2$ norm can be calculated by solving a particular Lyapunov equation. More specifically, suppose
\[
\Sigma_{\hat{h}(s)}=\left[\begin{array}{c|c}
A & B \\\hline{}
C & D
\end{array}\right],
\]
and let $X$ denote the solution to the Lyapunov equation
\begin{align}
AX+XA^T=-BB^T.\label{eq:lyp-x}
\end{align}
If $\hat{h}(s)$ is stable, then
\begin{align}
\|\hat{h}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2=\begin{cases}
\infty{}&\text{if $D\neq{}0$,}\\
CXC^T&\text{otherwise}.
\end{cases}\label{eq:h2-2cases}
\end{align}
Consider the observable canonical form of $\hat{h}(s)$ given by
\begin{align}
\Sigma_{\hat{h}(s)}=
\left[\begin{array}{cccc|c}
0&0&0&-a_0&b_0\\
1&0&0&-a_1&b_1\\
0&1&0&-a_2&b_2\\
0&0&1&-a_3&b_3\\\hline
0&0&0 & 1&b_4
\end{array}\right].\label{eq:real-h}
\end{align}
Since $D=b_4$, it is trivial to see from \eqref{eq:h2-2cases} that if $b_4\neq0$ then $\|\hat{h}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 = \infty$. Hence, in the rest of the proof, we assume $b_4=0$. We will now solve the Lyapunov equation analytically for the realization \eqref{eq:real-h}. $X$ must be symmetric and thus can be parameterized as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:grammian-4th}
X=\big[x_{ij}\big]\in\real^{4\times4}\;, \quad\text{with}\quad x_{ij}=x_{ji}.
\end{equation}
Since it is easy to see that $C X C^T = x_{44}$, the problem becomes solving for $x_{44}$.
Substituting \eqref{eq:real-h} and \eqref{eq:grammian-4th} into \eqref{eq:lyp-x} yields the following equations
\begin{subequations}\label{eq:lyap-group}
\begin{align}
2 a_0 x_{14}=&\ b_0^2\;,\label{eq:lyap-1}\\
x_{12} - a_2 x_{14} - a_0 x_{34} =& -b_0 b_2\;,\label{eq:lyap-3}\\
2(x_{12} - a_1 x_{24})=&-b_1^2\;,\label{eq:lyap-5}\\
x_{23} - a_3 x_{24} + x_{14} - a_1 x_{44} =& -b_1 b_3\;,\label{eq:lyap-7}\\
2(x_{23} - a_2 x_{34})=&-b_2^2\;,\label{eq:lyap-8}\\
2(x_{34} - a_3 x_{44})=&-b_3^2\;.\label{eq:lyap-10}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
\ifthenelse{\boolean{archive}}{
Since $\hat{h}(s)$ is stable, by the Routh-Hurwitz criterion $a_0\neq0$, and therefore \eqref{eq:lyap-1} yields
\begin{align}
x_{14}=\frac{b_0^2}{2 a_0}\;.\label{eq:x14}
\end{align}
Applying \eqref{eq:x14} to \eqref{eq:lyap-3} and \eqref{eq:lyap-7} gives
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
x_{12} =& a_0 x_{34} + \frac{a_2b_0^2}{2 a_0}-b_0 b_2\;,\label{eq:x12 in x34}\\
x_{23} - a_3 x_{24} =& a_1 x_{44}-\frac{b_0^2}{2 a_0}-b_1 b_3\;.\label{eq:x23-24 in x44}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
We now parameterize unknowns in $x_{44}$.
Equation \eqref{eq:lyap-10} yields
\begin{align}
x_{34} =& a_3 x_{44}-\frac{b_3^2}{2}\;.\label{eq:x34 in x44}
\end{align}
Substituting \eqref{eq:x34 in x44} into \eqref{eq:lyap-8} and \eqref{eq:x12 in x34} gives
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
x_{23} =&a_2 a_3 x_{44}-\frac{a_2 b_3^2+b_2^2}{2}\;,\label{eq:x23 in x44}\\
x_{12} =& a_0 a_3 x_{44}-\frac{a_0b_3^2}{2} + \frac{a_2b_0^2}{2 a_0}-b_0 b_2\;,\label{eq:x12 in x44}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
respectively.
Plugging \eqref{eq:x12 in x44} into \eqref{eq:lyap-5} leads to
\begin{align}
a_1 x_{24}=&a_0 a_3 x_{44}-\frac{a_0b_3^2}{2} + \frac{a_2b_0^2}{2 a_0}-b_0 b_2 +\frac{b_1^2}{2}\;,\label{eq:x24 in x44}
\end{align}
Combining \eqref{eq:x23-24 in x44}, \eqref{eq:x23 in x44}, and \eqref{eq:x24 in x44}, we can solve for $x_{44}$ as}
{Through standard algebra, we can solve for $x_{44}$ as}
\[
x_{44} =
\displaystyle{\frac{\zeta_0 b_0^2+\zeta_1 b_1^2+\zeta_2 b_2^2+\zeta_3 b_3^2+\zeta_4}{2 a_0 \left(a_1 a_2 a_3-a_1^2 -a_0 a_3^2\right)}}
\]
with $\zeta_0, \zeta_1, \zeta_2, \zeta_3$, and $\zeta_4$ defined by \eqref{eq:zeta},
which concludes the proof; the denominator is guaranteed to be nonzero by the Routh-Hurwitz criterion.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}[$\mathcal{H}_2$ norm of a transfer function lower than fourth-order]\label{rem:h2-3rd}
Although Lemma~\ref{lm:h2-4th} is stated for a fourth-order transfer function, it can also be used to find the $\mathcal{H}_2$ norm of third-, second-, and first-order transfer functions by considering appropriate limits. For example, setting $a_0=b_0=\epsilon{}$ and considering the limit $\epsilon\to 0$, \eqref{eq:4throderh2} gives the $\mathcal{H}_2$ norm of a generic third-order transfer function. This process shows that given a stable transfer function $\hat{h}(s)$, if $b_4=0$ and:
\begin{itemize}
\item (third-order transfer function) $a_0=b_0=0$, then
\[
\|\hat{h}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 = \frac{a_3 b_1^2+a_1 b_2^2+a_1 a_2b_3^2-2 a_1 b_1 b_3}{2 a_1 (a_2 a_3- a_1)};
\]
\item (second-order transfer function) $a_0=b_0=a_1=b_1=0$, then
\[
\|\hat{h}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 = \frac{b_2^2+a_2b_3^2}{2 a_2a_3};
\]
\item (first-order transfer function) $a_0=b_0=a_1=b_1=a_2=b_2=0$, then
\[
\|\hat{h}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 =\frac{b_3^2}{2 a_3};
\]
\end{itemize}
otherwise $\|\hat{h}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2=\infty{}$.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}[Well-definedness by the stability]
Note that the stability of $\hat{h}(s)$ guarantees that the denominators in all the above $\mathcal{H}_2$ norm expressions are nonzero by the Routh-Hurwitz stability criterion.
\end{rem}
\subsubsection{Synchronization Cost}
The computation of the synchronization cost defined in \eqref{eq:sync_cost} for the system $\hat{T}_{ \omega\mathrm{p}}$ in the absence of inverter control can be found in \cite{pm2019preprint}. Taking this into account, we can get corresponding results for the system with any control law readily.
\begin{lem}[Synchronization cost]\label{lem:syncost-generic}
Let Assumptions~\ref{ass:proportion} and \ref{ass:step} hold. Define $\tilde{u}_0 := V_{\bot}^T F^{-\frac{1}{2}} u_0$ and $\tilde{\Gamma} := V_{\bot}^T F^{-1} V_{\bot}$. Then the synchronization cost of the system $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{p}}$ is given by
\begin{align*}
\|\tilde{\omega}\|_2^2 = \tilde{u}_0^T \left(\tilde{\Gamma}\circ \tilde{H}\right) \tilde{u}_0,
\end{align*}
where $\circ$ denotes the Hadamard product and $\tilde{H}\in\real^{(n-1) \times (n-1)}$ is the matrix with entries
\begin{equation*}
\tilde{H}_{kl} := \int_0^\infty h_{\mathrm{u},k}(t) h_{\mathrm{u},l}(t)\ \mathrm{d}t\,,\quad\forall k,l \in \{1,\dots, n-1\}
\end{equation*}
with $\hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k}(s) := \hat{h}_{\mathrm{p},{k+1},\mathrm{T}}(s)/s$ and $\hat{h}_{\mathrm{p},k,\mathrm{T}}(s)$ being a specified case of the transfer function $\hat{h}_{\mathrm{p},k}(s)$ defined in \eqref{eq:hp-s}, i.e., when the turbine is triggered.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
This is a direct extension of \cite[Proposition 2]{pm2019preprint}.
\end{proof}
Lemma~\ref{lem:syncost-generic} shows that the computation of the synchronization cost requires knowing the inner products $\tilde{H}_{kl}$. However, the general expressions of these inner products for an arbitrary combination of $k$ and $l$ are already too tedious to be useful in our analysis. Therefore, we will investigate instead bounds on the synchronization cost in terms of the inner products $\tilde{H}_{kl}$ when $k=l$; which are exactly the $\mathcal{H}_2$ norms of transfer functions $\hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k}(s)$.
\begin{lem}
[Bounds for Hadamard product]\label{lem:bounds-Had}
Let $P\in\real^{n\times{}n}$ be a symmetric matrix with minimum and maximum eigenvalues given by $\lambda_{\mathrm{min}}(P)$ and $\lambda_{\mathrm{max}}(P)$, respectively. Then $\forall x, y\in\real^n$,
\[
\lambda_{\mathrm{min}}(P)\sum_{k=1}^nx_k^2y_k^2\leq{}x^T\left(P\circ\left(yy^T\right)\right)x\leq{}\lambda_{\mathrm{max}}(P) \sum_{k=1}^nx_k^2y_k^2.
\]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
First note that
\[
\begin{aligned}
x^T\left(P\circ\left(yy^T\right)\right)x&=\tr{P^T\left(x\circ y\right)\left(x\circ y\right)^T}\\
&=\left(x\circ y\right)^T P^T\left(x\circ y\right).
\end{aligned}
\]
Let $w:=x\circ y$. Since $P$ is symmetric, by Rayleigh \cite{Horn2012MA}
\[
\lambda_{\mathrm{min}}(P) w^Tw\leq{}x^T\left(P\circ\left(yy^T\right)\right)x\leq{}\lambda_{\mathrm{max}}(P) w^Tw.
\]
Observing that $w^Tw=\sum_{k=1}^nx_k^2y_k^2$ completes the proof.
\end{proof}
Lemma~\ref{lem:bounds-Had} implies the following bounds on the synchronization cost.
\begin{thm}[Bounds on synchronization cost]\label{thm:bound-cost}
Let Assumptions~\ref{ass:proportion} and \ref{ass:step} hold. Then the synchronization cost of the system $\hat{T}_{ \omega\mathrm{p}}$ is bounded by $\underline{\|\tilde{\omega}\|_2^2} \leq\|\tilde{\omega}\|_2^2 \leq \overline{\|\tilde{\omega}\|_2^2}$, where
\[
\underline{\|\tilde{\omega}\|_2^2}\!\!:=\!\!\frac{\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}\!\tilde{u}_{0,k}^2\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2}{\max_{i \in \mathcal{V}} \left(f_i \right)}\ \text{and}\ \overline{\|\tilde{\omega}\|_2^2} \!\!:=\!\!\frac{\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}\!\tilde{u}_{0,k}^2\!\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2}{\min_{i \in \mathcal{V}} \left(f_i \right)} .
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma~\ref{lem:syncost-generic},
\[
\begin{aligned}
\|\tilde{\omega}\|_2^2&\!=\!\!\int_0^\infty{}\tilde{u}_0^T\left(\tilde{\Gamma}\circ{}\left(h_{\mathrm{u}}(t)h_{\mathrm{u}}(t)^T\right)\right)\tilde{u}_0\,\mathrm{d}t\\
\!&\!\!\!\geq{}\!\!\int_0^\infty{}\lambda_{\min}(\tilde{\Gamma})\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}\tilde{u}_{0,k}^2h_{\mathrm{u},k}(t)^2\,\mathrm{d}t\\
\!&\!\!\!=\!\lambda_{\min}(\tilde{\Gamma})\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}\tilde{u}_{0,k}^2\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2\\
\!&\!\!\!\geq{}\!\lambda_{\min}(F^{-1})\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}\tilde{u}_{0,k}^2\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 =\!\frac{\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}\tilde{u}_{0,k}^2\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2}{\max_{i \in \mathcal{V}} \left(f_i \right)},
\end{aligned}
\]
which concludes the proof of the lower bound.
The first inequality follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:bounds-Had} by setting $P = \tilde{\Gamma}$, $x = \tilde{u}_0$, and $y = h_{\mathrm{u}}(t):=\left(h_{\mathrm{u},k}(t), k \in \{1,\dots, n-1\}\right) \in \real^{n-1}$. The second inequality follows from the interlacing theorem \cite[Theorem 4.3.17]{Horn2012MA}. The upper bound can be proved similarly.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}[Synchronization cost in homogeneous case]\label{rem:syncost-homo}
In the system with homogeneous parameters, i.e., $F=fI_n$ for some $f>0$, the identical lower and upper bounds on the synchronization cost imply that
\[\|\tilde{\omega}\|_2^2=f^{-1}\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}\!\tilde{u}_{0,k}^2\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2.
\]
\end{rem}
\subsubsection{Nadir}
A deep Nadir poses a threat to the reliable operation of a power system. Hence one of the goals of inverter control laws is the reduction of Nadir. We seek to evaluate the ability of different control laws to eliminate Nadir. To this end, we provide a necessary and sufficient condition for Nadir elimination in a second-order system with a zero.
\begin{thm}[Nadir elimination for a second-order system] \label{th:nonadir-con}
Assume $K>0$, $z>0$, $\xi \geq 0$, $\omega_\mathrm{n}> 0$. The step response of a second-order system with transfer function given by
\begin{equation*}
\hat{h}(s) = \dfrac{K\left(s + z\right)}{ s^2 + 2\xi\omega_\mathrm{n} s + \omega_\mathrm{n}^2 }
\end{equation*}
has no Nadir if and only if
\begin{align}\label{eq:nonadir-con}
1 \leq \xi\leq z/\omega_\mathrm{n} \quad\text{or}\quad
\begin{cases}
\xi>z/\omega_\mathrm{n}\\
\xi \geq \left(z/\omega_\mathrm{n}+\omega_\mathrm{n}/z\right)/2
\end{cases},
\end{align}
where the conditions in braces jointly imply $\xi>1$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Basically, Nadir must occur at some non-negative finite time instant $t_\mathrm{nadir}$, such that $\dot{p}_\mathrm{u}(t_\mathrm{nadir}) =0$ and $p_\mathrm{u}(t_\mathrm{nadir})$ is a maximum,
where $p_\mathrm{u}(t)$ denotes the unit-step response of $\hat{h}(s)$, i.e., $\hat{p}_\mathrm{u}(s) := \hat{h}(s)/s$. We consider three cases based on the value of damping ratio $\xi$ separately:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Under damped case ($0\leq\xi<1$): The output is
\begin{align*}
\hat{p}_\mathrm{u}(s) = \dfrac{Kz}{\omega_\mathrm{n}^2} \left[\dfrac{1}{s}- \dfrac{s + \xi\omega_\mathrm{n}}{ (s+\xi\omega_\mathrm{n})^2 + \omega_\mathrm{d}^2 }- \dfrac{\xi\omega_\mathrm{n} - \omega_\mathrm{n}^2 z^{-1}}{ (s+\xi\omega_\mathrm{n})^2 + \omega_\mathrm{d}^2 }\right]
\end{align*}
with $\omega_\mathrm{d} := \omega_\mathrm{n} \sqrt{1 - \xi^2}$, which gives the time domain response
\begin{align*}
p_\mathrm{u}(t)
= \dfrac{Kz}{\omega_\mathrm{n}^2} \left[1- e^{-\xi\omega_\mathrm{n} t} \eta_0\sin{(\omega_\mathrm{d} t+\phi)}\right]\;,
\end{align*}
where
\[
\eta_0 = \!\sqrt{1+\dfrac{\left(\xi\omega_\mathrm{n} - \omega_\mathrm{n}^2 z^{-1}\right)^2}{\omega_\mathrm{d}^2}}\ \text{and}\
\tan\phi = \dfrac{\omega_\mathrm{d}}{\xi\omega_\mathrm{n} - \omega_\mathrm{n}^2 z^{-1}}.
\]
Clearly, the above response must have oscillations. Therefore, for the case $0\leq\xi<1$, Nadir always exists.
\item Critically damped case ($\xi=1$): The output is
\begin{align*}
\hat{p}_\mathrm{u}(s)
=\dfrac{Kz}{\omega_\mathrm{n}^2} \left[\dfrac{1}{s}- \dfrac{1}{ s + \omega_\mathrm{n} }- \dfrac{ \omega_\mathrm{n} - \omega_\mathrm{n}^2 z^{-1}}{ \left(s + \omega_\mathrm{n}\right)^2 }\right]\;,
\end{align*}
which gives the time domain response
\begin{align*}
p_\mathrm{u}(t) = \dfrac{Kz}{\omega_\mathrm{n}^2} \left\{1- e^{-\omega_\mathrm{n} t}\left[1 + \left(\omega_\mathrm{n} - \omega_\mathrm{n}^2 z^{-1}\right) t\right]\right\}\;.
\end{align*}
Thus,
\begin{align*}
\dot{p}_\mathrm{u}(t) = Kz e^{-\omega_\mathrm{n} t}\left[ \left( 1- \omega_\mathrm{n} z^{-1}\right) t + z^{-1}\right]\;.
\end{align*}
Letting $\dot{p}_\mathrm{u}(t) =0$ yields
\begin{align*}
\omega_\mathrm{n} e^{-\omega_\mathrm{n} t} \left[1 + \left(\omega_\mathrm{n} - \omega_\mathrm{n}^2 z^{-1}\right) t\right] = e^{-\omega_\mathrm{n} t} \left(\omega_\mathrm{n} - \omega_\mathrm{n}^2 z^{-1}\right)\;,
\end{align*}
which has a non-negative finite solution
\begin{align*}
t_\mathrm{nadir}
=\dfrac{z^{-1}}{\omega_\mathrm{n} z^{-1} -1}
\end{align*}
whenever $\omega_\mathrm{n} z^{-1} > 1$. For any $\epsilon>0$, it holds that
\begin{align*}
\dot {p}_\mathrm{u}(t_\mathrm{nadir}-\epsilon) = \epsilon Kz e^{-\omega_\mathrm{n} \left(t_\mathrm{nadir}-\epsilon\right)} \left(\omega_\mathrm{n} z^{-1}-1\right)>0\;,\\
\dot {p}_\mathrm{u}(t_\mathrm{nadir}+\epsilon) = \epsilon Kz e^{-\omega_\mathrm{n} \left(t_\mathrm{nadir}+\epsilon\right)} \left( 1- \omega_\mathrm{n} z^{-1}\right)<0 \;.
\end{align*}
Clearly, Nadir occurs at $t_\mathrm{nadir}$.
Therefore, for the case $\xi = 1$, Nadir is eliminated if and only if $\omega_\mathrm{n} z^{-1} \leq 1$. To put it more succinctly, we combine the two conditions into
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cri-nonadir}
1=\xi\leq z/\omega_\mathrm{n}\;.
\end{equation}
\item Over damped case ($\xi>1$): The output is
\begin{align*}
\hat{p}_\mathrm{u}(s)
=&\dfrac{Kz}{\omega_\mathrm{n}^2} \left(\dfrac{1}{s}- \dfrac{\eta_1}{ s +\sigma_1}- \dfrac{\eta_2}{ s+\sigma_2}\right)
\end{align*}
with
\begin{align*}
\sigma_{1,2} = \omega_\mathrm{n}\left(\xi\pm \sqrt{\xi^2-1}\right)\ \ \text{and}\ \ \eta_{1,2} =\dfrac{1}{2}\mp \dfrac{\xi- \omega_\mathrm{n}z^{-1}}{ 2\sqrt{\xi^2-1}}\;,
\end{align*}
which gives the time domain response
\begin{align*}
p_\mathrm{u}(t) = \dfrac{Kz}{\omega_\mathrm{n}^2} \left(1- \eta_1 e^{-\sigma_1 t}-\eta_2 e^{-\sigma_2 t}\right)\;.
\end{align*}
Thus,
\begin{align*}
\dot{p}_\mathrm{u}(t) = \dfrac{Kz}{\omega_\mathrm{n}^2} \left(\sigma_1 \eta_1 e^{-\sigma_1 t}+\sigma_2\eta_2 e^{-\sigma_2 t}\right)\;.
\end{align*}
Letting $\dot{p}_\mathrm{u}(t) =0$ yields $\sigma_1 \eta_1 e^{-\sigma_1 t} = - \sigma_2 \eta_2 e^{-\sigma_2 t}$,
which has a non-negative finite solution
\begin{align*}
t_\mathrm{nadir}
=\dfrac{1}{2\omega_\mathrm{n} \sqrt{\xi^2-1}}\ln{\dfrac{1 - \omega_\mathrm{n}z^{-1}\left(\xi+ \sqrt{\xi^2-1}\right)}{1 - \omega_\mathrm{n}z^{-1}\left(\xi- \sqrt{\xi^2-1}\right)}}
\end{align*}
whenever $1 - \omega_\mathrm{n}z^{-1}\left(\xi- \sqrt{\xi^2-1}\right)<0$. For any $\epsilon>0$, it holds that
\begin{align*}
\dot{p}_\mathrm{u}(t_\mathrm{nadir}-\epsilon)
>& \dfrac{Kz}{\omega_\mathrm{n}^2} e^{\sigma_1 \epsilon} \left(\sigma_1 \eta_1 e^{-\sigma_1 t_\mathrm{nadir}}+ \sigma_2\eta_2e^{-\sigma_2 t_\mathrm{nadir}}\right)\\
=& e^{\sigma_1 \epsilon} \dot{p}_\mathrm{u}(t_\mathrm{nadir})=0\;,\\
\dot{p}_\mathrm{u}(t_\mathrm{nadir}+\epsilon)
<& \dfrac{Kz}{\omega_\mathrm{n}^2} e^{-\sigma_1 \epsilon} \left(\sigma_1 \eta_1 e^{-\sigma_1 t_\mathrm{nadir}}+ \sigma_2\eta_2e^{-\sigma_2 t_\mathrm{nadir}}\right)\\
=& e^{-\sigma_1 \epsilon} \dot{p}_\mathrm{u}(t_\mathrm{nadir})=0\;,
\end{align*}
since $\sigma_1>\sigma_2>0$ and one can show that $\sigma_2\eta_2<0$. Clearly, Nadir occurs at $t_\mathrm{nadir}$.
Therefore, for the case $\xi > 1$, Nadir is eliminated if and only if $1 - \omega_\mathrm{n}z^{-1}\left(\xi- \sqrt{\xi^2-1}\right)\geq0$, i.e., $\sqrt{\xi^2-1} \geq \xi-z/\omega_\mathrm{n}$,
which holds if and only if
\begin{align*}
\xi\leq z/\omega_\mathrm{n} \quad\text{or}\quad
\begin{cases}
\xi> z/\omega_\mathrm{n}\\
\xi \geq \left(z/\omega_\mathrm{n}+\omega_\mathrm{n}/z\right)/2
\end{cases}.
\end{align*}
Thus we get the conditions
\begin{align}\label{eq:ov-nonadir}
1 < \xi\leq z/\omega_\mathrm{n} \quad\text{or}\quad
\begin{cases}
\xi>1\\
\xi>z/\omega_\mathrm{n}\\
\xi \geq \left(z/\omega_\mathrm{n}+\omega_\mathrm{n}/z\right)/2
\end{cases}.
\end{align}
\end{enumerate}
Finally, since $\forall a, b \geq 0$, $(a+b)/2\geq\sqrt{ab}$ with equality only when $a=b$, it follows that the second condition in \eqref{eq:ov-nonadir} can only hold when $\xi>1$.
Thus we can combine
\eqref{eq:cri-nonadir} and \eqref{eq:ov-nonadir} to yield \eqref{eq:nonadir-con}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Steady-state Effort Share}
\begin{cor}[Synchronous frequency under DC and VI]\label{lem:syn-fre-dc}
Let Assumption~\ref{ass:step} hold. When $q_{\mathrm{r},i}$ is defined by the control law DC \eqref{eq:dy-dc} or VI \eqref{eq:dy-vi}, the steady-state frequency deviation of the system $\hat{T}_{\omega \mathrm{p,DC}}$ or $\hat{T}_{\omega \mathrm{p, VI}}$ synchronizes to the synchronous frequency, i.e., $\omega_{\mathrm{ss}} = \omega_{\mathrm{syn}} \mathbbold{1}_n$ with
\begin{equation}
\omega_{\mathrm{syn}} = \dfrac{\sum_{i=1}^n u_{0,i}}{\sum_{i=1}^n \left( d_i + r_{\mathrm{t},i}^{-1} + r_{\mathrm{r},i}^{-1} \right)}\;. \label{eq:ome-syn-dc}
\end{equation}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
The result follows directly from Lemma~\ref{lem:syn-fre}.
\end{proof}
Now, the corollary below gives the expression for the steady-state effort share when inverters are under the control law DC or VI.
\begin{cor}[Steady-state effort share of DC and VI]\label{thm:ss-DC}
Let Assumption~\ref{ass:step} hold. If $q_{\mathrm{r},i}$ is under the control law \eqref{eq:dy-dc} or \eqref{eq:dy-vi}, then the steady-state effort share of the system $\hat{T}_{\omega \mathrm{p, DC}}$ or $\hat{T}_{\omega \mathrm{p, VI}}$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:es-ratio}
\mathrm{ES} = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^n r_{\mathrm{r},i}^{-1}}{\sum_{i=1}^n \left( d_i + {r_{\mathrm{t},i}^{-1} + r_{\mathrm{r},i}^{-1}} \right) }\;.
\end{equation}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
The result follows directly from Theorem~\ref{thm:ss-es} applied to \eqref{eq:dy-dc} and \eqref{eq:dy-vi}.
\end{proof}
Corollary~\ref{thm:ss-DC} indicates that DC and VI have the same steady-state effort share, which increases as $r_{\mathrm{r},i}^{-1}$ increase.
However, $r_{\mathrm{r},i}^{-1}$ are parameters that also directly affect the dynamic performance of the power system, which can be seen clearly from the dynamic performance analysis.
\subsection{Power Fluctuations and Measurement Noise}\label{ssec:VI-dy}
Using Theorem~\ref{thm:h2-sum} and Lemma~\ref{lm:h2-4th}, it is possible to get closed form expressions of $\mathcal{H}_2$ norms for systems $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn},\mathrm{DC}}$ and $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn},\mathrm{VI}}$.
\begin{cor}[Frequency variance under DC and VI]\label{thm:noise-VI}
Let Assumptions~\ref{ass:proportion} and \ref{ass:noise} hold. The squared $\mathcal{H}_2$ norm of $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn},\mathrm{DC}}$ and $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn},\mathrm{VI}}$ is given by
\begin{subequations}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:noise-DC}
\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 = \sum_{k=1}^n \Gamma_{kk} \dfrac{\kappa_\mathrm{p}^2 + r_\mathrm{r}^{-2} \kappa_\omega^2}{2m \check{d}} ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:noise-VI}
\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{VI}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 = \infty \;,
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
respectively, where $\check{d} := d + r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
We study the two cases separately.
We begin with $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$.
Applying \eqref{eq:go-sw} and \eqref{eq:co-dc} to \eqref{eq:hp-s} and \eqref{eq:homega-s} shows
$\hat{h}_{{\mathrm{p},k},\mathrm{DC}}(s)$ is a transfer function with $b_4=a_0=b_0=a_1=b_1=0, a_2 = \lambda_k/m, b_2 = 0, a_3 = \check{d}/m, b_3 =1/m$, while $\hat{h}_{{\omega,k},\mathrm{DC}}(s)$ is a transfer function with $b_4=a_0=b_0=a_1=b_1=0, a_2 = \lambda_k/m, b_2 = 0, a_3 = \check{d}/m, b_3 =-r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}/m$.
Thus, by Lemma~\ref{lm:h2-4th},
\begin{align*}
\|\hat{h}_{{\mathrm{p},k},\mathrm{DC}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2=\frac{1}{2m\check{d}} \quad \text{and} \quad
\|\hat{h}_{{\omega,k},\mathrm{DC}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2=\frac{r_\mathrm{r}^{-2}}{2m\check{d}}\;.
\end{align*}
Then \eqref{eq:noise-DC} follows from Theorem~\ref{thm:h2-sum}.
We now turn to show that $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{VI}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ is infinite. Applying \eqref{eq:go-sw} and \eqref{eq:co-vi} to \eqref{eq:homega-s} yields
\begin{align*}
\hat{h}_{{\omega,k},\mathrm{VI}}(s) =& - \frac{m_{\mathrm{v}} s^2 + r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} s}{(m + m_\mathrm{v}) s^2 + \check{d} s + \lambda_k}\;,
\end{align*}
which by Lemma~\ref{lm:h2-4th} has $b_4 = -m_\mathrm{v}/\left(m + m_\mathrm{v}\right)\neq0$ and thus $\|\hat{h}_{{\omega,k},\mathrm{DC}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2=\infty$. Then \eqref{eq:noise-VI} follows directly from Theorem~\ref{thm:h2-sum}.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}[Optimal $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$ for $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$] \label{cor:optimal-h2-dc}Let Assumptions~\ref{ass:proportion} and \ref{ass:noise} hold. Then
\begin{align}\label{eq:rr-star}
r_\mathrm{r}^{-1\star}\!\!:=\!\argmin_{r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} > 0}\! \|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2\!\!=\!-d +\! \sqrt{d^2 + (\kappa_{\mathrm{p}}/\kappa_{\omega})^2}\,.
\end{align}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
The partial derivative of $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ with respect to $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$ is
\begin{align}\label{eq:h2-dc-partial}
\partial_{r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}}\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 = \sum_{k=1}^n \Gamma_{kk} \frac{\kappa_\omega^2 r_\mathrm{r}^{-2} \!+\! 2d\kappa_\omega^2 r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}\!-\!\kappa_\mathrm{p}^2}{2m\check{d}^2}\,.
\end{align}
By equating \eqref{eq:h2-dc-partial} to 0, we can solve the corresponding $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$ as ${r_\mathrm{r}^{-1\star}}_\pm=-d \pm \sqrt{d^2 + (\kappa_{\mathrm{p}}/\kappa_{\omega})^2}$. The only positive root is therefore $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1\star}:=-d + \sqrt{d^2 + (\kappa_{\mathrm{p}}/\kappa_{\omega})^2}$. We now show that $\Gamma_{kk} > 0$, $\forall k \in \{1,\dots, n\}$. Recall that $\Gamma := V^T F^{-1} V$. We know $\Gamma_{kk} = \sum_{j=1}^n ( v_{k,j}^2/f_j)$. Since $v_k$ is an eigenvector, $\forall k \in \{1,\dots, n\}$, there must exist at least one $j\in \mathcal{V}$ such that $v_{k,j}\neq0$. Since $f_i > 0$, $\forall i$, we have that $\Gamma_{kk} > 0$, $\forall k \in \{1,\dots, n\}$. In addition, since the denominator of \eqref{eq:h2-dc-partial} is always positive and the highest order coefficient of the numerator is positive, whenever $0 < r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} < r_\mathrm{r}^{-1\star}$, then $ \partial_{r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}}\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 < 0$, and if $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} > r_\mathrm{r}^{-1\star}$, then $ \partial_{r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}}\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 > 0$. Therefore, $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1\star}$ is the minimizer of $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$.
\end{proof}
Two main observations can be made from Corollary~\ref{thm:noise-VI}. First, the control parameter $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$ of DC has an direct effect on the size of the frequency variance in the system, which makes it impossible to require DC to bear an assigned amount of steady-state effort share and reduce the frequency variance at the same time. The other important point is that VI will induce unbounded frequency variance, which poses a threat to the operation of the power system. Therefore, neither DC nor VI is good solution to improve the frequency variance without sacrificing the steady-state effort share.
\subsection{Synchronization Cost}
Theorem~\ref{thm:bound-cost} implies that the synchronization cost of $\hat{T}_{\omega \mathrm{p, DC}}$ and $\hat{T}_{\omega \mathrm{p, VI}}$ are bounded by a weighted sum of $\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{DC}} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ and $\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{VI}} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$, respectively. Hence, in order to see the limited ability of DC and VI to reduce the synchronization cost, we need to gain a deeper understanding of $\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{DC}} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ and $\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{VI}} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ first.
\begin{thm}[Bounds of $\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{DC}} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ and $\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{VI}} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$]
\label{lem:bounds-VI}
Let Assumptions~\ref{ass:proportion} and \ref{ass:step} hold. Then, given $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}>0$, $\forall m_\mathrm{v} > 0$,
\begin{align*}
\dfrac{1}{2 \lambda_{k+1} \!\left(\check{d} \!+\! r_\mathrm{t}^{-1}\right)} \!\!<\! \| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{VI}} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 \!\!<\! \| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{DC}} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 \!\!<\! \| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{SW}} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2,
\end{align*}
where $\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{SW}} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ represents the inner products of the open-loop system with no additional control from inverters.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Considering that DC can be viewed as VI with $m_\mathrm{v} = 0$ and the open-loop system can be viewed as VI with $m_\mathrm{v}=r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}=0$, we only compute $\|\hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{VI}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$, which straightforwardly implies the other two. Applying \eqref{eq:go-sw-tb} and \eqref{eq:co-vi} to \eqref{eq:hp-s} shows $\hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{VI}}(s)=\hat{h}_{\mathrm{p},k+1,\mathrm{T,VI}}(s)/s$ is a transfer function with $b_4=a_0=b_0=0, a_1=\lambda_{k+1}/\left(\check{m} \tau\right), b_1=1/\left(\check{m} \tau\right), a_2 = \left(\check{d} + r_{\mathrm{t}}^{-1} + \lambda_{k+1} \tau\right)/\left(\check{m} \tau\right), b_2 = 1/\check{m}, a_3 = \left(\check{m} + \check{d} \tau\right)/\left(\check{m} \tau\right), b_3 =0$.
Then it follows from Lemma~\ref{lm:h2-4th} that
\begin{align}
\|\hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{VI}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2
\!\!=\!\dfrac{\check{m} + \tau\! \left(\lambda_{k+1} \tau + \check{d} \right)}{ 2 \lambda_{k+1}\!\left[\tau \check{d} \left(\lambda_{k+1} \tau + \check{d} +\! r_\mathrm{t}^{-1}\right) \!+ \!\check{m}\!\left(\check{d} + r_\mathrm{t}^{-1}\right)\right] }. \nonumber
\end{align}
Since $\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{VI}} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ is a function of $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$ and $m_\mathrm{v}$, in what follows we denote it by $\rho(r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}, m_\mathrm{v})$. In order to have an insight on how $\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{VI}} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ changes with $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$ and $m_\mathrm{v}$, we take partial derivatives of $\rho(r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}, m_\mathrm{v})$ with respect to $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$ and $m_\mathrm{v}$, i.e.,
\begin{align}
&\partial_{r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}} \rho (r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}, m_\mathrm{v}) \nonumber\\
=& - \!\dfrac{
\left[\check{m}+ \tau \left(\lambda_{k+1} \tau + \check{d} \right)\right]^2 + \lambda_{k+1} \tau^3 r_\mathrm{t}^{-1} }{ 2 \lambda_{k+1}\left[ \tau \check{d} \left(\lambda_{k+1} \tau + \check{d} + r_\mathrm{t}^{-1}\right) + \check{m}(\check{d} + r_\mathrm{t}^{-1}) \right]^2}\;,\nonumber\\
&\partial_{m_\mathrm{v}} \rho (r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}, m_\mathrm{v}) \nonumber\\
=& - \!\dfrac{ \tau^2 r_\mathrm{t}^{-1}}{ 2 \left[ \tau \check{d} \left(\lambda_{k+1} \tau + \check{d} + r_\mathrm{t}^{-1}\right) + \check{m}(\check{d} + r_\mathrm{t}^{-1}) \right]^2}\;. \nonumber
\end{align}
Clearly, for all $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} \geq 0$, $\partial_{r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}} \rho (r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}, m_\mathrm{v}) < 0$, which means that $\rho (r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}, m_\mathrm{v})$ is a monotonically decreasing function of $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$. Similarly, for all $m_\mathrm{v} \geq 0$, $\partial_{m_\mathrm{v}} \rho (r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}, m_\mathrm{v}) < 0$, which means that $\rho (r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}, m_\mathrm{v})$ is a monotonically decreasing function of $m_\mathrm{v}$. Therefore, given $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} > 0$, $\forall m_\mathrm{v} > 0$, it holds that
\[
\lim_{m_\mathrm{v}\to \infty} \rho(r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}, m_\mathrm{v})<\rho(r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}, m_\mathrm{v}) < \rho(r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}, 0)< \rho(0, 0)\,.
\]
Recall that $\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{VI}} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 = \rho(r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}, m_\mathrm{v})$, $\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{DC}} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 = \rho(r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}, 0)$, and $\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{SW}} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 = \rho(0, 0)$.
The result follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}[Comparison of synchronization cost in homogeneous case] \label{cor:syncost-homoe-bounds}
Denote the synchronization cost of the open-loop system as $\|\tilde{\omega}_\mathrm{SW}\|_2^2$. Then, under Assumptions~\ref{ass:proportion} and \ref{ass:step}, given $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}>0$, $\forall m_\mathrm{v} > 0$, we can order the synchronization cost when $F=fI_n$ as:
\[
\frac{\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}\left(\tilde{u}_{0,k}^2/\lambda_{k+1}\right)}{2f\left(\check{d} + r_\mathrm{t}^{-1}\right)}< \|\tilde{\omega}_\mathrm{VI}\|_2^2 < \|\tilde{\omega}_\mathrm{DC}\|_2^2 < \|\tilde{\omega}_\mathrm{SW}\|_2^2\,.
\]
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
The result follows by combining Remark~\ref{rem:syncost-homo} and Theorem~\ref{lem:bounds-VI}.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}[Lower bound of synchronization cost under DC and VI]\label{cor:low-bound-pro}
Under Assumptions~\ref{ass:proportion} and \ref{ass:step}, the ordering of the size of the bounds on the synchronization cost of open-loop, DC, and VI depends on the parameter values. Thus we cannot order $\|\tilde{\omega}_\mathrm{VI}\|_2^2$, $\|\tilde{\omega}_\mathrm{DC}\|_2^2$, and $\|\tilde{\omega}_\mathrm{SW}\|_2^2$ strictly. Instead, we highlight that, given $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}>0$, the synchronization cost under DC and VI are bounded below by
\[
\frac{\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}\left(\tilde{u}_{0,k}^2/\lambda_{k+1}\right)}{2\max_{i \in \mathcal{V}} \left(f_i \right)\left(\check{d} + r_\mathrm{t}^{-1}\right)}\,.
\]
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
The result follows from Theorems~\ref{thm:bound-cost} and~\ref{lem:bounds-VI}.
\end{proof}
Corollary~\ref{cor:syncost-homoe-bounds} provides both upper and lower bounds for the synchronization cost under DC and VI in homogeneous case. The upper bound verifies that DC and VI do reduce the synchronization cost by adding damping and inertia while the lower bound indicates that the reduction of the synchronization cost through DC and VI is limited by certain value that is dependent on $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$. Corollary~\ref{cor:low-bound-pro} implies that in the proportional case the synchronization cost under DC and VI is also bounded below by a value that is dependent on $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$. The fact that the lower bound of the synchronization cost under DC and VI is reduced as $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$ increases is not satisfactory, since, from the stead-state effort share point of view, a smaller $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$ is preferred. However, given a small $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$, even if the inertia is very high, i.e., $m_\mathrm{v}\to\infty$, the synchronization cost $\|\tilde{\omega}_\mathrm{VI}\|_2^2$ can never reach zero, not to mention $\|\tilde{\omega}_\mathrm{DC}\|_2^2$.
\subsection{Nadir}
Finally, with the help of Theorem~\ref{th:nonadir-con}, we can determine the conditions that the parameters of DC and VI must satisfy to eliminate Nadir of the system frequency.
\begin{thm}[Nadir elimination under DC and VI]\label{thm:no-nadir-cond-VI}
Under Assumptions~\ref{ass:proportion} and \ref{ass:step}:
\begin{itemize}
\item
for $\hat{T}_{\omega \mathrm{p, DC}}$,
the tuning region that eliminates Nadir through DC is $r_{\mathrm{r}}^{-1}$ such that
\begin{align}\label{eq:nadir-DC}
r_{\mathrm{r}}^{-1} \leq m\left(\tau^{-1} - 2\sqrt{\tau^{-1}r_{\mathrm{t}}^{-1}/m}\right)-d\;;
\end{align}
\item
for $\hat{T}_{\omega \mathrm{p, VI}}$,
the tuning region that eliminates Nadir through VI is $(r_{\mathrm{r}}^{-1}, m_{\mathrm{v}})$ such that
\begin{align}\label{eq:nadir-VI}
r_{\mathrm{r}}^{-1} \!\leq \! \left(m\!+\! m_{\mathrm{v}}\right)\!\left(\tau^{-1}\! -\! 2\sqrt{\tau^{-1}r_{\mathrm{t}}^{-1}\!/\!\left(m\!+\! m_{\mathrm{v}}\right)}\right)\!-d\;.
\end{align}
\end{itemize}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We start by deriving the Nadir elimination condition for VI.
The system frequency of $\hat{T}_{\omega \mathrm{p, VI}}$ is given by \cite{p2017ccc}
\begin{equation*}
\bar{\omega}_\mathrm{VI}(t) = \dfrac{\sum_{i=1}^n u_{0,i} }{ \sum_{i=1}^n f_i } p_\mathrm{u,VI}(t)\;,
\end{equation*}
where $p_\mathrm{u,VI}(t)$ is the unit-step response of $\hat{h}_{{\mathrm{p},1},\mathrm{T, VI}}(s)$. Clearly, as long as $p_\mathrm{u,VI}(t)$ has no Nadir, neither does $\bar{\omega}_\mathrm{VI}(t)$. Thus, as shown later, the core is to apply Theorem~\ref{th:nonadir-con} to $\hat{h}_{{\mathrm{p},1},\mathrm{T, VI}}(s)$.
Substituting \eqref{eq:go-sw-tb} and \eqref{eq:co-vi} to \eqref{eq:hp-s} yields
\begin{align*}
\hat{h}_{\mathrm{p},1,\mathrm{T,VI}}(s)
= \frac{1}{\check{m}}\dfrac{s + \tau^{-1}}{ s^2 + 2\xi\omega_\mathrm{n} s + \omega_\mathrm{n}^2 }\;,\nonumber
\end{align*}
where $\omega_\mathrm{n} := \sqrt{\cfrac{\check{d} +r_{\mathrm{t}}^{-1}}{\check{m}\tau}}\;,\quad
\xi := \dfrac{\tau^{-1}+\check{d}/\check{m}}{2\sqrt{\left(\check{d} +r_{\mathrm{t}}^{-1}\right)/\left(\check{m}\tau\right)}}\;.$
Now we are ready to search the Nadir elimination tuning region by means of Theorem~\ref{th:nonadir-con}. An easy computation shows the following inequality: $2\xi\omega_\mathrm{n} - \tau^{-1} = \check{d}/\check{m} < \left(\check{d} +r_{\mathrm{t}}^{-1}\right)/\check{m}=\omega^2_\mathrm{n} \tau$.
Equivalently, it holds that $\xi < \left[1/\left(\omega_\mathrm{n}\tau\right)+ \omega_\mathrm{n} \tau\right]/2$,
which indicates that the second set of conditions in \eqref{eq:nonadir-con} cannot be satisfied. Hence, we turn to the first set of conditions in \eqref{eq:nonadir-con}, which holds if and only $\xi \geq 1$ and $\xi\omega_\mathrm{n} \leq \tau^{-1}$. Via simple algebraic computations, this is equivalent to
\begin{align}\label{eq:cond-nonadir}
\tau \check{d}^2 /\check{m} - 2 \check{d} + \tau^{-1}\check{m} - 4r_{\mathrm{t}}^{-1} \!\geq 0 \quad\text{and}\quad
\check{d}/\check{m} \!\leq \tau^{-1}.
\end{align}
The first condition in \eqref{eq:cond-nonadir} can be viewed as a quadratic inequality with respect to $\check{d}$, which holds if and only if
\begin{align*}
\check{d} \leq \check{m}\left(\tau^{-1} - 2\sqrt{ \cfrac{r_{\mathrm{t}}^{-1}}{\check{m}\tau}}\right)
\quad\text{or}\quad
\check{d} \geq \check{m}\left(\tau^{-1} + 2\sqrt{ \cfrac{r_{\mathrm{t}}^{-1}}{\check{m}\tau}}\right)\,.
\end{align*}
However, only the former region satisfies the second condition in \eqref{eq:cond-nonadir}. This concludes the proof of the second statement. The first statement follows trivially by setting $m_{\mathrm{v}}=0$.
\end{proof}
Important inferences can be made from Theorem~\ref{thm:no-nadir-cond-VI}. The fact that a small $m$ tends to make the term on the right hand side of \eqref{eq:nadir-DC} negative implies that in a low-inertia power system it is impossible to eliminate Nadir using only DC. Undoubtedly, the addition of $m_\mathrm{v}$ makes the tuning region in \eqref{eq:nadir-VI} more accessible, which indicates that VI can help a low-inertia power system improve Nadir.
We end this section by summarizing the pros and cons of each controller.
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Droop control:}~With only one parameter $r_{\mathrm{r}}^{-1}$, DC can neither reduce frequency variance or synchronization cost without affecting steady-state effort share. Moreover, for low-inertia systems, DC cannot eliminate Nadir.
\item \textbf{Virtual inertia:}~ VI can use its additional dynamic parameter $m_\mathrm{v}$ to eliminate system Nadir and relatively improve synchronization cost. However this comes at the price of introducing large frequency variance in response to noise, and cannot be decoupled from increases in the steady-state effort share.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Steady-state Effort Share}
We can show that iDroop is able to preserve the steady-state behavior given by DC and VI.
\begin{cor}[Synchronous frequency under iDroop]\label{lem:syn-fre-idroop}
Let Assumption~\ref{ass:step} hold. If $q_{\mathrm{r},i}$ is under the control law \eqref{eq:dy-idroop}, then the steady-state frequency deviation of the system $\hat{T}_{\omega \mathrm{p, iDroop}}$ synchronizes to the synchronous frequency given by \eqref{eq:ome-syn-dc}.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
The result follows directly from Lemma~\ref{lem:syn-fre}.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}[Steady-state effort share of iDroop]\label{thm:ss-idroop}
Let Assumption~\ref{ass:step} hold. If $q_{\mathrm{r},i}$ is under the control law \eqref{eq:dy-idroop}, then the steady-state effort share of the system $\hat{T}_{\omega \mathrm{p, iDroop}}$ is given by \eqref{eq:es-ratio}.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
The result follows directly from Theorem~\ref{thm:ss-es} applied to \eqref{eq:dy-idroop}.
\end{proof}
Corollaries~\ref{lem:syn-fre-idroop} and~\ref{thm:ss-idroop} suggest that iDroop achieves the same synchronous frequency and steady-state effort share as DC and VI do, which depend on $r_{\mathrm{r},i}^{-1}$. Note that besides $r_{\mathrm{r},i}^{-1}$ iDroop provides us with two more degrees of freedom by $\delta_i$ and $\nu_i$.
\subsection{Power Fluctuations and Measurement Noise}
The next theorem quantifies the frequency variance under iDroop through the squared $\mathcal{H}_2$ norm of the system $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}$.
\begin{cor}[Frequency variance under iDroop]\label{thm:noise-idroop}
Let Assumptions~\ref{ass:proportion} and \ref{ass:noise} hold. The squared $\mathcal{H}_2$ norm of $\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}$ is given by
\begin{align}
& \|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}\label{eq:h2-idroop}\\&= \sum_{k=1}^n \Gamma_{kk} {\dfrac{(\kappa_\mathrm{p}^2 + r_\mathrm{r}^{-2} \kappa_\omega^2) m \delta^2 + (\kappa_\mathrm{p}^2+\nu^2 \kappa_\omega^2)\left(\check{d} \delta + \lambda_k \right) }{2m\left[\check{d}m\delta^2 + (d+\nu)\left(\check{d}\delta + \lambda_k \right)\right]}}.\nonumber
\end{align}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
The proof is based on the Theorem~\ref{thm:h2-sum} and Lemma~\ref{lm:h2-4th}.
Applying \eqref{eq:go-sw} and \eqref{eq:co-idroop} to \eqref{eq:hp-s} and \eqref{eq:homega-s} shows
$\hat{h}_{{\mathrm{p},k},\mathrm{iDroop}}(s)$ is a transfer function with $b_4=a_0=b_0=0, a_1 = \left(\lambda_k \delta\right)/m, b_1 =0, a_2 = \left(\check{d} \delta + \lambda_k\right)/m, b_2 = \delta/m, a_3 = \left(m \delta + d +\nu\right)/m, b_3 =1/m$, while $\hat{h}_{{\omega,k},\mathrm{iDroop}}(s)$ is a transfer function with $b_4=a_0=b_0=0, a_1 = \left(\lambda_k \delta\right)/m, b_1 =0, a_2 = \left(\check{d} \delta + \lambda_k\right)/m, b_2 = -\left(r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}\delta\right)/m, a_3 = \left(m \delta + d +\nu\right)/m, b_3 =-\nu/m$.
Thus, by Lemma~\ref{lm:h2-4th},
\begin{align*}
\|\hat{h}_{{\mathrm{p},k},\mathrm{iDroop}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2={\dfrac{ m \delta^2 + \check{d} \delta + \lambda_k }{2m\left[\check{d}m\delta^2 + (d+\nu)\left(\check{d} \delta + \lambda_k \right)\right]}} \;,\\
\|\hat{h}_{{\omega,k},\mathrm{iDroop}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2={\dfrac{ r_\mathrm{r}^{-2} m \delta^2 + \nu^2 \left(\check{d} \delta + \lambda_k \right) }{2m\left[\check{d}m\delta^2 + (d+\nu)\left(\check{d} \delta + \lambda_k \right)\right]}}\;.
\end{align*}
Then \eqref{eq:h2-idroop} follows from Theorem~\ref{thm:h2-sum}.
\end{proof}
The explicit expression of $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}$ given in Corollary~\ref{thm:noise-idroop} is useful to show that iDroop can reduce the frequency variance relative to DC and VI. Given the fact that $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{VI}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}$ is infinite, the question indeed lies in whether we can find a set of values for parameters $\delta$ and $\nu$ that ensure $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2} \leq \|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}$. Fortunately, we can not only find such a set but also the optimal setting for \eqref{eq:h2-idroop}. The following three lemmas set the foundation of this important result which is given as Theorem 7.
\begin{lem}[Limit of $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}$]\label{lem:h2lim}
Let Assumptions~\ref{ass:proportion} and \ref{ass:noise} hold. If $\delta \to \infty$, then $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2} = \|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The limit of \eqref{eq:h2-idroop} as $\delta \to \infty$ can be computed as
\[
\underset{\delta \to \infty}{\lim} \|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}
\!=\! \sum_{k=1}^n \Gamma_{kk} {\dfrac{\kappa_\mathrm{p}^2 + r_\mathrm{r}^{-2} \kappa_\omega^2 }{2m\check{d}}} \!=\! \|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}\,,
\]
where the second equality follows from \eqref{eq:noise-DC}.
\end{proof}
Lemma~\ref{lem:h2lim} shows that $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ asymptotically converges to $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ as $\delta \to \infty$.
The next lemma shows that this convergence is monotonically from either above or below depending on the value of the parameter $\nu$.
\begin{lem}[$\nu$-dependent monotonicity of $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{ iDroop}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ with respect to $\delta$ ]\label{lem:mono-alp}
Let Assumptions~\ref{ass:proportion} and \ref{ass:noise} hold. Define
\begin{equation}
\alpha_1 (\nu)
:= \dfrac{- \check{d}\kappa_\omega^2 \nu^2 + \left(\kappa_\mathrm{p}^2 + r_\mathrm{r}^{-2}\kappa_\omega^2 \right)\nu + d r_\mathrm{r}^{-2} \kappa_\omega^2 - r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}\kappa_\mathrm{p}^2}{d+\nu} \nonumber\,.\label{eq:alpha1}
\end{equation}
Then
\begin{itemize}
\item
$\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ is a monotonically increasing or decreasing function of $\delta > 0$ if and only if $\alpha_1 (\nu)$ is positive or negative, respectively.
\item
$\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ is independent of $\delta>0$ if and only if $\alpha_1 (\nu)$ is zero.
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Provided that $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ is a function of $\delta$ and $\nu$, in what follows we denote it by $\Pi(\delta, \nu)$. To make it clear how $\Pi(\delta, \nu)$ changes with $\delta$, we firstly put it into the equivalent form of
\begin{equation*}
\Pi(\delta, \nu) = \sum_{k=1}^n \Gamma_{kk} \left[\dfrac{\alpha_1(\nu) \delta^2}{\alpha_2 \delta^2+\alpha_3(\nu) \delta +\alpha_4(\nu, \lambda_k)} + \alpha_5(\nu) \right]\
\end{equation*}
with
\begin{subequations} \label{eq:alpha}
\begin{align*}
&\alpha_1(\nu) := \dfrac{- \check{d}\kappa_\omega^2 \nu^2 + \left(\kappa_\mathrm{p}^2 + r_\mathrm{r}^{-2}\kappa_\omega^2 \right)\nu + d r_\mathrm{r}^{-2} \kappa_\omega^2 - r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}\kappa_\mathrm{p}^2}{d+\nu}\;,\\
&\alpha_2 := 2m\check{d}\;,\qquad\;
\alpha_3(\nu) := 2(d+\nu)\check{d}\;, \\
&\alpha_4(\nu, \lambda_k) := 2(d+\nu)\lambda_k\;,\qquad
\alpha_5(\nu) := \dfrac{\kappa_\mathrm{p}^2+\nu^2 \kappa_\omega^2}{2m(d+\nu)}\;.
\end{align*}
\end{subequations}
We then take the partial derivative of $\Pi(\delta, \nu)$ with respect to $\delta$ as
\begin{align*}
\partial_{\delta} \Pi(\delta, \nu)
=\! \alpha_1(\nu) \sum_{k=1}^n \Gamma_{kk} \!\left[ \dfrac{ \alpha_3(\nu) \delta^2 +2 \alpha_4(\nu, \lambda_k) \delta}{(\alpha_2 \delta^2+\alpha_3(\nu) \delta +\alpha_4(\nu, \lambda_k))^2}\right].
\end{align*}
Since $m > 0$, $d > 0$, $\nu > 0$, and $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} > 0$, $\alpha_2$ and $\alpha_3(\nu)$ are positive. Also, given that all the eigenvalues of the scaled Laplacian matrix $L_\mathrm{F}$ are non-negative, $\alpha_4(\nu, \lambda_k)$ must be non-negative. Thus, $\forall \delta > 0$, $( \alpha_3(\nu) \delta^2 +2 \alpha_4(\nu, \lambda_k) \delta)/(\alpha_2 \delta^2+\alpha_3(\nu) \delta +\alpha_4(\nu, \lambda_k))^2 > 0$.
Recall from the proof of Corollary~\ref{cor:optimal-h2-dc} that $\Gamma_{kk} > 0$, $\forall k \in \{1,\dots, n\}$. Therefore, $\forall \delta > 0$, $\mathrm{sign} \left( \partial_{\delta} \Pi(\delta, \nu) \right) = \mathrm{sign} \left( \alpha_1(\nu) \right)$.
\end{proof}
By Lemma~\ref{lem:mono-alp}, for a given $\nu$, if $\alpha_1(\nu) < 0$, then $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}$ always decreases as $\delta$ increases. However, according to Lemma~\ref{lem:h2lim}, even if $\delta \to \infty$, we can only obtain $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2} = \|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}$. Similarly, if $\alpha_1 (\nu) = 0$, then $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}$ keeps constant as $\delta$ increases, which means whatever $\delta$ is we will always obtain $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2} = \|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}$. Therefore, iDroop cannot outperform DC when $\alpha_1 (\nu) \le 0$. To put it another way, Lemmas~\ref{lem:h2lim} and \ref{lem:mono-alp} imply that in order to improve the frequency variance through iDroop, one needs to set $\nu$ such that $\alpha_1(\nu) > 0$ and $\delta$ as small as practically possible. The following lemma characterizes the minimizer $\nu^{\star}$ of $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ when $\delta = 0$.
\begin{lem}[Minimizer $\nu^{\star}$ of $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ when $\delta = 0$]\label{lem:vstar}
Let Assumptions~\ref{ass:proportion} and \ref{ass:noise} hold. Then
\begin{equation}\label{eq:vstar}
\nu^{\star}\!\!:=\! \argmin_{\delta = 0, \nu > 0} \!\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 \!\!=\! -d +\! \sqrt{d^2 + (\kappa_{\mathrm{p}}/\kappa_{\omega})^2}\, .
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Recall from the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:mono-alp} that $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 = \Pi(\delta, \nu)$. Then we have
\begin{equation*}
\Pi(0, \nu) = \dfrac{\kappa_\mathrm{p}^2+\nu^2 \kappa_\omega^2}{2m(d + \nu)} \sum_{k=1}^n \Gamma_{kk}\;,
\end{equation*}
whose derivative with respect to $\nu$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\Pi'(0, \nu) = \dfrac{\kappa_\omega^2\nu^2 + 2 d\kappa_\omega^2 \nu - \kappa_\mathrm{p}^2}{2m (d+\nu)^2} \sum_{k=1}^n \Gamma_{kk}\;. \label{eq:g'(0,nu)}
\end{equation}
Note that \eqref{eq:g'(0,nu)} and \eqref{eq:h2-dc-partial} are in the same form. Thus, $\nu^{\star}$ is determined in the same way as in the proof of Corollary~\ref{cor:optimal-h2-dc}.
\end{proof}
We are now ready to prove the next theorem.
\begin{thm}[$\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ optimal tuning]\label{thm:h2-improves}
Let Assumptions~\ref{ass:proportion} and \ref{ass:noise} hold. Define $\nu^{\star}$ as in \eqref{eq:vstar}. Then
\begin{itemize}
\item whenever $(\kappa_\mathrm{p}/\kappa_\omega)^2 \neq 2r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}d + r_\mathrm{r}^{-2}$, for any $\delta > 0$ and $\nu$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:condition}
\nu \in [\nu^{\star},r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}) \quad \text{or}\quad \nu \in (r_\mathrm{r}^{-1},\nu^\star]\;,
\end{equation}
iDroop outperforms DC in terms of frequency variance, i.e.,
\begin{equation*}
\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}<\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}\;.
\end{equation*}
Moreover, the global minimum of $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}$ is obtained by setting $\delta \to 0$ and $\nu \to \nu^{\star}$.
\item if $(\kappa_\mathrm{p}/\kappa_\omega)^2 = 2r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}d + r_\mathrm{r}^{-2}$, then for any $\delta > 0$, by setting $\nu \to \nu^{\star} = r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$, iDroop matches DC in terms of frequency variance, i.e.,
\begin{equation*}
\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}=\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}\;.
\end{equation*}
\end{itemize}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
As discussed before, to guarantee $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2} < \|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}$, one requires to set $\nu$ such that $\alpha_1 (\nu) > 0$. In this case, $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}$ always increases as $\delta$ increases, so choosing $\delta$ arbitrarily small is optimal for any fixed $\nu$.
We now look for the values of $\nu$ that satisfy the requirement $\alpha_1 (\nu) > 0$. Since the denominator of $\alpha_1 (\nu) $ is always positive, the sign of $\alpha_1 (\nu)$ only depends on its numerator. Denote the numerator of $\alpha_1 (\nu)$ as $N_{\alpha_1}(\nu)$. Clearly, $N_{\alpha_1}(\nu)$ is a univariate quadratic function in $\nu$, whose roots are: $\nu_1 = r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$ and $\nu_2 = \left[(\kappa_\mathrm{p}/\kappa_\omega)^2 - r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} d \right]/\check{d}$.
Provided that the highest order coefficient of $N_{\alpha_1}(\nu)$ is negative, the graph of $N_{\alpha_1}(\nu)$ is a parabola that opens downwards. Therefore, if $\nu_1 < \nu_2$, then $\nu \in (\nu_1, \nu_2)$ guarantees $\alpha_1 (\nu) > 0$; if $\nu_1 > \nu_2$, then $\nu \in (\nu_2, \nu_1)\cap(0, \infty)$ guarantees $\alpha_1 (\nu) > 0$. Notably, if $\nu_1 = \nu_2$, there exists no feasible points of $\nu$ to make $\alpha_1 (\nu) > 0$.
The condition $\nu_1 = \nu_2$ happens only if $(\kappa_\mathrm{p}/\kappa_\omega)^2 = 2r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} d + r_\mathrm{r}^{-2}$, from which it follows that $\nu^{\star} = r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} = \nu_1 = \nu_2$. Then $\alpha_1 (\nu^{\star}) = \alpha_1 (r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}) = 0$. Therefore, by setting $\nu \to \nu^{\star} = r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$, we get $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}=\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}$. This concludes the proof of the second part.
We now focus on the case where the set $S=(\nu_1, \nu_2)\cup\{(\nu_2, \nu_1)\cap(0, \infty)\}$
is nonempty. Recall from the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:mono-alp} that $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{iDroop}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2} = \Pi(\delta, \nu)$. For any fixed $\nu \in S$, it holds that $\alpha_1 (\nu) > 0$ and thus $\Pi(\delta, \nu) > \Pi(0, \nu)$ for any $\delta >0$. Recall from the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:vstar} that $\nu^{\star}$ is the minimizer of $\Pi(0, \nu)$. Hence, $(0, \nu^{\star})$ globally minimizes $\Pi(\delta, \nu)$ as long as $\nu^{\star}\in S$. In fact, we will show next that $\nu^{\star}$ is always within $S$ whenever $S\neq\emptyset$.
Firstly we consider the case when $\nu_1 < \nu_2$, which implies that $(\kappa_\mathrm{p}/\kappa_\omega)^2 > 2r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} d + r_\mathrm{r}^{-2}$. Then we have $\nu^{\star} >-d+\sqrt{d^2 + 2r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}d + r_\mathrm{r}^{-2}} = r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} = \nu_1$.
We also want to show $\nu^{\star} < \nu_2$ which holds if and only if
\begin{align*}
\sqrt{d^2 + (\kappa_\mathrm{p}/\kappa_\omega)^2} \!<\! \dfrac{(\kappa_\mathrm{p}/\kappa_\omega)^2 - r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} d }{\check{d}} + d = \dfrac{(\kappa_\mathrm{p}/\kappa_\omega)^2 + d^2 }{\check{d}}
\end{align*}
which is equivalent to $1 < \sqrt{d^2 + (\kappa_\mathrm{p}/\kappa_\omega)^2}/\check{d}$.
This always holds since $(\kappa_\mathrm{p}/\kappa_\omega)^2 > 2r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} d + r_\mathrm{r}^{-2}$. Thus, $\nu_1 < \nu^{\star} < \nu_2$.
Similarly, we can prove that in the case when $\nu_1 > \nu_2$, $\nu_2 < \nu^{\star} < \nu_1$ holds and thus $\nu^{\star} \in (\nu_2, \nu_1)\cap(0, \infty)$.
It follows that $(0, \nu^{\star})$ is the global minimizer of $\Pi(\delta, \nu)$.
Finally, by Lemma~\ref{lem:h2lim}, $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|^{2}_{\mathcal{H}_2} = \Pi(\infty, \nu)$. The condition \eqref{eq:condition} actually guarantees $\nu \in S$ and thus $\alpha_1(\nu) > 0$. Then, by Lemma~\ref{lem:mono-alp}, we have $\|\hat{T}_{\omega\mathrm{dn}, \mathrm{DC}}\|^{2}_{\mathcal{H}_2} = \Pi(\infty, \nu) > \Pi(\delta, \nu)$.
This concludes the proof of the first part.
\end{proof}
Theorem \ref{thm:h2-improves} shows that, to optimally improve the frequency variance, iDroop needs to first set $\delta$ arbitrarily close to zero. Interestingly, this implies that the transfer function $\hat{c}_\mathrm{o}(s)\approx-\nu$ except for $\hat{c}_\mathrm{o}(0)=-r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$. In other words, iDroop uses its first-order lead/lag property to effectively decouple the dc gain $\hat{c}_\mathrm{o}(0)$ from the gain at all the other frequencies such that $\hat{c}_\mathrm{o}(\boldsymbol{j\omega})\approx -\nu$. This decouple is particularly easy to understand in two special regimes: (i) If $\kappa_\mathrm{p}\ll \kappa_\omega$, the system is dominated by measurement noise and therefore $\nu^{\star} \approx 0 <r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$ which makes iDroop a lag compensator. Thus, by using lag compensation (setting $\nu<r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$) iDroop can attenuate frequency noise;
(ii) If $\kappa_\mathrm{p} \gg \kappa_\omega$, the system is dominated by power fluctuations and therefore $\nu^\star \approx \kappa_\mathrm{p}/\kappa_\omega >r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$ which makes iDroop a lead compensator. Thus, by using lead compensation (setting $\nu>r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$) iDroop can mitigate power fluctuations.
\subsection{Synchronization Cost}
Theorem~\ref{thm:bound-cost} implies that the bounds on the synchronization cost of $\hat{T}_{\omega \mathrm{p, iDroop}}$ are closely related to $\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{iDroop}} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$. If we can find a tuning that forces $\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{iDroop}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2$ to be zero, then both lower and upper bounds on the synchronization cost converge to zero. Then, the zero synchronization cost is achieved naturally. The next theorem addresses this problem.
\begin{thm}[Zero synchronization cost tuning of iDroop]
\label{th:zero-syn-idroop}
Let Assumptions~\ref{ass:proportion} and \ref{ass:step} hold. Then a zero synchronization cost of the system $\hat{T}_{\omega \mathrm{p, iDroop}}$, i.e., $\|\tilde{\omega}_\mathrm{iDroop}\|_2^2 = 0$, can be achieved by setting $\delta \to 0$ and $\nu \to \infty$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Since the key is to show that $\| \hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{iDroop}} \|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2 \to 0$ as $\delta \to 0$ and $\nu \to \infty$,
we can use Lemma~\ref{lm:h2-4th}. Applying \eqref{eq:go-sw-tb} and \eqref{eq:co-idroop} to \eqref{eq:hp-s} shows $\hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{iDroop}}(s)=\hat{h}_{\mathrm{p},k+1,\mathrm{T,iDroop}}(s)/s$ is a transfer function with
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align*}
a_0 =& \frac{\lambda_{k+1}\delta}{m \tau}\;,
\qquad b_0 = \frac{\delta}{m \tau}\;,\\
a_1 =& \frac{ \delta(\check{d}+ r_{\mathrm{t}}^{-1}+\lambda_{k+1}\tau) + \lambda_{k+1}}{m \tau}\;,
\qquad b_1 = \frac{\delta \tau + 1}{m \tau}\;,\\
a_2 =& \frac{\delta(m+ \check{d} \tau ) + d + r_{\mathrm{t}}^{-1} + \lambda_{k+1} \tau + \nu }{m \tau},\qquad b_2 =\! \frac{1}{m}\;,\\
a_3 =& \frac{m \delta \tau + m + d \tau + \nu \tau}{m \tau},
\qquad b_3 = 0\;,\qquad b_4 = 0\;.
\end{align*}
\end{subequations}
Considering that $a_0\to0$ and $b_0\to0$ as $\delta \to 0$ and $\nu \to \infty$,
we can employ the $\mathcal{H}_2$ norm computation formula for the third-order transfer function in Remark~\ref{rem:h2-3rd}. Then
\begin{align*}
\underset{\delta \to 0, \nu \to \infty}{\lim} \!\!\|\hat{h}_{\mathrm{u},k,\mathrm{iDroop}}\|_{\mathcal{H}_2}^2
\!\
\!=&\!\underset{\delta \to 0, \nu \to \infty}{\lim} \!\frac{\frac{\nu}{m} \!\left(\frac{1}{m \tau}\right)^2\!+\!\frac{\lambda_{k+1} }{m \tau} \!\left(\frac{1}{m}\right)^2}{2 \frac{\lambda_{k+1} }{m \tau} (\frac{\nu}{m \tau} \frac{\nu}{m}\!-\! \frac{\lambda_{k+1} }{m \tau})}
\!=\!0\,.
\end{align*}
Thus by Theorem~\ref{thm:bound-cost}, $\underline{\|\tilde{\omega}_\mathrm{iDroop}\|_2^2}=\overline{\|\tilde{\omega}_\mathrm{iDroop}\|_2^2}=0$, which forces $\|\tilde{\omega}_\mathrm{iDroop}\|_2^2 = 0$.
\end{proof}
Theorem~\ref{th:zero-syn-idroop} shows that unlike DC and VI that require changes on $r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$ to arbitrarily reduce the synchronization cost, iDroop can achieve zero synchronization cost without affecting the steady-state effort share. Naturally, $\delta\approx0$ may lead to slow response and $\nu\rightarrow\infty$ may hinder robustness. Thus this result should be appreciated from the viewpoint of the additional tuning flexibility that iDroop provides.
\subsection{Nadir}
Finally, we show that with $\delta$ and $\nu$ tuned appropriately, iDroop enables the system frequency of $\hat{T}_{\omega \mathrm{p, iDroop}}$ to evolve as a first-order response to step power disturbances, which effectively makes Nadir disappear. The following theorem summarizes this idea.
\begin{thm}[Nadir elimination with iDroop]\label{thm:no nadir}
Let Assumptions~\ref{ass:proportion} and \ref{ass:step} hold. By setting $\delta = \tau^{-1}$ and $\nu = r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} + r_\mathrm{t}^{-1}$, Nadir \eqref{eq:Nadir} of $\hat{T}_{\omega \mathrm{p, iDroop}}$ disappears.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The system frequency of $\hat{T}_{\omega \mathrm{p, iDroop}}$ is given by \cite{p2017ccc}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:nadir}
\bar{\omega}_\mathrm{iDroop}(t) = \dfrac{\sum_{i=1}^n u_{0,i} }{ \sum_{i=1}^n f_i } p_\mathrm{u,iDroop}(t)\;,
\end{equation}
where $p_\mathrm{u,iDroop}(t)$ is the unit-step response of $\hat{h}_{{\mathrm{p},1},\mathrm{T, iDroop}}(s)$. If we set $\delta = \tau^{-1}$ and $\nu = r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} + r_\mathrm{t}^{-1}$, then \eqref{eq:co-idroop} becomes
\begin{equation}\label{eq:co-idroop-nonadir}
\hat{c}_\mathrm{o}(s) =\frac{ r_\mathrm{t}^{-1} }{\tau s+1}-\left(r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} + r_\mathrm{t}^{-1}\right)\;.
\end{equation}
Applying \eqref{eq:go-sw-tb} and \eqref{eq:co-idroop-nonadir} to \eqref{eq:hp-s} yields
\begin{align*}
\hat{h}_{{\mathrm{p},1},\mathrm{T, iDroop}}(s)
=& \dfrac{1}{m s + \check{d} + r_{\mathrm{t}}^{-1}}\;,
\end{align*}
whose unit-step response $p_\mathrm{u,iDroop}(t)$ is a first-order evolution. Thus, \eqref{eq:nadir} indicates that Nadir of the system frequency disappears.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Comparison in Step Input Scenario}\label{sub:step-simulation}
Fig.~\ref{fig:step simulation 1} shows how different controllers perform when the system suffers from a step drop of $-0.3$ p.u. in power injection at bus number $2$ at time $t = \SI{1}{\second}$. As for the representative inverter, we turn $\delta = \tau^{-1} = \SI{0.218}{\per\second}$ and $\nu = r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} + r_\mathrm{t}^{-1} = \SI{0.004}{\second\per\radian}$ in iDroop such that Nadir of the system frequency disappears as suggested by Theorem~\ref{thm:no nadir} and we tune $m_\mathrm{v} = \SI{0.022}{\square\second\per\radian}$ in VI such that the system frequency is critically damped.\footnotemark[7] The inverter parameters on each bus $i$ are defined as follows: $\delta_i := \delta$, $\nu_i := f_i \nu$, and $m_{\mathrm{v},i} = f_i m_{\mathrm{v}}$.
\footnotetext[7]{In the rest of this section, we keep tuning $m_\mathrm{v} = \SI{0.022}{\square\second\per\radian}$.}
The results are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:step simulation 1}. One observation is that all three controllers lead to the same synchronous frequency as predicted by Corollaries~\ref{lem:syn-fre-dc} and~\ref{lem:syn-fre-idroop}. Another observation is that although both of VI and iDroop succeed in eliminating Nadir of the system frequency --which is better than what DC does-- the system synchronizes with much faster rate and lower cost under iDroop than VI. Interestingly, the synchronization cost under VI is even slightly higher than that under DC, which indicates that the benefit of eliminating Nadir through increasing $m_\mathrm{v}$ in VI is significantly diluted by the obvious sluggishness introduced to the synchronization process in the meanwhile. Finally, we highlight the huge control effort required by VI when compared with DC and iDroop.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\subfigure[Frequency deviations]
{\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{frequency_step_sde_db.eps}}
\hfil
\subfigure[Control effort]
{\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{control_step_sde_db.eps}}
\hfil
\subfigure[System frequency and synchronization cost]
{\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{COI_cost_step_sde_db.eps}}
\caption{Comparison between controllers when a $-0.3$ p.u. step change in power injection is introduced to bus number $2$.}
\label{fig:step simulation 1}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Comparison in Noise Scenario}
\ifthenelse{\boolean{archive}}{Fig.~\ref{fig:noise simulation pdom} and Fig.~\ref{fig:noise simulation ndom} show how different controllers perform when the system encounters power fluctuations and measurement noise. Fig.~\ref{fig:noise simulation pdom} focuses on the case dominated by power fluctuations where $\kappa_\mathrm{p} = 10^{-4}$ and $\kappa_\omega = 10^{-5}$, while Fig.~\ref{fig:noise simulation ndom} corresponds to the case dominated by measurement noise where $\kappa_\mathrm{p} = 10^{-4}$ and $\kappa_\omega = 10^{-3}$. As required by Theorem~\ref{thm:h2-improves}, we tune $\delta$ to be a small value $\SI{0.1}{\per\second}$ and $\nu$ to be the optimal value $\nu^{\star}$ which is either $\SI{9.9986}{\second\per\radian}$ for $\kappa_\mathrm{p} \gg \kappa_\omega$ or $\SI{0.0986}{\second\per\radian}$ for $\kappa_\mathrm{p} \ll \kappa_\omega$.
Observe from Fig.~\ref{fig:noise simulation pdom-fre} and Fig.~\ref{fig:noise simulation ndom-fre} that setting $\delta$ small enough and $\nu$ optimally guarantees iDroop has a better performance than DC in terms of noise variance, which actually fits well with Theorem~\ref{thm:h2-improves}. Note that, as expected from Corollary~\ref{thm:noise-VI}, whichever type of noise dominates the system under VI performs badly, therefore whenever noise appears the simulation results of VI will be omitted throughout this section.}
{Fig.~\ref{fig:noise simulation pdom} shows how different controllers perform when the system encounters power fluctuations and measurement noise. Since in reality power fluctuations are larger than measurement noise, we focus on the case dominated by power fluctuations, where $\kappa_\mathrm{p} = 10^{-4}$ and $\kappa_\omega = 10^{-5}$. As required by Theorem~\ref{thm:h2-improves}, we tune $\delta$ to be a small value $\SI{0.1}{\per\second}$ and $\nu$ to be the optimal value $\nu^{\star}$ which is $\SI{9.9986}{\second\per\radian}$ here.
Observe from Fig.~\ref{fig:noise simulation pdom-fre} that setting $\delta$ small enough and $\nu=\nu^\star$ ensures that iDroop has a better performance than DC in terms of frequency variance, as expected by Theorem~\ref{thm:h2-improves}. Note that, since by Corollary~\ref{thm:noise-VI}, VI performs badly, we do not evaluate VI in the presence of stochastic disturbances.}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\subfigure[Frequency deviations]
{\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{frequency_noise_pdom_sde_db.eps}\label{fig:noise simulation pdom-fre}}
\hfil
\subfigure[Control effort]
{\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{control_noise_pdom_sde_db.eps}}
\caption{Comparison between controllers when power fluctuations and measurement noise are introduced with $\kappa_\mathrm{p} = 10^{-4}$ and $\kappa_\omega = 10^{-5}$.}
\label{fig:noise simulation pdom}
\end{figure}
\ifthenelse{\boolean{archive}}{
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\subfigure[Frequency deviations]
{\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{frequency_noise_ndom_sde_db.eps}\label{fig:noise simulation ndom-fre}}
\hfil
\subfigure[Control effort]
{\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{control_noise_ndom_sde_db.eps}}
\hfil
\subfigure[Empirical PDF of frequency deviations]
{\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{pdf_noise_ndom_sde_db.eps}}
\caption{Comparison between controllers when power fluctuations and measurement noises are introduced with $\kappa_\mathrm{p} = 10^{-4}$ and $\kappa_\omega = 10^{-3}$.}
\label{fig:noise simulation ndom}
\end{figure}}
\subsection{Tuning for Combined Noise and Step Disturbances}\label{sub:comb-simulation}
Although our current study does not contemplate jointly step and stochastic disturbances, we illustrate here that the Nadir eliminated tuning of Theorem \ref{thm:no nadir} for iDroop can perform quite well in more realistic scenarios with combined step and stochastic disturbances.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:combine simulation pdom np}, we show how different controllers perform when the system is subject to a step drop of $-0.3$p.u. in power injection at bus number $2$ at time $t = \SI{1}{\second}$ as well as power fluctuations and measurement noise. \ifthenelse{\boolean{archive}}{Since in reality usually power disturbances have a higher order of magnitude than measurement noise does}{Again}, we consider the case with $\kappa_\mathrm{p} = 10^{-4}$ and $\kappa_\omega = 10^{-5}$. Here we employ the same inverter parameters setting as in the step input scenario. More precisely, we tune inverter parameters in iDroop on each bus $i$ as follows: $\delta_i := \delta$, $\nu_i := f_i \nu$, where $\delta = \tau^{-1} = \SI{0.218}{\per\second}$ and $\nu = r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} + r_\mathrm{t}^{-1} = \SI{0.004}{\second\per\radian}$.
Some observations are in order. First, even though the result is not given here, there is no surprise that the system under VI performs badly due to its inability to reject noise.
Second, the performance of the system under DC and iDroop is similar to the one in the step input scenario except additional noise. Last but not least, a bonus of the Nadir eliminated tuning is that iDroop outperforms DC in frequency variance as well. This can be understood through Theorem~\ref{thm:h2-improves}. Provided that $\kappa_\mathrm{p} \gg \kappa_\omega$, we know from the definition in Lemma~\ref{lem:vstar} that $\nu^{\star} \approx \kappa_{\mathrm{p}}/\kappa_{\omega}$. Thus, for realistic values of system parameters, $\nu^{\star} \gg r_\mathrm{r}^{-1}$ always holds. It follows directly that $\nu = r_\mathrm{r}^{-1} + r_\mathrm{t}^{-1} \in (r_\mathrm{r}^{-1},\nu^{\star}]$. By Theorem~\ref{thm:h2-improves}, iDroop performs better than DC in terms of frequency variance. Further, the preceding simulation results suggest that the Nadir eliminated tuning of iDroop designed based on the proportional parameter assumption works relatively well even when parameters are non-proportional.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\subfigure[Frequency deviations]
{\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{frequency_combine_sde_db.eps}}
\hfil
\subfigure[Empirical PDF of frequency deviations and system frequency]
{\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{pdf_COI_combine_sde_db.eps}}
\caption{Comparison between controllers when a $-0.3$ p.u. step change in power injection is introduced to bus number $2$ and power fluctuations and measurement noise are introduced with $\kappa_\mathrm{p} = 10^{-4}$ and $\kappa_\omega = 10^{-5}$.}
\label{fig:combine simulation pdom np}
\end{figure}
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
\input{01-intro.tex}
\section{Preliminaries} \label{sec:prelim}
\input{02-preliminaries.tex}
\section{Results}
\label{sec:result}
\input{03-results.tex}
\section{The Need for a Better Solution}\label{sec:need}
\input{04-the_need_of_a_better_solution.tex}
\section{Dynam-i-c Droop Control (iDroop)}\label{sec:idroop}
\input{05-idroop.tex}
\section{Numerical Illustrations}\label{sec:simulation}
\input{06-numerical_illustration.tex}
\section{Conclusions}\label{sec:conclusion}
\input{07-conclusion.tex}
\section{Acknowledgements}
The authors would like to acknowledge and thank Fernando Paganini, Petr Vorobev, and Janusz Bialek for their insightful comments that helped improve earlier versions of this manuscript.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
The U(1) criticality is a textbook example of phase transition and plays a crucial role in many-body phenomena ranging from vortex binding-unbinding transition~\cite{kosterlitz1973ordering}, exotic quantum phases such as superfluid (SF)~\cite{svistunov2015superfluid} and spin liquid~\cite{hermele2004pyrochlore,hermele2004stability}, emergent continuous symmetries responsible for deconfined criticality~\cite{senthil2004deconfined,senthil2004quantum} to quantum emulating~\cite{greiner2002quantum} and to relativistic gauge field theories in particle physics~\cite{faddeev2018gauge}. Hence, the quantitative aspects of the U(1) criticality are frequently a requisite.
In three dimensions, systems within the U(1) universality class have a continuous phase transition with non-trivial critical exponents. Exact results are unavailable either for the critical points or the critical exponents. Numerical~\cite{campostrini2001critical,alet2003directed,campostrini2006theoretical,burovski2006high,lan2012high,komura2014cuda} and approximate~\cite{gottlob1993critical,campostrini2000determination,kos2016precision} methodologies
have been extensively applied. Up to now, the most precise estimates of critical exponents were obtained mostly with Monte Carlo methods, including $\nu=0.671\,7(1)$~\cite{campostrini2006theoretical} and $0.671 \, 7(3)$~\cite{burovski2006high}
and $\eta=0.038 \, 1(2)$~\cite{campostrini2006theoretical}. These estimates have been extensively utilized in literature, albeit the estimate of $\nu$ differs from the celebrated experimental result $\nu=0.670 \, 9(1)$~\cite{lipa2003specific}
determined by a specific heat measurement around the finite-temperature SF transition of $^{4}$He performed in the microgravity environment of a space shuttle. The conformal bootstrap method has given a very precise determination for the critical exponents of three-dimensional (3D) Ising ($\mathbb{Z}_2$) model, yet produced less precise estimates $\nu=0.671 \, 9(11)$ and $\eta=0.038 \, 52(64)$ for the U(1) case~\cite{kos2016precision}.
A summary of estimated critical exponents $\nu$ and $\eta$ for the 3D U(1) universality class are given by Table~\ref{Litnueta}.
In this work we carry out a high-precision Monte Carlo study of three paradigmatic models in the 3D U(1) universality class,
including the classical XY and Villain models on the simple-cubic lattice and the quantum Bose-Hubbard (BH) model with unitary filling on the square lattice. The XY model is the $n=2$ case of the O($n$) vector model and is a prototype of lattice models with continuous symmetries.
It has a broad realm of physical realizations including granular superconductors and Josephson junction arrays~\cite{goldman2013percolation}.
The XY model has been extensively studied by Monte Carlo simulations, which are mostly on the spin representation and use the celebrated cluster update schemes~\cite{swendsen1987nonuniversal,wolff1989collective}.
The Villain model is a variant of the XY model. Both the XY and Villain models can be rewritten in the directed flow representation, and then be simulated by the worm algorithm~\cite{prokof2001worm}, which is very efficient in the measurement of correlation functions.
Together with numerical analytical-continuation methods, the high-precision Monte Carlo data of the two-point correlation function, obtained by worm-type simulations, have uncovered intriguing low-energy excitations and
transport properties near the critical temperature $T_c$~\cite{chen2014universal,witczak2014dynamics}.
It was observed~\cite{chen2014universal} that the precise determination of $T_c$ is crucial in these studies.
The BH model and its extensions can describe a wide variety of quantum phenomena~\cite{dutta2015non}, including the SF, Mott insulator, supersolid and spin-liquid phases. In quantum Monte Carlo (QMC) simulations, the BH model is frequently expressed in terms of the imaginary-time world-line (path-integral) representation.
In the field of cold-atom physics, the BH model has become a prominent object of state-of-the-art optical lattice emulators~\cite{greiner2002quantum,trotzky2010suppression,endres2011observation}.
At unitary filling--i.e., each lattice site is occupied by a particle on average,
the $d$-dimensional BH model exhibits the particle-hole symmetry, and the quantum phase transition between the SF and the Mott insulating phase belongs to the $(d+1)$-dimensional XY universality.
In our worm-type Monte Carlo simulations, periodic boundary conditions are applied.
From the topology of the directed flow and the world-line configurations,
we sample the SF stiffness $\rho_s$ and the wrapping probabilities $R$'s, of which the definitions will be given below.
The data of $\rho_s$ and $R$ are analyzed according to the finite-size scaling theory,
and yield mutually consistent determinations of the critical points.
The wrapping probability is observed to suffer from smaller finite-size corrections.
The final estimates of the critical temperature, which takes into account both the statistical and the systematic uncertainties,
are $T_c ({\rm XY}) =2.201 \, 844 \, 1(5)$ and $T_c({\rm Villain})=0.333\, 067\, 04(7)$.
In a similar way, the quantum critical point (QCP) of the unitary-filling BH model is determined as $(t/U)_c=0.059 \, 729 \, 1(8)$, where $t$ is the hopping amplitude between the nearest-neighboring sites and $U$ denotes the strength of on-site repulsion.
Our estimates improve significantly over the existing results; see Table~\ref{LitCP} for details.
For instance, in comparison with $(t/U)_c=0.059 \, 74(4)$ from the strong-coupling expansion~\cite{elstner1999dynamics}
and $(t/U)_c=0.059 \, 74(3)$ by QMC simulations~\cite{capogrosso2008monte},
our result of the QCP has a higher precision by a factor of more than 40.
To determine the correlation length critical exponent $\nu$, we calculate the derivative of the wrapping probability $R$ with respect to the temperature $T$ from the covariance of $R$ and energy. For the Villain model at criticality, a quantity of this type is found to exhibit negligible finite-size corrections and yields $\nu=0.671 \, 83(18)$. This estimate is consistent with the most precise Monte Carlo results $\nu=0.671 \, 7(1)$~\cite{campostrini2006theoretical} and $0.671 \, 7(3)$~\cite{burovski2006high} with a comparable precision, and suggests that the experimental determination $\nu=0.670 \, 9(1)$~\cite{lipa2003specific} and the graphics processing unit (GPU) simulation result $\nu=0.670 \, 98(16)$~\cite{lan2012high} are unlikely. In addition, we obtain the critical exponent $\eta=0.038 \, 53(48)$ from a susceptibility-like quantity, which is very close to a recent conformal boostrap estimate $\eta=0.038 \, 52(64)$~\cite{kos2016precision}.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Estimates of the critical exponents $\nu$ and $\eta$ in the 3D U(1) universality class. The method adopted and the year when the result was published are also listed. `Ref.', `RG', `Exp.', `HTE', `MC' and `CB' are the abbreviations of `reference', `renormalization group', `experiment', `high-temperature expansion', `Monte Carlo' and `conformal bootstrap', respectively.}
\label{Litnueta}
\begin{tabular}[t]{|c|c|c|l|l|}
\hline
Ref. & Method & Year & $\nu$& $\eta$ \\
\hline
\cite{gottlob1993critical} & RG &1993& 0.662(7) & \\
\cite{lipa1996heat} & Exp. &1996& 0.670\,19(13)& \\
\cite{campostrini2000determination} & HTE &2000& 0.671\,66(55)& 0.038\,1(3)\\
\cite{campostrini2001critical} & MC & 2001 & 0.671\,6(5)& 0.038\,0(5)\\
\cite{campostrini2001critical} & MC+HTE &2001& 0.671\,55(27) & 0.038\,0(4)\\
\cite{lipa2003specific} & Exp. &2003& 0.670\,9(1)& \\
\cite{campostrini2006theoretical} & MC+HTE &2006& 0.671\,7(1)& 0.038\,1(2)\\
\cite{burovski2006high} & MC &2006& 0.671\,7(3)& \\
\cite{lan2012high} & MC (GPU) & 2012 &0.670\,98(16)& \\
\cite{lan2012high} & MC (GPU) & 2012 &0.671\,38(11)& \\
\cite{komura2014cuda} & MC (GPU) & 2014 &0.672(4) & \\
\cite{kos2016precision} & CB & 2016 &0.671\,9(11)& 0.038\,52(64) \\
this work & MC & 2019 &0.671\,83(18)& 0.038\,53(48)\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
In the remainder of this paper, we present details for the definition of the models, the methodology and the scaling analyses of numerical results. Section~\ref{Models} introduces the models addressed in this work. Section~\ref{Methodology} elaborates the methodology which contains a unified formulation of worm Monte Carlo algorithm for the XY and Villain models, the definitions of sampled quantities, and finite-size scaling ansatze. Section~\ref{re} presents Monte Carlo results and scaling analyzes. A short summary is finally given in Sec.~\ref{sum}.
\section{Models}~\label{Models}
The Hamiltonian of the XY model reads
\begin{equation}\label{HamXY}
H_{\rm XY}=- \sum\limits_{\langle{\bf r}
{\bf r'}\rangle} {\bf S_{\bf r}} \cdot {\bf S_{{\bf r'}}},
\end{equation}
where ${\bf S_{\bf r}}$=$(\cos \theta_{\bf r}, \sin \theta_{\bf r})$ denotes a planar spin vector with unit length at site ${\bf r}$ and the summation runs over pairs of nearest neighboring sites on a simple-cubic lattice. As listed in Table~\ref{LitCP}, the most recent estimates of $T_c$ (we have set $k_{\rm B}=1$ for convenience) include $2.201\,840\,5(48)$~\cite{deng2005surface}, $2.201\,831\,2(6)$~\cite{lan2012high}, $2.201\,852(1)$~\cite{lan2012high} and $2.201\,836(6)$~\cite{komura2014cuda}. Albeit these estimates are all based on Monte Carlo simulations, they are {\it not} completely consistent with each other.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Estimates of the critical temperatures for the 3D XY and Villain models and the critical hopping amplitude for the two-dimensional (2D) unitary-filling BH model. `SCE' is the abbreviation of `strong-coupling expansion'.}
\label{LitCP}
\begin{tabular}[t]{|c|c|c|c|l|}
\hline
Model & Ref. & Method & Year &$T_c$ or $(t/U)_c$ \\
\hline
{\multirow{8}{*}{XY}} & \cite{gottlob1993critical} & MC &1993 & 2.201\,67(10)\\
&\cite{Ballesteros} & MC &1996 & 2.201\,843(19) \\
&\cite{Cucchieri} & MC &2002 & 2.201\,833(19) \\
&\cite{deng2005surface} & MC &2005 & 2.201\,840\,5(48) \\
& \cite{lan2012high} & MC (GPU) & 2012 &2.201\,831\,2(6)\\
& \cite{lan2012high} & MC (GPU) & 2012 &2.201\,852(1)\\
&\cite{komura2014cuda} & MC (GPU) &2014 &2.201\,836(6) \\
&this work & MC &2019 & 2.201\,844\,1(5)\\
\hline
{\multirow{3}{*}{Villain}} &\cite{alet2003cluster}& MC & 2003 & 0.333\,05(5)\\
& \cite{chen2014universal} & MC & 2014 & 0.333\,067\,0(2)\\
& this work & MC & 2019 & 0.333\,067\,04(7) \\
\hline
{\multirow{3}{*}{BH}} & \cite{elstner1999dynamics} & SCE &1993 & 0.059\,74(4) \\
& \cite{capogrosso2008monte} & MC & 2008 & 0.059\,74(3) \\
& this work & MC &2019 & 0.059\,729\,1(8)\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
We perform a high-temperature expansion on model~(\ref{HamXY}) for the directed flow representation. We begin with the partition function
\begin{equation}\label{ZXY}
\mathcal{Z}_{\rm XY}=(\frac{1}{2\pi})^N \int e^{-\frac{H_{\rm XY}}{T}} \prod_{\bf r} d\theta_{\bf r},
\end{equation}
where $N$ is the number of lattice sites on the simple-cubic lattice and the exponential $e^{-\frac{H_{\rm XY}}{T}}$ can be expanded as
\begin{equation}\label{exp}
e^{-\frac{H_{\rm XY}}{T}}=\prod_{\langle{\bf r}{\bf r'}\rangle} e^{\frac{\cos(\theta_{\bf r}-\theta_{\bf r'})}{T}}.
\end{equation}
Next, we combine (\ref{ZXY}) and (\ref{exp}) with the Fourier transform
\begin{equation}\label{eqft}
e^{\frac{\cos(\theta_{\bf r}-\theta_{\bf r'})}{T}}=\sum^{+\infty}_{\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}{\bf r'}}=-\infty} J_{\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}
{\bf r'}}}(\frac{1}{T}) e^{i \mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}
{\bf r'}} (\theta_{\bf r}
-\theta_{\bf r'})},
\end{equation}
where $J_{\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}{\bf r'}}}(\frac{1}{T})$ represents the $\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}{\bf r'}}$th order modified Bessel function of
the first kind in variable of $\frac{1}{T}$; $J_{\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}{\bf r'}}}(\frac{1}{T})=J_{-\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}{\bf r'}}}(\frac{1}{T})$.
It follows that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{dr2}
&\mathcal{Z}_{\rm XY}&= (\frac{1}{2\pi})^N \sum_{\{\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}
{\bf r'}}\}} \int \Bigg( \prod_{\langle{\bf r}
{\bf r'}\rangle} J_{\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}
{\bf r'}}}(\frac{1}{T}) e^{i \mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}
{\bf r'}} (\theta_{\bf r}
-\theta_{\bf r'}) } \Bigg) \prod_{\bf r}
d\theta_{\bf r}
\nonumber \\
&= &(\frac{1}{2\pi})^N \sum_{\{\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}
{\bf r'}}\}} \Bigg(\prod_{\langle{\bf r}
{\bf r'}\rangle} J_{\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}
{\bf r'}}}(\frac{1}{T}) \Bigg) \int \prod_{\langle{\bf r}
{\bf r'}\rangle} e^{i
\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}
{\bf r'}} (\theta_{\bf r}
-\theta_{\bf r'}) } \prod_{\bf r} d\theta_{\bf r} \nonumber \\
&=& (\frac{1}{2\pi})^N \sum_{\{\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}
{\bf r'}}\}} \Bigg(\prod_{\langle {\bf r}
{\bf r'}\rangle} J_{\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}
{\bf r'}}}(\frac{1}{T}) \Bigg) \int \prod_{\bf r} e^{i \mathcal{D}_{{\bf r}
} \theta_{\bf r}
} \prod_{\bf r} d\theta_{\bf r}. \nonumber \\ \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
We represent the term $ \mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}
{\bf r'}} (\theta_{\bf r}
-\theta_{\bf r'})$ by a vector flow variable $\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}
{\bf r'}}$ from ${\bf r}$ to
${\bf r'}$. As $\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}{\bf r'}}$ is positive (negative), it means that the flow is
from ${\bf r}$ to
${\bf r'}$ (${\bf r'}$ to
${\bf r}$); $\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}{\bf r'}}=-\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r'}{\bf r}}$. $\mathcal{D}_{{\bf r}
}=\sum_{\bf r'} \mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}{\bf r'}}$ denotes the divergence of flow at ${\bf r}$.
The inner integration would be zero unless $\Delta\mathcal{C}=0$ := ($\forall \,\, {\bf r}, \mathcal{D}_{{\bf r}}=0$).
Hence $\Delta\mathcal{C}=0$ represents the null divergence of flow over lattice sites and mimics the Kirchhoff's current law.
As a result we have
\begin{equation}\label{ZXYO}
\mathcal{Z}_{\rm XY}= \sum_{\Delta\mathcal{C}=0} \prod_{\langle {\bf r}
{\bf r'}\rangle} J_{\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}
{\bf r'}}}(\frac{1}{T}),
\end{equation}
where the summation runs over all the directed flow states with $\Delta\mathcal{C}=0$. Up to now, we have finished an exact transformation of standard XY model onto a directed flow model, for which we illustrate a configuration in Fig.~\ref{configuration}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=5cm]{fig1.eps}
\caption{A directed flow configuration of the XY and Villain models on a cross section of $6 \times 6 \times 6$ periodic simple-cubic lattice.}~\label{configuration}
\end{figure}
A variant of the standard XY model is the Villain model with partition function
\begin{equation}\label{ZVillian}
\mathcal{Z}_{\rm Villain}= (\frac{1}{2\pi})^N \int \prod_{\bf r} d\theta_{\bf r} \sum\limits_{\mathcal{L}_{{\bf rr'}}=-\infty}^{+\infty} e^{-\frac{1}{2T} \sum\limits_{\langle{\bf r}
{\bf r'}\rangle}(\theta_{{\bf r'}}-\theta_{\bf r}-2 \pi \mathcal{L}_{{\bf rr'}})^2}.
\end{equation}
The $2\pi$ periodicity persists in the interaction potential of the Villain model, which is believed to capture the characteristics of XY model~\cite{cha1991universal,alet2003cluster,vsmakov2005universal,chen2014universal,witczak2014dynamics}. A high-temperature expansion~\cite{nishimori2010elements} can be performed on the Villain model to build the directed flow representation. As a result, the partition function in the directed flow space $\Delta\mathcal{C}=0$ reads
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{Z}_{\rm Villain}= \sum_{\Delta\mathcal{C}=0} \prod_{\langle {\bf r}
{\bf r'}\rangle} e^{\frac{-\mathcal{C}^2_{{\bf rr'}}}{2T}}.
\end{equation}
Note that the Villain model has a simple form of statistical weight allocation in the directed flow representation. Estimates of $T_c$ for the 3D Villain model are summarized in Table~\ref{LitCP}.
We consider the 2D unitary-filling BH model with the Hamiltonian
\begin{equation}\label{HamBH}
\hat{H}_{\rm BH}=-t \sum\limits_{\langle{\bf r}
{\bf r'}\rangle}(\hat{a}^+_{{\bf r}
} \hat{a}_{{\bf r'}}+\hat{a}^+_{{\bf r'}} \hat{a}_{{\bf r}})+\frac{U}{2} \sum\limits_{{\bf r}}\hat{n}_{{\bf r}}(\hat{n}_{{\bf r}}-1),
\end{equation}
where $\hat{a}^+_{{\bf r}}$ ($\hat{a}_{{\bf r}}$) represents the local bosonic creation (annihilation) operator at site ${\bf r}$; $\hat{n}_{{\bf r}}$=$\hat{a}^+_{{\bf r}} \hat{a}_{{\bf r}}$. The first summation runs over the pairs of nearest-neighbouring sites on a square lattice and the second one is over sites. When the particle density is fixed at integer numbers, a quantum phase transition between the compressible SF phase and the incompressible Mott insulating phase occurs by tuning the ratio $t/U$. The transition falls in the 3D U(1) universality and features a relativistic (particle-hole) symmetry with the dynamical critical exponent $z=1$. In this work we study the unitary-filling case for which the QCP has been estimated as $(t/U)_c=0.059\,74(4)$ by a high-order strong-coupling expansion~\cite{elstner1999dynamics} and $(t/U)_c=0.059\,74(3)$ by QMC simulations~\cite{capogrosso2008monte}. These two estimates have become benchmarks for the location of QCP of the 2D unitary-filling BH model (Table~\ref{LitCP}).
\section{Methodology}~\label{Methodology}
\subsection{Monte Carlo Algorithms}
Our Monte Carlo simulations of both the classical (XY and Villain) and quantum (BH) models employ worm-type algorithms. For the classical models the worm algorithm was first proposed in~\cite{prokof2001worm}. An explicit formulation of worm algorithm for the Villain model has been presented in~\cite{alet2003cluster}. It has been demonstrated~\cite{deng2007dynamic} that the worm algorithm stands out from state-of-the-art algorithms when sampling certain quantities for the 3D Ising model. For completeness, we shall formulate a worm algorithm for the XY and Villain models. As for the BH model, we use the standard worm QMC algorithm in the continuous imaginary time path-integral (world-line) representation~\cite{prokof1998exact,prokof1998worm}, for which we refrain from a detailed elaboration and refer the readers to~\cite{prokof1998exact,prokof1998worm,prokof2009worm,pollet2012recent}.
\subsubsection{Worm Algorithm for the XY model}~\label{waxy}
{\it Extending state space.---} A character of worm algorithm is enlarging state space.
It extends the original directed flow space $\Delta\mathcal{C}=0$ by including two additional degrees of freedom,
namely, two defects $I$ and $M$ individually on a site, by defining that the subspace with $I=M$ recovers exactly the
original space $\Delta\mathcal{C}=0$ and that the subspace with $I\ne M$ is exactly outside the original space.
The latter is called worm ($\mathcal W$) sector, where the Kirchhoff's current law does not hold for sites $I$ and $M$,
namely, $\mathcal{D}_I \neq 0, \mathcal{D}_M \neq 0$. Accordingly, the partition function for the extended state space can be
separated into two parts~\cite{lv2011worm}. The first part
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{Z}_{\rm XY}=\frac{1}{N} \sum_{\Delta\mathcal{C}=0; I, M} \delta_{I,M} \prod_{\langle {\bf r}
{\bf r'}\rangle} J_{\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}{\bf r'}}}(\frac{1}{T})
\end{equation}
corresponds to the original partition function (\ref{ZXYO}), with $\delta$ the Kronecker delta function. The summation runs over the extended state space. The second part relates to $\mathcal W$ sector and reads
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{Z}_\mathcal W=\frac{1}{N} \sum_{\Delta\mathcal{C}=0; I, M} (1-\delta_{I,M}) \prod_{\langle {\bf r}
{\bf r'}\rangle} J_{\mathcal{C}_{{\bf r}
{\bf r'}}}(\frac{1}{T}).
\end{equation}
The Monte Carlo simulations will be performed in the extended state space with the partition function
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{Z}_{\rm Ext}=\mathcal{Z}_{\rm XY}+\Lambda \mathcal{Z}_\mathcal W,
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda$ is a tunable parameter often (but not necessarily) set as $\Lambda=1$.
{\it Worm updates.---} The worm process moves $I$ or/and $M$ around lattice and updates the directed
flow configuration by changing the local flow variable through a biased random walk designed with detailed balance.
More specifically, as $I$ ($M$) moves to a neighboring site $I_\mathcal{N}$ ($M_\mathcal{N}$), the flow on edge $II_\mathcal{N}$ ($MM_\mathcal{N}$) will be
updated accordingly by adding a unit, directed flow from $I$ to $I_\mathcal{N}$ ($M_\mathcal{N}$ to $M$).
The movement repeats until $I$ and $M$ meet ($I=M$), when the original state space is hit.
Hence the movement of $I$ or $M$ serves as a step of random walk in the $\mathcal W$ sector or
in between the $\mathcal W$ sector and the original state space. The core steps are given as follows. \\
{\vspace{0.cm}\hspace{0.51cm} \textbf{Core steps of the worm algorithm for XY model}
\begin{enumerate}[leftmargin=*,labelindent=-1pt,label=\bfseries Step \arabic*.]
\item If $I=M$, randomly choose a new site $I'$ and set $I=M=I'$, ${\rm sign}(I)=1$, ${\rm sign}(M)=-1$.
\item Interchange $I \leftrightarrow M$ and ${\rm sign}(I) \leftrightarrow {\rm sign}(M)$ with probability $1/2$.
\item Randomly choose one neighboring site $I_\mathcal{N}$ of $I$.
\item Propose to move $I \rightarrow I_\mathcal{N}$ by updating the flow along edge-$II_\mathcal{N}$, $\mathcal{C}_{II_\mathcal{N}}$, to $\mathcal{C}'_{II_\mathcal{N}}$:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{C}'_{II_\mathcal{N}}=\mathcal{C}_{II_\mathcal{N}}+{\rm sign}(I \rightarrow I_\mathcal{N}){\rm sign}(I), \nonumber
\end{equation}
where ${\rm sign}(I \rightarrow I_\mathcal{N})=\pm 1$, parametrizing the flow direction along edge-$II_\mathcal{N}$.
\item Accept the proposal with probability
\begin{equation}
{\mathbf P}_{\rm acc} = \min (1, \frac{J_{\mathcal{C}'_{II_\mathcal{N}}}(\frac{1}{T})}{J_{\mathcal{C}_{II_\mathcal{N}}}(\frac{1}{T})}) \nonumber
\end{equation}
according to the Metropolis scheme.
\end{enumerate} \vspace{0.cm}}
Monte Carlo simulations are constituted by repeating \textbf{Steps 1} to \textbf{5}. The exploration of XY model is achieved by sampling quantities as the original state space is hit. Besides, the worm process itself is informative for detecting two-point correlations. A susceptibility-like quantity $T_w$ (integral of two-point correlation) can be evaluated by the number of worm steps between subsequent hits on the original state space, which is known as returning time $\mathcal{\tau_{\rm w}}$. Accordingly, the definition of $T_w$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{defineTw}
T_w=\langle \mathcal{\tau}_w \rangle,
\end{equation}
which scales as $T_w \sim L^{2-\eta}$ at the critical point and is useful for determining the critical exponent $\eta$.
\subsubsection{Worm Algorithm for the Villain Model}~\label{wavl}
The worm algorithm formulated in Sec.~\ref{waxy} applies to the Villain model once a substitute of \textbf{Step 5} is taken as follows.\\
{\vspace{0.cm}
\begin{enumerate}[leftmargin=*,labelindent=-1pt,label=\bfseries Step \arabic*.]
\item[\textbf{Step 5.}] Accept the proposal with probability
\begin{equation}
{\mathbf P}_{\rm acc} = \min (1, e^{\frac{-(\mathcal{C}'^2_{II_\mathcal{N}}-\mathcal{C}^2_{II_\mathcal{N}})}{2T}}) \nonumber
\end{equation}
according to the Metropolis scheme.
\end{enumerate} \vspace{0.cm}}
The definition of $T_w$~(\ref{defineTw}) applies to the Villain model as well.
\subsection{Sampled Quantities}
Wrapping probability has been studied for random cluster models (including its limiting situations percolation, Ising and Potts models, etc.)~\cite{langlands1992universality,pinson1994critical,ziff1999shape,newman2001fast,arguin2002homology,martins2003percolation, wang2013bond,xu2014simultaneous,hou2019geometric}. Thus far, however, the method has not been employed for the U(1) lattice models which, as we have shown, admit a graphic representation such as directed flow representation. Moreover, the applicability of wrapping probability approach to
quantum models has not yet been addressed.
The original definition of wrapping is based on the cluster representation of percolation~\cite{langlands1992universality}. Here we extend its original definition to describe a broader class of graphic representation constituted by the directed flows (XY and Villain models) or the particle lines in the imaginary-time path-integral configuration (BH model), by exploiting the wrapping of directed flows or particle lines around lattice torus. As the flow is non-divergent, the wrapping for XY and Villain models around a certain direction can be justified by the presence of {\it net} flow passing through the perpendicular cross section. Moreover, in the present worm Monte Carlo simulations for the XY, Villain and BH models, the wrapping of directed flows or particle lines can be justified by tracking the movements of defects ($I$ and $M$). Directed flow configurations with wrapping, namely, $\mathcal{R}_{\kappa}=1$ for $\kappa$=$x$, $y$ or/and $z$, are illustrated by Fig.~\ref{guide_wrapping} for XY and Villain models.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=3.5cm]{fig2.eps}
\caption{Illustration of wrappings for directed flow configurations of the 3D XY and Villain models on a cross section of $3 \times 3 \times 3$ periodic simple-cubic lattice.}~\label{guide_wrapping}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Sampled Quantities for the 3D XY and Villain Models}
Some wrapping-related quantities for 3D XY and Villain models are defined as follows.
The wrapping probabilities in the directed flow representation are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
R_x &=& \langle \mathcal{R}_x \rangle = \langle \mathcal{R}_y \rangle = \langle \mathcal{R}_z \rangle, \\
R_a &=& 1 - \langle (1-\mathcal{R}_x)(1-\mathcal{R}_y)(1-\mathcal{R}_z)\rangle, \\
R_2 &=& \langle \mathcal{R}_x \mathcal{R}_y (1-\mathcal{R}_z)\rangle +\langle \mathcal{R}_y \mathcal{R}_z (1-\mathcal{R}_x)\rangle \nonumber \\ &&+\langle \mathcal{R}_z \mathcal{R}_x (1-\mathcal{R}_y)\rangle,
\end{eqnarray}
where $R_x$, $R_a$ and $R_2$ define the probabilities that the wrapping of directed flows exists in $x$ direction, in at least one direction and in two (and only two) directions, respectively. For a wrapping observable (say $\mathcal{R}_{\kappa}$), we define its covariance with energy $\mathcal{E}$ as
\begin{equation}
G_{R_\kappa E}= \frac{1}{T^2} (\langle \mathcal{R}_\kappa \mathcal{E} \rangle - \langle \mathcal{R}_\kappa \rangle \langle \mathcal{E} \rangle),
\label{eq:Rp}
\end{equation}
which is equivalent to the derivative of $R_\kappa$ with respect to $T$.
Recall the definition of winding number on a torus. If a direction (say $\kappa$) is specified, the event {\it wrapping} (namely, $\mathcal{R}_\kappa=1$) relates to a non-zero winding number $\mathcal{W}_\kappa \ne 0$ of directed flow. The latter has a close connection to the definition of SF stiffness~\cite{pollock1987path}. We sample the SF stiffness by winding number fluctuations, which can be written as
\begin{equation}
\rho_s=\langle \mathcal{W}_x^2+\mathcal{W}_y^2+\mathcal{W}_z^2 \rangle /3L.
\end{equation}
Moreover, we estimate the derivative of $\rho_s$ with respect to $T$ by
\begin{equation}
G_{\rho_sE} = \frac{1}{3LT^2} (\langle (\mathcal{W}_x^2+\mathcal{W}_y^2+\mathcal{W}_z^2) \mathcal{E} \rangle -\langle \mathcal{W}_x^2+\mathcal{W}_y^2+\mathcal{W}_z^2 \rangle \langle \mathcal{E} \rangle).
\label{eq:rhosp}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Sampled Quantities for the 2D BH Model}
For the 2D BH model, the wrapping probabilities of particle lines in the world-line representation read
\begin{eqnarray}
R_x &=& \langle \mathcal{R}_x \rangle = \langle \mathcal{R}_y \rangle, \\
R_a &=& 1 - \langle (1-\mathcal{R}_x)(1-\mathcal{R}_y)\rangle, \\
R_2 &=& \langle \mathcal{R}_x \mathcal{R}_y\rangle,
\end{eqnarray}
where $R_x$, $R_a$ and $R_2$ define the probabilities that the wrapping of particle lines exists in $x$ direction, in at least one direction and in two directions, respectively.
For a given spatial direction (say $\kappa$), the event {\it wrapping} (namely, $\mathcal{R}_\kappa=1$) relates to a non-zero winding number $\mathcal{W}_\kappa \ne 0$ of particle lines. We sample the SF stiffness by winding number fluctuations through~\cite{pollock1987path}
\begin{equation}
\rho_s=\langle \mathcal{W}_x^2+\mathcal{W}_y^2 \rangle /4 t \beta.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Finite-size Scaling Ansatze}~\label{fss}
In order to formulate the finite-size scaling for the thermodynamic phase transition of the classical (XY and Villain) models and the quantum phase transition of the quantum (BH) model in a more or less unified manner, a quantum to classical mapping is required.
For the QCP of the unitary-filling BH model, the dynamic critical exponent $z=1$~\cite{fisher1989boson} has been verified extensively~\cite{cha1991universal,alet2003cluster}. In our QMC simulations of the BH model, we use the temperature contour $\beta \equiv 1/T=2L$. This treatment eliminates the variable $\beta/L^z$ in the finite-size scaling ansatz of the BH model.
Wrapping probabilities are dimensionless quantities whose finite-size scaling is described by
\begin{equation}\label{Rscaling}
R_{\kappa}=\widetilde{R}_{\kappa} (\epsilon L^{1/\nu})
\end{equation}
where $\widetilde{R}_{\kappa}$ is a scaling function, $\epsilon$ denotes the distance to critical point. We set for the XY and Villain models $\epsilon=T_c-T$ and for the BH model $\epsilon=(t/U)_c-t/U$.
Performing a Taylor's expansion and incorporating corrections to scaling, we have
\begin{equation}\label{fit_R}
R_{\kappa}=\mathcal{Q}_0+\sum_n a_n \epsilon L^{n/\nu}+\sum_m b_m L^{-\omega_m},
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{Q}_0$ is a somewhat universal constant, $a_n$ ($n=1,2,...$) and $b_m$ ($m=1,2,...$) are non-universal constants, and $\omega_m$ ($m=1,2,...$) refers to correction-to-scaling exponents. To estimate the critical exponent $\nu$ we analyze $G_{R_\kappa E}=\frac{d R_{\kappa}}{dT}$ which should scale as
\begin{equation}
G_{R_\kappa E}=L^{1/\nu} {\widetilde{G}_{R_\kappa E}} (\epsilon L^{1/\nu}),
\end{equation}
and we have
\begin{equation}\label{fit_Rp}
G_{R_\kappa E}=L^{1/\nu} (\mathcal{Q}_0+\sum_n a_n \epsilon L^{n/\nu}+\sum_m b_m L^{-\omega_m}).
\end{equation}
The finite-size scaling of $\rho_s$ can be figured out by $\rho_s \sim \xi^{2-d-z}$~\cite{ma1986strongly,fisher1989boson} with $\xi$ the correlation length. For the present case (three space-time dimensions), we have $d+z=3$. It follows that
\begin{equation}~\label{rhosscaling}
\rho_s L=\widetilde{\rho}_s(\epsilon L^{1/\nu})
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{fit_Rhos}
\rho_s L=\mathcal{Q}_0+\sum_n a_n \epsilon L^{n/\nu}+\sum_m b_m L^{-\omega_m}.
\end{equation}
The scaling form of $G_{\rho_sE}=\frac{d\rho_s}{dT}$ reads
\begin{equation}
G_{\rho_sE}=L^{(-1+\frac{1}{\nu})} \widetilde{G}_{\rho_s E} (\epsilon L^{1/\nu}),
\end{equation}
and we have
\begin{equation}\label{fit_Rhosp}
G_{\rho_sE}=L^{(-1+\frac{1}{\nu})}(\mathcal{Q}_0+\sum_n a_n \epsilon L^{n/\nu}+\sum_m b_m L^{-\omega_m}).
\end{equation}
Besides, for the XY and Villain models, one may use the following scaling form of $T_w$ to determine the critical exponent $\eta$,
\begin{equation}\label{scaling_Tw}
T_w=L^{2-\eta} \widetilde{T}_w(\epsilon L^{1/\nu}),
\end{equation}
which gives
\begin{equation}\label{fit_Tw}
T_w=L^{2-\eta}(\mathcal{Q}_0+\sum_n a_n \epsilon L^{n/\nu}+\sum_m b_m L^{-\omega_m}).
\end{equation}
In principle, an analytic background should be added up to (\ref{scaling_Tw}) and (\ref{fit_Tw}). For the present case,
this analytic background is effectively higher-order corrections compared with the correction terms taken into
account explicitly throughout this work.
\section{Numerical Results and Finite-size Scaling Analyses}~\label{re}
In this section, we present Monte Carlo results which are analyzed by performing finite-size scaling. In subsection~\ref{dtc}, firstly, the scaling behaviors of wrapping probabilities and some other quantities are explored for 3D Villain and XY models. We find that certain wrapping probabilities exhibit smaller corrections in finite-size scaling than those of the ``conventional'' quantities such as SF stiffness and susceptibility-like quantities. Universal values of critical dimensionless quantities are confirmed numerically for the XY and Villain models. Subsequently, we extend the wrapping probability approach to determine the QCP of the 2D unitary-filling BH model. For each of the Villain, XY and BH models, an unprecedentedly precise estimate of critical point is obtained. In subsection~\ref{fatc}, we determine the critical exponents $\nu$ and $\eta$ following extensive simulations at the high-precision $T_c$ of the Villain model. We find that the quantity $G_{R_xE}$ exhibits a negligible (if non-zero) amplitude of leading correction, which helps to determine a precise estimate of critical exponent $\nu$. Moreover, the critical exponent $\eta$ is estimated by analyzing the susceptibility-like quantity $T_w$.
\subsection{Determining Critical Points}\label{dtc}
\subsubsection{3D Villain Model}
We simulate the 3D Villain model on periodic $L\times L \times L$ simple-cubic lattices with linear sizes $L=16$, $24$, $32$, $64$, $128$, $256$, $384$ and $512$ for different $T$ around $T=0.333\,067$. The simulations use the worm Monte Carlo algorithm described in Sec.~\ref{wavl}. The finite-size scaling for the finite-temperature phase transition of 3D Villain model is performed by fitting the Monte Carlo data of wrapping probabilities $R_x$, $R_a$ and $R_2$ to (\ref{fit_R}), of scaled SF stiffness $\rho_s L$ to (\ref{fit_Rhos}), and of susceptibility-like quantity $T_w$ to (\ref{fit_Tw}). These fits are carried out with the least squares method. For a preferred fit, one expects that $\chi^2$ per degree of freedom (DF) $\chi^2/{\rm DF}$ is $O(1)$. Moreover, for a precaution against systematic errors brought about by the exclusion of high-order correction terms, we prefer the fits with a stability against varying the cut-off size $L_{\rm min}$, which denotes the smallest lattice of which the data are included in.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9cm,height=7cm]{fig3.eps}
\caption{Wrapping probabilities $R_x$ and $R_a$, scaled SF stiffness $\rho_s L$ and scaled susceptibility-like quantity $T_wL^{-2+\eta}$ versus $T$ in the neighbourhood of critical temperature for the 3D Villain model. The linear lattice sizes are $L=32$, $64$, $128$, $256$, $384$ and $512$. The symbols stand for Monte Carlo raw data, and the lines are drawn with a preferred fit with $\chi^2/{\rm DF} \approx 1$. Note that the same domain of vertical coordinate is focused on around the crossing points (estimated by $\mathcal{Q}_0$ in the fits) for the quantities to make it is fair to compare finite-size corrections. The vertical dashed lines represent our finite estimate of critical temperature $T_c=0.333\,067\,04(7)$.}~\label{Villainquantities}
\end{figure}
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption{Fits of the wrapping probabilities $R_x$, $R_a$, $R_2$ to $(\ref{fit_R})$ and the scaled SF stiffness $\rho_s L$ to $(\ref{fit_Rhos})$ for the 3D Villain model. `Qua.' is the abbreviation of `quantities'. The correction exponents $\omega_1=0.789$ and $\omega_2=1.77$ are adopted. The symbol `-' denotes the absence of the corresponding correction term in the fit.}
\label{Tab:fit-Villian1}
\begin{tabular}[t]{|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
Qua. &$L_{\rm min}$ & $\chi^2/$DF & $T_c$ & $1/\nu$ & $\mathcal{Q}_0$ & $a_1$ & $b_1$ & $b_2$ \\
\hline
{\multirow{8}{*}{$R_x$}} &16& 27.2/26 & 0.333\,067\,035(15)&1.43(6) &0.378\,65(4) &-1.26(39) & -0.0459(4) & - \\
&24& 24.8/22 & 0.333\,067\,038(16)&1.43(6)&0.378\,66(5) &-1.32(41) & -0.0461(7) & - \\
&32& 22.0/18 & 0.333\,067\,039(17)&1.43(6)&0.378\,67(6) &-1.31(41) & -0.046(1) & - \\
&64& 21.0/14 & 0.333\,067\,045(22)&1.43(6)&0.378\,7(1) &-1.31(43) & -0.047(3) & - \\
& 8& 29.1/29 & 0.333\,067\,047(16)&1.44(6)&0.378\,72(5) &-1.25(38) & -0.0480(9) & 0.025(5) \\
&16& 26.9/25 & 0.333\,067\,041(18)&1.44(6) &0.378\,68(7) &-1.25(39) & -0.047(2) & 0.01(2) \\
&24& 24.7/21 & 0.333\,067\,041(21)&1.43(6)&0.378\,7(1) &-1.31(41) & -0.047(4) & 0.02(7) \\
&32& 21.9/17 & 0.333\,067\,044(25)&1.43(6)&0.378\,7(2) &-1.30(41) & -0.048(7) & 0.04(14) \\
\hline
{\multirow{7}{*}{$R_a$}}
&24& 33.5/22 &0.333\,067\,020(18)&1.41(6)&0.688\,70(7) &-1.90(65) & -0.031(1) & - \\
&32& 23.3/18 &0.333\,067\,032(19)&1.42(6)&0.688\,79(8) &-1.78(62) & -0.033(2) & - \\
&64& 20.7/14 &0.333\,067\,044(24)&1.42(7) &0.688\,9(2) &-1.81(65) & -0.037(4) & - \\
& 8& 34.9/29 &0.333\,067\,058(18)&1.43(6)&0.689\,05(7) &-1.73(59) & -0.044(1) & 0.194(8) \\
&16& 33.0/25 &0.333\,067\,046(20)&1.43(6) &0.689\,0(1) &-1.72(59) & -0.040(3) & 0.15(3) \\
&24& 29.9/21 &0.333\,067\,050(24)&1.42(6)&0.689\,0(2) &-1.83(63) & -0.042(6) & 0.19(10) \\
&32& 22.8/17 &0.333\,067\,046(28)&1.43(6)&0.689\,0(3) &-1.76(62) & -0.04(1) & 0.14(21) \\
\hline
{\multirow{8}{*}{$R_2$}} &16& 31.7/26 & 0.333\,067\,074(21)&1.47(9) &0.264\,10(4) &-0.81(37) & -0.034\,7(5) & - \\
&24& 16.1/22 & 0.333\,067\,060(23)&1.47(9)&0.264\,06(5) &-0.83(39) & -0.033\,8(8) & - \\
&32& 13.5/18 & 0.333\,067\,059(25)&1.47(9)&0.264\,05(6) &-0.82(39) & -0.034(1) & - \\
&64& 12.2/14 & 0.333\,067\,049(31)&1.46(9)&0.264\,0(1) &-0.89(43) & -0.032(3) & - \\
& 8& 31.2/29 & 0.333\,067\,062(23)&1.47(9)&0.264\,06(5) &-0.83(38) & -0.033\,3(9) & -0.015(6) \\
&16& 29.1/25 & 0.333\,067\,050(26)&1.47(9) &0.264\,00(8) &-0.82(38) & -0.032(2) & -0.04(2) \\
&24& 16.0/21 & 0.333\,067\,052(31)&1.47(9)&0.264\,0(1) &-0.84(39) & -0.032(4) & -0.03(7) \\
&32& 13.0/17 & 0.333\,067\,041(36)&1.47(9)&0.263\,9(2) &-0.82(39) & -0.029(8) & -0.10(15) \\
\hline
{\multirow{8}{*}{$\rho_s L$}} &16& 30.4/26 & 0.333\,067\,019(15)&1.45(6) &0.515\,45(6) &-2.21(67) & -0.1452(8) & - \\
&24& 25.5/22 & 0.333\,067\,028(16)&1.44(6)&0.515\,51(8) &-2.30(70) & -0.146(1) & - \\
&32& 24.7/18 & 0.333\,067\,029(18)&1.43(6)&0.515\,5(1) &-2.38(74) & -0.147(2) & - \\
&64& 24.0/14 & 0.333\,067\,035(22)&1.43(6)&0.515\,6(2) &-2.39(76) & -0.149(5) & - \\
& 8& 30.0/29 & 0.333\,067\,040(16)&1.45(6)&0.515\,66(8) &-2.14(65) & -0.152(2) & 0.078(9) \\
&16& 28.5/25 & 0.333\,067\,034(18)&1.45(6) &0.515\,6(1) &-2.17(66) & -0.150(3) & 0.05(4) \\
&24& 25.4/21 & 0.333\,067\,033(22)&1.44(6)&0.515\,6(2) &-2.28(70) & -0.149(7) & 0.04(12) \\
&32& 24.7/17 & 0.333\,067\,033(26)&1.43(6)&0.515\,6(3) &-2.38(74) & -0.15(1) & 0.05(24) \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption{Fits of $T_w$ to $(\ref{fit_Tw})$ for the 3D Villain model. The correction exponents $\omega_1=0.789$ and $\omega_2=1.77$ are adopted.}
\label{Tab:fit-Villian2}
\begin{tabular}[t]{|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
$L_{\rm min}$ & $\chi^2/$DF & $T_c$ & $\eta$ & $1/\nu$ & $\mathcal{Q}_0$ & $a_1$ & $b_1$ & $b_2$ \\
\hline
16& 29.8/28 &0.333\,066\,996(17)&0.0392(2)&1.52(4) &1.360(1) &-3.06(67) & -0.307(6) & - \\
24& 24.2/24 &0.333\,067\,021(21)&0.0386(4)&1.52(4)&1.356(2) &-3.04(67) & -0.29(1) & - \\
32& 21.7/20 &0.333\,067\,027(25)&0.0385(5)&1.53(4)&1.355(4) &-2.95(66) & -0.28(2) & - \\
64& 21.1/15 &0.333\,067\,027(55)&0.0385(16)&1.53(4)&1.36(1) &-2.90(66) & -0.28(9) & - \\
8& 29.4/31 &0.333\,067\,040(20)&0.0380(3)&1.52(4)&1.351(2) &-3.01(66) & -0.24(1) & -0.40(5) \\
16& 26.1/27 &0.333\,067\,042(29)&0.0379(7)&1.53(4) &1.351(5) &-2.96(65) & -0.24(4) & -0.4(2) \\
24& 24.0/23 &0.333\,067\,034(39)&0.0382(11)&1.52(4)&1.353(9) &-3.03(67) & -0.26(8)& -0.2(6) \\
32& 21.7/19 &0.333\,067\,027(67)&0.0385(25)&1.53(4)&1.36(2) &-2.95(66) & -0.3(2) & 0(2) \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
We quote the leading correction exponent $\omega_1=0.789(11)$ predicated by a $d=3$ loop expansion~\cite{guida1998critical} and verified by a finite-size scaling of Monte Carlo data~\cite{campostrini2006theoretical} that produced $\omega=0.785(20)$. We shall perform a test for this correction exponent in below. As for the sub-leading correction term, we adopt the correction exponent $\omega_2=1.77$~\cite{guida1998critical}. We observe that the incorporating of correction terms stabilizes fits. In Table~\ref{Tab:fit-Villian1}, we list the details of the fits for dimensionless quantities $R_x$, $R_a$, $R_2$ and $\rho_s L$. The fitting results for $T_w$ are given by Table~\ref{Tab:fit-Villian2}. It is found that the amplitudes of leading correction (namely, $|b_1|$) for these quantities differ from each other. Each of the wrapping probabilities $R_x$, $R_a$ and $R_2$ suffers from minor corrections to scaling, with $|b_1| \lessapprox 0.05$. By contrast, the ``conventional" quantity $\rho_s L$ and $T_w$ exhibit more significant corrections with $|b_1| \approx 0.15$ and $0.3$, respectively. The distinct amplitudes of finite-size corrections for the quantities can be inferred from Fig.~\ref{Villainquantities}.
We should not trust blindly a sole fitting even though $\chi^2$/DF is close to $1$ and we do not take any individual fitting result as our final estimate. In fact, we take the medium out of all preferred fitting results of the quantities to estimate $T_c$. To be conservative, the estimated error bar measures the distance between the final estimate and the farthest bound among those indicated by individual fits. Accordingly, by using the finite-size scaling analyses of the dimensionless quantities and the quantity $T_w$ respectively presented in Tables~\ref{Tab:fit-Villian1} and~\ref{Tab:fit-Villian2}, we estimate the critical temperature as $T_c=0.333\,067\,04(7)$. As an illustration, we plot in Fig.~\ref{Rtx} the size-dependent behavior of $R_x$ and $R_a$ with correction terms at $T_c=0.333\,067\,039$ (we take $T_c=0.333\,067\,04(7)$ and keep one more decimal place) and at its neighborhoods $T=0.333\,066\,7$ and $0.333\,067\,4$. At $T_c$, the data becomes asymptotically a constant as $L \rightarrow \infty$, whereas it is either upward or downward as $T$ deviates from $T_c$. These suggest for the present size scale that $T_c=0.333\,067\,039$ is a reasonable estimate and that $T=0.333\,0667$ and $0.333\,0674$ deviate from the critical region.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=6.7cm]{fig4.eps}
\caption{Scaled $R_x$ and $R_a$ with correction terms versus $L$ at $T_c$ and its neighborhoods for the 3D Villain model. The corrections terms quote preferred fitting results in Table~\ref{Tab:fit-Villian1}.}~\label{Rtx}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=5.8cm]{fig5.eps}
\caption{Corrections to leading scaling revealed by $R_\kappa-\mathcal{Q}_0$ for $R_\kappa$ ($\kappa=x,a,2$), by $\rho_sL-\mathcal{Q}_0$ for $\rho_s L$, and by $T_wL^{-2+\eta}-\mathcal{Q}_0$ for $T_w$ at the estimated critical temperature $T_c=0.333\,0670\,39$ of the 3D Villain model. The parameter $\mathcal{Q}_0$ is determined from Table~\ref{Tab:fit-Villian1} for $R_\kappa$ ($\kappa=x,a,2$) and $\rho_s L$, and from Table~\ref{Tab:fit-Villian2} for $T_w$. The critical exponent $\eta$ takes our finite estimate $\eta=0.038\,53$.}~\label{corr}
\end{figure}
The relatively small finite-size corrections of $R_x$, $R_a$ and $R_2$ compared with those of $\rho_s L$ and $T_w$ can be observed in Fig.~\ref{corr}, which demonstrates the corrections to leading scaling for each of the quantities.
We determine by Table~\ref{Tab:fit-Villian1} (from the estimates of $\mathcal{Q}_0$) the critical wrapping probabilities as $R^c_x=0.378\,7(2)$, $R^c_a=0.688\,9(4)$ and $R^c_2=0.264\,0(3)$, and the critical winding number fluctuations (namely, the critical scaled SF stiffness) as $\rho^c_sL=0.515\,6(3)$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9cm,height=7cm]{fig6.eps}
\caption{Wrapping probabilities $R_x$ and $R_a$, scaled SF stiffness $\rho_sL$ and scaled susceptibility-like quantity $T_wL^{-2+\eta}$ versus $T$ in the neighbourhood of critical temperature for the 3D XY model. The linear lattice sizes are $L=64$, $128$, $256$, $384$ and $512$. The same domain of vertical coordinate is focused on for the quantities. The vertical dashed lines represent our finite estimate of critical temperature $T_c=2.201\,844\,1(5)$.}~\label{3dxy_tc}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{3D XY model}
By means of the worm algorithm formulated in Sec.~\ref{waxy}, we simulate the 3D XY model (\ref{HamXY}) on periodic simple-cubic lattices with linear sizes $L=8$, $16$, $32$, $64$, $128$, $256$, $384$ and $512$ around $T=2.201\,84$. We aim at estimating the critical temperature $T_c$ of this paradigmatic model and exploring universal features of critical wrapping probabilities. We fit the quantities $R_\kappa$ ($\kappa=x,a,2$) and $\rho_s L$ to their finite-size scaling ansatze (\ref{fit_R}) and (\ref{fit_Rhos}), respectively. The fitting results are detailed in Appendix~\ref{appendix:3dxy} by which we estimate the critical temperature as $T_c=2.201\,844\,1(5)$, which is more precise than the best results available in literature, as listed in Table~\ref{LitCP}. The estimate $T_c=2.201\,844\,1(5)$ is further confirmed by the finite-size scaling analysis with a fixed $\nu$ (Appendix~\ref{appendix:3dxy}). Figure~\ref{3dxy_tc} illustrates the quantities $R_x$, $R_a$, $\rho_sL$ and $T_wL^{-2+\eta}$ as a function of $T$. Shown by Table~\ref{Tab:universalWP}, the Villain model and the XY model share universal critical values of wrapping probabilities and of winding number fluctuations.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Critical wrapping probabilities $R^c_x$, $R^c_a$, $R^c_2$ and critical winding number fluctuations $\rho^c_sL$ for the 3D Villain and XY models.}
\label{Tab:universalWP}
\begin{tabular}[t]{|c|c|c|}
\hline
& Villain & XY \\
\hline
$R^c_x$& 0.378\,7(2) & 0.378\,8(4) \\
$R^c_a$& 0.688\,9(4) & 0.688\,9(6) \\
$R^c_2$& 0.264\,0(3) & 0.264\,1(5) \\
$\rho^c_sL$ & 0.515\,6(3) & 0.515\,8(9) \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{2D Unitary-filling BH Model}
We extend the applicability of wrapping probability approach to the 2D unitary-filling BH model (\ref{HamBH}), aiming to precisely locate the U(1) QCP. We simulate the model in canonical ensemble with the worm QMC method within the imaginary-time path-integral representation. The simulations are performed on periodic $L\times L$ lattices with $L=8$, $16$, $32$, $48$, $64$, $80$, $96$ and $112$ for the temperature contour $\beta=2L$. Particle line wrapping probabilities $R_x$, $R_a$ and $R_2$ together with the SF stiffness $\rho_s$ are sampled. Figure~\ref{2dbh_jc} illustrates these quantities around the QCP. Least squares fits are performed for the finite-size scaling analyses described in Sec.~\ref{fss}. It is observed that the sampled wrapping probabilities $R_x$, $R_a$ and $R_2$ all exhibit slight finite-size corrections with the amplitudes of leading correction $|b_1| \lessapprox 0.04$. By contrast, the scaled SF stiffness $\rho_s L$ demonstrates more significant corrections with the amplitude $|b_1| \approx 0.2$. The observation of small corrections for the wrapping probabilities is reminiscent of that for the aforementioned 3D classical models. The fitting results are summarized in Appendix~\ref{appendix:2dbh} by which we estimate the critical hopping amplitude as $(t/U)_c=0.059\,729\,1(8)$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9cm,height=7cm]{fig7.eps}
\caption{Wrapping probabilities $R_x$, $R_a$, $R_2$ and scaled SF stiffness $\rho_s L$ in the neighborhood of QCP for the 2D unitary-filling BH model. The linear lattice sizes are $L=8$, $16$, $32$, $48$, $64$, $80$, $96$ and $112$; for each $L$, the inverse temperature is $\beta=2L$. The same domain of vertical coordinate is focused on for the quantities. The vertical dashed lines represent our finite estimate of QCP, namely, $(t/U)_c=0.059\,729\,1(8)$.}~\label{2dbh_jc}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Determining Critical Exponents $\nu$ and $\eta$}\label{fatc}
Estimating critical exponents by performing fits at the precise critical temperature $T_c$ takes the advantage of reducing a fitting parameter. We perform extensive simulations with a number of lattice sizes ($L=12$, $16$, $20$, $24$, $32$, $40$, $48$, $64$, $80$, $96$, $128$, $160$, $192$, $256$, $384$ and $512$) right at the high-precision critical temperature $T_c=0.333\,067\,039$ of the 3D Villain model. For a quantity $\mathcal{Q}$ ($\mathcal{Q}=G_{R_xE}$, $G_{R_aE}$, $G_{R_2E}$, $G_{\rho_sE}$, $T_w$), the scaling ansatz reduces to
\begin{equation}\label{fit_at_Tc}
\mathcal{Q}=L^{y_\mathcal{Q}}(\mathcal{Q}_0+\sum_m b_m L^{-\omega_m}),
\end{equation}
with $y_\mathcal{Q}=1/\nu$ for $G_{R_xE}$, $G_{R_aE}$ and $G_{R_2E}$, $y_\mathcal{Q}=-1+1/\nu$ for $G_{\rho_sE}$, and $y_\mathcal{Q}=2-\eta$ for $T_w$.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Fits of $G_{R_xE}$, $G_{R_aE}$, $G_{R_2E}$ and $G_{\rho_sE}$ to $(\ref{fit_at_Tc})$ at the estimated critical temperature $T_c=0.333\,067\,039$ of the 3D Villain model. The correction exponent $\omega_1=0.789$ is adopted.}
\label{Tab:estimate_nu}
\begin{tabular}[t]{|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
Qua. & $L_{\rm min}$& $\chi^2/$DF & $1/\nu$ & $\mathcal{Q}_0$ & $b_1$ \\
\hline
{\multirow{12}{*}{$G_{R_xE}$}}
&16& 17.4/13 &1.488\,47(14)&0.989\,0(5)&- \\
&20& 16.8/12 &1.488\,53(17)&0.988\,8(7)&- \\
&24& 14.5/11 &1.488\,38(20)&0.989\,4(8)&- \\
& 32& 14.4/10 &1.488\,33(24)&0.990(1)&- \\
& 40& 11.3/9 &1.488\,66(31)&0.988(1)&- \\
& 48& 9.2/8 &1.488\,45(34)&0.989(2)&- \\
& 16& 17.4/12 &1.488\,49(54)&0.989(3)&0.001(13) \\
& 20& 16.4/11 &1.488\,13(64)&0.991(3)&-0.01(2) \\
& 24& 14.3/10 &1.488\,67(75)&0.988(4)&0.01(2) \\
& 32& 13.5/9 &1.489\,2(10)&0.985(5)&0.03(3) \\
& 40& 11.0/8 &1.488\,0(12)&0.992(7)&-0.03(5) \\
& 48& 9.1/7 &1.488\,9(14)&0.987(8)&0.02(6) \\
\hline
{\multirow{6}{*}{$G_{R_aE}$}}
&16& 15.0/12 &1.487\,82(62)&1.344(4)&0.10(2) \\
&20& 13.5/11 &1.487\,32(74)&1.348(5) &0.08(3) \\
&24& 10.9/10 &1.488\,01(85)&1.343(6) &0.11(4) \\
&32& 10.3/9 &1.488\,5(11)&1.339(8)&0.14(5) \\
&40& 8.7/8 &1.487\,5(14)&1.35(1)&0.07(8) \\
&48& 8.4/7 &1.487\,9(15)&1.34(1) &0.1(1) \\
\hline
{\multirow{6}{*}{$G_{R_2E}$}}
& 16& 16.7/12 &1.489\,18(72)&0.768(3)&0.10(1) \\
& 20& 16.5/11 &1.488\,96(86)&0.769(4)&0.09(2) \\
& 24& 14.9/10 &1.489\,6(10)&0.766(4)&0.11(2) \\
& 32& 11.8/9 &1.491\,1(13)&0.760(6)&0.16(4) \\
& 40& 10.0/8 &1.489\,6(17)&0.766(8)&0.10(6) \\
& 48& 9.9/7 &1.489\,9(19)&0.765(9)&0.11(7) \\
\hline
{\multirow{6}{*}{$G_{\rho_sE}$}}
&16& 16.7/12 &1.488\,42(54)&1.825(5)&-0.52(2) \\
&20& 16.7/11 &1.488\,33(65)&1.826(6) &-0.53(3)\\
&24& 15.2/10 &1.488\,83(77)&1.821(8) &-0.49(5) \\
&32& 14.9/9 &1.489\,2(10)&1.82(1)&-0.47(7) \\
&40& 13.0/8 &1.488\,1(12)&1.83(1)&-0.6(1) \\
&48& 10.6/7 &1.489\,0(14)&1.82(1)&-0.5(1) \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=6cm]{fig8a.eps}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=6cm]{fig8b.eps}
\caption{(a) Scaled quantity $G_{R_xE} L^{-1/\nu}$ with $\nu=0.671\,83$ (estimate of this work) and $\nu=0.670\,9$ (experimental result~\cite{lipa2003specific}) at the estimated critical temperature $T_c=0.333\,067\,039$ of the 3D Villain model. The horizonal dashed line denotes $\mathcal{Q}_0=0.989$ which is determined from Table~\ref{Tab:estimate_nu}. (b) Scaled quantity $T_{w} L^{-2+\eta}$ with $\eta=0.038\,53$. A correction term quoted from Table~\ref{Tab:fit_Tw_Tc} is included. The horizonal dashed line denotes $\mathcal{Q}_0=1.355\,75$ which is determined from Table~\ref{Tab:fit-Villian2}.}~\label{Figs_Rxp}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Fits of $T_w$ to $(\ref{fit_at_Tc})$ at the estimated critical temperature $T_c=0.333\,0670\,39$ of the 3D Villain model. The correction exponent $\omega_2=1.77$ is adopted. Some of the fits are performed with fixed $\mathcal{Q}_0=1.355\,75$ which is determined from Table~\ref{Tab:fit-Villian2}.}
\label{Tab:fit_Tw_Tc}
\begin{tabular}[t]{|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
$L_{\rm min}$& $\chi^2/$DF & $\eta$ & $\mathcal{Q}_0$ & $b_1$ &$\omega_1$ & $b_2$ \\
\hline
20&13.3/11 &0.038\,59(16)&1.356(1)&-0.288(7)&0.789&- \\
24&13.3/10 &0.038\,59(19)&1.356(1)&-0.289(9)&0.789 &-\\
32&13.2/9 &0.038\,55(23)&1.356(2)&-0.29(1)&0.789&-\\
48&11.6/7 &0.038\,60(31)&1.356(3)&-0.29(2) &0.789&-\\
\hline
12&17.7/12 &0.038\,45(23)&1.355(2)&-0.27(2)&0.789 &-0.23(9)\\
16&16.8/11 &0.038\,29(28)&1.354(2)&-0.26(2)&0.789&-0.4(2) \\
20&13.3/10 &0.038\,65(34)&1.357(3)&-0.29(3)&0.789&0.1(3) \\
24&13.2/9 &0.038\,68(40)&1.357(3)&-0.30(4) &0.789&0.1(4)\\
\hline
20&14.5/11 &0.038\,53(4)&1.355\,75&-0.29(2)&0.791(20)&- \\
24&14.5/10 &0.038\,53(5)&1.355\,75&-0.29(2)&0.790(27)&- \\
32&14.3/9 &0.038\,51(7)&1.355\,75&-0.27(3) &0.776(39)&-\\
48&12.8/7 &0.038\,52(9)&1.355\,75&-0.27(7)&0.776(69)&- \\
\hline
12&18.8/12 &0.038\,51(7)&1.355\,75&-0.25(4) &0.760(46)&-0.3(2)\\
16&17.0/11 &0.038\,45(9)&1.355\,75&-0.19(5) &0.694(68)&-0.7(3)\\
20&14.5/10 &0.038\,53(9)&1.355\,75&-0.3(1) &0.790(94)&0.0(6)\\
24&14.5/9 &0.038\,53(11)&1.355\,75&-0.3(1) &0.79(12)&0.0(9)\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Fits of the wrapping probabilities $R_x$, $R_a$, $R_2$ and the scaled SF stiffness $\rho_s L$ to $(\ref{fit_at_Tc})$ with $y_\mathcal{Q}=0$ at the estimated critical temperature $T_c=0.333\,067\,039$ of the 3D Villain model. The $\mathcal{Q}_0$'s are fixed at their estimates determined from Table~\ref{Tab:fit-Villian1}. The correction exponent $\omega_2=1.77$ is adopted.}
\label{Tab:fit-Villiannew-omega}
\begin{tabular}[t]{|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
Qua. &$L_{\rm min}$ & $\chi^2/$DF & $\mathcal{Q}_0$ & $b_1$& $\omega_1$ & $b_2$ \\
\hline
{\multirow{4}{*}{$R_x$}}
&16& 4.6/12&0.378\,685&-0.034(6)&0.723(40)&-0.10(5) \\
&20& 2.9/11&0.378\,685&-0.04(1)&0.769(53)&-0.02(9) \\
&24& 2.9/10&0.378\,685&-0.04(2)&0.777(69)&0.0(1) \\
&32& 2.9/9&0.378\,685&-0.05(2)&0.78(10)&0.0(3) \\
\hline
{\multirow{4}{*}{$R_a$}}
&16& 4.9/12&0.688\,920&-0.025(8)&0.702(71)&0.01(7) \\
&20& 2.2/11&0.688\,920&-0.04(2)&0.804(95)&0.2(1) \\
&24& 1.9/10&0.688\,920&-0.03(2)&0.76(12)&0.1(2) \\
&32& 1.8/9&0.688\,920&-0.04(4)&0.79(18)&0.1(4) \\
\hline
{\multirow{4}{*}{$R_2$}}
&16& 8.6/12&0.264\,021&-0.016(4)&0.647(59)&-0.16(4) \\
&20& 8.5/11&0.264\,021&-0.015(6)&0.635(77)&-0.18(7) \\
&24& 8.3/10&0.264\,021&-0.013(6)&0.603(96)&-0.21(9) \\
&32& 7.8/9&0.264\,021&-0.009(6)&0.52(14)&-0.3(2) \\
\hline
{\multirow{4}{*}{$\rho_s L$}}
&16& 8.5/12&0.515\,565&-0.13(1)&0.767(22)&-0.10(9) \\
&20& 5.3/11&0.515\,565&-0.16(2)&0.801(30)&0.1(2) \\
&24& 5.1/10&0.515\,565&-0.17(3)&0.812(38)&0.2(3) \\
&32& 4.4/9&0.515\,565&-0.21(6)&0.852(59)&0.6(5) \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
We estimate the critical exponent $\nu$ from the derivatives of wrapping probabilities $G_{R_\kappa E}$ ($\kappa=x, a, 2$) and the derivative of SF stiffness $G_{\rho_sE}$ by fitting them to (\ref{fit_at_Tc}). The details of the least squares fits are given in Tables~\ref{Tab:estimate_nu}. We find that the amplitudes of leading corrections for $G_{R_xE}$, $G_{R_aE}$ and $G_{R_2E}$ are typically smaller than that for $G_{\rho_sE}$, even though leading corrections are clearly there for $G_{R_aE}$ and $G_{R_2E}$. Moreover, it is hard to detect a finite amplitude of leading correction for $G_{R_xE}$, which should be very small if non-zero. This is a useful feature for locating $\nu$ as the leading correction term can be precluded out for the less uncertainties of fitting parameters. By fitting $G_{R_xE}$ to (\ref{fit_at_Tc}) without correction term, we determine $\nu=0.671\,83(6)$ for $L_{\rm min}=16$, $\nu=0.671\,80(8)$ for $L_{\rm min}=20$, $\nu=0.671\,87(9)$ for $L_{\rm min}=24$, $\nu=0.671\,89(11)$ for $L_{\rm min}=32$, $\nu=0.671\,75(14)$ for $L_{\rm min}=40$ and $\nu=0.671\,84(15)$ for $L_{\rm min}=48$, with $\chi^2/{\rm DF} \approx 1$ for all of these fits. Note that the fitting is already stable as $L_{\rm min} \gtrapprox 16$. On this basis, we estimate, more or less conservatively, that $\nu=0.671\,83(18)$. As an illustrative test of our estimate of $\nu$, we plot in Fig.~\ref{Figs_Rxp}(a) the scaled quantity $G_{R_xE}L^{-1/\nu}$ (without correction term) at $T_c$ with $\nu=0.671\,83$ and find that $G_{R_xE} L^{-1/\nu}$ converges fast. By contrast, the experimental estimate $\nu=0.670\,9$~\cite{lipa2003specific} is ruled out. Hence, our estimate of $\nu$ is further evidenced. For $G_{R_aE}$, $G_{R_2E}$ and $G_{\rho_sE}$, correction terms are needed to achieve a stable fitting, bringing about more uncertainties for fitting parameters.
In order to estimate $\eta$, we fit the finite-size $T_w$ data to (\ref{fit_at_Tc}) with $y_\mathcal{Q}=2-\eta$. Obvious corrections to scaling are present in the finite-size scaling. We explore the situations with different combinations of correction terms and the situations with $\mathcal{Q}_0$ being fixed or unfixed. By comparing all the fitting results listed in Table~\ref{Tab:fit_Tw_Tc}, our final estimate is $\eta=0.038\,53(48)$. The scaled quantity $T_{w} L^{-2+\eta}$ with a leading correction term is shown in Fig.~\ref{Figs_Rxp}(b) for $\eta=0.038\,53$.
On the basis of the fits for $T_w$ (Table~\ref{Tab:fit_Tw_Tc}), the leading correction exponent is estimated as $\omega_1=0.77(13)$, which is consistent with the literature results $\omega_1=0.789(11)$~\cite{guida1998critical} and $\omega_1=0.785(20)$~\cite{campostrini2006theoretical}.
Besides, we estimate the leading correction exponent $\omega_1$ from the finite-size scaling of quantities $R_x$, $R_a$, $R_2$ and $\rho_s L$, according to (\ref{fit_at_Tc}), with $y_\mathcal{Q}=0$. As shown by Table~\ref{Tab:fit-Villiannew-omega}, we obtain $\omega_1 \approx 0.7$ which agrees with the estimate $\omega_1=0.77(13)$ from analyzing $T_w$.
\section{Summary}~\label{sum}
In this work we utilize the geometric wrapping probability to exploit the quantitative aspects of the U(1) criticality in three dimensions in the contexts of the finite-temperature transitions in Villain and XY models and the quantum phase transition in the BH model. For both the classical and quantum models, we observe that certain wrapping probability-related quantities exhibit weak corrections in the finite-size scaling. The critical temperatures of the 3D XY and Villain models are estimated as $T_c=2.201\,844\,1(5)$ and $0.333\, 067\, 04(7)$, respectively. The QCP of the 2D unitary-filling BH model is estimated as $(t/U)_c=0.059\,729\,1(8)$. As demonstrated by Table~\ref{LitCP}, our locations of critical points for the 3D XY, 3D Villain and 2D unitary-filling BH models significantly improve over the best literature results. For the 3D classical models, the universal critical wrapping probabilities are determined as $R^c_x=0.378\,7(2)$, $R^c_a=0.688\,9(4)$ and $R^c_2=0.264\,0(3)$, which have not yet been reported. The critical winding number fluctuations is estimated as $\rho^c_sL=0.515\,6(3)$, which agrees well with $\rho^c_s L=0.516\,0(6)$ reported in~\cite{burovski2006high} and has a better precision. Moreover, we find that the derivative of a wrapping probability with respect to $T$, namely $G_{R_xE}$, suffers from negligible corrections. Making use of this feature, we determine the correlation length critical exponent as $\nu=0.671\,83(18)$, which is comparable with the most precise results available in literature (Table~\ref{Litnueta}). In addition, we estimate the critical exponent $\eta$ as $\eta=0.038\,53(48)$, which is close to the recent conformal bootstrap result $\eta=0.038 \, 52(64)$~\cite{kos2016precision}. To sum up, this work is a reference for applying wrapping probability-related quantities to determine the quantitative aspects of critical behaviors and provides several benchmarks for the 3D U(1) criticality.
\begin{acknowledgments} This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under grant No. 11774002 (W.X., Y.S. and J.P.L.) and the National Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars under Grant No. 11625522 (Y.D.).
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}\label{intro}
Galaxy kinematics provides important clues to trace the formation history of a galaxy.
Particularly, galaxy rotation is a simple but strong constraint on the past events of galaxy assembly, because angular momentum is always conserved in an isolated system. If a galaxy formed from a rotating gas cloud, the angular momentum of the gas cloud must remain in the galaxy after condensation. If a galaxy formed from an off-axis merger of two objects, the total angular momentum of the binary system must be succeeded by the merger-remnant galaxy. This is simple physics, but in reality the detailed origins of galaxy rotation are not sufficiently understood yet. This is partially because the history of integral field spectroscopy (IFS) is not so long and thus until only several years ago it was not easy to secure a galaxy sample that is large enough to obtain statistically reliable results.
In the last decade, however, we have learned various aspects about how galaxy rotation is influenced by environment. Owing to several large IFS surveys, now it is known that even early-type galaxies mostly rotate and such rotation is tightly related to environmental density \citep[][and many other studies]{cap06,ems07, cap11,ems11,kra11}. It was also revealed that direct interactions or mergers between galaxies significantly affect the position angle of galaxy rotation axis, which may result in prolate rotation \citep{tsa17,kra18,wea18}, morpho-kinematic misalignment \citep{bar15,oh16}, or kinematically distinct cores \citep{ems14,kra15,tay18}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\plotone{f1.eps}
\caption{(a) Spatial distribution and (b) redshits and $r$-band absolute magnitudes of the CALIFA galaxies (colored dots: red for $M_r\leq -22.5$, green for $-22.5<M_r\leq -20.5$ and blue for $M_r> -20.5$). The background contours show the log-scale number density of the NSA galaxies.\label{spdist}}
\end{figure}
More recently, \citet[][hereafter \emph{L19}]{lee19} reported the first discovery of observational evidence for the systematic coherence between galaxy rotation and the average motion of neighbor galaxies. Such coherence appears to be particularly strong for the rotation at the outskirt ($R_e<R\leq 2R_e$; where $R_e$ is the effective radius) of each galaxy. The coherence signal is statistically significant for neighbors out to 800 kpc from each target galaxy, and it tends to be more conspicuous when target galaxies are faint and neighbor galaxies are bright. All of these results indicate that fly-by interactions with neighbors may strongly influence the rotational direction of a galaxy at least in its outskirt.
In \emph{L19}, the luminosity-weighted mean velocity profiles of neighbors significantly drop down at $\sim800$ kpc and almost converge to zero velocity as the distance from a target galaxy increases (Figure~13 in \emph{L19}), which seems to indicate that too distant neighbors hardly affect galaxy rotation, as we can reasonably guess. However, the profiles appear to be somewhat noisy and fluctuating, and thus one may have suspicion if the coherence signals really converge to zero at $>800$ kpc. This suspicion can be rephrased as the following question: is galaxy rotation not related to the motions of neighbors at far distances (for example, in several-Mpc scales) at all?
As several recent observational and theoretical studies have reported, the spin axes of galaxies appear to be aligned with the directions of surrounding large-scale structures such as filaments, which means that large-scale structures may influence the internal kinematics of individual galaxies to some extent \citep[e.g.,][]{nav04,tem13,lai15,kim18,lee18}.
In that viewpoint, will it be possible that some large-scale effects cause dynamical coherence between galaxies at far distances, although the direct interactions between them are impossible?
To answer these questions, in this paper, we extend the previous work of \emph{L19} to larger scales, out to 15 Mpc.
The paper follows the listed structure. Section~\ref{data} describes the data set and key quantities. Section~\ref{anal} specifies our methods to detect the signal of the dynamical coherence in large scales. Section~\ref{result} shows the results, and a possible scenario for the results is discussed in Section~\ref{discuss}. The conclusions of the paper are given in Section~\ref{conclude}.
Throughout this paper, we adopt the cosmological parameters: $h=0.7$, $\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.7$, and $\Omega_{M}=0.3$.
\section{DATA, SAMPLE AND QUANTITIES}\label{data}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\plotone{f2.eps}
\caption{(a) Normalized angular momenta ($R\leq R_e$) of the CALIFA galaxies as a function of $r$-band absolute magnitude. The red line is the linear regression fit. (b) Normalized angular momenta ($R\leq R_e$), corrected for $r$-band absolute magnitude. \label{angmom}}
\end{figure}
In this paper, we use the PyCASSO database\footnote{http://pycasso.ufsc.br or http://pycasso.iaa.es/} \citep{dea17}, which is a data set value-added by analyzing the Calar Alto Legacy Integral Field Area Survey \citep[CALIFA;][]{san12,san16,wal14} data with the Python CALIFA STARLIGHT Synthesis Organizer platform \citep[PyCASSO;][]{cid05,cid13}. The PyCASSO database provides well-produced maps of various spectroscopic information including stellar mass and line-of-sight velocity for 445 galaxies at $z\lesssim0.03$. The greatest merit of CALIFA is that it has unprecedentedly wide field of view ($> 1$ arcmin$^2$), which covers more than $2R_e$ for most targets. For more detailed description about the CALIFA and PyCASSO data, see Section~2.1 of \emph{L19} and the references therein.
Figure~\ref{spdist} presents the sky distribution of the CALIFA galaxies and their absolute magnitudes and redshifts. The CALIFA galaxies are not significantly biased or clustered to any specific region in the sky.
From the PyCASSO maps of stellar mass surface density and line-of-sight velocity of each CALIFA galaxy, we estimated the angular momenta at its center ($R\leq R_e$) and outskirt ($R_e<R\leq 2R_e$). We also estimated the statistical uncertainty of the position angle for each angular momentum vector, by bootstrapping spaxels in each target galaxy, as described in Section~2.1.1 of \emph{L19}. In this paper, we limit our sample to the CALIFA galaxies that have at least five Voronoi bins at given radial range and the position angle uncertainty not larger than $45^{\circ}$, which leaves 434 galaxies with the central angular momentum measurements and 392 galaxies with the outskirt angular momentum measurements.
Figure~\ref{angmom}(a) shows the central angular momenta normalized by the mean value among the CALIFA galaxies, as a function of $r$-band absolute magnitude. Since the angular momenta strongly depend on the absolute magnitudes, largely due to the mass factor in the angular momentum formula ($L=mr\times v$), we derived the \emph{corrected angular momenta} to remove their luminosity dependence, as shown in Figure~\ref{angmom}(b). This correction enables us to simply separate between the galaxies with low and high angular momenta in any luminosity bin.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\plotone{f3.eps}
\caption{Histograms of the indicators for local environments around the CALIFA galaxies: (a) the number of neighbors brighter than $M_r=-20$ in 1 Mpc and $\pm500$ {{km s$^{-1}$}}, and (b) the local luminosity density, which is defined in the main text (a smaller value indicates higher density). The median value of the local luminosity density of the CALIFA galaxies with at least one neighbor is denoted by the red line ($M_{r,\Sigma(L_r/D)}=-21.1$). \label{env}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\plotone{f4.eps}
\caption{Several basic quantities of the CALIFA galaxies as a function of $r$-band absolute magnitude: (a) $g-r$ color, (b) S{\'e}rsic index, (c) internal angular misalignment, and (d) local luminosity density. The red crosses are the CALIFA galaxies that have no neighbor ($M_r \leq -20$) within 1 Mpc distance. \label{basic}}
\end{figure}
For the estimation of the neighbor motions around the CALIFA galaxies, we use the NASA-Sloan Atlas (NSA) catalog\footnote{http://www.nsatlas.org}. The NSA catalog was created by Michael Blanton, by combining the Sloan Digital Sky Survey \citep[SDSS;][]{yor00}, NASA Extragalactic Database (NED)\footnote{https://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/}, Six-degree Field Galaxy Redshift Survey \citep[6dFGS;][]{jon09}, Two-degree Field Galaxy Redshift Survey \citep[2dFGRS;][]{col01}, CfA Redshift Survey \citep[ZCAT;][]{huc83}, Arecibo Legacy Fast ALFA Survey \citep[ALFALFA;][]{gio05} and the Galaxy Evolution Explorer \citep[GALEX;][]{mar03} survey data.
From the NSA catalog, we obtained right ascension, declination, redshift, S{\'e}rsic index and absolute magnitudes in the $g$ and $r$ bands for the CALIFA galaxies and their neighbors.
We define the `neighbors' as the galaxies that have line-of-sight velocity differences within $\pm500$ {{km s$^{-1}$}} and projected distances not larger than 15 Mpc from the CALIFA galaxies. Note that the galaxies at such huge distances are not usually called `neighbors', but as did in \emph{L19}, we keep this wording for convenience in this paper.
To define the local environment of each CALIFA galaxy, we first counted the number of neighbors that satisfy: (1) the $r$-band absolute magnitude is not fainter than $M_r= -20$ \footnote{This magnitude cut is applied only to the local luminosity density calculation. No magnitude cut is applied to the calculation of luminosity-weighted mean velocity profiles.}, (2) the distance from the CALIFA galaxy is not larger than 1 Mpc, and (3) the line-of-sight velocity difference is not larger than 500 {{km s$^{-1}$}}. Among the 434 CALIFA galaxies, 122 galaxies do not have any neighbor that satisfies the conditions.
For the CALIFA galaxies that have one or more neighbors, we estimated the luminosity density weighted by distance ($M_{r,\sum(L_r/D)}$), as follows:
\begin{equation}
M_{r,\sum(L_r/D)} = -2.5 \log \Big(\sum^{i} 10^{-0.4M_{r,i}}/D_i \Big),
\end{equation}
where $M_{r,i}$ is the $r$-band absolute magnitude of the $i$-th neighbor and $D_i$ is its distance from a given CALIFA galaxy in unit of 100 kpc. This parameter is a rough proxy of the integrated gravitational potential from the neighbors \citep[the basic concept is introduced in][]{lee16}.
In Figure~\ref{env}, it is shown how the number of neighbors and the local luminosity density of the CALIFA galaxies are distributed. The median value of the luminosity density of the CALIFA galaxies with at least one neighbor is $M_{r,\sum(L_r/D)} = -21.1$.
Figure~\ref{basic} presents the distributions of several quantities as a function of $r$-band absolute magnitude for the CALIFA galaxies. The $g-r$ color appears to strongly depend on magnitude as well known, while the S{\'e}rsic index and local luminosity density show weak dependence. The internal angular misalignment, defined as the position angle difference between the central and outskirt angular momentum vectors ($|\theta(\leq R_e) - \theta(R_e<R\leq 2R_e)|$), hardly depends on magnitude, as described in \emph{L19}.
\section{ANALYSIS}\label{anal}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\plotone{f5.eps}
\caption{Schematic picture describing the procedure to build a composite kinematics map of the neighbors around the CALIFA galaxies. Step 1 (left boxes): kinematics maps for individual systems. Step 2 (middle boxes): kinematics maps aligned for the angular momentum vector of each CALIFA galaxy to be upward. Step 3 (right box): the composite map of kinematics for the whole systems around the CALIFA galaxies. \label{flow}}
\end{figure}
The procedure to investigate the dynamical coherence in large scales is intrinsically the same as the work in small scales of \emph{L19}. The final goal of the procedure is to build the luminosity-weighted mean velocity profiles with statistical uncertainties, from which we can determine how significant the coherence between galaxy rotation and the average motion of neighbors at given distance is.
Since the details of the procedure are fully described in Sections~3 and 4 of \emph{L19}, here we simply summarize the key processes from the individual kinematics maps to the luminosity-weighted mean velocity profiles with statistical uncertainties.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\plotone{f6.eps}
\caption{\emph{Upper}: Contour map for the luminosity-weighted mean line-of-sight velocity of neighbors out to 15 Mpc, estimated using the composite kinematics map (aligned for the central rotations of the CALIFA galaxies). The right-side bar shows the color code, in which the numbers indicate the line-of-sight velocities in unit of {{km s$^{-1}$}}. The contour map is built on 100 $\times$ 100 bins, and each bin was smoothed over 3 bins with linear weight by distance. Note that this smoothing is just for the visualization and irrelevant to the main results (the mean velocity profiles). \emph{Lower}: The same as the upper panel, but the color bar is shifted by 35 {{km s$^{-1}$}} (the mean value of the cumulative luminosity-weighted mean velocities at $D\sim15$ and $-15$ Mpc; see Figure~\ref{vprof}(b) and the main text) to compensate the redshift bias of the CALIFA galaxies. \label{velmap}}
\end{figure}
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(1)] First of all, a composite kinematics map needs to be built from the kinematics maps for individual CALIFA galaxies and their neighbors, because the number of neighbors in a single system is mostly not enough to give sufficient reliability in the statistical analysis. This process is schematized in Figure~\ref{flow}. The individual systems are aligned for the angular momentum vector of each CALIFA galaxy to be upward (Step~2 in Figure~\ref{flow}). After that, the whole systems are combined into a single composite map of kinematics (Step~3 in Figure~\ref{flow}).
\item[(2)] In the composite map, the neighbors in the domains of $-45^{\circ}<\theta<45^{\circ}$ and $135^{\circ}<\theta<225^{\circ}$ are discarded, where $\theta$ is the position angle from the angular momentum vector direction (this configuration is called \emph{X-cut}; \emph{L19}), in consideration of the uncertainty in measuring the position angle of an angular momentum vector. Figure~\ref{velmap} shows the luminosity-weighted line-of-sight velocity contour maps after the X-cut. If the dynamical coherence exists in large scales, the right-side contours must be redder than the left-side contours on average.
\item[(3)] We estimate the luminosity-weighted mean velocity profiles, as shown in Figure~\ref{vprof}. The derivative mean velocity ($\langle\Delta v\rangle^{d1000}$) is defined as follows:
\end{enumerate}
\begin{equation}
\langle\Delta v\rangle^{d1000}(D') = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{\displaystyle \sum_{Rd(D',1000)} \Delta v \mathcal{L}}{\displaystyle \sum_{Rd(D',1000)} \mathcal{L}} & \textrm{if}\: D'>0 \\
0 & \textrm{if}\: D'=0 \\
\frac{\displaystyle \sum_{Ld(D',1000)} \Delta v \mathcal{L}}{\displaystyle \sum_{Ld(D',1000)} \mathcal{L}} & \textrm{if}\: D'<0 \textrm{,}
\end{array} \right .
\end{equation}
where $\Delta v$ is the line-of-sight recession velocity of a neighbor galaxy relative to a given CALIFA galaxy, $\mathcal{L}$ is the luminosity of the neighbor galaxy, $D'$ is the projected distance to the CALIFA galaxy, and the right-side distance range $Rd$ is:
\begin{equation}
Rd(D',1000) = \left\{
\begin{array}{l}
D'-1\,\textrm{Mpc} < D \le D' \\
\qquad\qquad\, \textrm{if}\: D'>1 \,\textrm{Mpc}\\
0 < D \le D' \\
\qquad\qquad\, \textrm{if}\: 0<D'\le 1\,\textrm{Mpc,}
\end{array} \right .
\end{equation}
and the left-side distance range $Ld$ is:
\begin{equation}
Ld(D',1000) = \left\{
\begin{array}{l}
D' \le D < D'+1\,\textrm{Mpc} \\
\qquad\qquad \textrm{if}\: D'<-1 \,\textrm{Mpc}\\
D' \le D < 0 \\
\qquad\qquad \textrm{if}\: -1\,\textrm{Mpc}\le D'<0 \textrm{,}
\end{array} \right .
\end{equation}
and the cumulative mean velocity ($\langle\Delta v\rangle^{c}$) is:
\begin{equation}
\langle\Delta v\rangle^{c}(D') = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{\displaystyle \sum_{0<D\le D'} \Delta v \mathcal{L}}{\displaystyle \sum_{0<D\le D'} \mathcal{L}} & \textrm{if}\: D'>0 \\
0 & \textrm{if}\: D'=0 \\
\frac{\displaystyle \sum_{D'\le D<0} \Delta v \mathcal{L}}{\displaystyle \sum_{D'\le D<0} \mathcal{L}} & \textrm{if}\: D'<0 \textrm{.}
\end{array} \right .
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\plotone{f7.eps}
\caption{(a) Derivative radial profiles of luminosity-weighted mean velocity. A top-hat smoothing kernel with 1-Mpc size is applied. The red line shows the profiles for central angular momenta ($R{\le}R_e$), while the blue line is the profiles for outskirt angular momenta ($R_e<R\le 2R_e$). (b) Cumulative radial profiles of luminosity-weighted mean velocity. The positive/negative values in the distance from a given CALIFA galaxy ($D$) indicate the right/left-side neighbors. \label{vprof}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{f8.eps}
\caption{Right-left-merged luminosity-weighted mean velocity profiles for the whole CALIFA sample: (a) the 1-Mpc-binned mean velocity distribution for central ($R\leq R_e$) rotation, (b) the 1-Mpc-binned mean velocity distribution for outskirt ($R_e<R\leq 2R_e$) rotation, (c) the cumulative profile for central rotation, and (d) the cumulative profile for outskirt rotation. Three different kinds of statistical uncertainty are denoted: bootstrap uncertainty (BST; shades), random spin-axis uncertainty (RAX; blue lines), and randomly flipped ($\pm90^{\circ}$) spin-axis uncertainty (RFA; red lines). \label{vprofall}}
\end{figure*}
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(4)] The positive velocities of the right-side neighbors ($D>0$) and the negative velocities of the left-side neighbors ($D<0$) commonly support the coherence between galaxy rotation and neighbor motions. Therefore, we can further simplify Figure~\ref{vprof}(b) by defining the \emph{right-left-merged} mean velocities (Figures~\ref{vprofall} - \ref{vprofneicol}), as follows:
\end{enumerate}
\begin{equation}\label{cumeqn}
\langle\Delta v\rangle^{c}_{R-L}(D') = \frac{\displaystyle \Bigg(\sum_{0<D{\le}D'} \Delta v \mathcal{L} \Bigg) - \Bigg(\sum_{-D'{\le}D<0} \Delta v \mathcal{L} \Bigg)}{\displaystyle \Bigg( \sum_{0<D{\le}D'} \mathcal{L} \Bigg) + \Bigg(\sum_{-D'{\le}D<0} \mathcal{L} \Bigg)}
\end{equation}
where $D'>0$. While Equation~\ref{cumeqn} defines the cumulative mean velocity profile ($\langle\Delta v\rangle^{c}_{R-L}$), the right-left-merged mean velocity at any given distance range without accumulation is simply denoted as $\langle\Delta v\rangle_{R-L}$.
\begin{figure*}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{f9.eps}
\caption{Right-left-merged luminosity-weighted mean velocity profiles for the whole CALIFA galaxies, when the neighbors are divided by luminosity: (a) the 1-Mpc-binned mean velocity distribution for central rotation and for bright ($M_r\leq -20$) neighbors, (b) the 1-Mpc-binned mean velocity distribution for outskirt rotation and for bright neighbors, (c) the cumulative mean velocity profile for central rotation and for bright neighbors, (d) the cumulative mean velocity profile for outskirt rotation and for bright neighbors, (e) the 1-Mpc-binned mean velocity distribution for central rotation and for faint ($M_r>-20$) neighbors, (f) the 1-Mpc-binned mean velocity distribution for outskirt rotation and for faint neighbors, (g) the cumulative mean velocity profile for central rotation and for faint neighbors, and (h) the cumulative mean velocity profile for outskirt rotation and for faint neighbors. \label{vprofneimag}}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{f10.eps}
\caption{Right-left-merged luminosity-weighted mean velocity profiles for the whole CALIFA galaxies, when the neighbors are divided by color: (a) the 1-Mpc-binned mean velocity distribution for central rotation and for red ($g-r\geq 0.7$) neighbors, (b) the 1-Mpc-binned mean velocity distribution for outskirt rotation and for red neighbors, (c) the cumulative mean velocity profile for central rotation and for red neighbors, (d) the cumulative mean velocity profile for outskirt rotation and for red neighbors, (e) the 1-Mpc-binned mean velocity distribution for central rotation and for blue ($g-r<0.7$) neighbors, (f) the 1-Mpc-binned mean velocity distribution for outskirt rotation and for blue neighbors, (g) the cumulative mean velocity profile for central rotation and for blue neighbors, and (h) the cumulative mean velocity profile for outskirt rotation and for blue neighbors. \label{vprofneicol}}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{f11.eps}
\caption{Right-left-merged mean velocities at selected distance ranges for the whole CALIFA galaxies, when only red neighbors are used: (a) central rotation with luminosity weight, (b) outskirt rotation with luminosity weight, (c) central rotation without luminosity weight, and (d) outskirt rotation without luminosity weight. The random spin-axis (RAX) uncertainties are denoted (shades). \label{pltall}}
\end{figure*}
In \emph{L19}, two options for the luminosity weight ($\mathcal{L}$) were applied: absolute-luminosity weight and relative-luminosity weight. For the relative-luminosity weight, $\mathcal{L}$ must be the luminosity ratio between a neighbor and a given CALIFA galaxy, instead of the simple luminosity of a neighbor galaxy. The relative-luminosity-weighted mean velocity better reflects the direct interactions between a CALIFA galaxy and its neighbors. However, because such direct interactions are hardly expected in large (several Mpc) scales, we use only the absolute-luminosity-weighted mean velocities in this paper.
Note that the cumulative profiles (Figure~\ref{vprof}(b)) do not converge to zero velocity as $|D|$ increases but have small margins ($\sim25-45$ {{km s$^{-1}$}}) to positive direction (upward). This is probably due to the CALIFA target selection bias: the CALIFA targets are apparently much brighter than average NSA galaxies, which results in the tendency that the CALIFA targets are biased to lower redshifts compared to NSA galaxies (see Section~4.1 of L19 for more detailed discussion). We confirmed that the margin tends to be mitigated more when a tighter cut of apparent magnitude is applied to the neighbor galaxies, which strongly supports our interpretation.
Such margins are canceled out in the right-left merged profiles.
Figure~\ref{velmap}(b) shows the velocity contour map with the color bar shifted by 35 {{km s$^{-1}$}}, which gives us a clearer view for visually checking the existence of the dynamical coherence, by removing the bias-induced velocity-margin effect.
In the finally-derived right-left-merged mean velocity profiles, the statistical uncertainty is estimated using three different methods: bootstrap (BST) uncertainty, random spin-axis (RAX) uncertainty, and randomly flipped ($\pm90^{\circ}$) spin-axis (RFA) uncertainty.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(5)] To estimate the BST uncertainty, the neighbors are randomly resampled with replacement, and the standard deviation of the resulting mean velocity profiles from 1000-times resampling experiments is estimated.
\item[(6)] The estimation of the RAX uncertainty is based on a null hypothesis, ``the spin axis of each CALIFA galaxy is randomly determined regardless of the motions of its neighbors''. To test it, after replacing the angular momentum vector of each CALIFA galaxy with a random vector, we build a new (random-vector-based) composite kinematics map and derive its corresponding mean velocity profiles. The standard deviation is estimated from 1000-times repetition of this process.
\item[(7)] The process to estimate the RFA uncertainty is similar to that for the RAX uncertainty, but the angular momentum vector of each CALIFA galaxy is randomly flipped by $+90^{\circ}$ or $-90^{\circ}$, instead of being fully randomized.
\end{enumerate}
In Figures~\ref{vprofall} - \ref{vprofneicol}, all the three kinds of uncertainty are presented at the same time, but we will regard the RAX uncertainty as the standard uncertainty. This is because the null hypothesis for the RAX test exactly coincides with what we intend to examine in this paper.
The BST uncertainty is classic and widely used, but it may vary according to the size of a sample, which tends to result in too large uncertainty at small $D$ or too small uncertainty at large $D$.
Actually, when compared to the {\emph L19} results, the BST uncertainty is not well matched at $D=1$ Mpc, whereas the RAX and RFA uncertainties show very good agreements.
The RFA uncertainty is useful to estimate genuinely random axis uncertainty, when it is assumed that there is some coherence between the CALIFA galaxy rotation and the motions of its neighbors, because the neighbors in the X-cut regions after the random flipping by $\pm90^{\circ}$ must have genuinely random motions, not contaminated by coherent motions. However, in the results, the difference between the RAX and RFA uncertainties appears to be tiny.
\section{RESULTS}\label{result}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\plotone{f12.eps}
\caption{\emph{Upper}: Contour map for the luminosity-weighted mean line-of-sight velocity of red ($g-r\ge0.7$) neighbors out to 15 Mpc (aligned for the central rotations of the CALIFA galaxies). The right-side bar shows the color code, in which the numbers indicate the line-of-sight velocities in unit of {{km s$^{-1}$}}. Note that the neutral point of the color bar indicates 35 {{km s$^{-1}$}}, not 0 {{km s$^{-1}$}} to compensate the redshift bias of the CALIFA galaxies. The three green circles show the distance ranges of 6, 11 and 15 Mpc, respectively. \emph{Lower}: Contour map for the luminosity-weighted mean line-of-sight velocity of blue ($g-r<0.7$) neighbors. \label{velmap2}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{f13.eps}
\caption{The 1-Mpc-binned (histograms) and cumulative (red lines) luminosity-weighted mean velocity profiles for all CALIFA galaxies (central rotation) and red neighbors, when the sky is divided into six areas (A1 -- A6). The RAX uncertainties are overlaid (grey bars and red shades for the 1-Mpc-binned and cumulative velocities, respectively). The number of CALIFA galaxies in each area is denoted at the lower-right corner in each panel. \label{spfrag}}
\end{figure*}
In this section, the final products of the right-left-merged mean velocity profiles are inspected one by one. The results for the whole CALIFA sample and CALIFA subsamples divided by several quantities are presented in separate sub-sections.
\subsection{The Whole Sample}\label{result1}
Figure~\ref{vprofall} presents the 1-Mpc-binned mean velocity profiles and the cumulative mean velocity profiles for the whole sample of the CALIFA galaxies.
In Figure~\ref{vprofall}(a) and (b), the binned mean velocities have positive values out to 8 Mpc, which is consistent with the coherent motion of neighbors aligned to the rotation of CALIFA galaxies. In the cumulative profiles, the coherence signal (i.e., the luminosity-weighted mean velocity of neighbors) is as large as $21.2\pm7.9$ {{km s$^{-1}$}} ($2.7\sigma$) at $D\le6.20$ Mpc for central rotation, while it is $22.1\pm8.4$ {{km s$^{-1}$}} ($2.6\sigma$) at $D\le2.95$ Mpc for outskirt rotation. The shapes of the cumulative profiles are possibly different between central and outskirt rotations (the cumulative mean velocity almost steadily increases out to 6 Mpc for central rotation, whereas the steady increase is only out to 3 Mpc for outskirt rotation), but the difference is statistically insignificant.
The significance to the BST uncertainty reaches to $2.9\sigma$ even at $D>10$ Mpc, but we will not overvalue it, because of the weakness of the BST uncertainties mentioned in Section~\ref{anal}. The RFA uncertainty tends to well follow the trends of the RAX uncertainty.
The properties of neighbors that have stronger coherent motions are important clues to infer the origin of this mysterious dynamical coherence in large scales. Thus, we estimated the mean velocity profiles for the whole CALIFA galaxies when their neighbors are controlled.
Figure~\ref{vprofneimag} compare the results when the neighbors are divided by luminosity ($M_r=-20$). In this comparison, the difference between bright and faint neighbors do not seem to be large, overall.
On the other hand, in Figure~\ref{vprofneicol}, the red and blue neighbors show striking differences. When the neighbors are limited to red ($g-r\geq 0.7$) galaxies, the coherence signals are as large as $29.1\pm9.7$ {{km s$^{-1}$}} ($3.0\sigma$) at $D\le6.20$ Mpc and $22.7\pm7.9$ {{km s$^{-1}$}} ($2.9\sigma$) at $D\le10.30$ Mpc (for central rotation; Figure~\ref{vprofneicol}(c)).
The coherence signals for outskirt rotation are slightly smaller, but still considerable ($2.5-2.8\sigma$ significance; Figure~\ref{vprofneicol}(d)). These coherence signals are even more significant than those when the whole neighbors are used, despite the smaller neighbor sample size.
The binned mean velocities mostly have positive values (except the 8 - 9 Mpc bin for central rotation) out to 11 Mpc (Figure~\ref{vprofneicol}(a) and (b)), which supports the existence of dynamical coherence in such large scales, too.
On the other hand, when the neighbors are limited to blue ($g-r<0.7$) galaxies, coherence signals appear to be obviously insignificant. These results indicate that the color of the neighbors is a critical factor for the large-scale coherence.
\begin{deluxetable}{cr @{$\pm$} lc}
\tablenum{1} \tablecolumns{4} \tablecaption{Coherence Signal at $1 - 6$ Mpc in Each Sky Area} \tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{ Sky Area & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$\langle\Delta v\rangle_{(R-L)}\pm$ e$_{\textrm{\tiny RAX}}$} & Significance \\
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{[{{km s$^{-1}$}}]} }
\startdata
A1 & 22.1 & 27.2 & $0.8\sigma$ \\
A2 & 0.2 & 17.5 & $0.0\sigma$ \\
A3 & 31.2 & 26.7 & $1.2\sigma$ \\
A4 & 25.8 & 34.1 & $0.8\sigma$ \\
A5 & 5.0 & 19.0 & $0.3\sigma$ \\
A6 & 64.9 & 26.0 & $2.5\sigma$ \\
\hline\hline
RMS$^{\dagger}$ & \multicolumn{2}{l}{21.0} \\
Error$^{\ddagger}$ & \multicolumn{2}{l}{\phantom{0}9.4} \\
\enddata
\tablecomments{ $^\dagger$ The root-mean-square dispersion of $\langle\Delta v\rangle_{(R-L)}$ among the six sky areas. \\
$^\ddagger$ Error on the mean = RMS $/\sqrt{N-1}$.}
\label{skytab}
\end{deluxetable}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{f14.eps}
\caption{Right-left-merged luminosity-weighted mean velocities at selected distance ranges for the CALIFA subsamples divided by luminosity: (a) central rotation for bright ($M_r\leq -22.5$) galaxies, (b) outskirt rotation for bright galaxies, (c) central rotation for intermediate ($-22.5<M_r\leq -20.5$) galaxies, (d) outskirt rotation for intermediate galaxies, (e) central rotation for faint ($M_r>-20.5$) galaxies, and (f) outskirt rotation for faint galaxies. Only red ($g-r\ge0.7$) neighbors are considered.\label{vprofmag}}
\end{figure*}
One important issue is the exact distance scale, out to which the dynamical coherence exists. When we focus on the central rotations and the red neighbors, the coherence out to 6 Mpc seems to be quite clear, because (1) all binned mean velocities have positive values, (2) the 5 - 6 Mpc bin shows the highest mean velocity (= the strongest coherence signal), and (3) the cumulative profile almost steadily increases. However, for the signals at 6 - 11 Mpc range, it is not easy to assert if the signals are sufficiently significant. The weakness of the cumulative profile is that once a strong signal appears (e.g., the high $\langle\Delta v\rangle_{R-L}$ at 5 - 6 Mpc), it may strongly influence the cumulative mean velocities even out of that point. In other words, the high coherence signals out to 11 Mpc in the cumulative profile may be simply the remnant effect of the strong coherence signals at $D\le6$ Mpc.
To address this issue, we plot Figure~\ref{pltall}, which shows the mean velocities at three selected distance ranges: $1 - 6$ Mpc, $6 - 11$ Mpc, and $11 - 15$ Mpc. In addition, we also compare the mean velocities with and without luminosity weight, to see how significantly the luminosity weight influence the results. As a result, we confirm that the coherence signal is still strong ($30.6\pm10.9$ {{km s$^{-1}$}}; $2.8\sigma$; for central rotation and with luminosity weight) at $D\le6$ Mpc, even after the influence of small-scale coherence ($<1$ Mpc) is removed. The significance becomes weaker when luminosity weight is not applied, but still meaningful ($18.1\pm7.7$ {{km s$^{-1}$}}; $2.4\sigma$). However, at the $6 - 11$ Mpc range, the statistical significance of dynamical coherence appears to be very marginal ($16.5\pm11.0$ {{km s$^{-1}$}}; $1.5\sigma$). That is, even though we suspect the existence of dynamical coherence out to 11 Mpc from Figure~\ref{vprofneicol} (consistently positive $\langle\Delta v\rangle_{R-L}$ out to 11 Mpc for red neighbors), the statistical evidence for it is not decisive. Thus, hereafter we will focus on the distance range of $D\le6$ Mpc, at which the obvious coherence signals are detected.
Figure~\ref{velmap2} presents the contour maps for the luminosity-weighted mean line-of-sight velocity of red and blue neighbors, respectively. Compared to Figure~\ref{velmap} (lower panel), the trends of `redshift at the right side' and `blueshift at the left side' appear more obviously when the neighbors are limited to red ones, particularly at $D\le6$ Mpc. The trends at $6 - 11$ Mpc range are somewhat ambiguous, and the $D>11$ Mpc range shows clearly no coherence signal.
Finally, we test if the large-scale coherence is a universal feature or there are some variations across the sky. Figure~\ref{spfrag} shows what the mean velocity profiles look like when the sky is divided into six areas. Although the coherence in each sky area is mostly insignificant because of the small sample size, the divided areas seem to present some possible differences: relatively strong coherence (A3 and A6), ambiguous coherence (A1 and A4), and almost no coherence (A2 and A5) out to 6 Mpc.
This may imply that the large-scale coherence is attributed to specific large-scale structures, rather than to a universal property in the Universe. We also estimated the luminosity-weighted mean velocity and its RAX uncertainty at the $1 - 6$ Mpc distance range in each sky area, the results of which are summarized in Table~\ref{skytab}. The root-mean-square (RMS) dispersion of the mean velocities among the six sky areas and the error on the mean (= RMS $/\sqrt{N-1}$) are also given. The RMS is comparable with the RAX uncertainty in each sky area, and the error of the mean estimated using the six sky subsamples gives a $3.3\sigma$ significance to the mean velocity of the whole sample ($30.6\pm9.4$ {{km s$^{-1}$}}).
In summary, the dynamical coherence is obviously detected out to 6 Mpc, with confidence levels up to $2.8\sigma$ significance. This is the first discovery of the dynamical coherence in such a large scale. We suspect the possible existence of dynamical coherence even out to 11 Mpc, but the statistical evidence is insufficient at least in this study.
\subsection{Subsamples}\label{result2}
\begin{figure*}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{f15.eps}
\caption{Right-left-merged luminosity-weighted mean velocities at selected distance ranges for the CALIFA subsamples divided by color: (a) central rotation for red ($g-r\leq 0.756$) galaxies, (b) outskirt rotation for red galaxies, (c) central rotation for blue ($g-r>0.756$) galaxies, and (d) outskirt rotation for blue galaxies. Only red ($g-r\ge0.7$) neighbors are considered.\label{vprofcol}}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{f16.eps}
\caption{Right-left-merged luminosity-weighted mean velocities at selected distance ranges for the CALIFA subsamples divided by S{\'e}rsic index: (a) central rotation for concentrated ($n\leq 2$) galaxies, (b) outskirt rotation for concentrated galaxies, (c) central rotation for diffuse ($n>2$) galaxies, and (d) outskirt rotation for diffuse galaxies. Only red ($g-r\ge0.7$) neighbors are considered.\label{vprofser}}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{f17.eps}
\caption{Right-left-merged luminosity-weighted mean velocities at selected distance ranges for the CALIFA subsamples divided by internal misalignment: (a) central rotation for well-aligned ($|\theta(R\le R_e)-\theta(R_e<R\le 2R_e)|\leq 5.0^{\circ}$) galaxies, (b) outskirt rotation for well-aligned galaxies, (c) central rotation for misaligned ($|\theta(R\le R_e)-\theta(R_e<R\le 2R_e)|>5.0^{\circ}$) galaxies, and (d) outskirt rotation for misaligned galaxies. Only red ($g-r\ge0.7$) neighbors are considered. \label{vprofmis}}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{f18.eps}
\caption{Right-left-merged luminosity-weighted mean velocities at selected distance ranges for the CALIFA subsamples divided by luminosity-corrected central angular momentum: (a) central rotation for fast-rotating ($\log(L/\langle L\rangle)-(-0.659M_r - 14.144) \geq 0$) galaxies, (b) outskirt rotation for fast-rotating galaxies, (c) central rotation for slowly-rotating ($\log(L/\langle L\rangle)-(-0.659M_r - 14.144) < 0$) galaxies, and (d) outskirt rotation for slowly-rotating galaxies. Only red ($g-r\ge0.7$) neighbors are considered. \label{vprofmom}}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{f19.eps}
\caption{Right-left-merged luminosity-weighted mean velocities at selected distance ranges for the CALIFA subsamples divided by local luminosity density: (a) central rotation for galaxies in loose environment (no neighbor with $M_r\leq -21$ in 1 Mpc), (b) outskirt rotation for galaxies in loose environment, (c) central rotation for galaxies in intermediate environment ($-21.1<M_{r,(\sum(L_r/D)}\leq -17.0$), (d) outskirt rotation for galaxies in intermediate environment, (e) central rotation for galaxies in dense environment ($M_{r,(\sum(L_r/D)}\leq -21.1$), and (f) outskirt rotation for galaxies in dense environment. Only red ($g-r\ge0.7$) neighbors are considered. \label{vprofenv}}
\end{figure*}
We examine various subsamples of the CALIFA galaxies, divided by luminosity, color, S{\'e}rsic index, internal misalignment, luminosity-corrected angular momentum, and local luminosity density. In this subsample analysis, we limited the neighbors only to red ones, because the results in Section~\ref{result1} clearly show that the large-scale coherence is related to red neighbors, not blue ones. We tried these comparisons to find out any clues for the origin of the large-scale dynamical coherence. As a result, some cases show \emph{possible} differences between the subsamples, but unfortunately they are mostly statistically insignificant.
Here we summarize the results of subsample comparisons. The statistical significance of the difference between the divided subsamples is given for each comparison, which is for central rotation and at $1-6$ Mpc if there is no additional note.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(1)] In Figure~\ref{vprofmag}, the bright CALIFA galaxies ($M_r\leq -20.5$) show relatively strong signals ($2.2 - 2.3\sigma$; at $1 - 6$ Mpc and for central rotation), whereas the faint CALIFA galaxies ($M_r> -20.5$) hardly show meaningful signals. [Significance of the difference: $0.6\sigma$]
\item[(2)] In Figure~\ref{vprofcol}, the red ($g-r\ge0.756$) CALIFA galaxies show very slightly stronger coherence signals than blue ($g-r<0.756$) CALIFA galaxies ($2.7\sigma$ versus $2.2\sigma$). [Significance of the difference: $0.1\sigma$]
\item[(3)] In Figure~\ref{vprofser}, both of the concentrated ($n\ge2$) and diffuse ($n<2$) galaxies show marginal coherence signals ($2.0 - 2.2\sigma$) at $1 - 6$ Mpc. However, at $6 - 11$ Mpc, the diffuse galaxies show marginal coherence signals ($2.3 - 2.4\sigma$) whereas the concentrated galaxies show no signal. This is the only case that the statistical significance of coherence signal is larger than $2\sigma$ at $6 - 11$ Mpc. [Significance of the difference: $1.7\sigma$ (at $6 - 11$ Mpc)]
\item[(4)] In Figure~\ref{vprofmis}, the well-aligned galaxies are found to have stronger coherence signals ($2.5\sigma$) at $1 - 6$ Mpc, while the misaligned galaxies mostly show insignificant signals. [Significance of the difference: $1.5\sigma$]
\item[(5)] In Figure~\ref{vprofmom}, the CALIFA galaxies with high angular momenta ($\log(L/\langle L\rangle)-(-0.659M_r - 14.144) \geq 0$) appear to be more strongly coherent with neighbors ($2.3\sigma$) than the ones with low angular momenta at $1 - 6$ Mpc. [Significance of the difference: $0.8\sigma$]
\item[(6)] In Figure~\ref{vprofenv}, the CALIFA galaxies in dense ($M_{r,(\sum(L_r/D)}\leq -21.1$) environment show stronger signals ($2.4\sigma$ at $1 - 6$ Mpc) than those in loose environment. [Significance of the difference: $1.0\sigma$]
\end{enumerate}
Again, we emphasize that these differences are \emph{statistically insignificant}. Only two cases show very marginal differences ($\gtrsim 1.5\sigma$): the diffuse or well-aligned CALIFA galaxies tend to show stronger signals of large-scale coherence. The other cases are too uncertain to be seriously discussed in this work, and we need to be sufficiently cautious even for the two very marginal cases.
\section{DISCUSSION}\label{discuss}
The key result in Section~\ref{result} is that galaxy rotation appears to be considerably coherent with the average line-of-sight motion of neighbors at far distances. When the neighbors are limited to red ones, the signal for the whole CALIFA sample is as significant as $2.8\sigma$ at $1<D\le$ 6 Mpc.
From this result, a simple but hard question is propounded.
\emph{How can the dynamical coherence be established over such large scales?}
Undoubtedly, direct interactions are impossible between galaxies separated by several Mpc. Then what caused this mysterious coherence in large scales?
The first clue is the property of the coherently-moving neighbors. In our results, only red neighbors show strong signals of dynamical coherence, while blue neighbors hardly show such signals. Red galaxies are widely used as a tracer of large-scale structures \citep[e.g.,][]{san09,kaz10,mon12,bau18}. In other words, the average motions of red neighbors may be equivalent with the motion of large-scale structures. If we adopt this interpretation, our results may indicate that the rotation of a galaxy is related to the motion of large-scale structures around it.
The second clue is the properties of the CALIFA galaxies with strong signals of large-scale coherence.
In Section~\ref{result2}, the diffuse or internally-well-aligned CALIFA galaxies tend to show stronger coherence signals, although the difference is very marginal. If we cautiously suppose that they are real features, such differences may be interpreted that late-type galaxies with less dynamical perturbation tend to have stronger large-scale coherence.
Hence, the two clues are combined into a single sentence: ``the rotational directions of late-type galaxies experiencing less dynamical perturbation are considerably related to the motions of large-scale structures around them''.
Before suggesting a scenario that explains this phenomenon, it will be worth comparing the results in this paper with those of \emph{L19}: the difference between the large-scale coherence and the small-scale coherence. In the small scale ($<$ 1 Mpc) of \emph{L19}, the rotations of \emph{faint} CALIFA galaxies are more strongly coherent with the average motion of \emph{bright} neighbors. On the other hand, in the large scale of this paper, the rotations of \emph{late-type} CALIFA galaxies show stronger coherence with the average motion of \emph{red} neighbors. About internal alignment of CALIFA galaxies, the small-scale coherence is stronger for \emph{misaligned} galaxies, whereas the large-scale coherence is stronger for \emph{well-aligned} galaxies. While all the features of small-scale coherence appear to be consistent with the interaction origin (\emph{L19}), the features of large-scale coherence found in this paper seem to be far from it. In other words, the two kinds of dynamical coherence probably have different origins.
One possible scenario for the large-scale dynamical coherence is as follows: A large-scale structure may have its own motion. The motion is different from the streaming motions of galaxies within the structure, but it indicates an extremely slow displacement of the structure itself. For example, imagine a large-scale filament or sheet with non-translational motion (different parts of the structure move at different speeds; differential motion).
If such a motion influences the individual angular momenta of the galaxies in the structure, then the large-scale dynamical coherence signals can manifest as discovered in this paper.
Unfortunately we do not have sufficient evidence supporting this scenario now, but we continue our speculation based on it. In our results, the luminosity-weighted mean velocity at $1<D\le6$ Mpc is 30.6 {{km s$^{-1}$}} (for central rotation of the CALIFA galaxies and for red neighbors; Figure~\ref{vprofneicol}). Supposing that this speed represents the long-term motion of large-scale structures (for example, the filament or sheet we assumed in the previous paragraph), we can roughly estimate the speed of position angle variation of the large-scale structure as follows:
30.6~{{km s$^{-1}$}} $\div$ 6 Mpc $\approx$ 2.9$^{\circ}$ per 10 Gyr.
Even if we adopt the luminosity-weighted mean velocity of 64.6 {{km s$^{-1}$}} for the A6 area (Table~\ref{skytab}), the speed of position angle variation is only 6.2$^{\circ}$ per 10 Gyr.
That is, in this speed, the change of the large-scale structure will be tiny even over the Hubble time.
If such a slow motion of a large-scale structure causes coherent angular momenta of galaxy-forming proto-clouds in it, the angular momenta will be conserved even after the proto-clouds form galaxies, until they suffer some disturbances from outside, such as galaxy interactions or merging events.
This scenario explains why unperturbed late-type galaxies show stronger coherence signals: late-type galaxies may conserve their initial angular momenta, whereas early-type galaxies grown through various merging events may have lost them.
The sky variation of the large-scale coherence found in Figure~\ref{spfrag} and Table~\ref{skytab} may be also explained by this scenario, because large-scale structures need to be well aligned perpendicularly to our line-of-sight, to be detected in our analysis.
However, we emphasize again that the differences between the subsamples are very marginal, and thus they need to be confirmed using a sufficiently large IFS sample, which will be crucial to support our suggested scenario.
How can we verify this scenario in another observational approach?
To do that, first it is necessary to (1) identify large-scale structures (such as filaments or sheets) that have a long-term motion as described above. After that, we need to (2) collect IFS data for a number of galaxies in the structures and (3) estimate the angular momentum vectors of those galaxies and compare their directions with the long-term motions of the structures.
Since today various IFS surveys are producing data cubes for more and more galaxies, Steps (2) and (3) may not be too hard only if Step (1) is accomplished.
However, the real problem is Step (1): currently we cannot suggest any promising methodology to observationally confirm the long-term motion of a given large-scale structure. It is because the line-of-sight velocity of a large-scale structure (or the galaxies in it) is the combination of the Hubble expansion and the peculiar motion, which cannot be observationally distinguished. Thus, although a statistical study for a bundle of large-scale structures will be possible (just like this work), an intensive investigation for a given specific structure seems to be hardly achievable.
In that sense, numerical simulations would be a better approach practically, if it is possible that they are done for sufficiently large scales (to cover large-scale structures) and in high resolution (to resolve galaxy rotations) at the same time.
Finally, we try to reconcile this scenario with the previous findings that the spin axes of galaxies are aligned with large-scale filaments. According to recent studies in simulations \citep{nav04,ara07,bru07,cen14,dub14,liu17,lee18} and in observations \citep{tem13,zha13,zha15,hir17,kim18,jeo19},
late-type galaxies in a filament tend to have spin axes parallel with the filament direction, while spin axes of early-type galaxies tend to be perpendicular to it.
Since the galaxies with strong coherence signals in our results may be mainly late-type galaxies, if they are located in filaments, their spin axes may be aligned to be parallel with filaments according to those studies.
In this case, it is not strongly expected that a late-type galaxy in a filament has large-scale dynamical coherence with galaxies in the same filaments, even if the filament has its own long-term differential motion. However, suppose that the filament is embedded in a sheet-like structure with its own long-term differential motion, and this motion had induced the spin of the late-type galaxy. Then, the late-type galaxy in the filament will have the large-scale dynamical coherence with sheet galaxies, rather than with other filament galaxies. In this way, our scenario and the previous studies can be reconciled. As mentioned earlier, such a configuration of large-scale structures can not be easily identified in observations. However, with the help of simulations, it could be explored more along this direction.
\section{CONCLUSION}\label{conclude}
We examined whether there is any coherence between the rotational direction of galaxies and the average motions of their neighbor galaxies in large scales out to 15 Mpc, using the CALIFA survey data and the NSA catalog.
From our statistical analysis, we discovered that the coherence is established even in several-Mpc scales.
Our main conclusions are summarized as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[1.] The rotation of a galaxy appears to be related to the average motion of its neighbors out to several Mpc scales. The large-scale coherence is stronger when the neighbors are limited to red ones ($2.8\sigma$ significance at $1<D\le6$ Mpc for central rotation), whereas it is obviously insignificant for blue neighbors.
\item[2.] The diffuse or internally-well-aligned CALIFA galaxies show stronger coherence signals than concentrated or internally-misaligned CALIFA galaxies. However, the differences are statistically very marginal and thus need to be checked using a much larger IFS sample.
\item[3.] The detailed trends of the large-scale coherence are different from those of the small-scale coherence. The features of the large-scale coherence seem to be hardly caused by direct interactions between galaxies, which were suggested as the main origin of the small-scale coherence in \emph{L19}.
\item[4.] For the large-scale coherence discovered in this paper, we cautiously suggest a scenario that the long-term motion of a large-scale structure may influence the rotations of galaxies in it. It will not be easy to verify this scenario in another observational approach, but numerical simulations would be helpful.
\end{enumerate}
\acknowledgments
This study uses data provided by the Calar Alto Legacy Integral Field Area (CALIFA) survey (http://califa.caha.es/), which is based on observations collected at the Centro Astron{\'o}mico Hispano Alem{\'a}n (CAHA) at Calar Alto, operated jointly by the Max-Planck-Institut f{\"u}r Astronomie and the Instituto de Astrof{\'i}sica de Andaluc{\'i}a (CSIC).
This study also uses the the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED), which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro}
In modern electronics the coordination of complex systems and processes in time is necessary for a defined system behavior, efficient operation and reliable parallel information processing \cite{Corbett2012,Brewer2017,Shrit2017}.
To establish such coordination via a global time reference for spatially distributed clock elements can be a challenging task, especially at high frequencies and in the presence of signal transmission- and processing-delays.
Such delays are induced by finite signal propagation speeds in transmission lines and due to signal processing, e.g., filtering.
Furthermore, integrated electronic systems display a considerable degree of heterogeneity in their component characteristics due to, e.g., the production process of semiconductor technology~\cite{Verma2009,Alioto2010,Onabajo2012}.
This has far reaching consequences for the architectures of electronic systems, requiring their functionality to be robust against such heterogeneity.
Example systems are global and indoor positioning, large antenna, radar and sensory arrays, multi-processor computer architectures, terahertz based technology and databases on the internet~\cite{Corbett2012}.
A common approach to synchronization in such systems is to entrain imprecise electronic clocks, so called phase-locked loops (PLLs)~\cite{Yuldashev2015}, hierarchically with a dedicated and precise reference clock (usually a quartz).
Such references feed their signal unidirectionally into a clock-tree that becomes increasingly complicated as the system size grows~\cite{Ho2001,Mensink2010}.
Therefore such systems are often synchronized only locally by \textbf{g}lobally \textbf{a}synchronous, \textbf{l}ocally \textbf{s}ynchronous operations (\textit{GALS})~\cite{Yu2009}.
A novel approach to the synchronization of large spatially distributed electronic systems is to allow the formation of self-organized synchronous states \cite{Orsatti2008,Javidan2011,Pollakis2014,Koskin2018}.
This is inspired by robust self-organized synchronization without hierarchical structures as found in biological systems, where synchronization is achieved robustly in highly noisy environments with strong heterogeneities and in the presence of considerable time-delays \cite{Morelli2009,Oates2012}.
So far, such networks have been studied analytically for homogeneous clock networks and and have been tested experimentally with weakly heterogeneous electronic prototype clocks \cite{Pollakis2014,Jorg2015,Wetzel2017}.
To enable this technology for applications in electrical engineering, it is important to understand the consequences of heterogeneity on the collective self-organized dynamics in finite-size systems \cite{Koskin2018}.
Furthermore, studying synchronization of heterogeneous clocks is relevant beyond electronic systems and can provide insight in, e.g. power grid and biological neural networks, consisting of strongly heterogeneous units \cite{Balasubramanian2015,Tenti2016,Kehl2017}.
In this paper we study and analyze the effects of heterogeneity on the synchronization dynamics of mutually delay-coupled electronic clocks.
We use a Kuramoto-type model, i.e., networks of delay-coupled phase oscillators with node dynamics that include processing and inversion of signals and delayed feedback \cite{Kuramoto1984,Strogatz2000}.
The paper is organized as follows.
We introduce a model for heterogeneous networks of non-identical mutually delay-coupled digital electronic clocks with signal filtering in Sec.~\ref{sec:2hetoPLL}.
For such systems we calculate the frequencies and phase configurations of synchronized states, and analyze their stability as a function of different heterogeneous system parameters in Sec.~\ref{sec:sync-sol-new}.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:results} we discuss the effects of these heterogeneities and compare to the case of networks of identical clocks.
We present how the different types of time-delays and their interplay affects the dynamical properties of synchronization in such systems.
We summarize in Sec.~\ref{sec:discuss}, connect the results to modern electronic applications and components, and discuss the potential of self-organized synchronization for microelectronic systems and processes.
\section{Mutually delay-coupled electronic clocks} \label{sec:2hetoPLL}
We consider a system of mutually delay-coupled electronic clocks, so called phase-locked loops (PLLs) \cite{Meyr1986,Gardner2005}.
Each PLL of the clock networks considered here consists of a phase-detector (PD), a loop-filter (LF), a voltage controlled oscillator (VCO),
an inverter (INV) and a feedback-delay component in the feedback path, see Fig.~\ref{fig:sketchPLL}.
Heterogeneity in these components manifests in heterogeneous intrinsic frequencies, filter cut-off frequencies, transmission- and feedback-delays.
The PLLs are mutually connected, i.e., each VCO sends its output signal $x_k(t)$ to at least one other and receives time-delayed signals $x_l(t-\tau_{kl})$ from at least another oscillator in the network.
The PD generates a signal that contains information about the phase relations between the input signals $x_l(t-\tau_{kl})$ from other PLLs and the internal feedback signals $x_k(t-\tau_{kl}^f)$
\begin{equation} \label{eq:pd-output}
x_k^{\text{PD}}(t) = \frac{1}{n_k}\sum_{l=1}^{N}\,c_{kl}\,h^{\rm PD}\left[ \phi_l(t-\tau_{kl}), \phi_k(t-\tau_{kl}^f) \right],
\end{equation}
where $h^{\rm PD}(\,\cdot\,)$ denotes $2\pi$-periodic coupling functions that depend on the type of phase detection at the PD (e.g. XOR or analog multiplier),
$\phi_l(t-\tau_{kl})$ denotes the phases of the input signals from other PLLs, delayed by transmission-delays $\tau_{kl}$,
$\phi_k(t-\tau_{kl}^f)$ denotes the phase of the feedback signal, delayed by a feedback-delay $\tau_{kl}^f$,
and $n_k=\sum_l \,c_{kl}$ is the node degree and denotes the number of the nodes' input signals.
The $c_{kl}$, equal to one if there is a connection between PLL $l$ and PLL $k$ and zero otherwise, denote the elements of the adjacency matrix that specifies the coupling topology.
The LF then processes the PD signal which yields the filtered control signal $x_k^{\text{C}}(t)$
\begin{equation} \label{eq:lf-output}
x_k^{\text{C}} (t) = \int_0^{\infty}{\mbox d}u~\,p_{k}(u)\,x_k^{\text{PD}}(t-u),
\end{equation}
\noindent
where $p_{k}(u)$ denotes the impulse response of the LF.
Usually the LF is implemented as a RC low-pass.
Its transfer-function in Laplace-domain is represented in time-domain by the Gamma-distribution~\cite{Mancini2003}.
A large class of LFs can hence be modeled as $p_{k}(u)=p(u;a_k,b_k)$ \cite{Mancini2003}, where
\begin{equation} \label{eq:pu01}
\begin{split}
p(u;a,b) = u^{(a-1)} \frac{e^{-u/b}}{b^{a} ~\Gamma(a) },
~\rm{and}~\int_0^{\infty} {\mbox d}u~ p(u;a,b) = 1.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The LF is characterized by the order $a_{k}$ of the filter, and the scale parameter $b_{k}$ which are related to the cut-off frequency of the LF as $\omega_{k}^c = 2 \pi f_{k}^c = 1/(a_{k} b_{k})$.
The VCO is operated such that it responds linearly to the control signal $x_k^{\text{C}}(t)$
\begin{equation} \label{eq:vco-output}
\dot{\phi}_k = \omega_k^0 + K_{k}^{\rm VCO} x_k^{\text{C}} (t),
\end{equation}
where $k=1,\dots,N$ indexes the PLLs in the network, $\omega_k^0$ denotes the intrinsic frequency and $K_{k}^{\rm VCO}$ denotes the input sensitivity of VCO $k$.
Using Eq.~(\ref{eq:pd-output}), Eq.~(\ref{eq:lf-output}) and Eq.~(\ref{eq:vco-output}) we obtain the phase model
\begin{equation} \label{eq:sys-sine}
\dot{\phi}_k(t) = \omega_k + \frac{K_{k}}{n_k} \sum_{l=1}^N c_{kl} \int_0^{\infty} {\mbox d}u~ p_{k}(u) \cdot X_{kl}(t,u,\tau_{kl},\tau_{kl}^f),
\end{equation}
where we defined the coupling strength $K_k=K_k^{\rm VCO}/2$, and $X_{kl} = h\left[ \phi_l(t-u-\tau_{kl})-\phi_k(t-u-\tau_{kl}^f) \right]$ denotes the low frequency components of $h^{\rm PD}[\,\cdot\,]$.
We here consider the high frequency components to be ideally filtered by the LF \cite{Pollakis2014}.
In the case of digital signals and an XOR phase detector, as will be shown in the section with the experimental results, the coupling function $h[\,\cdot\,]$ is a triangular function ~\cite{Wetzel2017}.
In the following, we consider a cosine coupling function associated with analog signals and a multiplier PD, see~\cite{Pollakis2014}.
Note that for an LF impulse response peaked at zero, $p(u)=\delta(u)$, a sinusoidal coupling function $h(\,\cdot\,)$, and $\tau_{kl}=\tau_{kl}^f=0$, Eq.~(\ref{eq:sys-sine}) reduces to a Kuramoto model of coupled phase oscillators with heterogeneous intrinsic frequencies \cite{Schuster1989,Acebron2005}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[scale=.305, angle=0]{PLL.png}
\caption{Simplified schematic of a phase-locked loop unit. \emph{PD} denotes the phase detector, \emph{LF} the loop filter, \emph{VCO} the voltage controlled oscillator,
\emph{INV} the inverter in the feedback loop and
$\tau_f$ the feedback-delay element.}
\label{fig:sketchPLL}
\end{figure}
\section{Synchronized solutions and linear stability} \label{sec:sync-sol-new}
We now consider a system of two delay-coupled phase-locked loops.
This minimal system is suitable to exemplify the implications of component heterogeneities for the dynamics of self-organized synchronization.
The general case of $N$ delay-coupled heterogeneous PLLs is shown in the Supplementary material~\ref{supp-mat-Nosc}.
The instantaneous frequencies of the two analog delay-coupled PLLs are given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:n=2-system}
\begin{split}
\dot{\phi}_{1,2}(t) &= \omega_{1,2} + K_{1,2} \int_0^{\infty} {\mbox d}u~ p_{1,2}(u) \\
&\cos\left[ \phi_l(t-u-\tau_{12,21})-\phi_k(t-u-\tau_{12,21}^f) \right].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We are interested in phase-locked synchronized states, i.e., all oscillators evolve with same collective frequency $\Omega$ and have constant phase-lag $\beta$ between them
\begin{equation}\label{eq:n=2-sync-ansatz}
\begin{split}
\phi_1 = \Omega t;~~\phi_2 = \Omega t + \beta.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In this case synchronized solutions with global frequency $\Omega$ and phase difference $\beta$ are given by the following transcendental equations~(derivation see Appendix \ref{sec:app-sync-sol-N2})
\begin{equation}\label{eq:n=2-all-hetero-sync-sol}
\begin{split}
\Omega &= \bar{\omega} + \bar{K} \cos(\Omega \bar{\tau}_e) \cos(B) - \frac{\Delta K}{2} \sin(\Omega \bar{\tau}_e) \sin(B),\\
\beta &= - \frac{\Omega \Delta \tau_e}{2} + \sin^{-1}\left( \frac{\Delta\omega}{H_1}\right) +
\sin^{-1}\left( \frac{\Delta{K} \cos(\Omega \bar{\tau}_e)}{H_1}\right),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $B = (\Omega \Delta{\tau_e})/2 + \beta$ and
\begin{equation}
H_1 = \sqrt{ \left(2 \bar{K} \sin(\Omega \bar{\tau}_e) \right)^2 + \left( \Delta{K} \cos(\Omega \bar{\tau}_e) \right)^2}.
\end{equation}
The heterogeneous parameters, $\omega_{1,2}$, $\tau_{12,21}$, $\tau^f_{12,21}$, $K_{1,2}$, $\omega_{c1,c2}$ are written in terms of their mean $\bar{x} = (x_1+x_2)/2$ and difference $\Delta x = x_2-x_1$.
Parameter symbols without a subscript indicate identical parameters for both oscillators.
We also defined $\bar{\tau}_e = (\bar{\tau} - \bar{\tau}^f)$, and $\Delta{\tau}_e = (\Delta{\tau} - \Delta{\tau}^f)$.
For the case of identical oscillators, in- and antiphase synchronized states exist, characterized by a common global frequency $\Omega$ and a constant phase difference $\beta$ which is either zero or $\pi$, respectively.
How heterogeneous parameters affect the existence of synchronized solutions, the global frequencies and phase configurations given by Eq.~\eqref{eq:n=2-all-hetero-sync-sol} will be discussed in detail in Sec.~\ref{sec:results}.
The stability of such solutions can be determined by analyzing the response to small perturbations.
More precisely, we can look at the perturbation mode related to the phase-difference between the oscillations of two PLL clocks.
The characteristic equation governing the exponential growth or decay rate $\lambda$ of these perturbations is given by (derivation see appendix~\ref{sec:app-stab})
\begin{equation}\label{eq:n=2-all-hetero-stab-con}
\begin{split}
\frac{\lambda^2}{\alpha_{12} \hat{p}_{1}(\lambda) \alpha_{21} \hat{p}_{2}(\lambda) e^{-2\lambda \bar{\tau}^{f}}}\hspace{4cm}\\
+ \lambda
\left(
\frac{1}{ \alpha_{12} \hat{p}_{1}(\lambda) e^{-\lambda \tau^{f}_{1}} } +
\frac{1}{ \alpha_{21} \hat{p}_{2}(\lambda) e^{-\lambda \tau^{f}_{2}} }
\right)\\
- \left( e^{-2\lambda (\bar{\tau} - \bar{\tau}^f)} - 1 \right)
=0,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\noindent
where the $\lambda$ denote the eigenvalues of the perturbation modes, $\hat{p}(\lambda) = (1+\lambda b_{k})^{-1}$ denotes the Laplace transform of the impulse response function introduced in Eq.~(\ref{eq:pu01}),
and $\alpha_{12} = K_1 ~h^{\prime} [ ( -\Omega(\tau_{12}-\tau^{f}_{1}) + \beta ) ]$, $\alpha_{21} = K_2 ~h^{\prime} [ ( -\Omega(\tau_{21}-\tau^{f}_{2}) - \beta ) ]$
with $h^{\prime}$ being the derivative of the coupling function with respect to its argument.
The eigenvalue ($\lambda_{\rm max} = \sigma + i \gamma$) with the largest real part $\sigma$ dominates the long-term behavior and determines the stability of synchronized states.
For $\sigma > 0$ perturbations to synchronized states grow and the solution is unstable, whereas $\sigma < 0$ implies linear stability and that perturbations decay at a characteristic time-scale $t_c=-\sigma^{-1}$.
The case of $\sigma = 0$ denotes marginal stability, i.e., perturbations neither grow or decay.
This is always a solution to Eq.~\eqref{eq:n=2-all-hetero-stab-con} and represents an equal shift of the phase of each oscillator.
The imaginary part $\gamma = {\mbox{Im}}(\lambda_{\rm max})$ denotes the frequency of the perturbation response.
Since the stability depends on the frequency and phase-configurations, the delays and cut-off frequencies, it can also be modified when heterogeneities are introduced.
\section{Effects of heterogeneities on synchronization} \label{sec:results}
In this section, we systematically analyze the effects of heterogeneity in the different clock components.
The results are compared to those obtained from an experimental setup of two identical delay-coupled PLLs.
We show how the notion of in- and antiphase synchronized states, observed for identical oscillators, becomes blurred when heterogeneities in the intrinsic frequencies, coupling strength, transmission and feedback-delays are introduced.
For those cases we define so called \textit{asymptotic-inphase} and \textit{-antiphase} synchronized states that approach the in- and antiphase synchronized states for identical clocks as the heterogeneities approach zero.
In the following sections we will introduce the heterogeneities gradually, starting with heterogeneity in the intrinsic frequencies, followed by the heterogeneities in the other parameters.
\subsection{Heterogeneous intrinsic frequencies} \label{subsec:detuning}
Here we analyze how synchronization in a system of two delay-coupled PLLs is affected by heterogeneous intrinsic frequencies.
The results that we obtain for the second-order Kuramoto-model are identical to the ones obtained for the first-order Kuramoto-model with time-delayed coupling and no signal filtering \cite{Schuster1989}.
We assume that signal transmission-delays, coupling strengths and impulse response functions of the LFs for the two oscillators are equal, i.e., $\tau_{12} = \tau_{21} = \tau$, $K_1=K_2=K$, $p_1(u) = p_2(u) = p(u)$.
The feedback-delays are set to zero, $\tau^{f}_{12} = \tau^{f}_{21} = 0$.
Under these assumptions we find for the frequencies in Eq.~\eqref{eq:n=2-all-hetero-sync-sol}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:n=2-sfreq-sol-h1}
\begin{split}
\Omega = \bar{\omega} \pm K \cos \left( -\Omega {\tau} \right)
\sqrt{ 1 - \left( \frac{\Delta\omega}{2 K \sin \left( \Omega {\tau} \right)} \right)^2 },
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\noindent
and the corresponding phase differences $\beta$
\begin{equation}\label{eq:n=2-sphase-sol-h1}
\beta =
\begin{cases}
\sin^{-1} \left( \frac{\Delta\omega}{2 K \sin \left( \Omega {\tau} \right)} \right),
~~~~~~~\mbox{if}~~\sin \left( \Omega {\tau} \right)>0, \\
\\
\pi - \sin^{-1} \left( \frac{\Delta\omega}{2 K \sin \left( \Omega {\tau}) \right)} \right),
~~\mbox{if}~~\sin \left( \Omega {\tau} \right)<0. \\
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\noindent
This quantifies the phase differences $\beta$ as a function of the detuning $\Delta \omega$ between the intrinsic frequencies.
The phase differences are no longer $0$ (inphase) or $\pi$ (antiphase) as in the case of identical oscillators.
Instead, new phase configurations emerge due to the detuning.
They depend on the ratio of frequency differences to coupling strength $\propto (\Delta\omega/K)$, see Eq.~\eqref{eq:n=2-sphase-sol-h1}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics [scale=0.305, angle=0]{new-hf-fig11.png}
\caption{(Color online)
%
Global frequency $\Omega$, the phase-difference $\beta$, the perturbation response rate $\sigma$ and the corresponding modulation frequency $\gamma$ as a function of the transmission-delay $\tau$ for two mutually delay-coupled PLLs with $K=0.25\,\rm{radHz}$ and $\omega_c=0.25\times\bar{\omega}\,\rm{radHz}$.
%
The left column shows the results with identical ($\omega_{1,2} = 2\pi\,\rm{~rad Hz}$) and the right column the results for heterogeneous intrinsic frequencies ($\omega_{1,2} = (1\mp0.02)2\pi\,\rm{radHz}$).
%
The blue (dark gray) and red (light gray) curves correspond to the inphase and antiphase ($\Delta\omega = 0$) or asymptotic-inphase and -antiphase
($\Delta\omega = 0.04\times 2 \pi\,\rm{radHz}$) synchronized states.
%
The thick curves denote stable solutions (from Eq.~\eqref{eq:n=2-stabcon2-h1}, with $\sigma={\mbox{Re}}(\lambda_{max})<0$) and the thin curves denote unstable solutions.}
\label{fig:new-hf-fig11}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!th]
\includegraphics [scale=0.305, angle=0]{new-hf-fig14.png}
\caption{(Color online)
Existence and stability of synchronized solutions for two delay-coupled PLLs in the parameter plane of coupling strength and transmission-delay with detuned intrinsic frequencies $\omega_{1,2} = (1\mp0.02)\times 2\pi \rm{~rad Hz}$, $\omega_c = 0.25\times \bar{\omega} \rm{~rad Hz}$.
Asymptotic-inphase and -antiphase synchronized solutions are denoted by the blue and red colored regions, respectively.
In overlapping regions both solutions are stable.
%
The green region represents the parameter values where synchronized states do not exist due to the detuning $\Delta \omega$.
%
The instabilities induced by the filtering process lead to the blank (white) regions where synchronized states do exist but are not stable.
%
In those regimes new solutions with modulated frequencies emerge.}
\label{fig:new-hf-fig14}
\end{figure}
The detuning also implies, see Eq.~\eqref{eq:n=2-sfreq-sol-h1}, that synchronized solutions exist only if
\begin{equation}\label{eq:n=2-sfreq-sol-restriction}
\begin{split}
\sin^2 \left( \Omega {\tau} \right) \geq \left( \frac{\Delta\omega}{2 K} \right)^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\noindent
Therefore, synchronized solutions do not exist below a critical value of the coupling strength $K_{\rm c} = \Delta\omega/2$ for any delay value, that is, if $\vert \Delta \omega/2K \vert > 1$.
From Eq.~\eqref{eq:n=2-all-hetero-stab-con} the linear stability of such synchronized solutions is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:n=2-stabcon2-h1}
\begin{split}
\frac{\lambda^2}{\hat{p}^{2}(\lambda)} +
\left( \alpha_{21} + \alpha_{12} \right) \frac{\lambda}{\hat{p}(\lambda)}
- \alpha_{12} \alpha_{21} \left( e^{-2\lambda {\tau}} - 1 \right)
=0,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha_{12,21} = -K\sin(-\Omega\tau \pm \beta)$ and $\hat{p}(\lambda) = (1+\lambda b)^{-1}$.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:new-hf-fig11} synchronized solutions in a system without heterogeneity (left column) and with heterogeneity (right column) in the intrinsic frequencies are shown.
The coloring identifies asymptotic-inphase and -antiphase states, blue and red, respectively.
In the right column of Fig.~\ref{fig:new-hf-fig11} for heterogeneous frequencies, we observe regimes for which no synchronized solutions exist, since Eq.~\eqref{eq:n=2-sfreq-sol-restriction} is not satisfied.
These gaps (windows) appear due to the detuning and are absent when $\Delta\omega = 0$, see left column.
In that case, we find that pairs of synchronized solutions go through a saddle-node bifurcation as the magnitude of the detuning $\Delta\omega$ is increased from $\Delta\omega = 0$, see Supplementary material Fig.~\ref{fig:new-hf-fig13}.
Furthermore, for identical oscillators, non-generic solutions with coinciding frequencies exist for specific parameter values $\Omega\tau_e = n\pi, \;n \in \mathbb{N}_0^+$, see Appendix~\ref{sec:app-sync-sol-N2}.
These solutions split up due to the symmetry breaking, i.e., additional solutions emerge as the intrinsic frequencies are detuned.
The range of possible global frequencies decreases.
For identical oscillators, the global frequencies lie in the range $\Omega \in [\omega-K, \omega+K]$, whereas for detuned frequencies this range decreases by $\Delta\omega$, i.e., $\Omega \in [\bar{\omega}-K+\Delta\omega/2, \bar{\omega}+K-\Delta\omega/2]$.
That is, the system can only self-organize to synchronized states with global frequencies that can be reached by all oscillators in the network, see experimental results in \cite{Wetzel2017}.
Linear stability of such synchronized states is also affected by the detuning as it depends on the values $\Omega$ and $\beta$ of the synchronized solutions.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:new-hf-fig14} we provide an overview of existence and linear stability of synchronized solutions in parameter space, i.e., the ($K, \tau$)-plane.
\subsection{Heterogeneity in transmission-delays} \label{subsec:transmission-delay}
Now we add heterogeneous transmission-delays, i.e., $\tau_{12} \neq \tau_{21}$ to the system with detuned intrinsic frequencies.
The frequencies and phase configurations then are
\begin{equation} \label{eq:n=2-sfreq-sol-h2}
\begin{split}
\Omega = \bar{\omega} \pm K \cos \left( -\Omega \bar{\tau} \right)
\sqrt{1 -
\left( \frac{\Delta\omega}{2 K \sin \left( \Omega \bar{\tau} \right)} \right)^2 }.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:n=2-sphase-sol-h2}
\beta =
\begin{cases}
&-\frac{\Omega \Delta\tau}{2} +
\sin^{-1} \left( \frac{\Delta\omega}{2 K \sin \left( \Omega \bar{\tau} \right)} \right) \vspace{0.25cm} \\
&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\mbox{if}~~\sin \left( \Omega \bar{\tau} \right)>0, \\
\\
&-\frac{\Omega \Delta\tau}{2} +
\pi - \sin^{-1} \left( \frac{\Delta\omega}{2 K \sin \left( \Omega \bar{\tau} \right)} \right)\vspace{0.25cm} \\
&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\mbox{if}~~\sin \left( \Omega \bar{\tau} \right)<0, \\
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
see Eq.~\eqref{eq:n=2-all-hetero-sync-sol}.
As in the last section we set feedback-delays to zero, and study the effects of heterogeneous transmission-delays.
The stability is given by the characteristic Eq.~\eqref{eq:n=2-all-hetero-stab-con}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:n=2-stabcon2-h2}
\begin{split}
\frac{\lambda^2}{\hat{p}^{2}(\lambda)} +
\frac{\lambda \left( \alpha_{21} + \alpha_{12} \right)}{\hat{p}(\lambda)}
- \alpha_{12} \alpha_{21} \left( e^{-2\lambda \bar{\tau}} - 1 \right)
=0,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha_{12} = -K\sin(-\Omega \tau_{12} + \beta)$, $\alpha_{21} = -K\sin(-\Omega \tau_{21} - \beta)$ and $\hat{p}(\lambda) = (1+\lambda b)^{-1}$.
These equations show that the frequencies of synchronized states depend only on the mean delay value $\bar{\tau} = (\tau_{12}+\tau_{21})/2$ but not the delay difference $\Delta\tau=\tau_{21}-\tau_{12}$.
The same is true for the characteristic equation which only depends on the mean delay $\bar{\tau}$, see~\cite{eqv-delay}.
Therefore the global frequencies of synchronized states and their stability remains the same as long as the mean delay value $\bar{\tau}$ is unchanged, see Fig.~\ref{fig:new-hf-dd-fig1}.
However, the effect of heterogeneous delays becomes significant for the phase-differences $\beta$ with its linear dependence on $\Delta \tau$.
As a result, the phase difference changes monotonically with $\Delta\tau$ without affecting the frequency and stability of synchronized states.
This is an interesting results since it allows the phase difference to be tuned to arbitrary values at a fixed frequency.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:exp-sim} we show this in experimental results for delay-coupled digital PLLs.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\includegraphics [scale=0.305, angle=0]{new-hf-dd-fig11.png}
\caption{(Color online)
%
Global frequency $\Omega$ and phase-difference $\beta$ as a function of the delay-difference $\Delta\tau$ for $N=2$ delay-coupled PLLs with identical $\omega_{1,2} = 1 \times 2\pi \rm{~rad Hz}$ (left column) and heterogeneous intrinsic frequencies $\omega_{1,2} = (1\mp0.02)\times 2\pi \rm{~rad Hz}$ (right column).
Mean transmission-delay $\bar{\tau}$ is fixed at $1.2 \rm{~s}$, $K=0.25 \rm{~rad Hz}$ and $\omega_c = 0.25\times \bar{\omega} \rm{~rad Hz}$.
The blue (dark gray) and red (light gray) curves correspond to the inphase and antiphase ($\Delta\omega=0$) or asymptotic-inphase and -antiphase ($\Delta\omega \neq 0$) synchronized states.
The thick and thin lines denote stable and unstable solutions, respectively.
}
\label{fig:new-hf-dd-fig1}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Heterogeneity in signal filtering parameters} \label{subsec:filtering}
Analyzing Eq.~\eqref{eq:n=2-all-hetero-sync-sol}, we find that the filtering process has no effect on the frequencies and phase differences of synchronized solutions.
However, the stability of synchronized solutions depends on the cut-off frequencies $\omega_{1,2}^c$ and the order $a_{1,2}$ of the LFs via the expression
$\hat{p}_{i}(\lambda) = (1 + \lambda/(a_{i}\omega_{i}^c))^{-a_{i}}$ for $i=\{1,2\}$, see Eq.~\eqref{eq:n=2-all-hetero-stab-con}.
We consider filters of first order ($a_i=1$) and set $\omega_{1,2}^c = \bar{\omega}^c \mp \Delta\omega^{c}/2$.
Note that for zeroth order filters the phase equations reduce to a first order Kuramoto model with delayed coupling, see Supplementary material \ref{supp-mat-second-order-km}.
For delay-coupled identical Kuramoto oscillators, Yeung, Earl and Strogatz~\cite{Yeung1999, Earl2003} provide a necessary and sufficient condition for the stability of inphase synchronized solutions, given by $K h^{\prime}[-\Omega \tau] > 0$.
However, in coupled PLL systems, first or higher order LFs have significant effects on stability.
In these cases, the stability criterion for systems without a LF is still sufficient but not necessary ($K h^{\prime}[-\Omega \tau+\beta]<0 \Rightarrow \sigma=\rm{Re}(\lambda)\geq 0$), since additional instabilities arise due to time-scale introduced by the filtering process~\cite{Pollakis2014}.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\includegraphics [scale=0.32, angle=0]{new-cof-fig11.png}
\caption{(Color online)
Stability of a asymptotic-inphase synchronized state for delay-coupled PLLs with $\Delta\omega = 0.04\times2\pi \rm{~rad Hz}$ plotted as a function of LF parameters -- the mean and the difference of the cut-off frequencies.
%
The green (dark-gray) region denotes the parameter values where the selected solution is stable, and the gray (light gray) the region where it is unstable.
%
Results are shown for different transmission-delays (upper row) $\tau=1.1, 1.2, 1.3 \rm{~s}$ at a fixed coupling strength $K=2.0 \rm{~rad Hz}$, and for different coupling strengths (lower row) $K=1.75, 1.5, 1.25 \rm{~rad Hz}$ at fixed delay $\tau=1.1 \rm{~s}$.
%
}
\label{fig:new-cof-fig1}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:new-cof-fig1}, we illustrate the effects of heterogeneous cut-off frequencies on the stability of one branch of the asymptotic-inphase solutions for different values of $K$ and $\tau$.
The mean cut-off frequency $\bar{\omega}^c = (\omega_{1}^c + \omega_{2}^c)/2$ is varied from a minimum value $0.05\bar{\omega}$ to $\bar{\omega}$.
With the mean $\bar{\omega}^c$ and the difference $\Delta\omega^{c}$, the individual cut-off frequencies of the filters are $\omega_{1,2}^c = \bar{\omega}^c \mp \Delta\omega^{c}/2$.
The magnitude of difference between cut-off frequencies $\vert \Delta\omega^{c} \vert$ is varied from zero (identical filters) to a maximum $(\Delta\omega^{c})^{\rm{max}} = 2(\bar{\omega}^c - 0.01\bar{\omega})$, such that the lower of the two individual cut-off frequencies (say $\omega_{1}^c = \bar{\omega}^c - \vert \Delta\omega^{c} \vert / 2$) is not smaller than $0.01\bar{\omega}$.
The normalized difference $\Delta\omega^{c} / (\Delta\omega^{c})^{\rm{max}}$ is plotted on the $y$-axis.
We find that the stability depends on the mean and the difference between the cut-off frequencies.
For identical LFs ($\omega_{1}^c=\omega_{2}^c$) synchronized states are unstable for cut-off frequencies that are small compared to the mean intrinsic frequency, i.e., large integration time of the filters.
However, as heterogeneities are introduced to the LFs, i.e., non-identical cut-off frequencies, unstable regimes can become stable.
Hence, specific differences $\Delta\omega^{c}$ in the cut-off frequencies may stabilize synchronized solutions that where unstable in the case of identical LFs.
The cut-off frequency induced instabilities also depend strongly on the value of the coupling strength $K$ and the transmission-delay $\tau$.
The gray-region indicating unstable solutions becomes considerably smaller as the coupling strength $K$ is decreased.
This is interesting as in the case without delays and filtering the stability is usually enhanced with larger coupling strength.
The time-scale associated to the loop-filter integration makes the system inert, i.e., effectively responding to outdated information.
As the coupling strength increases, we observe that the instabilities introduced by this inert dynamics are enhanced.
This is related to the perturbation decay dynamics which is underdamped for most values of the transmission delay, see e.g., values of $\gamma$ in Fig. \ref{fig:new-hf-fig11}.
The stronger the VCO reacts to the control-signal, the more it tends to overshoot when close to a synchronized state.
\subsection{Heterogeneity in feedback-delay and interplay between feedback, transmission and processing-delays} \label{subsec:feedback-delay}
So far we have discussed the effects of heterogeneities in the intrinsic frequencies of the VCOs, the transmission-delays and the cut-off frequencies of the LFs.
The filtering process is associated with a processing time-delay which is inversely proportional to its cut-off frequency $\tau^{\rm c} = b = 1/{\omega^c}$, the LF integration time.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\includegraphics [scale=0.305, angle=0]{new-fbd-fig11.png}
\caption{(Color online)
%
Global frequency $\Omega$, phase-difference $\beta$, perturbation response rate $\sigma$ and the corresponding frequency $\gamma$ for two delay-coupled PLLs with heterogeneous intrinsic frequencies $\omega_{1,2} = (1\mp0.02)\times 2\pi \rm{~rad Hz}$ as a function of mean feedback-delay $\bar{\tau}^f$ with a constant feedback-delay difference $\Delta\tau^f=0.2 \rm{~s}$.
The blue (dark gray) and red (light gray) curves correspond to asymptotic-inphase and -antiphase synchronized states, respectively.
%
Thick lines denote stable and the thin lines unstable solutions.
%
The results of synchronized solutions with homogeneous feedback-delays $\Delta\tau^f = 0 \rm{~s}$ are shown in gray.
%
Here, transmission-delays are equal and set to $\tau = 2.0 \rm{~s}$, coupling strength is $K=0.50 \rm{~radHz}$ and the cut-off frequency $\omega_c = 0.25\times \bar{\omega} \rm{~radHz}$.
%
}
\label{fig:new-fbd-fig1}
\end{figure}
As these processing time-delays increase, perturbation decay rates become smaller~\cite{Pollakis2014}.
In this section, we discuss how heterogeneous feedback-delays and its interplay with different delay-time scales (transmission and processing-delays) affects synchronized states.
The frequencies only depend on the mean of the transmission and feedback-delays ($\bar{\tau}$, $\bar{\tau}^f$) while the corresponding phase configurations depend on their differences $\Delta\tau$ and $\Delta\tau^f$.
The collective effect of these delay-times can be understood in terms of an effective mean delay $\bar{\tau}_{e} = \bar{\tau}-\bar{\tau}^f$ and an effective delay-difference $\Delta\tau_{e} = \Delta\tau -\Delta\tau^f$.
If the feedback-delay is equal to the transmission-delay, $\bar{\tau}_{e}$ will be zero.
In that case, the dynamical properties of the system change qualitatively, as the multistability induced by the transmission-delay vanishes.
The solutions are given by
\begin{figure}[t!]
\includegraphics [scale=0.32, angle=0]{new-fbd-fig21.pdf}
\caption{(Color online)
%
The stability of asymptotic-inphase and -antiphase synchronized states for two coupled PLLs in the parameter space of transmission-delay $\tau$ and feedback-delay $\tau_f$.
%
The feedback-delay $\tau^f$ is varied from zero to a maximum $\tau^f_{max} = 2\tau$ and normalized $\tau^f/\tau^f_{max}$.
%
The existence and the stability of the synchronized solutions is shown by the different colors, using the color code of Fig.~\ref{fig:new-hf-fig14}.
Results shown are for detuned intrinsic frequencies $\Delta \omega = 0.04\times 2\pi \rm{~rad Hz}$, $K=0.50 \rm{~rad Hz}$ and $\omega^c = 0.25\times \bar{\omega} \rm{~rad Hz}$.
}
\label{fig:new-fbd-fig2}
\end{figure}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:n=2-sfreq-sol-h4}
\begin{split}
\Omega = \bar{\omega} \pm K \cos \left( -\Omega \bar{\tau}_{e} \right)
\sqrt{1 -
\left( \frac{\Delta\omega}{2 K \sin \left( \Omega \bar{\tau}_{e} \right)} \right)^2 },
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:n=2-sphase-sol-h4}
\beta =
\begin{cases}
&- \frac{\Omega \Delta\tau_{e}}{2} +
\sin^{-1} \left( \frac{\Delta\omega}{2 K \sin \left( \Omega \bar{\tau}_{e} \right)} \right) \vspace{0.25cm} \\
&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\mbox{if}~~ \sin \left( \Omega \bar{\tau}_{e} \right)>0; \\
\\
&- \frac{\Omega \Delta\tau_{e}}{2} +
\pi - \sin^{-1} \left( \frac{\Delta\omega}{2 K \sin \left( \Omega \bar{\tau}_{e} \right)} \right) \vspace{0.25cm} \\
&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\mbox{if}~~ \sin \left( \Omega \bar{\tau}_{e} \right)<0. \\
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\noindent
In Fig.~\ref{fig:new-fbd-fig1} we plot synchronized solutions and their corresponding eigenvalues as a function of mean feedback-delay $\bar{\tau}^f$, given the individual feedback-delays as $\tau^f_{1,2} = \bar{\tau}^f \mp \Delta\tau^f/2$ with fixed difference $\Delta\tau^f = 0.2\,\rm{s}$.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\includegraphics [scale=0.32, angle=0]{new-fbd-fig31.pdf}
\caption{(Color online)
The stability of asymptotic-inphase and -antiphase synchronized states for two coupled PLLs plotted in the parameter space of the mean feedback-delay $\bar{\tau}^f$ and feedback-delay difference $\Delta\tau^f$.
The existence and the stability of the synchronized solutions is shown by the different colors, using the color code of Fig.~\ref{fig:new-hf-fig14}.
Results shown are for detuned intrinsic frequencies $\Delta \omega = 0.04\times 2\pi \rm{~rad Hz}$, $K=0.50 \rm{~rad Hz}$, $\tau =2 \rm{~s}$, $\omega_c = 0.25\times \bar{\omega} \rm{~rad Hz}$.
}
\label{fig:new-fbd-fig3}
\end{figure}
We focus on the effects of feedback-delays and therefore consider equal transmission-delays fixed at $\tau = 2\,\rm{s}$.
In this case there is a symmetry of the frequencies around $\bar{\tau}^{f} = 2\,\rm s$, i.e., $\bar{\tau}_{e} = 0$.
As can be seen from Eq.~(\ref{eq:n=2-sfreq-sol-h4}) this symmetry around $\bar{\tau}_{e}$ is a generic feature as the cosine and sine squared are symmetric around $0$.
The phase configurations are also modified as in the case of transmission-delays due to the heterogeneity $\Delta\tau^f$, however with opposite sign.
The characteristic equation~\eqref{eq:n=2-all-hetero-stab-con} for nonzero $\tau^f$ is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:n=2-stabcon2-h4}
\begin{split}
\frac{\lambda^2}{\hat{p}_{1}(\lambda) \hat{p}_{2}(\lambda) e^{-2\lambda \bar{\tau}^{f}}} -
\alpha_{12} \alpha_{21} \left( e^{-2\lambda (\bar{\tau} - \bar{\tau}^f)} - 1 \right) +& \\
\frac{\lambda}{ e^{-\lambda \bar{\tau}^{f}} }
\left(
\frac{\alpha_{21}}{ \hat{p}_{1}(\lambda) e^{+\lambda \frac{\Delta\tau^{f}}{2} } } +
\frac{\alpha_{12}}{ \hat{p}_{2}(\lambda) e^{-\lambda \frac{\Delta\tau^{f}}{2} } }
\right)
&=0.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\noindent
For the characteristic equation no single effective delay parameter representing the combined effect of transmission and feedback-delays can be defined.
We find that the transmission-delays affect the eigenvalues only through their mean value $\bar{\tau}$.
Fig.~\ref{fig:new-fbd-fig2} and Fig.~\ref{fig:new-fbd-fig3} show that $\Delta\tau^f$ and $\bar{\tau}^f$ have significant effects on the stability of synchronized solutions.
As the feedback-delay is increased, synchronized states become unstable.
Heterogeneity in the feedback-delays can stabilize and destabilize synchronized solutions that were unstable or stable for identical feedback-delays, respectively.
\subsection{Heterogenous coupling strengths} \label{subsec:coupling}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\includegraphics [scale=0.305, angle=0]{new-hc-fig11.png}
\caption{(Color online)
%
Global frequency $\Omega$, phase-difference $\beta$, perturbation response rate $\sigma$ and the corresponding frequency $\gamma$ of the synchronized states as a function of the transmission-delay $\tau$ for two mutually delay-coupled PLLs with heterogeneous coupling strengths $\bar{K}=0.25\,\rm{radHz}, \Delta K = -0.2~\rm{radHz}$.
The intrinsic frequencies are equal $\omega_{1,2} = \omega = 1\times 2\pi~\rm{radHz}$ and the cut-off frequency is $\omega_c=0.25\times\bar{\omega}\,\rm{radHz}$.
The blue (dark gray) and red (medium gray) curves correspond to the asymptotic-inphase and -antiphase synchronized states.
The thick curves denote stable solutions and the thin curves denote unstable solutions.
The limits of the frequency-range which is accessible to both oscillators with different coupling strength are shown by dashed lines.
For comparison, the results for equal coupling strengths, i.e., for $\Delta K = 0$ are plotted with gray (light gray) curves.
}
\label{fig:new-hc-fig1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!th]
\includegraphics [scale=0.305, angle=0]{new-hc-fig12.png}
\caption{(Color online)
%
Global frequency $\Omega$, the phase-difference $\beta$, the perturbation response rate $\sigma$ and the corresponding modulation frequency $\gamma$ of the synchronized states as a function of the transmission-delay $\tau$ for two delay-coupled PLLs with heterogeneous coupling strengths $\bar{K}=0.25\,\rm{radHz}, \Delta K = -0.2~\rm{radHz}$.
The intrinsic frequencies are $\omega_{1,2} = (1 \mp 0.02) \times 2\pi~\rm{radHz}$ and the cut-off frequency is $\omega_c = 0.25\times\bar{\omega}\,\rm{radHz}$.
The blue (dark gray) and red (medium gray) curves correspond to the asymptotic-inphase and -antiphase synchronized states.
The thick curves denote stable solutions and the thin curves denote unstable solutions.
The limits of the frequency-range which is accessible to both oscillators with different coupling strength are shown by dashed lines.
For comparison, the results for equal coupling strengths, i.e., for $\Delta K = 0$ are plotted with gray (light gray) curves.
}
\label{fig:new-hc-fig2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!th]
\includegraphics [scale=0.305, angle=0]{new-hc-fig21.png}
\caption{(Color online)
Global frequency $\Omega$, phase-difference $\beta$, perturbation response rate $\sigma$ and the corresponding frequency $\gamma$ of the synchronized states as a function of difference in coupling strength $\Delta K = (K_2 - K_1)$ for two delay-coupled PLLs at fixed mean coupling $\bar{K}=2.0\,\rm{radHz}$, transmission-delay $\tau = 0.5~\rm{s}$ and cut-off frequency $\omega_c=0.25\times\bar{\omega}\,\rm{radHz}$.
The blue (dark gray) and red (light gray) curves correspond to the inphase and antiphase ($\Delta\omega = 0\,\rm{radHz}$) or asymptotic-inphase and -antiphase ($\Delta\omega = 0.04\times 2 \pi\,\rm{radHz}$) synchronized states.
The thick curves denote stable solutions (from Eq.~\eqref{eq:n=2-all-hetero-stab-con}, with $\sigma={\mbox{Re}}(\lambda_{max})<0$) and the thin curves unstable solutions.
The left column shows the results for $\omega_{1,2} = 1 \times 2\pi\,\rm{~rad Hz}$ and the right column the results for $\omega_{1,2} = (1 \mp 0.02) \times 2\pi\,\rm{radHz}$.
}
\label{fig:new-hc-fig3}
\end{figure}
The coupling strength $K$ denotes the sensitivity of the VCO to the control signal.
It interacts with the effects of the transmission- and feedback-delays as well as the filtering process on the dynamics of the coupled system.
For example from Ref.~\cite{Schuster1989} it is well-known that the effects of time-delays are more pronounced for larger coupling strengths, see e.g., Fig.~\ref{fig:new-hf-dd-fig1}, and in the Supplementary material Figs.~\ref{fig:new-hf-fig12}-\ref{fig:new-hc-fig4}, for how the number of synchronized states increases with larger coupling $K$.
Simultaneously, more synchronized solutions become unstable as the instabilities introduced by the filtering process become more prominent.
On the other hand, the coupling above the critical coupling strength enables synchrony in detuned oscillators by forcing them towards a common frequency, and therefore counters the effects of detuning $\Delta\omega$.
These effects are modified when PLLs with heterogeneous sensitivity interact with each other, i.e., their coupling strengths are heterogeneous, see Eq.~\eqref{eq:n=2-all-hetero-sync-sol}.
Note that for identical coupling strengths and intrinsic frequencies, there are non-generic solution for specific parameter values when $\sin(\Omega \bar{\tau}_e)=0$.
These non-generic pairs of solutions with coinciding frequencies split-up as a result of the symmetry breaking, i.e., $K_1 \neq K_2$ and the system does not become underdetermined.
For such heterogeneity in the coupling strengths, the phase-differences and frequencies of the synchronized states are significantly modified, see Fig.~\ref{fig:new-hc-fig1} and~\ref{fig:new-hc-fig2}.
For $\Delta\omega = 0$, the maximum deviation $\vert\Omega-\omega\vert$ is now determined by the smallest of the coupling strengths, e.g., $\Omega \in [\omega - K_2, \omega + K_2]$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:new-hc-fig1}.
For detuned PLLs the range of global frequencies is given by $\Omega \in [\hbox{max}(\omega_k - K_k), \hbox{min}(\omega_k + K_k)]$, where $k = 1,2$.
The stability of these solutions and is given by Eq.~\eqref{eq:n=2-all-hetero-stab-con}.
The perturbation decay rate depends non-linearly on the difference between the coupling strengths, see Fig.~\ref{fig:new-hc-fig3}.
For differences in the coupling strength where one of them approaches zero and the other $\bar{K}$, the decay rates approach the case of perturbation decay in entrained oscillator systems.
However, the maximum decay rates are found for values of $\Delta K$ that do not equal to the case of entrainment $\Delta K_{\rm max}$ or identical coupling, $\Delta K=0$.
For these values where perturbations decay fastest, the decay changes qualitatively from oscillatory to overdamped.
This happens as the change in $\Delta K$ causes different solutions of the characteristic equation with zero and non-zero imaginary parts to interchange in terms of the maximum real part $\sigma$.
Fig.~\ref{fig:new-hc-fig2} suggests that around $\Delta K=\mp 2$ the system undergoes a pitchfork-bifurcation and reverse.
As soon as detuning of the PLLs is introduced, this changes and something closer to a transcritical bifurcations arises and frequencies of the different synchronized states change gradually with $\Delta K$ until they crash onto the other branch.
That means that a slight detuning of the intrinsic frequencies of the PLLs can cause an abrupt change in the frequencies of synchronized states.
\section{Experiments and Spice simulations} \label{sec:exp-sim}
\begin{figure}[b!]
\includegraphics [scale=0.41, angle=0]{new-exp-wc.png}
\caption{(Color online)
%
Experimental realization of stabilization of a synchronized state by introducing heterogeneity in the cut-off frequencies of the loop-filters $\omega_{1,2}^c$.
%
Initially the cut-off frequencies are equal $\omega_{1,2}^c=(0.055, 0.055)\times 2\pi \, \rm{radkHz}$, then are changed to $\omega_{1,2}^c=(0.0148, 0.9570)\times 2\pi \, \rm{radkHz}$ during the experiment.
%
It is observed that a asymptotic-inphase state stabilizes as a result of introducing heterogeneity in $\omega_{1,2}^c$.
%
The transmission delay values are equal and set to $\tau = 0.7512 \, \rm{ms}$.
%
The insets show the frequencies, phases (blue, red) and phase differences (black) obtained from the measured signals.
%
}
\label{fig:new-exp-dwc}
\end{figure}
To validate our theoretical predictions, we performed experiments using prototype DPLLs.
These are coupled via a microcontroller that buffers and thereby delays their output signals~\cite{Wetzel2017}.
The DPLL parameters are given in Table~\ref{tab:DPLLparam}.
In the setup currently available we can tune the transmission delay via the microcontroller and the cut-off frequency using the tunable resistance of the RC loop-filter.
The coupling-strength and the intrinsic frequencies are fixed system properties whose heterogeneity has been measured and is known~\cite{Wetzel2017}.
\begin{table}[th]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& $\omega$ in Hz & $K$ in Hz/V & $\omega^c$ in Hz \\ \hline
DPLL 1 & 948 & 409.5 & 14.8 \\ \hline
DPLL 2 & 1008 & 408 & 15.4 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}%
\caption{Prototype DPLL parameters.}
\label{tab:DPLLparam}
\end{table}
Feedback-delays, inverters and dividers are not available in this prototype setup.
A detailed description of how the experiments were carried out can be found in the Supplementary material, section~\ref{supp-mat-exp-spice}.
We also performed circuit-level \textit{Spice} simulations using the freeware implementation LTspice~\cite{Nagel1973,LTspice}.
In this framework, the voltages, currents and delay-times associated with the components of the electronic architecture can be simulated, see Fig.~\ref{fig:sketchLTspiceCircuit} in the Supplementary material.
The electronic components in the \textit{Spice} simulation can be configured to match those of the experimental setup by tuning individual voltages, resistances, propagation-delays and capacitances.
Taking into account the measured heterogeneity in the intrinsic frequencies and coupling strengths of the DPLL prototypes we show in theory, experiment and simulation that the phase-model can precisely predict the phase-differences and global frequencies of synchronized states, see Fig.~\ref{fig:new-exp-tau-fig11}.
We also show how the phase-difference depends linearly on the difference in the delays, while the frequency of the synchronized state remains constant as predicted in subsection~\ref{subsec:transmission-delay}, see Fig.~\ref{fig:new-exp-dtau-fig12}.
Furthermore we show an example, how synchrony can be recovered for an unstable synchronized state by tuning the cut-off frequencies to heterogeneous values while keeping the mean cut-off frequency constant, see Fig.~\ref{fig:new-exp-dwc}.
This is achieved by tuning the resistance trimmers of two coupled PLLs at runtime from identical values to values that correspond to detuned cut-off frequencies while the mean cut-off frequency is kept constant.
As a result the synchronized state becomes stable.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\includegraphics [scale=0.305, angle=0]{new-exp-tau-fig11.png}
\caption{(Color online)
%
Experimental results for global frequency $\Omega$ and phase-difference $\beta$ as a function of transmission delay $\tau$ for two heterogeneous delay-coupled digital PLLs.
%
Experimental results from prototype PLLs and simulations results from LTspice are plotted with circles and triangles respectively, analytic results are represented by the curves.
}
\label{fig:new-exp-tau-fig11}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics [scale=0.305, angle=0]{new-exp-dtau-fig12.png}
\caption{(Color online)
%
Experimental results for global frequency $\Omega$ and phase-difference $\beta$ as a function of transmission delay difference $\Delta\tau$ for two heterogeneous delay-coupled digital PLLs.
%
The results are obtained at fixed mean delay value of $\bar{\tau} = 0.536 \, \rm{ms}$.
%
Experimental results from prototype PLLs and simulations results from LTspice are plotted with circles and triangles respectively, whereas the analytic results are given by the curves.
%
}
\label{fig:new-exp-dtau-fig12}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion and application} \label{sec:discuss}
In this work we studied how breaking parameter symmetry affects the synchronization dynamics in systems of mutually delay-coupled oscillators.
We focused our analysis on the tractable case of two oscillators.
For studying larger systems we provide the analytic expressions, but their analysis is beyond the scope of this paper.
How the effects found for the two PLL system change with, e.g., coupling topologies, the number of oscillators, or in dependence of the distributions of the heterogeneities are interesting starting points for further research and need to be addressed when moving into application.
Certainly the control of self-organized synchronization will be highly relevant for the design of large distributed networks of mutually delay-coupled clocks.
The self-organization approach to synchronization discussed here is fundamentally and qualitatively different from hierarchical approaches.
There is no accumulation of phase-errors between the oscillators and signaling delays do not necessarily cause phase-offsets between the oscillators in synchronized states, to name two key strengths of self-organized synchronization.
However, the complex dependencies of the dynamics on the system parameters pose a challenge when it comes to the control and robustness of synchronization in the light of process, voltage and temperature (pvt)-variations, relevant to modern microelectronics.
Contrary to the expected hindering effects of component heterogeneity, known from synchronization in hierarchical networks, we here showed that clock heterogeneities can actually enhance synchronization in networks with flat hierarchy.
Specifically, this reflects in the optimal difference of the coupling-strengths that optimizes the decay of perturbations to synchronized states, and heterogeneous LF cut-off frequencies that can stabilize synchronized states.
Furthermore time-delays that usually complicate the synchronization of spatially distributed clocks are essential for the stability of synchronized states and control the clocks' mutual phase-differences.
Interestingly this dependence of the phase-configurations on the effective delays is linear.
Hence, the complex interplay between the different system parameters leads to rich dynamics and can provide the means to tune into synchronized states with, e.g., arbitrary phase relations.
These findings have strong implications for the application of self-organized synchronization in engineering.
Such an approach without hierarchical structures can only be taken if synchronization dynamics can be controlled.
As heterogeneities in the clock components are inevitable in modern integrated circuitry, adding transmission and feedback-delay elements and allowing for tunable loop-filters can enhance the control of the dynamics and perturbation decay processes in such systems.
Defined phase differences between frequency synchronized clocks for example enable \textit{beamforming}, i.e., spatially focused emission of electro-magnetic waves, relevant for communication, audio and radar applications \cite{Agrawal1999,Hajimiri2005,Theodoropoulos2009,Hu2013}.
A common, spatially distributed time-reference with locked phases can be the enabler of precise indoor-navigation systems, as the accuracy of the localization depends directly on the synchrony of the satellite-nodes.
Servers for globally available data-bases could be kept in sync to reduce the time-uncertainty of their time-stamps~\cite{Corbett2012, Brewer2017}.
Furthermore, cut-off frequencies much smaller than the mean intrinsic frequency make such clock networks inert and lead to slow perturbation decay~\cite{Pollakis2014}.
At the same time however, such small cut-off frequencies will enhance the signal-to-noise ratio within the circuitry~\cite{Widrow1975}.
These properties, together with the results that heterogeneity in the cut-off frequency can stabilize synchronized states that would have otherwise been unstable, show the potential for optimization of synchronization in large networks of spatially distributed electronic clocks~\cite{Lee2000,Lim2000}.
We envision that the effects studied here will be used in next-generation synchronization layers for large spatially distributed systems.
All free system parameters that can be tuned as the system operates would then be used to steer self-organized synchronization dynamics towards application-specific requirements within the same conceptual setting.
\section{Acknowledgments}
We thank Johannes Fritzsche, Frank J\"{u}licher, David J\"{o}rg, Rabea Seyboldt, Kevin Bassler, and Lennard Hilbert for stimulating discussions. This work is partly supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG) within the Cluster of Excellence `Center for Advancing Electronics Dresden'.
\begin{widetext}
|
\section{Vulnerability of the Scheme by Cui et al.}
The scheme by Cui et al.~\cite{cui2016key} does not satisfy the keyword privacy because random values embedded in encrypted keywords are common for every keywords.
We show an example where the scheme by Cui et al. is broken under our definition of the keyword privacy below.
In the game of the keyword privacy, an adversary can request an encrypted keyword to the encrypt oracle before receiving a challenge encrypted keyword. Then, the adversary chooses a keyword $w_{l'}$ before the guess phase, and requests $c_{i^*,l'}=(c_{1,i^*,l'},c_{2,i^*,l'},c_{3,i^*,l'})$ for encrypt oracle.
After that, by receiving the challenge encrypted keyword $c_{i^*,\theta}=(c_{1,i^*,\theta},c_{2,i^*,\theta},c_{3,i^*,\theta})$, the adversary can extract the keyword from the challenge encrypted keyword as follows:
\[
c_{3,i^*,\theta}/c_{3,i^*,l'}=e(H(w_\theta),g)/e(H(w_{l'}),g)
\]
Because the adversary knows the challenge keyword and its resulting $H(w_{l^*})$ and $H(w_{l'})$, the adversary can know whether either one of the challenge keyword or the random keyword is encrypted by calculating $e(H(w_{l^*}),g)/e(H(w_{l'}),g)$.
Thus, when a common random value is embedded in multiple encrypted keywords, i.e., the construction of the scheme by Cui et al., keywords can be extracted from the encrypted keywords.
Moreover, the scheme by Cui et al. does not satisfy the trapdoor privacy because trapdoor is deterministic with respect to a given keyword.
We show an example where the scheme by Cui et al. is broken under the definition of the trapdoor privacy.
In the game of the trapdoor privacy, an adversary can request trapdoors to the trapdoor oracle before receiving a challenge trapdoor. Then, the adversary chooses a keyword $w_{l'}$ before the guess phase, and requests $Tr'=k^*_{agg} \cdot H(w_{l'})$ to the trapdoor oracle.
After that, by receiving the challenge trapdoor $Tr^*=k^*_{agg} \cdot H(w_\theta)$, the adversary can extract the keyword from the challenge trapdoor as follows:
\[
(Tr^*\cdot H(w_{l'}))/Tr'=H(w_\theta)
\]
Thus, if trapdoors are deterministic, keywords can be extract from multiple trapdoors.
\section{Proofs of Main Construction}
\label{proof_appendix}
\subsection{Complexity Assumptions}
First, we define the $l$-(D-)BDHE assumption~\cite{boyen2008uber}.
This is an assumption in asymmetric bilinear groups.
\begin{defi}[$(\epsilon, l)$-(D-)BDHE Assumption in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$]
We say the $l$-(D-)BDHE problem in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ with a security parameter $1^k$ as,
for a given $(g,g^\alpha,g^{\alpha^2},...,g^{\alpha^l},g^{\alpha^{l+2}},...,\\g^{\alpha^{2l}}, h,h^s$, $\alpha, s\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$ and $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ as input,
determining whether $Z\in \mathbb{G}_T$ is $e(g^{\alpha^{l+1}},h^s)$ or a random value $R$.
We say that a polynomial time algorithm $\mathcal{A}$ can solve the $l$-(D-)BDHE problem in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ with an advantage $\epsilon$ if the following relation holds:
\begin{eqnarray}
|Pr[\mathcal{A}(g,h,h^s,\bm{y}_{g,h,\alpha,l},e(g_{l+1},h^s))=0]\nonumber \\
-Pr[\mathcal{A}(g,h,h^s,\bm{y}_{g,h,\alpha,l},R)=0]|\ge \epsilon, \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\bm{y}_{g,h,\alpha,l}=(g_1,...,g_l,g_{l+2},...,g_{2l})$.
We say the $l$-(D-)BDHE assumption holds in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ if there is no polynomial-time algorithm that can solve the $l$-(D-)BDHE problem in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ with $\epsilon$.
\end{defi}
The difference of the assumption described above from the assumption is only the input, i.e.,
$h\in \mathbb{G}$ for the $l$-BDHE assumption and $g^s$ for the $l$-(D-)BDHE assumption.
Namely, the notation of the input is different.
Next, we define $l$-BDHE assumption and $l$-DHE assumption in asymmetric bilinear groups.
We use these assumptions for the security proofs of the main construction.
We note that the $l$-BDHE assumption in asymmetric bilinear groups is naturally extended from the $l$-(D-)BDHE assumption.
In particular, in the following assumptions, when $\mathbb{G} = \mathbb{H}$ and $g = h$, the $l$-BDHE assumption in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ is identical to the $l$-(D-)BDHE assumption in this section and the $l$-DHE assumption in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ is identical to the $l$-DHE assumption in Section \ref{complexity_assumptoins}.
\begin{defi}[$(\epsilon, l)$-BDHE Assumption in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$]
We say the $l$-BDHE problem in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ with a security parameter $1^k$ as,
for a given $(g,g^s,g^\alpha,g^{\alpha^2},...,g^{\alpha^l},g^{\alpha^{l+2}},...,g^{\alpha^{2l}}, \\h,h^s,h^\alpha,h^{\alpha^2},...,h^{\alpha^l},Z)$ with uniformly random $g\in \mathbb{G}, h\in \mathbb{H}$, $\alpha, s\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$ and $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ as input,
determining whether $Z\in \mathbb{G}_T$ is $e(g^{\alpha^{l+1}},h^s)$ or a random value $R$.
We say that a polynomial time algorithm $\mathcal{A}$ can solve the $l$-BDHE problem in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ with an advantage $\epsilon$ if the following relation holds:
\begin{eqnarray}
|Pr[\mathcal{A}(g,g^s,h,h^s,\bm{y}_{g,h,\alpha,l},e(g_{l+1},h^s))=0]\nonumber \\
-Pr[\mathcal{A}(g,g^s,h,h^s,\bm{y}_{g,h,\alpha,l},R)=0]|\ge \epsilon, \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\bm{y}_{g,h,\alpha,l}=(g_1,...,g_l,g_{l+2},...,g_{2l},h_1,...,h_l)$.
We say the $l$-BDHE assumption holds in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ if there is no polynomial-time algorithm that can solve the $l$-BDHE problem in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ with $\epsilon$.
\end{defi}
\begin{defi}[$(\epsilon, l)$-DHE Assumption in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H})$]
We say the $l$-DHE problem in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H})$ with a security parameter $1^k$ as,
for a given $(g,g^\alpha,g^{\alpha^2},...,g^{\alpha^l},g^{\alpha^{l+2}},...,g^{\alpha^{2l}},h,h^\alpha,h^{\alpha^2},...,h^{\alpha^l})$ with uniformly random $g\in \mathbb{G}, h\in \mathbb{H}$, $\alpha\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$ and $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ as input,
computing $g^{\alpha^{l+1}}$.
We say that a polynomial time algorithm $\mathcal{A}$ can solve the $l$-DHE problem in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H})$ with an advantage $\epsilon$ if the following relation holds:
\[
Pr[\mathcal{A}(g,\bm{y}_{g,h,\alpha,l},g^{\alpha^{l+1}})]\ge \epsilon,
\]
where $\bm{y}_{g,h,\alpha,l}=(g^\alpha,g^{\alpha^2},...,g^{\alpha^l},g^{\alpha^{l+2}},...,g^{\alpha^{2l}},h^\alpha,h^{\alpha^2},...,\\h^{\alpha^l})$.
We say the $l$-DHE assumption holds in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H})$ if there is no polynomial-time algorithm that can solve the $l$-DHE problem in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H})$ with $\epsilon$.
\end{defi}
\subsection{Proof for Keyword Privacy}
In this section, we show that the main construction satisfies the keyword privacy.
\begin{theo}[$(\epsilon',n)$-Keyword Privacy]
The main construction satisfies the $(\epsilon',n)$-keyword privacy under the $(\epsilon,n)$-BDHE assumption in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$, where $\epsilon\geq\epsilon'$.
\end{theo}
\textit{Proof}.
Suppose there exists as adversary $\mathcal{A}$, whose advantage is $\epsilon'$, against the main construction.
We then build an algorithm $\mathcal{B}$ that solves the BDHE problem in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$.
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a challenger for the BDHE problem in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$.
Algorithm $\mathcal{B}$ proceeds as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item Init:
$\mathcal{A}$ declares a challenge file index $i^* \in [1,n]$ and sends it to $\mathcal{C}$.
\item Setup:
$\mathcal{C}$ sends $(g,g^s,g_1,g_2,...,g_n,g_{n+2},...,g_{2n},h,h^s,\\h_1,h_2,...,h_n,h_{n+2},...,h_{2n},Z)$ to $\mathcal{B}$.
$\mathcal{B}$ randomly generates $sk=\beta$ and calculates $v'=g^\beta g_{i^*}^{-1}$.
$\mathcal{B}$ sends $params=(g,g_1,g_2,...,g_n,g_{n+2},...,g_{2n},h,h_1,h_2,...,h_n)$ to $\mathcal{A}$.
\item Query:
When $\mathcal{A}$ queries for $\mathcal{O}_{Extract}$, $\mathcal{B}$ responds as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item
If an aggregate key for $i^* \in S$ is queried, returns $\bot$.
\item
If an aggregate key for $i^* \not\in S$ is queried, returns $k_{agg}=(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^{\beta}) \cdot (\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j+i^*})^{-1}=\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^{\beta - \alpha^{i^*}}$.
Note that, if $j=i^*$, $(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j+i^*})^{-1}$ cannot be calculated, but it can be calculated because of $i^* \not\in S$.
\end{itemize}
When $\mathcal{A}$ queries for $\mathcal{O}_{Encrypt}$, $\mathcal{B}$ randomly generates $t_{i,l}\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$, calculates the following $c_{i,l}=(c_{1,i,l},c_{2,i,l},c_{3,i,l})$ and responds to $\mathcal{A}$ ($c_{1,i,l}=h^{t_{i,l}},c_{2,i,l}=(v' \cdot g_i)^{t_{i,l}} ,c_{3,i,l}=\frac{e(H(w_{l}),h)^{t_{i,l}}}{e(g_1,h_n)^{t_{i,l}}}$).
\item Guess:
$\mathcal{A}$ declares the challenge keyword $w_{l^*}$ and sends to $\mathcal{B}$.
$\mathcal{B}$ calculates the challenge encrypted keyword $c_{1,i^*,\theta}=h^s,c_{2,i^*,\theta}=(g^s)^\beta ,c_{3,i^*,\theta}=\frac{e(H(w_{l^*}),h^s)}{Z}$.
Then, when $Z=e(g_{n+1},h^s)$, $c_{1,i^*,\theta}=h^s ,c_{2,i^*,\theta}=((g^\beta g_{i^*}^{-1})\cdot g_{i^*})^s=g^{\beta s}=(g^s)^\beta, c_{3,i^*,\theta}=\frac{e(H(w_{l^*}),h)^s}{e(g_1,h_n)^s}=\frac{e(H(w_{l^*}),h^s)}{e(g_{n+1},h^s)}=\frac{e(H(w_{l^*}),h^s)}{Z}$.
Therefore, the calculation results are identical to the Encrypt algorithm of the main construction.
$\mathcal{B}$ sends $c_{i^*,\theta}=(c_{1,i^*,\theta},c_{2,i^*,\theta},c_{3,i^*,\theta})$ to $\mathcal{A}$.
$\mathcal{A}$ chooses $\theta'\in \{0,1\}$ and sends it to $\mathcal{B}$.
Then, $\mathcal{B}$ sends $\theta'$ to $\mathcal{C}$ as a guess of $\theta$.
\end{itemize}
In the guess phase, if $Z$ is a random value, then $\Pr[\theta=\theta']=1/2$.
On the other hand, if $Z=e(g_{n+1},h^s)$, $|\Pr[\theta=\theta']-1/2|>\epsilon'$.
This indicates that $\mathcal{B}$ has an advantage over $\epsilon'$ for solving the $(\epsilon,n)$-BDHE problem in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$.
Thus, if the $(\epsilon,n)$-BDHE assumption holds in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$, the main construction satisfies the $(\epsilon',n)$-keyword privacy.
\subsection{Proof for Aggregate key Unforgeability}
In this section, we show that the main construction satisfies the aggregate key unforgeability.
\begin{theo}[$(\epsilon',n)$-Aggregate key Unforgeability]
The main construction satisfies the $(\epsilon',n)$-aggregate key unforgeability under the $(\epsilon,n)$-DHE Assumption in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H})$, where $\epsilon=\epsilon'$.
\end{theo}
$Proof.$
Suppose there exists as adversary $\mathcal{A}$, whose advantage is $\epsilon'$, against the main construction.
We then build an algorithm $\mathcal{B}$ that solves the DHE problem.
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a challenger for the DHE problem.
Algorithm $\mathcal{B}$ proceeds as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item Setup:
$\mathcal{C}$ sends $(g,g_1,g_2,...,g_n,g_{n+2},...,g_{2n},h,h_1,h_2,\\...,h_n,h_{n+2},...,h_{2n})$ to $\mathcal{B}$.
$\mathcal{B}$ randomly generates $sk=\beta$ and calculates $v'=g^\beta g_{i^*}^{-1}$.
$\mathcal{B}$ sends $params=(g,g_1,g_2,...,g_n,g_{n+2},...,g_{2n},h,h_1,h_2,...,h_n)$ to $\mathcal{A}$.
\item Query:
When $\mathcal{A}$ queries for $\mathcal{O}_{Extract}$, $\mathcal{B}$ responds as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item
If an aggregate key for $i^* \in S$ is queried, returns $\bot$.
\item
If an aggregate key for $i^* \not\in S$ is queried, returns $k_{agg}=(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^{\beta}) \cdot (\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j+i^*})^{-1}=\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^{\beta - \alpha^{i^*}}$.
Here, if $j=i^*$, then $(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j+i^*})^{-1}$ cannot be calculated, but it can be calculated because of $i^* \not\in S$.
\end{itemize}
When $\mathcal{A}$ queries for $\mathcal{O}_{Encrypt}$, $\mathcal{B}$ randomly generates $t_{i,l}\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$, calculates $c_{i,l}=(c_{1,i,l},c_{2,i,l},c_{3,i,l})$ and responds to $\mathcal{A}$ ($c_{1,i,l}=h^{t_{i,l}},c_{2,i,l}=(v' \cdot g_i)^{t_{i,l}} ,c_{3,i,l}=\frac{e(H(w_{l}),h)^{t_{i,l}}}{e(g_1,h_n)^{t_{i,l}}}$).
\item Forge:
$\mathcal{A}$ outputs $S^*,k_{agg}^*$ and sends them to $\mathcal{B}$.
\begin{itemize}
\item If $i^*\not\in S^*$, abort
\item If $i^*\in S^*$, $k_{agg}^*=(\Pi_{j\in S,j\not= i^*}g_{n+1-j})^{\beta -\alpha^{i^*}}\cdot (g_{n+1-i^*})^{\beta- \alpha^{i^*}}$.
By using this $k_{agg}^*$, $\mathcal{B}$ calculates $(\Pi_{j\in S^*,j\not= i^*}g_{n+1-j})^\beta \cdot (\Pi_{j\in S^* ,j\not= i^*}g_{n+1-j+i^*})^{-1} \cdot (g_{n+1-i^*})^\beta/k_{agg}^*=g^{\alpha+1}$ and outputs results.
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
The result in the above $(\epsilon',n)$-aggregate key unforgeability game is identical to the answer of the $(\epsilon,n)$-DHE problem in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H})$.
That is, the advantage of the aggregate key unforgeability game is equal to the advantage of the $(\epsilon,n)$-DHE problem in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H})$.
Thus, if the $(\epsilon,n)$-DHE assumption holds, the main construction satisfies the $(\epsilon',n)$-aggregate key unforgeability.
\section{Conclusion} \label{Conclusion}
In this paper, we proposed provably secure KASE scheme and defined the security of KASE formally. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper to provide a formal security discussion of KASE. Our main idea was to combine broadcast encryption and aggregate signatures, and we proposed the scheme called first construction by combining the broadcast encryption scheme by Boneh et al. and the aggregate signature scheme by Boneh et al. The security is provably secure with respect to the keyword privacy under the BDHE-assumption and the aggregate key unforgeability under the DHE assumption. Furthermore, by constructing trapdoors that utilize random numbers distributed via secret sharing, we proposed another scheme called main construction that satisfies the trapdoor privacy. We then implemented the proposed schemes and showed that both schemes could encrypt 5,000 keywords within one second. Moreover, a search in the 5,000 keywords can be executed within about three seconds in the first construction and about six seconds in the main construction. These results show that the proposed schemes are practical while achieving provably security. As future work, we plan to propose a generic construction through any broadcast encryption and any aggregate signatures because the proposed schemes in this paper are based on the specific constructions described above. We also plan to optimize implementation, e.g., parallelization of processes, to improve the performance of the proposed schemes.
\section{Constructions}
\label{sec:constructions}
In this section, we propose two constructions, namely, the first construction and the main construction, following the security requirements described in Section~\ref{security_definitions}.
The first construction satisfies the keyword privacy and the aggregate key unforgeability.
The main construction satisfies the trapdoor privacy in addition to the keyword privacy and the aggregate key unforgeability.
\subsection{Idea}
Our main idea of KASE is to combine broadcast encryption (BE)~\cite{boneh2005collusion,fiat1993broadcast} and aggregate signatures (AS)~\cite{boneh2003aggregate}. BE is an encryption scheme that allows a specified set of users to decrypt ciphertext whereby a set of indexes corresponding to the user index is embedded in ciphertexts. Intuitively, the searchability can be realized by treating a decryption algorithm of BE as a test algorithm of KASE.
The keyword privacy can then be satisfied by utilizing the ciphertext security of BE.
Furthermore, we construct an aggregate key in the form of AS~\cite{boneh2003aggregate}.
The signature size can be aggregated to a fixed length regardless of the number of users, and hence the compactness can be satisfied by keeping the construction of AS in aggregate keys.
This also implies that the aggregate key unforgeability can be satisfied via the unforgeability of AS.
When we considered the idea of combining BE and AS, we found that the BE proposed by Boneh et al.~\cite{boneh2005collusion} and the AS proposed by Boneh et al.~\cite{boneh2003aggregate} could be combined.
Our first construction is close to a simple combination and can be constructed by a single server. However, trapdoor is out of the scope in this construction, i.e., the trapdoor privacy is unsatisfied.
For this reason, we also propose the main construction that satisfies the trapdoor privacy.
In our main construction, we embed random values in trapdoors to make the trapdoors probabilistic. In doing so, to satisfy the searchability with the trapdoors, it is necessary to embed the same random values in encrypted keywords on a cloud. However, if the random values are sent to the cloud, the cloud can also extract the original keywords from the given trapdoor. Thus, we further utilize the idea of secret sharing for these random values.
We also prepare for two servers that do not collude with each other.
A data user distributes the random values embedded in the trapdoors into two shares, and then sends the shares to each server individually.
By constructing the test algorithm in a way such as $n$-$out$-$of$-$n$ threshold decryption~\cite{desmedt1994threshold,boneh2006chosen}, the random values can be embedded in encrypted keywords and public parameters without knowing the original random values themselves. The approach described above allows search in ciphertexts and satisfies the trapdoor privacy.
\subsection{First Construction}
\label{sec:first_construction}
The algorithms for the first construction are as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item $params\gets Setup(1^\lambda,n)$:
Generate $\mathbb{B}=(p,\mathbb{G},\mathbb{G}_T,e(\cdot ,\cdot))$ as a bilinear map and bilinear groups, where $p$ is an order such that $\mathbb{G}$ and $2^\lambda < p < 2^{\lambda +1}$.
Set $n$ as the maximum number of documents.
For $i\in\{1,2,...,n,n+2,...,2n\}$, pick a random generator $g \in \mathbb{G}$ and a random $\alpha \in \mathbb{Z}_p$, and then compute $g_i = g^{(\alpha^i)}\in \mathbb{G}$.
Select a one-way hash function $H:\{0,1\}^* \to \mathbb{G}$.
Finally, output a public parameter $params = (\mathbb{B}, PubK, H)$, where $PubK=(g,g_1,...,g_n,g_{n+2},...,g_{2n})\in \mathbb{G}^{2n}$.
\item $sk\gets KeyGen(params)$:
Pick a random $\beta \in \mathbb{Z}_p$ and output a secret key $sk=\beta$.
\item $c_{i,l}\gets Encrypt(params,sk,i,w_l)$:
Pick a random $t_{i,l} \in \mathbb{Z}_p$ and output an encrypted keyword $c_{i,l}=(c_{1,i,l},c_{2,i,l},c_{3,i,l})$ by computing the following:
\begin{eqnarray*}
c_{1,i,l}=g^{t_{i,l}} ,
c_{2,i,l}=(g^\beta \cdot g_i)^{t_{i,l}} ,
c_{3,i,l}=\frac{e(H(w_l),g)^{t_{i,l}}}{e(g_1,g_n)^{t_{i,l}}} .
\end{eqnarray*}
\item $k_{agg}\gets Extract(params,sk,S)$:
For the given subset $S \subseteq [1,n]$ which contains the indexes of documents,
output an aggregate key $k_{agg}$ by computing the following:
\[
k_{agg}=\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^{\beta}.
\]
\item $Tr\gets Trapdoor(params,k_{agg},S,w_l)$:
For all documents relevant to the given aggregate key $k_{agg}$,
generate a single trapdoor $Tr$ for the keyword $w_l$ by computing the following:
\[
Tr=k_{agg} \cdot H(w_l).
\]
\item $Tr_i\gets Adjust(params,i,S,Tr)$:
For each document in the given set $S$, output trapdoor $Tr_i$ by computing the following:
\[
Tr_{i}=Tr \cdot \Pi_{j\in S, j \not= i}g_{n+1-j+i}.
\]
\item $b\gets Test(params,Tr_i,S,c_{i,l})$:
For the $i$th document and the keyword embedded in $Tr_i$, output $true$ or $false$ by judging whether the following equation holds or not:
\[
\frac{e(Tr_{i},c_{1,i,l})}{e(c_{2,i,l},pub)}=^? c_{3,i,l},
\]
where $pub = \Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}$.
\end{itemize}
The first construction described above satisfies the correctness, i.e., the searchability, because equation~(\ref{first_construction_correctness}) holds.
\begin{table*}[tbp] \centering
\begin{eqnarray
&& \frac{e(Tr_{i},c_{1,i,l})}{e(c_{2,i,l},pub)} \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{e(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^{\beta} \cdot H(w_l) \cdot \Pi_{j\in S, j \not= i}g_{n+1-j+i},g^{t_{i,l}})}{e((g^{\beta}\cdot g_i)^{t_{i,l}},\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j})}
= \frac{e(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^{\beta} ,g^{t_{i,l}}) \cdot
e(H(w_l),g^{t_{i,l}}) \cdot
e(\Pi_{j\in S, j \not= i}g_{n+1-j+i},g^{t_{i,l}})}
{e(g^{\beta t_{i,l}},\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}) \cdot
e(g_i^{t_{i,l}},\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j})} \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{e(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j} ,g^{\beta t_{i,l}}) \cdot
e(H(w_l),g^{t_{i,l}}) \cdot
e(\Pi_{j\in S, j \not= i}g_{n+1-j+i},g^{t_{i,l}})}
{e(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j},g^{\beta t_{i,l}}) \cdot
e(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j+i}g^{t_{i,l}})}
= \frac{e(H(w_l),g^{t_{i,l}}) \cdot
e(\Pi_{j\in S, j \not= i}g_{n+1-j+i},g^{t_{i,l}})}
{e(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j+i},g^{t_{i,l}})} \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{e(H(w_l),g^{t_{i,l}}) \cdot
e(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j+i},g^{t_{i,l}})}
{e(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j+i},g^{t_{i,l}}) \cdot
e(g_{n+1}.g^{t_{i,l}})}
= \frac{e(H(w_l),g^{t_{i,l}})}
{e(g_{n+1}.g^{t_{i,l}})}
= \frac{e(H(w_l),g)^{t_{i,l}}}
{e(g_{1}.g_n)^{t_{i,l}}} .
\label{first_construction_correctness}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{table*}
Furthermore, the sizes of an aggregate key and a trapdoor are $|\mathbb{G}|$ independent of the number of indexes in $S$ because $k_{agg}=\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^\beta \in \mathbb{G}$ and $Tr=k_{agg}\cdot H(w_l) \in \mathbb{G}$.
A search over encrypted keywords can be executed without changing the encrypted keywords themselves for any keyword. Hence, the first construction satisfies the compactness.
We will show that the first construction satisfies the keyword privacy and the aggregate key unforgeability in Section~\ref{Proof of First Construction}.
The first construction does not satisfy the trapdoor privacy because trapdoors are deterministic with respect to keywords. In other words, an adversary can extract keywords from trapdoors when the keywords used-so-far are sent again. In the next subsection, we will introduce the main construction, which satisfies the trapdoor privacy, under a two-server setting.
\subsection{Main Construction}
\label{main_construction}
To construct a scheme that satisfies the trapdoor privacy, random values should be embedded in trapdoors. Likewise, the same random values should be embedded in the encrypted keyword and public parameters to satisfy the correctness.
Intuitively, the approach to use random values in trapdoors seems to require a data user to send the same random values to a cloud. However, if the data user sends the same random value as those in trapdoors, the cloud can extract $k_{agg}\cdot H(w_l)$ from the given trapdoors and the random values. Consequently, the trapdoor privacy is unsatisfied.
To overcome this limitation, instead of sending random values to a cloud, we aim to send the random values in a manner that nobody except for a data user itself can extract.
Simultaneously, embedding the random values in encrypted keywords and a public parameter on the cloud without revealing the random values themselves. To do this, we construct trapdoors by using secret sharing. Consider a data user that distributes random values into two shares and then sends the shares to two servers. By utilizing these shares, a cloud can embed the random values in encrypted keywords and a public parameter without knowing the random values themselves.
In the main construction that will be described below, two servers $\mathcal{C}_{main}$ and $\mathcal{C}_{aid}$ are assumed to be semi-honest and to not collude with each other without loss of generality. Both servers store the same encrypted keywords.
When a data user generates a trapdoor, he/she also generates a random value $r$ and embeds $r$ in the resulting trapdoor. The data user then distributes $r$ into two shares and sends either of the shares to $\mathcal{C}_{main}$ and $ \mathcal{C}_{aid}$, respectively.
After receiving the trapdoor and the share, $\mathcal{C}_{main}$ and $\mathcal{C}_{aid}$ embed the received share in the stored encrypted keyword and public parameter provisionally. Then, these values are gathered on the $\mathcal{C}_{main}$ side.
$\mathcal{C}_{main}$ then combines the encrypted keywords and the public parameter with the shares to recover $r$.
That is, $\mathcal{C}_{main}$ can obtain the encrypted keywords and the public parameter where the random $r$ is embedded without knowing $r$ itself.
Consequently, $\mathcal{C}_{main}$ is able to search in encrypted files and return the search results to the data user.
The main construction is described as follows. The asymmetric bilinear map is used in the main construction to satisfy the trapdoor privacy.
Furthermore, in the Adjust and Test algorithms, we instantiate a function $f:\mathbb{Z}_p \times \mathbb{G} \to \mathbb{G}$ and $f_T:\mathbb{Z}_p \times \mathbb{G}_T \to \mathbb{G}_T$ as auxiliary functions of the input defined in Section~\ref{algorithms}.
$f$ is a function that takes two arbitrary inputs $x\in \mathbb{Z}_p, g\in \mathbb{G}$ and outputs $g^x\in \mathbb{G}$.
$f_T$ is a function that takes two arbitrary inputs $x\in \mathbb{Z}_p, g_T\in \mathbb{G}_T$ and outputs $g_T^x\in \mathbb{G}_T$.
\begin{itemize}
\item $params\gets Setup(1^\lambda,n)$:
Generate a bilinear map group system $\mathbb{B}=(p,\mathbb{G},\mathbb{H},\mathbb{G}_T,e(\cdot ,\cdot))$, where $p$ is the order of $\mathbb{G},\mathbb{H}$ and $2^\lambda < p < 2^{\lambda +1}$.
Set $n$ as the maximum possible number of documents that belong to a data owner.
Pick a generator $g \in \mathbb{G}, h \in \mathbb{H}$ and a random $\alpha \in \mathbb{Z}_p$, and then compute $g_i = g^{(\alpha^i)}\in \mathbb{G}$ for $i\in\{1,2,...,n,n+2,...,2n\}, h_i = h^{(\alpha^i)}\in \mathbb{H}$ for $i\in[1,n]$.
Select a one-way hash function $H:\{0,1\}^* \to \mathbb{G}$.
Finally, output a public parameter $params = (\mathbb{B}, PubK, H)$, where $PubK=(g,g_1,...,g_n,g_{n+2},...,g_{2n},h,h_1,...,h_n)\in (\mathbb{G}^{2n}\times \mathbb{H}^{n+1})$.
\item $sk\gets KeyGen(params)$:
Pick a random $\beta \in \mathbb{Z}_p$ and output a secret key $sk=\beta$.
\item $c_{i,l}\gets Encrypt(params,sk,i,w_l)$:
Pick a random $t_{i,l} \in \mathbb{Z}_p$ and output an encrypted keyword $c_{i,l}=(c_{1,i,l},c_{2,i,l},c_{3,i,l})$ by computing the following:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
c_{1,i,l}=h^{t_{i,l}} \in \mathbb{H}, \\
c_{2,i,l}=(g^\beta \cdot g_i)^{t_{i,l}} \in \mathbb{G}, \\
c_{3,i,l}= \frac{e(H(w_l),h)^{t_{i,l}}}{e(g_1,h_n)^{t_{i,l}}} \in \mathbb{G}_T. \nonumber
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\item $k_{agg}\gets Extract(params,sk,S)$:
For the given subset $S \subseteq [1,n]$ which contains the indexes of documents,
output an aggregate key $k_{agg}$ by computing the following:
\[
k_{agg}=\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^{\beta}\in \mathbb{G}.
\]
\item $Tr\gets Trapdoor(params,k_{agg},S,w_l)$:
Randomly generate $r \in \mathbb{Z}_p$ and calculate $Tr=(k_{agg} \cdot H(w_l))^r\in \mathbb{G}$.
Then, $r$ is broken into $r=r_{main} + r_{aid}$, and $Tr_{main}=(Tr,r_{main}),Tr_{aid}=r_{aid}$.
\item $Tr_{i}\gets Adjust(params,i,S,Tr,f(r_{main},pub_i),f(r_{aid},\\pub_i))$:
Calculate $pub_i=\Pi_{j\in S, j \not= i}g_{n+1-j+i}\in \mathbb{G}$ on the two servers.
$\mathcal{C}_{aid}$ sends $f(r_{aid},pub_i)=pub_i^{r_{aid}}$ to $\mathcal{C}_{main}$.
Next, $\mathcal{C}_{main}$ calculates $(f(r_{main},pub_i))\cdot (f(r_{aid},pub_i))=pub_i^{r_{main}}\cdot pub_i^{r_{aid}}=pub_i^r$ and calculates $Tr_i=Tr\cdot pub_i^r\in \mathbb{G}$.
\item $b\gets Test(params,Tr_i,S,c_{i,l},f_T(r_{main},c^\#_{2,i,l}),f_T(r_{aid},\\c^\#_{2,i,l}),f_T(r_{main},c_{3,i,l}),f_T(r_{aid},c_{3,i,l}))$:
Calculate $pub=\Pi_{j\in S}h_{n+1-j}\in \mathbb{H}$ and $c^\#_{2,i,l}=e(c_{2,i,l},pub)$ on the two servers.
$\mathcal{C}_{aid}$ sends $f_T(r_{aid},c^\#_{2,i,l})=e(c_{2,i,l},pub)^{r_{aid}}$ to $\mathcal{C}_{main}$.
Next, $\mathcal{C}_{main}$ calculates $(f_T(r_{main},c^\#_{2,i,l}))\cdot (f_T(r_{aid},c^\#_{2,i,l}))=e(c_{2,i,l},pub)^{r_{main}}\cdot e(c_{2,i,l},pub)^{r_{aid}}=e(c_{2,i,l},pub)^r$.
In addition, $\mathcal{C}_{aid}$ sends $f_T(r_{aid},c_{3,i,l})=c_{3,i,l}^{r_{aid}}$ to $\mathcal{C}_{main}$.
Then, $\mathcal{C}_{main}$ calculates $(f_T(r_{main},c_{3,i,l}))\cdot (f_T(r_{aid},c_{3,i,l}))=c_{3,i,l}^{r_{main}}\cdot c_{3,i,l}^{r_{aid}}=c_{3,i,l}^r$ and outputs $true$ or $false$ by judging whether the following equation holds or not:
\[
\frac{e(Tr_{i},c_{1,i,l})}{e(c_{2,i,l},pub)^r}=^? c_{3,i,l}^r .
\]
\end{itemize}
The main construction satisfies the correctness, i.e., the searchability, as shown in equation~(\ref{main_construction_correctness}).
\begin{table*}[tbp] \centering
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \frac{e(Tr_{i},c_{1,i,l})}{e(c_{2,i,l},pub)^r} \nonumber \\
&=&\frac{e(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^{\beta r} \cdot H(w_l)^r \cdot \Pi_{j\in S, j \not= i}g_{n+1-j+i}^r,h^{t_{i,l}})}{e((g^{\beta}\cdot g_i)^{t_{i,l}},\Pi_{j\in S}h_{n+1-j}^{r})}
=\frac{e(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^{\beta r} ,h^{t_{i,l}}) \cdot
e(H(w_l)^r,h^{t_{i,l}}) \cdot
e(\Pi_{j\in S, j \not= i}g_{n+1-j+i}^r,h^{t_{i,l}})}
{e(g^{\beta t_{i,l}},\Pi_{j\in S}h_{n+1-j}^{r}) \cdot
e(g_i^{t_{i,l}},\Pi_{j\in S}h_{n+1-j}^{r})} \nonumber \\
&=&\frac{e(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^{r} ,h^{\beta t_{i,l}}) \cdot
e(H(w_l)^r,h^{t_{i,l}}) \cdot
e(\Pi_{j\in S, j \not= i}g_{n+1-j+i}^r,h^{t_{i,l}})}
{e(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^{r},h^{\beta t_{i,l}}) \cdot
e(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j+i}^{r},h^{t_{i,l}})}
=\frac{e(H(w_l)^r,h^{t_{i,l}}) \cdot
e(\Pi_{j\in S, j \not= i}g_{n+1-j+i}^r,h^{t_{i,l}})}
{e(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j+i}^{r},h^{t_{i,l}})} \nonumber \\
&=&\frac{e(H(w_l)^r,h^{t_{i,l}}) \cdot
e(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j+i}^r,h^{t_{i,l}})}
{e(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j+i}^{r},h^{t_{i,l}}) \cdot
e(g^r_{n+1}.h^{t_{i,l}})}
=\frac{e(H(w_l)^r,h^{t_{i,l}})}
{e(g^r_{n+1},h^{t_{i,l}})}
=\frac{e(H(w_l),h)^{r t_{i,l}}}
{e(g_{1}.h_n)^{r t_{i,l}}}
=c^r_{3,i,l}
\label{main_construction_correctness}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{table*}
Furthermore, similar to the first construction, the sizes of an aggregate key and a trapdoor are $|\mathbb{G}|$ independent of the number $n$ of indexes in $S$. In addition, the data size of encrypted keywords is independent of the number of users because the algorithms do not change the encrypted keywords themselves.
Thus, the main construction also satisfies the compactness.
\if0
(Hereafter, the original sentencses were in the next chapter. This section sholud be re-organized for the consistency of this section and the next section.)}
First, we utilize asymmetric bilinear maps for constructing the main construction described below. There is an efficient conversion method~\cite{abe2016design} for any cryptographic scheme from symmetric bilinear maps to an asymmetric group. The construction after conversion is as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item $params\gets Setup(1^\lambda,n)$:
Generate a bilinear map group system $\mathbb{B}=(p,\mathbb{G},\mathbb{H},\mathbb{G}_T,e(\cdot ,\cdot))$, where $p$ is the order of $\mathbb{G},\mathbb{H}$ and $2^\lambda < p < 2^{\lambda +1}$.
Set $n$ as the maximum possible number of documents which belongs to a data owner.
Pick a generator $g \in \mathbb{G}, h \in \mathbb{H}$ and a random $\alpha \in \mathbb{Z}_p$, and computes $g_i = g^{(\alpha^i)}\in \mathbb{G}$ for $i\in\{1,2,...,n,n+2,...,2n\}, h_i = h^{(\alpha^i)}\in \mathbb{H}$ for $i\in[1,n]$.
Select a one-way hash function $H:\{0,1\}^* \to \mathbb{G}$.
Finally, output a public parameter $params = (\mathbb{B}, PubK, H)$, where $PubK=(g,g_1,...,g_n,g_{n+2},...,g_{2n},h,h_1,...,h_n)\in (\mathbb{G}^{2n}\times \mathbb{H}^n)$.
\item $sk\gets KeyGen(params)$:
$sk=\beta$.
\item $c_{i,l}\gets Encrypt(params,sk,i,w_l)$:
$c_{1,i,l}=h^{t_{i,l}} \in \mathbb{H},c_{2,i,l}=(g^\beta \cdot g_i)^{t_{i,l}} \in \mathbb{G},c_{3,i,l}=\frac{e(H(w_l),h)^{t_{i,l}}}{e(g_1,h_n)^{t_{i,l}}} \in \mathbb{G}_T$.
\item $k_{agg}\gets Extract(params,sk,S)$:
$k_{agg}=\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^{\beta}\in \mathbb{G}$.
\item $Tr\gets Trapdoor(params,k_{agg},S,w_l)$:
$Tr=(k_{agg} \cdot H(w_l))^r\in \mathbb{G}$.
\item $Tr_{i}\gets Adjust(params,i,S,Tr,f(r_{main},pub_i),\\f(r_{aid},pub_i))$:
$Tr_{i}=(Tr \cdot \Pi_{j\in S, j \not= i}g_{n+1-j+i})^r\in \mathbb{G}$.
\item $b\gets Test(params,Tr_i,S,c_{i,l},f(r_{main},pub),\\f(r_{aid},pub),f_T(r_{main},c_{3,i,l}),f_T(r_{aid},c_{3,i,l}))$:
$\frac{e(Tr_{i},c_{1,i,l})}{e(c_{2,i,l},pub^r)}=^? c^r_{3,i,l}$,
where $pub = \Pi_{j\in S}h_{n+1-j}\in \mathbb{H}$.
\end{itemize}
\fi
\section{Discussion}
\label{Discussion}
In this section, we discuss performance of our proposed schemes. We first implement the proposed schemes to measure their actual performance. Next, we theoretically compare the computational cost and the storage cost of the proposed schemes with those of related works. We also compare the security features with related works.
\subsection{Implementation and Performance}
We implement the first construction and the main construction to evaluate the performance of each algorithm. The implementation environment and performance evaluation are as follows:
\subsubsection{Implementation Environment}
In our implementation, we use the mcl library version 0.94\footnote{mcl library: \url{ https://github.com/herumi/mcl}}, which is a C++ library for pairing computation.
We also use the BLS12-381 curves. The curves are asymmetric bilinear maps, and hence the parameters in the first construction are dually generated for each input group of the bilinear maps.
We also evaluate each cryptographic operation in the C++ platform with Mac OS named Mojave. In our environment, CPU is 1.4 GHz Intel Core i5-4260U and memory is 4 GB 1600 MHz DDR3.
We note that the communication latency to interact between $\mathcal{C}_{main}$ and $\mathcal{C}_{aid}$ in the main construction is not measured because the communication process between $\mathcal{C}_{main}$ and $\mathcal{C}_{aid}$ is not implemented due to the lack of communication function in the mcl library.
\subsubsection{Performance Evaluation}
The results of the performance evaluation of our schemes are shown in Figures~~\ref {fig:setup}-\ref{fig:test}.
Among the KASE algorithms, the Setup, Encrypt, and Extract algorithms are common to the first construction and the main construction because the mcl library supports asymmetric bilinear maps. Thus, the evaluation of these algorithms, i.e., Figures~\ref {fig:setup}-\ref{fig:extract}, contains only the first construction. The results shown in Figures~\ref {fig:setup}-\ref{fig:extract} are common also for those in the main construction.
On the other hand, the results of the Adjust and Test algorithms listed in Figures~\ref{fig:adjust}-\ref{fig:test} do not include the communication latency between the two servers in the main construction.
\begin{figure*}[htpb]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c}
\begin{minipage}{0.33\hsize}
\centering
\includegraphics[keepaspectratio, scale=0.55, angle=0]{setup.pdf}
\caption{Time cost of Setup}
\label{fig:setup}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.33\hsize}
\centering
\includegraphics[keepaspectratio, scale=0.55, angle=0]{encrypt.pdf}
\caption{Time cost of Encrypt}
\label{fig:encrypt}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.33\hsize}
\centering
\includegraphics[keepaspectratio, scale=0.55, angle=0]
{extract.pdf}
\caption{Time cost of Extract}
\label{fig:extract}
\end{minipage} \\
\begin{minipage}{0.06\hsize}
\vspace{7mm}
\end{minipage} \\
\begin{minipage}{0.33\hsize}
\centering
\includegraphics[keepaspectratio, scale=0.55, angle=0]
{trapdoor.pdf}
\caption{Time cost of Trapdoor}
\label{fig:trapdoor}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.33\hsize}
\centering
\includegraphics[keepaspectratio, scale=0.55, angle=0]
{adjust.pdf}
\caption{Time cost of Adjust}
\label{fig:adjust}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.33\hsize}
\centering
\includegraphics[keepaspectratio, scale=0.55, angle=0]
{test.pdf}
\caption{Time cost of Test}
\label{fig:test}
\end{minipage}
\end{tabular}
\end{figure*}
The execution time of the Setup algorithm is linear with respect to the maximum number of documents belonging to a single owner. When the number of documents increases to 5,000, the Setup algorithm only needs one millisecond of execution time and therefore remains reasonable.
The execution time of the Encrypt algorithm is linear with respect to the number of keywords.
The execution time of the Encrypt algorithm is larger than those of other algorithms because of the use of bilinear maps with heavy calculations. Nevertheless, when the number of documents increases to 5,000, the execution time of the Encrypt algorithm finishes within one second and is therefore still practical .
The execution time of the Extract algorithm is linear with respect to the number of shared documents. When the number of documents increases to 5,000, the Extract algorithm needs only 0.07 milliseconds of execution time. The Extract algorithm can be performed faster than the other algorithms.
The execution time of the Trapdoor algorithm is constant with respect to the number of documents, i.e., 0.07 milliseconds in the first construction and 0.2 milliseconds in the main construction. The difference in the execution time depends on the number of scalar multiplications. In particular, the first construction does not utilize scalar multiplication, whereas the main construction utilizes a single scalar multiplication. Since the data sizes of $r_{main}$ and $r_{aid}$ are small because of integers, the entire execution time can be minimized even when the communication latency is included.
The execution time of the Adjust algorithm is linear with respect to the number of documents.
When the number of documents increases to 5,000, the Adjust algorithm takes only 0.06 milliseconds in the first construction and only 0.18 milliseconds in the main construction. Similar to the Extract algorithm, the Adjust algorithm in the first construction can be performed faster than the other algorithms. In the main construction, the Adjust algorithm includes scalar multiplications and hence the computation is slightly heavy. However, we note that the computations for $\mathcal{C}_{main}$ and $\mathcal{C}_{aid}$ can be done in parallel to improve the performance. Although we did not implement the parallelization, this could improve the performance twice faster.
The execution time of the Test algorithm is linear with respect to the number of encrypted keywords. When the number of documents increases to 5,000, the algorithm takes three seconds in the first construction and six seconds in the main construction. Similar to the Encrypt algorithm, the high cost is caused by the use of bilinear maps, which is a bottleneck in all algorithms that use it. However, the search process can be fully parallelized because it is individual for each encrypted keyword. Thus, the performance can be improved by parallelization, e.g., by the use of the OpenMP library\footnote{OpenMP library: \url{ https://www.openmp.org/wp-content/uploads/cspec20.pdf}}.
Finally, search for any keyword is a summation of the execution times of the Trapdoor, Adjust, and Test algorithms. For instance, a search in 5,000 encrypted keywords is executed within about three seconds in the first construction and about six seconds in the main construction.
\subsection{Computational and Storage Cost Analysis}
In this section, we compare the computational cost and the storage cost of our schemes with other schemes~\cite{cui2016key,li2016verifiable,zhou2018file} of KASE. The results are shown in Tables \ref{tab:computation_KASE} and \ref{tab:cost_KASE}.
Li et al.~\cite{li2016verifiable} proposed two constructions, i.e., the single-owner setting and the multi-owner setting. Therefore, we only compare our schemes in the single-owner setting because our schemes have a single-owner setting.
\if0
\begin{table*}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c} \hline
& Cui et al. \cite{cui2016key} & Li et al. \cite{li2016verifiable} & Zhou et al.\cite{zhou2018file} \\ \hline
$Encrypt$ &$T_{h}+2T_{sm}+T_a+2T_p+T_{mul}+T_{exp}$ & $T_{h}+2T_{sm}+2T_a+2T_p+T_{mul}+2T_{exp}+T_{x}+T_{bf}$ & $T_{h}+4T_{sm}+T_a$ \\ \hline
$Trapdoor$ & $T_{h}+T_a$ & $T_{h}+T_a$ & $T_{h}+3T_{sm}+T_a$ \\ \hline
$Adjust+Test$ & $2|S|\cdot T_{a}+T_{mul}+2T_{p}$ & $2|S|\cdot T_{a}+T_{mul}+2T_{p}$ & $2|S|\cdot T_{a}+2T_{mul}+4T_p$ \\ \hline \cline{1-3}
& First Construction & \multicolumn{1}{c}{Main Construction} & \\ \cline{1-3}
$Encrypt$ & $T_{h}+2T_{sm}+T_a+2T_p+T_{mul}+T_{exp}$ & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$T_{h}+2T_{sm}+T_a+2T_p+T_{mul}+T_{exp}$} & \\ \cline{1-3}
$Trapdoor$ & $T_{h}+T_a$ & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$T_{h}+T_a+T_{sm}$} & \\ \cline{1-3}
$Adjust+Test$ & $2|S|\cdot T_{a}+T_{mul}+2T_{p}$ & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$6|S|\cdot T_a + 2|S|\cdot T_{mul} + 4T_{sm} + 2T_{exp} +2T_p$} & \\ \cline{1-3}
\end{tabular}
\caption{The computational cost of KASE: The operation time of hash operations, scalar multiplication, point addition, exclusive or in $\mathbb{G}_T$, exponentiation in $\mathbb{G}_T$, multiplication in $\mathbb{G}_T$ and pairing operation are identified as $T_{h},T_{sm},T_a,T_{x},T_{exp},T_{mul},T_p$, respectively. In addition, Li et al. \cite{li2016verifiable} uses a Bloom filter to verify whether the keyword really exists in the document set. The time taken for the operation is represented as $T_{bf}$. The random generation and integer addition are ignored. Note that The time of $ Adjust + Test $ shown above is a computational cost that takes file per one index.}
\label{tab:computation_KASE}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\fi
\begin{table*}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c} \hline
& Cui et al. \cite{cui2016key} & Li et al. \cite{li2016verifiable} & Zhou et al.\cite{zhou2018file} & First Construction & Main Construction \\ \hline
\raisebox{0.5em}{$Encrypt$} &\shortstack[l]{$T_{h}+2T_{sm}+T_a+$\\$2T_p+T_{mul}+T_{exp}$} & \shortstack[l]{$T_{h}+2T_{sm}+2T_a+2T_p+$\\$T_{mul}+2T_{exp}+T_{x}+T_{bf}$} & \raisebox{0.5em}{$T_{h}+4T_{sm}+T_a$} & \shortstack[l]{$T_{h}+2T_{sm}+T_a+$\\$2T_p+T_{mul}+T_{exp}$} &\shortstack[l]{$T_{h}+2T_{sm}+T_a+$\\$2T_p+T_{mul}+T_{exp}$} \\ \hline
$Trapdoor$ & $T_{h}+T_a$ & $T_{h}+T_a$ & $T_{h}+3T_{sm}+T_a$ & $T_{h}+T_a$ & $T_{h}+T_a+T_{sm}$ \\ \hline
\raisebox{0.5em}{$Adjust+Test$} & \shortstack[l]{$2|S|\cdot T_{a}+$\\$T_{mul}+2T_{p}$} & \shortstack[l]{$2|S|\cdot T_{a}+$\\$T_{mul}+2T_{p}$} & \shortstack[l]{$2|S|\cdot T_{a}+$\\$2T_{mul}+4T_p$} & \shortstack[l]{$2|S|\cdot T_{a}+$\\$T_{mul}+2T_{p}$} & \shortstack[l]{$6|S|\cdot T_a + 2|S|\cdot T_{mul} + $\\$4T_{sm} + 2T_{exp} +2T_p$} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The computational cost of KASE: The operation time of hash operations, scalar multiplication, point addition, exclusive or in $\mathbb{G}_T$, exponentiation in $\mathbb{G}_T$, multiplication in $\mathbb{G}_T$, and pairing operation are identified as $T_{h},T_{sm},T_a,T_{x},T_{exp},T_{mul},$ and $T_p$, respectively. Li et al. \cite{li2016verifiable} uses a Bloom filter to verify whether the keyword really exists in the document set. The time taken for the operation is represented as $T_{bf}$. The random generation and integer addition are ignored. The time of $ Adjust + Test $ refers to the computational cost that takes file per one index.}
\label{tab:computation_KASE}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c} \hline
& Cui et al. \cite{cui2016key} & Li et al. \cite{li2016verifiable} & Zhou et al.\cite{zhou2018file} & First Construction & Main Construction \\ \hline
encrypted keyword & $2|\mathbb{G}|+|\mathbb{G}_T|$ & $2|\mathbb{G}|+3|\mathbb{G}_T|$ & $3|\mathbb{G}|$ & $2|\mathbb{G}|+|\mathbb{G}_T|$ & $3|\mathbb{G}|+2|\mathbb{G}_T|$ \\ \hline
trapdoor & $|\mathbb{G}|$ & $|\mathbb{G}|$ & $2|\mathbb{G}|$ & $|\mathbb{G}|$ & $|\mathbb{G}|+2|\mathbb{Z}_p^*|$ \\ \hline
aggregate key & $|\mathbb{G}|$ & $|\mathbb{G}|$ & $|\mathbb{G}|$ & $|\mathbb{G}|$ & $|\mathbb{G}|$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The storage cost of KASE: $|\mathbb{G}|, |\mathbb{G}_T|$ refers to the size of $\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{G}_T$.}
\label{tab:cost_KASE}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
The computational cost and the storage size for the first construction are less-than-or-equal to those of the schemes by Cui et al.~\cite{cui2016key} and by Li et al. ~\cite{li2016verifiable} in spite of achieving the provable security, which is an open problem in these works.
Even in the main construction, the computational cost for the Encrypt algorithm is identical to that of the scheme by Cui et al. ~\cite{cui2016key}, and the computational cost for the Trapdoor algorithm is smaller than that of the scheme by Zhou et al.~\cite{zhou2018file}. Although the computational costs for the Adjust and Test algorithms are greater than those of other schemes, the number of scalar multiplications in $\mathbb{G}$ and exponentiations in $\mathbb{G}_T$, whose computations are heavy, are constant with respect to the number of documents. Thus, the computational cost of the main construction can be considered to be practical. Moreover, for the storage cost, in spite of two additional components in $\mathbb{Z}_p$, the storage size is fairly identical to that of the scheme by Zhou et al. In particular, an element in $\mathbb{G}$ is constructed by two integers on an elliptic curve, i.e., $x$-coordinate and $y$-coordinate, whose bit lengths are the same as the bit length of an element in $\mathbb{Z}_p$. Thus, the entire bit length of $2 \mathbb{Z}_p$ is equal to that of $\mathbb{G}$. The main construction can achieve a similar storage size as other works.
As will be discussed in detail in the next subsection, the performance of the proposed schemes described above has been achieved as well as the provable security, which is the open problem in the existing works.
\if0
一般的に、securityはcomputational cost, storage costとトレードオフの関係にある。
Storage cost of our schemes do not have much difference compared with other KASE.
In particular, the size of the aggregate key is the same as other KASE.
Among our schemes, storage cost of Main Construction is larger than that of First Construction.
However, since the increase is suppressed at the constant level, it can be said that it is suppressed at a realistic storage cost while improving security.
\fi
\subsection{Security}
In this section, we discuss the security required in KASE. The results are shown in Table~\ref{tab:security}.
\begin{table*}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c} \hline
& Cui et al. \cite{cui2016key} & Li et al. \cite{li2016verifiable} & Zhou et al.\cite{zhou2018file} & First Construction & Main Construction \\ \hline
Compactness & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ \\ \hline
Keyword Privacy & & & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ \\ \hline
Aggregate key Unforgeability & & & & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ \\ \hline
Trapdoor Privacy & & &$\checkmark$ & & $\checkmark$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The Security of KASE: Checkmark means achievement of the provable security.}
\label{tab:security}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
In Table~\ref{tab:security}, the schemes by Cui et al.~\cite{cui2016key} and by Li et al.~\cite{li2016verifiable} do not satisfy the keyword privacy, the aggregate key unforgeability, and the trapdoor privacy.
On the other hand, the scheme by Zhou et al.~\cite{zhou2018file}, the first construction, and the main construction satisfy the keyword privacy. Although Cui et al. and Li et al. have discussed the keyword privacy informally, their discussions do not include the provable security with reduction algorithms. As a result, the security can be broken through our oracle-based definitions (see the Appendix for details).
Although the scheme by Zhou et al. satisfies the keyword privacy and the trapdoor privacy, it does not satisfy the compactness.
Zhou et al.'s scheme assumes a special situation where a remote sensor device encrypts its sensing data. This requires each sensor device to have an extra key for encryption, and the number of keys increases linearly with respect to the number of sensors when viewed across the system. Thus, the compactness cannot be satisfied. We also note that the scheme by Zhou et al. deals with a problem different from ours. Moreover, the aggregate key unforgeability has not been discussed explicitly in other works.
\section{Introduction}
\label{Introduction}
\subsection{Background}
A cloud storage service provides a solution for storing, accessing, and sharing files over the Internet.
However, such a service may be vulnerable and hence leak stored data without the permission or knowledge of the data owners.
To prevent this leakage, data owners would want to encrypt their files before uploading them to a cloud storage. Searchable encryption~\cite{song2000practical} allows users to search over encrypted data with a chosen keyword without decryption of the encrypted data. Searchable encryption is suitable for a storage of data even in a vulnerable cloud storage service. In particular, even if control of a storage is exploited by an adversary, leakage of the stored data can be prevented by virtue of encrypting the data. To maximize the capabilities of the cloud
and features of cloud storage, data owners should also be able to
share their files to intended recipients. In recent years, several researchers ~\cite{popa2013multi,kiayias2016efficient,hamlin2018multi} created schemes that authorize other users to search over encrypted data, therefore sharing the data without decryption in the multi-user setting as well as encrypted search.
On this background, this paper aims to introduce a scheme that authorizes for search in encrypted data, i.e., the searchability, \textit{efficiently}. More specifically, suppose that a data owner who owns a set of original data can issue a key that enables other users to search in a subset of its encrypted data without decryption. In such setting, the following features are desirable: (1) the data owner issues only a \textit{single short key} that is independent of both the number of encrypted data and the number of users who the encrypted data by the data owner, (2) and the encrypted data can be shared with users \textit{without changing or reproducing the encrypted data}.
These features can make the operations of a cloud storage service efficient because the keys and encrypted data become easier to manage for both a data owner and users. We note that these \textit{features are not implied in previous systems,} namely, multi-user searchable encryption~\cite{bao2008private,hwang2007public,van2015multi,zhao2011multi} and multi-key searchable encryption~\cite{popa2013multi,hamlin2018multi}, which do not include efficient management described above in their scope. Therefore, achieving the features described above is a non-trivial problem.
Cui et al. ~\cite{cui2016key} proposed \textit{key-aggregate searchable encryption (KASE)} for the underlying purpose.
An overview of KASE is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:cloud-assisted_content-sharing_network}. In KASE, a data owner issues aggregate keys that allow data users to search in authorized data only, i.e., data users generate trapdoors to search in encrypted data.
The data sizes of ciphertexts and aggregate keys are independent of the number of data users the ciphertexts will be shared to, and the data size of ciphertexts is independent of the number of users.
Therefore, KASE can improve the efficiency of the operations of a cloud storage service under the problem setting described above.
However, Cui et al. did not provide formal definitions of the security of KASE and its security proofs. Moreover, Kiayias et al. ~\cite{kiayias2016efficient} introduced an attack against the scheme of Cui et al. in which encrypted keywords in ciphertexts are distinguishable for an adversary. To the best of our knowledge, no KASE scheme with formal security definitions and proofs has been introduced, even in subsequent works~\cite{li2018key,li2016verifiable}, making it an open problem.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[clip,width=7.0cm]{cloud-assisted_content-sharing_network.pdf}
\caption{Overview of Key-Aggregate Searchable Encryption (KASE)}
\label{fig:cloud-assisted_content-sharing_network}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Our contributions}
In this paper, we propose KASE schemes with provable security. To the best of our knowledge, these schemes are the first provably secure constructions. We also define a syntax and its security formally. We note that constructing a provably secure KASE scheme is \textit{non-trivial}. As will be described in Section~\ref{sec:difficulty} in details, KASE requires a data owner to control the searchability via only a single short key and without changing ciphertexts for each user. The algebraic structures that can be used to construct a KASE scheme are limited by the use of the single short key and keeping encrypted keywords.
we will newly show that the scheme of Cui et al. becomes insecure under our security definitions.
In contrast, by shedding light on the mathematical features of the cryptographic primitives used to construct KASE, we construct a provably secure KASE scheme by tactically combining the existing instantiations of these cryptographic primitives.
As will be described in Section~\ref{sec:constructions} in details, some instantiations of \textit{broadcast encryption}\cite{boneh2005collusion,fiat1993broadcast} and \textit{aggregate signatures}\cite{boneh2003aggregate} are generally combined as basics. A simple combination called \textit{first construction} can provide \textit{keyword privacy} that guarantees the confidentiality of encrypted keywords and \textit{aggregate key unforgeability} that authorizes the searchability of keywords from a data owner to users. In addition to these two primitives, i.e., achieving the keyword privacy and the aggregate key unforgeability, the use of \textit{secret sharing}~\cite{shamir1979share} can provide \textit{trapdoor privacy} that guarantees the privacy of search for the users. We call the construction with secret sharing as \textit{main construction}.
Notably, computational cost and the size of ciphertexts in the first construction are identical to those of the scheme by Cui et al.~\cite{cui2016key}, but the first construction is provably secure. Considering 5,000 keywords, our two constructions can encrypt all keywords within one second, the first construction can perform search within three seconds, and the main construction can perform search within six seconds. We leave the construction of a generic scheme based on any instantiation of the primitives we used as an open problem.
\subsection{Potential Applications}
KASE has many potential applications. We describe cloud-assisted content-sharing networks with cryptography~\cite{WWD13} and privacy-preserving authenticated communication in smart home environment~\cite{poh2019privhome} as example applications below.
Content sharing networks are networks that are scalable in terms of the number of users, storage size, and network bandwidth. Cloud-assisted content sharing networks with cryptography mainly aim to enable both a service provider and users to control the privacy of data flexibly and scalably. According to Wu et al.~\cite{WWD13}, cloud-assisted content sharing networks with cryptography allows:
(1) an individual to freely produce any number and any kind of online media, such as texts, images, and videos; (2) an individual to grant any access to his/her media to anyone at any time; (3) an individual to reveal a large number of attributes (e.g., age, address, and gender), some of which can be dynamic; and (4) an individual to share contents using various devices and bandwidths, and hence demand different access privileges for the same media.
Wu et al. proposed an instanton of cloud-assisted content sharing networks with cryptography by utilizing attribute-based encryption~\cite{bethencourt2007ciphertext}. However, attribute-based encryption does not provide the searchability for ciphertexts, and hence the content of ciphertexts cannot be searched without decryption. This limitation make may lose the users' attention due to the lack of the searchability for encrypted contents. Moreover, attribute-based encryption requires a trusted third-party to generate secret keys, creating a potential single point of failure in the entire system.
Furthermore, the number of secret keys increases with the number of attributes, and thus the size of a storage and management cost of the keys also increases with the number of users and the management of authorization for content sharing.
In contrast, KASE provides searchability of contents of ciphertexts and a fixed size of keys for both a data owner and users, solving the problems of cloud-assisted content-sharing networks described above. Therefore, KASE is desirable for use in cloud-assisted content-sharing networks.
The privacy-preserving authenticated communication in smart home environment by Poh et al.~\cite{poh2019privhome} is an application where a user can securely utilize smart devices that accumulate private information, such as sleeping patterns and medical information.
Poh et al. realized such an application in the single-user setting by integrating searchable encryption and authenticated key-establishment protocol.
However, smart devices are continuously becoming more popular, and thus the use of smart devices in the multi-user setting should be considered.
For example, in a case with a large number of users, e.g., employees in a workplace, each employee has a separated data access per device. KASE can be used to control access of each employee to devices and their data by the use of a single key. Thus, a more efficient and attractive usage of device management can be expected by virtue of KASE.
\subsection{Related works}
Following the original KASE proposed by Cui et al.~\cite{cui2016key}, many KASE schemes have been proposed in \cite{li2018key,li2016verifiable,mukti2018mulkase}.
We note that the both schemes are essentially the same as the construction by Cui et al. and their security have never been proven. Liu et al. \cite{li2016verifiable} introduced the verifiability of search results, and Li et al. \cite{li2018key} discussed situations with multiple data owners.
Meanwhile, Mukti et al.~\cite{mukti2018mulkase} proposed KASE with multiple data owners and discussed its security formally. Unfortunately, their definitions are incomplete and their proofs are wrong. In particular, in their syntax, any keyword can be searched as long as the keyword is included as a part of ciphertexts, even if its searched documents are the outside of his/her authorized documents. Moreover, in their proposed construction, the bilinear maps are nested for the test algorithm, which is an unworkable setting for bilinear maps.
As a special research alleviating the conditions of KASE, Zhou et al. \cite{zhou2018file} proposed a searchable and secure scheme in the situation where remote sensor devices encrypt data. This scheme individually changes the key for aggregate key issuance and the key for data encryption.
However, this feature raises an issue of increased key management for a data owner.
Patranabis et al. \cite{Patranabis2017key} also considered variants of KASE, but their scheme has no search delegation to other users.
Therefore, the situation that KASE normally handles is different, so it can be said that it is different from the problem dealt with in this paper.
In a framework of conventional searchable encryption, the multi-user setting~\cite{bao2008private,hwang2007public,van2015multi,zhao2011multi,zhang2018efficient,wu2018verifiable} and the multi-key setting~\cite{popa2013multi,hamlin2018multi,wang2017idcrypt} have been known to control the searchability for each document. However, an efficient control of the searchability, such as issuance of aggregate keys which is one of the main problems in KASE, is out of the scope of such settings.
Searchable attribute-based encryption (SABE)~\cite{liang2015searchable,zheng2014vabks,yin2019cp,alrawais2017attribute,wang2018efficiently} is an encryption scheme similar to KASE. SABE is a searchable encryption scheme in which documents corresponding to attributes are searchable for users who own secret keys of the attributes. While SABE provides searchability along with attributes for each document, the size of secret keys depends on the number of attributes, i.e., the key size is linear. This problem in SABE is a different problem from KASE.
As additional related works, key-aggregate cryptosystems~\cite{guo2018key,chu2014kac,patranabis2017kac} outsource the decryption of data. Among them, Patranabis et al.~\cite{patranabis2017kac} showed a provably secure scheme. However, the searchability for ciphertexts is out of the scope in these works.
Since the searchability is not implied generally, constructing a provably secure KASE remains an open problem.
\subsubsection{Paper Organization}
The rest of this paper is organized as follows.
The mathematical background to understanding this work is described in Section~\ref{Preliminaries}, and then a definition of KASE and the technical difficulty in constructing a KASE scheme is presented in Section~\ref{Key Aggregate Searchable Encryption}.
The main idea to overcome the difficulty and the proposed KASE schemes are discussed in Section~\ref{sec:constructions}, and then their security proofs are presented in Section~\ref{Proofs}.
Implementation, evaluation, and analysis are discussed in Section~\ref{Discussion}.
Finally, the conclusion and future direction are presented in Section~\ref{Conclusion}.
\section{Key-Aggregate Searchable Encryption(KASE)} \label{Key Aggregate Searchable Encryption}
In this section, we describe the main problem statement of key-aggregate searchable encryption (KASE)~\cite{cui2016key}.
Then, we newly define a syntax of algorithms and the security for KASE.
These definitions are our contributions.
\subsection{Problem Statement}
In key-aggregate searchable encryption (KASE)~\cite{cui2016key},
a data owner provides a ``single-and-short'' aggregate key that enables a user to access documents for authorization of search.
Each user, which we call data user for the sake of convenience, is given an aggregate key as secret information and then generates a ``single-and-short'' trapdoor to search for a keyword from the documents.
In doing so, the following requirements should be satisfied by KASE:
\begin{itemize}
\item Searchability:
A user can generate trapdoors for any keyword to search in encrypted documents.
\item Compactness:
The size of both aggregate keys and trapdoors should be independent of the number of documents and number of users.
In addition, the size of encrypted keywords should be independent of the number of users.
\item Keyword Privacy:
An adversary cannot extract information about the original keywords from encrypted documents.
That is, a person who does not have an aggregate key corresponding to indexes of the documents cannot get any information from the encrypted keyword.
\item Aggregate Key Unforgeability:
An adversary cannot search for any keyword without authorization from a data owner.
That is, an adversary cannot perform keyword search over the documents that are not related to the known aggregate key and it cannot generate new aggregate keys for other sets of documents from the known keys.
\end{itemize}
These requirements are also shown in the original work of KASE~\cite{cui2016key}.
The compactness and the searchability are functionality for KASE while the keyword privacy and the aggregate key unforgeability are security for KASE.
As described above, the compactness must be satisfied because the main motivation of KASE is to keep aggregate keys and trapdoors short while providing the searchability.
We note that \textit{the size of encrypted keywords may depend on the number of documents} because the data size of the encrypted keywords with respect to the number of users is the out of the scope of efficient.
The keyword privacy is a requirement that prevents an adversary from getting information contained in encrypted documents.
Meanwhile, aggregate key is a new notion required in KASE and has not been discussed in general searchable encryption.
However, because documents outside the scope of authorization should be unsearchable, the aggregate key unforgeability should be discussed. Even if the keyword privacy is satisfied, there is a possibility that an adversary can search documents outside the scope of authorization.
Thus, both the keyword privacy and the aggregate key unforgeability should be discussed.
As another security requirement, the following should be considered:
\begin{itemize}
\item Trapdoor Privacy:
An adversary cannot determine a keyword embedded in the given trapdoor.
That is, even when a user asks an untrusted cloud server to search,
the server cannot obtain the keyword except for the search result.
\end{itemize}
We note that the trapdoor privacy is an additional security requirement,
i.e., only a few schemes~\cite{cao2014privacy,kiayias2016efficient,arriaga2014trapdoor} satisfy the trapdoor privacy even in the conventional searchable encryption.
However, satisfying the trapdoor privacy is an important feature. When keywords embedded in trapdoors are revealed, the original keywords can be analyzed from encrypted documents by looking up the search results.
In other words, if the trapdoor privacy is unsatisfied, then the keyword privacy may be threatened.
Thus, we consider that a KASE scheme should satisfy all requirements described above.
To the best of our knowledge, no provably secure KASE scheme or formal security definitions have been proposed.
Thus, in this paper, we define the requirements above formally.
\subsection{Algorithms}
\label{algorithms}
The algorithms of KASE are defined as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item $params\gets Setup(1^\lambda,n)$:
This algorithm is run by a cloud service provider to set up the scheme.
On input of a security parameter $1^\lambda$ and the maximum number $n$ of possible documents owned by a data owner,
the algorithm outputs a public parameter $params$.
\item $sk\gets KeyGen(params)$:
This algorithm is run by a data owner to generate a secret key $sk$.
\item $c_{i,l}\gets Encrypt(params, sk, i, w_l)$:
This algorithm is run by a data owner to encrypt a keyword which belongs to the $i$th document and generate an encrypted keyword.
On input of the data owner's secret key $sk$, an document index $i$ and a keyword $w_l\in \mathcal{KS}$
where $\mathcal{KS}$ is a keyword space,
the algorithm outputs an encrypted keyword $c_{i,l}$.
\item $k_{agg}\gets Extract(params, sk,S)$:
This algorithm is run by a data owner to generate an aggregate key for delegating the keyword search capability for
a certain set of documents to other data users.
On input of the data owner's secret key $sk$ and a set $S$ of indexes of documents,
the algorithm outputs an aggregate key $k_{agg}$.
\item $Tr\gets Trapdoor(params, k_{agg},S,w_l)$:
This algorithm is run by a data user who performs the keyword search.
On input of an aggregate key $k_{agg}$ and a keyword $w_l$, the algorithm outputs a single trapdoor $Tr$.
\item $Tr_i\gets Adjust(params, i,S,Tr,\{f_{1,i}\}_{i\in [1,m_1]})$:
This algorithm is run by a cloud server to adjust the given aggregate trapdoor for each document.
On input of a set $S$ of indexes of documents, the index $i$ of the target document, an aggregate trapdoor $Tr$ and auxiliary functions $\{f_{i}\}_{i\in [1,m_1]}(m_1 \in \mathbb{N})$ possibly,
the algorithm outputs each trapdoor $Tr_i$ for the $i$th target document in $S$.
\item $b\gets Test(params, Tr_i,S,c_{i,l},\{f_{2,i}\}_{i\in [1,m_2]})$:
This algorithm is run by a cloud server to perform keyword search over an encrypted document.
On input of a trapdoor $Tr_i$, the document index $i$ and auxiliary functions $\{f_{i}\}_{i\in [1,m_2]}(m_2 \in \mathbb{N})$ possibly,
the algorithm outputs $true$ or $false$ to denote whether the $i$th document contains
the keyword $w_l$.
\end{itemize}
We note that the syntax above represents a multi-server setting that includes multiple cloud servers. The syntax can contain multiple servers by setting auxiliary functions separately for each cloud server in the Adjust and Test algorithms.
We define the correctness of the syntax of KASE as follows:
\begin{defi}[Correctness]
For any document
containing the keyword $w_l$ with index $i \in S$,
We say that a KASE scheme satisfies the correctness if the following statement holds:
for all $1^\lambda, n\in \mathbb{N}, i \in [1,n], w_l\in \mathcal{KS}$, when a public parameter $params\gets Setup(1^\lambda,n)$ and a secret key $sk\gets KeyGen(params), c_{i,l}\gets Encrypt(params, sk,i,w_l)$ are used, $Test(params, Tr_i, S,c_{i,l},\{f_{2,i}\}_{i\in [1,m_2]})= true$ if $Tr \gets Trapdoor(params, k_{agg},S,w_l)$ and $Tr_i\gets Adjust(params, i, S, Tr,\{f_{1,i}\}_{i\in [1,m_1]})$.
\end{defi}
The correctness defined above imposes the searchability of KASE because the correctness guarantees that a data user can search for any keyword without decryption. Moreover, the syntax described above is identical to the abstraction of the algorithms proposed in the original work of KASE~\cite{cui2016key} except that the symmetric key setting instead of the public key setting in~\cite{cui2016key}.
We define the compactness of KASE as follows:
\begin{defi}[Compactness]
We say that KASE satisfies the compactness if the sizes of both aggregate keys and trapdoors are independent of the number $n$ of encrypted documents and the number $m$ of data users, i.e., $\mathcal{O}(1)$ with respect to $n$ and $m$, and the size of encrypted keywords is independent of $m$, i.e., $\mathcal{O}(n)$ with respect to $n$ and $m$.
\end{defi}
\subsection{Security Definitions}
\label{security_definitions}
In this section, we define three security requirements for KASE, namely, the keyword privacy, the aggregate key unforgeability, and the trapdoor privacy.
The security requirements are defined by the following game between an adversary $\mathcal{A}$ and a
challenger $\mathcal{C}$.
For each game,
both $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{A}$ are given $(1^\lambda,n)$ as input,
$\mathcal{A}$ is allowed to get aggregate keys, encrypted keywords, and trapdoors in the query phase by accessing the key extraction oracle $\mathcal{O}_{Extract}$, the encryption oracle $\mathcal{O}_{Encrypt}$, and the trapdoor oracle $\mathcal{O}_{Trapdoor}$, respectively.
In particular, $\mathcal{A}$ accesses each oracle as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathcal{O}_{Extract}$: by taking $S\subseteq [1,n]$ as input, return $k_{agg}\gets Extract(params,sk,S)$.
\item $\mathcal{O}_{Encrypt}$: by taking $i\in [1,n],w_l\in \mathcal{KS}$ as input, return $c_{i,l}\gets Encrypt(params,sk,i,w_l)$.
\item $\mathcal{O}_{Trapdoor}$: by taking $S\subseteq [1,n], w_l \in \mathcal{KS}$ as input, return $Tr\gets Trapdoor(params,Extract(params,sk,S),\\S,w_l)$.
\end{itemize}
\begin{defi}[$(\epsilon,n)$-Keyword Privacy]
In this game, an adversary $\mathcal{A}$ tries to distinguish a challenge keyword or a random keyword from a challenge encrypted keyword.
\begin{itemize}
\item Init:
$\mathcal{A}$ declares the index $i^* \in [1,n]$ of a challenge document used in the guess phase and sends it to $\mathcal{C}$.
\item Setup:
$\mathcal{C}$ generates $params\gets Setup(1^\lambda,n)$ and $sk\gets KeyGen (params)$, and sends $params$ to $\mathcal{A}$.
\item Query:
$\mathcal{A}$ can query to $\mathcal{O}_{Extract}$ at most $n-1$ times\footnote{If $\mathcal{A}$ can access to $\mathcal{O}_{Extract}$ more than $n$ times, $\mathcal{A}$ can generate trapdoors for every index. $\mathcal{A}$ can trivially break any scheme without loss of generality. The restriction is also necessary for the remaining definitions.} and can query to $\mathcal{O}_{Encrypt}$ at arbitrary times.
Here, when $\mathcal{A}$ queries to $\mathcal{O}_{Extract}$, it imposes the constraint $S\subseteq [1,n]\setminus \{i^*\}$.
\item Guess:
$\mathcal{A}$ declares a challenge keyword $w_{l^*}$ and sends it to $\mathcal{C}$.
$\mathcal{C}$ randomly chooses $\theta \in \{0,1\}$.
If $\theta=0$, then $\mathcal{C}$ sets $w_\theta=w_{l^*}$.
Otherwise, i.e., $\theta=1$, $\mathcal{C}$ sets a random keyword as $w_\theta$, where $|w_0|=|w_1|$.
$\mathcal{C}$ sends $c_{i^*,\theta}\gets Encrypt(params,sk,i^*,w_\theta)$ to $\mathcal{A}$.
$\mathcal{A}$ then selects $\theta'\in \{0,1\}$.
\end{itemize}
We say KASE satisfies the $(\epsilon,n)$-keyword privacy if the following relation holds for $\mathcal{A}$'s advantage with any probabilistic polynomial time algorithm and $1^\lambda$ with any sufficiently large size:
\[
Adv:=|Pr[\theta=\theta']-1/2|<\epsilo
\]
\end{defi}
\begin{defi}[$(\epsilon,n)$-Aggregate Key Unforgeability]
In this game, an adversary $\mathcal{A}$ tries to forge a valid aggregate key where $\mathcal{A}$ can search encrypted documents with the aggregate key.
\begin{itemize}
\item Setup:
$\mathcal{C}$ randomly chooses $i^*\in [1,n]$.
$\mathcal{C}$ generates $params\gets Setup(1^\lambda,n)$ and $sk\gets KeyGen (params)$, and then sends $params,i^*$ to $\mathcal{A}$.
\item Query:
$\mathcal{A}$ can query to $\mathcal{O}_{Extract}$ at most $n-1$ times and can query to $\mathcal{O}_{Encrypt}$ at arbitrary times.
Here, when $\mathcal{A}$ queries to $\mathcal{O}_{Extract}$, it imposes the constraint $i^* \not\in S$.
\item Forge:
$\mathcal{A}$ outputs $S^*\subseteq [1,n]$ and $k_{agg}^*$,
where $S^*$ includes $i^*$, i.e., $i^*\in S^*$.
\end{itemize}
We say KASE satisfies the $(\epsilon,n)$-aggregate key unforgeability if the following relation holds for $\mathcal{A}$'s advantage with any probabilistic polynomial time algorithm, keyword $w_l$ and $1^\lambda$ with any sufficiently large size:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
Adv:=Pr[Test(params,Adjust(params,i^*,S^*, \nonumber \\
Trapdoor(params,k^*_{agg},S^*,w_l)))=Test(params, \nonumber \\
Adjust(params,i^*,S^*,Trapdoor(params,Extract\nonumber \\
(params, sk,S^*),S^*,w_l)))]<\epsilon \nonumber
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\end{defi}
\begin{defi}[$(\epsilon,n)$-Trapdoor Privacy]
In this game, an adversary $\mathcal{A}$ tries to distinguish a challenge keyword or a random keyword from the given challenge trapdoor.
\begin{itemize}
\item Init:
$\mathcal{A}$ declares a set $S^* \subseteq [1,n]$ of indexes and a challenge keyword $w_{l^*}$ used in the guess phase, and sends it to $\mathcal{C}$.
\item Setup:
$\mathcal{C}$ generates $params\gets Setup(1^\lambda,n)$ and $sk\gets KeyGen (params)$, and then sends $params$ to $\mathcal{A}$.
\item Query:
$\mathcal{A}$ can query to $\mathcal{O}_{Trapdoor}$ at most $n-|S^*|$ times and can query to $\mathcal{O}_{Encrypt}$ at arbitrary times.
Here, when $\mathcal{A}$ queries to $\mathcal{O}_{Encrypt}$, it imposes the constraint $w_l \not= w_{l^*} \land i \not\in S^*$.
\item Guess:
$\mathcal{C}$ randomly chooses $\theta \in \{0,1\}$.
If $\theta=0$ then $\mathcal{C}$ sets $w_\theta=w_{l^*}$.
Otherwise, i.e., $\theta=1$, $\mathcal{C}$ sets a random keyword as $w_\theta$, where $|w_0|=|w_1|$ holds.
$\mathcal{C}$ sends $Tr^*\gets Trapdoor(params,k_{agg}^*,S^*,w_{\theta})$ to $\mathcal{A}$.
$\mathcal{A}$ then selects $\theta'\in \{0,1\}$.
\end{itemize}
We say KASE satisfies the $(\epsilon,n)$-trapdoor privacy if the following relation holds for $\mathcal{A}$'s advantage with any probabilistic polynomial time algorithm and $1^\lambda$ with any sufficiently large size:
\[
Adv:=|Pr[\theta=\theta' ]-1/2|<\epsilon
\]
\end{defi}
\subsection{Technical Difficulty}
\label{sec:difficulty}
Although one might think that the conventional searchable encryption~\cite{song2000practical,curtmola2011searchable,kamara2013parallel} can perform the same search as KASE, the number of secret keys possessed to a data user and the number of trapdoors are proportional to the number of documents stored in cloud.
Thus, the compactness cannot be satisfied.
The intuition of KASE's difficulty lies in the trade-off between security and features.
That is, there is a possibility that security cannot be satisfied if the focus is only satisfying the compactness.
In the case of KASE, the algebraic structure is limited because the sizes of aggregate key and trapdoor need to be $\mathcal{O}(1)$ regardless of the number of documents and the number of users.
Therefore, potential configurations that satisfy searchability are limited, and it has been shown that the KASE scheme of Cui et al. does not satisfy keyword privacy~\cite{kiayias2016efficient}.
Furthermore, for the trapdoor privacy, the aggregate key must already have a concrete algebraic structure, and thus a trapdoor that uses only the aggregate key necessarily has more restrictive algebraic structures.
This makes the trapdoor privacy even more difficult to satisfy. The KASE scheme of Cui et al. also does not satisfy the trapdoor privacy (see the Appendix for details).
\section{Preliminaries} \label{Preliminaries}
In this section, we present the background to groups with bilinear maps and their security assumptions.
\subsection{Bilinear maps}
\label{bilinear_maps}
The proposed schemes are based on bilinear maps and bilinear groups.
In this paper, we recall the standard description defined in~\cite{joux2000one}.
Here, let $\mathbb{G}$, $\mathbb{H}$, and $\mathbb{G}_T$ be groups with the same prime order $p$.
We then define bilinear groups $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ and bilinear maps $e:\mathbb{G}\times \mathbb{H}\to \mathbb{G}_T$ as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Bilinear groups $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ are two cyclic groups with a prime order $p$.
\item $g\in \mathbb{G}$ and $h \in \mathbb{H}$ are generators of $\mathbb{G}$ and $\mathbb{H}$, respectively.
\item A bilinear map $e:\mathbb{G}\times \mathbb{H} \to \mathbb{G}_T$ is a map with the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Bilinearity. For any value $u\in \mathbb{G}$, $v \in \mathbb{H}$ and $a,b\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$, $e(u^a,v^b)=e(u,v)^{ab}$ holds.
\item Non-degeneracy. $e(g,h)\not=1$ holds, where $1$ means an identity element over $\mathbb{G}_T$.
\item Computability. For any value $u\in \mathbb{G}$ and $h \in \mathbb{H}$, $e(u,v)$ can be calculated efficiently.
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
When $\mathbb{G} = \mathbb{H}$, bilinear groups are said to be \textit{symmetric} and denoted by $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ for the sake of convenience.
Likewise, $\mathbb{G} \neq \mathbb{H}$, bilinear groups are said to be \textit{asymmetric} and denoted by $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$.
\subsection{Complexity Assumptions}
\label{complexity_assumptoins}
In this section, we define security assumptions utilized in the proposed schemes.
\subsubsection{BDHE Assumption in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{G}_T)$}
The bilinear Diffie-Hellman exponentiation (BDHE) assumption in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ is an assumption introduced by Boneh et al.~\cite{boneh2005collusion}.
\begin{defi}[$(\epsilon, l)$-BDHE Assumption in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{G}_T)$]
We say the $l$-BDHE problem in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ with a security parameter $1^k$ as,
for a given $(g,h,g^\alpha,g^{\alpha^2},...,g^{\alpha^l},g^{\alpha^{l+2}},...,g^{\alpha^{2l}}, Z)$ with uniformly random $(g,h)\in \mathbb{G}$, $\alpha\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$ and $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ as input,
determining whether $Z\in \mathbb{G}_T$ is $e(g^{\alpha^{l+1}},h)$ or a random value $R$.
We say that a polynomial time algorithm $\mathcal{A}$ can solve the $l$-BDHE problem in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ with an advantage $\epsilon$ if the following relation holds:
\begin{eqnarray}
|Pr[\mathcal{A}(g,h,\bm{y}_{g,\alpha,l},e(g^{\alpha^{l+1}},h), \mathbb{G}, \mathbb{G}_T)=0]\nonumber \\
-Pr[\mathcal{A}(g,h,\bm{y}_{g,\alpha,l},R, \mathbb{G}, \mathbb{G}_T)=0]|\ge \epsilon, \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\bm{y}_{g,\alpha,l}=(g^\alpha,g^{\alpha^2},...,g^{\alpha^l},g^{\alpha^{l+2}},...,g^{\alpha^{2l}})$.
We say the $(\epsilon, l)$-BDHE assumption holds in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ if there is no polynomial-time algorithm that can solve the $l$-BDHE problem in $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ with $\epsilon$.
\end{defi}
\subsubsection{DHE Assumption in $\mathbb{G}$}
The Diffie-Hellman exponentiation (DHE) assumption in $\mathbb{G}$ is an assumption introduced by Herranz et al.~\cite{herranz2012short}.
\begin{defi}[$(\epsilon, l)$-DHE Assumption in $\mathbb{G}$]
We say the $l$-DHE problem with a security parameter $1^k$ as,
for a given $(g,g^\alpha,g^{\alpha^2},...,g^{\alpha^l},g^{\alpha^{l+2}},...,g^{\alpha^{2l}})$ with uniformly random $g\in \mathbb{G}$, $\alpha\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$ and $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ as input,
computing $g^{\alpha^{l+1}}$.
We say that a polynomial time algorithm $\mathcal{A}$ can solve the $l$-DHE problem in $\mathbb{G}$ with an advantage $\epsilon$ if the following relation holds:
\[
Pr[\mathcal{A}(g,\bm{y}_{g,\alpha,l},g^{\alpha^{l+1}}, \mathbb{G}, \mathbb{G}_T)]\ge \epsilon,
\]
where $\bm{y}_{g,\alpha,l}=(g^\alpha,g^{\alpha^2},...,g^{\alpha^l},g^{\alpha^{l+2}},...,g^{\alpha^{2l}})$.
We say the $(\epsilon, l)$-DHE assumption holds in $\mathbb{G}$ if there is no polynomial-time algorithm that can solve the $l$-DHE problem in $\mathbb{G}$ with $\epsilon$.
\end{defi}
\subsubsection{XDH Assumption in $(\mathbb{G},\mathbb{H})$}
The external Diffie-Hellman (XDH) assumption in $(\mathbb{G},\mathbb{H})$ is an assumption introduced in~\cite{ateniese2005untraceable,ballard2005correlation}.
Note that, unlike the BDHE assumption and the DHE assumption described above, the XDH assumption holds on only \textit{asymmetric} bilinear groups $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$.
\begin{defi}[$\epsilon$-XDH Assumption in $(\mathbb{G},\mathbb{H})$]
We say the XDH problem in $(\mathbb{G},\mathbb{H})$ as,
for a given $(g,h,g^a,g^b,Z)$ with uniformly random $g\in \mathbb{G}, h\in \mathbb{H}$, $(a,b)\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$ and $(\mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)$ as input,
determining whether $Z\in \mathbb{G}$ is $g^{ab}$ or is a random value $R$.
We say that a polynomial time algorithm $\mathcal{A}$ can solve XDH problem in $(\mathbb{G},\mathbb{H})$ with advantage $\epsilon$ if the following relation holds:
\begin{eqnarray}
|Pr[\mathcal{A}(g,h,g^a,g^b,g^{ab}, \mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)=0]\nonumber \\
-Pr[\mathcal{A}(g,h,g^a,g^b,R, \mathbb{G}, \mathbb{H}, \mathbb{G}_T)=0]|\ge \epsilon. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
We say $\epsilon$-XDH assumption holds in $(\mathbb{G},\mathbb{H})$ if there is no polynomial-time algorithm that can solve the XDH problem in $(\mathbb{G},\mathbb{H})$ with $\epsilon$.
\end{defi}
\section{Security Proofs} \label{Proofs}
In this section, we will show the security proofs of the first construction and main construction. The security of the main construction is proved in the two-server setting because it uses to servers.
The proof statement is consistent with the security definitions because our definitions have captured the multi-server setting by applying an auxiliary function individually for each server.
\subsection{Proofs of the First Construction} \label{Proof of First Construction}
The first construction satisfies the $(\epsilon',n)$-keyword privacy and the $(\epsilon',n)$-aggregate key unforgeability.
In this section, we prove these two securities.
\begin{theo}[$(\epsilon',n)$-Keyword Privacy]
The first construction satisfies the $(\epsilon',n)$-keyword privacy under the $(\epsilon,n)$-BDHE Assumption, where $\epsilon\geq\epsilon'$.
\end{theo}
$Proof.$
Suppose there exists an adversary $\mathcal{A}$, whose advantage is $\epsilon'$, against the first construction.
We then build an algorithm $\mathcal{B}$ that solves the BDHE problem.
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a challenger for the BDHE problem.
Algorithm $\mathcal{B}$ proceeds as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item Init:
$\mathcal{A}$ declares challenge file index $i^* \in [1,n]$ and sends it to $\mathcal{C}$.
\item Setup:
$\mathcal{C}$ sends $(g,h,g_1,g_2,...,g_n,g_{n+2},...,g_{2n},Z)$ to $\mathcal{B}$.
$\mathcal{B}$ randomly generates $sk=\beta$ and calculates $v'=g^\beta g_{i^*}^{-1}$.
$\mathcal{B}$ sends $params=(g,g_1,g_2,...,g_n,g_{n+2},...,g_{2n})$ to $\mathcal{A}$.
\item Query:
When $\mathcal{A}$ queries for $\mathcal{O}_{Extract}$, $\mathcal{B}$ responds as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item
If an aggregate key for $i^* \in S$ is queried, return $\bot$.
\item
If an aggregate key for $i^* \not\in S$ is queried, return $k_{agg}=(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^{\beta}) \cdot (\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j+i^*})^{-1}=\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^{\beta - \alpha^{i^*}}$.
If $j=i^*$, $(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j+i^*})^{-1}$ cannot be calculated, but it can be calculated because of $i^* \not\in S$.
\end{itemize}
When $\mathcal{A}$ queries for $\mathcal{O}_{Encrypt}$, $\mathcal{B}$ randomly generates $t_{i,l}\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$, calculates the following $c_{i,l}=(c_{1,i,l},c_{2,i,l},c_{3,i,l})$ and responds to $\mathcal{A}$ ($c_{1,i,l}=g^{t_{i,l}},c_{2,i,l}=(v' \cdot g_i)^{t_{i,l}} ,c_{3,i,l}=\frac{e(H(w_{l}),g)^{t_{i,l}}}{e(g_1,g_n)^{t_{i,l}}}$).
\item Guess:
$\mathcal{A}$ declares the challenge keyword $w_{l^*}$ and sends it to $\mathcal{B}$.
$\mathcal{B}$ calculates the challenge encrypted keyword $c_{1,i^*,\theta}=h,c_{2,i^*,\theta}=h^\beta ,c_{3,i^*,\theta}=\frac{e(H(w_{l^*}),h)}{Z}$.
Here, we define $h=g^t$ ($t$ is a random value).
Then, when $Z=e(g_{n+1},h)$, $c_{1,i^*,\theta}=g^t=h ,c_{2,i^*,\theta}=((g^\beta g_{i^*}^{-1})\cdot g_{i^*})^t=g^{\beta t}=h^\beta, c_{3,i^*,\theta}=\frac{e(H(w_{l^*}),g)^t}{e(g_1,g_n)^t}=\frac{e(H(w_{l^*}),h)}{e(g_{n+1},h)}=\frac{e(H(w_{l^*}),h)}{Z}$.
Therefore, the calculation results are identical to the results of the Encrypt algorithm of the first construction.
$\mathcal{B}$ sends $c_{i^*,\theta}=(c_{1,i^*,\theta},c_{2,i^*,\theta},c_{3,i^*,\theta})$ to $\mathcal{A}$.
$\mathcal{A}$ chooses $\theta'\in \{0,1\}$ and sends it to $\mathcal{B}$.
Then, $\mathcal{B}$ sends $\theta'$ to $\mathcal{C}$ as a guess of $\theta$.
\end{itemize}
In the guess phase, if $Z$ is a random value, then $\Pr[\theta=\theta']=1/2$.
On the other hand, if $Z=e(g_{n+1},h)$, then $|\Pr[\theta=\theta']-1/2|>\epsilon'$.
This indicates that $\mathcal{B}$ has an advantage over $\epsilon'$ for solving the $(\epsilon,n)$-BDHE problem.
Thus, if the $(\epsilon,n)$-BDHE assumption holds, the first construction satisfies the $(\epsilon',n)$-keyword privacy.
\begin{theo}[$(\epsilon',n)$-Aggregate key Unforgeability]
The first construction satisfies the $(\epsilon',n)$-aggregate key unforgeability under the $(\epsilon,n)$-DHE Assumption, where $\epsilon=\epsilon'$.
\end{theo}
$Proof.$
Suppose there exists as adversary $\mathcal{A}$, whose advantage is $\epsilon'$, against the first construction.
We then build an algorithm $\mathcal{B}$ that solves the DHE problem.
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a challenger for the DHE problem.
Algorithm $\mathcal{B}$ proceeds as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item Setup:
$\mathcal{C}$ sends $(g,g^{\alpha},g^{\alpha^2},...,g^{\alpha^n},g^{\alpha^{n+2}},...,g^{\alpha^{2n}})$ to $\mathcal{B}$.
$\mathcal{B}$ randomly generates $sk=\beta$ and calculates $v'=g^\beta g_{i^*}^{-1}$.
$\mathcal{B}$ sends $params=(g,g_1,g_2,...,g_n,g_{n+2},...,g_{2n})$ to $\mathcal{A}$.
\item Query:
When $\mathcal{A}$ queries for $\mathcal{O}_{Extract}$, $\mathcal{B}$ responds as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item
If an aggregate key for $i^* \in S$ is queried, return $\bot$.
\item
If an aggregate key for $i^* \not\in S$ is queried, return $k_{agg}=(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^{\beta}) \cdot (\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j+i^*})^{-1}=\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^{\beta - \alpha^{i^*}}$.
Here, if $j=i^*$, then $(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j+i^*})^{-1}$ cannot be calculated, but it can be calculated because of $i^* \not\in S$.
\end{itemize}
When $\mathcal{A}$ queries for $\mathcal{O}_{Encrypt}$, $\mathcal{B}$ randomly generates $t_{i,l}\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$, calculates $c_{i,l}=(c_{1,i,l},c_{2,i,l},c_{3,i,l})$ and responds to $\mathcal{A}$ ($c_{1,i,l}=g^{t_{i,l}},c_{2,i,l}=(v' \cdot g_i)^{t_{i,l}} ,c_{3,i,l}=\frac{e(H(w_{l}),g)^{t_{i,l}}}{e(g_1,g_n)^{t_{i,l}}}$).
\item Forge:
$\mathcal{A}$ outputs $S^*,k_{agg}^*$ and sends them to $\mathcal{B}$.
\begin{itemize}
\item If $i^*\not\in S^*$, abort
\item If $i^*\in S^*$, $k_{agg}^*=(\Pi_{j\in S,j\not= i^*}g_{n+1-j})^{\beta -\alpha^{i^*}}\cdot (g_{n+1-i^*})^{\beta- \alpha^{i^*}}$.
By using this $k_{agg}^*$, $\mathcal{B}$ calculates (\ref{aggregate_key_forge}) and outputs results.
\begin{table*}[tbp] \centering
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\frac{(\Pi_{j\in S^*,j\not= i^*}g_{n+1-j})^\beta \cdot (\Pi_{j\in S^* ,j\not= i^*}g_{n+1-j+i^*})^{-1} \cdot (g_{n+1-i^*})^\beta}{k_{agg}^*} \nonumber \\
&=&\frac{(\Pi_{j\in S^*,j\not= i^*}g_{n+1-j})^\beta \cdot (\Pi_{j\in S^* ,j\not= i^*}g_{n+1-j+i^*})^{-1} \cdot (g_{n+1-i^*})^\beta}{(\Pi_{j\in S^*,j\not= i^*}g_{n+1-j})^\beta \cdot (\Pi_{j\in S^*,j\not= i^*}g_{n+1-j})^{-\alpha^{i^*}}\cdot (g_{n+1-i^*})^\beta \cdot (g_{n+1-i^*})^{-\alpha^{i^*}}}
=(g_{n+1-i^*})^{\alpha^{i^*}}
=g^{\alpha^{n+1-i^*+i^*}}
=g^{\alpha^{n+1}}
\label{aggregate_key_forge}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{table*}
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
The result in the above $(\epsilon',n)$-aggregate key unforgeability game is identical to the answer of the $(\epsilon,n)$-DHE problem.
That is, the advantage of the $(\epsilon',n)$-aggregate key unforgeability game is equal to the advantage of the $(\epsilon,n)$-DHE problem.
Thus, if the $(\epsilon,n)$-DHE assumption holds, the first construction satisfies the $(\epsilon',n)$-aggregate key unforgeability.
\subsection{Proofs of the Main Construction}
In this section, we prove that the main construction satisfies the $(\epsilon',n)$-trapdoor privacy.
Note that the $(\epsilon',n)$-keyword privacy and the $(\epsilon',n)$-aggregate key unforgeability can be proved similarly to the proofs for the first construction except for the use security assumptions in asymmetric bilinear groups (see the Appendix for details).
As described in the previous section, the main construction is based on two servers.
In our security proof, a challenge ciphertext and a challenge trapdoor for both $\mathcal{C}_{main}$ and $\mathcal{C}_{aid}$ are simulated by a reduction algorithm.
\begin{theo}[$(\epsilon',n)$-Trapdoor Privacy]
Let a hash function $H$ be modeled as a random oracle.
The main construction satisfies the $(\epsilon',n)$-trapdoor privacy under the $\epsilon$-XDH assumption, where $\epsilon\geq\epsilon'$.
\end{theo}
$Proof.$
Suppose there exists as adversary $\mathcal{A}$, whose advantage is $\epsilon'$, against the main construction.
We then build an algorithm $\mathcal{B}$ that solves the XDH problem.
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a challenger for the XDH problem.
Algorithm $\mathcal{B}$ proceeds as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item Init:
$\mathcal{A}$ declares challenge file index set $S^* \subseteq U$ and challenge keyword $w_{l^*}$ and sends them to $\mathcal{C}$.
\item Setup:
$\mathcal{C}$ sends $(g,h,g^a,g^b,Z)$ to $\mathcal{B}$.
$\mathcal{B}$ randomly generates $\alpha, \omega, r'_{main}\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$ and calculates $g_i=g^{\alpha^i}(i\in \{1,2,...,n,n+2,...,2n\}), h_i=h^{\alpha^i}(i\in [1,n+1])$.
$\omega$ is used to generate both a response from the random oracle $H$ and the challenge trapdoor. Simultaneously, $r'_{main}$ corresponds to $r_{main}$ of the challenge trapdoor.
In this proof, the random value $r$ of challenge trapdoor is mapped to the challenge $a$ of $g^a$. In doing so, calculating $r'_{aid}=a-r'_{main}$ is necessary in accordance with the Trapdoor algorithm. However, since $\mathcal{B}$ does not know $a$, $\mathcal{B}$ cannot calculate $r'_{aid}$ itself.
Then, instead of calculating $r'_{aid}$ as behavior for $\mathcal{C}_{aid}$ in the challenge phase, $\mathcal{B}$ calculates the value including $r'_{aid}$ as $\mathcal{C}_{aid}$. Specifically, $\mathcal{B}$ calculates $g^a \cdot g^{-r'_{main}}=g^{a- r'_{main}}=g^{r'_{aid}}$ and generates the value including $g^{r'_{aid}}$ as the behavior of $\mathcal{C}_{aid}$.
This implicitly means that, in the main construction, $\mathcal{C}_{aid}$, who receives $r_{aid}$, embeds $r_{aid}$ in $e(c_{2,i,l},pub),pub_i$ and $c_{3,i,l}$ in the Adjust and Test algorithms.
To execute the Adjust and Test algorithms correctly for the challenge trapdoor, $\mathcal{C}_{aid}$ is also considered to use the following values:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
pub^*=\Pi_{j\in S^*}h_{n+1-j}, \\
pub^*_i=\Pi_{j\in S^*,j\not= i}(g^{r'_{aid}})^{\alpha^{n+1-j+i}}(i\in S^*). \nonumber
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Next, $\mathcal{B}$ calculates the following values:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
c'^\#_{2,i,l}=(Z\cdot g^{b r'_{main}})\cdot (g^{r'_{aid}})^{\alpha^i}(i\in S^*), \\
A_i=e(c'^\#_{2,i,l},pub^*), \\
B=\frac{e((g^{r'_{aid}})^\omega, h)}{e(g^{r'_{aid}},h_{n+1})}=(\frac{e(g^\omega, h)}{e(g_1,h_n)})^{r'_{aid}}. \nonumber
\end{array}
\end{equation}
These values are used to calculate encrypted keywords, which satisfy the correctness for the challenge trapdoor.
$\mathcal{B}$ sends $params=(g,g_1,g_2,...,g_n,g_{n+2},...,g_{2n},h,h_1,h_2,...,h_n)$ to $\mathcal{A}$.
Here, $\mathcal{B}$ does not know $sk=b$ because it is a part of the secret of the challenge.
\item Hash:
When $\mathcal{A}$ queries for random oracle model, $\mathcal{B}$ responds as follows.
Note that $\mathcal{B}$ has a hash list $L(w_l,y_l)$.
In the initial state, $L$ is an empty set.
\begin{itemize}
\item
If $w_l$ is in $L$, return the corresponding $y_l$ stored in $L$.
\item
If $w_l$ is not in $L$, setting $y_l$ as follows, add $(w_l,y_l)$ to $L$ and return $y_l$.
\begin{itemize}
\item
If $w_l=w_{l^*}$, let $y_l=g^{\omega}$.
\item
If $w_l\not=w_{l^*}$, choose $x \in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$ uniformly randomly and let $ y_l = g ^ {x} $.
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\item Query:
If $\mathcal{A}$ queries for $\mathcal{O}_{Encrypt}$, $\mathcal{B}$ returns as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item
If $\mathcal{A}$ queries for a keyword which satisfies $w_l = w_{l^*} \lor i \in S^*$, return $\bot$.
\item
If $\mathcal{A}$ queries for a keyword which satisfies $w_l \not= w_{l^*} \land i \not\in S^*$, randomly generate $t_{i,l} \in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$ and return $c_{i,l}=(c_{1,i,l},c_{2,i,l},c_{3,i,l})$
($c_{1,i,l}=h^{t_{i,l}} ,c_{2,i,l}=(g^b \cdot g_i)^{t_{i,l}} ,c_{3,i,l}=\frac{e(H(w_l),h)^{t_{i,l}}}{e(g_1,h_n)^{t_{i,l}}}$)
\end{itemize}
If $\mathcal{A}$ queries for $\mathcal{O}_{Trapdoor}$, $\mathcal{B}$ randomly generate $r\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$ and calculate $Tr=(\Pi_{j\in S}(g^b)^{\alpha^{n+1-j}} \cdot H(w_l))^r=(\Pi_{j\in S}g_{n+1-j}^b \cdot H(w_l))^r$.
Then, $\mathcal{B}$ randomly generates $r_{main}\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$ and calculates $r_{aid}=r-r_{main}$.
$\mathcal{B}$ returns $(Tr,r_{main})$ to $\mathcal{A}$.
\item Guess:
$\mathcal{B}$ calculates the challenge trapdoor as $Tr^*=\Pi_{j\in S^*}Z^{\alpha^{n+1-j}} \cdot (g^a)^\omega$.
At this time, if $Z=g^{ab}$, $Tr=\Pi_{j\in S^*}(g^{ab})^{\alpha^{n+1-j}} \cdot (g^a)^\omega=(\Pi_{j\in S^*}g^b_{n+1-j} \cdot g^\omega)^a$ holds.
From the simulation of the hash phase, $H(w_{l^*})=g^{\omega}$ holds, and therefore $Tr=(\Pi_{j\in S^*}g^b_{n+1-j} \cdot H(w_{l^*}))^a$ holds.
Therefore, $Tr$ has the same distribution as that calculated by the Trapdoor algorithm in the main construction.
$\mathcal{B}$ sends $Tr^*$ and $r'_{main}$ to $\mathcal{A}$.
$\mathcal{A}$ then chooses $\theta'\in\{0,1\}$ and returns it to $\mathcal{B}$.
Finally, $\mathcal{B}$ returns the received $\theta'$ to $\mathcal{C}$ as a guess of $\theta$.
\end{itemize}
Note that if $Z=g^{ab}$, not only the trapdoor generated in the query phase but also the challenge trapdoor satisfies the correctness.
In the guess phase, if $Z$ is a random value, then $Pr[\theta=\theta']=1/2$.
On the other hand, if $Z=g^{ab}$, then $|Pr[\theta=\theta']-1/2|=Adv>\epsilon'$.
This indicates that $\mathcal{B}$ has an advantage over $\epsilon'$ for solving the $\epsilon$-XDH problem.
Thus, if the $\epsilon$-XDH assumption holds, the main construction satisfies the $(\epsilon',n)$-trapdoor privacy.
|
\section{Introduction}
High-energy neutrinos are a unique probe to study the extreme high-energy universe. Neutrinos reach us from their production sites in the universe without absorption or deflection by magnetic fields.
The IceCube Neutrino Observatory has discovered a flux of high-energy neutrinos of cosmic origin
\cite{Aartsen:2014gkd,Aartsen:2016xlq}. The observed neutrino flux arrives almost isotropically at Earth. Recently, evidence for correlated neutrino and photon emission from the active galaxy TXS 0506+056 has been reported \cite{IceCube:2018dnn,IceCube:2018cha}.
IceCube's main instrument \cite{Aartsen:2016nxy} is a large-volume Cherenkov detector that instruments the glacial ice at the South Pole between depths from \SIrange{1.45}{2.45}{km} with \num{5160} digital optical modules
(DOMs) each containing a \SI{10}{"} photomultiplier tube \cite{Abbasi:2010vc} and associated electronics \cite{Abbasi:2008aa}. These DOMs are frozen into the ice along 86 vertical strings, with 60 DOMs per string.
In addition to the in-ice detector, the surface is instrumented with the IceTop air-shower detector \cite{IceCube:2012nn} that is composed of 162 Cherenkov tanks, each containing about 3 cubic meters of clear ice, instrumented with two DOMs.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.47\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Plots/RoofACT.jpg}
\subcaption{IceAct roof-telescope on the roof of the IceCube Laboratory (ICL) in the antartic winter 2019. }\label{Pic:RoofACT}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.47\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Plots/SnowACT.jpg}
\subcaption{IceAct field-telescope on the snow during the antartic winter 2019.}\label{Pic:SnowACT}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{IceAct demonstrator telescopes operating in 2019. Images courtesy of Benjamin Eberhardt.}
\end{figure}
IceAct itself is the proposed array of multiple IceAct telescopes on the footprint of IceCube as a surface extension. Currently, it consists of two demonstrator telescopes, one telescope on the roof of the IceCube Laboratory (ICL) (see picture \ref{Pic:RoofACT}) and one on the snow approximately 220\,m west-southwest from the ICL (see picture \ref{Pic:SnowACT}). The main goal of IceAct is the calibration of the IceCube in-ice reconstruction and the IceTop energy scale as well as cosmic-ray physics in the energy range between the knee and the ankle, roughly from \SIrange{e15}{e18}{eV}.
\section{Science scope}
As a result of the observations with IceCube,
the IceCube-Gen2 collaboration aims to substantially enhance the sensitivity of IceCube for astrophysical neutrino measurements \cite{Aartsen:2014njl,Aartsen:2015dkp}.
Three detector systems have been proposed to enhance the surface detector IceTop \cite{Haungs:2019ylq} as potential extensions: a dense array of scintillator detectors
\cite{TheIceCubeGenCollaborationHuberKelleyKunwar2017_1000082468}, radio antennas \cite{V.:2017kbm} and an array of small air-Cherenkov telescopes (IceAct) that is subject of this paper. The main goals of IceAct overlap to varying degrees with those of the other proposed extensions, and include calibration of IceCube and IceTop, measurement of the cosmic ray composition in coincidence with IceCube and IceTop, and veto of high energy muon neutrinos. \\
\textbf{Calibration:} The coincident detection of cosmic ray-induced air showers and muons deep in the ice will allow for an improved calibration of the in-ice detector and IceTop. Direct measurements of the electromagnetic component of the air-shower with imaging air-Cherenkov telescopes can be compared to the high-energy muon component measured deep in the ice and the mixed component in IceTop. The independence of the telescopes from the ice and snow properties potentially provides a handle to reduce the influence of these systematic uncertainties \cite{Auffenberg:2017vwc,Ackermann:2017pja}. The granularity of the camera of imaging air Cherenkov telescopes allows for precise measurements of cosmic ray-induced showers with very few telescopes.\\
\textbf{Composition Measurement:}
The observation of comic rays through several independent detection channels will also improve the capabilities of IceCube, IceTop, and IceAct to measure the composition of cosmic rays. High energy gamma-ray detection might also be possible \cite{Auffenberg:2017ypn}. A limited number of telescope stations to cover the overlap region of IceTop and IceCube in-ice promises a cost-efficient way to add an independent component to improve composition measurements in the energy range of IceCube in-ice and IceTop.\\
\textbf{Neutrino Veto:} The ability to veto high-energy muon events detected with IceCube, when a surface detector detects a coincident air-shower signal, will reduce the background to astrophysical neutrino searches and lower the detection threshold \cite{Auffenberg:2017vwc,Ackermann:2017pja}. The low energy threshold might greatly increase the sensitivity of IceCube in the southern sky for astrophysical neutrino detection down to \SI{30}{TeV} neutrino energy or lower with a dedicated array of IceAct telescopes \cite{Auffenberg:2017vwc}.
\section{Telescope design}
The basic concept of the IceAct imaging air-Cherenkov telescopes is a compact and robust design, as outlined in \cite{Bretz:2018lhg}, optimized for operation in extreme environments and cost efficiency. Thus, the telescope has enclosed optics with a large field-of-view. This enclosure shields all delicate instrumentation (including the SiPM-based camera) from the harsh South Pole environment. Due to the use of SiPMs for the camera and the enclosure of the entire electronics, this instrument allows for a high duty cycle as demonstrated by the FACT telescope \cite{Knoetig:2013tja,2017NIMPA.876...17N}.
The IceAct telescopes are much smaller than most imaging air-Cherenkov telescopes (IACTs), with a diameter of \SI{55}{cm} and a tube length of about \SI{1}{m} including the DAQ. This reduction in size implies a higher energy threshold (\SI{10}{TeV} to \SI{20}{TeV} primary energy) than other IACTs. However, the energy threshold for air-shower detection of imaging air-Cherenkov telescopes is naturally much lower than achievable for sparse particle detectors on the surface as the air-Cherenkov light of air showers is predominantly emitted by the electromagnetic part of the air-shower during the entire air shower development. Thus, the energy threshold of IceAct is still much lower than that of IceTop, so this does not impede the capability of IceAct to achieve its science goals. Compared to previous non-imaging air Cherenkov arrays at the South Pole, like VULCAN \cite{DICKINSON2000114}, imaging air-Cherenkov telescopes can monitor the entire evolution of the particle cascade propagating through the atmosphere. In addition, the smaller field-of-view of the single pixels of the IceAct camera allows for a more selective trigger which reduces the vulnerability to fluctuations in the night-sky background light (such as auroras that distribute their light over large regions of the sky) which were problematic for VULCAN.
\section{First light}
\FloatBarrier
Since May 2019 both telescopes are opened and taking data. The roof telescope is synchronized with the IceCube datastream via a trigger output feed into a DOM mainboard, which allows for an easy search for events in coincidence with the IceCube or IceTop datastream. Figure \ref{Plt:FirstLightDRS} shows one of the first events recorded with the roof telescope. One of the first events of the field telescope is shown in figure \ref{Plt:FirstLightTarget}. The typical geometrical clustering (left) and timing (right) of air-cherenkov images is visible. Depending on the configured trigger threshold, the night sky background and weather conditions the telescopes operate between 1\,Hz and 4\,Hz trigger rate with a negligible noise trigger content.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.55\textwidth]{Plots/Event307.pdf}
\caption{\label{Plt:FirstLightDRS}Event recorded shortly after the First Light of the IceAct roof-telescope (DRS DAQ) during the Antarctic winter 2019. The color encodes the value of the amplitude. The trace of every single channel (0-2000\,mV, 2\,GS/s) is also shown. }
\end{figure}
To evaluate the quality of the data, daily monitoring plots are produced. These monitoring plots include the timeline for the trigger rate and the pixel bias current as well as statistical control plots as the average peak height or the single pixel trigger rate. Figure \ref{Plt:Moni} shows an example trigger rate (Top) and bias current timeline (Bottom) for a full day. The short but strong current peaks originating from aurora activities are clearly visible. The length of the aurora events is in the order of seconds to minutes. Only very high currents can cause noise high enough to trigger the system: for the day shown only the spike around 24:00 affected the trigger rate significantly.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.99\textwidth]{Plots/20190504_0_Event_13.eps}
\caption{\label{Plt:FirstLightTarget}One of the first events recorded with the IceAct field-telescope. Event amplitude distribution (a) and timing distribution (b) with the typical geometric and time clustering of an air-cherenkov event.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{Plots/FTU_PSU_monplot.png}
\caption{\label{Plt:Moni} Top) Trigger rate (red) and smoothed rate (black) of the IceAct telescope during one day with a threshold of $\approx 54$\,PE per fixed 9 pixel-group (see \cite{Bretz:2018lhg} for further details). Bottom) Single pixel bias current with the maximum pixel current (blue) and the median pixel current (black). Spikes originate from aurora activity in the field-of-view of the telescope. Besides the event around 24:00 these current spikes show little impact on the trigger rate at this trigger level.}
\end{figure}
A further cross-check is shown in Figure
\ref{Plt:Distribution}, which depicts the distribution of reconstructed shower cores on surface for one day of coincident events (triggered by both IceCube and IceAct). For these distributions, the tracks from high energy muon bundles are detected using the IceCube in-ice detector. The location of the shower core at the surface is then back-tracked using the directional information from IceCube. IceCube's reconstructed muon energy estimation is then used to select events from two different energy regions. Figure \ref{Plt:Distribution} (left) shows that selecting only the lower energy (< 25~TeV) events: the distribution is clearly centered around the position of IceAct. Figure \ref{Plt:Distribution} (right) shows coincident events with higher energies (> 200~TeV), which shows that the maximum distance between IceAct and the reconstructed shower cores is clearly correlated with the muon in-ice energy, and that at higher energies the effective area of IceAct is larger for higher energy events. \\
With a detailed study of the instrument using either experimental data (as in \cite{Schaufel:2017niw}) or simulated data, misreconstructed events can be identified. The energy and angular reconstructions can also be improved by using the image information of the telescope or the hydrid reconstruction with IceTop, thus allowing for more precise event-by-event calibration and cosmic ray studies.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Plots/SurfacePosition_Energy_lessthan10e4_4.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Plots/SurfacePosition_Energy_morethan10e5_5.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{\label{Plt:Distribution} Coincident events of the IceCube in-ice detector and IceAct with a livetime of one day. Left) Events with a reconstructed energy < 25\,TeV which are clearly clustering around the telescope position. Right) Events with a reconstructed in-ice energy > 200\,TeV. Due to the higher light yield of the high-energy events the effective area increases with event energy.}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\section{IceAct development strategy}
Several stages of telescope arrays are envisioned during the development process that will reach different science goals.
As a first step, a 7 pixel telescope was deployed in 2015 to prove the existence of technology that can be operated at the South Pole.
In 2017 the first telescope with a full 61 pixel camera was operated at the South Pole on the roof of the IceCube Laboratory.
In 2018/2019 this telescope was upgraded and one additional telescope was deployed on the snow surface of the South Pole operating in parallel to other surface detector prototypes.
The two telescopes currently running at the South Pole test several critical technical capabilities to ensure successful operations of IceAct stations, including:
\begin{itemize}
\item operation in coincidence with IceCube and IceTop,
\item operation in conjunction with other surface detector prototypes,
\item independent snow management and frost removal, and
\item autonomous response to changing weather conditions and ambient light.
\end{itemize}
In 2019/2020 the two telescopes currently running at the Pole will be tied into the new surface station infrastructure, which has the capability to host up to 7 telescopes. This will prove the capability of the telescopes to fully synchronize with each other and with IceCube and IceTop based on a White Rabbit timing system. The two telescopes will operate as cosmic-ray detectors in conjunction with IceTop to detect cosmic-ray air showers starting at 30\,TeV up to PeV primary energies.
The 5 additional telescopes to complete the station are planned for deployment in 2020/2021. This station will have a field of view of $36^{\circ}$ and detect air showers in coincidence with IceTop. This system will enable composition analyses of cosmic rays at PeV energies with 3 different detector components, IceCube, IceTop, and IceAct, and prove the stable operation of imaging air Cherenkov telescopes under the harsh and variable conditions at the South Pole. It will also test the capability of the stations to act as a veto of cosmic rays for astrophysical neutrino detection.\\
In the future, a large array of imaging air-Cherenkov telescopes is foreseen. To reach this goal, studies of the capability of the array for gamma-ray detection will also be performed, and a full detector layout will be designed to optimize the capabilities of the different science goals in cosmic-ray, gamma ray and astrophysical neutrino detection.
\section{Summary}
In this proceeding we described the science goals of IceAct, an array consisting of imaging air-Cherenkov telescopes which will operate in conjunction with IceCube, IceTop, and other future astrophysical detector components at the South Pole. In addition, we presented the first light data and the status of the two demonstrator telescopes currently operating at the South Pole.
\newpage
\bibliographystyle{ICRC}
|
\section{Introduction}
Properties of financial markets and their behavior are of great interest to academics, policy makers, traders and investors. These markets are complex systems and all of them present universal emerging properties of statistical nature, nowadays commonly called by the name of stylized facts \cite{Kaldor,Cont}.
In particular, the empirical gain/loss asymmetry, i.e. ``draw-downs in stock prices or stock index values are larger than the upward variations'', is one of those stylized facts, and it is of great and current interest under both, practical/applied and academic points of view (i.e. symmetry based automatic trading systems, skewness induced risk, validity of Efficient Market Hypothesis, etc). Indeed, studying the symmetry of the distribution of financial returns has been researched for many years and it has always been an important and tricky business: results of symmetry measurements depend on the period of time of data records, the time scale analyzed, returns definition, leverage effect, etc. \cite{Beedles,Fogler,Bouchaud,Jensen2,Dutta,deAlmeida}.
Initially, most of the market symmetry or gain/loss asymmetry studies relied on studying the third standardized moment of the price or index variations or other similar measurement. More recently, symmetry of financial variations or related problems has been approached by very ingenious methodologies, as for example, the analysis of the returns distribution of stocks ensembles during crash and rally days \cite{Lillo}; the study of large fluctuation dynamics under time reversal (TR) symmetry (large fluctuations dynamics at daily scale are not TR symmetric, but at the scale of high frequency data they are)\cite{Jiang}; study of the investment horizons distribution \cite{Jensen,Karpio}; empirical analysis of the clustering on the asymmetry properties in financial time series \cite{Jun}; symmetry break mechanisms \cite{Savona}; symmetry in trading volume \cite{Duarte}; analysis related to time-scale effects on gain/loss asymmetry in stock indices \cite{Zoltan}; the use of the non-extensive formalism of Physics \cite{Grech}, or focusing in searching possible symmetry points of returns \cite{Coronel-Montoya} and many more interesting empirical and agents modeled studies \cite{Vitalies,Takayasu}.
Even though it has been researched for many years, the study of the symmetry of the unconditional distribution of financial returns remains, in our opinion a not fully understood subject. For instance, \cite{peiro,peiro2} have analyzed returns of a large sample of diverse financial indices without finding important symmetry deviations or fully rejecting the symmetry hypothesis. On the other hand, many studies under different conditions and points of view have reported the emergence of asymmetries in the financial returns distribution \cite{Lillo,Jiang,Jensen,Karpio,Jun,Savona,Duarte,Zoltan,Grech,Coronel-Montoya,Vitalies,Takayasu}.
By the analysis presented in this paper we expect to shed new light in what it may be grasped when we speak of symmetry of the distribution of financial variations. Usually, in finance, a symmetric distribution of financial variations is understood as a distribution with a mirrored symmetry around the $y$ vertical axis in $x=0$, i.e. the mean values of the distribution coincides with the origin. In this paper, we will see that although it is possible to find a symmetry point of the variations distribution, most of the time this point it is not situated in the origin or symmetrically around it.
\subsection{Organization of the present paper}
This work is organized as follows: in the next section we briefly review the statistical methodology used for the symmetry analysis: we show the results of the numerical calculation of the asymptotic distribution of the $T_n$ statistic as obtained in \cite{Coronel-Montoya}. These values are important because we use them to find the interval where it is more plausible to observe symmetry points of market variations, as is explained in subsection \ref{Meth}. In section \ref{sec:Data}, and following \cite{Olivares}, we present the time multi-scale observables analyzed in this work. We explain their construction, report some interesting statistical distributional properties that they display, such as bi-modality, and we include a brief digression on the reasons these observables were chosen to study the symmetry of market variations. In section \ref{sec:analisis}, we apply our methodology for assessing symmetry to four data samples of different markets from the period of time including 11-08-1991 to 06-30-2017. Also, in this section we show how the most plausible symmetry point for a given confidence level from market variations evolves in time and behaves around extreme market movements. Finally, conclusions and a summary are discussed in section \ref{sec:Final}.
\section{The $T_{n}$ Statistic and methodology to test symmetry}
\label{sec:Tn}
Our symmetry test is based in the distribution-free test statistic $T_{n}$ for symmetry testing proposed by Einmahl and Mckeague \cite{Einmahl} and it follows an empirical likelihood approach.
Suppose a sample $X_{1},\ldots,X_{n}$ consisting of independent and identically distributed random variables with common absolutly continuous cumulative distribution function $F$.
The null hypothesis is that there exists a point of symmetry around zero, i.e. , $H_{0}:F(0-x)=1-F(x-0)$, for all $x>0$ belonging to the sample.
We use the notation $F_n(-x) \coloneqq F_n(0-x)$ and $F_n(x-) \coloneqq F_n(x-0)$, where the empirical distribution function $F_n$ is defined as $$F_n(x): = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^{n} I(X_{i}\leq x)$$ and the function $I$, named the indicator function, takes a value of 1 if its argument is true and 0 if its argument is false. The test statistic by Einmahl and Mckeague is:
\begin{equation}
T_{n}=-2\int_{0}^{\infty} \log H(x)dG_{n}(x)=-\frac{2}{n}\sum_{i=1}^{n} \log H \left( \left| X_{i} \right| \right).
\label{ts1}
\end{equation}
where $G_{n}$ is the empirical distribution function of the $\left| X_{i} \right|$, and $H$ satisfies:
$ \log H(x) = nF_n \left( { - x} \right)\log \frac{{F_n \left( { - x} \right) + 1 - F_n (x - )}}{{2F_n \left( { - x} \right)}}+n\left[ {1 - F_n \left( {x - } \right)} \right]\log \frac{{F_n ( - x) + 1- F_n (x - )}}{{2\left[ {1 - F_n \left( {x - } \right)} \right]}} $
More details on the above shown, can be found in \cite{Einmahl}.
In the previous cited paper by the authors \cite{Coronel-Montoya}, the asymptotic percentage points of the statistic $T_{n}$ were calculated numerically and they are shown in table \ref{tab:Cpoints}.
\begin{table}[h!tb]
\begin{center}
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|}
\hline
Cumulative Probability &Percentage point\\
\hline
\hline
0.50&0.659\\
\hline
0.75&1.258\\
\hline
0.85&1.768\\
\hline
0.90&2.200\\
\hline
0.95&2.983\\
\hline
0.975&3.798\\
\hline
0.990&4.909\\
\hline
0.995&5.768\\
\hline
0.999&7.803\\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Asymptotic percentage points of $T_n$ calculated numerically from \cite{Coronel-Montoya}.}
\label{tab:Cpoints}
\end{center}
\end{table}
These limiting distribution points were found by proving that $T_n$ converges to:
\[
T_n \mathop \to \limits^D \int\limits_0^1 { \frac{W(t)^2}{t} dt}
\]
where $W$ denotes a standard Wiener process.
Asymptotic points were obtained using the series representation \cite{imhof}
\[
T_n \mathop \to \limits^D \sum\limits_{i = 1}^\infty {\lambda _i \nu _i },
\]
where $\nu_1,\nu_2,\ldots$ are independent chi-squared random variables with one degree of freedom, and $\lambda_1,\lambda_2,\ldots$ are the eigenvalues of the integral equation:
\begin{equation}
\int\limits_0^1 {\sigma (s,t)f_i ds = \lambda _i f_i (t)}
\label{inteq}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma(s,t)$ denotes the covariance function of the process $\frac{W(t)}{\sqrt{t}}$. Finally, the asymptotic percentage points of the distribution of $T_n$ were found solving equation~\ref{inteq} numerically.
It is worth mentioning that in table A1 of \cite{Einmahl2}, Einmahl and Mckeague had only provided critical values of $T_{n}$ based on 100,000 simulations for selected sample sizes up to n=150. Their simulation results showed a fast convergence to the asymptotic percentage points.
Values of table \ref{tab:Cpoints} will be used in our statistical procedure to assessing the symmetry of the financial indices variations as summarized in section \ref{sec:Data}. For further details on this methodology see again \cite{Coronel-Montoya}.
\subsection{Statistical Methodology}
\label{Meth}
Let us now summarize the statistical methodology based on $T_n$ to assess symmetry of a given set of observations from an unknown probability distribution. For more details, consult \cite{Coronel-Montoya}.
As usual, given a daily financial time series of prices or indice values $P_1,\ldots P_{N+1}$ we define its corresponding time series of daily logarithmic returns, called in this paper only Returns, as $R_i := \log(P_{i+1})-\log(P_i$), $i=1,\ldots N$.
Let us define for Returns time series their ``{\it shifted returns around} $c$'' as $S_{R_{t}}(c)=R_{t}-c$, with $t=1,\ldots,N$, where $c$ is a real number, not necessarily a symmetry point. In particular, for the present explanation, $R_{t}$ may represent either daily logarithmic returns or the multi-scale returns, defined in next section.
We will use the time series of shifted returns to obtain the corresponding values of their test-statistic $T_{n}$ calculated from $S_{R_{1}}(c),\ldots,S_{R_{N}}(c)$, and denoted $T_{n}(c)$ for a particular value of $c$.
Now, let us suppose the data to test have at least a symmetry point. Then a {\em plausible} value of the symmetry point (for a given significance level $\alpha$), will be any real number $c$, such that
\begin{equation}
T_{n}(c)<T(\alpha),
\label{eq:SL}
\end{equation}
where $T(\alpha)$ denotes the $\alpha-$level upper point of the distribution of $T_{n}$ selected from table \ref{tab:Cpoints}.
The interval of symmetry of our returns distribution, with a significance level $\alpha$, will be the interval $(C_{min},C_{max})$, where $C_{min}$ and $C_{max}$ are, respectively the infimum and supremum of the set of all plausible symmetry points i.e. those points satisfying equation \ref{eq:SL}.
Finally, the most plausible symmetry point for the chosen significance level $\alpha$, is the one that minimizes $T_{n}(c)$ in the interval $(C_{min},C_{max})$ and it will denoted $C$.
To obtain $(C_{min},C_{max})$ it is necessary to determine the intersection of the curve of $T_{n}(c)$ versus $c$ and the horizontal line of significance level calculated from table \ref{tab:Cpoints} in an interval that contains the set of all possible values of $c$ which would not lead to the rejection of the null hypothesis of symmetry for the probability distribution of the random variable $R_{t}$ at the given significance level $\alpha$. Of course, $C$ is the point in this interval that minimizes $T_{n}(c)$.
The previously described methodology will be illustrated for all our data samples in section \ref{sec:Data}.
\subsection{Skewness vs $T_n$}
We close this section with a few words explaining our motivation to choose a methodology based on the $T_n$ statistic over more traditional tests based on skewness:
\begin{itemize}
\item It is well known that a small skewness of a distribution is a necessary condition for symmetry, but it is not a sufficient condition, i.e., a small value of skewness does not guarantee the symmetry of the corresponding distribution.
\item A statistical test of symmetry or a statistic based on skewness has to overcome the above mentioned problem and for that reason should be more complex than our test making necessary to set up additional conditions to the tested distribution.
\item Our assessment of symmetry is independent of the distribution of data. No additional constrains are required for its application and $T_n$ is based in the empirical distribution function only.
\item Finally, and as previously mentioned at the beginning of this work, since many years, most of the statistical studies of symmetry of financial data were elaborated by analyzing skewness of data distribution. In our opinion, new statistic perspectives to face this important and interesting problem are needed.
\end{itemize}
\section{Data Sample and construction of our observables}
\label{sec:Data}
We construct the observables of market variations from the following financial indices daily time series:
\begin{enumerate}
\item American DJIA (Dow Jones Industrial Average).
\item American Nasdaq (National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotation).
\item Mexican IPC (Indice de Precios y Cotizaciones in Spanish of Index of Prices and Quotations in English).
\item Japanese Nikkei 225.
\end{enumerate}
All data samples were downloaded from \url{https://finance.yahoo.com/} website, the period of time considered in our analysis is from 11-08-1991 to 06-30-2017.
\subsection{Observables construction}
In order to study the symmetry of financial markets variations, we construct two time multi-scale observables of financial returns calculated by analogy with daily returns and using the logarithmic differences of the extreme values of daily uninterrupted trends \footnote{In probability theory, this kind of consecutive events are called ``runs''.}\cite{Wilks}. This has the advantage of not having to define a fixed and arbitrary scale for returns, since that time scale is naturally defined by the different uninterrupted trends durations. For a graphic illustration using DJIA data, showing what we mean by uninterrupted trends, see figure \ref{fig:TReturns}.
\begin{figure}[h!tb!]
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{figures/TrendLines.pdf}
\centering
\caption{\protect\raggedright Uninterrupted daily trends for DJIA. Time period from Nov/08/1991 to Jan/21/1992.}
\label{fig:TReturns}
\end{figure}
More formally, given a price time series $P_{1},\ldots,P_{n}$, we define an ``uninterrupted trend'' of duration $k$, as a succession of $k+1$ consecutive values of the given time series where each value is greater than the preceding one. In this case we say that these consecutive $k+1$ increasing values form an uninterrupted uptrend. On the other hand, if each one of the $k+1$ consecutive values is smaller or equal than the preceding one we say we have an uninterrupted downtrend of length $k$.
Now, let us suppose that for a fixed integer $m>0$, an uninterrupted trend (uptrend or downtrend), starts at $P_m$ with a duration of $k$ days: $P_{m},\ldots,P_{m+k}$. In this case, we define their corresponding trend return as:
\begin{equation}
S_m^k := \log(P_{m+k}) - \log(P_{m})
\end{equation}
Where $m$ indexes the different trends and $k$ indicates the duration in days of the $m$-th trend.
An other useful and closely related observable we analyze in this paper is defined as:
\begin{equation}
TS_m^k :=\frac{ \log(P_{m+k}) - \log(P_{m})}{k}
\end{equation}
i.e. the terms of the time series of TReturns divided by their corresponding duration. It gives us an estimation of how fast trends\footnote{From now on, for simplicity, we will refer to uninterrupted trends only as trends} are. Let us name $TS_m^k$ as TVReturns, meaning Trends Velocity \footnote{Independently of knowing that TVReturns is a discrete observable, we use this term because every TVReturn is obtained dividing its corresponding TReturn by time duration in number of days} returns.
Figure \ref{fig:TRandTVRdist} is divided in four panels and they will be referred as figures \ref{fig:TRandTVRdista} to \ref{fig:TRandTVRdistd} respectively.
For illustration purposes figure \ref{fig:TRandTVRdista} displays only for DJIA data, the evolution of Returns, TReturns and TVReturns for the period of time analysed in the present work. The another figures \ref{fig:TRandTVRdistb} to \ref{fig:TRandTVRdistd} show Returns, TReturns and TVReturns smoothed probability density functions respectively. A summary of their descriptive statistics can be found in table \ref{Tab:TabStats}, showing number of entries, mean, standard deviation, skewness and kurtosis values.
As expected from the idea of aggregating same signed variations, TReturns reach the bigger amplitude fluctuations, then Returns and finally TVReturns. Compare their RMS values in fifth column of table \ref{Tab:TabStats}.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.48\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/Distributions/RetsTRetsTVretsDJIAUnicoNN.pdf}
\caption[ ]{{Time evolution of TReturns, TVReturns and Returns for DJIA data sample.}}
\label{fig:TRandTVRdista}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.475\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/Distributions/ReturnDist.pdf}
\caption[ ]{{Returns probability density function for the four analysed data samples.}}
\label{fig:TRandTVRdistb}
\end{subfigure}
\vskip\baselineskip
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.475\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/Distributions/TreturnDist.pdf}
\caption[ ]{{TReturns probability density function for all samples.}}
\label{fig:TRandTVRdistc}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.475\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/Distributions/TVreturnDist.pdf}
\caption[ ]{{TVReturns probability density function, again for all data samples}}
\label{fig:TRandTVRdistd}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{a) Returns, TReturns and TVReturns evolution for DJIA sample. Figures (b),(c) and (d) Smoothed probability density function of TReturns and the constructed Multi-scale returns for all data samples.Descriptive statistics of these distributions is show in table \ref{Tab:TabStats} }
\label{fig:TRandTVRdist}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[htb]
\begin{center}
\setlength\tabcolsep{3.2pt}
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.1
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Market&Observable&Entries&$\mu$&$\sigma$&Skewness&Kurtosis\\
\hline
\hline
DJIA&Returns& 6447& $(2.9 \pm 1.3) \!\times\!10^{-4}$&0.011&-0.176&11.56\\
\hline
DJIA&TReturns& 3340& $(5.6 \pm 3.5) \!\times\!10^{-4}$&0.021&-0.693&14.95\\
\hline
DJIA&TVReturns& 3340& $(1.6 \pm 1.7) \!\times\!10^{-4}$&0.010&0.378&13.96\\
\hline
IPC&Returns&6409& $(5.5 \pm 1.8) \!\times\!10^{-4}$&0.015&0.022&9.355\\
\hline
IPC&TReturns&2942& $(1.2 \pm 0.6) \!\times\!10^{-3}$&0.034&-0.241&9.678\\
\hline
IPC&TVReturns&2942& $(4.6 \pm 2.4) \!\times\!10^{-4}$&0.013&0.0152&5.845\\
\hline
DAX&Returns&6465& $(3.1 \pm 1.7) \!\times\!10^{-4}$&0.014&-0.106&7.300\\
\hline
DAX&TReturns&3274& $(6.3 \pm 5.1) \!\times\!10^{-4}$&0.029&-0.729&10.83\\
\hline
DAX&TVReturns&3274& $(1.2 \pm 2.2) \!\times\!10^{-4}$&0.013&-0.027&5.431\\
\hline
Nikkei&Returns&6282& $(-0.3 \pm 1.9) \!\times\!10^{-4}$&0.015&-0.203&8.094\\
\hline
Nikkei&TReturns&3272& $(-0.5 \pm 5.2) \!\times\!10^{-4}$&0.030&-0.569&11.95\\
\hline
Nikkei&TVReturns&3272& $(-0.6 \pm 2.4) \!\times\!10^{-4}$&0.014&-0.257&6.813\\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\caption[]{\small Descriptive statistics of Returns, TReturns and TVReturns for all data samples.}
\label{Tab:TabStats}
\end{center}
\end{table}
It is interesting to observe in the figure \ref{fig:TRandTVRdistd} that TVReturns for the four samples have a bi-modal distribution. Even more, bi-modality is also observed in the distributions of TReturns obtained from trends with duration longer than one day as is shown in all left sub-figures of figure \ref{fig:TRetsMulTiTrends}, where for clarity, we have plotted TReturns and TVReturns distributions only with duration from one to four days.
The bi-modality of TReturns from trends longer than one day and TVReturns for all trends durations is explained as follows:
TReturns for a trend duration equal to one day, are a sub-sample of the uni-modal, daily returns distribution of any of our data samples; the TReturns distribution becomes bi-modal for trends with duration bigger than one day as shown in all left sub-figures of figure \ref{fig:TRetsMulTiTrends}, because as trend duration increases, the magnitude of TReturns tends to increase and the probability of observing small positive and negative fluctuations around zero becomes smaller, giving place to the bi-modal shape of TReturns distributions for trends duration bigger than one day. See left sub-figures of figure \ref{fig:TRetsMulTiTrends}.
For the case of TVReturns, as shown in figure \ref{fig:TRandTVRdistd},the bi-modal effect is clearly observed at the overall of TVReturns distributions. The reason of this is because the definition of TVReturns implies the division or TReturns by their corresponding duration in days, this operation narrows the obtained TVReturns distribution with trend duration bigger than one day, with respect to the distribution of TReturns, giving more entries closer to zero, without canceling the bi-modal behavior of TReturns and increasing the amplitude of peaks for trends durations bigger than one day. Finally, all right sub-figures on figure \ref{fig:TRetsMulTiTrends} show that the subsample of TVReturns for trends of length equal to one day, i.e. uni-modal daily returns, unlike the TReturns case, has not enough statistics to mask the bi-modal distribution of TVReturns for trends with duration bigger than one day, as is evidenced again in figure \ref{fig:TRandTVRdistd}.
It is important to point out that in the case of the bi-modal distributions of figure \ref{fig:TRandTVRdistd}, our symmetry test results in the non rejection of the assumption of symmetry, due to the fact that, even though the TVReturns series shows two modes with slightly different heights, the difference was not large enough for rejecting the null hypothesis, according to the distribution of the test statistic $T_n$. Additional studies have to be performed with much larger data samples to examine in detail this behavior. To have an idea of the difference in peaks amplitude of TVReturns samples, table \ref{tab:heights} indicates their higher to lower peaks ratio.
\begin{table}[h!tb]
\begin{center}
\setlength\tabcolsep{3pt}
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
Name& Height ratio\\
\hline
\hline
DJIA & 1.0246\\
\hline
IPC &1.0233\\
\hline
DAX &1.0235\\
\hline
Nikkei& 1.0878\\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\caption[]{\small Ratio between higher to lower peaks for TVReturns samples. See figure \ref{fig:TRandTVRdistd}.}
\label{tab:heights}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[h!tb]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.30]{figures/Distributions/djia_distbyruns_tret.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\quad
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.30]{figures/Distributions/djia_distbyruns_vtret.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\vskip\baselineskip
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{figures/Distributions/ipc_distbyruns_tret.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\quad
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{figures/Distributions/ipc_distbyruns_vtret.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\vskip\baselineskip
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{figures/Distributions/dax_distbyruns_tret.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\quad
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{figures/Distributions/dax_distbyruns_vtret.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\vskip\baselineskip
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{figures/Distributions/nikkei_distbyruns_tret.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\quad
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{figures/Distributions/nikkei_distbyruns_vtret.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Bi-Modal behavior of TReturns (left column) and TVReturns (right column). We show only variations from trends not longer than 4 days.}
\label{fig:TRetsMulTiTrends}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Justification of our selection of observables}
\label{Observables}
Since in this paper we are interested in the symmetry of market indices variations, in our opinion, our selection of observables TReturns and TVReturns is more interesting and realistic for this goal than using only standard daily returns for the following reasons:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Sign symmetry: By construction the time series of TReturns and TVReturns
alternate in sign, having the same number of negative and non-negative
terms, or differing in the number of common signed entries only by one unit
if the time series have an odd number of terms. Entries of the TReturns series are
obtained by aggregating consecutive same signed variations, spreading its
distribution in relation to the Returns distribution, as may be appreciated in
figure 2 and confirmed from RMS values from Table 3. We expect this
aggregation process to make the observable more sensitive to symmetry
fluctuations by unmasking and emphasizing the effect on symmetry
of large fluctuations composed by smaller ones. In fact small consecutive
same signed variations in real life can cause large financial gains or
losses.
The TVReturns, obtained by the same process of aggregating consecutive common signed
variations, become smaller and spread less than the TReturns and Returns due to the effect of dividing
the latter by their corresponding durations. See again figure \ref{fig:TRandTVRdist} and the corresponding RMS values from table \ref{tab:heights}.
\item Time multi-scale observables: The time series of TReturns and TVReturns
involve in their construction different and non arbitrary time scales determined by trends duration. This makes our analysis more general, allowing us to explore a more realistic situation and giving us the opportunity to construct new indicators and observables based on this, for example market volatility from TReturns or TVReturns.
\end{enumerate}
\section{Data analyses}
\label{sec:analisis}
Applying the statistical methodology summarized in subsection \ref{Meth}, the interval of symmetry $(C_{min},C_{max})$, i.e. the {\em plausible} set of values of the unknown symmetry points $c$, for different values of significance level $\alpha$ can be seen in the plots of $T_{n}(c)$ versus $c$ for our multi-scale returns samples in figures \ref{fig:RetsFigs} to \ref{fig:TVRetsFigs}.
\begin{figure}[h!tb]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/SymmetryPlots/simetria_retornos_simples_DJIA.pdf}
\caption[ ]%
{{\small DJIA (Asymmetric around zero)}}
\label{fig:RetsFigsDJIA}
\end{subfigure}
\quad
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/SymmetryPlots/simetria_retornos_simples_IPC.pdf}
\caption[ ]%
{{\small IPC (Asymmetric around zero)}}
\label{fig:RetsFigsIPC}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/SymmetryPlots/simetria_retornos_simples_DAX.pdf}
\caption[]%
{{\small DAX (Asymmetric around zero)}}
\label{fig:RetsFigsDAX}
\end{subfigure}
\quad
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/SymmetryPlots/simetria_retornos_simples_NIKKEI.pdf}
\caption[]%
{{\small Nikkei (Symmetric around zero)}}
\label{fig:RetsFigsNikkei}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Plots of statistic $T_{n}(c)$ versus selected values of the symmetry point $c$ for daily simple logarithmic returns of our four analyzed markets]
{\small Returns statistic $T_{n}(c)$ versus selected values of the symmetry point $c$. Horizontal straight lines correspond to the 99, 95 and 90 upper percentage points, as indicated. Returns mean value $\mu$, the origin, and the most plausible symmetry point $C$ are indicated by vertical lines. Gray rectangles determine the interval $(C_{min},C_{max})$ for $\alpha=0.05$.}
\label{fig:RetsFigs}
\end{figure}
As mentioned in subsection \ref{Meth}, the symmetry interval $(C_{min},C_{max})$ is determined by the intersection of the curve of $T_{n}(c)$ and the horizontal line of significance level calculated in table \ref{tab:Cpoints} in an interval that contains the set of all possible values of $c$ which would not lead to the rejection of the null hypothesis of symmetry for the probability distribution of the analysed random variable. This interval is shown in gray for our different multi-scale returns data, in figures \ref{fig:RetsFigs}, \ref{fig:TRetsFigs} and \ref{fig:TVRetsFigs}, where the horizontal lines $T_n=4.909$, $T_n=2.983$ and $T_n=2.200$, correspond to the asymptotic 0.99, 0.95 and 0.90 percentiles of the distribution of the $T_{n}$ statistic corresponding to $\alpha=0.01$, $0.05$ and $0.1$ respectively, displayed in table \ref{tab:Cpoints}. For a significance level $\alpha=0.10$ (or lower), in each one of our data samples, it was always possible to find an interval of plausible values for the unknown point of symmetry which would not lead us to the rejection of the assumption of symmetry. The table \ref{tab:confidence} shows all this symmetry intervals for $\alpha=0.05$, where each point belonging to them can be statistically considered as a plausible point around which the distribution of the market variations (Returns, TReturns and TVReturns) is symmetric.
\begin{figure}[h!tb]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/SymmetryPlots/simetria_TReturns_DJIA.pdf}
\caption[ ]%
{{\small DJIA (Asymmetric around zero)}}
\label{fig:TRetsFigsDJIA}
\end{subfigure}
\quad
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/SymmetryPlots/simetria_TReturns_IPC.pdf}
\caption[ ]%
{{\small IPC (Asymmetric around zero)}}
\label{fig:TRetsFigsIPC}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/SymmetryPlots/simetria_TReturns_DAX.pdf}
\caption[]%
{{\small DAX (Asymmetric around zero)}}
\label{fig:TRetsFigsDAX}
\end{subfigure}
\quad
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/SymmetryPlots/simetria_TReturns_NIKKEI.pdf}
\caption[]%
{{\small Nikkei (Symmetric around zero)}}
\label{fig:TRetsFigsNikkei}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Plots of statistic $T_{n}(c)$ versus selected values of the symmetry point $c$ for our four different markets TReturns series data]
{\small TReturns Statistic $T_{n}(c)$ versus selected values of the symmetry point $c$. Again, horizontal straight lines indicate the 99, 95 and 90 upper percentage points, TReturns mean $\mu$, the origin and $C$ are signaled by vertical lines. Again the symmetry interval is marked in gray for $\alpha=0.05$.}
\label{fig:TRetsFigs}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!tb]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/SymmetryPlots/simetria_TVReturns_DJIA.pdf}
\caption[ ]%
{{\small DJIA (Asymmetric around zero)}}
\label{fig:TVRetsFigsDJIA}
\end{subfigure}
\quad
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/SymmetryPlots/simetria_TVReturns_IPC.pdf}
\caption[ ]%
{{\small IPC (Symmetric around zero)}}
\label{fig:TVRetsFigsIPC}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/SymmetryPlots/simetria_TVReturns_DAX.pdf}
\caption[]%
{{\small DAX (Asymmetric around zero)}}
\label{fig:TVRetsFigsDAX}
\end{subfigure}
\quad
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/SymmetryPlots/simetria_TVReturns_NIKKEI.pdf}
\caption[]%
{{\small Nikkei (Symmetric around zero)}}
\label{fig:TVRetsFigsNikkei}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[TVReturns statistic $T_{n}(c)$ versus selected values of the symmetry point $c$ ]
{\small TVReturns statistic $T_{n}(c)$ versus selected values of the symmetry point $c$. As before, horizontal straight lines correspond to the 99, 95 and 90 upper percentage points. Mean value $\mu$, $C$ and the origin are again shown by vertical lines. As two previous plots $(C_{min},C_{max})$ for $\alpha=0.05$ is emphasized in gray. }
\label{fig:TVRetsFigs}
\end{figure}
Table \ref{tab:confidence} shows a summary of the information presented visually in figures \ref{fig:RetsFigs}, \ref{fig:TRetsFigs} and \ref{fig:TVRetsFigs}, including observables mean values, symmetry intervals, confidence level and whether or not the daily and multi-scale returns distributions past the symmetry test.
\begin{table}[h!tb]
\begin{center}
\setlength\tabcolsep{1.6pt}
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Market&Observable&$\mu$&Symmetry&$C$&Zero\\
& & &interval& & symmetric\\
\hline
\hline
DJIA&Returns&$2.9\!\times\!10^{-4}$&($3.2\!\times\!10^{-4}$,$6.1\!\times\!10^{-4}$)&$4.7\!\times\!10^{-4}$&No\\
\hline
DJIA&TReturns&$5.6\!\times\!10^{-4}$&($2.0\!\times\!10^{-4}$,$1.1\!\times\!10^{-3}$)&$6.9\!\times\!10^{-4}$&No\\
\hline
DJIA&TVReturns&$1.6\!\times\!10^{-4}$&($-1.5\!\times\!10^{-7}$,$4.7\!\times\!10^{-4}$)&$2.3\!\times\!10^{-4}$&Yes\\
\hline
IPC&Returns&$5.5\!\times\!10^{-4}$&($2.9\!\times\!10^{-4}$,$8.8\!\times\!1.0^{-4}$)&$5.9\!\times\!10^{-4}$&No\\
\hline
IPC&TReturns&$1.2\!\times\!10^{-3}$&($2.8\!\times\!10^{-4}$,$1.8\!\times\!10^{-3}$)&$1.0\!\times\!10^{-3}$&No\\
\hline
IPC&TVReturns&$4.6\!\times\!10^{-4}$&($-5.3\!\times\!10^{-5}$,$7.6\!\times\!10^{-4}$)&$3.6\!\times\!10^{-4}$&Yes\\
\hline
DAX&Returns&$3.1\!\times\!10^{-4}$&($4.8\!\times\!10^{-4}$,$6.8\!\times\!10^{-4}$)&$5.8\!\times\!10^{-4}$&No\\
\hline
DAX&TReturns&$6.3\!\times\!10^{-4}$&($3.6\!\times\!10^{-4}$,$1.7\!\times\!10^{-3}$)&$1.0\!\times\!10^{-3}$&No\\
\hline
DAX&TVReturns&$1.2\!\times\!10^{-4}$&($-8.8\!\times\!10^{-5}$,$5.8\!\times\!10^{-4}$)&$2.4\!\times\!10^{-4}$&Yes\\
\hline
Nikkei&Returns&$-3.1\!\times\!10^{-5}$&($-1.6\!\times\!10^{-4}$,$4.1\!\times\!10^{-4}$)&$1.2\!\times\!10^{-4}$&Yes\\
\hline
Nikkei&TReturns&$-5.9\!\times\!10^{-5}$&($-4.3\!\times\!10^{-4}$,$1.1\!\times\!10^{-3}$)&$3.6\!\times\!10^{-4}$&Yes\\
\hline
Nikkei&TVReturns&$-6.2\!\times\!10^{-5}$&($-2.8\!\times\!10^{-4}$,$4.1\!\times\!10^{-4}$)&$6.1 \times 10^{-5}$&Yes\\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\caption[]{\small Mean value $\mu$, symmetry interval, most probable symmetry point and result of our symmetry test around zero for all data samples analyzed and our three observables. Measurements were performed with a significance level $\alpha = 0.05$.}
\label{tab:confidence}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Again, as mentioned in \cite{Coronel-Montoya} it is important to have in mind that our statistical approach is different from that of maximizing a test-statistic, as it is done generally, see for example in \cite{Karsten,Coronel_tesis,Coronel}. Instead, our methodology statistically sustains the idea that whenever there exist one or many plausible values for the points of symmetry, these plausible symmetry points may be found, and if $T_n(c)$ has a minimum value, denoted in this paper by $C$, this point will be the most plausible symmetry point for a given significance level $\alpha$.
\subsection{Time evolution of $T_n$ and the most plausible symmetry point $C$}
Until now we have only assessed the overall symmetry of our four data samples for three observables. We would like to have a more complete image of symmetry changes on time, i.e. we would like to see how $T_n$ and the most plausible symmetry point $C$ found with our method, evolve over time, at least at a coarse grained level as determined by the chosen observables. To achieve this we use a movable time window for all our samples and observables and perform the statistical test successively. We chose a time window of $252$ trading days since it is the average number of trading days in a year for the selected markets and its resolution is not enough noisy to allow us appreciate some market days with extreme movements as it will be shown in subsection \ref{extreme}. Results on the dynamics of of $T_n$ are shown in figure \ref{fig:ZeroSymm}, where these plots show that at the chosen time window resolution level, the plausibility of symmetry around $c=0$ is variable, being rejected at different periods of time for the different significance levels. We will show explicitly the dynamics of $C$ and its confidence interval next.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.475\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/zerosymmetry/simetria_cero_tiempo_simpleret.pdf}
\caption[ ]{{\small Returns}}
\label{fig:ZeroSymmReturns}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.475\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/zerosymmetry/simetria_cero_tiempo_trendret.pdf}
\caption[ ]{{\small TReturns }}
\label{fig:ZeroSymmTReturns}
\end{subfigure}
\vskip\baselineskip
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.47\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/zerosymmetry/simetria_cero_tiempo_trendvel.pdf}
\caption[]{{\small TVReturns}}
\label{fig:ZeroSymmTVReturns}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Plots of statistic $T_{n}(c = 0)$ versus date for our four different markets series data]
{\small Plots of statistic $T_{n}(c = 0)$ versus date for our four different markets series data. Also in this plot, horizontal straight lines that correspond to the 99, 95 and 90 upper percentage points, are indicated.}
\label{fig:ZeroSymm}
\end{figure}
The corresponding coarse grained images of the time evolution of $C$ for all data samples and observables were obtained. Figure \ref{fig:CEvolution} displays the desired results. In \ref{appendixa} we show these plots separately including its confidence interval evolution.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.475\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/timesymmetry/simetria_tiempo_simpleret.pdf}
\caption[ ]{{Returns}}
\label{fig:CEvolutionSimpleret}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.475\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/timesymmetry/simetria_tiempo_trendret.pdf}
\caption[ ]{{TReturns}}
\label{fig:CEvolutionTrendret}
\end{subfigure}
\vskip\baselineskip
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.475\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/timesymmetry/simetria_tiempo_trendvel.pdf}
\caption[ ]{{TVReturns}}
\label{fig:CEvolutionTrendvel}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Plots of the most plausible point of symmetry $C$ versus time for our four different markets series data]
{\small Plots of the most plausible point of symmetry $C$ versus time for the three different observables and four data samples. A 252 trading days time window was used. To appreciate independently each plot, see \ref{appendixa}.}
\label{fig:CEvolution}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Behavior of the Symmetry point $C$ around extreme market movements dates}
\label{extreme}
By their construction, since the observables TReturns and TVReturns are coarse grained, in order to clarify the sensitivity of $C$ on market big movements, we show only plots for daily returns from figure \ref{fig:CEvolutionSimpleret}, this time separately in figure \ref{fig:CvsTRets}, where in the graphs of evolution of $C$ on time, we appreciate clearly the days listed in table \ref{tab:BigMovs} when market experienced extreme events, as well as the dates and duration of important crisis, such as the dotcom bubble and the subprime bear market. Because it is not the goal of this research, we do not compare the reliability of this methodology with other financial indicators to study extreme events or market cycles, but it is in our opinion that it can be applied to this kind of financial analyses. In fact traders use many indicators simultaneously to follow market behavior and construct trading systems. Implications for trading applications of our methodology are clear.
\begin{table}[h!tb]
\begin{center}
\setlength\tabcolsep{3pt}
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
Name&date\\
\hline
\hline
a) Japanese asset price bubble& 1-1-1990\\
\hline
b) Tequila Effect& 12-20-1994\\
\hline
c) Dotcom bubble&03-10-2000\\
\hline
d) Subprime crisis&08-09-2007\\
\hline
e) Brexit&06-23-2018\\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\caption[]{\small Recent crisis and critical market days chronologically ordered and pointed out in figures \ref{fig:CvsTRets}. }
\label{tab:BigMovs}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Note on the variation ranges of $C$ and $\mu$}
It is pertinent to include here a brief comment on the small range of variation of our variable $C$ displayed in figures \ref{fig:RetsFigs} to \ref{fig:TVRetsFigs}, \ref{fig:CEvolution} and \ref{fig:CvsTRets}. Table \ref{tab:confidence} shows the $C$ interval range of all our observables for all our data samples.
Figures \ref{fig:SymmReturns005} to \ref{fig:SymmTVReturns005} included in \ref{appendixa} show the evolution of $C$ and it confidence interval for all our observables and all analyzed data samples. Small values of $C$ must be expected, since that bigger the $C$ value, the further the market would be from efficiency. Since the market seems to be efficient most of the time, $C$ usually must take very small values. A quantitative study of the above mentioned could be addressed in another paper. Same comment applies also to the variation range of the mean value $\mu$ of the observables analyzed here.
\begin{figure}[h!tb]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/timesymmetry/Returns/Simetria_DJIA_CL005.pdf}
\caption[ ]%
{{\small DJIA: $C$ vs time}}
\label{fig:TVRetsTimeFigsDJIA}
\end{subfigure}
\quad
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/timesymmetry/Returns/Simetria_IPC_CL005.pdf}
\caption[ ]%
{{\small IPC: $C$ vs time}}
\label{fig:TVRetsTimeFigsIPC}
\end{subfigure}
\vskip\baselineskip
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/timesymmetry/Returns/Simetria_DAX_CL005.pdf}
\caption[]%
{{\small DAX: $C$ vs time}}
\label{fig:TVRetsTimeFigsDAX}
\end{subfigure}
\quad
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/timesymmetry/Returns/Simetria_NIKKEI_CL005.pdf}
\caption[]%
{{\small Nikkei: $C$ vs time}}
\label{fig:TVRetsTimeFigsNikkei}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Plots of most plausible symmetry point $C$ time evolution for simple returns..]
{\small Most plausible symmetry point $C$ time evolution only for daily returns. Same time window of 252 trading days was used and graphs are displayed separately. Some important market extreme events are pointed out.}
\label{fig:CvsTRets}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:Final}
In this article we study the symmetry of distributions of two coarse-grained, multi-scale observables computed from daily uninterrupted trends, named TReturns and TVReturns of four financial
daily data samples: DJIA, DAX, Nikkei and IPC indices. Per se, these distributions display
interesting properties such as bi-modality, smoother variations,
a time multi-scale nature, etc., as discussed in section 3, deserving a deeper
and additional analysis to be presented in a following paper. For comparison
and completeness purposes, the same analyses are performed on the usual daily
returns, named here only Returns.
Studying the symmetry of the distribution of variations of stocks prices, financial
index or other assets is a topic of great interest in finance. It gives us information of market fairness and how easily wealth can be created or destroyed. Also,
it is strongly linked to the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH), which implies
that for efficient markets, variations of assets prices or indices values must be
symmetric. It is precisely due to this reason that people from the financial
community almost automatically consider that these kind of distributions must
be symmetrical around the origin. In this work we show that this is not the general case: the most plausible symmetry point $C$ of financial variations fluctuates
around and close to zero. Furthermore, there exist intervals containing possible
symmetry points, varying over time and, although the mean value $\mu$ of financial
variations may belong to the interval of symmetry, $\mu \subseteq (C_{min},C_{max})$, it is not always necessarily the most plausible symmetry point. See figures \ref{fig:RetsFigs} to \ref{fig:TVRetsFigs}.
Results of our test for symmetry around zero, with a significance level $\alpha=0.05$
and a time window of 252 trading days can be seen in table \ref{tab:confidence}, showing that
for all the analyzed data samples, with the exception of Nikkei index, Returns
and TReturns are not zero symmetric and that TVReturns are zero symmetric
according to the symmetry test applied to all data samples. In the same table,
the intervals where these observables, Returns and the constructed multi-scale returns,
have symmetry points, together with their mean values and their corresponding most
plausible symmetry points found with our method are displayed. We find that, in the same way as log-returns have greater plausibility of being symmetric than plain returns (defined as just price differences) \cite{Beedles}, TVReturns have greater plausibility of being symmetric than TReturns.
We have also examined the behavior of the most plausible symmetry point $C$ of our samples of financial variations around dates with extreme market movements, see figure \ref{fig:CvsTRets}, showing that $C$ displays a good response and sensitivity to market fluctuations. In our opinion, the sensitivity of $C$ to these fluctuations make our methodology a good candidate to construct automatic trading systems and may
be attractive to people interested in this aspect of financial markets.
According to our statistical test, it is not always possible to find symmetry intervals around zero for certain significance levels, as can be seen in figure \ref{fig:ZeroSymm}. The same can be said more generally for other points that are different but close to zero.
In fact, at the confidence limits and time window resolution used in our analyses, most of the time markets seem to be close to efficiency, and then the most plausible symmetry point $C$ as well as $\mu$ must adopt very small values and increase when the markets moves away from efficiency. Of course, using a small enough time windows would result in periods of time around big market movements where would not be possible to find an interval of symmetry points and neither a most plausible symmetry point. This issue deserves a proper and additional study and as we mentioned before, we consider that this observation could be applied to study quantitatively the efficiency of financial markets.
On the other hand, and under a different research perspective, such as studies performed using
agents simulation models, our results are of interest because all acceptable agent models or of
any other kind must reproduce the empirical facts of our findings.
\subsection*{\bf Acknowledgments}
We thank Ms. Selene Jim\'enez for her \LaTeX \, revision and writing, Alejandro Aguilar for his comments and Dr. Horacio Tapia-McClung by his detailed revision to this manuscript.
This work has been endorsed by Conacyt-Mexico under Grants 283815 and 427582 and project number 5150 supported by FOINS.
|
\section{Introduction}
The presence of channel state information at the transmitter (CSIT) plays an important role in enhancing the performance of multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) systems \cite{CapacityofMultiantennaGaussian}. However, in practice, the channels between the users and the base station (BS) must be estimated, often using training. For example, in time division duplexing (TDD) systems that estimation is typically performed during the uplink training phase. Another example is the frequency division duplexing (FDD) systems where each receiver estimates its channel and feeds back a quantized version of that estimate to the BS. Crucially, for our purposes, regardless of the system used, the available CSIT is noisy.
When considering very long time intervals, the ergodic capacity can be used to describe the system performance. However, for delay-limited applications the outage capacity is a preferred metric~\cite{Efficientuseoffadingcorrelations,simon2005digital}. In this case, we investigate each data block separately. If it is successfully decoded, we proceed to the next data block. Otherwise, we have an outage and the packet must be retransmitted. That can be achieved using automatic-repeat-request algorithms; e.g.,~\cite{AnARQSchemewithMemory,Automaticrepeatrequest}, where the user sends an ``acknowledged" (ACK) when the packet is successfully decoded or ``not acknowledged" (NAK) when it requires retransmission. These ARQ protocols, therefore, provide reliability to the transmission.
When we define the outage capacity as the maximum transmission rate that can guarantee a certain outage probability, that definition does not provide us with the best transmission rate nor outage. The transmission rate that is set at the transmitter determines the outage probability, and, in turn, describes how much of that rate can be realized at the receiver. When we have a reliable system; e.g., ARQ-based systems, the throughput is named goodput~\cite{ThroughputOptimalPrecoding}. By measuring the rate actually realized at the receiver, goodput provides an effective metric to measure system performance~\cite{Rateadaptationvialink,RobustRatePowerandPrecoder}.
Using goodput as the performance metric raises a distinction between the transmission rate and the received rate. A high transmission rate results in a high outage probability (due to channel uncertainty; i.e., error in channel estimates) and most of the rate is lost in outage. On the other hand if the transmission rate is set too low, the received rate will be low. In~\cite{TheEffectofChannelEstimation}, the authors first select the user with the best channel, then for that user, choose a back off factor, from the maximum achievable rate, between zero and one. The factor is chosen to to maximize the goodput; this is, in fact, a common approach in most works. In~\cite{GoodputOptimalRateAdaptation}, the authors define a, similar, utilization factor that is optimized for a single-input single-output (SISO) system. The authors in~\cite{ThroughputOptimalPrecoding} provide goodput maximization for a single-user MISO system. Optimization for the point-to-point MIMO goodput was presented in~\cite{RobustRatePowerandPrecoder}. In \cite{OnimperfectCSIforthedownlink}, the rate back off is optimized for the downlink of a two-tier network. In \cite{JointRateandPowerAllocation}, the throughput maximization was done for a system using non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA). In \cite{DesignandanalysisofmultiuserSDMA}, the authors focused on goodput maximization for multi-user MISO system. Due to the mathematically challenging problem, orthogonal precoding is used with equal power loading and the codebook used is orthonormal. In \cite{Rateadaptationvialink}, the authors used the ACK and NAK signals available from the ARQ protocol to adapt the transmission rate in order to maximize the long-term expected goodput.
This paper considers the goodput optimization problem, under channel uncertainty, in the context of a \emph{multiuser} MISO system. The BS uses zero-forcing (ZF) beamforming to service multiple users. Specifically, we optimize max-min rate delivered to users with a certain guarantee. Further, we consider the more general case of hybrid-ARQ (HARQ) protocols~\cite{Forwarderrorcorrection}, wherein packets in outage are not dropped and retransmitted, but augmented with parity bits. This allows the receiver to recover some part of the data rate associated with the packets in outage.
In analyzing goodput, calculating the outage probability requires the probability density function (PDF) of a quadratic term with indefinite matrix. The PDF of a quadratic term with positive definite matrix has been developed in~\cite{Ontheinversionofcertain}. Then, the quadratic term with indefinite matrix was decomposed to two independent quadratic forms with definite matrices in~\cite{Anaccurateapproximationtothedistribution}. These mathematical tools provide an approach to obtain the outage probability for any beamforming vectors and transmission rates.
The key contribution in this paper is to underline the significant gains to be had in \emph{delivered} rates to users using the goodput framework. We show that the goodput is highly dependent on the transmission rate, and significant gains can be obtained by properly choosing that rate. We then show how a robust approach can be modified such that we can balance between the transmission rate and outage. We focus on the case of maximizing the minimum delivered rate, and provide iterative closed-form expressions for this case.
\section{System Model}
We consider a narrowband multiuser MISO downlink system with an $N_t$-antenna BS and $K$ single-antenna users. The transmitted signal $\mathbf{x}_t$ is designed using linear beamforming such that $\mathbf{x}_t= \sum_{k=1}^K\mathbf{w}_k s_k$, where $s_k$ is the data symbol for user $k$, and $\mathbf{w}_k$ the associated beamformer. The received signal at user $k$ is
\begin{equation}\label{rcvd_sig}
y_k= \mathbf{h}_k^H \mathbf{w}_k s_k + \textstyle\sum_{j \neq k}\mathbf{h}_k^H \mathbf{w}_j s_j + n_k,
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{h}_k^H$ denotes the actual channel between the BS and receiver $k$, and $n_k$ represents the additive zero-mean circular complex Gaussian noise at that user. The signal-to-interference-and-noise ratio (SINR) value at user $k$ is
\begin{equation}\
\text{SINR}_k = \frac{\mathbf{h}_k^H \mathbf{w}_k \mathbf{w}_k^H \mathbf{h}_k}{\mathbf{h}_k^H (\sum_{j \neq k}\mathbf{w}_j \mathbf{w}_j^H) \mathbf{h}_k + \sigma_k^2} , \\
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_k^2$ is the noise variance at receiver $k$. In the case of zero-mean independent data symbols of normalized power, the average transmission power is $\textstyle\sum_{k=1}^K \mathbf{w}_k^H \mathbf{w}_k$. In this paper, we will assume that we have a total power constraint; $\textstyle\sum_{k=1}^K \mathbf{w}_k^H \mathbf{w}_k \leq P_t$, where $ P_t$ is the maximum power allowed for transmission.
The SINR at the user is important in determining the rate that can be transmitted with tolerable bit-error rate. However, that value depends on the channels being known at the BS. In reality, the channels are estimated and channel uncertainty is inevitable. In this paper, we will consider systems with additive channel uncertainty modeled as
\begin{equation}\label{uncertainty}
\mathbf{h}_k= \mathbf{h}_{e_k} +\mathbf{e}_k,
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{h}_{e_k}$ is the BS's estimate of the channel to user $k$, and $\mathbf{e}_k \backsim \mathcal{CN} (\boldsymbol\mu_k,\mathbf{C}_k)$, denoting $\mathbf{e}_k$ to be complex Gaussian with mean $\boldsymbol{\mu}_k$ and covariance $\mathbf{C}_k$.
Based on this channel uncertainty, the outage probability $\delta_k= \mathbb{P}[\text{SINR}_k \leq \gamma_k$], where $\gamma_k$ is the SINR target that sets the transmission rate and $\mathbb{P}[\cdot]$ denotes probability. The outage probability is equivalent to $\mathbb{P}[\mathbf{h}_k^H \mathbf{Q}_k \mathbf{h}_k - \sigma_k^2 \leq 0]$, where
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{Q}_k &= \mathbf{w}_k \mathbf{w}_k^H/\gamma_k-\textstyle\sum_{j \neq k} \mathbf{w}_j \mathbf{w}_j^H \\
&= \beta_k \mathbf{u}_k \mathbf{u}_k^H/\gamma_k-\textstyle\sum_{j \neq k} \beta_j \mathbf{u}_j \mathbf{u}_j^H,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
with $\beta_k=\| \mathbf{w}_k \|^2$, and $ \mathbf{u}_k$ the unit norm vector in the direction of $ \mathbf{w}_k$.
Using the additive channel uncertainty model in \eqref{uncertainty}, we have that the outage probability, $\delta_k$, is $\mathbb{P}[f_k(\mathbf{e}_k) \leq 0]$ with
\begin{equation}\label{SINR_reformulation}
f_k(\mathbf{e}_k)=\mathbf{h}_{e_k}^H \mathbf{Q}_k \mathbf{h}_{e_k} + 2 \mathcal{R}\left(\mathbf{e}_k^H \mathbf{Q}_k \mathbf{h}_{e_k} \right) + \mathbf{e}_k^H \mathbf{Q}_k \mathbf{e}_k - \sigma_k^2,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{R}\left(\cdot\right)$ denotes the real part of a complex number.
Outage constraints are generally intractable even when the uncertainty is Gaussian~\cite{Optimalpowercontrol,Probabilisticallyconstrained,OutageConstrained}. We will show in this paper how we can calculate such a probability and how to use that value to enhance the system performance.
\subsection{Goodput Rate: The Objective Function}
If the BS ignored the channel uncertainty, it would transmit at a rate $\log(1+\gamma_k)$ supported by the SINR value $\gamma_k$. Typically, the beamforming vectors reduce the interference terms in the denominator of the SINR so that we can have high SINR values. When we have channel uncertainties, extra interference terms in the form of $\mathbf{e}_k^H (\sum_{j \neq k}\mathbf{w}_j \mathbf{w}_j^H) \mathbf{e}_k$ will be added to the denominator which will decrease the SINR value and the user will suffer from high outage.
If we denote the rate transmitted to user $k$ as $R_k$, this rate is the goodput conditioned on there being no outage; this happens with probability $1 - \delta_k$. However, when an outage happens, the user will ask for the packets to be retransmitted again. If the packet during outage is just discarded, then the rate retrieved from that packet is $\eta=0$. When advanced HARQ algorithms that make use of the previous sent packets are implemented, some of the transmitted rate can be retrieved, $\eta R_k$, where $\eta < 1$. Accordingly, the sum goodput can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{goodput_obj}
R^{(g)} = \sum_{k=1}^K (1-\delta_k) R_k + \eta \delta_k R_k.
\end{equation}
Since we focus here on the case of max-min, the objective function simplifies to $R^{(g)} = \sum_{k=1}^K (1-\delta_k) R + \eta \delta_k R$.
The differences between this objective and the sum-rate (SR) approach are important to highlight. To maximize SR, we maximize $ \log(1+\gamma_k)$; however, for goodput, a higher $R_k$ results in a higher outage, $\delta_k$; i.e., there is a tradeoff between transmitted rate and outage. Furthermore, we note that the value of $\eta$, related to the HARQ, sets the importance of preventing the occurrence of an outage (for simplicity, in this paper, we assume that $\eta$ is constant).
\section{Effect of Channel Uncertainties on Outage}
Once the BS chooses a transmission rate, $R_k$, to user $k$, the outage probability, $\delta_k$, is given by $\mathbb{P}[f_k(\mathbf{e}_k)<0]$. We now show how to efficiently approximate this expression using the approximate PDF of positive definite quadratic forms~\cite{Anaccurateapproximationtothedistribution,Ontheinversionofcertain}.
Since $\mathbf{e}_k \backsim \mathcal{CN} (\boldsymbol\mu_k,\mathbf{C}_k)$, we can write $\mathbf{e}_k=\boldsymbol\mu_k+\mathbf{C}^{1/2}_k \mathbf{z}_k$, where $\mathbf{z}_k \backsim \mathcal{CN} (\boldsymbol 0,\mathbf{I})$.
Accordingly, we can rewrite $f_k(\mathbf{e}_k)$ as
\begin{subequations}\label{matrix_decomp}
\begin{align}
f_k(\mathbf{e}_k) &=\mathbf{h}_k^H \mathbf{Q}_k \mathbf{h}_k - \sigma_k^2 \\
&= (\mathbf{h}_{e_k}+\mathbf{e}_k)^H \mathbf{Q}_k (\mathbf{h}_{e_k}+\mathbf{e}_k)- \sigma_k^2 \\
&= (\mathbf{h}_{e_k}+\boldsymbol\mu_k+\mathbf{C}^{1/2}_k \mathbf{z}_k)^H \mathbf{Q}_k (\mathbf{h}_{e_k}+\boldsymbol\mu_k+\mathbf{C}^{1/2}_k \mathbf{z}_k) \nonumber \\ & \hspace*{1.5in} -\sigma_k^2 \\
&= (\mathbf{C}^{-1/2}_k(\mathbf{h}_{e_k}+\boldsymbol\mu_k)+ \mathbf{z}_k)^H \mathbf{C}^{1/2}_k \mathbf{Q}_k \mathbf{C}^{1/2}_k \nonumber \\ & \hspace*{0.7in} \times(\mathbf{C}^{-1/2}_k(\mathbf{h}_{e_k}+\boldsymbol\mu_k)+ \mathbf{z}_k)- \sigma_k^2 \\
&= (\mathbf{P}^H_k \mathbf{C}_k^{-1/2}(\mathbf{h}_{e_k}+\boldsymbol\mu_k)+ \mathbf{P}^H_k \mathbf{z}_k)^H \boldsymbol\Delta_k \nonumber \\ \label{SINR_sep}
& \hspace*{0.2in} \times(\mathbf{P}^H_k \mathbf{C}^{-1/2}_k (\mathbf{h}_{e_k}+\boldsymbol\mu_k)+ \mathbf{P}^H_k \mathbf{z}_k)- \sigma_k^2,
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $\mathbf{C}^{1/2}_k \mathbf{Q}_k \mathbf{C}^{1/2}_k = \mathbf{P}_k \boldsymbol\Delta_k \mathbf{P}^H_k,$ $\boldsymbol\Delta_k$ is a diagonal matrix, and $\mathbf{P}_k$ is an orthonormal matrix. Now in~\eqref{SINR_sep} we observe that the term $\mathbf{P}^H_k \mathbf{C}^{-1/2}_k (\mathbf{h}_{e_k}+\boldsymbol\mu_k)$ is constant, and that, since $\mathbf{P}_k$ is an orthonormal matrix, $\mathbf{P}^H_k \mathbf{z}_k$ is a vector of independent normal random variables. Accordingly, the quadratic form in \eqref{SINR_sep} can be divided into the difference of two independent quadratic positive definite forms; $(\mathbf{b}_1+\mathbf{z}_1)^H\boldsymbol\Delta_1 (\mathbf{b}_1+\mathbf{z}_1) - (\mathbf{b}_2+\mathbf{z}_2)^H\boldsymbol\Delta_2 (\mathbf{b}_2+\mathbf{z}_2)-\sigma_k^2$. The first positive definite term corresponds to the positive values in $\boldsymbol\Delta$, while the second corresponds to the negative values. Since the individual terms are independent, the overall PDF can be obtained directly by using convolution.
\subsection{Approximating the PDF of a Positive Definite Quadratic Form}\label{PDF_PDM}
In this section, we will summarize the steps required to approximate the PDF of a positive definite quadratic form $\mathbf{x}^T \mathbf{A} \mathbf{x}$ as shown in \cite{Anaccurateapproximationtothedistribution}. The approximation is based on obtaining the moments of the quadratic form from its cumulants by using a recursive formula, then using those moments to approximate the density function of the positive definite quadratic form. That approximation uses Laguerre polynomials and makes use of their orthogonality to obtain the polynomials' weights. Those weights are selected such that the first $d$ moments of the original and approximated PDF are the same, where $d$ sets the degree, and, accordingly, accuracy of approximation.
For $\mathbf{x} \backsim \mathcal{N} (\boldsymbol\mu_x,\mathbf{C})$ and a real positive definite matrix $\mathbf{A}$, the $i$th cumulant, $c_i$, of $\mathbf{x}^T \mathbf{A} \mathbf{x}$ is \cite{Quadraticformsinrandom}
\begin{equation}\label{cumulants}
c_i=2^{i-1} i! (\text{tr}(\mathbf{A}\mathbf{C})^i/i+ \boldsymbol\mu_x^T (\mathbf{A}\mathbf{C} )^{i-1} \mathbf{A}\boldsymbol\mu_x),
\end{equation}
where $\mathrm{tr}(\cdot)$ denotes the trace function.
Using the calculated cumulants, we can obtain the $i$th moment $\boldsymbol\chi_i$ as~\cite{Arecursiveformulationoftheoldproblem}
\begin{equation}\label{moments}
\chi_i= \sum_{k=0}^{i-1} \frac{(i-1)!}{(i-k-1)!k!} c_{i-k} \chi_k.
\end{equation}
We define $\beta_x =\chi_2/\chi_1 - \chi_1, \nu=\chi^2_1/(\chi_2 - \chi_1^2) -1, d_{i,k}= \frac{ (-1)^k \Gamma(i+\nu+1) }{ (i-k)! k! \Gamma(\nu+k+1)}, \eta_i=\frac{\Gamma(\nu+1) i!}{\Gamma(\nu+i+1)} \sum_{k=0}^i d_{i,k} \chi_k/\beta^k_x,$ and $\xi_k=\sum_{i=k}^d \eta_i d_{i,k}.$
Using those definitions, the approximated density at $y$ can be written as \cite{Ontheinversionofcertain}
\begin{equation}\label{pdf_approx}
f_a(y)=\frac{y^\nu e^{-y/\beta_x}}{\beta_x^{\nu} \Gamma(\nu+1)} \sum_{k=0}^d \xi_k y^k/\beta^{k+1}_x.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Approximating the PDF of $f_k(\mathbf{e}_k)$}
To approximate the PDF of $f_k(\mathbf{e}_k)$, the only remaining point to deal with is the fact that the quadratic term $\mathbf{h}_k^H \mathbf{Q}_k \mathbf{h}_k$ consists of complex vector $\mathbf{h}_k$ and matrix $\mathbf{Q}_k $, while the derivations of the approximate PDF for the form $\mathbf{x}^T \mathbf{A} \mathbf{x}$ assumed real values only. However, a complex quadratic form can be directly decoupled to a real quadratic form of twice the dimensions as follows
\begin{equation}\label{real_imag_decop}
\mathbf{h}_k^H \mathbf{Q}_k \mathbf{h}_k=
\left[\begin{array}{l}\mathcal{R}(\mathbf{h}_k)\\\mathcal{I}(\mathbf{h}_k)\end{array}\right]^T
\left[\begin{array}{c c}\mathcal{R}(\mathbf{Q}_k)&-\mathcal{I}(\mathbf{Q}_k)\\ \mathcal{I}(\mathbf{Q}_k )&\mathcal{R}(\mathbf{Q}_k )\end{array}\right]
\left[\begin{array}{l}\mathcal{R}(\mathbf{h}_k)\\\mathcal{I}(\mathbf{h}_k)\end{array}\right],
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{I}(\cdot)$ denotes the imaginary part of a complex number.
Now, the PDF of $f_k(\mathbf{e}_k)$ can be efficiently approximated by obtaining the PDFs of its underlying definite quadratic components. The steps for doing so are summarized in Alg.~\ref{Alg1}.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Approximating the PDF of $f_k(\mathbf{e}_k)$}
\label{Alg1}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State Decompose $f_k(\mathbf{e}_k)$ into two quadratic forms $(\mathbf{b}_i+\mathbf{z}_i)^H\boldsymbol\Delta_i (\mathbf{b}_i+\mathbf{z}_i)$ using \eqref{matrix_decomp}, $i=1,2$.
\State Do steps 3-5 for each of the quadratic forms.
\State Use \eqref{real_imag_decop} to obtain the real representation $\mathbf{x}^T \mathbf{A} \mathbf{x}$ for $(\mathbf{b}_i+\mathbf{z}_i)^H\boldsymbol\Delta_i (\mathbf{b}_i+\mathbf{z}_i)$.
\State Compute the moments $\chi_i$ using \eqref{cumulants}, \eqref{moments}.
\State Calculate the constants and weights to obtain $f_a^i(\cdot)$ using \eqref{pdf_approx}.
\State Obtain the approximate PDF $f_a(\cdot)$ as the convolution of $f_a^1(\cdot)$ and $f_a^2(\cdot)$.
\State The outage probability is the probability that $f_a(\cdot) < \sigma_k^2.$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
The technique described in Alg.~\ref{Alg1} provides the outage probability for a given transmission rate for any set of beamforming vectors. That enables us to find the different outage probabilities for a range of transmission rates, and obtain the goodput $R^{(g)}$ in~\eqref{goodput_obj} for those rates.
\section{Robust Beamforming to Optimize Max-Min Goodput}
The goodput objective in \eqref{goodput_obj} combines the hardness of rate algorithms in addition to the intractability of the outage probability constraints. However, without both, we are not measuring the actual rate at the receiver side. To untangle this problem, we will consider a two-layer approach. For the outer layer, we will modify a heuristic approach to control the outage, then use insights from a special case to approximate the outage probability $\delta$. Then for the inner layer, we will use that $\delta$ to obtain closed-form expressions for the max-min rates.
\subsection{The Heuristic Approach and the Proposed Modification}
When dealing with channel uncertainty, a well-known heuristic is to combat the expected resulting interference by adding additional noise terms for user $k$, specifically $\mathbb{E}[\mathbf{e}_k^H (\sum_{j \neq k}\mathbf{w}_j \mathbf{w}_j^H) \mathbf{e}_k]$, where $\mathbb{E}[\cdot]$ denotes expectation. This additional noise term can be written as
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
n_{e_k}^2&= \mathbb{E}[\mathbf{e}_k^H (\sum_{j \neq k}\mathbf{w}_j \mathbf{w}_j^H) \mathbf{e}_k] \\
&= \mathbb{E}[(\boldsymbol\mu_k+\mathbf{C}_k^{1/2} \mathbf{z}_k)^H (\sum_{j \neq k}\mathbf{w}_j \mathbf{w}_j^H) (\boldsymbol\mu_k+\mathbf{C}_k^{1/2} \mathbf{z}_k))] \\
\pagebreak
&=\boldsymbol\mu_k^H (\sum_{j \neq k}\mathbf{w}_j \mathbf{w}_j^H)\boldsymbol\mu_k+ \mathbb{E} [\sum_{j \neq k} \mathbf{w}_j^H \mathbf{C}_k^{1/2} \mathbf{z}_k \mathbf{z}_k^H \mathbf{C}_k^{1/2}\mathbf{w}_j] \\
&=\boldsymbol\mu_k^H (\sum_{j \neq k}\mathbf{w}_j \mathbf{w}_j^H)\boldsymbol\mu_k+ \sum_{j \neq k} \mathbf{w}_j^H \mathbf{C}_k \mathbf{w}_j \\
&=\boldsymbol\mu_k^H (\sum_{j \neq k} \beta_j \mathbf{u}_j \mathbf{u}_j^H)\boldsymbol\mu_k+ \sum_{j \neq k} \beta_j \mathbf{u}_j^H \mathbf{C}_k \mathbf{u}_j.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
For a given set of beamforming vectors, $n_{e_k}^2$ is linear in each $\beta_k$. Further, when $\mathbf{e}_k \backsim \mathcal{CN} (\boldsymbol 0, \sigma_{e_k}^2 \mathbf{I})$, we have the simplified factor $n_{e_k}^2=\sum_{j \neq k} \beta_j \sigma_{e_k}^2.$
Adding this term to the noise essentially assumes that the additional interference is Gaussian (the worst-case from an information theoretic perspective) and infinite block lengths. However, this approach must be visited in the framework of outage probability.
We observe that, with channel uncertainty, we have two factors affecting the SINR. The first is that the true signal power is $\mathbf{h}_k^H \mathbf{w}_k \mathbf{w}_k^H \mathbf{h}_k$, while we only have an estimated channel $\mathbf{h}_{e_k}^H$ instead. However, this effect is small as the magnitude of $\mathbf{h}_{e_k}^H$ should be significantly larger than the channel estimation error $\mathbf{e}_k$ for proper operation \cite{MIMObroadcast}. The second effect is more important which is the effect of the channel estimation error on the interference terms. When assuming ZF beamforming, the term $\mathbf{e}_k^H (\sum_{j \neq k}\mathbf{w}_j \mathbf{w}_j^H) \mathbf{e}_k$ can significantly degrades the overall SINR. This term is what the heuristic use to combat the noise, by adding its expected value to the noise level.
Note that, for fixed beamformers, we can obtain the PDF of the term $\mathbf{e}_k^H (\sum_{j \neq k}\mathbf{w}_j \mathbf{w}_j^H) \mathbf{e}_k$ as shown in Section~\ref{PDF_PDM} since it is a quadratic form with a positive definite matrix, and that PDF could be used to approximate the outage probability for a certain SINR target. The advantage of this technique is that we have only one PDF to estimate, as that term is not a function of the SINR value. However, when the noise level is very high, the effect of interference terms on outage decreases and the effect of the channel error in the SINR numerator becomes more dominant.
\subsection{Insights from a Special Case}
In the special case of only one significant interferer indexed $j$ and white estimation error, the PDF of $\mathbf{e}_k^H \mathbf{w}_j \mathbf{w}_j^H \mathbf{e}_k$, where $\mathbf{e}_k \backsim \mathcal{CN} (\boldsymbol 0, \sigma_{e_k}^2 \mathbf{I})$, can be obtained using \eqref{cumulants}, \eqref{moments} and \eqref{pdf_approx} as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{err_pdf_approx}
f_a(y)= e^{-y/\beta_x} /\beta_x,
\end{equation}
where $\beta_x= \beta_j \sigma_{e_k}^2$. In this case, $\mathbb{P}[Y > a\beta_x] = e^{-a}$ where $a$ is a threshold factor. Accordingly, we can choose the value of $a$ to balance between maximizing the rate and minimizing the outage to maximize the overall goodput. Note that in the case of one strong interferer, $a \beta_x $ is approximately $a$ times $n_{e_k}^2.$ This inspires us to modify the heuristic approach such that it provides robustness by \emph{scaling the average interference power} $n_{e_k}^2$ by a factor of $a$ to combat interference. This way, we control the outage probability by choosing $a$, and we approximate the outage probability by $e^{-a}$.
Using our proposed two-layer approach, for a given value of $a$, the inner layer can be written generally in the SR case as follows
\begin{subequations}\label{heurisric}
\begin{align}
\max_{\substack{\gamma_k, \mathbf{w}_k}} \quad & \sum_{k=1}^K \log(1+\gamma_k) \\
\text{s.t.} \quad & \mathbf{h}_{e_k}^H \mathbf{Q}_k \mathbf{h}_{e_k} - a n_{e_k}^2 - \sigma_k^2 \geq 0, \\
& \sum_k \beta_k \leq P_t.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
The problem in \eqref{heurisric} is hard to solve even when $a n_{e_k}^2$ is set to zero. A typical approach for SR algorithms is to use ZF directions, which allows for an optimal water-filling algorithm for the power loading. However, when the extra terms $a n_{e_k}^2$ are added, the problem is non-convex, even when ZF directions are assumed. On the other hand, when we investigate the case of maximizing the minimum rate when ZF beamforming is used, the problem in \eqref{heurisric} can be optimally solved. Since all the constraints are linear in $\beta_k$, we can use a bisection search for the common SINR $\gamma$ and in each iteration the linear program is checked for feasibility. If the problem is to be solved for a general SR objective, one possible way is to use the expected value of $\beta_k=P_t/K$ in $n_{e_k}$ to ensure that $a n_{e_k}^2$ is constant. In this case, water-filling can be optimally used to obtain the power loading.
\subsection{Max-Min Closed-From Expressions}\label{sect_heur_maxmin}
We stated that the problem in \eqref{heurisric} can be solved by bisection search if the objective is maximizing the minimum rate. Here, we provide efficient closed-form expressions to do so when ZF directions are used.
We observe that we can write the set of $K$ constraints $ \mathbf{h}_{e_k}^H \mathbf{Q}_k \mathbf{h}_{e_k} - a n_{e_k}^2 - \sigma_k^2 \geq 0$ in a matrix form as follows
\begin{equation}\label{A_eqn}
\mathbf{A} \boldsymbol{\beta} \geq \boldsymbol{\sigma}^2,
\end{equation}
where $\boldsymbol{\beta}=[\beta_1, \beta_2,..., \beta_K]^T$, $\boldsymbol{\sigma}=[\sigma_{1}, \sigma_{2},..., \sigma_{K}]^T$, $\mathbf{[A]}_{ii}= | \mathbf{h}_{e_i}^H {\mathbf{u}}_i |^2/\gamma_i$, and $\mathbf{[A]}_{ij}= - a \sigma_{e_i}^2$, $\forall i \neq j$. The power loading satisfying this constraint by equality is $ \boldsymbol{\beta} = \mathbf{A}^{-1} \boldsymbol{\sigma}^2.$
If we let $\boldsymbol{1}$ denote a column vector of ones, then the power constraint can be written as
$$ P_t \geq \boldsymbol{1}^H \mathbf{A}^{-1} \boldsymbol{\sigma}^2.$$
We observe that the matrix $\mathbf{A}$ can be written as a diagonal matrix $\mathbf{B}$ that is perturbed by a rank one update $\mathbf{s} \boldsymbol{1}^H$, where $\mathbf{s}_k=- a \sigma_{e_k}^2$. Accordingly, we have \cite{sherman1949adjustment}
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\boldsymbol{1}^H \mathbf{A}^{-1} \boldsymbol{\sigma}^2 & = \boldsymbol{1}^H \Bigl(\mathbf{B}^{-1} + \frac{\mathbf{B}^{-1} \mathbf{s} \boldsymbol{1}^H \mathbf{B}^{-1}}{1- \mathbf{s}^H \mathbf{B}^{-1} \boldsymbol{1}} \Bigr)\boldsymbol{\sigma}^2 \\
& = \frac{\boldsymbol{1}^H \mathbf{B}^{-1}\boldsymbol{\sigma}^2}{1- \mathbf{s}^H \mathbf{B}^{-1} \boldsymbol{1}}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Now we can write the power constraint as
$$ \boldsymbol{1}^H \mathbf{B}^{-1} (\boldsymbol{\sigma}^2 - P_t \mathbf{s}) \leq P_t.$$
If we define the vector $\mathbf{b}$ as the vector of the diagonal elements of $\mathbf{B}^{-1}$, then the $k$th element would be
$\mathbf{b}_k= \gamma/ (| \mathbf{h}_{e_k}^H {\mathbf{u}}_k |^2 + a \sigma_{e_k}^2 \gamma).$
The power constraint is then
\begin{equation}\label{maxmin_cond}
\sum_k \gamma (\sigma_k^2 + P_t a \sigma_{e_k}^2) / (| \mathbf{h}_{e_k}^H {\mathbf{u}}_k |^2 + a \sigma_{e_k}^2 \gamma) \leq P_t.
\end{equation}
Accordingly, instead of solving the convex problem in \eqref{heurisric} iteratively, we can find the optimal solution by bisection on the SINR target $\gamma$ and checking whether it satisfies \eqref{maxmin_cond} or not.
\subsection{Choice of $a$}\label{sect_a_est}
We stated that for a given $a$, we can solve \eqref{heurisric}. The value of $a$ sets the resulting SINR target(s), and outage probabilities. To obtain the highest goodput, we should solve for all the possible values of $a$, and choose that corresponding to the highest goodput. Since the goodput function increases to a maximum then decreases, then we can use bisection search for the best value of $a$. In each iteration, for the current value of $a$, the outage can be approximated as $e^{-a}$, and the corresponding $\gamma$ can be obtained using bisection to obtain the maximum value that satisfies \eqref{maxmin_cond}. While bisection search is typically fast, having nested bisection search can be of moderate complexity, and we may rather operate using a fixed $a$.
\section{Simulation Results}
For the simulation setup, we will we consider a downlink system in which a BS with $N_t=8$ antennas serves $K=3$ single-antenna users randomly distributed around the BS within a radius of 1km. The large scale fading is described by a path-loss exponent of 3.52 and log-normal shadow fading with 8dB standard deviation, and the small scale fading is modeled using the standard i.i.d. Rayleigh model. The channel estimation error is zero-mean and Gaussian with covariance $\sigma_{e_k}^2 \mathbf{I}$, where $\sigma_{e_k}^2$ is of power -100dBm. The user noise level is -90dBm, and $P_t=40$ watts is the total power constraint. The BS uses ZF directions and the power loading is designed to maximize the minimum rate. In our simulations, we use $d=6$ for the PDF approximation.
In Fig.~\ref{fig1}, we plot the average goodput as defined in \eqref{goodput_obj} versus the transmission rate $R$ for a random set of channel vectors when $\eta=0.3$. We plot the curves for the theoretical goodput values as obtained from Alg.~\ref{Alg1}, and once again using Monte Carlo simulations by producing 2000 random error vector for each SINR target and computing the corresponding goodput. We observe that the PDF approximation using Alg.~\ref{Alg1} provides an excellent approximation for the outage probability, and, accordingly, the goodput all over the transmission rate range. Note that, for this set of channels, the expected max-min rate value when no uncertainty is present is 8.23 bits/s/Hz while the actual goodput at the user side for that rate is 2.77 bits/s/Hz. We observe that there is significant gap between what is promised by the max-min rate algorithm compared to what is actually delivered to the user side. We also plot the heuristic robust approach for different values of the scale factor $a$ ranging from one to twenty.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\epsfysize= 2.0in
\epsffile{fig1.eps}
\caption{The average goodput per user versus $R$ (Single-cell).}\label{fig1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig2}, we add the inter-cell interference from the six surrounding BSs to the users' noise level. The other BSs have the same parameters and their centers are 2km away from the center BS. While the significantly higher interference makes the rates lower, we can still observe the same typical performance as that explained for Fig.~\ref{fig1}. In addition, we can see that since the noise is far more dominant now, combating the relatively smaller channel error costs a smaller decrease in the rate. In other words, we only need to slightly decrease the transmission rate to obtain the maximum goodput.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\epsfysize= 2.0in
\epsffile{fig2b.eps}
\caption{The average goodput per user versus $R$ (Multi-cell).}\label{fig2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig3}, we show the goodput performance of the heuristic for different values of $a$ for the multi-cell case. We observe that while the delivered rates can be low for small $a$, the performance is almost flat for a range of $a$. Accordingly, obtaining a good performance for a fixed $a$ is possible.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\epsfysize= 2.0in
\epsffile{fig3b.eps}
\caption{The average goodput per user versus the scale $a$.}\label{fig3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig1} (or ~\ref{fig2}), we showed the typical behavior for a set of channels. Now in Table \ref{table1}, we show the average goodput per user for 100 set of channels for each case. For each set, the highest goodput is selected for the theoretical Alg.~\ref{Alg1}, and the heuristic approach in Sect.~\ref{sect_heur_maxmin}. We also show the performance of the heuristic algorithm for $a$ that provides the maximum goodput, and for $a=1 $ which is the original heuristic. We also show the performance when $a$ is estimated as shown in Sect.~\ref{sect_a_est}. We observe that Sect.~\ref{sect_a_est} provides better results when the noise is low, as the outage estimation relies on the interference being dominant. We can see that, for each case, there is a fixed factor $a$ that provides performance quite close to the best case. We also provide the actual goodput for the max-min rate algorithm that does not take into account the channel uncertainty, versus its claimed performance. Again, this marks a great gap, and suggests that the goodput metric can provide a more accurate representation for the system performance than the rate.
\begin {table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Average goodput in bits/sec/Hertz versus the noise level}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
cell & Alg.~\ref{Alg1} & \ref{sect_heur_maxmin} & Best $a$ & $a=1$ & \ref{sect_a_est} & Max. min \\
\hline
Single & 7.84 & 8.38 & 8.36 ($a=3$) & 7.15 & 8.43 & 3.42 (11.3) \\
\hline
Multi & 1.6 & 1.58 & 1.55 ($a=42$) & 1.1 & 1.4 & 1 (1.68) \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table1}
\end{center}
\end {table}
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we proposed using mathematical tools capable of approximating the PDF of a quadratic form with positive definite matrix to obtain the outage probability for a given set of beamformers and transmission rates. The selection of the transmission rate affects the outage probability and the resulting goodput. We proposed a two-layer approach that can provide significant gains with low-computational cost. The approach is based on controlling the outage using a modification to a well-known heuristic, and obtaining the best goodput for that outage. We showed that there can be significant gaps between the rates promised assuming no channel uncertainty and the actual goodput. In summary, the goodput provides a better performance metric to assess the system performance than the rates.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
Analytic continuation is well known to be ill-posed. To be
precise, suppose a function $f$ is analytic in a connected open
region $\Omega$ of the complex plane and we know its values in a
set $E\subset \overline\Omega$ to an accuracy of $\varepsilon>0$.
(We assume $E$ is a bounded nonempty continuum whose closure
does not enclose any points of $\Omega\backslash \overline E$,
and that $f$ extends analytically to $E$.) This implies no bounds
whatsoever on the value of $f$ at any point $z\in \Omega\backslash
\overline E$ (see Theorem~\ref{genthm1}). And yet if we knew
$f$ {\em exactly\/} in~$E$, this would determine its values in
$\Omega$ exactly.
In practice, nevertheless, analytic continuation from inexact
data is carried out all the time, and what makes this possible
is {\em regularization,} the introduction of additional
smoothness assumptions. Often an extrapolation technique is
applied without such assumptions being made explicit---and
this is understandable, for in applications, often one has a
sense of certain features of one's function without
being able to pin them down precisely. In this paper, however,
we wish to be completely explicit and show how certain natural
regularizing assumptions lead to upper and lower bounds
on the accuracy of analytic continuation.
Our regularizing assumption will be that $f$ is not only analytic
in $\Omega$, but bounded. For example, we can take
the bound to be
$\half$ and consider the set of functions
that are analytic in $\Omega$ and satisfy $\|f\|_\Omega^{} \le \half$.
(The symbol $\|\cdot\|_A^{}$ always denotes the supremum
norm over the set $A$.)
If $f,\ft$ are two such functions, then $\|\ft-f\|_\Omega^{} \le 1$. We shall show
(Theorem~\ref{genthm2}) that
if in addition $\|\ft-f\|_E^{}\le \varepsilon$, then for
each $z\in \Omega\backslash \overline E$,
\begin{equation}
|\ft(z) -f(z)| \le \varepsilon^{\alpha(z)}
\label{bound1}
\end{equation}
for some $\alpha(z)\in (0,1)$ that depends on $\Omega$, $E$,
and $z$ but not on $f$ and $\ft$ or $\varepsilon$.
Another way to say the same thing is
\begin{equation}
\log |\ft(z) -f(z)| \le \alpha(z) \log \varepsilon.
\label{bound2}
\end{equation}
We may interpret (\ref{bound2}) as follows: if we know a function
$f$ satisfying $\|f\|_\Omega\le \half$ to~$d$ digits on $E$,
then it is determined to $\alpha(z) \kern .3pt d$ digits at~$z$.
Even though our theorems are, of course, mathematical rather than
computational results, we shall use the terminology of digits a
good deal in discussing them, for this is an easy way to talk about
logarithmic quantities.
This general framework may sound rather abstract. It becomes
concrete when we consider the dependence of $\alpha(z)$ on $z$
for particular choices of $\Omega$ and $E$, and after stating
a basic lemma in Section~2, we shall focus on two choices that
are particularly fundamental. The first is radial geometry,
with analytic continuation outward from the unit disk $E$ into
a disk $\Omega$ of radius $R>1$ (Section~3). In this setting
analytic continuation is reasonably well-conditioned, with
digits of accuracy being lost only linearly as $|z|$ increases.
This observation possibly goes back to Hadamard himself, and its
numerical implications have been considered by various authors
including Miller~\cite{miller} and Franklin~\cite{franklin}.
An intuitive way to understand the effect is to note that in the
limiting case $R\to\infty$, Liouville's theorem implies that $f$
must be constant, so if we know $f$ to accuracy $\varepsilon$
on~$E$, we know it to the same accuracy everywhere. The result for
finite $R$ (Theorem~\ref{thm1}) can be derived from the Hadamard
three-circles theorem~\cite{hille}. The essence of the matter
is that analyticity and boundedness at a large radius imply rapid
exponential decrease of Taylor coefficients, hence good behavior
at smaller radii.
Analytic continuation is much more difficult in the other geometry
we focus on, which is linear (Section~4). Here we take $\Omega$
to be an infinite half-strip of half-width~$1$ (without loss
of generality), and $E$ as the end segment of the half-strip. As $z$
moves away from $E$ along the centerline of the strip, digits are
lost exponentially as a function of distance, and we prove this by
reducing the problem to the configuration of Lemma~\ref{thelemma}.
At a point $z$ that is $2\pi$ units away from the end, for
example, the number of accurate digits has shrunk by a factor
$(\pi/4)\exp(\pi^2)\approx \hbox{15,000}$, so if you want to
have $3$ digits of accuracy at such a point, you'll need to
start with 45,000 digits.
Our formulations are conformally invariant, and thus different
regions $\Omega\ne \C$ can be transplanted from one to another.
In particular, analytic continuation in a disk and a half-strip
are essentially equivalent problems,
and the reason the half-strip is exponentially more difficult
than the disk is that the conformal map that relates them is an
exponential. Section 5 explores results for general regions (not
necessarily simply connected) that follow from these observations,
presenting theorems establishing the behavior asserted in the
opening paragraphs of this introduction.
Along the way, we shall relate our results to numerical algorithms.
Section 3 presents a simple method for numerical analytic
continuation in a disk that approximately achieves the bounds
indicated in Theorem~\ref{thm1}, based on Taylor series on the
disk, and in Section 6 we show that this method is implicit
in Chebfun~\cite{chebfun,atap}. An algorithm of this kind was
proposed by Franklin~\cite{franklin}, and there is
recent related work by Demanet and coauthors~\cite{batenkov,demtow},
among others. Further numerical algorithms and associated
mathematical estimates for analytic continuation can be found
in~\cite{cannm,douglas,fdfd,fdfq,fzcm,hen66,henrici,miller,niet,reichel,stef,vessella}.
More generally, there is a large literature of numerical methods for
ill-posed problems, which are often defined by partial differential
or integral equations. One paper that speaks of the connection
between analytic continuation and more general ill-posed problems
defined by PDE\kern .3pt s is~\cite{miller}.
In Section 7 we turn to the most famous algorithm of analytic
continuation, which goes back to Weierstrass:
marching Taylor expansions from one overlapping disk to another
in a chain. We show that this method, if carried out
numerically in the half-strip with a certain optimal choice of
parameters, suffers exponential loss of accuracy at a rate $2\kern
.3pt e/\pi$ times faster than the optimal rate in a half-strip,
so that if one marches $2\pi$ units down the half-strip, the
number of accurate digits is divided by $\exp(2\pi e) \approx
\hbox{26,000,000}$.
Before turning to the details, we comment on the relationship
between approximation methods based on multiple derivative values
at a single point, such as chain-of-disks continuation of Taylor
series or Pad\'e approximation~\cite{bgm}, and methods based just
on function values but at multiple points. Our formulations are
of the latter form, but the two contexts are close. Thanks to
the standard lemma of complex analysis known as Cauchy's estimate,
knowing a function $f$ on the unit disk to accuracy~$\varepsilon$
is approximately the same as knowing its Taylor coefficients $c_k$
to accuracy~$\varepsilon$, and more generally, if $f$ is known to
accuracy~$\varepsilon$ on the closed disk of radius $r$, this is
approximately the same as knowing its Taylor coefficients $c_k$
to accuracy~$\varepsilon \kern .5pt r^{-k}$.
\section{A lemma}
Our results are based on the following lemma,
the {\em Hadamard three-lines theorem,}
a more general form of which can be found in~\cite[Thm.~12.8]{rudin}.
Numerical algorithms for this geometry are discussed in~\cite{fdfq}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{thelemma}
Let\/ $h$ be an analytic function in the infinite strip
$S = \{ w: \, 0< \Real w < 1\}$
with $\|h\|_S^{}\le 1$ and\/ $\lim_{u\downarrow 0}^{}
\sup_v|h(u+iv)| \le \varepsilon$ for some\/ $\varepsilon \in(0,1)$. Then
for all $w\in S$,
\begin{equation}
\log|h(w)| \le (1-\Real w)\log\varepsilon,
\hbox{\quad i.e.,\quad}
|h(w)| \le \varepsilon^{1-\Res w}.
\label{lemmaeq}
\end{equation}
Conversely, for any\/ $\varepsilon\in(0,1)$, there is a function\/ $h$
satisfying the given conditions for which the inequalities
$(\ref{lemmaeq})$ hold as equalities for all\/ $z$ with $0 < \Real z
< 1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We begin by noting that without loss of generality, we
may suppose that $h$ is analytic on the closed set
$\overline S$. If not, we could restrict attention to a smaller
domain $\delta\le \Real w \le 1-\delta$ for $\delta<0$ and then
take the limit $\delta \to 0$.
Set $\nu = -\log\varepsilon$, implying $e^{-\nu} = \varepsilon$.
The function $e^{-\nu \kern .5pt w} h(w)$ is analytic in $\overline
S$ and bounded in absolute value by $\varepsilon$ for $\Real w =
0$ and also for $\Real w = 1$. Therefore, by the maximum modulus
principle as qualified in the next paragraph, it is bounded
by~$\varepsilon$ for all $w\in \overline S$. Thus $|h(w)| \le
\varepsilon\kern .5pt e^{\kern .7pt \nu \Res w} = e^{(1-\Res
w)\log \varepsilon}$, as required.
The qualification just mentioned is that the maximum modulus
principle does not apply to arbitrary functions on an unbounded
domain with a gap in the boundary at~$\infty$. However,
this function is known to be bounded in an infinite strip,
and in such a situation, according to a Phragm\'en--Lindel\"of
theorem~\cite[Thm.~18.1.4]{hille}, the maximum modulus principle
applies after all.
For the converse, it is enough to consider the function
$h(w) = \varepsilon \kern .5pt e^{\kern .7pt \nu w}$.
\qed
\end{proof}
\section{Analytic continuation in a disk}
Figure~\ref{geom1} shows our first fundamental geometry, one that
has been considered by a number of authors. We take $E$ to be the
closed unit disk and $\Omega$ as the open disk of radius $R>1$.
As always, our concern is obtaining bounds on $|\kern .3pt
g(z)|,$ $z \in \Omega\backslash E$, for an analytic function $g$
($= \ft - f\kern .7pt$) satisfying $\|\kern .3pt g\|_\Omega^{}
\le 1$ and $\|\kern .3pt g\|_E^{}\le \varepsilon$. Here is the
result, essentially the {\em Hadamard three-circles theorem,} with
$\|\cdot\|_r^{}$ denoting the supremum norm over $\{z:\, |z|< r\}$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\vskip .6in
\includegraphics[scale=.6]{geom1}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{geom1}Analytic continuation of a function
$f$ from the unit disk\/ $E$ to a larger disk\/~$\Omega$ where it
is bounded.
If $f$ is known to $d$ digits on $E$, the number of digits
determined in\/ $\Omega$ falls off smoothly to $0$ at the outer boundary.}
\end{figure}
\begin{theorem}
Given $R>1$, let $g$ be analytic in $\Omega = \{z\in\C: \,
|z|< R\}$ with $\|\kern
.3pt g\|_R^{}\le 1$ and
$\|\kern .3pt g\|_1^{}\le \varepsilon \in (0,1)$. Then for
any\/ $z$ with $1< |z|< R$,
\begin{equation}
\log |\kern .3pt g(z)| \le \alpha(z) \log\varepsilon, \hbox{\quad i.e.,\quad}
|\kern .3pt g(z)| \le \varepsilon^{\alpha(z)},
\label{ineq1}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\alpha(z) = 1 - {\log |z|\over \log R}.
\label{alfdef}
\end{equation}
Conversely, for an infinite sequence of
values\/ $\varepsilon$ converging to\/ $0$, there are functions~$g$ satisfying
the given conditions for which the inequalities
$(\ref{ineq1})$ hold as equalities for all\/~$z$ with $1<|z|<R$.
\label{thm1}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
As in the proof of Lemma~\ref{thelemma}, we begin by noting that
without loss of generality, we may suppose that $g$ is analytic in
the closed domain $|z| \le R$. We transplant the problem to
the infinite strip $\overline S$ of the last section by defining
$h(w) = g(z)$ for $z = R^{\kern .8pt w} = e^{w\log R}$, hence $
w = \log z / \log R$ (it doesn't matter which branch of $\log z$ is
used, as they all lead to the same estimate).
By the lemma, we have $\log|\kern
.3pt g(z)|\le (1- \Real w)\log \varepsilon = (1-\log|z|/\log
R)\log\varepsilon$, as claimed.
For the converse result, consider $g(z) = (z/R)^n$ with
$n = -\log\varepsilon / \log R$. For an infinite sequence of values
$\varepsilon\to 0$, $n$ is an integer, and in these cases $g$ is an
analytic function with the required properties.
\qed
\end{proof}
In words, we can describe Theorem~\ref{thm1} as follows. If $f$
is known to $d$ digits for $|z|\le 1$, the number of digits
determined for $|z|=r$ diminishes to $0$ as $r\to R\kern
1pt$; as a function of $\log r$, the loss of digits is linear.
At $r=\sqrt R$, for example, $f$ is determined to $d/2$ digits.
It is easy to outline an algorithm for analytic continuation,
based on a finite Taylor series of length $n \approx -\log\varepsilon/\log R$,
that achieves approximately the accuracy promised in
Theorem~\ref{thm1}.
From approximate values
for $|z|=1$ with error at most $\varepsilon$ of a function~$f$
with $\|f\|_\Omega^{}\le \half$,
we compute approximations $\ct_k\approx c_k$ to the
Taylor coefficients $\{c_k\}$ of $f$ for $0\le k \le n$
with $|\ct_k-c_k|\le \varepsilon$.
That this is possible follows from Cauchy's estimate applied
on the circle $|z|=1$; in practice,
we sample $f$ on a grid of $N\gg n$ roots of unity and
use the Fast Fourier Transform~\cite{akt}. By Cauchy's
estimate applied now for $|z|=R$, the Taylor coefficients
of $f$ satisfy $|c_k| \le \half R^{-k}$.
If we define
\begin{equation}
\ft(z) = \sum_{k=0}^n \ct_k z^k,
\label{ftildeseries}
\end{equation}
then we have
$$
\ft(z)-f(z) = \sum_{k=0}^n (\ct_k-c_k) z^k - \sum_{k=n+1}^\infty
c_kz^k,
$$
implying
$$
|\ft(z)-f(z)| \le \sum_{k=0}^n \varepsilon |z|^k + \half\sum_{k=n+1}^\infty
(|z|/R)^k.
$$
Our choice $n \approx -\log\varepsilon/\log R$ implies
$\varepsilon\approx R^{-n}$, and thus
these two sums are both of size on the order of $(|z|/R)^n$.
We therefore achieve, as required,
$$
|\ft(z)-f(z)| \approx (R/|z|)^{-n} = R^{-\alpha(z)n} \approx
\varepsilon^{\alpha(z)},
$$
with the equality in the middle holding
since the definition (\ref{alfdef}) implies $R^{\kern .8pt\alpha(z)}
= R/|z|$.
In the algorithm just described, the regularization occurred
when we took the series (\ref{ftildeseries}) to be finite rather
than infinite.
In this geometry, the ill-posedness of analytic
continuation resides in the fact that as $k\to\infty$, powers $z^k$
have unbounded discrepancies of absolute value between one radius
$|z|$ and another. For a fascinating analysis of the implications
of such behavior in the context of computation of
Taylor coefficients, see~\cite{born}.
The importance of truncating a series for numerical analytic
continuation was
recognized at least as early as~\cite{lewis}, and
a detailed error analysis of an algorithm with this flavor can
be found in~\cite{franklin}.
We have described the algorithm as a process for working with
a function known to accuracy $\varepsilon$ on the unit disk.
One way to obtain such data is to take Taylor polynomials of $f$
of successively higher degrees (in exact arithmetic), in which
case (\ref{ineq1}) amounts to the statement that the convergence
of Taylor polynomials to $f(z)$ for $|z|<R$ is exponential at a
rate of order $(|z|/R)^n$.
\section{Analytic continuation in a half-strip}
Our second fundamental geometry is shown in Figure~\ref{geom2}.
Now $E$ is the complex interval $(-i,i\kern .7pt )$ and $\Omega$ is the
half-strip~$H$ of points $z=x+iy$ with $x> 0$, $-1<y<1$.
Our aim is to analytically continue a function $f$ from the end
segment of the strip to real positive values $x$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\vskip .8in
\includegraphics[scale=.6]{geom2}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{geom2}Analytic continuation of a bounded function
$f$ along the centerline of an infinite half-strip $H$ of
half-width $1$. The number of digits
determined falls off exponentially with distance from the data,
reducing by a factor of\/ $10$ each time\/ $x$ increases by
$(2/\pi)\log 10 \approx 1.47$.}
\end{figure}
To apply Lemma~\ref{thelemma}
in this geometry, we need to map $H$ conformally to the infinite
strip $S$ of Section 2 in such a way that the corner points
$z = \pm \kern .3pt i$ map to the infinite vertices $w = \pm \kern
.3pt i\kern .5pt
\infty$ and
$z=\infty$ maps to $w=1$.
We can construct such a map by composing three simpler maps.
First, $u = \sinh(\pi z/2)$ maps $H$ to the right half-plane with
distinguished points $\pm i$ and~$\infty$.
Next, $v = {(i-u)/(i+u)}$ maps the right half-plane to the
upper half-plane with distinguished points $0$, $\infty$, and $-1$.
Finally, $w = (-i/\pi)\log v$ maps the upper half-plane to
$S$ as required.
Combining these steps, we find that
the map from the half-strip $H$ in the $z$-plane to the
infinite strip $S$ in the $w$-plane is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{map}
w = -{i\over \pi} \log\left( {i - \sinh(\pi z/2)\over i + \sinh(\pi
z/2)} \right) =
{2\kern .3pt i\over \pi}\log\left( {1-i\kern .5pt\exp(\pi z/2)\over
-i + \exp(\pi z/2)} \right).
\end{equation}
The properties of this map are such as to reveal that analytic
continuation into a half-strip where a function is known to
be bounded, while possible in principle, is so ill-conditioned as to
be generally infeasible in practice. Instead of digits
of accuracy being lost linearly, they are lost exponentially,
as emphasized in Figure~\ref{geom2}.
To see how this comes about,
consider the situation in which $z$ is a real number
$x>0$. The leading
terms in the asymptotics for $u$, $v$, and $w$ for large $x$
give us
\begin{equation}
u \sim \half e^{\pi x / 2}, \quad
v \sim -1 + 4\kern .3pt i\kern .5pt e^{-\pi x/2}, \quad
w \sim 1 - {4\over \pi} \kern .7pt e^{-\pi x/2}.
\label{asymp1}
\end{equation}
Since $w$ is exponentially close to $1$, Lemma~\ref{thelemma}
implies that the number of digits of accuracy will
be multiplied by an exponentially small factor
${\sim}\kern 1pt (4/\pi) \exp(-\pi x /2)$.
A more careful analysis sharpens (\ref{asymp1}) to
\begin{equation}
{4\over \pi} \kern .7pt e^{-\pi x/2} - \left({4\over \pi} - 1\right)
e^{-\pi x} \,\le\,
1- w \,\le\, {4\over \pi} \kern .7pt e^{-\pi x/2}
\quad (x \ge 0),
\label{asymp2}
\end{equation}
from which we get the following theorem:
\begin{theorem}
Let $g$ be analytic in the half-strip $H$ with $\|\kern .3pt
g\|_H^{}\le 1$ and
$\|\kern .3pt g\|_E^{}\le \varepsilon$
for some\/ $\varepsilon \in(0,1)$. Then for
any\/ $x > 0$,
\begin{equation}
\log |\kern .3pt g(x)| \le \alpha(x) \log\varepsilon, \hbox{\quad i.e.,\quad}
|\kern .3pt g(x)| \le \varepsilon^{\alpha(x)},
\label{ineq2}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\alpha(x) = {4\over \pi} \kern .7pt e^{-\pi x/2}
- \left({4\over \pi} - 1\right) e^{-\pi x}.
\label{alfdef2}
\end{equation}
Conversely, for any $\varepsilon\in (0,1)$, there is a function
$g$ satisfying the given conditions for which,
for all $x\ge 0$,
\begin{equation}
\log |\kern .3pt g(x)| \ge \beta(x) \log\varepsilon, \hbox{\quad i.e.,\quad}
|\kern .3pt g(x)| \ge \varepsilon^{\beta(x)},
\label{conv}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\beta(x) = {4\over \pi} e^{-\pi x/2}.
\label{betadef}
\end{equation}
\label{thm2}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
This follows from Lemma~\ref{thelemma} by the conformal
transplantation (\ref{map}), using the bounds (\ref{asymp2}).
\qed
\end{proof}
\section{General geometries}
For more general geometries than the disk or the half-strip,
let us now justify the claims made in the introduction.
First is the ill-posedness statement of the opening paragraph, which
as usual we formulate as an assertion about an analytic
function $g = \ft - f$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{genthm1}
Let $\Omega$ be a connected open region of the complex plane
$\C$ and let~$E$ be a bounded nonempty continuum in $\overline\Omega$
whose closure $\overline E$ does not enclose any points of\/ $\Omega\backslash
\overline E$.
Let $g$ be an analytic function in\/ $\Omega\cup E$ satisfying
$\|\kern .3pt g\|_E^{} \le \varepsilon$ for some $\varepsilon> 0$.
This condition implies
no bounds whatsoever on the value of\/~$g$ at any point $z\in
\Omega\backslash \overline E$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Given $z\in \Omega\backslash\overline E$ and a complex
number $M$, we shall show there is a polynomial $p$ such
that $\|\kern .5pt p\|_E^{}\le\varepsilon$ and $p(z) = M$.
Let $\Et$ denote the
compact set consisting of $\overline E$ together
with all points enclosed by this set; thus the complement of
$\Et$ in the complex plane is connected.
By assumption, $z \not\in \Et$.
According to Runge's theorem~\cite[Thm.~13.7]{rudin},
there is a
polynomial $q$ such that $\|\kern .3pt q\|_{\Et}^{} \le \varepsilon/2$
and $|\kern .3pt q(z)-M| \le \varepsilon/2$.
Now define $p(\zeta) = q(\zeta) + M - q(z)$.
We readily verify $p(z) = M$ and $|\kern .5pt p(\zeta)|
\le |\kern .3pt q(\zeta)| + |M-q(z)| \le
\varepsilon$ for all $\zeta\in E$.
\qed
\end{proof}
The well-posedness statement of the introduction is (\ref{bound1}),
which we formulate as follows.
\begin{theorem}
\label{genthm2}
Let $\Omega$, $E$, $\varepsilon$, and $g$ be as in
Theorem~$\ref{genthm1}$,
but now with $g$ additionally satisfying $\|g\|_\Omega^{}\le 1$,
and let\/ $z$ be a point in $\Omega\backslash \overline E$.
Assume that the boundary of $E$ is piecewise smooth (a finite
union of smooth Jordan arcs).
Then there is a number\/ $\alpha\in (0,1)$, independent
of\/ $g$ though not of~$z$, such that for all\/ $\varepsilon>0$,
\begin{equation}
|\kern .3pt g(z)| \le \varepsilon^{\alpha(z)}.
\label{genthm2eq}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Gamma$ be a smooth open arc in $\Omega$ connecting
a point $e$ in the boundary of $E$, which will
necessarily belong to $\overline \Omega$, to $z$. For a sufficiently
small $\delta>0$, the intersection of the open $\delta$-neighborhood
of $\Gamma$ with $\Omega$ is a simply-connected region $J$
in $\Omega$ with $z$ in its interior and a piecewise smooth
boundary,
a portion of $E$ making up part of this boundary. By a conformal
map, we may transplant $J$ to the domain of Figure~\ref{geom2},
whereupon Theorem~\ref{thm2} provides a suitable (if
typically very pessimistic) value of $\alpha$.
\qed
\end{proof}
Theorem~\ref{genthm2} asserts
that analytic continuation in the presence of a boundedness
condition is a well-posed problem in the sense
that there is a unique solution depending continuously
on the data, but this does not mean that its condition
number is finite. A finite condition number would correspond
to $|\kern .3pt g(z)|$ shrinking linearly with~$\varepsilon$, that is,
to a value $\alpha = 1$ in (\ref{genthm2eq}), or more
generally to the bound
\begin{equation}
|g(z)| \le C\kern .3pt\varepsilon
\label{moregen}
\end{equation}
as $\varepsilon\to 0$ for some constant $C$ depending on $z$ but
not $g$.
But Theorem~\ref{genthm2} only gives
$\alpha < 1$, and in fact, we now show that $\alpha = 1$ cannot occur except
in trivial cases with $\overline \Omega = \C$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{genthm3}
Under the circumstances of Theorem~$\ref{genthm2}$,
a bound of the form $(\ref{moregen})$ can never hold unless
$\overline\Omega$ is the whole complex plane $\C$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
If $\overline\Omega$ is all of $\C$, we may be in the trivial
situation mentioned in the introduction, where Liouville's theorem
implies that $g$ is constant. (This will be true, for example,
if $\Omega$ consists of $\C$ with a finite set of points removed.
It won't be true if~$\Omega$ consists of $\C$ with some arcs
removed.)
On the other hand suppose there
is a point $z_0^{}\in\C$ disjoint from $\overline\Omega$. Then
there is a closed disk $\Delta$ about~$z_0^{}$ that is disjoint
from $\overline\Omega$.
By the conformal map $1/(z-z_0^{})$, we may transplant the problem
so that $\Omega$ and $E$ are bounded.
For any $z \in \Omega\backslash\overline E$,
as in the proof of Theorem~\ref{genthm1}, Runge's theorem
ensures that there is a polynomial $p$ such that
$p(z) = 0$ and $\Real p(\zeta) \le -1$ for all $\zeta\in E$.
Choose $M>0$ such that $\Real p(\zeta) \le M$ for all $\zeta\in \Omega$.
Then $q(z) = p(z)-M$ has real parts $\le -(1+M)$ for $\zeta\in E$,
$-M$ at $z$, and $\le 0$ for $\zeta\in \Omega$.
Given $\varepsilon\in (0,1)$, define
$g(\zeta) = \exp[\kern 1pt\log(\varepsilon)(-q(\zeta))/(1+M)]$.
Then $\|\kern .3pt g\|_\Omega^{}\le 1$
and $\|\kern .3pt g\|_E^{} \le \varepsilon$, but
$|\kern .3pt g(z)| = \varepsilon^{M/(M+1)}$.
This contradicts (\ref{moregen}).
\qed
\end{proof}
Together, Theorems~\ref{genthm2} and \ref{genthm3} assert that
analytic continuation with a boundedness condition in a nontrivial
region is always well-posed but always has an infinite condition
number. I am not aware if such a general assertion has been
made before.
\section{Analytic continuation in Chebfun}
This project sprang from work with Chebfun, a software system for
numerical computing with functions~\cite{chebfun}. In its basic
mode of operation, Chebfun works with smooth functions
on an interval that without loss of generality we may take to
be $[-1,1]$. Chebfun represents each function to ${\approx}\kern
1pt 16$ digit precision by a polynomial in the form of a finite
Chebyshev series, and early in the project, it was realized that
the same series could be used for evaluation at complex points
off the interval.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\smallskip
\vskip .2in
\includegraphics[scale=.7]{chebex}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{chebfig} Chebfun implicitly carries out analytic
continuation within a Bernstein ellipse bounded approximately
by the nearest complex
singularity of a function\/ $f$ defined on a real interval.
For the function $f(x) = \log(1+x^2)$ defined on $[-1,1]$,
the thick outer curve shows the ``Chebfun ellipse'' estimate of the
region of analyticity plotted by \kern 1pt{\tt plotregion} and the
inner curves are contour lines corresponding to errors
$|f(x) - p(x)| = 10^{-2}, 10^{-4}, \dots, 10^{-14}$ (from outside
in), where $p$ is the Chebfun approximation, a polynomial of
degree $38$. The dots mark the actual branch points of~$f$.}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{chebfig} illustrates this effect for the function $f(x)
= \log(1+x^2)$, which has branch points at $x = \pm\kern .5pt i$.
By an adaptive process described in~\cite{chopping}, the Chebfun
command \verb|p = chebfun('log(1+x^2)')| constructs a polynomial
$p$ that matches $f$ on $[-1,1]$ with a maximal error of about
$2^{-51} \approx 4.44\times 10^{-16}$; the degree of $p$ for this
example is 38.\ \ Typing {\tt p(0)} to evaluate the polynomial
at $x=0$, for example, returns the value $5.5\times 10^{-17}$,
accurate to more than 16 digits. What is interesting is that
typing {\tt p(i/2)} also gives an accurate value: $-0.2876820630$,
as compared with the true value $\log(0.75) \approx -0.2876820768$.
How can we explain this?
In fact, Chebfun is carrying out the Chebyshev analogue of the
algorithm of Section~3: it computes a finite sequence of Chebyshev
series coefficients, then uses these coefficients to define an
approximation $p = \ft$. Instead of working outward from the
unit disk $E$ to larger disks, it is working outward from the
unit interval $E$ to so-called Bernstein ellipses, whose algebra
is defined by a transplantation of the results of Section~3 by
the Joukowski map $(z+z^{-1})/2$. For details, see~\cite{atap},
particularly the discussions of the ``Chebfun ellipse'' and the
command {\tt plotregion}.
According to Theorem~\ref{thm1} as transplanted from disks to
ellipses, we can expect the number of accurate digits to fall
off smoothly, and Figure~\ref{chebfig} shows that this is just
what is observed.
Analytic continuation in a region bounded by an ellipse is
mentioned as Example~3 of~\cite{franklin}, and a detailed analysis
of algorithms in this geometry is presented in~\cite{demtow}.
Results for ellipses analogous to those of~\cite{born} for disks
can be found in~\cite{wang}.
\section{Analytic continuation by a chain of disks}
The classic idea for analytic continuation, going back to
Weierstrass, involves a succession of Taylor expansions,
each with its own disk of convergence. In principle, this
procedure enables one to track a function along any path where
it is analytic, and we recommend the beautifully illustrated
discussion in Section~3.6 of Wegert's {\em Visual Complex
Functions}~\cite{wegert}. For inexact function data, however,
the method is far from promising. There is a small literature
on numerical realizations, and a memorable contribution is a 1966
paper by Henrici in which the necessary transformations of series
coefficients are formulated in terms of matrix multiplications;
see~\cite{hen66} or~\cite[sec.~3.6]{henrici}.
To analyze this idea quantitatively, the simplest setting is
a channel, essentially the same as the
half-strip of Section~4. Specifically,
consider the finite-length ``stadium'' $G$ shown in
Figure~\ref{stadium}. Given $L>0$, this is the strip
of half-width $1$ extending from $x=0$ to $x=L$ together with
half-disks of radius~1 at each end. For some $n>0$ and
$r\in (0,1),$ we define $h=L/n$ and
\begin{equation}
\xk = kh, ~~\Dk = \{z: \, |z-x_k|< 1\}, ~~
\Dkr = \{z: \, |z-x_k|< r\}
\label{kdefs}
\end{equation}
for $0 \le k \le n$.
We assume $n$ is large enough so that $h < 1-r$.
\begin{theorem}
With the definitions of the last paragraph,
let $f$ be analytic in\/ $G$ with $\|f\|_G^{}\le 1$
and let $\fk$ be analytic in $D_k^{}$
with $\|\fk\|_{D_k^{}}^{}\le 1$, $0\le k \le n-1$.
Assume $r\le 1/2$ and $h\le 1/4$.
Given $\varepsilon\in (0,1)$, define
\begin{equation}
\vark = \varepsilon^{\kern .5pt \exp(-\et\kern .8pt \xk)}, \quad
\et = {1+2h\over r\log(1/r)}.
\label{vardef}
\end{equation}
If
\begin{equation}
\|f_0^{}-f\|_{D_0^{(r)}} \le \varepsilon_0^{}
\label{basecase}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\|\fk-f_{k-1}^{}\|_{D_k^{(r)}} \le \vark, \quad 1\le k \le n-1,
\label{ineqs}
\end{equation}
then for all sufficiently small choices of $\varepsilon$,
\begin{equation}
\|f_{k-1}^{}- f\|_{D_k^{(r)}}^{} \le \vark, \quad 1 \le k \le n.
\label{induc2}
\end{equation}
\label{chainthm}
\end{theorem}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\vskip .25in
\includegraphics[scale=.82]{ac2fig.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{stadium} Chain-of-disks analytic continuation of a
function $f$ along a channel $G$ of half-width~$1$
where it is assumed to be bounded
and analytic. One starts with $f$ known to accuracy
$\varepsilon_0^{}
=\varepsilon$ in the shaded disk \smash{$D_0^{(r)}$} of radius
$r$ about $x_0 = 0$; this is then used
to construct an expansion to accuracy~$\varepsilon_1^{}$ in the next
shaded disk about $x_1^{}=h$, and so on. The
best accuracy is achieved with $r = 1/e$ and
$h\to 0$, with the number of accurate digits diminishing at
the rate $\exp(-e\kern .3pt x)$.}
\end{figure}
\begin{proof}
We proceed by induction on $k$ in (\ref{induc2}).
The case $k=1$ follows from (\ref{basecase}) by
Theorem~\ref{thm1} (rescaled by a factor $R=1/r$).
Consider step $k+1$, assuming (\ref{induc2}) has been established
for previous steps.
Combining (\ref{ineqs}) and (\ref{induc2}) gives
\begin{equation}
\|\fk - f\|_{\Dkr}^{} \le 2\kern .5pt \vark.
\label{induc4}
\end{equation}
By Theorem~\ref{thm1} (with the same rescaling as
before), (\ref{induc4}) implies
\begin{equation}
\|\fk - f\|_{D_{k+1}^{(r)}}^{} \le
(2\kern .5pt \vark)^\alpha, \quad \alpha =
1 - {\log(1+h/r)\over \log (1/r)}.
\label{induc3}
\end{equation}
(We avoid replacing $\log(1/r)$ by $-\log r$ since it can be
confusing to have to remember that $\log r$ is negative.)
We are done if we can show
\begin{displaymath}
(2\kern .5pt \vark)^\alpha \le \varepsilon_{k+1}^{}.
\end{displaymath}
or by taking logarithms,
\begin{displaymath}
\left( 1 - {\log(1+h/r)\over \log (1/r)}\right)
(\log 2 + \log(\vark)) \le
\log(\varepsilon_{k+1}^{}).
\end{displaymath}
By (\ref{vardef}), if we divide both sides by the negative
quantity $\log(\vark)$, this becomes
\begin{equation}
\left( 1 - {\log(1+h/r)\over \log (1/r)}\right)
\left({\log 2 \over \log(\vark)} + 1\right) \ge
\exp\left({-h-2h^2\over r \log(1/r)}\right) .
\label{toprove}
\end{equation}
Now suppose for a moment that $\vark$ is negligible. Then
the $\log 2 /\log(\vark)$ term goes away and
the condition we must verify reduces to
\begin{displaymath}
1 - {\log(1+h/r)\over \log (1/r)}
\ge \exp\left({-h-2h^2\over r \log(1/r)}\right) .
\end{displaymath}
A numerical search readily confirms that this holds
with a strict
inequality over the indicated region $r\in(0,1/2)$, $h\in (0,1/4)$
(the coefficient of the term $-2\kern .3pt h^2$ was introduced
to ensure this).
Because of the assumption in the theorem statement that~$\varepsilon$ is
sufficiently small, this establishes (\ref{toprove}).
\qed
\end{proof}
The conclusion of
Theorem~\ref{chainthm} becomes memorable
in the limit $\varepsilon,h\to 0$.
The parameter $\et$ of (\ref{vardef}) is
then minimized with the choice $r=1/e$, for which
it takes the value $\et = e$.
We conclude that with this optimal choice of $r$,
\begin{displaymath}
\hbox{\em The number of accurate digits in chain-of-disks continuation}
\end{displaymath}
\vskip -28pt
\begin{displaymath}
\hbox{\em along a channel of half-width\/ $1$
decays at the rate $\exp(-e\kern .3pt x)$.}
\end{displaymath}
In a field as established as complex analysis, it is hard to be
sure that anything is
entirely new, but I am not aware of a previous estimation of
loss of digits at the rate $\exp(-e \kern .3pt x)$ for
chain-of-disks continuation. The
general observation of exponential loss of information is more
than a century old. Henrici~\cite{hen66} writes (his italics)
\begin{displaymath}
\hbox{\em The early vectors$\dots$ must be computed more accurately than
the late ones}
\end{displaymath}
and he gives credit for related work to Mittag-Leffler,
Painlev\'e, Zeller, and Lewis~\cite{lewis}.
It is interesting to note what our estimates suggest for what
might be considered a very natural test problem for analytic continuation.
Suppose we have a function like $f(z) = \sqrt z$
that is known to be known to be bounded and analytically continuable
along any curve in the punctured disk $0 < |z|<2$. If we start near $z=1$ with a certain
accuracy $\varepsilon$ and go around the origin and back to $z=1$ again, how much
accuracy will remain?
We will not attempt to give a sharp solution to this problem,
but it is the example that motivated our choice of a strip
of length $2\pi$ for the numbers quoted in the introduction.
Our estimates suggest
that the number of accurate digits may be reduced by a
factor as great as
$(\pi/4)\exp(\pi^2) \approx \hbox{15,000}$, or
$\exp(2\kern .4pt \pi e) \approx \hbox{26,000,000}$ for the chain-of-disks method.
\section{Conclusion}
A compelling presentation of the practical side of
analytic continuation can be found in the book to appear
by Fornberg and Piret~\cite{fp}. In the case of exactly known
functions, although one could use the
chain-of-disks idea in principle, Taylor series play little role
in practice. A far more
powerful approach is to find an analytical method to transform one
formula defining a function (a formula being after all a finite
object, unlike an infinite set of Taylor coefficients)
into another formula with a new region of validity.
For the most famous of all examples, the
Dirichlet series for the Riemann zeta function converges
only for $\Real z > 1$, but other representations extend $\zeta(z)$
to the whole complex plane.
The present paper has concerned the case of inexactly known
functions. Here, for continuation of functions from a disk to a
larger disk, or from an interval to an ellipse, algorithms related
to Taylor or Chebyshev series are effective, as has
been discovered by various authors and we have illustrated by
Figure~\ref{chebfig} from Chebfun.
A third equivalent
context would be analytic continuation of a periodic function into
a strip by Fourier series.
The question is, what can one
do to continue a function beyond the disk/ellipse/strip of convergence
of its Taylor/Chebyshev/Fourier series?
Our theorems show that if all one knows is analyticity and boundedness
along certain channels, then
accuracy may be lost at a precipitous exponential
rate, better than the chain-of-disks but only by a constant.
However, the assumption of analyticity just
in a channel is more pessimistic than necessary in many applications.
Functions arising in applications rarely have natural boundaries or
other beautiful pathologies of analytic function theory, however
generic such structures may be from a certain abstract point of
view; they are far more likely to be analytic everywhere apart from
certain poles and branch points. In practice, rational functions
are the crucial tool for analytic continuation in such cases, and
when they work, their convergence is typically exponential, just as
we have found for series-based methods in a disk~\cite{bgm,eiermann,atap}.
It would be an
interesting challenge to develop theorems for meromorphic functions
analogous to what we have established here in the analytic case,
and a discussion with some of this flavor can be found
in~\cite{millerb}.
\begin{acknowledgements}
The early stages of this work benefited from discussions with Marco
Fasondini, Bengt Fornberg, Yuji Nakatsukasa, and Olivier S\`ete.
The first version of the
paper was written during a sabbatical
visit to the Laboratoire de l'Informatique du Parall\'elisme
at ENS Lyon in 2017--18 hosted by Nicolas Brisebarre, Jean-Michel Muller,
and Bruno Salvy. It was improved in revision by
suggestions from Marco Fasondini, Daan Huybrechs,
Alex Townsend, Marcus Webb, Kuan Xu, and especially Elias Wegert.
\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec_Intro}
For many hydrodynamic problems, the Navier-Stokes (NS) equation can be simplified by considering the fluid as inviscid and incompressible. Within these approximations, the inviscid water wave problem reduces to solving the Laplace equation within the bulk, together with the boundary conditions for the free surface and the rigid bottom. This set of equations for the surface elevation $\eta$ and the velocity potential $\phi$ can be used as the starting point to obtain Nonlinear Schr\"odinger (NLS) equation-like propagation models, or can serve as a basis for higher order spectral methods \citep{West1987,Dommermuth1987,Ducrozet2016}.
While this approach is sufficient in many situations, in reality, water is a viscous medium. The molecular viscosity accounts for wave damping but also plays a more intricate role for instance in downshifting of the spectrum \cite{Carter2016}, in stabilizing the Benjamin-Feir instability \citep{Segur2005}, or can serve as a model for the eddy viscosity in the case of breaking waves \citep{Tian2010,Longuet-Higgins1992}. In domains such as the dissipation of swells \citep{Babanin2012}, visco-elastic waves propagating in ice \citep{Bennetts2012}, or the motion of very viscous fluids such as oil spills, considering viscosity is important.
The inclusion of viscosity in the water wave problem has been proposed in several ways. One option, hereafter denoted as System A, used in \citet{Ruvinsky1991,Dias2008} (hereafter RFF and DDZ, respectively), includes the rotational part of the velocity vector into the kinematic boundary condition (KBC) at the surface. As the vorticity is assumed to be confined to only a thin boundary layer below the surface, the rotational velocity is zero in the bulk.
The second option, denoted System B (\citet{Dommermuth1993}), makes a gauge choice for the velocity vector such that the rotational contribution in the KBC disappears. The cost is however, that the rotational part of the velocity is nonzero in the bulk. Moreover, the pressure is split into rotational and irrotational parts too, introducing an additional equation for the rotational pressure that couples to the Navier-Stokes equation. This system is however fully nonlinear and makes no boundary layer approximations.
The third option, denoted System C (\citet{Longuet-Higgins1969,Longuet-Higgins1992}), circumvents the difficulty of the rotational kinematic boundary condition by explicitly splitting the problem into two domains: the irrotational bulk and the vortical boundary layer. The former is shown to receive an additional pressure due to the weight of the latter.
The goal of this paper is to contrast and compare these models, offering a physical understanding of their mathematical differences. In this comparison (Sections 2 and 3), we map out the relation between the rotational part of the velocity vector and the pressure. In addition, we highlight where linearization is applied in order to close the systems and we explore the importance of nonlinear vortical terms. We point out in which situation a given model is more appropriate than another. Furthermore, we examine the conservation of mass conditions for each system and show how this should be interpreted with respect to the irrotational system, further highlighting the relation between vorticity and pressure (Section 4). Finally, we summarize our findings (Section 5).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.70\textwidth]{LinearWave.pdf}
\caption{The water wave problem and its relevant length scales. The velocity potential $\phi$ is indicated by the color-scale. The arrows indicate the velocity vector $\vec{u}$, following the gradient of $\phi$. The surface elevation $\eta (x,z)$ is indicated by the black line. The vortical boundary layer $\delta$ is displayed for two different regimes, indicated by the superscript: (1) $\delta < a$, or $\frac{a}{\delta}=\frac{\epsilon}{\delta k}>1$ (dashed line) and (2) $\delta > a$ or $\frac{a}{\delta}=\frac{\epsilon}{\delta k}<1$ (dotted line).}\label{fig_LengthScales}
\end{figure}
\section{Boundary Conditions}
The physics of the water wave problem is defined by the boundary conditions. Figure \ref{fig_LengthScales} depicts the 2D water wave problem and its relevant quantities and length scales. The surface elevation $\eta(x,t)$ is denoted by the black line, the arrows are the local velocity vectors and the color scale refers to the value of the velocity potential $\phi(x,z,t)$, based on a linear wave \cite{Lamb1932}.
\subsection{Shear stress: viscosity and vorticity} \label{sec:ShearStress}
For non-viscous waves the velocity vector $ \vec{u}$ is irrotational and can be written as the gradient of a potential field:
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_pot}
\vec{u} = \nabla \phi.
\end{equation}
However, in the presence of viscosity, the continuity of tangential stresses at the free surface can only be fulfilled by rotational motion of the fluid \cite{Longuet-Higgins1992a, Lundgren1999}.
The stress tensor in 2D tangential and normal components can be written as:
\begin{gather}
\du{\sigma} = \begin{bmatrix} 2\mu \vec{u}^s_s - P & \mu(\vec{u}^n_s+\vec{u}^s_n)\\ \mu (\vec{u}^s_n+\vec{u}^n_s) & 2\mu \vec{u}^n_n-P\end{bmatrix} ,
\end{gather}
\noindent where $\mu$ is the dynamic viscosity, and $P$ the pressure. We consider gravity waves in our analysis and therefore ignore the effect of the surface tension, as it is negligible. Note the different meanings of $s$ and $n$ as subscript or superscript. Here and in the following, subscripts denote the partial derivatives and superscripts denote the components of a vector, where $s$ denotes tangential and $n$ normal. The tangential stress component is
\begin{align}
\sigma^s &= \tau^s = \mu (\vec{u}^s_n+\vec{u}^n_s) \label{eqn_sigmas},
\end{align}
\noindent where $\tau$ is the deviatoric stress tensor.
Since $\mu$ in air is much smaller than in water, the shear stress must vanish at the surface, implying $\vec{u}^s_n=-\vec{u}^n_s$. There is thus no relative distortion to the fluid-particle, which due to the curvature of the interface, results in a rotational flow \cite{Longuet-Higgins1992a}. See Fig.~\ref{fig_rot} for an illustration of a rotational and an irrotational flow.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{RotvsIrrot}
\caption{In an irrotational flow there can be circular paths for the fluid, but each individual fluid particle does not rotate.} \label{fig_rot}
\end{figure}
For the free surface water wave problem, viscosity therefore directly implies vorticity, \textit{i.e.} a rotational flow. That is, it is unphysical to have a viscid, irrotational flow \citep{Lundgren1999}.
For a rotational flow, the Helmholtz decomposition is used to split the velocity field into an irrotational part $\nabla \phi$, and a rotational, solenoidal ($\nabla \cdot \vec{U}=0$) part, $\vec{U}$:
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_HH}
\vec{u}= \nabla \phi + \vec{U}= \nabla \phi + \nabla \times \vec{A}.
\end{equation}
Since $\vec{u}$ only contains components in the $x,z$ plane, $\vec{A}$ only has a component in the $y$ direction, and can therefore be treated as a scalar, $A$. The velocity vector $\vec{u} = (u,w)$ can explicitly be written as
\begin{align} \label{eqn_def_vPhiA}
u &= \phi_x + U = \phi_x - A_z, & \vec{u}^s &= \phi_s + \vec{U}^s \\
w &= \phi_z + W = \phi_z + A_x , & \vec{u}^n &= \phi_n + \vec{U}^n.
\end{align}
Using the Helmholtz decomposition requires finding a harmonic function $\phi$ that satisfies $\nabla^2\phi=0$ and a solenoidal field $\vec{U}$ that satisfies the NS equations \citep{Joseph2006}. Therefore, certain transfers of irrotational flow from the $\nabla\phi$ term to the $\vec{U}$ are allowed, keeping Eq.~(\ref{eqn_HH}) valid. That is, while $\nabla \phi$ is irrotational (since the curl of a gradient is always 0), $\vec{U}$ can include an irrotational part on top of its rotational part \citep{Dommermuth1993}.
This implies that one cannot assume a-priori that $\nabla\phi$ contains the full irrotational velocity potential: its value differs for different gauge choices.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.99\textwidth]{3sits3}
\caption{(a) System A: The boundary conditions include the balance of normal stress, the vanishing of the shear stress, and the rotational KBC. The grey shaded area indicates that $\vec{U}^n$ decays over a characteristic length $\delta$. (b) System B: The boundary conditions include the splitting of the pressure for the normal stress, the vanishing of the shear stress, and an irrotational KBC. The grey shaded area indicates that while $\vec{U}^n=0$ at the surface, this is not the case within the bulk. (c) System C: The domain is split into two sub domains separated by $\eta^*$: the bulk ($\Gamma_1$) and the vortical boundary layer ($\Gamma_2$). The boundary conditions for the irrotational domain $\Gamma_1$ on $\eta^*$ are the continuity of normal stress, with an added pressure due to the weight of $\Gamma_{II}$, and an irrotational KBC. The shear stress does not need to vanish at $\eta^*$.}\label{fig_3situations}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Kinematic boundary condition} \label{sec_KBC}
The KBC ensures that fluid particles on the free surface always remain there. As it is a key ingredient for the rest of our discussion, we shall derive it explicitly. We can describe the surface elevation by $z = \eta(x,t)$, and let the level set $f(x,y,t)=0$ define the interface between air and water
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_KBC_f}
f(x,z,t) \equiv z - \eta(x,t).
\end{equation}
\noindent Because $f=0$ on the interface at all times $t$, its material derivative, $D/Dt$, must be null
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_KBC_matD}
\begin{split}
\frac{Df}{Dt} &\equiv \frac{\partial f}{\partial t} + \vec{u} \cdot\nabla f = 0 \qquad \textrm{on} \quad f = 0 .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\noindent To write the KBC in terms of $\eta$ and the velocity vector $\vec{u}=(u,w)$, inserting Eq.~(\ref{eqn_KBC_f}) into Eq.~(\ref{eqn_KBC_matD}) yields
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_KBC_u}
\frac{\partial \eta}{\partial t} = - u\frac{\partial \eta}{\partial x} + w \qquad \textrm{at} \quad z = \eta .
\end{equation}
\noindent in Cartesian coordinates. In normal and tangential coordinates Eq.~(\ref{eqn_KBC_matD}) reads:
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_KBC_u2}
\frac{\partial \eta (x,t)}{\partial t} = \vec{u} \cdot \hat{n} |\nabla f| = \vec{u}^n \sqrt{1+\eta_x^2} ,
\end{equation}
\noindent where the unit normal vector is defined as $\hat{n}= \nabla f / |\nabla f|=(-\eta_x,1)/\sqrt{\eta_x^2+1}$, and points outwards. Using $\eta(s,t)$, the KBC can be written as:
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_KBC_u3}
\frac{\partial \eta (s,t)}{\partial t} = \vec{u}^n .
\end{equation}
\noindent The latter expression corresponds to the intuitive image that the deformation of the surface, \textit{i.e.} the change of $\eta$ in time, is equal to the normal component of the velocity vector $\vec{u}^n$ pushing the surface either inwards or outwards.
\subsection{Dynamic boundary condition}\label{sec_DBC}
In addition to the continuity of shear stress, the normal stress must also be continuous over the boundary between water (w) and air (a) $\sigma^{n,\textrm{w}}=\sigma^{n,\textrm{a}}$, yielding the dynamic boundary condition (DBC). We can write
\begin{equation}
\sigma^n = \tau^n - p^n = 2\mu \vec{u}^n_n-P \label{eqn_sigman} \qquad \textrm{at} \quad z = \eta , \\
\end{equation}
\noindent where $P$ is the pressure.
\subsubsection{Irrotational Flow}
For an irrotational flow, the continuity of normal stress reduces to the continuity of pressure: $P^{\textrm{w}}=P^{\textrm{a}}$. For an irrotational, incompressible flow, integrating the NS equation in space leads to the Bernoulli equation:
\begin{equation} \label{eq_Bernoulli1}
P^{\textrm{w}} = -\rho\left(\phi_t + \frac{1}{2} (\nabla \phi)^2 + g\eta\right) + c(t) = P^{\textrm{a}} \qquad \textrm{at} \quad z = \eta .
\end{equation}
Choosing the arbitrary Bernoulli function $c(t) = P^{\textrm{a}} $ gives the DBC:
\begin{equation} \label{eq_Bernoulli}
\phi_t + \frac{1}{2} (\nabla \phi)^2 + g\eta = 0 \qquad \textrm{at} \quad z = \eta .
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Rotational Flow}
Due to the Helmholtz decomposition, the situation is more complicated for a rotational fluid. Again we start from the continuity of normal stresses:
\begin{equation}
2 \mu \vec{u}^n_n - P^{\textrm{w}} = -P^{\textrm{a}} \qquad \textrm{at} \quad z = \eta .
\end{equation}
Using the Helmholtz decomposition gives
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_press}
2 \nu \left(\phi_{nn} + \vec{U}^n_n\right) -P^{\textrm{w}} = -P^{\textrm{a}} ,
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\nu=\mu/\rho$ is the kinematic viscosity. The pressure $P^{\textrm{w}}$ can be obtained from the Navier-Stokes equation for an incompressible, Newtonian fluid :
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_NS_incompr}
\vec{u}_t + \vec{u} \cdot \nabla \vec{u} = - \frac{1}{\rho}\nabla P^{\textrm{w}} + \vec{g} + \nu \nabla^2 \vec{u} .
\end{equation}
\noindent Using the relation $\vec{u} \cdot \nabla \vec{u} =\frac{1}{2} (\nabla \vec{u})^2 + \omega \times \vec{u} $ in Eq.~(\ref{eqn_NS_incompr}), and again integrating in space, yields
\begin{multline} \label{eqn_DBC_P}
\underbrace{ \phi_t + \frac{1}{2} (\nabla \phi)^2 + \frac{P^{\textrm{w}}}{\rho} + g\eta+c(t)}_\textrm{Bernoulli} = \\\underbrace{ - \int_{\eta-\delta}^{\eta} \left( \vec{U}_t - \nu \nabla^2 \vec{U} - \omega \times \vec{U} \right) dz - \frac{1}{2}\vec{U}^2}_\textrm{Vortical layer} \\
\underbrace{+\phi_n \vec{U}^n + \phi_s \vec{U}^s}_\textrm{Mixed NL terms} .\qquad
\end{multline}
\noindent Inserting Eq.~(\ref{eqn_DBC_P}) into the balance of normal stress (Eq.~(\ref{eqn_press})) gives the DBC. Here and in the following, we always choose the arbitrary integration function $c(t)$ such that it cancels $P^{\textrm{a}}$. Therefore, we omit the $w$ index for $P^{\textrm{w}}$ from now on. Compared to the inviscid water wave problem, the rotational part of the velocity $\vec{U}$ is a third unknown in addition to $\phi$ and $\eta$. To close the system different routes can be taken. We shall now review three of these.
\linebreak
\section{Three complementary views} \label{sec_ThreeSystems}
The three systems introduced in the Introduction, are summarized in Figure \ref{fig_3situations} and Table \ref{tab:summary}.
In System A (Figure \ref{fig_3situations}A), the velocity has a rotational part (Eq.~(\ref{eqn_HH})), and therefore a rotational KBC. The vortical component of the velocity, indicated by the grey shaded area, is nonzero at the boundary and rapidly decays to zero, over a typical length $\delta$: the width of the vortical boundary layer. There are different ways to close this system. One, described in RFF \citep{Ruvinsky1991}, is to impose a separate boundary condition for the rotational part of the velocity vector $\vec{U}$, based on the vorticity equation. The second, introduced in DDZ \citep{Dias2008}, is to write $\vec{U}$ in potential flow terms, using expressions obtained from the linearized equations.
In System B (Figure \ref{fig_3situations}B), as presented in \citet{Dommermuth1993}, an additional boundary condition $\vec{U}^n = 0$ is imposed. This is in effect a gauge choice in the Helmholtz decomposition, and leads to an irrotational velocity at the surface, Eq.~(\ref{eqn_pot}). The price for the irrotational KBC is that the normal stress continuity boundary condition now pertains to the sum of the irrotational and the rotational parts of the pressure: $P=P_{\text{i}}+P_{\text{r}}$. Moreover, the vortical component of the velocity (the grey shaded area) is nonzero in the bulk of the fluid.
In System C (Figure \ref{fig_3situations}C), derived by \citet{Longuet-Higgins1969,Longuet-Higgins1992}, the problem is split into two domains: an irrotational bulk ($\Gamma_I$), and a rotational boundary layer ($\Gamma_{II}$). The equations are solved for $\Gamma_I$. Since there is no interface with air for $\Gamma_I$, the shear stress on the boundary does not have to vanish, and the viscous fluid in this domain can therefore be irrotational. The weight of $\Gamma_{II}$ induces a pressure $P_\delta$ on the top boundary of $\Gamma_I$. An expression for $P_\delta$ is derived in terms of the mass-flux of $\Gamma_{II}$, caused by the rotational part of the velocity ($\vec{U}$).
\subsection{Shared equations}
For all three systems, the continuity equation in the bulk $\nabla \cdot \vec{u} =0$ yields the Laplace equation for the velocity potential:
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_cont}
\nabla^2~\phi~=0 .
\end{equation}
They also share the same bottom boundary condition in the deep water limit: $\phi_z~\rightarrow ~0 $ as $ z~\rightarrow ~-\infty $.
We shall now discuss each system in detail. We shall first provide the remaining equations for each system, and then discuss each equation. All results are also summarized in Table \ref{tab:summary}.
\subsection{System A} \label{sec_sys_Ruv}
The boundary conditions at the free surface boundary, $z=\eta$ can be written as
\begin{subequations}\label{sys_A_total}
\begin{align}
&\eta_t + \eta_x\phi_x + \underbrace{\eta_x U}_{\text{NLV1}} = \phi_z + W & \text{KBC} \label{sys_A_KBC} \\
&\sigma^n \equiv 2\mu \phi_{zz} - P= -P^{\textrm{a}} & \perp-\text{stress} \label{sys_A_Norm} \\
& P=- \rho\left( \phi_t +\frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2 + g\eta + \underbrace{\phi_xU}_{\text{NLV2}}\right) + c(t) & \text{NS} \label{sys_A_NS}\\
& \rightarrow \quad \phi_t +\frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2 + g\eta = - 2\nu\phi_{zz} -\underbrace{\phi_xU}_{\text{NLV2}} & \text{DBC} \label{sys_A_DBC}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
\noindent where NS refers to the space-integrated Navier-Stokes equation evaluated at the surface. The arrow indicates that inserting the latter into the balance of normal stress Eq.~(\ref{sys_A_Norm}) yields the DBC. Recall that we use $c(t)$ to cancel $P^{\textrm{a}}$.
\begin{itemize}
\item In the KBC, the fluid is considered rotational (see Fig.~\ref{fig_3situations}A). Therefore the Helmholtz notation is used, Eq.~(\ref{eqn_KBC_u}), giving Eq.~(\ref{sys_A_KBC})\footnote{
The vortical part decreases rapidly over a distance $\delta=\sqrt{\frac{2\nu}{\omega}}$, as demonstrated in \citet{Lamb1932} section 348, where the stream function $\Psi$ corresponds to $A$ in Eq.~(\ref{eqn_def_vPhiA}).}. Like Eq.~(\ref{eqn_KBC_u3}), this can also be written as
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_KBC_A2}
\eta(s,t)_t = \phi_n + \vec{U}^n.
\end{equation}
\item The normal stress boundary condition (Eq.~(\ref{sys_A_Norm})) is Eq.~(\ref{eqn_press}), neglecting the term $\vec{U}^n_n$, because $\vec{U}^n/\phi_{n} \sim k\delta \ll 1$. In addition, the approximation $\partial / \partial n \approx \partial / \partial z$ is used.
\item To obtain the pressure, in Eq.~(\ref{eqn_DBC_P}), we retain terms of $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon\delta k)$, that is only the term $\phi_s \vec{U}^s \approx \phi_x U$, yielding:
\begin{equation} \label{A_eqn_pressure}
-\frac{P}{\rho} = \underbrace{\phi_t + \frac{1}{2}(\nabla \phi)^2}_\textrm{Dynamic pressure} \underbrace{+g\eta}_\textrm{Static pressure} + \underbrace{\phi_x U}_\textrm{NL vort. term}.
\end{equation}
\item The DBC (Eq.~(\ref{sys_A_DBC})) is obtained by inserting the pressure from the NS equation (Eq.~(\ref{sys_A_NS})) into the balance of normal stress (Eq.~(\ref{sys_A_Norm})).
\end{itemize}
We discuss three variations of System A:
\subsubsection{Ruvinsky, Feldstein and Freidman, 1991}
The first method to close the system is developed by RFF (\citep{Ruvinsky1991}), who insert the Helmholtz decomposition in Eq.~(\ref{eqn_NS_incompr}) and rewrite the vector products using $\nabla \phi \cdot \nabla (\nabla \phi) = \nabla \frac{1}{2}(\nabla \phi)^2$, giving
\begin{multline}
\nabla\phi_t + \vec{U}_t + \nabla \frac{1}{2}(\nabla \phi)^2+ ((\nabla \phi + \vec{U}) \cdot \nabla) \vec{U} + (\vec{U}\cdot \nabla) \nabla \phi = \\
- \frac{1}{\rho}\nabla P + \vec{g} + \nu \nabla^2 \vec{U} .
\end{multline}
Subsequently, they move the gradient terms to the LHS, and on the RHS integrate along the vertical direction, in a small range near the surface ($\eta-\delta,\eta$). Taking the normal component, and assuming that $\vec{U}=0$ outside the boundary layer, $z \in (\eta-\delta,\eta)$ they obtain
\begin{multline} \label{eqn_Ptot_Ruv}
\phi_t + \frac{1}{2}(\nabla \phi)^2 + g\eta + \frac{P}{\rho} + c(t) = \\
- \underbrace{\int_{\eta-\delta}^{\eta}\hat{n}\cdot \left( \vec{U}_t + ((\nabla \phi + \vec{U}) \cdot \nabla) \vec{U} + (\vec{U}\cdot \nabla) \nabla \phi - \nu \nabla^2 \vec{U} \right) dn}_\textrm{Vorticity terms in the boundary layer}.
\end{multline}
Performing the dimensional analysis they show that the integral terms on the RHS are of higher order in steepness $\epsilon = ak$ and $\frac{\delta}{a} \ll 1$, and are therefore neglected. Inserting into the balance of normal stress gives the DBC. Additionally, the vorticity equation ($\omega_t+(\vec{u}\cdot\nabla)\omega = \nu \nabla^2 \omega$ ) is evaluated at the boundary, yielding a vortical boundary condition (VBC), see \citep{Ruvinsky1991} for details. Together with the KBC, this gives the following system:
\begin{subequations}\label{sys_RFF_total}
\begin{align}
&\eta_t + \eta_x\phi_x = \phi_z + W & \text{KBC} \label{sys_RFF_KBC} \\
&\phi_t +\frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2 + g\eta = - 2\nu\phi_{zz} & \text{DBC}\label{sys_RFF_DBC} \\
&W_t=2\nu \phi_{zxx} & \text{VBC}\label{sys_RFF_VBC}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
\noindent where we ignore the surface tension.
\citet{Jarrad2001} perform a linear stability analysis on the RFF system \citep{Ruvinsky1991}, finding growing modes, while the only physical modes are decaying ones. However, when rewriting the VBC as in \citet{Tian2010}, only the DBC and KBC remain, and it is equivalent to the DDZ system (see next section). Performing a linear stability analysis on this system yields physical eigenvalues, with a $-2\nu k^2$ damping rate.
\subsubsection{Dias, Dyachenko and Zakharov, 2008}
The second method to close the system is described in DDZ (\citep{Dias2008}). The vortical velocity component $W$ is expressed in terms of $\phi$ or $\eta$. These expressions can be found using on the linear water wave problem. Subsequently, it can be conjectured that these expressions also hold in the nonlinear system, giving:
\begin{subequations}\label{sys_DDZ_total}
\begin{align}
&\eta_t + \eta_x\phi_x = \phi_z + \nu \eta_{xx} & \text{KBC} \label{sys_DDZ_KBC} \\
&\phi_t +\frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2 + g\eta = - 2\nu\phi_{zz} & \text{DBC} \label{sys_DDZ_DBC}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
\subsubsection{Nonlinear vortical version System A}
The most general version of System A includes the nonlinear vorticity terms labeled VNL1 and VNL2 in Eqs.~(\ref{sys_A_total}) that are neglected by RFF and DDZ systems. The relevance of these terms will be discussed in detail in Section \ref{sec_Disc_NLV}.
\subsection{System B} \label{sec_sys_Domm}
The boundary equations at $z=\eta$ for System B (\citet{Dommermuth1993}) can be written as :
\begin{subequations}\label{sys_B_total}
\begin{align}
&\eta_t + \eta_x\phi_x = \phi_z & \text{KBC1} \label{sys_B_KBC1}\\
&\vec{U}^n = 0 & \text{KBC2} \label{sys_B_KBC2}\\
&\sigma^n\equiv2\mu \frac{1}{\eta_x^2 + 1} (\phi_{zz} + W_z)+ \text{NL} -(P_{\text{rot}} + P_{\text{irr}})=P^{\textrm{a}}& \perp \text{-stress} \label{sys_B_Norm} \\
&P_{\text{irr}} = -\rho\left(\phi_t + \frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2 + g\eta \right) + c(t) & \text{NS}, P_{\text{irr}} \label{sys_B_Pirr}\\
&\rightarrow \quad \phi_t +\frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2 + g\eta = - 2\nu\frac{1}{\eta_x^2 + 1} \left(\phi_{zz}+W_z\right)- \frac{P_\textrm{rot}}{\rho} & \text{DBC}\label{sys_B_DBC}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Where NL indicates nonlinear terms, which can be found in \citep{Dommermuth1993}.
\begin{itemize}
\item For the KBC, the additional boundary condition $\vec{U}^n=0$ is imposed at the surface (Eq.~(\ref{sys_B_KBC2})), rendering the KBC (Eq.~(\ref{sys_B_KBC1})) irrotational. This is achieved at the cost of $\vec{U}$ being non-zero in the bulk, as indicated in Figure \ref{fig_3situations}B.
\item In order to obtain an additional equation to accommodate for the extra boundary condition, the pressure is also split in a rotational and irrotational part in the balance of normal stresses (Eq \ref{sys_B_Norm}):
\begin{align}
P &= P_{\text{irr}} + P_{\text{rot}}. \label{eqn_B_P}
\end{align}
\item The irrotational Bernoulli equation defines $P_{\text{irr}}$, the remaining part is denoted $P_{\text{rot}}$.
\item Like in System A, the DBC (Eq.( \ref{sys_B_DBC})) is obtained by inserting the equation for the pressure (Eq.~(\ref{sys_B_Pirr})) into the normal stress balance (Eq.( \ref{sys_B_Norm})). However, now, $P_{\text{rot}}$ remains unknown.
\item To obtain an equation for $P_{\text{rot}}$, the decomposition for the velocity (Eq.~(\ref{eqn_HH})), and for the pressure (Eq.~(\ref{eqn_B_P})) can be inserted into the viscous and rotational Navier-Stokes equation in the bulk, resulting in
\begin{equation}\label{sys_B_Prot}
\begin{split}
\nabla P_{\text{rot}} = U_t - ((\vec{U}+\nabla \phi)\cdot \nabla)\vec{U)}\\
\qquad \qquad \qquad -(\vec{U}\cdot \nabla\phi)\nabla\phi + \nu \nabla^2\vec{U}.&
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\noindent Taking the scalar product of the Navier-Stokes equation with the normal vector to the free surface, one can obtain a boundary condition for $\partial P_{\text{rot}} / \partial n$.
\end{itemize}
Dommermuth's system retains all nonlinear terms without any approximations. This system was derived for studying the evolution of vortical cylinders moving from the bottom towards the water surface, where the vorticity is indeed not just limited to the boundary. The Helmholtz decomposition allows for a seamless transition between regimes with different Reynolds numbers.
\subsection{System C} \label{sec_sys_LH}
\citet{Longuet-Higgins1992,Longuet-Higgins1969} formally splits the problem into two domains: the irrotational bulk $\Gamma_{I}$, and the vortical boundary layer $\Gamma_{II}$, see Fig. \ref{fig_3situations}C. The equations for $\Gamma_I$ at its upper boundary $z=\eta^*$ are given by:
\begin{subequations}\label{sys_C_total}
\begin{align}
& \eta^*_t + \eta^*_x\phi_x = \phi_z & \text{KBC} \label{sys_C_KBC}\\
&\sigma_n \equiv 2\mu \phi_{zz} - P = -\left(P_{\delta}+P^\text{a}\right) & \perp\text{-stress} \label{sys_C_Norm} \\
&P_{\delta}/\rho = g \eta' = 2\nu \phi_{zz} & \text{added } P_{\delta} \label{sys_C_Pdelta}\\
& P= -\rho \left(\phi_t + \frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2 + g\eta^* \right)+c(t) & \text{NS} \label{sys_C_NS}\\
&\rightarrow \quad \phi_t + \frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2+ g\eta^* = -4\nu \phi_{zz} & \text{DBC} \label{sys_C_DBC}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
\begin{itemize}
\item In this configuration, the shear stress for the top boundary of $\Gamma_I$ , $\eta^*$, does not have to vanish, as it does not have an interface with air. Therefore, the viscous fluid, and the KBC (Eq.~(\ref{sys_C_KBC})), can be treated as irrotational. This is in contrast to models like Refs. \citep{Joseph2006,Padrino2007}, which have the unphysical situation of an irrotational fluid with the free surface as top boundary: the vanishing of shear stresses at the free surface cannot physically occur in an irrotational fluid.
\item The normal stress balance (Eq.~(\ref{sys_C_Norm})) receives an additional pressure $P_\delta$ due to the weight of the boundary layer above.
\item The Navier-Stokes equation (Eq.~(\ref{sys_C_NS})) is now evaluated at the top of $\Gamma_I$: $\eta^*$.
\item Again, combining the normal stress balance and the Navier-Stokes gives the DBC: Eq.~(\ref{sys_C_DBC}).
\end{itemize}
The domain of the boundary layer $\Gamma_{II}$ is considered not to have a constant thickness $\delta$, but a variable height $\eta'(x,t)$. We can write for $\eta$:
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_LH_etadef}
\eta =\eta^* + \eta'
\end{equation}
Briefly, obtaining a function for $\eta'$ hinges on three critical observations:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The boundary layer is \emph{defined} as a fluid region where there is a mass-flux, {\it i.e}. fluid flowing through the boundary, due to vorticity. This mass-flux can be written as
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_LH_M}
M = \int_{\eta^*}^{\eta} \rho \vec{U}^s dn .
\end{equation}
\item The layer thickness is not constant in time, and a KBC can be written as
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_LH_Un}
\frac{\partial \eta'}{\partial t}=\vec{U}^n = \int \vec{U}^n_n dn = - \int \vec{U}^s_s dn ,
\end{equation}
\noindent where the last step is made using the fact that the divergence of $\vec{U}$ is null. Note that this corresponds to the change of the \textit{thickness} of the boundary layer in time. This is different from the motion of the upper boundary $\eta$, which would depend on the total normal velocity $\vec{u}^n=\vec{U}^n+\phi_n$.
Combining Eq.~(\ref{eqn_LH_M}) and Eq.~(\ref{eqn_LH_Un}) gives
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_LH_deltat2}
\frac{\partial \eta'}{\partial t}=-\frac{1}{\rho}\frac{\partial M}{\partial s}\simeq-\frac{1}{\rho c}\frac{\partial M}{\partial t},
\end{equation}
\noindent where in the \emph{linear} limit $\partial/\partial x \sim (1/c) \partial/\partial t$, with $c~=~\omega/k$ the phase speed, $\omega$ the orbital frequency and $k$ the wavenmber. This shows the intuitive relation that the difference between the mass-flux from one boundary at $s$ and the other at $s+ds$, $\frac{1}{\rho}\frac{\partial M}{\partial s}$, determines the fluid inflow into a slice, and must be equal to the change in height of the boundary layer, as displayed in Figure \ref{fig_MassCons}a. This point will be further discussed in Section \ref{sec_ConsMass}.
\item The total tangential stress $\tau^{s,\textrm{tot}}$ on the boundaries of the layer is equal to the mass transport
\begin{equation}
M_t = \tau^{s,\textrm{tot}}.
\end{equation}
\noindent Therefore, Eq.~(\ref{eqn_LH_deltat2}) can be written as
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial \eta'}{\partial t}=-\frac{\tau^{s,\textrm{tot}}}{\rho c} .
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
\noindent Assuming $\eta' \propto e^{i(kx - \omega t)}$, gives
\begin{equation}
\eta'= -\frac{i \tau^{s,\textrm{tot}}}{\rho c \omega} ,
\end{equation}
\noindent showing that $\eta'$ leads $\tau$ by 90$^{\circ} $. Since the shear stress at the surface must vanish, it is only the shear stress induced at the bottom of the vortical layer due to the viscous fluid motion of the irrotational bulk that contributes to $\tau^{s,\textrm{tot}}$:
\begin{equation}
\tau^{s,\textrm{tot}}= \tau^s= \mu (\vec{u}^s_n+\vec{u}^n_s)= 2\mu \vec{u}^n_s \approx 2 \mu \eta_{st} \approx 2 \mu \omega k \eta ,
\end{equation}
\noindent where the last two steps are made assuming that $\eta$ is \textit{linear}. Now we can write
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_LH_eta'}
\eta'(x,t) = - \frac{2i\mu k^2}{\rho \omega}\eta(x,t) = 2\nu \frac{k}{\omega^2} \phi_{zz}(x,t) .
\end{equation}
This layer produces an additional normal stress on its bottom boundary (denoted $\eta^*$), simply due to its own weight: $P_{\delta}=\rho g \eta' = 2\mu \phi_{zz}$.
Finally, this method does not rely on the size of $\delta$, or the relation between $\delta$ and $\epsilon$. Therefore, it is valid also for $\frac{a}{\delta}=\frac{\epsilon}{\delta k}\ll1$, unlike for instance the Stokes expansion \citep{Longuet-Higgins1953}. However, the expression for the pressure is made in the linear approximation, and consequently does imply $\epsilon \ll 1$
It is interesting to note that the KBC (Eq.~(\ref{sys_C_KBC})) and DBC (Eq.~(\ref{sys_C_DBC})) of System C are the same as those used by \citet{Wu2006}, namely:
\begin{subnumcases}{\label{sys_D_total}\hspace{-3em} z=\eta}
\eta_t + \eta_x\phi_x = \phi_z & \hspace{-1em} KBC \label{sys_D_KBC}
\\
\phi_t + \frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2+ g\eta = - 4 \nu \phi_{zz} & \hspace{-1em} DBC \label{sys_D_DBC}
\end{subnumcases}
This system is also suggested in the last sentence of the appendix in RFF as a simpler alternative for their system, without further explanation. Longuet-Higgins was able to give a physical underpinning for the irrotational KBC and the added factor 2 to the viscosity term $-2\nu \phi_{zz}$ in the DBC. However, while Eqs.~(\ref{sys_D_total}) refer to the surface elevation $\eta$ at the boundary between air and water, Eqs.~(\ref{sys_C_total}) refer to $\eta^*$, between the boundary layer and the bulk, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig_3situations}C. Nevertheless, since the absolute amplitude of the boundary is irrelevant in a deep water limit, the boundary condition follows the same motion as $\eta$, apart from the aforementioned phase-lag. Performing a multiple scales analysis on Eqs.~(\ref{sys_D_total}) gives the same viscous higher order Nonlinear Schr\"odinger equation (the Dysthe equation) for the propagation of the envelope as the DDZ system (Eq.~(\ref{eqn_propeqn_vort})).
\begin{sidewaystable}
\centering
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.3}
\scalebox{0.74}{\begin{tabular}{| c c c c c |}
\hline
& & \textbf{System A} & \textbf{System B} & \textbf{System C}\\
\cline{3-5}
$z< \textrm{upper boundary}$ & & {$\nabla^2\phi=0$} & {$\nabla^2\phi=0$} & {$\nabla^2\phi=0$} \\
$ z = $lower boundary & & {$\phi_z \rightarrow 0$}& {$\phi_z \rightarrow 0$}& {$\phi_z \rightarrow 0$} \\
\multirow{5}{*}{$z= \textrm{upper boundary}$ $\left\{\begin{tabular}{@{\ }l@{}}
\\ \\ \\ \\ \\
\end{tabular}\right.$}& KBC & $\eta_t + \eta_x\phi_x + \underbrace{\eta_x U}_{\text{NLV1}} = \phi_z + W $ & $\eta_t + \eta_x\phi_x = \phi_z $ & $ \eta^*_t + \eta^*_x\phi_x = \phi_z $ \\
& KBC2 & - & $\vec{U}^n=0$ & - \\
& $\perp$-stress & $\sigma^n \equiv 2\mu \phi_{zz} - P= -P^\text{a}$ & $\sigma^n\equiv 2\mu \frac{1}{\eta_x^2 + 1} (\phi_{zz} + W_z)+\text{NL} -(P_{\text{rot}} + P_{\text{irr}})=-P^\text{a}$ & $ \sigma^n \equiv 2\mu \phi_{zz} - P = -(P_{\delta}+P^\text{a}) $\\
& NS & $P= -\rho \left( \phi_t +\frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2 + g\eta + \underbrace{\phi_xU}_{\text{NLV2}}\right) + c(t) $ & $P_{\text{irr}}= -\rho\left(\phi_t + \frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2 + g\eta\right)+ c(t)$ & $P= -\rho \left(\phi_t + \frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2 + g\eta^* \right)+ c(t)$ \\
& $\rightarrow$ DBC & $ \phi_t +\frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2+ g\eta = - 2\nu\phi_{nn} -\underbrace{\phi_xU}_{\text{NLV2}}$ & $\phi_t +\frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2 + g\eta = - 2\nu\frac{1}{\eta_x^2 + 1}\left(\phi_{zz}+W_z\right)- \frac{P_\textrm{rot}}{\rho} $ & $\phi_t + \frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2+ g\eta^* = -4\nu \phi_{zz}$
\\
$z< \textrm{upper boundary}$ & NS & & $\nabla P_{\text{rot}} = U_t - ((\vec{U}+\nabla \phi)\cdot \nabla)\vec{U)}-(\vec{U}\cdot \nabla\phi)\nabla\phi + \nu \nabla^2\vec{U}$ & \\ \hline
\end{tabular}}\caption{Summary of equations for systems A,B and C.}\label{tab:summary} }
\end{sidewaystable}
\subsection{Nonlinear vortical terms}\label{sec_Disc_NLV}
Comparing the nonlinear vortical version of System A (Eqs (\ref{sys_A_total})) to the viscous water wave models presented in RFF and DDZ, the latter two ignore the nonlinear vortical terms: $\eta_x U$ in the KBC, and the $\phi_xU$ in the DBC. These terms are $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon \delta k)$. RFF justifies neglecting these terms because both the steepness, $\epsilon$, and the thickness of the boundary layer, $\delta k$, are very small quantities and thus their product leads to a negligible contribution.
However, a simple order analysis in \ref{app_OrderAnalysis} shows that the nonlinear vortical terms $\eta_x U$ in the KBC and $\phi_xU$ in the DBC are larger than the linear viscosity terms $W$ or $2\nu \phi_{zz}$ when $\frac{\epsilon}{\delta k}=\frac{a}{\delta}>1$, which holds in most physical cases (see Figure \ref{fig_MagnVort}), a fact that is also remarked in \citep{Longuet-Higgins1960}. In Figure~\ref{fig_LengthScales}, the case $\frac{a}{\delta}>1$ is indicated by the dashed line, and the case $\frac{a}{\delta}<1$ by the dotted line.
Yet, when we construct a viscous Dysthe equation through the method of multiple scales \textit{including} the nonlinear vortical terms, they cancel out (see \ref{app_ExpressionVort}). Thus, up to $O(\epsilon^4)$ in the MMS, the approximate models of RFF and DDZ give the same result as the nonlinear vortical variant of System A expressed in potential terms.
\bigbreak
\subsection{Comparison of the three systems}
First, the domain of application is different for each model. Systems A and C are written in potential flow terms, and are therefore suitable to obtain a viscous propagation equation for the envelope, by means of for instance the Method of Multiple Scales (MMS). Taking the MMS expansion to $\mathcal{O}\left(\epsilon^4\right)$, both systems A and C reduce to the viscous Dysthe equation \citep{Carter2016}. In addition, the DDZ version of System A has been used to model the effect of the eddy viscosity in breaking waves \cite{Tian2010}, integrating it using the pseudo-spectral method \citep{Choi1995}, where the value of $\nu$ now represents the eddy viscosity instead of the kinematic viscosity. However, in these potential flow descriptions of System A and System C, the details of the boundary layer are lost. When the boundary layer is of interest, System A in the RFF description, or System B can be of use.
In contrast to Systems A and C, no approximation is made in System B (Dommermuth). However, System B cannot provide an envelope equation. Indeed, as its original purpose was the study of vortical bores, it is well suited for a domain where the vortical part of the velocity vector plays an important role in the whole domain or is the subject of interest. However, this is obtained at the cost of a higher numerical complexity. It has to be solved using a numerical finite difference scheme, combining Fourier techniques and LU decomposition.
Secondly, our comparison also illustrates the link between the vortical part of the velocity vector and the rotational pressure. To demonstrate the equivalence between Systems A and C, \citet{Longuet-Higgins1992} rewrites the \textit{linearized } System A into the \textit{linearized } System C, by using $\eta=\eta^*+\eta'$. This demonstrates that the vortical terms in the free surface boundary conditions of System A can indeed be interpreted as an additional pressure $P_\delta$. In \ref{app_LH_NLRuvinsky} we derive that the \textit{nonlinear} versions of Systems A and C are equal if terms of order $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^2)$ and $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon \delta k)$ can be neglected.
Similarly, the terms labeled 'vorticity terms in the boundary layer' in the integral in Eq.~(\ref{eqn_Ptot_Ruv}) in System A, are equal to $\nabla P_{\text{rot}}$ in Eq.~(\ref{sys_B_Prot}) in System B. This equivalence indicates that these vorticity terms (which also contain mixed terms with $\phi$) in the boundary layer can be interpreted as the effect of the rotational pressure. In System A, the integral is only over the boundary layer. The net effect of the terms is very small, and, as discussed, these terms can be neglected. The contribution of the rotational pressure is already taken into account by the vortical term in the KBC (Eq.~(\ref{sys_A_KBC})). In System B, this contribution \emph{is} significant, as the equation for the rotational pressure spans the entire vertical domain $z \in (-\infty, \eta)$.
Comparing the DBC's of Systems B and C illustrates that vorticity and added pressure $P_\delta$ play the same role. However, instead of using the fully nonlinear equation for the vorticity as in System B (Eq.~(\ref{sys_B_Prot})), System~C \citep{Longuet-Higgins1969,Longuet-Higgins1992} relies on the physical argument of mass influx, using only \textit{linear} equations to obtain the additional pressure, as shown in Section \ref{sec_sys_LH}.
\section{Conservation of mass} \label{sec_ConsMass}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{massConservationDomain}
\caption{(a) The difference in mass-flux $M$ (grey shaded area) will lead to a rise or fall of the surface elevation over the interval $dx$. (b) Domain of mass conservation} \label{fig_MassCons}
\end{figure}
Since the three systems deal differently with the distinction between the irrotational bulk and the rotational boundary layer, we verify the mass conservation condition for the entire domain. As we consider the fluid to be incompressible, this of course reduces to the conservation of volume. We examine the continuity equation ($\nabla \cdot\vec{u}=0$) on the domain $\Gamma$ in Fig.~\ref{fig_MassCons}b, with depth $z \in (-\infty, \eta)$ and width $dx$.
The difference between the flux through side boundaries $\partial \Gamma_L$ and $\partial \Gamma_R$ denotes a total increase or decrease of fluid volume (area in 2D) in the domain in Fig.~\ref{fig_MassCons}a. In an incompressible fluid, this must be accommodated by an upward or downward movement of the free top boundary $\eta$. That is, the mass-flux through the side boundaries is compensated by the movement of the surface elevation $\eta$.
First, the continuity equation is integrated over the column $z \in (-\infty, \eta)$
\begin{align} \label{eqn_MassConsStep1}
\int_{-\infty}^{\eta(x)} (u_{x} + w_{z}) dz & = 0 .
\end{align}
\noindent Using the Leibniz rule gives
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_MassConsStep2}
\underbrace{\frac{d}{dx} \bigg(\int_{-\infty}^{\eta(x)} u dz}_\textrm{net in/out flux}\bigg) \underbrace{-u(\eta)\frac{\partial \eta}{\partial x} + w(\eta)}_\textrm{$\tilde{u}^n @ \eta$} = 0 .
\end{equation}
\noindent Here, $\int_{-\infty}^{\eta(x)} u dz$ denotes the flux through a vertical boundary at a given position $x$, see Figure \ref{fig_MassCons}a. The sign of its derivative $d/d x$ from one position to the next shows volume coming into, or leaving the slice. The rate at which this increase in volume occurs is equal to the velocity of the boundary moving up or down to accommodate the change: $\vec{u}^n$. Here $\tilde{u}^n$ refers to $\vec{u}^n$ in Cartesian coordinates: $\tilde{u}^n = \sqrt{\eta_x^2 +1}\vec{u}^n$ (see Eq.~\ref{eqn_KBC_u2}). Using the KBC (Eq.~(\ref{eqn_KBC_u})), we can write
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_massConsv_v1}
\underbrace{\frac{d}{dx} \bigg(\int_{-\infty}^{\eta(x)} u dz\bigg)}_\textrm{Total flux} + \underbrace{\eta_t}_\textrm{Change of $\eta$ in time} = 0 .
\end{equation}
\noindent This notation in terms of the velocity vector is a level of description higher than the one used in the three systems described above, {\it i.e.} before the introduction of the potential framework or the gauge choice of $\vec{U}$.
\subsection{Comparison to the irrotational system}\label{sec_MC_irr}
First, we would like to address the use of the irrotational fluid as a benchmark for the conservation of mass of a viscous system. For the irrotational water wave problem, the potential notation $\vec{u}=\nabla \phi_\textrm{\text{irr}}$ can be used in Eq.~(\ref{eqn_massConsv_v1}), to obtain:
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_massConsv_irr}
\underbrace{ \frac{d}{dx} \bigg(\int_{-\infty}^{\eta(x)} \phi_{\textrm{\text{irr}},x} dz\bigg) }_\textrm{Total flux} + \underbrace{ \eta_{t}}_\textrm{Change of $\eta$ in time} = 0 .
\end{equation}
For the viscous water wave problem, when using the Helmholtz decomposition for $\vec{u}$ in Eq.~(\ref{eqn_massConsv_v1}), this yields
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_massConsv_rot1}
\frac{d}{dx} \bigg(\int_{-\infty}^{\eta(x)}(\phi_{x} +U) dz\bigg) + \eta_t = 0.
\end{equation}
Rewriting $\int U dz$ using the Leibniz rule and the continuity equation ($U_x = - W_z$), gives
\begin{align}\label{eqn_massConsv_rot}
\begin{split}
\underbrace{\frac{d}{dx} \bigg(\int_{-\infty}^{\eta(x)} (\phi_{x}) dz\bigg) }_{\textrm{Irrotational flux}} - \underbrace{(-U\eta_x + W)}_\textrm{${U}^n$}|_{z=\eta}
&+ \underbrace{\eta_t }_{\textrm{Change of $\eta$ in time}} =0,
\end{split}
\end{align}
\noindent where ${U}^n$ is the normal component of the vortical velocity. Using for explicit expressions for the vortical terms, for instance from the DDZ system (Eq.(\ref{sys_DDZ_KBC})), where $-U\eta_x = 0$ and $W=2\nu \eta_{xx}$, results in
\begin{align}\label{eqn_massConsv_Dias}
\begin{split}
\frac{d}{dx}\bigg(\int_{-\infty}^{\eta(x)} (\phi_{\textrm{DDZ},x}) dz\bigg) \\ \underbrace{-2\nu\eta_{xx}}_\textrm{extra term}
&+ \int_{x_0}^{x_0 + \Delta x} \eta_t dx =0 .
\end{split}
\end{align}
In comparison to Eq. (\ref{eqn_massConsv_irr}) the additional term $2\nu\eta_{xx}$ seems to break the conservation of mass. However, as pointed out in Sec.~\ref{sec:ShearStress}, it is unphysical to have a viscous irrotational fluid with a curved free-surface boundary: a viscous fluid \textit{cannot} be irrotational at the boundary. Therefore, one must remember that $\eta_t$ is based on the rotational KBC (Eq.(\ref{sys_DDZ_KBC})):
\begin{align}\label{eqn_massConsv_Dias2}
\begin{split}
\underbrace{ \frac{d}{dx} \bigg(\int_{-\infty}^{\eta(x)} (\phi_{\textrm{DDZ},x}) dz\bigg)}_{ \textrm{Irrotational flux}} \\ \underbrace{\cancel{-2\nu\eta_{xx}}}_\textrm{extra term}
&+ \left(\underbrace{ -\eta_x\phi_x|_{z=\eta} + \phi_z|_{z=\eta} }_{\textrm{irrotational } \tilde{\eta}_t} + \cancel{2\nu \eta_{xx}} \right) =0 .
\end{split}
\end{align}
The irrotational mass flux due to $\phi_{\textrm{DDZ}}$ is equal to the irrotational $\tilde{\eta_t}$. This illustrates that the rotational and irrotational parts of the problem superpose linearly, as in the formulation of the Helmholtz equation. We therefore confirm that the mass is conserved in the DDZ system\footnote{Examining the integrability of the DDZ system, \cite{Ngom2018} points out that when the system is assumed periodic, the 'extra term' disappears. This is indeed valid for their system of periodic functions and their following development. However, here, we want to consider the conservation of mass on any domain, not just periodic ones.}.
\subsection{Mass conservation in the three systems}
In the following we compare the expressions for conservation of mass for systems A, B and C. We write the condition for mass conservation such that $\nabla\phi$ is the sole contributor to the mass-flux on the side boundaries, and any vorticity terms are expressed on the moving upper boundary.
\subsubsection{System A}\label{sec_MC_A}
The Helmholtz decomposition is used for $\vec{u}$ in Eq.~(\ref{eqn_massConsv_v1}), and results in Eq.~(\ref{eqn_massConsv_rot}), repeated below for clarity:
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_massConsv_A}
\underbrace{\frac{d}{dx} \bigg(\int_{-\infty}^{\eta(x)} \phi_{\textrm{A},x} + U_{\textrm{A}} dz\bigg) }_\textrm{Total flux} + \underbrace{ \eta_t }_\textrm{Change of $\eta$ in time } = 0 .
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{System B}
We repeat the same exercise for System B, however Eq.~(\ref{sys_B_KBC1}) is irrotational, indicated with the tilde. The mass conservation Eq.~(\ref{eqn_massConsv_rot1}) becomes
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_massConsv_B}
\underbrace{\frac{d}{dx} \bigg(\int_{-\infty}^{\eta(x)} \phi_{\textrm{B},x} + U_{\textrm{B}} dz\bigg) }_\textrm{Irrotational flux} + \underbrace{ \tilde{\eta}_t }_\textrm{irrotational} = 0 .
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{System C}
Again, the same method is repeated for System C. The conservation of mass, Eq.~(\ref{eqn_massConsv_v1}), is now written for both domains; the irrotational bulk $z \in (-\infty, \eta^*)$ ($\Gamma_I$), and the rotational boundary layer $z \in (\eta^*, \eta)$ ($\Gamma_{II}$):
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_massConsv_LH1}
\underbrace{ \frac{d}{dx} \bigg(\int_{-\infty}^{\eta^*(x)} \phi_{\textrm{C},x} dz\bigg) + \eta^*_t}_\textrm{Domain $\Gamma_{I}$} + \underbrace{ \frac{d}{dx} \bigg(\int_{\eta^*(x)}^{\eta(x)} U_\text{C} dz\bigg) + \eta'_t }_\textrm{Domain $\Gamma_{II}$} =0 .
\end{equation}
Recall from Section \ref{sec_sys_LH} that in $\Gamma_{II}$, by definition, the velocity vector has only the rotational component $\vec{U}$. Therefore $\phi_C=0$ in $\Gamma_{II}$. Similarly, $U_{\textrm{C}}=0$ in $\Gamma_{I}$. Consequently, both can be taken together in one integral that spans both domains, i.e. $z \in (-\infty, \eta)$. In addition, we rewrite $\eta= \eta^*+\eta'$ to obtain
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_massConsv_LH}
\underbrace{\frac{d}{dx} \bigg(\int_{-\infty}^{\eta(x)} \phi_{\textrm{C},x} + U_{\textrm{C}} dz\bigg) }_\textrm{Total net-flux} + \underbrace{\eta_t}_{\textrm{rotational}} = 0 .
\end{equation}
\subsection{Mass conservation comparison}\label{sec_MassConsvDisc}
We posed the conservation of mass condition for each system using the Helmholtz notation. As such, the conservation of mass can be posed individually for the rotational and irrotational part of the velocity vector. Using the explicit definition of the vortical terms in the DDZ version of System A, we show in Eq.~(\ref{eqn_massConsv_Dias2}) that this system conserves mass. By the same argument as in Section \ref{sec_MC_irr}, the soundness of the nonlinear vortical version and the RFF version of System A can be established. System C is by definition (Eq.~(\ref{eqn_massConsv_LH1})) an explicit addition of the irrotational bulk and the rotational boundary layer. For System B (Eq.~(\ref{eqn_massConsv_B})), like for the other two systems, the mass conservation condition in will be fulfilled provided no numerical errors are introduced in obtaining concrete values for the rotational velocity vector $\vec{U}$ and velocity potential $\phi$.
Furthermore, comparing the mass conservation conditions for Systems A (Eq.~(\ref{eqn_massConsv_A})) and C (Eq.~(\ref{eqn_massConsv_LH})), we can deduce that $\nabla\phi_C=\nabla\phi_{\text{irr}}=\nabla\phi_A$\footnote{Note that Eq.~(\ref{eqn_massConsv_LH}) corresponds to the fully nonlinear version of the model, i.e. before any form of linearization is introduced, since the normal vector $\vec{U}^n$ is not yet expressed in terms the vortical pressure $P_\delta$. }. Therefore, using a purely irrotational system for the viscous water wave problem neglects the vortical contribution to the mass-flux represented by the term $\int_{\eta^*(x)}^{\eta(x)} U dz$ in Eq.~(\ref{eqn_massConsv_LH1}), which is the definition of the vortical layer in Eq.~(\ref{eqn_LH_Un}). This is the origin of the pressure term $P_{\delta}$ in System C (Section \ref{sec_sys_LH}). When this additional pressure term is missing in the model equations, it leads to an underestimation of the decay rate, as exemplified in \citet{Padrino2007}.
Finally, for System B (Eq.~(\ref{eqn_massConsv_B})) both the rotational and irrotational part of the horizontal velocity $u$ are needed to account for the movement of the \textit{irrotational} $\tilde{\eta}$ (irrotational KBC). In contrast,
System A (Eq.~(\ref{eqn_massConsv_A})) and System C (Eq.~(\ref{eqn_massConsv_LH})), concern the movement of $\eta$ based on the rotational KBC. This exemplifies the gauge choice for System B where the vortical part of the velocity $\vec{U}$ also takes part of the irrotational velocity in the bulk, as indicated by the grey shaded area in Figure \ref{fig_3situations}B.
\section{Discussion and Conclusion}
In summary, we contrast and compare three different ways of looking at the viscous water wave problem, both in the model equations and in the resulting conservation of mass.
Practical implementation is the guiding factor in opting for one or the other. System B (\citet{Dommermuth1993}) is the only closed exact model that is fully nonlinear without approximations, at a cost of having more complicated equations in the bulk, where the fluid is assumed to be rotational, as well as an additional equation for the rotational pressure. To close the systems A and C, linearization has to be applied, and approximations have to be made. System C and the DDZ version of System A do not provide details on the boundary layer but are computationally simple, and can provide a basis for envelope evolution equations like the Nonlinear Schr\"odinger or Dysthe equations. \linebreak
We verify for all three systems that the mass conservation conditions are in agreement with the Helmholtz superposition of the rotational and irrotational flow. The comparison of the mass conservation conditions illustrates that the gauge choice of System B requires the vortical velocity vector to contain also an irrotational part.
It would be interesting to see how well the linear simplification of the vortical pressure captures the dynamics for the total pressure, comparing to results based on the fully nonlinear model by \citet{Dommermuth1993}.
Various other models hint at the existence and relevance of nonlinear viscosity terms in the propagation equation \citep{Armaroli2018_visc,Fabrikant1980}. The order analysis in Cartesian coordinates performed in \ref{app_OrderAnalysis} and a leading order analysis in curvilinear coordinates performed by \citet{Phillips1979} show their relevance in different regimes of viscosity and wave steepness. However, we show that, when the system is closed in potential terms so that the multiple-scale method can be applied, such viscosity terms cancel out each other and have no effect on the viscous Dysthe equation.
Depending on the physical application, it is important to have a clear understanding of the limitations and strength of each possible formulation of the viscous free-surface problem. We hope that this comparison contributes to a clearer interpretation of this problem, and will be built upon in future analyses.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We acknowledge the financial support from the Swiss National Science Foundation (Projects Nos. 200021-155970 and 200020-175697). We would like to thank John Carter, Peter Wittwer and Yves-Marie Ducimeti\`ere for fruitful discussions.
\bibliographystyle{model1-num-names}
\section{Conversion of System A to System C} \label{app_LH_NLRuvinsky}
\citet{Longuet-Higgins1992} demonstrates that the linearized system presented in RFF
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\eta_t & = \phi_z + W \\
\phi_t + g\eta & = - 2 \nu \phi_{zz}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\noindent can be written, using $\eta = \eta^* + \eta'$, as
\begin{equation}\label{eqn_app_LH_A_lin}
\begin{aligned}
\eta_t + \eta^*_x\phi_x + \eta'_x\phi_x &= \phi_z \\
\phi_t + \frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2+ g\eta^* & = - 4 \nu \phi_{zz}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\noindent where the boundary layer induced-pressure method described in \citet{Longuet-Higgins1969} is used. We perform the same exercise for the nonlinear System A.
\subsubsection*{The kinematic boundary condition}
Since $\eta'_t = -\eta_x U + W$, Eq.~(\ref{sys_A_KBC}) can be rewritten as
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\eta^*_t + \eta^*_x\phi_x + \eta'_x\phi_x &= \phi_z
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\noindent In \citet{Longuet-Higgins1969}, the nonlinear term $\eta'_x\phi_x$ is ignored. Since $\eta^*_x\propto a$ and $\eta'_x \propto \delta$, this is justified if $a \gg \delta$ (or $\epsilon \gg\delta k$), which looking at Figure \ref{fig_MagnVort} is the case in most physical situations. It can also be solved by moving to tangential coordinates, and recalling Eq.~(\ref{eqn_KBC_u3}), and writing
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\eta^*(s,t)_t + \eta'(s,t)_t &= u^n(s,t) \\
\eta^*_t &= \phi_n\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\noindent
resulting indeed in the irrotational KBC as in System C.
\subsubsection*{The dynamic boundary condition}
Starting from Eq.~(\ref{eqn_Ptot_Ruv}), we insert the normal stress balance, and replace $\eta = \eta^* + \eta'$, to obtain
\begin{multline} \label{A_eqn_Ruvinsky_DBC1}
\phi_t + \frac{1}{2} (\nabla \phi)^2 + 2 \nu \left(\phi_{nn} + U^n_n \right) - g\eta^* -g\eta' = \\\underbrace{ - \int_{\eta-\delta}^{\eta} \left( \vec{U}_t- \nu \nabla^2 \vec{U} - \omega \times \vec{U} \right) dz - \frac{1}{2}\vec{U}^2}_\textrm{Vortical layer} \\
\underbrace{\phi_n U^n + \phi_s U^s}_\textrm{Mixed NL terms} \qquad
\end{multline}
Recall the definition of the vortical layer in system C:
\begin{equation}\label{eqn_etaprime}
\begin{aligned}
\eta' &= \int U^n dt\\
&= -\int \eta_x U dt+\int W dt\\
&= -\int \eta_x U dt- 2\nu \frac{k}{\omega^2} \phi_{zz}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
This expression agrees with the one obtained in \citet{Longuet-Higgins1992} in the linear limit (see Eq. (3.11) in that paper). Inserting Eq.~(\ref{eqn_etaprime}) into Eq.~(\ref{A_eqn_Ruvinsky_DBC1}) and denoting VL for the small terms in the vortical layer:
\begin{multline} \label{A_eqn_Ruvinsky_DBC2}
\phi_t + \frac{1}{2} (\nabla \phi)^2 + 2 \nu \left(\phi_{nn} + U^n_n \right) - g\eta^* = \\
- g\int \eta_x U dt - 2\nu \phi_{zz} + \text{VL} + \phi_n U^n + \phi_s U^s \qquad
\end{multline}
Taking $z\approx n$ for $\phi$, which is justified for $\epsilon\ll1$ gives
\begin{multline} \label{eqn_app_LH_DBC3}
\phi_t + \frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2-g\eta^* = - 4\nu \phi_{zz} \\
- 2\nu\vec{U}^n_n- g\int \eta_x U dt + VL + \phi_n U^n + \phi_s U^s
\end{multline}
Systems A and C are equal if terms of $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^2)$ and $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon \delta k)$, {\it i.e.} the second line of the equation above, can be ignored.
\end{document}
\section{Nonlinear vortical terms}
\subsection{Closing system A}\label{app_ExpressionVort}
In order to close System A, the rotational part of the velocity, $\vec{U}$, needs to be expressed in terms of either $\phi$ or $\eta$. By solving for the linearized Navier-Stokes (NS) equations, \citet{Dias2008} (DDZ) show $W=A_x~=~2\nu\eta_{xx}$ in the linear viscous water wave problem, and conjectures that this also holds for the nonlinear case. We can follow the same line of reasoning to find an expression for $U=A_z$.
Following \citet{Lamb1932,Wang2006} and DDZ, using the linearized NS,
the solution where both $\phi$ and $A$ are periodic in $x$ and must have the form
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}\label{def_PhiA}
\phi (x,z,t) &= \phi_0 e^{i(kx-\omega t)}e^{|k|z} \\
A (x,z,t) &= A_0 e^{i(kx-\omega t)}e^{mz}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\noindent
yielding the relation
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}\label{eqn_m}
m^2 &= k^2-i\frac{\omega}{\nu}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
If the nonlinearity of the waves plays an important role, the expression obtained for the potential vector $A$ in the \textit{linear} equations is not sufficient. Instead, the nonlinear system should be used. To simplify the exponential behavior in $z$, we can consider that from Eq.~(\ref{eqn_m})
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}\label{eqn_mparts1}
\Re(m) &= +\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\sqrt{\sqrt{k^4+\frac{\omega^2}{\nu^2}}+k^2}\\
\Im(m) &= -\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\sqrt{\sqrt{k^4+\frac{\omega^2}{\nu^2}}-k^2}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\noindent and realizing that for typical values of $k$ the relation $\frac{\omega}{\nu} = \frac{2}{\delta^2} \gg k^2$ holds, so that Eq.~(\ref{eqn_mparts1}) reduces to
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}\label{eqn_mparts2}
\Re(m) &\approx +\frac{1}{\delta}\\
\Im(m) &\approx -\frac{1}{\delta}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
To derive an expression for $A_z$ from Eq.~(\ref{def_PhiA}), we consider only the real part of $m$ (Eq.~(\ref{eqn_mparts2})), since it is part of a real valued velocity vector \citep{Lamb1932}, and obtain
\begin{equation}
A_z\Big|_{z=0} = 2\sqrt{\frac{\nu}{2\omega}}\omega\eta_x= -2 \sqrt{\frac{\nu}{2\omega}}\phi_{zz} = -\frac{2k}{\sqrt{2}} \sqrt{\frac{\nu}{\omega}}\phi_{z}
\end{equation}
Note that like DDZ, we \textit{conjecture} that the linear versions of $\phi$ and $A$ are sufficiently precise to remain valid in the nonlinear KBC and DBC. The closed form of System A, including the nonlinear vortical terms can be written as:
\begin{subnumcases}{\label{sys_EulerVortPhi}\hspace{-3em} }
\phi_{xx} + \phi_{zz} = 0 &\hspace{-2em} $-\infty<z<\eta$ \\
\nabla \phi \to 0 & \hspace{-2em} $z\to-\infty$ \\
\eta_t + \phi_x \eta_x -\underbrace{2\sqrt{\frac{\nu}{2\omega}}\phi_{zz}\eta_x}_{\text{NLV1}} =\\ \nonumber
\hspace{8em} \phi_z + {2\nu \eta_{xx}} &\hspace{-2em} KBC \label{A_sys_A_NS} \\
\phi_t + \frac{1}{2}\left(\phi_x^2 + \phi_z^2 \right) + g\eta = \\ \nonumber
\hspace{4em} - 2 \nu \phi_{zz} + \underbrace{2 \sqrt{\frac{\nu}{2\omega}}\phi_{zz}\phi_x}_{\text{NLV2}} &\hspace{-2em} DBC \label{A_sys_A_DBC}
\end{subnumcases}
where the nonlinear vortical terms (NLV1, NLV2) correspond to those in System A~(Eqs.~(\ref{sys_A_total})).
\subsection{Propagation equation}
Using the method of multiple scales (MMS), as described in \citet{Carter2016}, gives the following propagation equation for the envelope $B$:
\begin{multline}\label{eqn_propeqn_vort}
\frac{\partial B}{\partial t} + \frac{\omega_0}{2k_0} \frac{\partial B}{\partial x} =
\epsilon\bigg[ +i\frac{\omega_0}{8 k_0^2} \frac{\partial^2 B}{\partial x^2} + \frac{1}{2}i k_0^2 \omega_0 B|B|^2 -2 k_0^2\nu B \bigg] \\
+ \epsilon^2\bigg[ - \frac{3}{2} k_0 \omega_0 |B|^2\frac{\partial B}{\partial x} - \frac{1}{4}k_0 \omega_0 B^2 \frac{\partial B^*}{\partial x} \\
+ \frac{\omega_0}{16k_0^3}\frac{\partial^3 B}{\partial x^3} +i k_0 B\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial x} - 4i k_0 \nu\frac{\partial B}{\partial x} \\
\underbrace{-2 k_0^3\omega_0 \delta B|B|^2 }_{\text{NLV1}} + \underbrace{2 k_0^3\omega_0 \delta B|B|^2 }_{\text{NLV2}}\bigg]
\end{multline}
The nonlinear vorticity terms cancel out. Hence, the solution reduces to the one given by the same system proposed by DDZ. \citet{Zhang1997} indeed also remark that RFF only take into account the linearized vorticity normal vector, and that the linear vorticity terms describe experiments in reasonable agreement.
\subsection{Order analysis} \label{app_OrderAnalysis}
To check for the relevance of the nonlinear vortical terms in the KBC and DBC the following order analysis is performed. Following Eq.~(\ref{eqn_HH}), we write $U=-A_z$ and $W=A_x$. Note that from the expression of $A$ in \ref{def_PhiA}, $A \propto e^{\delta^{-1}z}$, and thus decays from a finite value to a negligible value over a vertical distance $\delta$. However, $\nabla\phi$ is not affected by viscosity and experiences an exponential decay over a characteristic length $k^{-1}$.
Also note that the analysis in Cartesian coordinates is only valid if $\epsilon \ll 1$. The variables are scaled as follows
\begin{align}\label{sys_Scaling}
x&=k^{-1} \tilde{x} & \phi &= \phi_0 \tilde{\phi} \nonumber \\
t&=\omega^{-1}\tilde{t} & A &= A_0 \tilde{A} \nonumber \\
z&=k^{-1}\tilde{z} \qquad \textrm{for } \phi & \eta &= a \tilde{\eta}\\
z&=\delta\tilde{z} \qquad \quad \textrm{for } A & \nonumber
\end{align}
\noindent where $a,A_0$ and $\phi_0 = \frac{a \omega}{k}$ are the initial amplitudes of the corresponding quantities. Note that, following \citep{Dias2008}, if the viscosity is small $\Theta = \frac{A_0}{\phi_0} \approx \frac{\nu k^2}{\omega} \ll 1$. The KBC (Eq.~(\ref{sys_A_KBC})) and DBC (Eq. ~(\ref{sys_A_DBC})) can be written as
\begin{figure} [h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{dk_vs_kWG}
\caption{$\delta k$ as a function of wave number $k$ for the kinematic viscosity of water, $\nu= 10^{-6}\mathrm{\,m^2\,s^{-1}}$, (solid line) and for glycerine, $\nu=6.21\times 10^{-4}\mathrm{\,m^2\,s^{-1}}$, (dashed-dotted line). The steepness values $\epsilon$=0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 are indicated with horizontal dashed lines. Above $\epsilon$=0.44 waves are generally considered to break \citet{Toffoli2010a}.}\label{fig_MagnVort}
\end{figure}
\begin{equation} \label{eqn_KBVDBC_adim}
\begin{aligned}
\tilde{\eta}_{\tilde{t}} + \epsilon \tilde{\phi}_{\tilde{x}} \tilde{\eta}_{\tilde{x}} -\tilde{\phi}_{\tilde{z}} &= (\delta k)^2\tilde{A}_{\tilde{x}} + \epsilon\delta k\tilde{A}_{\tilde{z}}\tilde{\eta}_{\tilde{x}} & & \textrm{KBC} \\
\tilde{\phi}_{\tilde{t}} + \epsilon\frac{1}{2}(\tilde{\nabla}\tilde{\phi})^2 - \tilde{\eta} &= -2 (\delta k)^2 \tilde{\phi}_{\tilde{z}\tilde{z}} - \epsilon \delta k \tilde{\phi}_{\tilde{x}} \tilde{A}_z & & \textrm{DBC}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\noindent using $U=-A_z$ and $W=A_x$, it is clear that if
\begin{equation}\label{eqn_MangVortTerms}
\epsilon > \delta k \quad \Rightarrow \quad \eta_x U > W, \quad \phi_x U > \phi_{zz}
\end{equation}
Therefore, at fixed $k$, the nonlinear vorticity terms become more relevant for steeper waves or weaker viscosity. Fig.~\ref{fig_MagnVort} shows the value of $\delta k$ for water (solid line) and glycerine (dashed line), as a function of wave number. Comparing this to the wave steepness, indicated by the horizontal dashed lines, shows that for practically all wave-numbers $ \epsilon > \delta k$ in water. The relative magnitudes found in our dimensional analysis (Eq.~(\ref{eqn_MangVortTerms})) are is confirmed by the leading order expressions for the rotational and irrotational velocity vector in curvilinear coordinates (\citep{Phillips1979}, Chapter 3). \citet{Longuet-Higgins1953} indeed also mentions that $\epsilon/ \delta k = a/ \delta \gg 1$ is the common physical situation.
For this reason, we retained the nonlinear vortical terms in Eqs. (\ref{sys_A_total}), labeled VNL1 and VNL2. Surprisingly however, these terms compensate each other in the evolution equation for the envelope, Eq.~(\ref{eqn_propeqn_vort}). In particular, they give a null contribution at the 4$^{th}$ order level in steepness \footnote{Performing the order analysis on Eqs.~(\ref{sys_EulerVortPhi}), using the same scaling as in Eq.~(\ref{sys_Scaling}), indeed gives the same adimensional equation as Eq.~(\ref{eqn_KBVDBC_adim})}.
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
Active matter is a state of matter where large-scale dynamical
structures emerge from the interaction of individual active components
each driven by their own internal energy source. A well investigated
class of such systems comprises active nematics
\cite{Marchetti2013,Sagues_review} where individual elongated
components self-organize into a dynamic state with spatio-temporal
chaos with topological defects -- a behaviour known as active
turbulence \cite{Kessler,Zhou1265,Zhang13626, Sano,Chate2017,
Uchida,Saw, Sano2}. Several experimental and theoretical model
systems have been developed to study networks of cytoskeletal
filaments and motor proteins fueled by ATP
\cite{BauschPNAS,Sanchez,Alper}. A remarkable example is the emergent
behaviour in 2D observed in mixtures of microtubules and kinesin
motors arranged in bundles by a depletion agent pioneered by Sanchez
et al. \cite{Sanchez}. Internally generated spatio-temporally chaotic
flows at the millimetre scale were observed that persisted as long as
ATP was available. The 2D networks exhibit a steady state with
permanent flow at large scales, while the dynamics is driven by the
buckling and elongation of the microtubule bundles due to the activity
of the motors on the nanometer scale \cite{Voituriez}. At high
concentrations these networks show a transition to a locally ordered
nematic liquid-crystalline state with topological defects and
spatio-temporal dynamics
\cite{GiomiPRL,Yeomans2013,Thampi2014,Giomi2014,Yeomans2014,Yeomans_J,Sagues_Marchetti}
that can be varied by confinement such as structured liquid interfaces \cite{Sagues1}, hard wall circular boundaries \cite{Dogic2019}, curved surfaces of deformable spherical vesicles \cite{Keber1135}, toroidal droplets \cite{Fernandez}as well as by radial alignment \cite{Sagues2019}. These systems share the experimental approach to be condensed at an oil-water interface.\\
Whereas systems investigated in two-dimensions were the focus of
copious studies, the prospect of developing three-dimensional active
matter systems was shown only by a few examples. These 3D experiments
included microtubule-based active gels confined in toroids
\cite{Wueaal1979}, and sedimented cell-sized
droplets \cite{Suzuki201616001}.\\
In the present study we show experimentally that a three-dimensional
suspension of microtubules and kinesin-1 motors self-organizes into an
active nematic ribbon that for a range of parameters wrinkles
periodically in the third-dimension due to its longitudinal extension
before transitioning to a state of active turbulence. Similar, but
different, results of a parallel study have been recently published
\cite{Senoussi22464}. However, the contraction in the mentioned system
is passive and due to depletion agent, while our network actively
contracts due to the motor action. A related folding phenomenon has
been observed also in thin acto-myosin networks \cite{Bernheim} whose
behaviour was generated by contracting forces and not by extensile
ones as in the present work. Additionally we understand the behaviour
of our system with stochastic simulations and a quantitative theory
that describes the wrinkling instability.
\section{Results and discussion}
\paragraph*{\textbf{Experimental results.}}
We experimentally investigate the dynamics of an active nematic, confined in a long rectangular channel of size 30 mm $\times$ 1.5 mm $\times$ 100 $\mu$m. The active nematic consists of an ionic aqueous solution of microtubules, multi-headed kinesin-1 motors, and poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) as depletion agent \cite{Sanchez}. We observe that when the system is initially prepared with nematic order \cite{Prost2015} along the long axis of the channel, it exhibits a sequence of transitions before developing into the active turbulent phase with spatio-temporal chaos. This is summarized in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Figure1}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Figure_1}
\caption{\textbf{3D wrinkling formation}. (\textbf{A}) Schematic representation of the wrinkling process as a result of contractile and extensile forces that emerge at different times: the 3D active nematic system evolves to exhibit contraction into a sheet, a wrinkling instability simultaneously as a lateral contraction, and a final transition to active turbulence with spatio-temporal chaos. The red arrow indicates the nematic director before the onset of wrinkling instability. The black arrows indicate the elastic deformations induced by the active stress along different directions. (\textbf{B--E}) Time evolution of 3D active nematics through the different stages. The nematic order along the $x$-direction is visible. Scale bar: 500 $\mu$m. (\textbf{F--G}) Pattern visualization at two different heights. The 3D structure can be seen by the wave crests in focus and the adjacent ones out-of-focus when the focal plane is set to $z = 0$ $\mu$m. At $z = 70$ $\mu$m the situation is reversed. The experiment was conducted at 2mM ATP. Scale bar: 250 $\mu$m.}
\label{Fig:Figure1}
\end{figure*}
In particular, the system makes a transition from a space-filling 3D active nematic to a narrow ribbon extending over the length of the channel and located in the mid-plane (away from the boundaries). This initial contraction along the $z$-direction, which occurs over a time scale of $\tau_{\rm c}$, is followed by a wrinkling instability at time scale $\tau_{\rm w}$, which takes the system back to being 3D. The long-lived state of spatially periodic wrinkling that is oriented along the long axis undergoes another transition to an active turbulent state where the active nematic fills the entire channel after a long time $\tau_{\rm at}$. This remarkable sequence demonstrates 3D active nematic dynamics and instabilities similar to those observed in a recent study \cite{Senoussi22464}. Conversely, no comparison can be made with 2D systems investigated so far \cite{Sagues2019} due to different spatial distribution of that system and its interaction with substrates.\\
Inside the ribbon nematically ordered filament bundles are clearly visible. To confirm this bundles organization we quantify the nematic order in the sample by using correlation analysis and reconstruct the nematic director field as can be seen in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Fig2}.
The first mode of evolution of the active nematic is contraction perpendicular to the nematic director. After contraction, extensile stress builds up along the nematic director \cite{Marchetti2013} (Fig.~\ref{Fig:Figure1}A). Here, contractile and extensile stresses are internal stresses that would lead to contraction and extension, respectively, in the absence of constraints. In the channel, long-range expansion along the whole channel length is not possible and the extensile stress can lead to a spatially periodic wrinkling of the ribbon (Fig.~\ref{Fig:Figure1}B-E).
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Fig_2}
\caption{\textbf{Reconstruction of the nematic director field}. This confirms the nematic order of the microtubule bundles in the samples. The image is from Fig.~\ref{Fig:Figure1}C. For details see Supplementary Methods.}
\label{Fig:Fig2}
\end{figure}
No in-plane bending (horizontal deformation of the director field, akin to deformations in 2D active nematics) is observed at this stage. We expect that out-of-plane bending is preferred to in-plane deformations because it is opposed mainly by the stiffness of the microtubules whereas the in-plane bending additionally requires shearing of the cross-linked sheet.
By acquiring consecutive areas along the $x$-axis we showed that the 3D instabilities are not local but rather emerging in the whole network over centimeters (Fig.~S3). As the wrinkles grow, they reach the channel walls and start folding over. At this point, the sheet-like structure disappears and the individual bundles continue to extend in different directions in space.
After the time $\tau_{\rm at}$, the system reaches a dynamic state of active turbulence (Fig.~\ref{Fig:Figure1}E).
The characteristics of the material needed to form a 3D active nematic differ significantly from those in the previously studied 2D situations \cite{Sanchez, Sagues2019}. Those studies typically use short microtubules with lengths around 1$\mu$m, higher depletant concentration, an oil-water interface and a radial arrangement. Nematic ordering and active stress buildup in our 3D systems have a relatively low volume fraction of microtubules ($~0.001$), require longer filaments. The average microtubule length in our experiment was 19 $\mu$m $\pm$ 10 $\mu$m (Fig.~S2). We verified the importance of length by shearing the filaments to much shorter lengths, in which case no pattern was observed.\medskip
\paragraph*{\textbf{Contraction characterization.}}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{with_woPEG}
\caption{\textbf{Contraction with and without depletion agent PEG}. (\textbf{A--B}). Lateral contraction over time of a network made of microtubule and PEG mixture without addition of motor proteins. The system passively contracts due to the depletion effect of PEG. (\textbf{C--D}). Lateral contraction and longitudinal expansion of a microtubules-motor proteins network over time without addition of PEG. The contracting effect due to the motors proves that the network exhibits an active contraction contribution. The experiment was conducted at 2mM ATP concentration. Scale bar: 500 $\mu$m}
\label{Fig:with_woPEG}
\end{figure}
The evolution of the system from 3D to 2D includes contraction along both y- and z-directions. The average lateral ($y$) contraction was 169 $\pm$ 8 $\mu$m or 11.2$\%$. Vertically ($z$-direction), the ribbon thickness reaches 30 $\mu$m $\pm$ 2 $\mu$m, corresponding to a shrinkage by 70$\%$.
The non-uniform contraction likely reflects the dimensions of the channel. Lateral contraction involves larger absolute displacements and is therefore opposed by stronger drag forces. Similar non-uniform contraction is also seen in the simulation (Fig.~\ref{Fig:Fig5}H-I).
Whereas Senoussi et al. \cite{Senoussi22464} attribute the contraction to the effect of the depletion agent alone (2$\%$ Pluronic in that study), we show that in our system it results from the active component due to cross-linking activity of kinesin motors combined with the passive bundling effect of PEG.
By carrying out the experiment without including motors to the filament mixture we could observe the bundling of microtubules due to PEG alone, their nematic orientation along the longitudinal axis of the channel and the y-contraction ( Fig.~\ref{Fig:with_woPEG}A-B). The network contracts by 7.6$\%$ and reaches its final, stable state after $\sim$330 min. No instabilities are present. The final thickness of ca. 40-45 $\mu$m corresponds to a contraction of 57$\%$.
These contractions can be explained by the entropic mechanism of the depletion interaction. The non-adsorbing polymer (PEG) bundles the microtubules in order to minimize the excluded volume \cite{Braun}. The dimension of the resulting bundles depends on the molecular weight and radius of gyration of PEG (in our case 20KD and 7 nm, respectively).\newline
In order to show the active contribution to the contraction, we repeated the experiment with motor proteins alone and without PEG. Interestingly, the system actively contracts as well as in the case with depletion agent alone (Fig.~\ref{Fig:with_woPEG}C-D) and reaches a maximum shrinkage of 36$\%$, much stronger then the passive contraction through depletion forces. However, the time scale for shrinkage was 3 times slower than in the passive case. Although in this case the microtubules are ordered in a parallel fashion neither thick bundles (Fig.~S5) nor instabilities are visible. We explain the absence of instability by the missing bundling effect of PEG, which normally reduces the relative distance between microtubules to nanometric gap comparable to the dimension of motor clusters. This represents an optimal value for the continuous binding of kinesin motors and therefore for their efficacy.
The development of the extensile stress that is needed for the wrinkling to occur also requires the combined action of the multiheaded kinesins and the depletion forces. Again the PEG-induced force that holds the filaments together reduces the distance between the microtubules within the bundles, enhances the binding of the motors to the polymers and gives the system the possibility to contract. As a positive feedback reduced distance brings to further contraction given by the cross-linking of the motors. Under this configuration, the system reaches the ribbon configuration and the motors extend the polymers randomly oriented within the ribbon. The extensile stress can be explained by an asymmetric distribution of kinesin motors along microtubules. Because kinesins move towards the microtubule plus ends and then exert a minus-directed force on them, there will be an excess of compressive loads on the microtubules. These, in turn, lead to an extensile stress in the sheet (see Sect.\ Simulation). The ability of the motors to buckle the network was proven by reducing 10-fold the motors concentration. In this case the system is able to contract but the force of the motors is not enough for buckling the system (Fig.~\ref{Fig:Fig4}E).\medskip
\paragraph*{\textbf{Wavelength analysis.}}
In our experiments at onset of the wrinkling instability the observed wavelength $\lambda$ ranged from 200 $\mu$m to 500 $\mu$m for constant ATP concentration (2 mM) and the time until the onset of instability ($\tau_{\rm w}$) varied between 10 minutes and 2 hours (Fig.~\ref{Fig:Fig4}D). We find that the wavelength of the pattern and the time scale of its formation are correlated -- wrinkling instabilities that appear at shorter times tend to have shorter wavelengths than those forming later.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Figure_4}
\caption{\textbf{Different ATP and motors concentration}. (\textbf{A--C}) Wrinkle formation at different ATP concentrations: 2 mM; 1 mM; limiting concentration 10 $\mu$M. The concentration of motor proteins is 17 nM and constant in the three experiments. (\textbf{D}) The wrinkling wavelength, plotted against the appearance time. The continuous line shows the dependence $\lambda\propto \tau_{\rm w}^{1/4}$, predicted from the model for samples that differ only in the amount of active stress. (\textbf{E}) When the kinesin concentration is reduced by 10-fold, a strong lateral collapse is observed. (\textbf{F}) In some samples, pattern formation can be observed in both $x$-direction and $y$-direction. Scale bars: 500 $\mu$m}
\label{Fig:Fig4}
\end{figure*}
To further investigate this correlation, we varied the ATP concentration from 2 mM, at which the motors will be reaction-limited, to 10 $\mu$M that is in the diffusion-limited regime. At 1 mM ATP concentration the wavelength of the pattern was 272 $\mu$m $\pm$ 36 $\mu$m and the wrinkling set in after few minutes; at 10 $\mu$M ATP the wavelength was 249 $\mu$m $\pm$ 38 $\mu$m and the onset of wrinkling occurred at around 13 minutes.
Contrary to what one might expect, no discernible effect on the wavelength of the wrinkling instability could be observed. In other studies 2D system shows a faster response and a shorter selected wavelength with increasing ATP concentration \cite{Sagues2019}. However, due to the differences between the two setups (2D system, high depletant concnetration, confinement of the system to an oil-water interface) no direct comparison can be made. Remarkably in our case the instability does not change with ATP concentration as the time for wrinkling and its wavelength at 10 $\mu$M fall into the range observed at 2mM ATP. This is an interesting result as the variation of the characteristic wrinkling formation times cannot be understood through the biochemical process linking velocity and force to ATP hydrolysis, as is the case in classical 2D active nematics \cite{Dogic_SM2019}. It was not observed in the other 3D studies as those systems were investigated at constant ATP concentration at reaction-limited regime \cite{Senoussi22464, Bernheim}.
These observations suggest that the active stress is determined by the stall force of kinesin motors, which is independent of the ATP concentration, and by the cross-linking nature of the motors.
To test the importance of the motor concentration, we decreased the kinesin concentration by 10-fold (to 1.7 nM) and indeed did not observe the instability (Fig.~\ref{Fig:Fig4}E). However, the network contracted continuously for around 48 hours resembling the contraction of the stabilized microtubule network in \textit{Xenopus} oocyte extracts \cite{NeedlemanXen}. This result proves that the active force exerted by a lower amount of motors is able to contract the network through the capacity of kinesin to cross-link the filaments, but is not strong enough to trigger the instability. \medskip
\paragraph*{\textbf{Theory.}}
We can develop a theoretical understanding of the observed phenomena based on the combination of the contraction and the mechanical activity inside the resulting ribbon. The director field is mostly aligned in the direction of the channel, $\hat n\simeq \hat e_x$. For microtubules and kinesin motors, we expect an extensile stress along the director field. This stress is accompanied by contractile stresses across the channel (directions $\hat e_y$ and $\hat e_z$).
After the contractile stress in the $z$-direction leads to the formation of the ribbon, we can describe the system as a two dimensional active nematic sheet that can explore out-of-plane bending deformations. For this effective description, the nematic order is described by the symmetric traceless tensor $\mathbb{Q}=(\hat n \otimes \hat n - \frac 12 \mathbb{I}) S$, with the order parameter $S$, which has the value 1 for perfect nematic alignment and 0 for an isotropic state. The active stress that is caused by the motors can be written as \cite{Simha-Ramaswamy,Prost2015,Sagues_review}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:activestress}
\mathbb{\sigma}^{\rm active}=-\zeta \mathbb{Q}
\end{equation}
with an activity coefficient $\zeta$. In principle, an isotropic
contribution to the stress can also exist, but it can be shown that
this contribution plays a subdominant role and can be ignored for
simplicity (see Appendix B).
The ribbon can be described by a quasi 2D sheet, whose shape can be described (in a Monge representation) by a function $h(x,y)$ for the vertical deflection relative to the center of the channel, and a sheet stiffness $\kappa_{\rm eff}$ that can be derived from the bending modulus of the individual filaments and the nematic order parameter (see Appendix B).\\
Focusing for simplicity on the variations along the $x$-axis, we can
construct a generalized free energy functional as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:f}
\mathcal{F}[h]= \int \dd A \left[\frac 12\kappa_{\rm eff} (\partial ^2 _x h)^2 +\frac 12 \sigma^{\rm active}_{xx} (\partial_x h)^2\right]
\end{equation}
where the coupling between the active stress and the deformation arises from the nonlinear contribution to the strain tensor (see Appendix B for a full derivation that includes deformation in both directions).
The emerging instability of the sheet is subject to viscous dissipation (either in the fluid, or in the remaining microtubule network outside of the sheet). We describe it with a local drag term that resists vertical movement of the sheet, which is written as $\Gamma \partial_t h$. In Appendix B (Role of hydrodynamic drag) we show \textit{a posteriori} that it largely exceeds the expected hydrodynamic drag in the fluid layer surrounding the sheet and we therefore attribute it to the residual filament network filling the volume. Within a linear stability analysis, we use the {\it ansatz} $h(x,t)\propto e^{\Lambda t} e^{i q x}$ for a perturbation with the wave vector $q$. We find a growth rate of
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:growth}
\Lambda(q)=\frac 1 \Gamma \left(-\kappa_{\rm eff} q^4 +\frac 12 \zeta S q^2 \right)\;.
\end{equation}
For negative values of the active stress corresponding to extensile stress, the growth rate $\Lambda(q)$ will be positive for an interval of wave
numbers, with the fastest growing mode having the wave number $q^*=\sqrt{\frac{\zeta S}{4 \kappa_{\rm eff}}}$ and a
growth rate
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:lambda2}
\Lambda(q^*)= \frac{(\zeta S)^2}{16 \Gamma \kappa_{\rm eff}}\;.
\end{equation}
Assuming that the samples do not differ in other parameters, we obtain a relationship between the characteristic time of pattern formation and the wavelength $\lambda=2 \pi/q^*$ as follows
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:taulambda}
\tau_{\rm w} \propto \lambda^4
\end{equation}
The experimental data shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Fig4}D confirm the trend predicted by Eq.~(\ref{eq:taulambda}), both when comparing the outcome in equal samples and in those with different ATP concentrations. With the above equations we can quantitatively estimate the active stress per filament (see Appendix B, Net force per filament) as $0.004\,\rm pN$, several orders of magnitude below the force of a single kinesin motor. This indicates that the motor force almost cancel out in the network and only a small imbalance contributes to the macroscopic stress.\\
Our results also suggest that the nematic order is the requirement for wrinkling and the instability is independent from the size of the channel. This explains the coexistence of buckling along perpendicular axes in adjacent areas of the same channel shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Fig4}F.
In this case their nematic domains are oriented along perpendicular directions.\\
\paragraph*{\textbf{Simulation.}} We used a complementary computer simulation to directly verify that sheet formation and wrinkling arise from the interplay at nanometer scale between the action of kinesin motors and attractive depletion forces. We simulated the dynamics of 20,000 filaments in a sufficiently large box to reproduce the salient phenomena.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Figure_5}
\caption{\setlength{\baselineskip}{0pt} \textbf{Simulation of the active nematic using the Cytosim package}. It reproduces the dynamics observed in the experiment. (\textbf{A}) Initially, the 3D volume is filled with nematically ordered filaments (with orientations within $\theta_{\max}=30^\circ$ of the $x$-axis), mixed with tetrameric active motors and passive cross-linkers. Filaments are subject to repulsive hard-core interactions and attractive depletion forces. (\textbf{B}) The filaments first form a ribbon that contracts laterally. (\textbf{C}) Due to extensile stress, the ribbon forms wrinkles. At the same time, increased bundling of filaments is visible. (\textbf{D}) The wrinkles grow until they get constrained by the top and bottom walls of the channel. (\textbf{E}) Under constraint, the bundles increasingly extend in horizontal direction and the ribbon structure is dissolved. (\textbf{F}) Finally, a state of 3D active turbulence is reached. Upper row: top view; lower row: side view. (\textbf{G}) Average stress $-\sigma_{xx}$ in a cross-section of the channel as a function of simulation time. Positive values represent extensile stress. The letters indicate the times of snapshots in panels (A-E). (\textbf{H-I}) Kymographs showing the average filament density across the width (H) and height (I) of the channel as a function of time. Contraction in both directions is maximal at the onset of the wrinkling instability. }
\label{Fig:Fig5}
\end{figure*}
The simulated system consists of elastic filaments (microtubules), tetrameric kinesin motors (pairs of kinesin dimers that can bind to two adjacent filaments) and passive cross-linkers. Filaments are subject to hard-core repulsion and attractive depletion forces. The simulations use a Langevin-dynamics algorithm from the Cytosim package. The results are shown in Fig.~5 and Figure S6.\\
Starting from a nematically ordered state (Fig.~\ref{Fig:Fig5}A), the simulation first shows the condensation in the middle of the channel and shrinking in the lateral direction (Fig.~\ref{Fig:Fig5}B). As in the experiment, formation of microtubule bundles also becomes visible at this stage. Afterwards, the extensile stress (Fig.~\ref{Fig:Fig5}G) leads to a wrinkling instability in the sheet (Fig.~\ref{Fig:Fig5}C). The growth of the selected out-of-plane deformation mode continues until the amplitude becomes limited by the simulation box size (Fig.~\ref{Fig:Fig5}D). Afterwards, the ribbon structure disintegrates and the system ends in a state of 3D active turbulence (Fig.~\ref{Fig:Fig5}E-F). The simulation shows a very good qualitative agreement with the experimental observations. The lateral and vertical distribution of filaments as a function of time are shown as kymographs in Figs.~\ref{Fig:Fig5}H and I, respectively. The maximal contraction
is 73\% vertically and 19\% horizontally. The contraction is not uniform, but proceeds from the borders towards the center, explaining why the horizontal contraction is relatively weaker, although the absolute displacement is larger.\\
The simulations are in agreement with our earlier conclusion that the kinesin motors responsible for stress generation are close to the stall conditions. At the onset of instability, the kinesins connecting antiparallel filaments act with an average force of around 4pN or 80\% of the stall force (Fig.~S6B). Furthermore, the simulation provides an insight into the mechanism behind the buildup of extensile stress. Because motors move towards the microtubule plus ends, a density gradient is established along the microtubules (Fig.~S6C). This, in turn, causes on average a compressive force in the microtubule, or an extensile stress in the network.\\
We also repeated the simulations in the absence of motor proteins (Fig.~S6E) and without the attractive interaction caused by PEG (Fig.~S6F). Without motors, bundles are still formed and the network contracts, albeit slower than with motors. Without attractive forces, the contraction is further slowed down and no bundling is visible.
\section*{Conclusion}
We present a 3D active system without substrate interactions that collapses into a sheet due to activity and further evolves to exhibit a 3D wrinkling instability before transitioning to fully developed active turbulence.
The active stress is determined by the stall force of the molecular motors and simultaneous cross-linking function as the simulation confirmed. We expect our observation and explanation of these novel emergent properties to broaden the perspective of active nematic systems in 3D.
\section{Materials and Methods}
\textit{\textbf{Motile Bundle Solution.}}
The motile bundle solution was prepared as described before \cite{SANCHEZ2013205}.
Briefly, the kinesin-streptavidin complexes
were mixed with 2.7 mg/ml tubulin and 0.6\% PEG. (See Supplementary Methods for a more detailed description).
By adding PEG, attractive interactions between microtubules are induced through depletion force and lead to bundle formation \cite{Asakura, Needlemann}.
After the polymerization of microtubules, the active solution was injected into a PDMS microfluidic channel with a rectangular cross-section.
To reduce unspecific protein adsorption the channel was functionalized with PLL-g-PEG (see Supplementary Methods).
The peak-to-peak amplitude of the wrinkling can be determined by vertical scans as the difference between the two z-positions at which the structure is in focus (Fig.~\ref{Fig:Figure1}F-G).
\newline
\textit{\textbf{Imaging and tracking.}}
Image acquisition was performed using an inverted fluorescence microscope Olympus IX-71 with a 4$\times$ objective (Olympus, Japan) and a DeltaVision imaging system (GE Healthcare).
The images were acquired with a variable frame rate according to the experiment with an exposure time of 500 ms for a variable time according to the experiment (See Supplementary Methods for more details).\\
\textit{\textbf{Simulation.}}
We simulated the evolution of a 3D active nematic system using the
open source Cytosim package \cite{Nedelec.Foethke2007}
(www.cytosim.org) (See Supplementary Methods for more details).
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\renewcommand{\theequation}{S\arabic{equation}}
\setcounter{figure}{0}
\renewcommand{\thefigure}{S\arabic{figure}}
\setcounter{table}{0}
\renewcommand{\thetable}{S\arabic{table}}
\section{APPENDIX A}
\section{Supplementary methods}
\paragraph*{\textbf{Microfluidic device.}}
The experimental chamber was constituted by a custom-made microfluidic device made of polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS, 10:1 mixture with curing agent, Sylgard 184, Dow Corning Europe SA). Standard soft lithography was used to produce the microfluidic channel that was 1.5 mm wide, 100 $\mu$m high, and 30 mm long. Inlets and outlets for the active mixture were punched through the PDMS by using a syringe tip.
\paragraph*{\textbf{Non-adsorbing surface coatings and experimental chamber assembly.} }Glass coverslips ($64 \times 22\, \rm mm^2$, VWR) were cleaned by sonication in a 2\,$\%$ Hellmanex III solution (Hellma Analytics) for 30 minutes. Afterwards, they were extensive washed in deionized water, incubated 10 minutes in acetone, 10 minutes in ethanol, extensive washed in deionized water and drying with a filtered airflow. The cleaned coverslips were immediately activated in oxygen plasma (FEMTO, Diener Electronics, Germany) for 30 s at 0.5 mbar and sealed to the PDMS. 0.1 mg/mL Poly(L-lysine)-graft-poly(ethylene glycol) (PLL-g-PEG) (SuSoS AG, Switzerland) in 10 mM HEPES, pH 7.4, at room temperature was injected into the channel and incubated for 1 h. Finally, M2B buffer was used to remove the excess PLL-g-PEG from the channel.
\paragraph*{\textbf{Motile bundle solution.}}
The motile bundle solution was prepared as described before \cite{SANCHEZ2013205}.
Kinesin 401 was purified as previously published \cite{Gilbert, Young} and the kinesin-streptavidin complexes were prepared by mixing 0.2 mg/ml kinesin 401, 0.9 mM dithiothreitol (DTT), 0.1 mg/ml streptavidin (Invitrogen, S-888) (stochiometric ratio kinesin:streptavidin 2:1) dissolved in M2B (80 mM PIPES, adjusted to pH = 6.9 with KOH, 1 mM EGTA, 2 mM MgCl\textsubscript{2}) and incubated on ice for 15 min. The plasmid that codes biotin-labeled kinesin 401 (Kinesin 401-BIO-6xHIS) was a gift from Jeff Gelles (pWC2 - Addgene plasmid \# 15960; http://n2t.net/addgene:15960; RRID\textunderscore Addgene\textunderscore15960) \cite{Subramanian445} and was purified at the Dortmund protein facility (DPF).
The active mixture (AM) was obtained by mixing 2.4 mM Trolox (Sigma 238813), 1.7 $\mu$l pyruvate kinase/lactic dehydrogenase (PK/LDH, Sigma, P-0294), 32 mM phosphoenol pyruvate (PEP, VWR AAB20358-06), 16.6 $\mu$l 3$\%$ PEG, 5.5$\mu$l M2B and 3.25 $\mu$l DTT (10 mM), 0.5 mg/ml glucose, 0.2 mg/ml glucose oxidase (Sigma G2133), 0.05 mg/ml catalase (Sigma C40), 2 mM ATP and 4$\mu$l kinesin1-streptavidin clusters. The microtubule mixture (MT) was prepared by mixing 2.7 mg/ml 488 HiLyte\textsuperscript{TM} labeled porcine brain tubulin (Cytoskeleton, Inc., U.S.A.) in M2B with 5 mM MgCl\textsubscript{2}, 1 mM GTP, 50 $\%$ DMSO and 0.3$\%$ PEG.
The final mixture consists of 15$\mu$l MT, 29$\mu$l AM and 5.8 $\mu$l of a stabilising mixture composed by 68 mM MgCl$_2$ and 5 $\mu$M taxol. This solution is kept in the oven for 30 minutes by 37$^{\circ}$C and introduced into the PDMS channel thereafter.
Unlike previous experiments with 2D active nematics \cite{Sanchez} that used short microtubules polymerized with GMPCPP (Guanosine-5'-[($\alpha,\beta$)-methyleno]triphosphate, a GTP analogue), we used longer microtubules with an average length of 19 $\mu$m $\pm$ 10 $\mu$m, polymerized with GTP and stabilized with taxol (see Fig.~S2). The injection was accomplished at low pressure by using a 50 $\mu$l syringe in order to avoid shear damage to the filaments.
\paragraph*{\textbf{Imaging and tracking.}}
Image acquisition was performed using an inverted fluorescence microscope Olympus IX-71 with a 4$\times$ objective (Olympus, Japan) and a DeltaVision imaging system (GE Healthcare). For excitation, a Lumen 200 metal arc lamp (Prior Scientific Instruments, U.S.A.) was applied. The data was recorded with a CCD camera (CoolSnap HQ2, Photometrics). The images were acquired with a variable frame rate according to the experiment with an exposure time of 500 ms for a variable time according to the experiment.
The wavelengths of the pattern were measured by using a purpose-made algorithm written in python\textsuperscript{TM}. The images acquired during the experiments have been filtered with a threshold and binarized. The algorithm identifies the position of the intensity maxima corresponding to the waves. The wavelength is defined as the distance between such intensity peaks (see Fig. S1 below). The procedure is repeated at least five times for different $y$ positions within each the sample. The wavelength values are plotted as mean $\pm$ SD for each sample. Each data point in the plot in Fig.~3D correspond to an experiment.
\paragraph*{\textbf{Simulation.}} In the simulation we kept a filament density close
to the experimental value, but chose a smaller box which was
sufficiently large to capture the wrinkles while keeping the demand
for memory and CPU time feasible. We thus simulated a box of
200 $\mu$m length, 100 $\mu$m width and 20 $\mu$m
height with periodic boundary conditions in $x$ direction and
repulsive boundaries in $y$ and $z$ directions. The box contained
20,000 microtubules and the same number of tetrameric kinesin motors
and passive cross-linkers. Based on the experiment, the filament length
was chosen as 15 $\mu$m. The filaments are subject to repulsive
forces when the distance between their centerlines is closer than
$d_0=50\,\rm nm$. Beyond that distance, there is an attractive
interaction up to a distance $d_0+r_{\rm att}=90\,\rm nm$, which
describes the depletion forces caused by the PEG solution. Kinesin
motors attach to one or two microtubules with the rate
$r_{\rm on}=5\,\rm s^{-1}$ when they are within a range of
$100\,\rm nm$. When bound, they move along each filament with a
prescribed linear force-velocity relationship. The detachment from
microtubules is stochastic with a constant unbinding rate
$r_{\rm off}=0.1\,\rm s^{-1}$. Passive cross-linkers behave in a
similar way as the motors, but do not move along microtubules. The
simulation ran in steps of $\Delta t=0.02\,\rm s$ until the formation
of wrinkles. The simulation parameters are listed in Table S1.
\paragraph*{\textbf{Reconstruction of the nematic director field.}}
We used correlation analysis to quantify the nematic order in the sample. The image is given by the intensity function $I(X,Y)$ on a discrete lattice. To assess the order at position $(X_0,Y_0)$, we first evaluated the correlation function $C(\Delta x, \Delta y)$ as
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
C(\Delta x, \Delta y)= \frac 1 {(2a+1)^2} \sum_{k,l=-a}^a I(X_0-\frac{\Delta x}{2}+k,Y_0-\frac{\Delta y}{2}+l)\\ \times I(X_0+\frac{\Delta x}{2} +k,Y_0+\frac{\Delta y}{2} +l) \\ - \frac 1 {(2a+1)^4}\left[ \sum_{k,l=-a}^a I(X_0-\frac{\Delta x}{2}+k, Y_0-\frac{\Delta y}{2} +l) \right] \\ \times \left[ \sum_{k,l=-a}^a I(X_0+\frac{\Delta x}{2}+k,Y_0+\frac{\Delta y}{2} + l) \right] \;,
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
with the field size $a=16$. Next, we fitted the correlation function
to a Gaussian
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
C_{\rm fit}(\Delta x, \Delta y)=C_0 \exp\bigl[ -(\Delta x \cos \phi +\Delta y \sin \phi)^2 / (2 \sigma_{\rm major}^2) \\ - (\Delta x \sin \phi -\Delta y \cos \phi)^2 / (2 \sigma_{\rm minor}^2) \bigr]\;,
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
with the fit parameters $C_0$ (amplitude), $\phi$ (orientation of the major axis), $\sigma_{\rm major}$ (major correlation length), and $\sigma_{\rm minor}$ (minor correlation length, with $\sigma_{\rm minor}<\sigma_{\rm major}$). We determined the nematic director as $\hat n=(\cos\phi,\sin\phi)$ and the order parameter as
\begin{equation*}
S=1- \frac{\sigma_{\rm minor}}{\sigma_{\rm major}}\;.
\end{equation*}
\section{APPENDIX B}
\section{Stability analysis of the active elastic sheet}
In the following we present a more general discussion of the dynamics of an active nematic sheet. The calculation takes into account the active stress, anisotropic in-plane elasticity and anisotropic bending stiffness of the sheet.
We consider an elastic sheet that spans the $x-y$ plane before deformation. We describe in-plane deformations with the functions $u_1(x,y)$ and $u_2(x,y)$ and the out-of-plane deformation with the function $h(x,y)$. To the leading order, the strain in the deformed sheet is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:1}
u_{ij}=\frac 12 \left[ \partial_i u_j +\partial_j u_i +(\partial_i h)(\partial_j h)\right]\;,
\end{equation}
and consists of a linear term for in-plane deformations $u_{ij}^{\ell} = \frac 12 (\partial_i u_j+\partial_j u_i)$ and a quadratic term $\frac 12 (\partial_i h)(\partial_j h)$ describing the strain caused by small out-of-plane deformations. We have ignored a terms in the form of $\frac12 (\partial_i u_k)(\partial_j u_k)$.
The curvature tensor is defined by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:2}
H_{ij}=\frac{\partial_i \partial_j h}{\sqrt{1+(\nabla h)^2}}= \partial_i \partial_j h+{\cal O}(h^3),
\end{equation}
and determines the mean curvature $\frac 12 H_{ii}=\frac 12 \Delta h$ and the Gaussian curvature $K=\det H$. Note the use of summation convention over identical indices.
In the case of an isotropic sheet, the stretching elastic energy as given by the Hooke's law reads
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:3}
\mathcal{F}_{\rm stretch}^{I}=\int \dd A \left[ \frac 12 \lambda u_{ii} u_{jj} + \mu u_{ij}u_{ij}\right]\;,
\end{equation}
where $\lambda$ and $\mu$ are Lam\'e's first and second parameter, respectively. This elastic free energy corresponds to a linear relationship between the strain tensor $u_{ij}$, and the stress tensor
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:3a}
\sigma^I_{ij}= C_{ijkl}^I u_{kl}\;,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:3b}
C_{ijkl}^I=\lambda \delta_{ij} \delta_{kl}+\mu(\delta_{ik}\delta_{jl}+\delta_{il}\delta_{jk})
\end{equation}
is the isotropic 4-th order stiffness tensor.
Using the homogeneity of Hooke's law, the stretching free energy can be written in terms of the stress tensor $\sigma_{ij}^I$ as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:3c}
\mathcal{F}_{\rm stretch}^{I}=\frac12 \int \dd A \, \sigma^I_{ij} u_{ij}\;.
\end{equation}
Note that this result is valid despite the fact that the expression for the strain contains nonlinear contributions in terms of the deformation field.
We can now generalize this framework to include anisotropy and activity. We describe the nematic order with the symmetric tensor $\mathbb{Q}=(\hat n \otimes \hat n - \frac 1 d \mathbb{I}) S$, with $\hat n$ denoting the director. $S$ is the order parameter, which is $1$ if all filaments are aligned in the direction $\hat n$. We introduce the anisotropic stiffness tensor $C_{ijkl}$, which, by definition, has the symmetries $C_{ijkl}= C_{klij}= C_{jikl}= C_{ijlk}$. It also has to share the symmetries of the $\mathbb{Q}$-tensor. We therefore use the following ansatz:
\begin{widetext}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:4}
C_{ijkl}=\chi Q_{ij}Q_{kl} +\gamma (Q_{ij}\delta_{kl}+\delta_{ij} Q_{kl}) +\lambda \delta_{ij} \delta_{kl}+\mu(\delta_{ik}\delta_{jl}+\delta_{il}\delta_{jk})\;.
\end{equation}
The anisotropic stretching elastic energy follows as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:5}
\mathcal{F}_{\rm stretch}=\frac 12 \int \dd A \; C_{ijkl} u_{ij} u_{kl}\;,
\end{equation}
or, alternatively, as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:5a}
\mathcal{F}_{\rm stretch}=\frac12 \int \dd A \, \sigma_{ij} u_{ij}\;.
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:5b}
\sigma_{ij}= C_{ijkl} u_{kl}\;,
\end{equation}
represents the stress-strain relation for the anisotropic case. Note that Eqs. (\ref{eq:3}), (\ref{eq:3c}), (\ref{eq:5}), and (\ref{eq:5a}) include all possible nonlinear terms allowed by (the corresponding) rotational symmetry (of each case), upto and including terms of the order of ${\cal O}(u^\ell h^2)$ and ${\cal O}(h^4)$.
In an analogous way, we write the bending energy of the isotropic sheet as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:6}
\mathcal{F}_{\rm bend}^I=\int \dd A \left[ \frac 12 \kappa H_{ii} H_{jj} + \bar \kappa K \right]\;,
\end{equation}
and generalize it to the anisotropic case as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:7}
\mathcal{F}_{\rm bend}=\frac 12 \int \dd A \;\kappa_{ijkl} H_{ij} H_{kl}\;,
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\kappa_{ijkl}=\alpha Q_{ij}Q_{kl} +\nu (Q_{ij}\delta_{kl}+\delta_{ij} Q_{kl}) +(\kappa+\bar \kappa) \delta_{ij} \delta_{kl}-\frac{1}{2}\bar \kappa (\delta_{ik}\delta_{jl}+\delta_{il}\delta_{jk})\;.
\end{equation}
The active stress also follows the symmetry of the $\mathbb{Q}$-tensor, and we can write it as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:9}
\sigma^{\rm active}_{ij}=-\zeta Q_{ij}-\zeta^I\delta_{ij}\;,
\end{equation}
where $\zeta$ and $\zeta^I$ are coefficients that represent non-equilibrium activity. A positive value of $\zeta$ implies that the anisotropic stress is extensile in the nematic direction; for a negative $\zeta$ it would be contractile. $\zeta^I$ describes an isotropic active stress that can exist in the system because there is no volume conservation for the active component in the solution. The active stress adds a contribution
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:10}
\mathcal{F}^{\rm active}= \int \dd A \;\sigma_{ij}^{\rm active} u_{ij}\;,
\end{equation}
to the total generalized free energy, which can be written explicitly as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:10q}
\mathcal{F}^{\rm active}=- \int \dd A(\zeta Q_{ij}+\zeta^I \delta_{ij}) \left[u_{ij}^{\ell} +\frac 1 2 (\partial_i h )(\partial_j h) \right]\;,
\end{equation}
upon inserting Eqs. (\ref{eq:1}) and (\ref{eq:9}).
We can now combine all the contributions to the generalized free energy that depend on the out-of-plane deformations
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{F}_{\perp}=\frac12 \int \dd A \left[\kappa_{ijkl} H_{ij} H_{kl} - (\zeta Q_{ij}+\zeta^I \delta_{ij})(\partial_i h )(\partial_j h) \right]+{\cal O}(h^3)+{\cal O}(u^\ell h^2) \;,\label{eq:20}
\end{equation}
and write the leading order contributions in the Fourier space as
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{F}_{\perp}=\frac12 \int \frac{\dd^2{\mathbf{q}}}{(2 \pi)^2}\left[\alpha (Q_{ij} q_i q_j)^2+\nu Q_{ij} q_i q_j {\mathbf q}^2 + \kappa {\mathbf q}^4 -\zeta Q_{ij} q_i q_j -\zeta^I {\mathbf q}^2 \right] \left|h(\mathbf{q})\right|^2\;.\label{eq:21}
\end{equation}
Assuming that the sheet is subject to local viscous drag, we can write the rate of dissipation as
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{D}\equiv 2 \mathcal{R}=\int \dd A \;\Gamma (\partial_t h) ^2 = \int \frac{\dd^2{\mathbf{q}}}{(2 \pi)^2} \;\Gamma \left| \partial_t h (\mathbf{q})\right|^2\;,
\end{equation}
where we have defined the Rayleighian dissipation function
$\mathcal{R}$. The generalized conservative force and the
generalized friction force together need to be zero,
$\delta \mathcal{F}/\delta h+ \delta \mathcal{R} / \delta {\dot h}=0$.
Then the dynamics of the mode with the wave vector $\mathbf{q}$ is
determined by
\begin{equation}
\partial_t h(\mathbf{q},t)= - \frac 1 \Gamma \left[ \alpha (Q_{ij} q_i q_j)^2+\nu Q_{ij} q_i q_j {\mathbf q}^2 + \kappa {\mathbf q}^4 -\zeta Q_{ij} q_i q_j -\zeta^I {\mathbf q}^2 \right] h(\mathbf{q},t)\;,
\end{equation}
with the growth rate
\begin{equation}
\Lambda(\mathbf{q})= - \frac 1 \Gamma \left[ \alpha (Q_{ij} q_i q_j)^2+\nu Q_{ij} q_i q_j {\mathbf q}^2 + \kappa {\mathbf q}^4 \zeta Q_{ij} q_i q_j-\zeta^I {\mathbf q}^2 \right]\;.
\end{equation}
With the nematic order along $x$-axis ($\hat n= \hat e_x$), we have $\mathbb{Q}= \frac S 2 \left( \begin{array}{cc} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & -1 \end{array} \right)$ and
\begin{equation}
\Lambda(\mathbf{q})= - \frac 1 \Gamma \left[ \frac{1}{4} \alpha S^2 (q_x^2-q_y^2)^2 +\frac{1}{2}\nu S (q_x^4-q_y^4) + \kappa (q_x^2+q_y^2)^2 -\frac{1}{2}\zeta S (q_x^2-q_y^2) -\zeta^I (q_x^2+q_y^2) \right]\;.
\end{equation}
\end{widetext}
Because the last two terms are quadratic in $\mathbf{q}$, whereas all others are 4-th power, they will dominate at small $\mathbf{q}$ and it is always possible to find wave vectors with a positive growth rate, i.e., unstable modes. The growth rate is always maximal in $x$-direction. On that axis, it reads
\begin{equation}
\Lambda(q_x)= - \frac 1 \Gamma \left[ \left(\frac{1}{4} \alpha S^2 +\frac{1}{2} \nu S + \kappa\right) q_x^4 -\frac{1}{2}\left(\zeta S+2\zeta^I\right) q_x^2 \right]\;.
\end{equation}
Experimentally, we observe that the instability is present only when a sufficient initial degree of nematic alignment exists in the system. This suggests that the isotropic active stress plays a less dominant role as compared to the nematic active stress. Indeed, we expect the isotropic component to be contractile, and therefore contribute with the opposite sign (since $\zeta >0$ and $\zeta^I <0$) and oppose the formation of the instability. If a non-zero isotropic stress exists, then the instability requires a minimal threshold degree of nematic order given by $S \geq 2 |\zeta^I|/\zeta$. We can ignore the isotropic stress for a minimal representation of the theory, as it is done in the main text, where we have also used the shorthand $\kappa_{\rm eff} = \kappa +\frac 12 \nu S+\frac 14 \alpha S^2$.
We can also examine the prediction of the theoretical framework with regards to the stretching degrees of freedom. From the experimental observations, we expect to have a force balance in the direction perpendicular to the nematic alignment, namely the $y$-direction, since the deformation in this direction happens faster than the bending deformation. This entails
\begin{equation}
u^{\ell}_{yy}=-\frac{\zeta S}{4\mu}+\frac{\zeta^I}{2(\lambda+\mu)}\;,\label{eq:30}
\end{equation}
to the lowest order. Therefore, we find that the anti-symmetric stress causes contraction orthogonal to the nematic direction (since $\zeta >0$ and $\zeta^I <0$), as observed experimentally. It is important to note that the contribution from Eq.~(\ref{eq:30}) does not modify the spectrum of the out-of-plane deformations given in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:21}), as the inclusion of the nonlinear terms will lead to an exact cancellation of any additional term the depends on $h$. In the $x$-direction, however, the deformation mode relaxes at the same time scale as the bending mode, and, therefore, the stationary force balance condition does not hold. To solve for the longitudinal deformation mode $u^\ell_{xx}$, we need to have information about the boundary condition of the system, and in particular, whether the stress is balanced due to longitudinal friction or contact with the boundaries. In the absence of such information, we can only speculate about different possible scenarios. If mechanical contact is established with the substrate, then we expect $u^\ell_{xx} \simeq 0$. In the absence of such contact, the friction force can balance the residual stress in the $x$-direction, leading to an extension that grows with time. While we cannot rule out this possibility, we have not observed experimentally extension amplitudes that are comparable or larger than the extent of lateral contraction. This implies that the assumption to ignore the third order term of the form $u^\ell_{xx} (\partial_x h )^2$ in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:20}) is justified.
\section{Quantitative aspects}
\subsection{Net force per filament}
The theory can be used to estimate the average stress per filament. If we assume a thin sheet where the only contribution to the bending elasticity is that of bending filaments, it becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:kappa}
\kappa_{\text{eff}}=\rho L\cdot EI \left< n_x^2 \right>
\end{equation}
where $\rho$ is the surface density filaments in the sheet, $L$ their length, $EI$ the bending modulus and $n_x$ the component of the filament orientation in the direction of bending ($n_x=1$ for nematic alignment).
Through the equation $q^*=\sqrt{-\sigma_{xx}/2 \kappa_{\text{eff}}}$, we obtain the stress
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:stress}
-\sigma_{xx}=2\rho L\cdot EI \left< n_x^2 \right> (2\pi/\lambda)^2
\end{equation}
At the same time, the stress can be expressed from the average force in a filament,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:fbar}
-\sigma_{xx}=\rho L \left< n_x^2 \right> \bar f
\end{equation}
resulting in $\bar f=2EI (2\pi/\lambda)^2$. With the values
$EI=0.4\times 10^{-23}\,\rm Nm^2$ and $\lambda=300\,\rm \mu m$, the
stress per filament is $0.004\,\rm pN$, several orders of magnitude
smaller than the forces exerted by kinesins. This result shows that
the motor and crosslinker forces largely cancel out in the network and
only a small bias towards extensile drives the instability.
The relationship can be tested in the simulation (due to the reduced system size the values are somewhat scaled down). With $EI=2\times 10^{-23}\,\rm Nm^2$ and $\lambda=67\,\rm \mu m$, the estimated force per filament $0.35\,\rm pN$ is in agreement with simulation value at the onset of wrinkling instability, which is $0.31\,\rm pN$.
\subsection{Role of hydrodynamic drag}
The effective vertical drag coefficient per unit area, denoted $\Gamma$, can be estimated from Eq.~(4), which can be rewritten as
\begin{equation}
\Gamma=\frac{\kappa_{\text{eff}}}{\Lambda} \left( \frac{2\pi}{\lambda} \right)^4
\end{equation}
With the stiffnes from Eq.~(\ref{eq:kappa}), the density $\rho L=400\,\rm \mu m^{-1}$ and growth rate $\Lambda=1/(1000\,\rm s)$, we estimate $\Gamma=300,000\,\rm Pa (m/s)^{-1}$.
The fluid in the space between the sheet (assumed as impermeable) and the wall is governed by the continuity equation $\dot h (x,t)=(1/w) \partial x Q(x,t)$ and the flow rate $Q(x,t)=-H^3w/(12\eta)\partial_x p$. For a perturbation with a wavelength $\lambda$, the drag density is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:drag}
2\frac{p}{\dot h}=24 \eta / H^3 (\lambda/(2\pi))^2= 1300\,\rm Pa (m/s)^{-1}
\end{equation}
with $H=35\,\rm \mu m$. We conclude that the estimated hydrodynamic drag is significantly smaller than the total drag. A possible explanation is that the filaments outside the sheet provide effective drag that resists vertical displacements of the sheet.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
E.B., I.G., R.G. acknowledge support from the MaxSynBio Consortium which is jointly funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research of Germany and the Max Planck Society. E.B. acknowledges support from the Volkswagen Stiftung (priority call “Life?”). A.V. acknowledges support from the Slovenian Research Agency (grant no. P1-0099).
|
\section{Research studies in the area of bug-fixing changes.}
\label{appendix:related_table
\begin{table*}[!htb]
\caption*{APPENDIX A\\Research Studies in the Area of Bug-Fixing Changes}
\label{table:related_work}
\begin{adjustbox}{width=\columnwidth,center}
\begin{tabular}{>{\centering\arraybackslash}m{1in} >{\centering\arraybackslash}m{1in} >{\centering\arraybackslash}m{.5in} >{\centering\arraybackslash}m{1in} >{\centering\arraybackslash}m{1in} >{\arraybackslash}m{3.4in}}
\rowcolor{Gray} \multicolumn{1}{>{\centering\arraybackslash}m{1in}}{\textbf{Reference}}
& \multicolumn{1}{>{\centering\arraybackslash}m{1in}}{\textbf{Purpose}}
& \multicolumn{1}{>{\centering\arraybackslash}m{.5in}}{\textbf{Language}}
& \multicolumn{1}{>{\centering\arraybackslash}m{1in}}{\textbf{Number of projects}}
& \multicolumn{1}{>{\centering\arraybackslash}m{1in}}{\textbf{Dataset}}
& \multicolumn{1}{>{\centering\arraybackslash}m{3.4in}}{\textbf{Findings}}\\
\hline
Tufano et al. \cite{tufano2018learning} & Mutation Testing & Java & GitHub projects between March 2011 and October 2017 on GitHub Archive) & 10,056,052 bug-fixing commits & The generated mutants perfectly correspond to the original buggy code in 9\% to 45\% of cases (depending on the model). Furthermore, the specialized models are able to inject different types of mutants. Mostly, the type of mutants is related to \textit{deletion of method calls}, on \textit{deletion and replacement of an argument in a method call}, on \textit{if-else blocks and its logical conditions}, \textit{deleting and replacing variable assignments}. \\
\hline
Brown et al. \cite{brown2017care} & Mutation Testing & C & The top 50 project repositories in GitHub & $\sim$600,000 commits containing $\sim$20 million individual diff blocks spanning 850 million lines of text. & The authors provide an approach to automatically harvesting mutation operators—wild-caught mutants and compare the capabilities of the harvested mutation operators to those of existing studies. The proposed approach produces novel mutation operators, in turn creating defects that are about as difficult to kill as those arising from existing synthetic mutation operators. For example, the authors found new mutation operators like the missing call to a one-argument function whose return type is equal to its argument's type, direct access of field, and specific literal replacements.\\
\hline
Zhong et al. \cite{zhong2015empirical} & Automatic Program Repair & Java & 5 projects (Aries, Cassandra, Derby, Lucene/Solr, Mahout) & 9,000 real-world bug fixes & The authors found the most frequent \textit{actions} related to the bug-fix, focusing on the AST node type of JDT library. According to that, the top 3 actions (addition, deletion, and modification) belong to \textit{JavaDOC}, \textit{ExpressionStatement}, \textit{MethodDeclaration}, and \textit{ReturnStatement}. However, there is an open discussion whether changes on documentation should be considered as bug-fixes or not. Furthermore, the authors found that in most cases a bug-fix consists of multiple edit actions, thus fault localization tools could found only 1 bug precisely. \\
\hline
Soto et al. \cite{soto2016deeper} & Automatic Program Repair & Java & 554,864 Java projects from 2015 September Github repository offered by Boa & 4,590,679 bug fixing commits & The most common pattern observed is \textit{ABC (add or remove a branch condition)}; and the least common pattern is \textit{AOB (adding an array out of bound checker)}. If we conservatively assume that these patterns never appear together, they cover 14.78\% of buggy files. \\
\hline
Koyuncu et al. \cite{koyuncu2018fixminer} & Automatic Program Repair & Java & 50 large and popular open-source projects & 8,009 patches & The top 5 clusters found are: (i) \textit{Method reference modification}, (ii) \textit{Variable declaration statement modification}, (iii) \textit{String value modification in method call}, (iv) \textit{Method call parameter modification}, (v) \textit{Constant modification in declaration statement}.
Furthermore, in the 80\% of the cases FixMiner generates patches that are correct to be used in APR task. The closest related works \cite{le2016history, jiang2018shaping}, achieve respectively 26\% and 70\% of correctness.\\
\hline
Lin et al. \cite{lin2016empirical} & Bug characterization & Python & 10 python projects (Django, Tornado, Pandas, Pylearn2, Numpy, Scipy, Sympy, Nltk, Beets, Mopidy) & 132,294 commits & In most projects studied, \textit{Function Change} and \textit{Statement Change} are the most common change types. \textit{Loop Structure Change} is the most uncommon change type. The distributions of change type frequency share similar trends across studied projects. There are no significant differences among the distributions of change type frequency across studied domains. In the studied projects, if structure related change types are more related to bug-fix, especially \textit{Conditional Expression Update} and \textit{If Insert}. \\
\hline
Musavi et al. \cite{musavi2016experience} & Bug characterization & Python & Openstack project (the Nova, Swift, Heat, Neutron and Keystone projects) & 221,671 commits from 2010-05 to 2015-02 & The authors found that in the 56\% cases the cause of API failures is due to \textit{Small programming faults}, i.e., trivial programming mistake (e.g., the developer changes the default value of a variable to another value). The next most common type of fault (14\%) is \textit{major programming faults}. \textit{Configuration faults} (14\%). \\
\hline
Osman et al. \cite{osman2014mining} & Bug characterization & Java & 717 Java projects & 190,821 code changes corresponding to 94,534 bug-fix commits & In the 53\% of case, bug-fixes involve only one line of code. Specifically for bug characteristics: (i) More than 48\% of bugs are about \textit{missing NULL checks}; (ii) Other most frequent bug are \textit{Missing Invocation Method} and \textit{Wrong Parameters/Method}. \\
\hline
Pan et al. \cite{pan2009toward} & Bug characterization & Java & 7 Java projects (ArgoUML, Columba, Eclipse, JEdit, Scarab, Lucene, and MegaMek) & 20,270 number of revisions, within 6,978 number of commits & In that study, the authors found 27 bug fix patterns, which include \textit{If-related (IF)}, \textit{Method Call (MC)}, \textit{Loop (LP)}, \textit{Assignment (AS)}, \textit{Switch (SW)}, \textit{Try (TY)}, \textit{Method Declaration (MD)}, \textit{Sequence (SQ)}, and \textit{Class Field (CF)}.
The most common categories of bug fix patterns are \textit{Method Call} (MC, 21.9–33.1\%) and \textit{If-Related} (IF, 19.7–33.9\%).
The most common individual patterns are \textit{MC-DAP (method call with different actual parameter values)} at 14.9–25.5\%, \textit{IF-CC (change in if conditional)} at 5.6–18.6\%, and \textit{AS-CE (change of assignment expression)} at 6.0–14.2\%. \\
\hline
Martinez et al. \cite{martinez2013automatically} & Bug characterization & Java & 6 projects & 33,365 revisions, 6,233 commits & For instance, adding new methods (MD-ADD) and changing a condition expression (IF-CC) are the most frequent patterns while adding a try statement (TY-ARTC) is a low frequency action for fixing bugs. \\
\hline
Fluri et al. \cite{fluri2008discovering} & Bug characterization & Java & 3 projects (jEdit, JFreeChart, and Webframework (a commercial Java framework for web applications)) & 30,930 revisions with 229,604 changes & The authors found 2 top clusters for \textit{if-statement} and \textit{throw statement inserts} for JEDit e JFreeChart projects. About WebFramework project, the top clusters are about \textit{Constructor invocation changes}, \textit{Return type based method renaming}, \textit{Introducing prefixed parameter names}, \textit{Introducing single exit}, \textit{Change existing exception handling}. The authors do not provide any quantitative information for the patterns found. \\
\hline
Duraes et al. \cite{duraes2006emulation} & Fault Injection & C & 12 projects (CDEX, Vim, FreeCiv, pdf2h, GAIM, Joe, ZSNES, Bash, Linux Kernel, Firebird, MingW, ScummVM) & 668 bugs & According to the ODC classification, the authors found that: (i) \textit{Algorithm class} are the dominant faults (40.1\%). In particular, the 2 most frequent are about \textit{Missing IF construct plus statements} (30\%) and \textit{Missing Function Call} (26\%); (ii) \textit{Assignment faults} have approximately the same weight as \textit{Checking faults} (21.4\% and 25\%); (iii) \textit{Interface} and \textit{Function faults} are the less frequent ones (7.3\% and 6.1\%). \\
\hline
Basso et al. \cite{basso2009investigation} & Fault Injection & Java & 6 projects (Azureus Vuze, FreeMind, JEdit, Phex, Struts, Tomcat) & 574 bugs & According to ODC classification, the 2 most frequent fault type are \textit{Missing Functionality} and \textit{Missing if construct plus statements} (30\%). The third most frequent (10.5\%) is \textit{Missing Function Call fault}. \\
\hline
Neamtiu et al. \cite{neamtiu2005understanding} & Refactoring & C & 5 projects (Apache, OpenSSH, Vsftpd, Bind, and the Linux kernel) & N/A & The authors found that: \textit{(i)} the function and global variable \textit{additions} are far more frequent than \textit{deletions}; \textit{(ii)} the rates of \textit{addition} and \textit{deletion} vary from program to program; \textit{(iii)} the function bodies change quite frequently over time, but function prototypes change only rarely; \textit{(iv)} the type definitions (like \textit{struct} and \textit{union} declarations) change infrequently, and often in simple ways. \\
\hline
Silva et al.\cite{silva2017refdiff} & Refactoring & Java & 7 projects & N/A & The authors propose a tool for detecting 12 well-known refactoring types \cite{prete2010template}. The proposed approach achieved the best result among the evaluated tools in the state-of-the-art, with a \textit{Precision} of 1.00 and \textit{Recall} of 0.88.\\
\hline
Hora et al. \cite{hora2018assessing} & Refactoring & Java & 15 large projects in Java & The commits range from 1,025 (Android Image Loader) to 39,389 (Kotlin) & The most frequent untracked changes happen at the method level and are due to Rename Method (26\%), Extract Method (23\%), and Move Method (22\%). In contrast, the least frequent ones are due to Extract Superclass ($<$1\%), Extract Interface (1\%), and Push Down Method (1\%). The ratio of untracked changes ranges from 10\% to 21\% for methods, and from 2\% to 15\% for classes. Thus, the threat is more frequent at the method level. \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
\end{table*}
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
\vspace{-0.1mm}
In this paper, we propose an approach for analyzing bug-fixing changes, not limiting to \emph{what} has been changed, but also considering \emph{where} the change was made. We analyze bug-fixing changes by using a clustering approach on a set of features on the code change, in order to identify recurrent patterns. Furthermore, we investigate the \emph{context} of the bug-fix by analyzing an additional set of features derived from the code that surrounds the code change.
We applied the methodology to analyze bug-fixing changes in the OpenStack cloud computing platform, which is one of the most complex and widespread Python project, as it is the basis for several commercial products and services.
We found that in some cases the bug-fix patterns are consistent with previous studies made on Java and C software, but in many other cases the bug-fix patterns are influenced by the Python language. Additionally, some recurrent patterns are strictly related to the nature of the specific project. The analysis of where the change occurred pointed out that bug-fixes are in all cases located in specific source-code contexts.
The results of this study are valuable for several software engineering tasks that rely on knowledge of recurrent characteristics of software bugs. For example, mutation and fault injection testing will benefit in terms of decreasing the search space for mutants and the number of potential locations for injecting faults. A future direction for this work is to leverage these results by incorporating them into software engineering techniques and tools, such as in the context of fault injection and mutation testing.
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
Studying \emph{bug-fixing changes} is an important field of software engineering research \cite{tufano2018learning, brown2017care, zhong2015empirical, soto2016deeper, koyuncu2018fixminer, lin2016empirical, musavi2016experience, osman2014mining, pan2009toward, martinez2013automatically, fluri2008discovering, duraes2006emulation, basso2009investigation, neamtiu2005understanding, silva2017refdiff, hora2018assessing}. It consists in empirically analyzing the changes made by developers to software in real complex projects, with the aim to identify (possibly, in automated ways) patterns for the most common changes, and to create profiles for these changes. This analysis is useful for many software engineering tasks, such as software testing (in particular, mutation testing \cite{tufano2018learning, brown2017care}), fault localization \cite{zhong2015empirical}, automatic code repair \cite{zhong2015empirical, koyuncu2018fixminer}, and fault injection for testing fault-tolerance \cite{duraes2006emulation, basso2009investigation}.
Analyzing bug-fixing changes can be challenging since change patterns can be numerous and heterogeneous, and they can differ across different application domains, programming languages, and even software projects.
In this paper, we analyze bug-fixing changes in the context of the OpenStack cloud computing platform \cite{OpenStackHome}. OpenStack is a widespread software, as it is adopted in many private and public cloud infrastructures \cite{OpenStackProducts} and forms the basis of more than 30 commercial products (i.e., distributions and appliances) \cite{OpenStackUsers}. One reason that makes the OpenStack platform a relevant investigation subject is that it consists in several, diverse systems that focus on different cloud computing functions (sub-systems like \textit{Nova} for managing instances, \textit{Neutron} for managing virtual networks, and \textit{Cinder} for managing volumes). These systems are developed under independent projects by separate development teams, follow rigorous development and QA processes, and have nowadays achieved a high degree of maturity \cite{openstack_user_survey}.
Another motivation is that OpenStack is among the largest and most sophisticated software written in Python, which is a popular programming language that has not been investigated in depth by previous research on bug-fixing changes.
We first analyze in this study \emph{what} syntactic changes characterize bug-fixes in the OpenStack platform. This analysis advances the existing body of knowledge in the field of bug-fixing changes since it provides empirical insights on large Python projects. Moreover, this study explores the variability of bug-fixing changes across different projects and development teams, and discusses their variability with respect to other programming languages analyzed by previous studies (mostly on C and Java). Our approach performs a clustering analysis of bug-fixing changes, using numerical features from the Abstract Syntax Tree (AST) of the fixed code.
In addition to syntactic changes, we also study the code context \emph{where} bug-fixing changes were made, that is, the source code that surrounds the change. Most research on code changes neglects the code context, but this aspect can potentially narrow the search space for many software engineering tasks. For example, in mutation testing and in fault injection, mutants are generated by introducing changes throughout the whole source code (for example, in the case of ``assignment omissions'', by mutating every assignment statement). However, the number of generated mutants grows very quickly or too easy to kill \cite{jia2011analysis}, with many mutants that are unkillable \cite{yao2014study}. Moreover, the size of the search space is a challenging aspect also for fault localization and for automatic code repair \cite{martinez2015mining}. Therefore, we analyze the code context surrounding the bug-fixes, to a more detailed ``fingerprint'' of the bug-fixing patterns. Our approach collects additional features to represent the context of every cluster, and points out statistical deviations that characterize the clusters.
The main findings of the study include:
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=4mm]
\item Commits that are supposedly bug-fixes also contain many of changes that are not strictly bug-fixes. In some cases, the changes are refactorings for supporting the bug-fix (e.g., importing a package, changing the signature and the invocations of a method, changing the layout of a data structure). In other cases, the commits are not limited to bug-fixes, but also include many changes for improving the internal quality of the software (e.g., readability and maintainability of the source code). The high number of non-bug-fixing changes points out that empirical research must take into account refactorings when analyzing bug-fixing changes for testing and repair purposes.
\item Bug-fixing patterns exhibit relevant differences across programming languages, and across projects. While some of the bug-fixing patterns match the ones found in previous studies on C and Java software (in particular, the changes that fix the structure and the checking conditions of the control flow), we found several specific patterns that are induced by the features of the Python language, such as {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont dict} data structures and the rules for passing parameters. Moreover, we found several patterns that are specific for a project, such as, bugs influenced by API calling conventions.
\item The bug-fixing changes tend indeed to occur in specific code contexts. For example, several change patterns were located mostly in the largest classes and methods, or were located in loops or conditional constructs. Moreover, specific traits were found for the blocks and statements impacted by the change: for example, input parameters were omitted for methods which at least 2-3 arguments, and several bug-fix patterns involved statement blocks with large numbers of data containers and function calls.
\end{itemize}
In summary, the contributions of the paper are:
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=4mm]
\item An approach for characterizing bug-fixing changes not only with respect to \emph{what} a bug-fix changes, but also with respect to \emph{where} the change has been made.
\item A dataset of bug-fixing changes in three systems of the OpenStack platform, which represents the largest Python software ever analyzed by studies on bug-fixing changes to the best of our knowledge.
\item A detailed empirical analysis of recurring patterns in bug-fixing changes in the three OpenStack projects of the dataset.
\end{itemize}
In the following of this paper, Section~\ref{sec:related} discusses related work by exploring the various applications of bug-fix analysis; Section~\ref{sec:methodology} presents the proposed methodology for analyzing code changes; Section~\ref{sec:what_changes} and Section~\ref{sec:where_changes} analyze respectively \emph{what} is changed by bug-fixes, and \emph{where} the change was made, with a discussion on findings and implications. Section~\ref{sec:threats_to_validity} discusses the threats to validity of this study. Section~\ref{sec:conclusion} concludes the paper.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work has been partially supported by the PRIN project ``GAUSS'' funded by MIUR (n. 2015KWREMX\_002) and by UniNA and Compagnia di San Paolo in the frame of Programme STAR.
\IEEEtriggeratref{20}
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
\section{Methodology}
\label{sec:methodology}
The proposed approach consists of the following phases, which are summarized in \figurename~\ref{fig:approach}. First, we harvest data from the OpenStack public repository (\subsectionautorefname~\ref{subsec:data_collection}), by collecting \emph{code changes}. Then, we extract \emph{hunks} (see \tablename~\ref{tab:definition} about the terminology used by the OpenStack project) for the source files involved in the change (\subsectionautorefname~\ref{subsec:hunk_extraction}), generate features from these hunks (\subsectionautorefname~\ref{subsec:code_change_feature_extraction}), and we perform clustering of these hunk according to their features (\subsectionautorefname~\ref{subsec:hunk_clusterization}). The clusters will represent recurring patterns for bug-fixes. Once the clusters are defined, we investigate the code context surrounding the hunks, by means of an inter-cluster analysis on an additional set features (\subsectionautorefname~\ref{subsec:context_feature_analysis}). The resulting dataset, which include the code-change and the context features extracted from Openstack public repository, the results of both bug-fix clustering and the context analysis, is publicly available online at \url{https://figshare.com/s/7ae9d7dade9e8df62683}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.50\textwidth]{approach_v4.pdf}
\caption{The proposed approach.}
\label{fig:approach}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Definitions.}
\label{tab:definition}
\begin{tabular}{m{.7cm}m{2cm}m{4.8cm}}
\toprule
\textbf{Name} & \textbf{Definition} & \textbf{Description} \\ \midrule
Change & A set of patches with comments and code review rating & When developers want to fix a new bug or add new functionality, they push a commit with a new id (Change-Id) and Gerrit create a change. \\\midrule
Revision & A newer version of the change & A change has an initial version and possible multiple following versions. When developers want to modify their change, they push a new commit with the same Change-Id of the initial commit, and Gerrit creates a new revision to the change by adding the new set of patches and allowing new comments and rating. \\\midrule
Merged Change & A change which has been accepted by reviewers & When a change is accepted by reviewers, Gerrit cherry-pick the last revision's patches into the repository’s master branch and mark the change as merged. \\\midrule
Hunk & A group of consecutive lines that were modified by a patch & A hunk includes both the lines of the source code before the change and the lines of the source code after the change. \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Data collection}\label{subsec:data_collection}
The source of data that we analyze in this study comes from \textit{Gerrit}, the code review system used by the OpenStack project \cite{openstack_gerrit}, which is openly accessible.
We query the repository to collect the latest \textit{revision}s of each \textit{merged change}s and the list of files modified by the revision's commit.
Then, we filter the query results to focus on bug-related changes. We analyze the description of the change, and we only retain the changes that include at least one of the following keywords: \emph{bug}, \emph{fix}, \emph{fault}, \emph{fail}, \emph{patch}. A similar approach has been already adopted in other studies \cite{kim2008classifying, kamei2013large, musavi2016experience}.
Revisions of changes that do not contain any of these keywords are discarded. We also discard those files that only contain test cases because they represent unnecessary information for our analysis, as we are only interested in the specific patches needed to fix the bugs.
Our analysis focuses on the data related to the OpenStack Nova, Neutron, and Cinder sub-projects, respectively the compute, network, and storage managers of the OpenStack platform. Furthermore, we focus on the last four versions of OpenStack, \emph{i.e.,} Ocata, Pike, Queens, Rocket releases.
In total, we collected \textbf{22,418 unique revisions}, which touch \textbf{45,428 files}. The time span of the revisions is from February 2017 to May 2018.
\subsection{Hunks Extraction}
\label{subsec:hunk_extraction}
We iteratively analyze the collected files to extract \textit{hunk}s. First of all, the data from Gerrit contain only the git references to the actual files and they are retrieved automatically during this step of the analysis. Furthermore, they are converted to an Abstract Syntax Tree (AST) for convenience of manipulation and analysis of source code.
For each file, we parse the two versions (before and after the fix) of the source code to their respective ASTs. Then, we join the two trees to create an enhanced AST (\textit{AST of differences}). In such a tree, a node can be labeled as \textbf{minus node}, i.e., a node removed to fix the bug, or \textbf{plus node}, i.e., a node added to fix the bug. The nodes that are not labeled represent the parts of the source file that were not modified by the change.
The plus and minus nodes are grouped in hunks, such that nodes in the same hunk are within three lines of the source code, as bug-fixing changes tend to focus on localized portions of source code \cite{osman2014mining, musavi2016experience}.
Since the hunk includes a subset of nodes, it represents a sub-tree of the enhanced AST. The hunk can be a single node (\emph{e.g.,} when the bug-fix just changes the name of a variable) or a whole sub-tree (\emph{e.g.,} the bug-fix changes an \emph{if} block that contains several statements). A hunk is also characterized by all the ancestors of its plus and minus nodes. These ancestors are unlabeled nodes, which we define as \textbf{context nodes}. These nodes tell us which are the source code that envelops the change. For example, context nodes give information whether the changed lines are inside constructs like \emph{if}, \emph{for}, \emph{with}, \emph{while}, \emph{function definition}, \emph{class definition}, or a combination of them.
\figurename~\ref{fig:enchanced_ast_example} shows an example of an enhanced AST tree for a change. Specifically, the enhanced AST tree represents a change made within a function named {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont foo\_fun} defined inside the class {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont Foo}, by adding an if construct whose body has been replaced the initialization of a variable (i.e., {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont x = 0}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.8\columnwidth]{enchanced_ast_example_2.pdf}
\caption{Example of enhanced AST.}
\label{fig:enchanced_ast_example}
\end{figure}
We designed and developed a tool for fully automate this step of the analysis, namely \textit{PySA} (Python Source-code Analyzer) (publicly available at \url{https://github.com/dessertlab/PySA2}). \emph{PySA} is able to: (i) create a AST of differences from two versions of a file and (ii) extract the hunks from an AST of differences. We remark that we do not consider other existing AST differencing tools (e.g., ChangeDistiller \cite{fluri2007change}, GumTree \cite{falleri2014fine}) because they are either designed to work with Java or C source code, or they are not publicly available. Furthermore, such tools do not provide any information about the context, which is fundamental for our analysis.
In total, we extracted \textbf{16,081 unique hunks}, where 5,890 are from Nova, 4,261 from Neutron, and 5,930 from Cinder.
\subsection{Code-Change Features Extraction}
\label{subsec:code_change_feature_extraction}
From each hunk, we generate a \emph{feature vector} that describes the hunk as a flat series of numerical attributes. The feature vector still takes into account the relationship between statements (\emph{e.g.,} whether a statement is inside another block of code) by using \emph{weights}. The features are built by traversing the AST sub-tree for the hunk and inspecting the attributes of its nodes.
The Python Abstract Grammar consists of \textbf{89 AST node types} (e.g., an {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont If} node, a {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont Call} node, etc.). Moreover, an AST node can take over one of the \textbf{96 AST roles}, depending on the type of AST node. For example, a Python expression (represented by the {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont Expr} AST node type) can appear inside an {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont If} block, thus taking the role {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont If-Body}; or, a Python expression can appear as an input parameter of a method call, thus taking the role {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont Call-Args}.
We define a \textbf{feature vector} in which each element specifies (i) whether a node was added (i.e., \emph{plus} nodes) or removed (i.e., \emph{minus} nodes) within the fix, and (ii) counts how many times a node belongs to a specific type or role. In particular, the feature vector consists of two parts:
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=4mm]
\item \textbf{Node type features}: For each AST node type (e.g., \emph{Assign}, \emph{Call}, etc.), we have a feature that keeps track of how many times that node type appears in the bug-fix. In total, there are \textit{178 node type features}, defined as {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{<add|rem>\_<node\_type>}};
\item \textbf{Role type features}: For each AST node type, we have 96 potential \textit{role types}, which specifies the relationship between a AST node and its parent. Thus, these features keep track how many times an AST node type has a specific role. In total, there are \textit{17,088 role type features}, defined as {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont <add|rem>\_<role>\_<node\_type>}.
\end{itemize}
Starting from the enhanced AST, we check the type and role of each node, then we increase accordingly the corresponding element in the feature vector. Each type/role element is increased for every occurrence of that type/role in the AST. Specifically, the element is increased by a \emph{weighted value}, which takes into account the depth in which the type/role appears in the AST tree. This allows us to preserve part of the information about the structure of the code in the hunk.
In particular, the node type feature $F_{type}$ for a node type $type$ is increased by:
\begin{equation}
\boldsymbol{F}_{type} \mathrel{+}= \boldsymbol{w}_{type} \times \boldsymbol{r}^{\boldsymbol{-level}}
\end{equation}
\noindent
for each node of that type in the hunk, where:
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=4mm]
\item $\boldsymbol{w}_{type}$ is a weight that represents the relative importance between AST node types;
\item $\boldsymbol{r}$ is the relative importance between a node and its parent;
\item $\boldsymbol{level}$ is the distance of the node from the root of the hunk AST tree.
\end{itemize}
In our approach, we give the same importance to all node types. In particular, we set $\boldsymbol{w}_{type} = 10^{15}$ because 15 is the maximum height a hunk AST tree have in our datasets. Thus, we force the feature to be integers. We set ${r}=10$, so that nodes at different depths are differentiated by different orders of magnitude of the counter.
In a similar way, the role type feature $F_{role}$ for a node role $role$ is increased by:
\begin{equation}
\boldsymbol{F}_{role} \mathrel{+}= \boldsymbol{w}_{role} \times \boldsymbol{r}^{\boldsymbol{-level}} \times \boldsymbol{c}
\end{equation}
\noindent
for each node of that role type in the hunk, where:
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=4mm]
\item $\boldsymbol{w}_{role}$ is a weight that represents the relative importance between AST role types;
\item $\boldsymbol{r}$ is the relative importance between a node and its parent;
\item $\boldsymbol{level}$ is the distance of the node from the root of the hunk AST tree;
\item $\boldsymbol{c}$ is the relative importance between the node type and role type features.
\end{itemize}
In our approach, we give the same importance to all role types. Again, we set $\boldsymbol{w}_{role} = 10^{15}$ because 15 is the maximum height a hunk AST tree have in our datasets. Thus, we force the feature to be integers. Again, we set ${r}=10$. Furthermore, we set $\boldsymbol{c}=10^{-1}$ so that the features related to roles have a lower weight compared to node types. This choice is made in order to give greater importance to the outer code in a block of bug-fix statements.
\figurename~\ref{fig:weighted_feature_example} shows an example of a feature vector. The initial \emph{if} node (represented by the type \emph{add\_If}) is increased by a score with the highest weight ($+1000$), and the corresponding role (\emph{add\_If-Body\_If}) is also increased ($+100$). The inner \emph{if} node increases the type feature \emph{add\_If} with a lower weight than the previous \emph{if} node ($+100$) since it is a nested node. In this way, we give greater importance to the fact that the bug-fix is changing the outer \emph{if}, and we give less emphasis to the contents of the \emph{if} (e.g., the content may be another \emph{if}, or other kind of Python statements).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\linewidth]{features_example.pdf}
\caption{Example of hunk features vector.}
\label{fig:weighted_feature_example}
\end{figure}
We extended \emph{PySA} to automatically compute the features from the hunks. The resulting dataset consists of 5,890 (Nova), 4,261 (Neutron), and 5,930 (Cinder) hunks (dataset rows);
and 948 (Nova), 996 (Neutron), and 1,019 (Cinder) features (dataset columns). We are only considering features for programming constructs that actually occurred in the source code changes of our dataset (as features for unused constructs result in a series of zero values).
We extracted a set of additional features for representing also the code surrounding the bug-fix: \emph{outer} and \textit{inner} \textit{context features}.
\textbf{Outer context features} are extracted from the list of context nodes of the hunk, which includes all the ancestors of the plus and minus nodes (\emph{cfr.} \subsectionautorefname~\ref{subsec:hunk_extraction}).
There are two kinds of outer features:
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=4mm]
\item \textbf{Features of the including \emph{scoped node}}. These features are related to, and computed from, the hunk's closest ancestor node with {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{FunctionDef}}, {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{ClassDef}}, or {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{Module}} as type. The module, class, or function definition opens a new local scope in the language definition.
These context features describe the including \emph{scoped node} in terms of size (\emph{i.e.,}, number of children).
In total, there are 6 numeric features defined as { \fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{ctx\_<block\_type>\_size}}, where \texttt{block\_type} can be any of \emph{ClassDef}, \emph{FunctionDef\_args}, \emph{FunctionDef\_body}, or \emph{Module}, plus the boolean feature {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont ctx\_FunctionDef\_private} (a feature that indicates whether the function is intended for private use only, \emph{i.e.,} its name begins with an underscore).
\item \textbf{Features of the closest ancestor}. These features reflect the type of AST node that is closest to the hunk. The possible ancestors are nodes for iteration ({\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{For}} and {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{While}}), selection ({\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{If}}), assignment statements ({\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{Assign}}), definitions ({\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{ClassDef}}, {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{FunctionDef}}, and {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{Module}}), exception handling nodes ({\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{TryExcept}} and {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{TryFinally}}), and other kinds of expression statements, including {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{Attribute}}, {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{BinOp}}, {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{BoolOp}}, {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{Call}}, {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{Return}}, {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{Subscript}}.
There are 15 boolean features defined as {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{ctx\_including\_<node\_type>}}, which are all 0s except for the type of the statement that includes the bug-fix.
Furthermore, we have a numeric feature, defined as {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{ctx\_including\_node\_size}}, which indicates the number of children of the ancestor node.
\end{itemize}
\textbf{Inner context features} are extracted from the AST nodes below the hunk, in order to provide information on the types of elements (function calls, assignments, arithmetic operations, etc.) that appear in bug-fixed code (e.g., the block of statements that is surrounded by a new \emph{if}).
In total, there are 370 features for the inner context, defined as
{ \fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{ctx\_inner\_<add|rem>\_<node\_type>\_count}}, an
{ \fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{ctx\_inner\_<add|rem>\_<role>\_count}},
where \texttt{node\_type} is one of the 89 AST node types in the Python language grammar, and \texttt{role} is one of the 98 AST roles in the grammar.
In total, we computed 232 context features across Nova, Neutron, and Cinder.
\subsection{Hunks Clusterization}
\label{subsec:hunk_clusterization}
In this section, we describe all the choices made for categorizing the hunks found after the \textit{Hunks Extraction} and \textit{Feature Extraction} phases. Our main objective is to find categories that reflect what has been changed by bug-fixes. We adopt clustering to discover categories with respect to the programming constructs and entities that appear in the hunks (represented by the features discussed in the previous subsection).
In particular, we applied a hierarchical clustering algorithm, in order to scale to such large datasets, which consists of thousands of samples. We configured the clustering algorithm to use the Euclidean distance and single linkage. To validate the quality of this configuration, we computed the \textbf{cophenetic correlation coefficient} \cite{sokal1962comparison}, which is a measure of how faithfully a dendrogram preserves the pairwise distances between the original unmodeled data point. Hierarchical clustering is an iterative process, in which the closest pair of clusters are merged into one cluster, which replaces the previous pair. Then, the distance matrix is updated by removing the rows/columns of the deleted pair and adding a new row/column for the merged cluster. In some degenerate cases, the new distances in the new row/column may not faithfully be representative of the distances of the previous pair of clusters. The cophenetic coefficient computes the correlation between the new and the previous distances in order to detect such cases. The closer to 1 is the cophenetic coefficient, the more the clustering algorithm preserves correctly the distances between clusters.
The resulting cophenetic coefficients for the datasets are 0.87 (Nova), 0.86 (Neutron), and 0.9 (Cinder), which are leading to consider the configuration good enough for obtaining accurate clustering.
To determine the natural divisions of the dataset into clusters, we further analyzed the \textbf{inconsistency coefficient} \cite{jain1988algorithms} of the dendrogram links.
These coefficients compare the height of the link with the average height of other links at the same level of the hierarchy.
A large coefficient denotes that two ``diverse'' clusters were forcefully merged by the hierarchical clustering algorithms.
Thus, the links with a higher \emph{inconsistency coefficient} are good candidates for identifying a division of the data into clusters.
Clusters are formed when a node and all of its sub-nodes have an inconsistency value less than a cut-off threshold $c$.
All leaves at or below the node are grouped into the same cluster.
To identify the cut-off threshold $c$, we first analyze the distribution of the inconsistency coefficients across all links in the dendrogram.
We obtain such distribution by using the automatic binning algorithm provided by Matlab \cite{matlabhistogram}.
The binning algorithm divides the distribution among bins of fixed size.
The algorithm chooses the bin width by adopting a mix of heuristics and well-known algorithms, such as Scott and Freedman-Diaconis rules.
Our aim is to have a clusterization such that the clusters are not too specialized but they catch the coarse-grained pattern in the code change.
The binning algorithm provides us with intervals (bins) that discretize the values of inconsistency, giving us a hint on how many nodes we preserve if cutting at a certain inconsistency.
Then, since we want to consider only the greatest differences, we chose $c$ as the lower edge of the last bin.
Thus, only the highest inconsistency values are preserved, aggregating the other nodes of the dendrogram in large clusters.
In our dataset, we obtain $c = 1.15$ both for Nova and Cinder, and $c = 1.1$ for Neutron.
Since we want to focus on recurring bug patterns, we only consider the largest clusters, by considering the ones with a number of elements greater than a threshold on the cluster distribution (respectively 15, 10, and 15 elements for Nova, Neutron, and Cinder). We obtained $46$ clusters for Nova, $22$ clusters for Neutron, and $43$ clusters for Cinder.
Finally, every cluster has been manually analyzed by two authors (or more, in the case of disagreement) to assess whether the cluster actually represents a bug-fix.
For every cluster, we manually inspect a sample of $n$ changes in the clusters (in our empirical analysis, we consider $n=5$), and divide the clusters into three categories:
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=4mm]
\item \textbf{BUG-FIX} changes, which represent fixes to bugs. We classify a cluster for that category if a majority of changes in the sample actually fixes the behavior of the software, according to the description of the bug and to the nature of the change.
\item \textbf{FIX-INDUCED} changes, which represent code changes that are required to support a bug-fixing change, but do not represent themselves the actual bug-fix. For example, if the bug-fixing code uses a new input parameter to a method, the signature of the method and the call sites to the method must be also changed as a consequence of the bug-fix.
\item \textbf{REFACTORING}, in which code changes were made for purposes that do not modify the behavior of the software (e.g., better readability or modularization).
\end{itemize}
Finally, once the manual analysis confirms that a cluster represents a bug-fixing change, we attribute a label and a brief description of the cluster, and we consider the cluster for the next analysis of the context.
\subsection{Context Features Analysis}
\label{subsec:context_feature_analysis}
The objective of this analysis is to investigate the hypothesis that bug-fixing changes tend to occur in specific code contexts. In particular, we want to study what are the context features that are representative of a bug-fix change pattern in order to answer the following research question: \emph{Is the context relevant in the characterization of bug-fix changes?}
To answer this question, we compare the mean of each context feature within a bug-fix cluster with the mean of a control group, represented by the whole dataset (including both changes due to bugs, and other changes). To achieve this, we tested the null hypothesis that there is no difference between the bug fix pattern group and the control group, by means of the Dunn’s statistical test \cite{dunn1964multiple}. We used the Dunn’s test as it is robust with respect to groups of uneven size and it is a non-parametric test \cite{dunntest}. Then, we selected all the context features that have a mean statistically different from the control group with a confidence level of 95\%. If, as a result of this process, we find that there is at least one relevant context feature for every cluster, then we can answer affirmatively to the research question.
Moreover, we quantitatively analyzed the context features which resulted relevant by means of summary indicators, i.e., the average, the coefficient of variation (which is defined as the ratio of the standard deviation to the mean), and the distribution quantiles, in order to gain insights on the context conditions that are common to the majority of the bugs included in each bug pattern.
\section{Related work}
\label{sec:related}
Several studies have been investigating bug characteristics for various software engineering tasks, by analyzing problem reports, commits, revisions, and other information. Our intention is to give a broad view of how researchers have been using bug information in a different context, and their main findings.
In Appendix A, we summarize the surveyed studies, highlighting the specific \textit{purpose}, the \textit{programming language} used in the software under study, the \textit{dataset} (e.g., number of code changes, revisions, commits, bug-fixes), and a brief description of the \textit{findings} related to bug-fix patterns.
In most of these studies, the authors analyze code changes by using an \textit{Abstraction Syntax Tree (AST)} (i.e., a data structure representation of entities in the source code and their relations), and a generate \textit{edit actions} that reflect the differences between the ASTs before and after a change of the source code.
\textbf{\textit{Mutation testing}}. Mutation testing is a fault-based technique for the creation and the assessment of test suites.
Recently, Tufano et al. \cite{tufano2018learning} developed an AST-based differencing technique for analyzing bug-fixes and to abstract them. Their approach trains an artificial neural network with the bug-fixes, and then use the neural network to introduce new mutants that reflect the learned ones.
Brown et al. \cite{brown2017care} introduced the concept of \textit{wild-caught-mutants}, to address the issues that mutation operators do not necessarily emulate the types of changes made to source code by human programmers. Thus, their idea is to analyze bug-fixes from bug reports to define mutation operators that more closely reflect faults occurred in a specific project. For example, the authors found new mutation operators like missing call to a one-argument function whose return type is equal to its argument's type, direct access of field, and specific literal replacements.
\textbf{\textit{Automatic program repair}}. Automatic program repair is a branch of research on lowering the costs of bug-fixing. The general approach is to locate and mutate a faulty source location with a set of change operators, using search-based techniques, until the program passes a test suite. The quality of the test suite and of the program under fixing are preconditions for generating patches with a reasonable chance of success.
Zhong et al. \cite{zhong2015empirical} performed an empirical study on fixes of real bugs in open-source projects in order to reuse change patterns for automatic repairing and understand to what extent bugs are localized.
Similarly, Koyuncy et al. \cite{koyuncu2018fixminer} implemented repair strategies based on fix patterns or templates. They provide a tool for mining semantically-relevant patterns in a scalable, accurate and actionable way, by using a clustering strategy.
\textbf{\textit{Refactoring}}. Bug characterization studies analyzed whether an issue marked as a bug is actually a bug. As a matter of fact, in a recent study Herzig et al. \cite{herzig2013s} found that a high number of non-bug issue reports are misclassified as bugs, such as refactorings, requests for new features, documentation, and test cases.
In particular, previous studies on refactoring use source code changes history to detect and study refactoring changes.
The approach by Silva et al. \cite{silva2017refdiff} consists in 2 phases: (i) parse and analyze the history of source code changes to obtain a high level abstraction (i.e., a multiset of tokens); (ii) perform a relationship analysis, i.e., the procedure to find similarities between source code abstractions before and after the changes. The method was able to find 12 well-known refactoring templates (as defined by Prete et al. \cite{prete2010template}) with a \textit{Precision} of 1.00 and a \textit{Recall} of 0.88.
Hora et al. \cite{hora2018assessing} analyzed refactorings due to so-called \textit{untracked changes}, e.g., a method rename or move. That change can be misinterpreted as the disappearance of a method and the appearance of a brand new one, splitting its history, and could have a negative impact on the accuracy of mining software repository techniques if not properly handled.
In our work, we observe that refactoring-related changes after often mixed with bug-fixing changes, and we discriminate between these two categories to focus on bug-fixing ones.
\textbf{\textit{Fault injection}}. Fault injection is a technique for experimental evaluation of fault tolerance mechanisms, such as for quantifying their coverage and latency \cite{NFV_bench}. One research branch in this area has been focusing on the injection of software faults using code mutations, to emulate the most common bug patterns \cite{natella2013fault}.
To ensure the representativeness of the injected bugs with respect to actual bugs, these approaches have been relying on the analysis of bug-fixing patterns. For example, previous studies \cite{duraes2006emulation, basso2009investigation} manually analyzed bug fixes in C and Java projects, with respect to an extended version of the Orthogonal Defect Classification (ODC) schema \cite{chillarege1996orthogonal}, by including in the classification the specific kind of omitted or wrong construct (assignment, control flow checking, etc.), and an early notion of ``context'' (e.g., number of statements inside an IF block, presence of an assignment before a function call, etc.). These studies identified consistent patterns across these languages, such as missing function calls and missing IF blocks; moreover, they found that one recurring bug patterns (i.e., \textit{Assignment}) are common across projects and cover 21.4\% of the total bugs, but the remaining share of bugs follows project specific patterns.
Our study of bug-fixing patterns can be leveraged for injecting bugs into Python software and enriches the classification of bugs with broader and quantitative information about the context of bugs.
\textbf{\textit{Bug characterization}}. Numerous other studies have been investigating bug-fixing patterns, beyond the specific tasks above.
Pan et al. \cite{pan2009toward} found that the most common categories of bug-fix patterns in Java projects are \textit{Method Call} (21.9-33.1\%) and \textit{If-Related} (19.7-33.9\%). In particular, within the Method Call category, most of the bug fixes to method calls are changes to the actual parameter expressions (14.9–25.5\%), and within If-Related category the \textit{change in if conditional} is the more frequent (5.6–18.6\%). They also provided evidence of similarities of bug-fix patterns across different projects (i.e., Pearson similarity measures exceed $0.85$ with p-value less than $0.001$), and pointed out that developers can introduce the same kind of bugs independently from the specific program domain.
Osman et al. \cite{osman2014mining} presented another analysis of Java projects, and found that 53\% of the fixes involve only one line of code, and that 73\% of fixes consist in less than 4 lines of code. Moreover, they found that 40\% of bug-fixes are recurrent patterns. The most frequent fix pattern (48\%) involves the addition of \emph{null} checks on Java object references. Other fix patterns involve missing method invocations and wrong names for objects, methods, or parameters.
Other studies \cite{fluri2008discovering, martinez2013automatically}, pointed out similar findings.
Only a minority of studies focused on the Python language. Lin et al. \cite{lin2016empirical} analyzed 10 Python projects. They developed a tool for analyzing Python source code, and classifying changes according to edit actions on ASTs. They analyzed the distribution of edit actions across 8 gross categories, including \emph{Class} edits, \emph{Function} edits, \emph{Statement} edits, etc.. In most of the projects, they found that \textit{Function} and \textit{Statement} edits are the most common change types, whereas \textit{Loop Structure} edits are the least common ones. Furthermore, the authors found that the majority of bug-fix edit actions are \textit{Conditional Expression Update} and \textit{If Insert}.
Musavi et al. \cite{musavi2016experience} conducted an empirical study to understand API failures in OpenStack, by analyzing the code change history. The authors manually evaluate the bug reports and bug fixes of API failures during 2014, and classified them into 7 categories. More than half (56\%) causes of API failures are ``small programming faults'', which were fixed with simple edits such as inverting logical conditions, correcting variable names, or adding exception handling.
The main points of difference between our work and these studies can be summarized as follows:
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=4mm]
\item Most of the previous studies focused on software projects written in Java, for which there exist more various and mature tools for analyzing source code characteristics. Instead, our work concentrated on the less-explored, but much relevant Python language. We provided new insights about recurrent fix patterns found in large projects written in Python. Compared to the few previous studies on Python, we performed a more fine-grained analysis of bug-fixing patterns, not limited to distributions of changes with respect to fixed categories (e.g., type of edit actions or small-vs-large programming faults) but using clustering to discover patterns in an unsupervised way.
\item Recent research on bug patterns did not focus on the context in which code changes were made. Almost all previous studies have discovered that some bug patterns are more frequent than others, but do not give enough information about ``where'' in the code the bug occurred. Therefore, our analysis provides more detailed insights on the context of bug-fixes.
\end{itemize}
\section{Threats to validity}
\label{sec:threats_to_validity}
\vspace{-1mm}
We here review the main potential threats that can affect the validity of results, and how we mitigated them.
\textbf{Construct validity} refers to the relationship between the theory and the observation. A threat is that OpenStack revisions include code changes not related to bug-fixes (e.g., new features, documentation, refactoring, etc.). To avoid this threat we selected only revisions having a description with specific keywords (e.g., \emph{fix}, see \sectionautorefname~\ref{sec:methodology}). Since this text is filled out by humans, it is possible to wrongly include in the analysis also non bug-fix changes (e.g., the expression \emph{“fix code programming style”} refers to refactoring changes but includes the term \emph{fix}). To avoid these cases, we classified and excluded these changes by manual inspection during the post-hoc analysis of the clusters.
\textbf{Internal validity} relates to any confounding factor that could influence the results of the study. In this work, internal validity threats can be due to the manual classification step of the bug-fix clusters. A first threat is that we inspect a sample of items in each cluster (i.e., we select five elements) to decide if the cluster is a bug-fix pattern or if it is another kind of code change (e.g., refactoring, bug-fix induced, etc.). To mitigate this threat, we select the group of bug-fix to inspect randomly to avoid any correlation with time. A second threat is due to the manual classification that could potentially bias the results. To reduce the risk of this threat, each bug-fix pattern is independently classified by three authors, and combined through majority voting.
\textbf{External validity} relates to the possibility of generalizing the results of the study. This study focused on the three major OpenStack projects (i.e., Nova, Neutron, and Cinder). Even if our methodology is applicable to other projects, the bug-fixing patterns we found do not necessarily apply to other projects. However, the three projects we consider are large and diverse enough to get interesting insights on the similarity of bug-fixing patterns across different projects and across different languages (e.g., Python versus C and Java), and on the relevance of the context features. The diversity of the projects was reflected by differences in terms of project-specific patterns, due to the programming idioms, API conventions, and QA process of the projects, and in terms of the different context features that are relevant for the bug-fix patterns. This diversity allowed us to draw observations on the variability of patterns and on the relevance of context features in three large Python projects.
\textbf{Reliability validity} relates to the possibility of replicating this study. To ease replication of this study, we published the whole dataset with all of the features (code change and context), along with the \textit{PySA} tool. Moreover, in \sectionautorefname~\ref{sec:methodology} we provided detailed information on the methodological steps, algorithms and software involved, and choice of parameters.
\section{Analysis of \emph{what} is changed by a bug-fix}
\label{sec:what_changes}
In this section, we analyze the bug-fixing patterns obtained by means of clustering.
We first consider the classification of the clusters between bug-fixes and non-bug-fixes (i.e., FIX-INDUCED and REFACTORING).
\figurename~\ref{fig:clusters_summary} shows the distribution of the clusters found for the Nova, Neutron, and Cinder projects. The portion of BUG-FIX clusters across the three projects is similar. We found a high number of patterns that were either FIX-INDUCED or REFACTORING changes, with differences across the projects. These changes were included in the same commits for bug-fixes, in which developers took code reviews of bug-fixes as opportunities for also improving the internal quality (e.g., readability and maintainability) of the source code. Thus, both the bug-fixes and the refactoring changes end up in the same commit and get merged in the same revision.
Since these non-bug-fixes patterns come in a high number, we needed to identify and remove them from our analysis in order to focus on bugs.
Therefore, we caution other researchers interested in bug-fixing changes to carefully discriminate between bug- and refactoring- related changes, in order to provide more meaningful results for software testing and repair purposes.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.7\linewidth]{clusters_summary.pdf}
\caption{Types of clusters found in Nova, Neutron, and Cinder.}
\label{fig:clusters_summary}
\end{figure}
We focus our analysis on better understanding the BUG-FIX clusters. \tablename~\ref{tab:openstack_clusters} provides the detailed list of clusters, along with a brief description. We also present (\figurename~\ref{fig:clusters_bug-fix_pie}) the BUG-FIX clusters by dividing them into 8 categories, according to the syntactic changes introduced by the bug-fix. Almost half of the bug clusters are related to function calls (e.g., adding new function calls, or new arguments to a function call); the other clusters involve changes to the control flow, data structure initialization, exception handling, etc..
In the following, we first describe more in detail these categories with representative examples of recurrent patterns. Then, we summarize the main findings at the end of this section.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.7\linewidth]{clusters_bug-fix_pie.pdf}
\caption{BUG-FIX categories distribution.}
\label{fig:clusters_bug-fix_pie}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\caption{Bug-fix patterns clusters in Nova, Neutron, and Cinder.}
\label{tab:openstack_clusters}
\scalebox{0.85}{
\begin{tabular}{c c c p{42mm}}
\toprule
\textbf{Cluster ID} & \textbf{Size} & \textbf{Category} & \textbf{Description} \\ \toprule \\
\rowcolor{LightGrey} & & \textbf{Nova} & \\ \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_228} & 148 & Variable initialization & Add variable initialized to a constant value \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_131} & 61 & Adding arguments & Add one variable as keyword parameter to function call \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_128} & 45 & Adding arguments & Add object attribute as keyword parameter to function call \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_132} & 26 & Adding function call & Remove variable as keyword parameter from function call \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_474} & 22 & If-related & Surround expression with If \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_1099} & 21 & Adding function call & Remove object attribute variable \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_1097} & 19 & Adding arguments & Add one variable as keywords parameters to multiple function calls\\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_597} & 16 & If-related & Surround instructions with If \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_629} & 16 & If-related & Add boolean operator in condition \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_197} & 15 & If-related & Add If and its body \\ \\
\rowcolor{LightGrey} & & \textbf{Neutron} & \\ \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont neutron\_119} & 61 & Adding arguments & Add boolean as keyword parameter in function call \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont neutron\_13} & 45 & Adding function call & Add function call with 1 parameter \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont neutron\_14} & 17 & Adding function call & Add function call with no parameters \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont neutron\_132} & 15 & Data structure & Add new (key, value) to a dictionary\\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont neutron\_23} & 14 & Adding function call & Add function call with 2 parameters \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont neutron\_20} & 10 & If-related & Add If with return statement in body \\ \\
\rowcolor{LightGrey} & & \textbf{Cinder} & \\ \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont cinder\_115} & 48 & Adding arguments & Add variable as keyword parameter to function call \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont cinder\_621} & 40 & Data structure & Add new (key, value) to a dictionary \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont cinder\_438} & 35 & If-related & Add assign and add If with its body \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont cinder\_583} & 28 & Exception handling & Surround function call with Try-Except block \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont cinder\_627} & 24 & If-related & Replace boolean expression with function call in If condition \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont cinder\_14} & 20 & Adding function call & Add function call \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont cinder\_542} & 20 & Move function call & Move function call with in a new position \\
{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont cinder\_1168} & 18 & Replace arguments & Modify constant string parameter in function call \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
\noindent
\textbf{Adding arguments to function calls}. Several clusters from Nova (e.g., \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_131}}, \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_128}}, \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_1097}}), Neutron (e.g., \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont neutron\_119}}), and Cinder (e.g., \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont cinder\_115}}) are related to fixes that add a new parameter of a function call. In these cases, the developers accidentally forgot to add a variable or an expression as parameter of a function call.
An example of this kind of bug-fix is showed in Listing \ref{lst:add_param_var_label}, in which the developer adds a variable as input parameter:
\begin{minipage}{.45\textwidth}
\begin{lstlisting}[language=diff, caption={Add simple variable as parameter of a function call. Change No.: 468269. URL: \url{https://review.openstack.org/c/468269/6/nova/virt/libvirt/driver.py}, line 7174}, label={lst:add_param_var_label}, captionpos=b]
- instance_domains = self._host.list_instance_domains()
+ instance_domains = self._host.list_instance_domains(only_running=False)
\end{lstlisting}
\end{minipage}
Another example (Listing \ref{lst:add_param_var_attribute_label}) shows a bug-fix in which the developer added a more elaborated expression (an \emph{attribute} of an object) as parameter of a function call.
\begin{minipage}{.45\textwidth}
\begin{lstlisting}[language=diff,caption={Add an attribute of an object as parameter of a function call. Change No.: 526823. URL: \url{https://review.openstack.org/c/526823/18/nova/scheduler/client/report.py}, line 1624}, label={lst:add_param_var_attribute_label}, captionpos=b]
- r = self.post('/allocations', payload, version=POST_ALLOCATIONS_API_VERSION)
+ r = self.post('/allocations', payload, version=POST_ALLOCATIONS_API_VERSION, global_request_id=context.global_id)
\end{lstlisting}
\end{minipage}
These examples emphasize that the omissions occurred in functions with optional parameters (such as, optional objects representing a ``context'' for the method and for the resource), and with boolean flags for enabling special behaviors in the function. This relaxed parameter passing is syntactically valid in the Python language, and is extensively used in all OpenStack projects.
\noindent
\textbf{Variable initialization}. The highest number of recurring bug-fixes belong to the cluster \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_228}}, which includes fixes that add the initialization of a variable, e.g., using a boolean, a null object, or a constant string.
For example, Listing \ref{lst:add_constant_attribute} shows that the developer forgot to add the attribute \textit{RUN\_ON\_REBUILT} to the class {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont DiskFilter}.
In this case, the bug description points out that the change fixed an issue that occurred when a new image was provided and the instance had to be rebuilt, but Nova omitted to validate the existing pool of hosts excluding them from being scheduled.
\begin{minipage}{.45\textwidth}
\begin{lstlisting}[language=diff, caption={Add global variable to the class definition. Change No.: 523212. URL: \url{https://review.openstack.org/c/523212/2/nova/scheduler/filters/disk\_filter.py}, line 31}, label={lst:add_constant_attribute}, captionpos=b]
class DiskFilter(filters.BaseHostFilter):
"""Disk Filter with over subscription flag."""
+ RUN_ON_REBUILD = False
\end{lstlisting}
\end{minipage}
In general, variable initialization has been a recurring bug pattern in previous studies on C and Java \cite{duraes2006emulation}. In our analysis, we found that these issues were recurring specifically for the Neutron project, where developers often adopted global and class-level variables for controlling the configuration of the Neutron server.
\noindent
\textbf{If-related fixes}. These changes fix the code by modify the control flow, such as: by surrounding an existing statement, or block of statements, with an \emph{if} construct; by adding a new statement or block of statements together with an \emph{if} construct; and by adding a new boolean condition to an existing one. We found clusters of this kind of changes among Nova (\textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_474}}, \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_597}}, \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_629}}, and \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_197}}), Neutron (\textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont neutron\_20}}), and Cinder (\textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont cinder\_438}}, \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont cinder\_627}}). These bug-fixes handle corner cases in the user inputs and configuration, such as in the examples of Listing~\ref{lst:if_single_stmt_label} and Listing~\ref{lst:if_add_condition_label}.
\begin{minipage}{.45\textwidth}
\begin{lstlisting}[language=diff, caption={Surround single statement with if construct. Change No.: 442736. URL: \url{https://review.openstack.org/c/442736/27/nova/compute/manager.py}, line 1307}, label={lst:if_single_stmt_label}, captionpos=b]
+ if not CONF.workarounds.disable_group_policy_check_upcall:
_do_validation(context, instance, group_hint)
\end{lstlisting}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.45\textwidth}
\begin{lstlisting}[language=diff, caption={Add new condition to an existing one. Change No. 543595. URL: \url{https://review.openstack.org/c/543595/1/nova/scheduler/filters/isolated_hosts_filter.py}, line 64}, label={lst:if_add_condition_label}, captionpos=b]
- if spec_obj.image else None
+ if spec_obj.image and 'id' in spec_obj.image else None
\end{lstlisting}
\end{minipage}
\noindent
\textbf{Adding function calls}.
The clusters \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont neutron\_13}}, \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont neutron\_14}}, \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont neutron\_23}}, and \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont cinder\_14}} include fixes that add function calls. In these bugs, developers missed a function call, which caused omissions in the workflow of resource management. These issues mostly affected Neutron and Cinder, due to the nature of APIs in these projects. These projects have APIs for propagating across nodes a global view of the state of the data center (such as, the topology of virtual networks), which should be called whereas the state of resources is updated (such as, a network node is added or removed). However, these API calls can be easily omitted since they do not return data that are used afterward; for example, in Listing~\ref{lst:neutron_function_call_1}, a function call was missing after the update of a subnet.
\begin{minipage}{.45\textwidth}
\begin{lstlisting}[language=diff, caption={Add a function call. Change No.: 491409. URL: \url{https://review.openstack.org/c/491409/11/neutron/agent/linux/interface.py}, line 125}, label={lst:neutron_function_call_1}, captionpos=b]
if cidr == default_ipv6_lla:
+ cidrs.discard(cidr)
continue
\end{lstlisting}
\end{minipage}
\noindent
\textbf{Data structure-related fixes}. The clusters \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont neutron\_132}} and \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont cinder\_621}} include fixes that add a new pair {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont(key,value)} to a Python dictionary (i.e., the Python data type for associative arrays), in order to fix the layout of the data structure. The OpenStack projects make extensive use of complex data structures to represent the several attributes of virtual resources, such as instances, images, and so on. For example, Listing~\ref{lst:neutron_dict_issue} shows a bug-fix that adds a new entry in a dictionary that represents an \textit{ARP} table in a Neutron component.
\begin{minipage}{.45\textwidth}
\begin{lstlisting}[language=diff, caption={Add new key value to a dictionary. Change No.: 554729. URL: \url{https://review.openstack.org/c/554729/3/neutron/db/l3\_dvr\_db.py}, line 918}, , label={lst:neutron_dict_issue}, captionpos=b]
arp_table = {'ip_address': ip_address,
'mac_address': mac_address,
'subnet_id': subnet,
+ 'nud_state': nud_state}
\end{lstlisting}
\end{minipage}
\noindent
\textbf{Exception handling fixes}. The bug-fixes in the cluster \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont cinder\_583}} address missing exceptions, by adding try-except blocks around existing code. Listing~\ref{lst:try_except_fix} shows an example of bug-fix that addresses the case of an exception raised by {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont NetApp} (one of the several backend drivers supported by Cinder) when the callers try to delete a volume that does not exist.
\begin{minipage}{.45\textwidth}
\begin{lstlisting}[language=diff, caption={Surround function call with Try-Except block. Change No.: 491962. URL: \url{https://review.openstack.org/c/491962/1/cinder/volume/drivers/netapp/dataontap/block\_base.py}, line 284}, , label={lst:try_except_fix}, captionpos=b]
+ try:
self.zapi_client.destroy_lun(metadata['Path'])
+ except netapp_api.NaApiError as e:
+ if e.code == netapp_api.EOBJECTNOTFOUND:
+ LOG.warning(_LW("Failure deleting LUN
+ else:
+ error_message = (_('A NetApp Api Error occurred:
+ raise exception.NetAppDriverException(error_message)
\end{lstlisting}
\end{minipage}
\noindent
\textbf{Replace string arguments in function call}. The cluster \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont cinder\_1168}} includes bug-fixes that modify a string argument in a function call. Listing~\ref{lst:replace_string_arg_fix} shows an example in which the string parameter is used to represent a path in the filesystem.
These issues were recurrent due to the frequent use of external Linux commands in OpenStack. For example, Cinder uses administration utilities for handling storage volumes (e.g., {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont tgtadm} for SCSI, {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont ietadm} for iSCSI, etc.), and basic Linux commands for handling files (e.g., {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont touch}, {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont tee}, etc.).
\begin{minipage}{.45\textwidth}
\begin{lstlisting}[language=diff, caption={Incorrect string parameter. Change No.: 491962. URL: \url{https://review.opendev.org/c/465961/2/cinder/volume/drivers/ibm/gpfs.py}, line 211}, , label={lst:replace_string_arg_fix}, captionpos=b]
- (out, err) = self.gpfs_execute('mmlsconfig', 'clusterId', '-Y')
+ (out, err) = self.gpfs_execute(self.GPFS_PATH + 'mmlsconfig', 'clusterId', '-Y')
\end{lstlisting}
\end{minipage}
\vspace{2pt}
\noindent
\textbf{Deleting code bug-fixes}. The clusters \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_132}} and \textbf{{\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_1099}} include bug-fixes that remove surplus code. For example, in Listing~\ref{lst:remove_param}, the fix removed a parameter in excess ({\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont retry\_on\_request}) from an API call since that argument become deprecated after an update of the class {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont wrap\_db\_retry} (where retry on request is always enabled).
In general, surplus code occurred because of regressions, such as, APIs that are deprecated or that adopt new calling conventions, or changes in third-party software that is included in the project, or incorrect new code that is reversed to a previously-working version.
\begin{minipage}{.45\textwidth}
\begin{lstlisting}[language=diff, caption={Remove keyword parameter from function call. Change No. 501073. URL: \url{https://review.openstack.org/c/501073/1/nova/db/sqlalchemy/api.py}, line 64}, label={lst:remove_param}, captionpos=b]
@require_context
- @oslo_db_api.wrap_db_retry(max_retries=5, retry_on_deadlock=True, retry_on_request=True)
+ @oslo_db_api.wrap_db_retry(max_retries=5, retry_on_deadlock=True)
\end{lstlisting}
\end{minipage}
From our analysis of the clusters, we make the following observations on the general trends that we observed in bug-fixing changes.
\begin{tcolorbox}
\textit{\textbf{Observation 1}}.
\textbf{A minority of bug-fix patterns matches the ones found in previous studies} on Java and C software.
\end{tcolorbox}
In particular, this group of bug-fix patterns includes the ones in the \emph{If-related} category, which is one of the larges category found in our analysis (18\% in \figurename~\ref{fig:clusters_bug-fix_pie}). These patterns are consistent with other studies on bug analysis \cite{soto2016deeper, lin2016empirical, osman2014mining, pan2009toward, martinez2013automatically, fluri2008discovering, duraes2006emulation, basso2009investigation}, which found recurring issues that were fixed in the control flow (e.g.,the \emph{checking} and \emph{algorithm} categories in the ODC classification). These patterns were also consistently found across all of the Python projects.
There were other bug-fix patterns that were similar to the ones found in previous studies, which include bug-fix that \emph{added a function call} and the \emph{replace arguments in a function call} (e.g., the \emph{interface} category in the ODC classification). However, these patterns were not consistent across the projects, as they were only found in Neutron and Cinder, as discussed in the \emph{Observation 3}.
\begin{tcolorbox}
\textit{\textbf{Observation 2}}.
\textbf{Several patterns are related to the data structures and rules of the Python language}, and are common across projects.
\end{tcolorbox}
There were bug-fix patterns dependent on the Python language used for the projects. In particular, the bug-fixes involving \emph{data structures} affected Python {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont dict}s, which are a common way to represent data in this language. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that a noticeable share of bug-fixes affect these constructs, such as in their layout or in the contents of the data structures.
Moreover, the \emph{adding arguments} bug-fix patterns (32\% in \figurename~\ref{fig:clusters_bug-fix_pie}) seem also favored by the rules of the Python language. Differing from C and Java, the Python language makes easier for developer to have optional parameters in function calls, where a default value is assumed by the function if no parameter is passed at the call site. Therefore, while previous studies \cite{duraes2006emulation, basso2009investigation} found bugs in C and Java software where \emph{wrong} parameters were passed (e.g., using a wrong variable or an incomplete arithmetic expression), in our analysis the parameters were mostly \emph{missing}. These bugs were recurrent across the OpenStack projects.
\begin{tcolorbox}
\textit{\textbf{Observation 3}}.
\textbf{Most bug-fix patterns are project-specific}, as they are induced by API conventions, by the QA and testing process of the project, and the programming idioms used by developers.
\end{tcolorbox}
We found several bug-fix patterns that were specific to only some of the OpenStack projects. One of the causes was the design of APIs in the Neutron and Cinder projects, which developers had to call throughout many different places of the codebase in order to keep updated the global state view; these calls were often omitted, and were later added by bug-fixing changes. In the case of the Cinder project, bugs with wrong string parameters were related to invocations of external Linux commands, as these utility programs are often used for system administration purposes.
Another cause of project-specific patterns were regressions in Nova, which were fixed by deleting surplus code, going back to a working version of the code. The occurrence of regressions can be related to the testing and QA process of the projects since a less effective process can lead to more regressions that are later addressed by bug-fixing changes.
Finally, project-specific patterns were related to the programming idioms adopted in the project. For example, in the Nova project, many bug-fixes initialize a variable with a constant since such variables are often used in the projects for global or class-level configurations.
These observations provide information on which bug-fixing patterns apply to Python software. While some of these patterns are consistent across programming languages and projects, other ones are either influenced by the language or by the nature of the project. When pursuing tasks based on code mutations, such as automated program repair or fault injection, this finding motivates the calibration of code change patterns according to the specific project at hand. In the following section, we focus on the context in which these code changes should be performed.
\section{Analysis of \emph{where} bug-fix changes are made}
\label{sec:where_changes}
In this analysis, we consider the features about the code surrounding the bug-fixing change. Since we have a large number of context features, we simplify the presentation of results, by grouping context features in 17 categories with descriptive names. The first two sets of categories constitute the \textit{outer context}, while the last set of category forms the \textit{inner context}. In particular, we considered:
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=4mm]
\item 3 categories to group the feature of the including scoped node: \emph{Class Size}, \emph{Function Size}, \emph{Module Size} (\emph{cfr.} \subsectionautorefname~\ref{subsec:code_change_feature_extraction});
\item 8 categories to group the features representing the closest ancestor that includes the bug-fix: \emph{Closest Definition}, \emph{Closest Exception}, \emph{Closest Iteration}, \emph{Closest Selection}, \textit{Closest Access}, \textit{Closest Call}, \emph{Closest Assign}, and \emph{Closest Size} (\subsectionautorefname~\ref{subsec:code_change_feature_extraction});
\item 6 categories to group the inner context features: \emph{Assign Operators}, \emph{Control Flow}, \emph{Data Containers}, \emph{Functions}, \emph{Globals} and \emph{Special Operators} (i.e., Python operators such as \fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{print}, \fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{raise}, \fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{return}, \fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont{with}, etc.).
\end{itemize}
\tablename~\ref{tab:ctx_nova_summary}, \tablename~\ref{tab:ctx_neutron_summary}, and \tablename~\ref{tab:ctx_cinder_summary} show an overview on what context exists for a bug-fix cluster. Each table presents the {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont cluster ID} on the columns (see \sectionautorefname~\ref{sec:what_changes} for detailed descriptions of the clusters), and the 17 context feature categories on the rows. In the table cells, the checkmark symbol (\Checkmark{}) points out that a given context feature is statistically relevant for the cluster according to the Dunn test (i.e., the bug-fixes in the cluster show a significant deviation of the metric compared to the norm of the other changes; see \subsectionautorefname~\ref{subsec:context_feature_analysis}).
Every cluster exhibits several context features with relevant deviations. Consequently, the context in which a bug-fix was made should not be overlooked, as it provides characterizing information for the bug-fix pattern.
Moreover, all of the feature categories for both the outer context and inner context exhibit a statistically-significant relevance for at least one project. Therefore, the answer to the research question in \sectionautorefname~\ref{subsec:context_feature_analysis} is positive: \emph{the context is relevant in the characterization of bug-fix changes}.
For example, by focusing on the outer context features, we can notice that almost in all clusters for Nova and Cinder, the context of a bug is characterized by the \textit{Function Size}. This feature includes the number of function arguments, the size of the function body, and whether the function definition is marked as private. This implies that testing and repair algorithms should seek for functions with large functions in order to apply these code change patterns.
\figureautorefname{}~\ref{fig:representative_context_feature} shows a visual example for two clusters where the \emph{Function Size} is respectively relevant, and not relevant, for the cluster. The three box plots show the variation of the \textit{Function Size} feature across the whole dataset (first box), the {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_629} bug-fix pattern (second box) and the {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_1097} bug-fix pattern (third box). There are no relevant differences between the bug-fix pattern {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_1097} and the control group (\emph{all}), while the cluster {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_629} has a mean which is significantly greater than the control group. Therefore, we consider the \emph{Function Size} feature as statistically relevant to describe the context of the bug fix pattern {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont nova\_629}, as confirmed in the Table~\ref{tab:ctx_nova_summary} by means of the Dunn test results.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{box_functionsize.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of the \textit{Function Size} context feature in two clusters against the control group (i.e., the \texttt{all} group).}
\label{fig:representative_context_feature}
\end{figure}
Across the OpenStack projects, some context feature classes are more frequent than others. For example, the inner context feature category \textit{Function} describes 6 out of 11 bug patterns in Nova, 6 out of 8 bug patterns in Neutron, and 7 out of 8 bug patterns in Cinder. The metrics in the \textit{Function} category include the number of arguments and keywords were added/removed in a function call, or newly added function calls, and how many function calls appeared in a block inside the bug-fix (e.g., a block of statements that was surrounded by a new \emph{if}). Regardless of the bug-fix pattern (e.g., If-related, Data structure, etc.), in the majority of the cases, the context of bug-fix is characterized by the presence of function calls.
Another important category of inner context features is \textit{Data Containers}. These features keep track of the presence of special Python data structures (e.g., {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont dict}s, {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont list}s, {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont tuple}s) within the statements that were changed by a bug-fix. For example, the context feature for {\fontfamily{lmtt}\selectfont dict}s counts how many keys and values appeared in expressions that were added or removed by the bug-fix. Therefore, these bug-fixing patterns tend to occur in the context of complex expressions and data-structure layouts.
\input{tables.tex}
Similarly, the \textit{Closest Call} and the \textit{Closest Attribute} categories are relevant context features for all of the clusters of the type \textit{Adding arguments} (\tableautorefname{}~\ref{tab:openstack_clusters}), where the bug-fix adds parameters to a function call. These categories bring useful information to characterize the change patterns in these clusters. In particular, the \textit{Closest Call} category includes features for counting the number of arguments in the fixed function call (beyond the argument that is added by the bug-fix). A closer analysis of this feature tells us that the \textit{Adding arguments} bug-fix applies mostly to function calls that already have some parameters.
\figureautorefname{}~\ref{fig:including_call_context} shows the distribution of the number of arguments of the function call fixed by the changes. On average, the number of arguments settles between 2-3 for the bug-fixing patterns; only in a few cases the fixed function call had 1 or no parameters. This observation improves the characterization of bug-fixing changes that add parameters: it points out that these bug-fixing changes do not uniformly apply to all function calls, and that new parameters tend to be added on function calls that already take several input parameters.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.9\columnwidth]{dist_call_args.pdf}
\caption{Distribution of the number of arguments for the \textit{Closest call} context feature.}
\label{fig:including_call_context}
\vspace{-7mm}
\end{figure}
Finally, we can notice differences across the Nova, Neutron, and Cinder projects. For example, if we focus on the features on the scoped nodes that include the change (i.e., module size, class size, and function size), the results show some similarities between Nova and Cinder, and differences between them and the Neutron project. In the Neutron project, it seems that the size of modules, classes and functions, and the number of their arguments, is less relevant than for the Nova and Cinder projects. This result points out that the context for applying code changes needs to be calibrated with respect to the specific project.
|
\section{Introduction}
Many real-world domains incorporate large and complex networks of interconnected units.
Examples include social networks, the Internet, or biological and chemical systems.
These networks raise interesting questions regarding their structure.
One of those questions asks whether a~given network contains a~particular pattern, which typically represents a specific behaviour of interest \cite{mccc,ri,cit1}.
The problem of locating a particular pattern in the given network can be restated as a problem of locating a subgraph isomorphic to the given pattern graph in the network graph.
Formally, the \textsc{Subgraph Isomorphism (SubIso)} problem is, given two undirected graphs~$G$ and~$F$, to decide whether there is a (not necessarily induced) subgraph of~$G$ isomorphic to~$F$. Or, in other words, whether there is an adjacency-preserving injective mapping from vertices of $F$ to vertices of $G$.
Since we do not require the subgraph to be induced (or the mapping to preserve non-adjacencies), some authors call this variant of the problem \textsc{Subgraph Monomorphism}. %
For many applications it is not enough to just learn that the pattern does occur in the network, but it is necessary to actually obtain the location of an occurrence of the pattern or rather of all occurrences of the pattern \cite{cit2,pcc}.
Because of that, we aim to solve the problem of subgraph enumeration, in which it is required to output all subgraphs of the network graph isomorphic to the pattern graph. In \textsc{Subgraph Enumeration (SubEnum)}, given again two graphs $G$ and $F$, the goal is to enumerate all subgraphs of~$G$ isomorphic to~$F$.
Note, that \sc{SubEnum} is at least as hard as \sc{SubIso}. We call the variants, where the problem is required to be induced \textsc{IndSubIso} and \textsc{IndSubEnum}, respectively.
As \textsc{Clique}, one of the problems on the Karp's original list of 21 NP-complete problems~\cite{Karp72},
is a special case of \textsc{SubIso}, the problem is NP-complete.
Nevertheless, there are many heuristic algorithms for \textsc{SubEnum}, many of them based on ideas from constraint programming (see \autoref{sec:related}), which give results in reasonable time for most instances.
However, for each of them there are rather small instances which they find genuinely hard, as pointed out by McCreesh et al.~\cite{McCreeshPST18}. Therefore, developing an alternative approach that could possibly cope with these hard instances would be of interest.
In this paper we focus on the well known randomized color coding approach~\cite{ayz}, which presumably has almost optimal worst case time complexity.
Indeed, its time complexity is $\mathcal{O}\big(n_G^{\sc{tw}(F) + 1}2^{\mathcal{O}(n_F)}\big)$ with memory requirements of $\mathcal{O}\big(n_G^{\sc{tw}(F) + 1}\sc{tw}(F)n_F 2^{n_F}\big)$,
where~$n_G$ and~$n_F$ denote the number of vertices in the network graph~$G$ and the pattern graph~$F$, respectively, and
$\sc{tw}(F)$ is the treewidth of graph~$F$---a measure of tree-likeness (see \autoref{sec:defs} for exact definitions).
Moreover, we presumably cannot avoid the factor exponential in treewidth in the worst case running time, as Marx~\cite{cybtw} presented an ETH\footnote{Exponential Time Hypothesis~\cite{eth}}-based lower bound for \textsc{Partitioned Subgraph Isomorphism} problem.
\begin{proposition}[Marx~\cite{cybtw}]
\label{eth_bound}
If there is a recursively enumerable class~$\mathcal{F}$ of graphs with unbounded treewidth, an algorithm~$\mathcal{A}$, and an arbitrary function~$f$ such that~$\mathcal{A}$
correctly decides every instance of \textsc{Partitioned Subgraph Isomorphism} with the smaller graph~$F$ in~$\mathcal{F}$ in time $f(F)n_{G}^{o({\sc{tw}(F)}/{\log \sc{tw}(F)})}$, then ETH fails.
\end{proposition}
As the memory requirements of the color coding approach grow exponentially with treewidth of the pattern graph, existing implementations for subgraph enumeration based on this principle restrict themselves to paths~\cite{sig} or trees~\cite{pcc}, both having treewidth~1. As the real world applications might employ networks of possibly
tens to hundreds of thousands of vertices and also pattern graphs with structure more complicated than trees, we need to significantly reduce the memory usage of the algorithm.
Using the principle of inclusion-exclusion, Amini et al.~\cite[Theorem 15]{AminiFS12} suggested a modification of the color coding algorithm, which can decide whether the pattern $F$ occurs in the graph $G$ in expected time $\mathcal{O}\big(n_G^{\sc{tw}(F) + 1}2^{\mathcal{O}(n_F)}\big)$ with memory requirements reduced to $\mathcal{O}\big(n_G^{\sc{tw}(F) + 1} \log n_F)$.\footnote{While the formulation of Theorem 15 in \cite{AminiFS12} might suggest that the algorithm actually outputs a witnessing occurrence, the algorithm merely decides whether the number of occurrences is non-zero (see the proof of the theorem).} While single witnessing occurrence can be found by means of self-reduction (which is complicated in case of randomized algorithm), the inclusion-exclusion nature of the algorithm does not allow to find all occurrences of pattern in the graph, which is our main goal.
Therefore, our approach rather follows the paradigm of generating only those parts of a dynamic programming table that correspond to subproblems with a positive answer, recently called ``positive instance driven'' approach~\cite{Tamaki17}. This further prohibits the use of the inclusion-exclusion approach of Amini et al.~\cite{AminiFS12}, since the inclusion-exclusion approach tends to use most of the table and the term $\mathcal{O}\big(n_G^{\sc{tw}(F) + 1}\big)$ is itself prohibitive in the memory requirements for $\sc{tw}(F) \ge 2$.
Because of the time and memory requirements of the algorithm, for practical purposes we restrict ourselves to pattern graphs with at most~$32$ vertices.
Altogether, our main contribution is twofold:
\begin{itemize}
\item We provide a practical implementation of the color coding algorithm of Alon, Yuster, and Zwick~\cite{ayz} capable of processing large networks and (possibly disconnected) pattern graphs of small, yet not a priory bounded, treewidth.
\item We supply a routine to extract the occurrences of the subgraphs found from a run of the algorithm.
\end{itemize}
It is important to note that all the modifications only improve the practical memory requirements and running time. The theoretical worst case time and space complexity remain the same as for the original color coding algorithm and the algorithm achieves these, e.g., if the network graph is complete. Also, in such a case, there are $n_G^{\Theta(n_F)}$ occurrences of the pattern graph in the network implying a lower bound on the running time of the enumeration part.
In \autoref{sec:algorithm} we describe our modifications to the algorithm and necessary tools used in the process. Then, in \autoref{sec:experiments}, we benchmark our algorithm on synthetic and realistic data and compare its performance with available existing implementations of algorithms for subgraph isomorphism and discuss the results obtained. \autoref{sec:conclusion} presents future research directions.
\subsection{Related work} \label{sec:related}
There are several algorithms tackling \textsc{SubIso} and its related variants. Some of them only solve the variant of subgraph counting, our main focus is however on
algorithms actually solving \textsc{SubEnum}.
Following Carletti et al.~\cite{vf2plus} and Kimmig et al.~\cite{sharedmem}, we categorize the algorithms by the approach they use (see also Kotthoff et al.~\cite{KotthoffMS16} for more detailed description of the algorithms).
Many of the approaches can be used both for induced and non-induced variants of the problem, while some algorithms are applicable only for one of them.
Vast majority of known algorithms for the subgraph enumeration problem is based on the approach of representing the problem as a searching process.
Usually, the state space is modelled as a tree and its nodes represent a state of a partial mapping.
Finding a solution then typically resorts to the usage of DFS in order to find a path of mappings in the state space tree which is compliant with isomorphism requirements.
The efficiency of those algorithms is largely based on early pruning of unprofitable paths in the state space.
Indeed, McCreesh et al.~\cite{McCreeshPST18} even measure the efficiency in the number of generated search tree nodes.
The most prominent algorithms based on this idea are Ullmann's algorithm~\cite{ullmann}, VF algorithm and its variants~\cite{vf3,vf2plus,vf,vf2} (the latest VF3~\cite{vf3} only applies to \textsc{IndSubEnum}) and RI algorithm~\cite{ri}.
The differences between these algorithms are based both on employed pruning strategies and on the order in which the vertices of pattern graph are processed (i.e. in the shape of the state space tree).
Another approach is based on constraint programming, in which the problem is modelled as a set of variables (with respective domains)
and constraints restricting simultaneous variable assignments. The solution is an assignment of values to variables in a way such that no constraint remains unsatisfied.
In subgraph isomorphism, variables represent pattern graph vertices, their domain consists of target graph vertices to which they may be mapped and
constraints ensure that the properties of isomorphism remain satisfied.
Also in this approach, a state space of assignments is represented by a search tree, in which non-profitable branches are to be filtered.
Typical algorithms in this category are LAD algorithm~\cite{lad}, Ullmann's bitvector algorithm~\cite{ullmann_csp}, and Glasgow algorithm~\cite{McCreeshP15}.
These algorithms differ in the constraints they use, the way they propagate constraints, and in the way they filter state space tree.
There are already some implementations based on the color coding paradigm, where the idea is to randomly color the input graph and search only for its subgraphs, isomorphic to the pattern graph, that
are colored in distinct colors (see \autoref{subs:idea} for more detailed description). This approach is used in subgraph counting algorithms, e.g., in ParSE~\cite{parse}, FASCIA~\cite{fascia}, and in~\cite{mccc}, or in algorithms for path enumeration described in~\cite{pcc} or in~\cite{sig}.
Each of these algorithms, after the color coding step, tries to exploit the benefits offered by this technique in its own way; although usually a dynamic programming sees its use.
Counting algorithms as ParSE and FASCIA make use of specifically partitioned pattern graphs, which allow to use combinatorial computation.
Weighted path enumeration algorithms \cite{pcc,sig} describe a dynamic programming approach and try to optimize it in various ways.
However, to the best of our knowledge there is no color coding algorithm capable of enumerating patterns of treewidth larger than~1.
Our aim is to make step towards competitive implementation of color coding based algorithm for \textsc{SubEnum}, in order to see, where this approach can be potentially beneficial against the existing algorithms. To this end, we extend the comparisons of \textsc{SubEnum} algorithms~\cite{compar,KotthoffMS16,McCreeshPST18} to color coding based algorithms, including the one proposed in this paper.
\subsection{Basic definitions}\label{sec:defs}
All graphs in this paper are undirected and simple.
For a graph~$G$ we denote~$V(G)$ its vertex set,~$n_G$ the size of this set,~$E(G)$ its edge set, and~$m_G$ the size of its edge set.
As already said, we use the color coding algorithm. The algorithm is based on a dynamic programming on a nice tree decomposition of the pattern graph. We first define a tree decomposition and then its nice counterpart.
\begin{definition}
A \emph{tree decomposition} of a graph~$F$ is a triple $(T, \beta, r)$, where~$T$ is a tree rooted at node~$r$ and $\beta \colon V(T) \mapsto 2^{V(F)}$ is a mapping satisfying:
(i) $\bigcup_{x \in V(T)} \beta(x) = V(F)$;
(ii) $\forall \{u, v\} \in E(F)$ $\exists x \in V(T)$, such that $u, v \in \beta(x)$;
(iii) $\forall u \in V(F)$ the nodes $\{x \in V(T) \mid u \in \beta(x)\}$ form a connected subtree of~$T$.
\end{definition}
We shall denote bag~$\beta(x)$ as~$\mathcal{V}_x$. The width of tree decomposition $(T, \beta, r)$ is $\max_{x \in V(T)} |\mathcal{V}_x|-1$. Treewidth $\sc{tw}(F)$ of graph~$F$ is
the minimal width of a~tree decomposition of~$F$ over all such decompositions.
\begin{definition}
A tree decomposition of a graph~$F$ is \emph{nice} if $\deg_T(r) = 1$, $\mathcal{V}_r = \emptyset$, and
each node $x \in V(T)$ is of one of the following four types:
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Leaf node}---$x$ has no children and $|\mathcal{V}_x| = 1$;
\item \emph{Introduce node}---$x$ has exactly one child~$y$ and $\mathcal{V}_x = \mathcal{V}_y \cup \{u\}$ for some $u \in V(F) \setminus \mathcal{V}_y$;
\item \emph{Forget node}---$x$ has exactly one child~$y$ and $\mathcal{V}_x = \mathcal{V}_y \setminus \{u\}$ for some $u \in \mathcal{V}_y$;
\item \emph{Join node}---$x$ has exactly two children~$y, z$ and $\mathcal{V}_x = \mathcal{V}_y = \mathcal{V}_z$.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
Note that for practical purposes, we use a slightly modified definition of nice tree decomposition in this paper. As the algorithm starts the computation in a leaf node, using the standard definition with empty bags of leaves~\cite{kniha} would imply that the tables for leaves would be somewhat meaningless and redundant.
Therefore, we make bags of leaf nodes contain a single vertex.
\begin{definition}\label{def_v_star}
For a tree decomposition $(T, \beta, r)$, we denote by~$\mathcal{V}_x^*$ the set of vertices in~$\mathcal{V}_x$ and in~$\mathcal{V}_y$ for all descendants~$y$ of~$x$ in~$T$. Formally
$\mathcal{V}_x^* = \mathcal{V}_x \cup \bigcup_{y \text{ is a descendant of } x \text{ in } T} \mathcal{V}_y$.
\end{definition}
Note that, by Definition \ref{def_v_star}, for the root~$r$ of~$T$ we have $\mathcal{V}_r^* = V(F)$ and $F[\mathcal{V}_r^*] = F$.
\section{Algorithm Description}
\label{sec:algorithm}
In this section we first briefly describe the idea of the original color coding algorithm~\cite{ayz}, show, how to alter the computation in order to reduce its time and memory requirements, and describe implementation details and further optimizations of the algorithm.
\subsection{Idea of the Algorithm}
\label{subs:idea}
The critical idea of color coding is to reduce the problem to its colorful version. For a graph~$G$ and a pattern graph~$F$, we color the vertices of~$G$ with exactly~$n_{F}$ colors. We use the randomized version, i.e., we create a random
coloring $\zeta \colon V(G) \mapsto \{1, 2, \ldots, n_{F}\}$. After the coloring, the algorithm considers as valid only subgraphs~$G'$ of~$G$ that are colorful copies of~$F$ as follows.
\begin{definition}
Subgraph~$G'$ of a graph~$G$ is a \emph{colorful copy} of~$F$ with respect to coloring~$\zeta \colon V(G) \mapsto \{1, 2, \ldots, n_F\}$, if~$G'$ is isomorphic to~$F$ and all of its vertices
are colored by distinct colors in~$\zeta$.
\end{definition}
As the output of the algorithm heavily depends on the chosen random coloring of~$G$, in order to reach some predefined success rate of the algorithm, we need to repeat the process of coloring several times.
The probability of a particular occurrence of pattern graph~$F$ becoming colorful with respect to the random coloring is $\frac{n_{F}!}{n_{F}^{n_{F}}}$, which tends to $e^{-n_{F}}$ for large~$n_{F}$.
Therefore, by running the algorithm $\mathrm{e}^{n_{F}\log{\frac{1}{\varepsilon}}}$ times, each time with a random coloring~$\zeta \colon V(G) \mapsto \{1, 2, \ldots, n_{F}\}$, the probability that an existing occurrence of the pattern will be revealed in none of the runs
is at most~$\varepsilon$.
While using more colors can reduce the number of iterations needed, it also significantly increases the memory requirements. Hence, we stick to $n_F$ colors.
Even though it is possible to derandomize such algorithms, e.g., by the approach shown in~\cite{kniha},
in practice the randomized approach usually yields the results much quicker, as discussed in~\cite{pcc}.
Moreover, we are not aware of any actual implementation of the derandomization methods.
The main computational part of the algorithm is a dynamic programming.
The target is to create a graph isomorphism $\Phi \colon V(F) \mapsto V(G)$. We do so by traversing the
nice tree decomposition $(T, \beta, r)$ of the pattern graph~$F$ and at each node $x \in V(T)$ of the tree decomposition, we construct possible partial mappings $\varphi \colon \mathcal{V}^*_x \to V(G)$
with regard to required colorfulness of the copy.
Combination of partial mappings consistent in colorings then forms a desired resulting mapping.
The semantics of the dynamic programming table is as follows. For any tree decomposition node $x \in V(T)$, any partial mapping $\varphi \colon \mathcal{V}_x \mapsto V(G)$ and any color subset
$C \subseteq \{1, 2, \ldots, n_{F}\}$, we define $\mathcal{D}(x, \varphi, C) = 1$ if there is an isomorphism~$\Phi$ of $F[\mathcal{V}_x^*]$ to a subgraph~$G'$ of~$G$ such that:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item for all $u \in \mathcal{V}_x, \Phi(u) = \varphi(u)$;
\item $G'$ is a colorful copy of $F[\mathcal{V}_x^*]$ using exactly the colors in~$C$, that is, $\zeta(\Phi(\mathcal{V}_x^*)) = C$ and $\zeta$ is injective on $\Phi(\mathcal{V}_x^*)$.
\end{enumerate}
If there is no such isomorphism, then we let $\mathcal{D}(x, \varphi, C) = 0$.
We denote all configurations $(x, \varphi, C)$ for which $\mathcal{D}(x, \varphi, C) = 1$ as \emph{nonzero} configurations.
The original version of the algorithm is based on top-down dynamic programming approach with memoization of already computed results.
That immediately implies a big disadvantage of this approach---it requires the underlying dynamic programming table (which is used for memoization)
to be fully available throughout the whole run of the algorithm.
To avoid this inefficiency in our modification we aim to store only nonzero configurations, similarly to the recent ``positive instance driven'' dynamic programming approach~\cite{Tamaki17}.
\section{Obtaining a Nice Tree Decomposition}
\label{sec:obtaining}
The algorithm requires a nice tree decomposition of the pattern graph for its work.
The running time of the algorithm actually does not depend on the treewidth of the graph, but rather on the width of the tree decomposition supplied.
On one hand, for
a given graph~$G$ and an integer~$k$, the problem of determining whether the treewidth of~$G$ is at most~$k$, is \sc{NP}\normalfont{-complete}~\cite{arn}.
On the other hand, as the main algorithm is exponential in the size of the pattern anyway, we can afford to use exponential time algorithms in order to obtain a tree decomposition of minimum possible width.
We employ
known technique based on graph triangulation, chordal graphs and elimination orderings, combining the ideas of Bodlaender et al.~\cite{tw_exact,tw_upper}.
Time complexity of this algorithm is $\mathcal{O}(n^2_F \cdot 2^{n_F})$.
After obtaining tree decomposition of the pattern graph, we construct a nice tree decomposition as described by Cygan et al.~\cite{kniha}---any tree decomposition of a graph~$F$ that consists
of $\mathcal{O}(n_F)$ nodes with width at most~$t$, can be, in $\mathcal{O}(t^2 \cdot n_{F})$ time, transformed to a nice tree decomposition of~$F$ with $\mathcal{O}(t \cdot n_F)$ nodes and width bounded by~$t$.
Our further modification to the nice tree decomposition does not affect the running time.
\subsection{Initial Algorithm Modification}
In our implementation, we aim to store only nonzero configurations, therefore we need to be able to construct nonzero configurations
of a~parent node just from the list of nonzero configurations in its child/children.
We divide the dynamic programming table~$\mathcal{D}$ into lists of nonzero configurations, where each nice tree decomposition node has a list of its own.
Formally, for every node $x \in V(T)$, let us denote by~$\mathcal{D}_{x}$ a list of all mappings~$\varphi$ with a list of their corresponding color sets~$C$, for which $\mathcal{D}(x, \varphi, C) = 1$.
The list~$\mathcal{D}_{x}$ for all $x \in V(T)$ is, in terms of contained information, equivalent to maintaining the whole table~$\mathcal{D}$---all configurations not
present in the lists can be considered as configurations with a result equal to zero.
\subsubsection*{Dynamic Programming Description}
We now describe how to compute the lists $\mathcal{D}(x, \varphi, C)$ for each type of a nice tree decomposition node.
For a \emph{leaf} node $x \in T$, there is only a single vertex~$u$ in~$\mathcal{V}_x^*$ to consider. We can thus map~$u$ to all possible vertices of~$G$, and we obtain a list with~$n_{G}$ partial mappings~$\varphi$,
in which the color list for each mapping contains a~single color set~$\{\zeta(\varphi(u))\}$.
For an \emph{introduce} node $x \in T$ and its child~$y$ in~$T$, we denote by~$u$ the vertex being introduced in~$x$, i.e., $\{u\} = \mathcal{V}_x \setminus \mathcal{V}_y$. For all nonzero combinations of a~partial mapping
and a color set $(\varphi ', C')$ in the list~$\mathcal{D}_{y}$, we try to extend~$\varphi '$ by all possible mappings of the vertex~$u$ to the vertices of~$G$. We denote one such
a mapping as~$\varphi$. We can consider mapping~$\varphi$ as correct, if
(i) the new mapping~$\varphi(u)$ of the vertex~$u$ extends the previous colorset~$C'$, that is, $C = C' \cup \{\zeta(\varphi(u))\} \neq C'$, and (ii) $\varphi$ is \emph{edge consistent}, that is, for all
edges $\{v, w\} \in E(F)$ between currently mapped vertices, i.e., in our case $v, w \in \mathcal{V}_x$, there must be an edge $\{\varphi (v), \varphi (w)\} \in E(G)$. However, because~$\varphi '$ was by construction
already edge consistent, it suffices to check the edge consistency only for all edges in $F[\mathcal{V}_x]$ with~$u$ as one of their endpoints, i.e., for all edges $\{u, w\} \in E(F[\mathcal{V}_x])$ with
$w \in N_{F[\mathcal{V}_x]}(u)$. After checking those two conditions, we can add $(\varphi, C)$ to $\mathcal{D}_{x}$.
For a \emph{forget} node $x \in V(T)$ and its child~$y$ in~$T$, there is not much work to do, as in the bottom-up construction, we directly obtain the parent list of nonzero configurations.
We denote by~$u$, the vertex being forgotten in~$x$, i.e., $\{u\} = \mathcal{V}_y \setminus \mathcal{V}_x$.
In this case, for all partial mappings~$\varphi '$ in the list~$\mathcal{D}_{y}$,
we create a~new mapping~$\varphi$ that excludes the mapping~$\varphi'(u)$ for vertex~$u$, i.e., $\varphi = \restr{\varphi '}{\mathcal{V}_x}$. Color sets corresponding to~$\varphi '$
are carried over to~$\varphi$, as they represent colors already used in the construction. After this step, we might need to merge color lists of previously different mappings, as after the removal of the mapping~$\varphi'(u)$, they
might become the same mappings.
For a \emph{join} node $x \in V(T)$, we denote by~$y$ and~$z$ its children in~$T$. We traverse the children lists~$\mathcal{D}_{y}$ and~$\mathcal{D}_{z}$ and look for partial mappings~$\varphi'$ and~$\varphi''$,
for which $\varphi' = \varphi''$ holds. Such mappings are the only ones to potentially form a new nonzero configuration in the parent list, as due to the fact that $\mathcal{V}_x = \mathcal{V}_y = \mathcal{V}_z$,
we construct the new partial mapping~$\varphi$ as $\varphi = \varphi ' = \varphi ''$. However, for each
such mapping~$\varphi$, we must also construct the new list of color sets, which would afterwards be corresponding to the mapping in the parent list. We do that by traversing color lists
corresponding to mappings~$\varphi'$ and~$\varphi''$ in~$\mathcal{D}_{y}$ and~$\mathcal{D}_{z}$, respectively, and for particular sets~$C'$ and~$C''$ from the color lists of~$\varphi '$ and~$\varphi ''$
construct a new color set $C = C' \cup C''$. We must check, whether the intersection of~$C'$ and~$C''$ contains exactly the colors to color the vertices in~$\mathcal{V}_x$. That is, for mapping~$\varphi$, we add to~$\mathcal{D}_{x}$ a color set $C= C' \cup C''$, if $C' \cap C'' = \{\zeta(\varphi(\mathcal{V}_x))\}$.
Because we build the result from the leaves
of the nice tree decomposition, we employ a recursive procedure on its root, in which we perform the computations in a way of a post-order traversal of a tree. From each visited node, we obtain a bottom-up dynamic
programming list of nonzero configurations. After the whole nice tree decomposition is traversed, we obtain a list of configurations, that were valid in its root. Such configurations thus represent solutions
found during the algorithm, from which we afterwards reconstruct results. Note that as we prepend a root with no vertices in its bag to the nice tree decomposition, there is a nonzero number of solutions
if and only if, at the end of the algorithm, the list~$\mathcal{D}_{r}$ contains a single empty mapping using all colors.
\subsection{Further Implementation Optimizations}
\subsubsection*{Representation of Mappings}
For mapping representation, we suppose that the content of all bags of the nice tree decomposition stays in the same order during the whole algorithm.
This natural and easily satisfied condition allows us to represent a mapping
$\varphi \colon \mathcal{V}_x \mapsto V(G)$ in a nice tree decomposition node~$x$ simply by an ordered tuple of~$|\mathcal{V}_x|$ vertices from~$G$.
From this, we can easily determine which vertex from~$F$ is mapped to
which vertex in~$G$. Also, for a mapping in an~introduce or a~forget node, we can describe a position in the mapping, on which the process of introducing/forgetting takes place.
\subsubsection*{Representation of Color Sets}
We represent color sets as bitmasks, where the $i$-th bit states whether color~$i$ is contained in the set or not. For optimization purposes, we represent bitmasks with an integer number. As we use~$n_{F}$ colors in the algorithm
and restricted ourselves to pattern graphs with at most $32$ vertices, we represent a~color set with a~$32$-bit number.
\subsubsection*{Compressing the Lists}
Because we process the dynamic programming lists one mapping at a time, we store these lists in a compressed way and decompress them only on a mapping retrieval basis.
We serialize dynamic programming lists into a simple buffer of bytes. We store a dynamic programming list as a continuous group of records, each of which represents one partial mapping and its corresponding list of color sets.
Each record contains:
\begin{itemize}
\item a mapping in the form of ordered tuple of vertices,
\item the number of color sets included,
\item and color sets corresponding to the mapping in the form of non-negative integer numbers.
\end{itemize}
While deserializing, the number of vertices in a~mapping can be easily determined by the size
of the bag of a particular node.
As there is no requirement on the order of the color sets,
we store these sets sorted in the increasing order of their number representation. This allows us to effectively use delta compression.
Moreover, we use variable length encoding to store the numbers into buffer.
For several routines we use the LibUCW library,\footnote{LibUCW is downloadable from \url{http://www.ucw.cz/libucw/}.}
a C language library highly optimized for performance.
The employed routines include data structures like growing buffers, hash tables, red-black trees,
fast sorters, fast buffered input/output, and also the efficient variable length encoding of integers.
\subsubsection*{Masking Unprofitable Mappings}
Our implementation supports an extended format of input graphs where one can specify for each vertex of the network, which vertices of the pattern can be mapped to it.
This immediately yields a simple degree-based optimization. Before the run of the main algorithm, we perform a linear time preprocessing of input graphs
and only allow a vertex $y \in V(F)$ to be mapped to a vertex $x \in V(G)$ if $\deg_G(x) \geq \deg_F(y)$.
\subsubsection*{Mapping Expansion Optimizations}
The main ``brute-force'' work of the algorithm is performed in two types of nodes---leaf and introduce nodes, as we need to try all possible mappings of
a~particular vertex in a~leaf node or all possible mappings of an~introduced vertex in a~introduce node to a vertex from~$G$.
We describe ways to optimize the work in introduce nodes in this paragraph.
Let~$x$ be an introduce node, $u$ the vertex introduced and~$\varphi$ a mapping from a nonzero configuration for the child of~$x$.
We always need to check whether the new mapping of~$u$ is edge consistent with the mapping~$\varphi$ of the remaining vertices for the corresponding bag, i.e., whether all edges of~$F$ incident on~$u$ would be realized by an edge in~$G$.
Therefore, if~$u$ has any neighbors in $F[\mathcal{V}_x]$, then a vertex of~$G$ is a candidate for the mapping of~$u$ only if it is a neighbor of all vertices in the set $\varphi(N_{F[\mathcal{V}_x]}(u))$, i.e., the vertices of~$G$, where the neighbors of~$u$ in~$F$ are mapped.
Hence, we limit the number of candidates by using the adjacency lists of the already mapped vertices.
In the case $\deg_{F[\mathcal{V}_x]}(u) = 0$ we have to use different approach.
The pattern graphs~$F$ tend to be smaller than the input graphs~$G$ by several orders of magnitude.
Hence, if the introduced vertex is in the same connected component of~$F$ as some vertex already present in the bag, a~partial mapping processed in an introduce node
anchors the possible resulting component to a certain position in~$G$.
During the construction of possible mapping of~$u$, it is useless to try mapping~$u$ to vertices in~$G$ that are very distant to the current position and, therefore, could
by no means form a~resulting subgraph isomorphic to the component of~$F$.
We obtain the maximal possible distance to be considered in~$G$ as a minimal distance of~$u$ to a vertex in $\mathcal{V}_x \setminus \{u\}$.
I.e., we determine $w= \mathrm{argmin}_{v \in \mathcal{V}_x \setminus \{u\}}\mathrm{dist}_F(v,u)$.
Due to the limit on pattern graph size, we precompute distances between every pair of vertices by using BFS on each vertex before the start of the algorithm.
Then it suffices to try vertices from~$G$ that are in distance at most $\mathrm{dist}(w,u)$ from~$\varphi(w)$ in~$G$; again, by a simple BFS usage.
Only if there is no vertex in the bag sharing a connected component of~$F$ with~$u$, we have to fall back to trying all possible mappings.
\section{Result Reconstruction}
\label{sec:reconstruction}
It is usual in dynamic programming to store a witness or all witnesses for each reasonable value in the table. However, this would completely neglect the effect of compression of the lists and significantly increase the memory requirements.
Hence, to enumerate all results, we recursively traverse the computed dynamic programming lists~$\mathcal{D}_{x}$ starting with the root~$r$ of underlying nice tree decomposition.
The main idea is to ask the child~$y$ (or children $y, z$) of a node, how was a certain partial mapping~$\varphi$ obtained during the computation.
In other words, for each partial mapping~$\varphi$ in~$\mathcal{D}_{x}$ of interest, we will extract partial mappings~$\varphi'$ in~$\mathcal{D}_{y}$ (or possibly also partial mappings~$\varphi''$ in~$\mathcal{D}_{z}$) that lead to the addition of~$\varphi$ to~$\mathcal{D}_{x}$.
To preserve the colorfulness (and thus validity) of glued partial mappings, with a partial mapping~$\varphi$ we also recursively pass a set of colors that can still be used in the choice of corresponding partial mappings to glue with~$\varphi$.
By applying this approach recursively and by gluing the partial information together in mappings, we obtain all possible ways an empty mapping in~$r$ could have been obtained---which is exactly the same as all possible ways a pattern graph can be mapped to the original graph.
For the efficiency of the computation, we process each node only once and we thus recursively pass all partial mappings of interest and their remaining colorsets at once.
Formally, we will consider a recursive call of function $\mathcal{R}(x, \mathcal{M})$, where $x \in V(T)$, $\mathcal{M}$ is a set of pairs $(\varphi, C)$, $\varphi$ is a partial mapping $\varphi \colon \mathcal{V}_x \mapsto V(G)$ and~$C$ is a color subset
$C \subseteq \{1, 2, \ldots, n_{F}\}$. This function returns a list~$\mathcal{L}$ containing, for each pair $(\varphi, C)$ in~$\mathcal{M}$, a list $L_{(\varphi, C)}$ of mappings $\Phi : \mathcal{V}^*_x \mapsto V(G)$ that lead to the appearance of $(\varphi, C)$ in~$\mathcal{D}_{x}$.
In detail, the function $\mathcal{R}(x, \mathcal{M})$ proceeds as follows. If node~$x$ has a child~$y$, we first scan~$D_{t,y}$ for pairs $(\varphi', C')$,
in which~$\varphi'$ and~$\varphi$ and colorsets~$C'$ and~$C$ are in some sense consistent.
Pairs satisfying these conditions are then recursively passed to~$y$ in a list~$\widehat{\mathcal{M}}$, from which we obtain a list~$\widehat{\mathcal{L}}$.
In case of a join node, we perform this process for both children.
After that, we construct the resulting list from recursively computed list(s) by an addition of a mapping of the introduced vertex (in the case of a introduce node) or by all possible combinations of mappings (in the case of a join node).
In the end, we sometimes need to flatten the resulting list, so all resulting partial mappings corresponding to a pair $(\varphi, C)$ are in a single list $L_{(\varphi, C)} \in \mathcal{L}$.
We now describe the process and consistency conditions formally for each of the node types.
For a \emph{leaf} node $x \in T$, we simply return a list~$\mathcal{L}$ of single element lists~$L_{(\varphi, C)}$ for each pair $(\varphi, C) \in \mathcal{M}$. Each such list contains a partial mapping $\Phi \vcentcolon= \varphi$.
For an \emph{introduce} node $x \in T$ and its child~$y$ in~$T$, we denote by~$u$ the vertex being introduced in~$x$, i.e., $\{u\} = \mathcal{V}_x \setminus \mathcal{V}_y$.
We create~$\widehat{\mathcal{M}}$ consisting of $(\widehat{\varphi}, \widehat{C})$ by setting, for each pair $(\varphi, C) \in \mathcal{M}$,
$\widehat{\varphi} \vcentcolon= \restr{\varphi}{\mathcal{V}_y}$ and $\widehat{C} \vcentcolon= C \setminus \{\zeta(\varphi(u))\}$.
Note that $(\widehat{\varphi}, \widehat{C})$ must be in~$\mathcal{D}_{y}$, as otherwise $(\varphi, C)$ would not be present in~$\mathcal{M}$ (or equivalently in~$\mathcal{D}_{x}$).
Then we obtain $\widehat{\mathcal{L}} \vcentcolon= \mathcal{R}(y, \widehat{\mathcal{M}})$.
Let $(\widehat{\varphi}, \widehat{C}) \in \widehat{\mathcal{M}}$ be constructed from $(\varphi, C) \in \mathcal{M}$ and~$\widehat{L}_{(\widehat{\varphi}, \widehat{C})}$ be the corresponding list of~$\widehat{\mathcal{L}}$.
We construct the list~$L_{(\varphi, C)}$ corresponding to $(\varphi, C)$ by extending each $\Phi \in \widehat{L}_{(\widehat{\varphi}, \widehat{C})}$ by~$\varphi(u)$.
For a \emph{forget} node $x \in T$ and its child~$y$ in~$T$, we denote by~$u$ the vertex being forgotten in~$x$, i.e., $\{u\} = \mathcal{V}_y \setminus \mathcal{V}_x$.
We add to~$\widehat{\mathcal{M}}$ for each $(\varphi, C) \in \mathcal{M}$ all $(\widehat{\varphi}, \widehat{C})$ from~$\mathcal{D}_{y}$ such that $\varphi = \restr{\widehat{\varphi}}{\mathcal{V}_x}$ and $\widehat{C} = C$.
Then we obtain $\widehat{\mathcal{L}} \vcentcolon= \mathcal{R}(y, \widehat{\mathcal{M}})$.
We construct~$\mathcal{L}$ from~$\widehat{\mathcal{L}}$ as follows. We do not need to modify any~$\Phi$ in any $\widehat{L} \in \widehat{\mathcal{L}}$, as the computation in forget node adds no new information to the mapping.
However, as there may have been multiple (say~$k$) pairs $(\widehat{\varphi_1}, \widehat{C_1}), \ldots, (\widehat{\varphi_k}, \widehat{C_k}) \in \widehat{\mathcal{M}}$ constructed from a single $(\varphi, C)$, we flatten all lists $L_{(\widehat{\varphi_1}, \widehat{C_1})}, \ldots, L_{(\widehat{\varphi_k}, \widehat{C_k})} \in \widehat{\mathcal{L}}$ obtained from such pairs into a single list~$L_{(\varphi, C)}$ corresponding to $(\varphi, C) \in \mathcal{M}$.
For a \emph{join} node $x \in V(T)$, we denote by~$y$ and~$z$ its children in~$T$.
In this case, we create~$\mathcal{M}'$ and~$\mathcal{M}''$ consisting of $(\varphi', C')$ and $(\varphi'', C'')$, respectively.
For each $(\varphi, C)$, we find all $(\varphi', C') \in \mathcal{D}_{y}$ and $(\varphi'', C'') \in \mathcal{D}_{z}$, such that $\varphi = \varphi' = \varphi''$, $C = C' \cup C''$ and $C' \cap C'' = \{\zeta(\varphi(\mathcal{V}_x))\}$ and add them to~$\mathcal{M}'$ and~$\mathcal{M}''$, respectively.
Then we obtain $\mathcal{L}' \vcentcolon= \mathcal{R}(y, \mathcal{M}')$ and $\mathcal{L}'' \vcentcolon= \mathcal{R}(z, \mathcal{M}'')$.
Let $(\varphi_1', C'_1)$ and $(\varphi_1'', C''_1)$, \dots, $(\varphi_k', C'_k)$ and $(\varphi_k'', C''_k)$ be the pairs constructed from single $(\varphi, C) \in \mathcal{M}$
and let $L_{(\varphi_1', C'_1)}, \ldots, L_{(\varphi_k', C'_k)}$ and $L_{(\varphi_1'', C''_1)}, \ldots, L_{(\varphi_k'', C''_k)}$ be the corresponding lists in~$\mathcal{L}'$ and~$\mathcal{L}''$, respectively.
We obtain~$L_{(\varphi, C)}$ corresponding to~$(\varphi, C)$ as a union of lists $L_1, \ldots, L_k$, where~$L_i$ contains the union of~$\Phi'$ and~$\Phi''$ for each $\Phi' \in L_{(\varphi_i', C'_i)}$ and each $\Phi'' \in L_{(\varphi_i'', C''_i)}$.
\section{Experimental Results}
\label{sec:experiments}
The testing was performed on a 64-bit linux system with Intel Xeon CPU [email protected] and 32GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM memory.
The module was compiled with \verb|gcc| compiler (version 7.3.1)
with \verb|-O3| optimizations enabled.
Implementation and instances utilized in the testing are available at \url{http://users.fit.cvut.cz/malikjo1/subiso/}.
All results are an average of 5 independent measurements.
We evaluated our implementation in several ways.
Firstly, we compare available implementations on two different real world source graphs and a set of more-or-less standard target graph patterns.
Secondly, we compare available implementations on instances from ICPR2014 Contest on Graph Matching Algorithms for Pattern Search in Biological Databases \cite{ICPR2014} with suitably small patterns.
We also adapt the idea of testing the algorithms on Erd\H{o}s-R{\' e}nyi random graphs~\cite{McCreeshPST18}.
\subsection{Algorithm Properties and Performance}
In the first two subsection we used two different graphs of various properties as target graph~$G$.
The first instance, \sc{Images}, is built from an segmented image, and is a courtesy of~\cite{img}.
It consists of $4838$ vertices and $7067$ edges. The second instance, \sc{Trans}, is a graph of transfers on bank accounts. It is a very sparse network,
which consists of $45733$ vertices and $44727$ undirected edges.
For the pattern graphs, we first use a standard set of basic graph patterns, as the treewidth of such graphs is well known and
allows a clear interpretation of the results. In particular, we use paths, stars, cycles, an complete graphs on $n$ vertices, denoted $P_n$, $S_n$, $C_n$, and $K_n$ with treewidth 1, 1, 2, and $n-1$, respectively. We further used grids $G_{n,m}$ on $n \times m$ vertices, with treewidth $\mathrm{min}\{n, m\}$.
Secondly, we use a special set of pattern graphs in order to demonstrate performance on various patterns.
Patterns $A$, $B$, $C$, and $D$ have $9$, $7$, $9$, and $7$ vertices, $8$, $7$, $12$, $6$ edges, and treewidth $1$, $2$, $2$, and $2$, respectively. Patterns $A$, $B$, and $D$ appear in both dataset, pattern $C$ in neither and pattern $D$ is disconnected.
Description of these pattern graphs is shown in \autoref{prop} and their illustration is shown in \autoref{figpatt}.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption[Pattern graphs]{Pattern graphs.}
\begin{tabular}{c||c|c}
\label{prop}
Pattern $F$ & $\sc{tw}(F)$ & Description\\
\hline \hline
$P_n$ & $1$ & path on $n$ vertices \\ \hline
$S_n$ & $1$ & star on $n$ vertices\\ \hline
$C_n$ & $2$ & cycle on $n$ vertices\\ \hline
$K_n$ & $n - 1$ & complete graph on $n$ vertices\\ \hline
$G_{n,m}$ & $\mathrm{min}\{n, m\}$ & grid graph on $n \times m$ vertices\\ \hline
Pattern $A$ & $1$ & subgraph of both datasets with $9$ vertices, $8$ edges \\ \hline
Pattern $B$ & $2$ & subgraph of both datasets with $7$ vertices, $7$ edges \\ \hline
Pattern $C$ & $2$ & graph with $9$ vertices, $12$ edges \\ \hline
Pattern $D$ & $2$ & disconnected graph with $7$ vertices, $6$ edges \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\null\hfill
\subfloat[Pattern $A$]
{
\vspace{-0.6cm}
\begin{tikzpicture}
[
every node/.style={c}
]
\node(0) at (0, 0) {};
\node(1) at (0.5,0.5) {};
\node(2) at (1,0) {};
\node(3) at (0.75, -0.5) {};
\node(4) at (1,0.5) {};
\node(5) at (1.5,0.5) {};
\node(6) at (1.5,0) {};
\node(7) at (1.5,-0.5) {};
\node(8) at (1.25,-1) {};
\draw[-] (0) to (1);
\draw[-] (1) to (2);
\draw[-] (2) to (3);
\draw[-] (2) to (4);
\draw[-] (5) to (4);
\draw[-] (6) to (4);
\draw[-] (6) to (7);
\draw[-] (7) to (8);
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\hfill
\subfloat[Pattern $B$]
{
\begin{tikzpicture}
[
every node/.style={c}
]
\node(0) at (0, 0) {};
\node(1) at (1,0) {};
\node(2) at (0.5,0.72) {};
\node(3) at (0, 0.72) {};
\node(4) at (0.5,1.44) {};
\node(5) at (1.5,0.5) {};
\node(6) at (1.5,0) {};
\draw[-] (0) to (1);
\draw[-] (1) to (2);
\draw[-] (0) to (2);
\draw[-] (1) to (6);
\draw[-] (1) to (5);
\draw[-] (2) to (3);
\draw[-] (3) to (4);
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\hfill
\subfloat[Pattern $C$]
{
\begin{tikzpicture}
[
every node/.style={c}
]
\node(0) at (-1, 0) {};
\node(1) at (1,0) {};
\node(2) at (0,1.44) {};
\node(3) at (0, 0) {};
\node(4) at (-0.5,0.72) {};
\node(5) at (0.5,0.72) {};
\node(6) at (1,1.44) {};
\node(7) at (-1,1.44) {};
\node(8) at (0,-0.72) {};
\draw[-] (0) to (3);
\draw[-] (0) to (4);
\draw[-] (1) to (3);
\draw[-] (1) to (5);
\draw[-] (2) to (4);
\draw[-] (2) to (5);
\draw[-] (6) to (1);
\draw[-] (6) to (2);
\draw[-] (7) to (0);
\draw[-] (7) to (2);
\draw[-] (8) to (0);
\draw[-] (8) to (1);
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\hfill
\subfloat[Pattern $D$]
{
\begin{tikzpicture}
[
every node/.style={c}
]
\def 0.7cm {0.7cm}
\def5{5}
\node(p1) at (-1.5,0.5) {};
\node(p2) at (-1.5,-0.5) {};
\draw[-] (p1) to (p2);
\foreach \i in {1,...,5}
{
\node(\i) at ({360/5 * (\i + 2) + 90/5}:0.7cm) {};
}
\pgfmathtruncatemacro{\last}{5-1}
\foreach \i in {1,...,\last}
{
\pgfmathtruncatemacro{\nxt}{\i+1}
\draw[-] (\i) to (\nxt);
}
\draw[-] (1) to (5);
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\hfill\null
\caption{Pattern graph illustration}\label{figpatt}
\end{figure}
Due to randomization, in order to achieve some preselected constant error rate, we need to repeat the computation more than once. The number of found results thus depends not only on the quality of the
algorithm, but also on the choice of the number of its repetitions. Hence, it is logical to measure performance of the single run of the algorithm. Results from such a testing, however,
should be still taken as a rough average, because the running time of a single run of the algorithm depends on many factors.
Therefore, we first present measurements, where we average the results of many single runs of the algorithm. We average not only the time and space needed, but also the number of found subgraphs.
To obtain the expected time needed to run the whole algorithm, it suffices to sum the time needed to create a nice tree decomposition and~$\ell$ times the time required for a single run, if there are~$\ell$ runs in total.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption[Performance of a single run of the algorithm on \sc{Images} dataset]{Performance of a single run of the algorithm on \sc{Images} dataset.}
\vspace{10px}
\begin{tabular}{c||c|c||c|c||c}
\label{res_img}
Pattern & Comp. time [ms] & Comp. memory [MB] & Occurrences\\
\hline \hline
$\mathcal{P}_5$ & 240 & 12.73 & 3488.21 \\ \hline
$\mathcal{P}_{10}$ & 160 & 8.52 & 732.46 \\ \hline
$\mathcal{P}_{15}$ & 90 & 10.54 & 76.18 \\ \hline
$\mathcal{S}_5$ & 4 & 5.37 & 114.72 \\ \hline
$\mathcal{C}_5$ & 20 & 7.24 & 239.17 \\ \hline
$\mathcal{C}_{10}$ & 70 & 9.34 & 26.64 \\ \hline
$\mathcal{K}_{4}$ & 5 & 6.46 & 0 \\ \hline
$G_{3,3}$ & 90 & 13.42 & 0 \\ \hline
Pattern $A$ & 80 & 9.14 & 292.48 \\ \hline
Pattern $B$ & 10 & 7.17 & 6.85 \\ \hline
Pattern $C$ & 10 & 5.30 & 0 \\ \hline
Pattern $D$ & 40 & 10.14 & 426.76 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption[Performance of a single run of the algorithm on \sc{Trans} dataset]{Performance of a single run of the algorithm on \sc{Trans} dataset.}
\vspace{10px}
\begin{tabular}{c||c|c||c|c||c}
\label{res_Trans}
Pattern & Comp. time [s] & Comp. memory [MB] & Occurrences\\
\hline \hline
$\mathcal{P}_5$ & 6.15 & 33.82 & 54572.94 \\ \hline
$\mathcal{P}_{10} $ & 0.32 & 34.40 & 562.54 \\ \hline
$\mathcal{P}_{15} $ & 0.17 & 34.83 & 91.49 \\ \hline
$\mathcal{C}_5$ & 0.11 & 30.11 & 15.32 \\ \hline
$\mathcal{C}_{10}$ & 0.24 & 33.84 & 0 \\ \hline
$\mathcal{K}_{4}$ & 0.09 & 27.91 & 0.72 \\ \hline
$G_{3,3}$ & 2.16 & 48.68 & 0 \\ \hline
Pattern $A$ & 54.42 & 109.88 & 94145.82 \\ \hline
Pattern $B$ & 0.18 & 34.12 & 1127.11 \\ \hline
Pattern $C$ & 0.29 & 35.16 & 0 \\ \hline
Pattern $D$ & 0.25 & 47.54 & 178.29 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Comparison on Real World Graphs and Fixed Graph Patterns}
\label{sec:real_word}
We compare our implementation to three other tools for subgraph enumeration: RI algorithm~\cite{ri} (as implemented in \cite{leskovec2016snap}), LAD algorithm~\cite{lad} and color coding algorithm for weighted path enumeration~\cite{sig}
(by setting, for comparison purposes, all weights of edges to be equal). The comparison is done on the instances from previous subsection and only on pattern graphs which occur at least once in a particular target graph.
In comparison, note the following specifics of measured algorithms.
The RI algorithm does not support outputting solutions, which might positively affect its performance.
LAD algorithm uses adjacency matrix to store input graphs, and thus yields potentially limited use for graphs of larger scale.
Neither of RI or LAD algorithms supports enumeration of disconnected patterns.\footnote{
When dealing with disconnected patterns, one could find the components of the pattern one by one, omitting the vertices of the host graph used by the previous component.
However, this would basically raise the running time of the algorithm to the power equal to the number of components of the pattern graph.}
Also we did not measure the running time of the weighted path algorithm on non-path queries and also on \sc{Trans} dataset, as its implementation
is limited to graph sizes of at most $32\,000$.
We run our algorithm repeatedly to achieve an error rate of $\varepsilon = \frac{1}{e}$.
In order to be able to measure the computation for larger networks
with many occurrences of the pattern, we measure only the time required to retrieve no more than first $100\,000$ solutions
and we also consider running time greater than 10 minutes (600 seconds) as a timeout.
Since we study non-induced occurrences (and due to automorphisms) there might be several ways to map the pattern to the same set of vertices.
Other measured algorithms do count all of them.
Our algorithm can behave also like this, or can be switched to count only occurrences that differ in vertex sets.
For the sake of equal measurement, we use the former version of our algorithm.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption[Comparison of running time on \sc{Images} dataset (in seconds)]{Comparison of running time on \sc{Images} dataset (in seconds).}
\vspace{10px}
\begin{tabular}{c||c|c|c|c}
\label{c_i}
Pattern & Our algorithm & RI algorithm & LAD algorithm & Weighted path\\
\hline \hline
$\mathcal{P}_5$ & 31.12 & 0.11 & 28.86 & 362.41\\ \hline
$\mathcal{P}_{10} $ & 53.17 & 1.25 & 13.63 & $>600$\\ \hline
$\mathcal{P}_{15} $ & 104.30 & 3.7 & 8.18 & $>600$\\ \hline
$\mathcal{S}_5$ & 0.94 & 0.07 & 0.43 & --\\ \hline
$\mathcal{C}_5$ & 4.98 & 0.14 & 35.18 &--\\ \hline
$\mathcal{C}_{10}$ & 151.25 & 3.44 & 174.27 &--\\ \hline
Pattern $A$ & 43.11 & 0.82 & 36.60 &--\\ \hline
Pattern $B$ & 91.93 & 0.41 & 0.83 &--\\ \hline
Pattern $D$ & 23.54 & -- & -- &--\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption[Comparison of running time on \sc{Trans} dataset (in seconds)]{Comparison of running time on \sc{Trans} dataset (in seconds).}
\vspace{10px}
\begin{tabular}{c||c|c|c|c}
\label{c_t}
Pattern & Our algorithm & RI algorithm & LAD algorithm & Weighted path\\
\hline \hline
$\mathcal{P}_5$ & 11.64 & 2.53 & 59.57 & --\\ \hline
$\mathcal{P}_{10} $ & 44.72 & 4.77 & 34.00 & --\\ \hline
$\mathcal{P}_{15} $ & 295.11 & 24.11 & 28.98 & --\\ \hline
$\mathcal{C}_5$ & 19.25 & 0.56 & 24.58 & --\\ \hline
$\mathcal{K}_{4}$ & 4.38 & 0.70 & 2.24 & --\\ \hline
Pattern $A$ & 61.36 & 11.85 & 52.77 &--\\ \hline
Pattern $B$ & 23.91 & 1.63 & 31.67 &--\\ \hline
Pattern $D$ & 481.25 & -- & -- &--\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
From \autoref{c_i} and \autoref{c_t},
we can see that RI algorithm outperforms all other measured algorithms. We can also say our algorithm is on par with LAD algorithm,
as the results of comparison of running times are similar, but vary instance from instance.
Our algorithm nevertheless clearly outperforms another color coding algorithm, which on one hand solves more complicated problem
of weighted paths, but on the another, is still limited only to paths.
Also, our algorithm is the only algorithm capable of enumerating disconnected patterns.
The weak point of the color coding approach (or possibly only of our implementation) appears to be the search for a pattern of larger size with very few (or possibly zero) occurrences. To achieve the desired error rate, we need to repeatedly run the algorithm many times. Therefore our algorithm takes longer time to run on some instances
(especially close to zero-occurrence ones), which are easily solved by the other algorithms.
\subsection{ICPR2014 Contest Graphs}
To fully benchmark our algorithm without limitations on time or number of occurrences found, we perform a test on ICPR2014 Contest on Graph Matching Algorithms for Pattern Search in Biological Databases \cite{ICPR2014}.
In particular, we focus our attention on a \sc{Molecules} dataset, containing 10,000 (target) graphs representing the chemical structures of different small organic compounds and
on a \sc{Proteins} dataset, which contains 300 (target) graphs representing the chemical structures of proteins and protein backbones.
Target graphs in both datasets are sparse and up to 99 vertices or up 10,081 vertices for \sc{Molecules} and \sc{Proteins}, respectively.
In order to benchmark our algorithm without limiting its number of iterations, we focus on pattern graphs of small sizes, which offer reasonable number of iterations for an error rate of $\frac{1}{e}$.
Both datasets contain 10 patterns for each of considered sizes constructed by randomly choosing connected subgraphs of the target graphs.
We obtained an average matching time of all pattern graphs of a given size to all target graphs in a particular dataset.
\begin{table}[!h]
\centering
\caption[Comparison of average running time on ICPR2014 graphs]{Comparison of average running time on ICPR2014 graphs}
\label{icpr_avg}
\vspace{10px}
\begin{tabular}{c|c||c|c|c}
Targets & Pattern size & Our algorithm & LAD algorithm & RI algorithm\\
\hline \hline
\sc{Molecules} & 4 & 0.01 & 0.01 & 0.01\\ \hline
\sc{Molecules} & 8 & 0.67 & 0.14 & 0.01\\ \hline
\sc{Proteins} & 8 & 19.45 & 8.83 & 0.51\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
From the results in Table \ref{icpr_avg}, we can see our algorithm being on par with LAD algorithm, while being outperformed by RI algorithm.
However, we mainly include these results as a proof of versatility of our algorithm.
As discussed in \cite{McCreeshPST18}, benchmarks created by constructing subgraphs of target graphs do not necessarily encompass the possible hardness of some instances
and might even present a distorted view on algorithms' general performance.
Thus, in the following benchmark we opt to theoretically analyze our algorithm.
\subsection{Erd\H{o}s-R{\' e}nyi Graph Setup}
In order to precisely analyze the strong and weak points of our algorithm we measure its performance is a setting where both the pattern and the target are taken as an Erd\H{o}s-R{\' e}nyi random graph of fixed size with varying edge density and compare the performance of our algorithm with the analysis of McCreesh et al.~\cite{McCreeshPST18},
which focused on algorithms Glasgow, LAD, and VF2.
An Erd\H{o}s-R{\' e}nyi graph $G(n, p)$ is a random graph on $n$ vertices where
each edge is included in the graph independently at random with probability $p$.
We measure the performance on target graph of 150 vertices and pattern graph of 10 vertices with variable edge probabilities.
As our algorithm cannot be classified in terms of search nodes used (as in \cite{McCreeshPST18}), we measure the time needed to complete 10 iterations of our algorithm.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{pdf/rg_10}
\caption{Behavior for target graph of 150 vertices and pattern graph of 10 vertices.
The x-axis is the pattern edge probability, the y-axis is the target edge probability, from 0 to 1 with step of 0.03.
Graph shows the time required for our algorithm to complete 10 iterations (the darker, the more time is required).
Black regions indicate instances on which a timeout of 600\,s occurred.}
\label{rg10}
\end{figure}
From Fig.~\ref{msr_10_50} we can see our algorithm indeed follows a well observed phase transition (transition between instances without occurrence of the pattern and with many occurrences of the pattern).
If we compare our results from Fig.~\ref{rg10} to the results of \cite{McCreeshPST18}, we can see that hard instances for our algorithm start
to occur later (in terms of edge probabilities).
However, due to the almost linear dependency of treewidth on edge probabilities (see Fig. \ref{tw10}),
hard instances for our algorithm concentrate in the ``upper right corner'' of the diagram, which contains dense graphs with naturally large treewidth.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{pdf/tw_10}
\caption{Correspondence of treewidth to the edge probability of a pattern graph with 10 vertices.}
\label{tw10}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{pdf/msr_10_50}
\caption{Time needed to complete 10 iterations of our algorithm on a target graph of 150 vertices with edge probability of 0.5 and pattern graph of 10 vertices
with variable edge probability.}
\label{msr_10_50}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{pdf/msr_10_80}
\caption{Time needed to complete 10 iterations of our algorithm on a target graph of 150 vertices with edge probability of 0.8 and pattern graph of 10 vertices
with variable edge probability.}
\label{msr_10_80}
\end{figure}
Therefore, it seems that our algorithm complements the portfolio of algorithms studied by Kotthoff et al.~\cite{KotthoffMS16} by an algorithm suitable just below the phase transition (in view of Fig.~\ref{rg10}).
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
We described an efficient implementation of the well known color coding algorithm for the subgraph isomorphism problem.
Our implementation is the first color-coding based algorithm capable of enumerating all occurrences of patterns of treewidth larger than one. Moreover, we have shown that our implementation is competitive with existing state-of-the-art solutions in the setting of locating small pattern graphs.
As it exhibits significantly different behaviour than other solutions, it can be an interesting contribution to the portfolio of known algorithms~\cite{KotthoffMS16,McCreeshPST18}.
As an obvious next step, the algorithm could be made to run in parallel. We also wonder whether the algorithm could be significantly optimized even further, possibly using some of the approaches based on constraint programming.
\bibliographystyle{splncs04}
|
\section{Introduction}
The goal of zero-shot semantic parsing \cite{krishnamurthy2017neural,xu2017sqlnet,yu2018spider,yu2018syntaxsqlnet,herzig2018zeroshot} is to map language utterances into executable programs in a new environment, or database (DB). The key difficulty in this setup is that the parser must map new lexical items to DB constants that weren't observed at training time.
Existing semantic parsers
handle this mostly through a \emph{local} similarity function between words and DB constants, which considers each word and DB constant in isolation.
This function is combined with an auto-regressive decoder, where
the decoder chooses the DB constant that is most similar to the words it is currently attending to. Thus, selecting DB constants is done one at a time rather than as a set, and informative global considerations are ignored.
Consider the example in Figure~\ref{fig:problem}, where a question is mapped to a SQL query over a complex DB. After decoding \texttt{SELECT}, the decoder must now choose a DB constant. Assuming its attention is focused on the word \emph{`name'} (highlighted), and given local similarities only, the choice between the lexically-related DB constants (\texttt{singer.name} and \texttt{song.name}) is ambiguous. However, if we globally reason over the DB constants and question, we can combine additional cues.
First, a subsequent word \emph{`nation'} is similar to the DB column \texttt{country} which belongs to the table \texttt{singer}, thus selecting the column \texttt{singer.name} from the same table is more likely. Second, the next appearance of the word \emph{`name'} is next to the phrase \emph{'Hey'}, which appears as the value in one of the cells of the column \texttt{song.name}. Assuming a one-to-one mapping between words and DB constants, again \texttt{singer.name} is preferred.
\label{sec:model}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.27]{problem_v3}
\caption{An example where choosing a DB constant based on local similarities is difficult, but the ambiguity can be resolved through global reasoning (see text). }
\label{fig:problem}
\end{figure}
In this paper, we propose a semantic parser that reasons over the DB structure and question to make a \emph{global} decision about which DB constants should be used in a query. We extend the parser of \newcite{bogin2019gnn}, which learns a representation for the DB schema at parsing time. First, we perform message-passing through a graph neural network representation of the DB schema,
to softly select the set of DB constants that are likely to appear in the output query.
Second, we train a model that takes the top-$K$ queries output by the auto-regressive model and re-ranks them based on a global match between the DB and the question.
Both of these technical contributions can be applied to any zero-shot semantic parser.
We test our parser on \textsc{Spider}{}, a zero-shot semantic parsing dataset with complex DBs. We show that both our contributions improve performance, leading to an accuracy of 47.4\%, well beyond the current state-of-the-art of 39.4\%.
Our code is available at \url{https://github.com/benbogin/spider-schema-gnn-global}.
\section{Schema-augmented Semantic Parser}
\label{sec:base_model}
\noindent
\textbf{Problem Setup}
We are given a training set $\{(x^{(k)}, y^{(k)}, S^{(k)})\}_{k=1}^N$, where $x^{(k)}$ is a question, $y^{(k)}$ is its translation to a SQL query, and $S^{(k)}$ is the schema of the corresponding DB. We train a model to map question-schema pairs $(x,S)$ to the correct SQL query. Importantly, the schema $S$ was not seen at training time.
A DB schema $S$ includes : (a) A set of DB tables, (b) a set of columns for each table, and (c) a set of foreign key-primary key column pairs where each pair is a relation from a foreign-key in one table to a primary-key in another. Schema tables and columns are termed \emph{DB constants}, denoted by $\mathcal{V}$.
We now describe a recent semantic parser from \newcite{bogin2019gnn}, focusing on the components relevant for selecting DB constants.
\noindent
\textbf{Base Model}
The base parser is a standard top-down semantic parser with grammar-based decoding \cite{xiao2016sequence,yin2017syntactic,krishnamurthy2017neural,rabinovich2017abstract,lin2019grammar}. The input question $(x_1, \dots, x_{|x|})$ is encoded with a BiLSTM, where the hidden states $\bm{e}_i$ of the BiLSTM are used as contextualized representations for the word $x_i$. The output query $y$ is decoded top-down with another LSTM using a SQL grammar, where at each time step a grammar rule is decoded. Our main focus is decoding of DB constants, and we will elaborate on this part.
The parser decodes a DB constant whenever the previous step decoded the non-terminals \texttt{Table} or \texttt{Column}. To select the DB constant, it first computes an attention distribution over the question words $\{\alpha_i\}_{i=1}^{|x|}$ in the standard manner \cite{bahdanau2015neural}. Then the score for a DB constant $v$ is $s_v = \sum_{i} \alpha_i s_\text{link}(v, x_i)$, where $s_\text{link}$ is a local similarity score, computed from learned embeddings of the word and DB constant, and a few manually-crafted features, such as the edit distance between the two inputs and the fraction of string overlap between them. The output distribution of the decoder is simply $\text{softmax}(\{s_v\}_{v \in \mathcal{V}})$. Importantly, the dependence between decoding decisions for DB constants is weak -- the similarity function is independent for each constant and question word, and decisions are far apart in the decoding sequence, especially in a top-down parser.
\noindent
\textbf{DB schema encoding}
In the zero-shot setting, the schema structure of a new DB can affect the output query. To capture DB structure, \newcite{bogin2019gnn} learned a representation $\bm{h}_v$ for every DB constant, which the parser later used at decoding time. This was done by converting the DB schema into a graph, where nodes are DB constants, and edges connect tables and their columns, as well as primary and foreign keys (Figure~\ref{fig:highlevel}, left). A graph convolutional network (GCN) then learned representations $\bm{h_v}$ for nodes end-to-end \cite{Cao2018QuestionAB,sorokin-gurevych-2018-modeling}.
To focus the GCN's capacity on important nodes, a \emph{relevance probability} $\rho_v$ was computed for every node, and used to ``gate" the input to the GCN, conditioned on the question. Specifically, given a learned embedding $\bm{r}_v$ for every database constant, the GCN input is $\bm{h}^{(0)}_v = \rho_v \cdot \bm{r}_v$. Then, the GCN recurrence is applied for $L$ steps. At each step, nodes re-compute their representation based on the representation of their neighbors, where different edge types are associated with different learned parameters \cite{li2016gated}.
The final representation of each DB constant is $\bm{h}_v = \bm{h}_v^{(L)}$.
Importantly, the relevance probability $\rho_v$, which can be viewed as a soft selection for whether the DB constant should appear in the output,
was computed based on local information only: First, a distribution $p_\text{link}(v \mid x_i) \propto \exp(s_\text{link}(v, x_i))$ was defined, and then $\rho_v = \max_i{p_\text{link}(v \mid x_i)}$ was computed deterministically. Thus, $\rho_v$ doesn't consider the full question or DB structure. We address this next.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{highlevel}
\caption{High-level overview, where our contributions are in thick orange boxes. First, a relevance score is predicted for each of the DB constants using the gating GCN. Then, a learned representation is computed for each DB constant using the encoder GCN, which is then used by the decoder to predict $K$ candidates queries. Finally, the re-ranking GCN scores each one of these candidates, basing its score only on the selected DB constants. The dashed line and arrow indicate no gradients are propagated from the re-ranking GCN to the decoder, as the decoder outputs SQL queries. Names of loss terms are written below models that are trained with a loss on their output.
}
\label{fig:highlevel}
\end{figure*}
\section{Global Reasoning over DB Structures}
\label{sec:model}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.32]{reranker}
\caption{The re-ranking GCN architecture (see text).}
\label{fig:reranker}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:highlevel} gives a high-level view of our model, where the contributions of this paper are marked by thick orange boxes.
First, the aforementioned relevance probabilities are estimated with a \emph{learned} gating GCN, allowing global structure to be taken into account. Second, the model discriminatively re-ranks the top-$K$ queries output by the generative decoder.
\noindent
\textbf{Global gating}
\newcite{bogin2019gnn} showed that an oracle relevance probability can increase model performance, but computed $\rho_v$ from local information only.
We propose to train a GCN to directly predict
$\rho_v$ from the global context of the question and DB.
The input to the gating GCN is the same graph described in \S\ref{sec:base_model}, except we add a new node $v_\text{global}$, connected to all other nodes with a special edge type.
To predict the question-conditioned relevance of a node, we need a representation for both the DB constant and the question. Thus, we define the input to the GCN at node $v$ to be $\bm{g}^{(0)}_v = FF([\bm{r}_v;\bar{\bm{h}}_v; \rho_v])$, where '$;$' is concatenation, $FF(\cdot)$ is a feed-forward network, and $\bm{\bar{h}_v} = \sum_i p_{\text{link}}(x_i \mid v) \cdot \bm{e}_i$ is a weighted average of contextual representations of question tokens.
The initial embedding of $v_\text{global}$ is randomly initialized. A relevance probability is computed per DB constant based on the final graph representation: $\rho_v^{\text{global}} = \sigma(FF(\bm{g}^{(L)}_v))$. This probability replaces $\rho_v$ at the input to the encoder GCN (Figure~\ref{fig:highlevel}).
Because we have the gold query $y$ for each question, we can extract the gold subset of DB constants $\mathcal{U}_y$, i.e., all DB constants that appear in $y$. We can now add a \emph{relevance loss} term $-\sum_{v \in \mathcal{U}_y} \log \rho_v^\text{global} - \sum_{v \notin \mathcal{U}_y} \log (1 - \rho_v^\text{global})$ to the objective. Thus, the parameters of the gating GCN are trained from the relevance loss and the usual \emph{decoding loss}, a ML objective over the gold sequence of decisions that output the query $y$.
\noindent
\textbf{Discriminative re-ranking}
Global gating provides a more accurate model for softly predicting the correct subset of DB constants. However, parsing is still auto-regressive and performed with a local similarity function. To overcome this, we separately train a discriminative model \cite{collins2005discriminative,Raymond:2006:DRS:1273073.1273107,lu-etal-2008-generative,fried-etal-2017-improving} to re-rank the top-$K$ queries in the decoder's output beam. The re-ranker scores each candidate tuple $(x, S, \hat{y})$, and thus can globally reason over the entire candidate query $\hat{y}$.
We focus the re-ranker capacity on the main pain point of zero-shot parsing -- the set of DB constants $\mathcal{U}_{\hat{y}}$ that appear in $\hat{y}$.
At a high-level (Figure~\ref{fig:reranker}), for each candidate we compute a logit
$s_{\hat{y}} = \bm{w}^\top FF(\bm{f}_{\mathcal{U}_{\hat{y}}}, \bm{e}^\text{align})$, where $\bm{w}$ is a learned parameter vector, $\bm{f}_{\mathcal{U}_{\hat{y}}}$ is a representation for the set $\mathcal{U}_{\hat{y}}$, and $\bm{e}^\text{align}$ is a representation for the global alignment between question words and DB constants. The re-ranker is trained to minimize the \emph{re-ranker loss}, the negative log probability of the correct query $y$. We now describe the computation of $\bm{f}_{\mathcal{U}_{\hat{y}}}$ and $\bm{e}^\text{align}$, based on a re-ranking GCN.
Unlike the gating GCN, the re-ranking GCN takes as input only the sub-graph induced by the selected DB constants $\mathcal{U}_{\hat{y}}$, and the global node $v_\text{global}$. The input is represented by $\bm{f}^{(0)}_v = FF(\bm{r}_v; \bar{\bm{h}}_v)$, and after L propagation steps we obtain $\bm{f}_{\mathcal{U}_{\hat{y}}} = \bm{f}^{(L)_{v_\text{global}}}$. Note that the global node representation is used to describe and score the question-conditioned sub-graph, unlike the gating GCN where the global node mostly created shorter paths between other graph nodes.
The representation $\bm{f}_{\mathcal{U}_{\hat{y}}}$ captures global properties of selected nodes but ignores nodes that were not selected and are possibly relevant. Thus, we compute a representation $\bm{e}^\text{align}$, which captures whether question words are aligned to selected DB constants. We define a representation for every node $v \in \mathcal{V}$:
\[
\bm{\varphi}_v =
\begin{cases}
\bm{f}_v^{(L)} & \text{ if } v \in \mathcal{U}_{\hat{y}} \\
\bm{r}_v & \text{otherwise}
\end{cases}
\]
Now, we compute for every question word $x_i$ a representation of the DB constants it aligns to: $\bm{l}^\varphi_i = \sum_{v \in \mathcal{V}} p_\text{link}(v \mid x_i) \cdot \bm{\varphi}_v $. We concatenate this representation to every word $\bm{e}_i^{\text{align}} = [\bm{e}_i; \bm{l}^\varphi_i]$, and compute the vector $\bm{e}^\text{align}$ using attention over the question words, where the attention score for every word is $\bm{e}_i^{\text{align}\top} \bm{w}_\text{att}$ for a learned vector $\bm{w}_\text{att}$. The goal of this term is to allow the model to recognize whether there are any attended words that are aligned with DB constants, but these DB constants were not selected in $\mathcal{U}_{\hat{y}}$.
In sum, our model adds a gating GCN trained to softly select relevant nodes for the encoder, and a re-ranking GCN that globally reasons over the subset of selected DB constants, and captures
whether the query properly covers question words.
\section{Experiments and Results}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
{\small
\begin{tabular}{|l l|}
\hline
Model & Accuracy \\ \hline
\textsc{SyntaxSQLNet} & 19.7\% \\
\textsc{GNN} & 39.4\% \\ \hline
\textsc{\textbf{Global-GNN}} & \textbf{47.4\%} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Test set accuracy of \textsc{Global-GNN} compared to prior work on \textsc{Spider}{}.}
\label{tab:results_test}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
{\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{|l l l l l|}
\hline
Model & Acc. & Beam & \textsc{Single} & \textsc{Multi} \\ \hline
\textsc{SyntaxSQLNet} & 18.9\% & & 23.1\% & 7.0\% \\
\textsc{GNN} & 40.7\% & & 52.2\% & 26.8\% \\
+ \textsc{Re-implementation} & 44.1\% & 62.2\% & 58.3\% & 27.6\% \\ \hline
\textsc{\textbf{Global-GNN}} & \textbf{52.1\%} & \textbf{65.9 \%} & \textbf{61.6}\% & \textbf{40.3}\% \\
- \textsc{No Global Gating} & 48.8\% & 62.2\% & 60.9\% & 33.8\% \\
- \textsc{No Re-ranking} & 48.3\% & \textbf{65.9\%} & 58.1\% & 36.8\% \\
- \textsc{No Relevance Loss} & 50.1\% & 64.8\% & 60.9\% & 36.6\% \\
\textsc{No Align Rep.} & 50.8\% & \textbf{65.9\%} & 60.7\% & 38.3\% \\
\textsc{Query Re-ranker} & 47.8\% & \textbf{65.9\%} & 55.3\% & 38.3\% \\
\hline
\textsc{Oracle Relevance} & 56.4\% & 73.5\% & & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Development set accuracy for various experiments. The column `Beam' indicates the fraction of examples where the gold query is in the beam ($K=10$).}
\label{tab:results}
\end{table}
\noindent
\textbf{Experimental setup}
We train and evaluate on
\textsc{Spider}{} \cite{yu2018spider}, which contains 7,000/1,034/2,147 train/development/test examples, using the same pre-processing as \citet{bogin2019gnn}. To train the re-ranker, we take $K=40$ candidates from the beam output of the decoder. At each training step, if the gold query is in the beam, we calculate the loss on the gold query and 10 randomly selected negative candidates. At test time, we re-rank the best $K=10$ candidates in the beam, and break re-ranking ties using the auto-regressive decoder scores (ties happen since the re-ranker considers the DB constants only and not the entire query).
We use the official \textsc{Spider}{} script for evaluation, which tests for loose exact match of queries.
\noindent
\textbf{Results}
As shown in Table \ref{tab:results_test}, the accuracy of our proposed model (\textsc{Global-GNN}) on the hidden test set is 47.4\%, 8\% higher than current state-of-the art of 39.4\%. Table \ref{tab:results} shows accuracy results on the development set for different experiments. We perform minor modifications to the implementation of \newcite{bogin2019gnn}, improving the accuracy from 40.7\% to 44.1\% (details in appendix \ref{app:reimpl}). We follow \newcite{bogin2019gnn}, measuring accuracy on easier examples where queries use a single table (\textsc{Single}) and those using more than one table (\textsc{Multi}).
\textsc{Global-GNN} obtains 52.1\% accuracy on the development set, substantially higher than all previous scores. Importantly, the performance increase comes mostly from queries that require more than one table, which are usually more complex.
Removing any of our two main contributions (\textsc{No Global Gating}, \textsc{No Re-ranking}) leads to a 4\% drop in performance. Training without the relevance loss (\textsc{No Relevance Loss}) results in a 2\% accuracy degrade. Omitting the representation $e^{\text{align}}$ from the re-ranker (\textsc{No Align Rep.}) reduces performance, showing the importance of identifying unaligned question words.
We also consider a model that ranks the entire query and not only the set of DB constants.
We re-define $s_{\hat{y}} = \bm{w}^\top FF(\bm{f}_{\mathcal{U}_{\hat{y}}}, \bm{h}^\text{align}, \bm{h}^\text{query})$, where $\bm{h}^\text{query}$
is a concatenation of the last and first hidden states of a BiLSTM run over the output SQL query (\textsc{Query Re-ranker}).
We see performance is lower, and most introduced errors are minor mistakes such as \texttt{min} instead of \texttt{max}. This shows that our re-ranker excels at choosing DB constants, while the decoder is better at determining the SQL query structure and the SQL logical constants.
Finally, we compute two oracle scores to estimate future headroom. Assuming a perfect global gating, which gives probability $1.0$ iff the DB constant is in the gold query, increases accuracy to 63.2\%. Adding to that a perfect re-ranker leads to an accuracy of 73.5\%.
\noindent
\textbf{Qualitative analysis}
Analyzing the development set, we find two main re-occurring patterns, where the baseline model is wrong, but our parser is correct. (a) \emph{coverage}: when relevant question words are not covered by the query, which results in a missing joining of tables or selection of columns (b) \emph{precision}: when unrelated tables are joined to the query due to high lexical similarity. Selected examples are in Appendix \ref{app:examples}.
\noindent
\textbf{Error analysis} In 44.4\% of errors where the correct query was in the beam, the selection of $\mathcal{U}$ was correct but the query was wrong. Most of these errors are caused by minor local errors, e.g., \texttt{min}/\texttt{max} errors, while the rest are due to larger structural mistakes, indicating that a global model that jointly selects both DB constants and SQL tokens might further improve performance. Other types of errors include missing or extra columns and tables, especially in complex queries.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we demonstrate the importance of global decision-making for zero-shot semantic parsing, where
selecting the relevant set of DB constants is challenging.
We present two main technical contributions. First, we use a gating GCN that globally attends the input question and the entire DB schema to softly-select the relevant DB constants. Second, we re-rank the output of a generative semantic parser by globally scoring the set of selected DB-constants. Importantly, these contributions can be applied to any zero-shot semantic parser with minimal modifications. Empirically, we observe a substantial improvement over the state-of-the-art on the \textsc{Spider}{} dataset, showing the effectiveness of both contributions.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This research was partially supported by The
Yandex Initiative for Machine Learning. This work was completed in partial fulfillment for the Ph.D degree of the first author.
\section{Re-implementation}
\label{app:reimpl}
We perform a simple modification to \newcite{bogin2019gnn}. We add \emph{cell values} to the graph, in a similar fashion to \newcite{krishnamurthy2017neural}. Specifically, we extract the cells of the first 5000 rows of all tables in the schema, during the pre-processing phase. We then consider every cell $q$ of a column $c$, which has a partial match with any of the question words $(x_1, \dots, x_{|x|})$. We then add nodes representing these cells to all of the model's graphs, with extra edges $(c, q)$ and $(q, c)$.
\section{Selected examples}
\label{app:examples}
Selected examples are given in Table~\ref{tab:examples}.
\begin{table*}[!t]
\centering
\footnotesize
\begin{tabular}{L{1.3cm}p{2.8cm}L{3cm}L{7.1cm}}
\toprule
{\bf Category} & {\bf Question} & {\bf Schema} & {\bf Predicted Queries}\\
\midrule
Coverage & Show the name of the teacher for the math course. &
\textbf{course}: course\_id, staring\_date, course \newline
\textbf{teacher}: teacher\_id, name, age, hometown \newline
\textbf{course\_arrange}: course\_id, teacher\_id, grade &
\textbf{Baseline: } \texttt{SELECT teacher.name FROM teacher WHERE teacher.name = 'math'} \newline
\textbf{Our Model: } \texttt{SELECT teacher.name FROM teacher JOIN course\_arrange ON teacher.teacher\_id = course\_arrange.teacher\_id JOIN course ON course\_arrange.course\_id = course.course\_id WHERE course.course = 'math'}
\\\midrule
Coverage & Who is the first student to register? List the first name, middle name and last name. &
\textbf{students}: student\_id, current\_address\_id, first\_name, middle\_name, last\_name, ... \newline
\textbf{student\_enrolment}: student\_enrolment\_id, degree\_program\_id, ... \newline
...&
\textbf{Baseline: } \texttt{SELECT students.first\_name, students.middle\_name, students.last\_name FROM students} \newline
\textbf{Our Model: } \texttt{SELECT students.first\_name, students.middle\_name, students.last\_name FROM students ORDER BY students.date\_first\_registered LIMIT 1}
\\\midrule
Coverage & List all singer names in concerts in year 2014. &
\textbf{singer}: singer\_id, name, country, song\_name, song\_release\_year, ... \newline
\textbf{concert}: concert\_id, concert\_name, year, ... \newline
\textbf{singer\_in\_concert}: concert\_id, singer\_id \newline ... &
\textbf{Baseline: } \texttt{SELECT singer.name FROM singer WHERE singer.song\_release\_year = 2014} \newline
\textbf{Our Model: } \texttt{SELECT singer.name FROM singer JOIN singer\_in\_concert ON singer.singer\_id = singer\_in\_concert.singer\_id JOIN concert ON singer\_in\_concert.concert\_id = concert.concert\_id WHERE concert.year = 2014}
\\\midrule
Precision & What are the makers and models? &
\textbf{car\_makers}: id, maker, fullname, country \newline
\textbf{model\_list}: modelid, maker, model \newline ... &
\textbf{Baseline: } \texttt{SELECT car\_makers.maker, model\_list.model FROM car\_makers JOIN model\_list ON car\_makers.id = model\_list.maker} \newline
\textbf{Our Model: } \texttt{SELECT model\_list.maker, model\_list.model FROM model\_list}
\\\midrule
Precision & Return the id of the document with the fewest paragraphs. &
\textbf{documents}: document\_id, document\_name, document\_description, ... \newline
\textbf{paragraphs}: paragraph\_id, document\_id, paragraph\_text, ... \newline
...&
\textbf{Baseline: } \texttt{SELECT documents.document\_id FROM documents JOIN paragraphs ON documents.document\_id = paragraphs.document\_id GROUP BY documents.document\_id ORDER BY COUNT(*) LIMIT 1} \newline
\textbf{Our Model: } \texttt{SELECT paragraphs.document\_id FROM paragraphs GROUP BY paragraphs.document\_id ORDER BY COUNT(*) ASC LIMIT 1}
\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Selected correct examples where the baseline model is wrong, but our parser is correct.}
\label{tab:examples}
\end{table*}
|
\section{Introduction\label{sec:Introduction}}
The periodic driving enriches topological \cite{sorensen05,Oka2009,Kitagawa2010,Galitski2011NP,Rudner2013,Nathan15NJP,Budich17PRL,Eckardt17RMP,Weinberg17PR,Weitenberb19NatPhys,Unal19PRL}
and many body \cite{eckardt05,zenesini09,Eckardt2010,neupert11,regnault11,Struck11NP,wu12,Lewenstein2012,Chin2013NP,Struck:2013,bergholtz13,parameswaran13,Greschner14,Anisimovas15PRB,Nagerl2016,Esslinger17PRA,Eckardt17RMP,Chin18PRL,Sacha18RMP}
properties of physical systems. This can be used to generate the artificial
gauge fields for ultracold atoms \cite{kolovsky11,struck12,Hauke:2012,Ketterle:2013,Aidelsburger:2013,Anderson2013,Xu2013,atala14,Goldman2014RPP,Flaschner16,Luo16Sci_Rep,Shteynas19PRL,Galitski19PT}
and photonic systems \cite{Haldane:2008cc,Rechtsman:2013fe,Mukherjee17Ncommun,Rechtsman18PRL,Cardano16NPhoton,Ozawa19RMP},
as well as to alter the topological properties of condensed matter
systems \cite{Oka2009,Galitski2011NP,Kitagawa2011,Galitski13PRB,tong13majorana,grushin14,usaj14,quelle15,Gavensky18PRB}.
In many cases the periodic driving changes in time, which applies {\it inter alia}
to experiments on ultracold atoms where the periodic driving is often slowly
ramped up \cite{Esslinger17PRA}. In such a situation the
evolution of the system can be described in terms of a slowly changing
effective Floquet Hamiltonian and a fast oscillating micromotion operator
\cite{Novicenko2017}. In particular, this is the case if the time
periodic Hamiltonian is a product of a slowly changing operator
$\hat{V}\left(\boldsymbol{\lambda}\left(t\right)\right)$ and a fast
oscillating function $f\left(\omega t\right)=f\left(\omega t+2\pi\right)$
with a zero average, where the vector $\boldsymbol{\lambda}\left(t\right)$
represents a set of slowly changing parameters \cite{Novicenko2017,Novicenko19PRA}.
If the operator $\hat{V}\left(\boldsymbol{\lambda}\left(t\right)\right)$
does not commute with itself at different times,
the effective evolution of the periodically driven system can be accompanied
by non-Abelian (non-commuting) geometric phases after the vector $\boldsymbol{\lambda}\left(t\right)$
undergoes a cyclic change and returns to its original value \cite{Novicenko2017,Novicenko19PRA,Bigelow19Arxiv}.
Here we study a way to generate non-Abelian geometric potentials when
the incident parameter $\boldsymbol{\lambda}\left(t\right)$ is replaced
by a radius vector of a particle $\mathbf{r}=x\mathbf{e}_x+y\mathbf{e}_y+z\mathbf{e}_z$ representing a dynamical
variable, and a kinetic energy operator is added. If the operator
$\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$ featured in the periodic coupling
term $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)f\left(\omega t\right)$ does
not commute with itself at different positions, $\left[\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right),\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}^{\prime}\right)\right]\ne0$,
the adiabatic evolution of the system within a Floquet band can be
accompanied by a non-Abelian (non-commuting) geometric vector potential
providing a three-dimensional (3D) spin-orbit coupling (SOC). The
2D and 3D SOC can be also generated optically by using degenerate
eigenstates of the atom-light coupling operator known as dressed states
\cite{Ruseckas2005,Stanescu2007,Jacob2007,Juzeliunas2008PRA,Stanescu2008,Campbell2011,Anderson2012PRL,Huang16NP,Meng16PRL,Spielman19_2D_SOC}.
This requires a considerable amount of efforts \cite{Campbell2011,Huang16NP,Meng16PRL,Spielman19_2D_SOC}.
Furthermore the formation of the SOC is accompanied by unwanted heating due to the radiative decay of atoms in the dressed states.
The present approach does not rely on the degenerate atom-light dressed
states. Instead, employment of the time-periodic interaction of the form $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)f\left(\omega t\right)$
provides degenerate Floquet states \cite{Novicenko19PRA}.
The spatial and temporal dependence of these states yields the non-Abelian vector potential and thus the 3D SOC.
The general formalism is illustrated by analyzing the motion of an atom
in a spatially inhomogeneous magnetic field oscillating in time.
We study a cylindrically symmetric magnetic field and analyze the
coupling between the atomic spin $\mathbf{F}$ and the orbital angular momentum (OAM) $\mathbf{L}$ for such
a system. In particular, the monopole-type magnetic field generates
the 3D SOC of the $\mathbf{L}\cdot\mathbf{F}$ form involving the
coupling between the atomic spin $\mathbf{F}$ and OAM.
We shown that the strength
of the $\mathbf{L}\cdot\mathbf{F}$ SOC is long ranged and goes as
$1/r^{2}$ for larger distances, rather than as $1/r^3$, as experienced by an electron
in a Coulomb potential via the fine-structure interaction \cite{Landau:1987}.
For such larger
distances exceeding a characteristic SOC range $r_0$, the SOC contribution reduces to $-\mathbf{L}^{2}/2mr^{2}$ and thus it cancels the centrifugal term featured in the kinetic energy operator.
Therefore the SOC significantly affects all atomic states. In the case of the (quasi)spin $1/2$ atom, the SOC makes
the atomic states nearly degenerate with respect to the orbital quantum number $l$ for a fixed total angular momentum
quantum number $j=l\pm1/2$
and a fixed radial quantum number $n_{r}$.
Furthermore, for a harmonic trap the ground state with $j=1/2$ and $l=0$ has a slightly lower energy
than the one with $j=1/2$ and $l=1$. The situation can be changed
by adding an extra anti-trapping potential for small $r$. In that
case the ground state of the system acquires a non-zero orbital quantum
number $l=1$ and thus is affected by the SOC. This is a consequence
of the periodic driving; normally the ground state of a spherically
symmetric SOC system corresponds to $l=0$.
The paper is organized as follows. The general formalism is presented in the subsequent Sec.~\ref{sec:Formulation}.
We define a periodically driven system and apply a unitary transformation
eliminating the time-oscillating part of the original Hamiltonian.
The evolution of the transformed state vector is then governed by
a new Hamiltonian $W\left(\omega t\right)$ containing a vector potential type contribution $\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$ which gives the spin-dependent
momentum shift and provides the SOC in the effective Floquet Hamiltonian. We also
present a general analysis of the vector potential and discuss ramping
of the periodic diving. In Sec.~\ref{sec:Spin-in-oscillating}, as a specific example, we
study the spin in an oscillating magnetic field. We present an explicit
expression for the time-periodic vector potential, and consider the
coupling between the spin and OAM for a cylindrically symmetric
magnetic field. In Sec.~\ref{sec:Monopole-field} we analyze the
SOC for the spherically symmetric monopole magnetic field. Section~\ref{sec:Adiabatic-conditions-and-Implementation}
considers the adiabatic condition and discusses possible experimental
implementations. Section~\ref{sec:Concluding-remarks} presents concluding
remarks.
Details of some technical calculations are contained in two Appendices~\ref{sec:Appendix-A} and ~\ref{sec:A^2-term}.
In particular, in Appendix~\ref{sec:Appendix-A} we present a way of producing the interaction of an atom with an effective magnetic field violating the Maxwell equations,
including the monopole magnetic field \cite{Pu18PRL}.
\section{Periodically driven system with a modulated driving\label{sec:Formulation}}
\subsection{Hamiltonian and equations of motion}
Let us consider the center of mass motion of a quantum particle such
as an ultracold atom. The particle is subjected to a periodic driving
described by the operator $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)f\left(\omega t\right)$
which is a product of a position-dependent Hermitian operator $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$
and a time-periodic function $f\left(\omega t+2\pi\right)=f\left(\omega t\right)$
with a zero average ${\intop_{-\pi}^{\pi}f\left(\omega t\right)dt=0}$.
A hat over the operator $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$ indicates
that it depends on the internal degrees of freedom of the
particle. The state-dependent operator $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$
generally does not commute with itself at different positions $\left[\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right),\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}^{\prime}\right)\right]\ne0$.
Including the kinetic energy, the system is described by the time-periodic
Hamiltonian $\hat{H}\left(\omega t\right)=\hat{H}\left(\omega t+2\pi\right)$
given by:
\begin{equation}
\hat{H}\left(\omega t\right)=\frac{\mathbf{p}^{2}}{2m}+\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)f\left(\omega t\right)+V_{\mathrm{ex}}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\,,\label{eq:H_full}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{p}=-i\hbar\boldsymbol{\nabla}$
is the momentum operator, $m$ is the mass of the particle, and we
have also added an extra potential $V_{\mathrm{ex}}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$
to confine the particle in a trap. The external potential is considered
to be state-independent, so that $\left[V_{\mathrm{ex}}\left(\mathbf{r}\right),V_{\mathrm{ex}}\left(\mathbf{r}^{\prime}\right)\right] = 0$.
The system is described by a state-vector $\left|\phi\left(t\right)\right\rangle $
obeying the time-dependent Schr\"{o}dinger equation (TDSE):
\begin{equation}
i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\left|\phi\left(t\right)\right\rangle =\hat{H}\left(\omega t\right)\left|\phi\left(t\right)\right\rangle \,.\label{eq:Schroed-time-dep-H}
\end{equation}
An example of such a system is an atom in a spatially inhomogeneous
magnetic field $\mathbf{B}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)f\left(\omega t\right)$
with a fast oscillating amplitude ${\propto f\left(\omega t\right)}$
and a slowly changing magnitude or direction of the amplitude $\mathbf{B}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$.
In that case the position-dependent part of the operator $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)f\left(\omega t\right)$
is given by
\begin{equation}
\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)=g_{F}\hat{\mathbf{F}}\cdot\mathbf{B}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\,,\label{eq:V-spin}
\end{equation}
where $g_{F}$ is a gyromagnetic factor, and $\hat{\mathbf{F}}=\hat{F}_{1}\mathbf{e}_{x}+\hat{F}_{2}\mathbf{e}_{y}+\hat{F}_{3}\mathbf{e}_{z}$
is the spin operator with the Cartesian components obeying the commutation
relations $\left[\hat{F}_{s},\hat{F}_{q}\right]=i\hbar\epsilon_{squ}\hat{F}_{u}$.
Here $\epsilon_{squ}$ is a Levi-Civita symbol, and the summation
over a repeated Cartesian index $u=x,y,z$ is implied. The operator
$\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$ does not commute with itself at
different positions $\left[\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right),\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}^{\prime}\right)\right]\ne0$
if $\mathbf{B}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$ and $\mathbf{B}\left(\mathbf{r}^{\prime}\right)$
are oriented along different axes. This leads to the SOC for the spin in the spatially non-uniform magnetic field oscillating in time, to be studied in the subsequent Secs.~\ref{sec:Spin-in-oscillating}--\ref{sec:Adiabatic-conditions-and-Implementation}.
\subsection{Transformed representation }
To have a significant SOC, we consider a situation where the matrix
elements of the periodic driving $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)f\left(\omega t\right)$
are not necessarily small compared to the driving energy $\hbar\omega$.
In that case one cannot apply the high frequency expansion \cite{Goldman2014,Eckardt2015,Novicenko2017}
of an effective Floquet Hamiltonian in the original representation.
To by-pass the problem, we go to a new representation via a unitary
transformation eliminating the operator $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)f\left(\omega t\right)$:
\begin{equation}
\hat{R}=\hat{R}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)=\exp\left[-i\frac{\mathcal{F}\left(\omega t\right)}{\hbar\omega}\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\right]\,,\label{eq:R-Definition}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{F}\left(\theta\right)$ is a primitive function of
$f\left(\theta\right)=d\mathcal{F}\left(\theta\right)/d\theta$
with a zero average ($\intop_{-\pi}^{\pi}\mathcal{F}\left(\theta^{\prime}\right)d\theta^{\prime}=0$)
and a calligraphy letter $\mathcal{F}$ is used to avoid a confusion
with the spin operator $\mathbf{F}$ featured in Eq.~(\ref{eq:V-spin}).
Since $\mathcal{F}\left(\omega t\right)=\mathcal{F}\left(\omega t+2\pi\right)$,
the transformation $\hat{R}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)=\hat{R}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t+2\pi\right)$
has the same periodicity as the original Hamiltonian $\hat{H}\left(\omega t\right)=\hat{H}\left(\omega t+2\pi\right)$.
The transformed state-vector
\begin{equation}
\left|\psi\left(t\right)\right\rangle =\hat{R}^{\dagger}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)\left|\phi\left(t\right)\right\rangle \,\label{eq:|chi_theta>}
\end{equation}
obeys the TDSE
\begin{equation}
i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\left|\psi\left(t\right)\right\rangle =\hat{W}\left(\omega t\right)\left|\psi\left(t\right)\right\rangle \,\label{eq:Schroed-time-dep-K_R}
\end{equation}
governed by the Hamiltonian
\begin{equation}
\hat{W}\left(\omega t\right)=\frac{1}{2m}\left[\mathbf{p}-\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)\right]^{2}+V_{\mathrm{ex}}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\,,\label{eq:W-definition}
\end{equation}
where a time-periodic vector potential type operator
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)=i\hbar\hat{R}^{\dagger}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)\boldsymbol{\nabla}\hat{R}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)\,\label{eq:A-definition}
\end{equation}
is added to the momentum operator $\mathbf{p}$ due to the position-dependence
of the unitary transformation $\hat{R}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$.
On the other hand, the transformation $\hat{R}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$
does not affect the state-independent trapping potential $V_{\mathrm{ex}}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$.
The transformed Hamiltonian $\hat{W}\left(\omega t\right)$ no longer
contains the time-periodic term $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)f\left(\omega t\right)$.
The periodic driving is now represented by the operator $\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)=\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t+2\pi\right)$
featured in the transformed Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:W-definition}).
This leads to the SOC to be studied in the next Subsection.
In this way the properly chosen transformation $\hat{R}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$ eliminates the interaction operator $V(r)f(\omega t)$ in the original Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:H_full}). The position-dependence of $\hat{R}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$ yields the spin-dependent momentum shift $\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:W-definition}), so the SOC appears directly from the unitary transformation.
\subsection{Floquet adiabatic approach\label{subsec:Floquet-adiabatic-approach}}
The transformed Hamiltonian $\hat{W}\left(\omega t\right)=\hat{W}\left(\omega t+2\pi\right)$
can be expanded in the Fourier components:
\begin{equation}
\hat{W}\left(\omega t\right)=\sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}W^{\left(n\right)}e^{in\omega t},\label{eq:W-periodic-expansion}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\hat{W}^{\left(n\right)}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\intop_{-\pi}^{\pi}\hat{W}\left(\theta\right)e^{-in\theta}d\theta.
\label{eq:fourier_comp}
\end{equation}
In what follows the driving energy $\hbar\omega$ is assumed to be
much larger than the matrix elements of the Fourier components of
the transformed Hamiltonian $\hat{W}^{\left(n\right)}$,
\begin{equation}
\hbar\omega\gg\left|\hat{W}_{\alpha\beta}^{\left(n\right)}\right|\,,\label{eq:adiabatic_condition}
\end{equation}
where the superscript $\left(n\right)$ refers to the
$n$-th Fourier component. The condition (\ref{eq:adiabatic_condition}) allows one to consider the adiabatic
evolution of the system in a selected Floquet band by neglecting the non-zeroth
(with $n \neq 0$) Fourier components $\hat{W}^{\left(n\right)}$ of the
transformed Hamiltonian $\hat{W}\left(\omega t\right)$. Thus one
replaces the exact evolution governed by the time-dependent transformed
Hamiltonian $\hat{W}\left(\omega t\right)$ by the approximate one
governed by the time-independent effective Floquet Hamiltonian $\hat{W}_{\mathrm{eff}(0)}=\hat{W}^{\left(0\right)}$
equal to the zeroth Fourier component:
\begin{equation}
i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\left|\psi^{\left(0\right)}\left(t\right)\right\rangle =\hat{W}^{\left(0\right)}\left|\psi^{\left(0\right)}\left(t\right)\right\rangle \,,\label{eq:Schroed-time-dep-K_R-adiabatic}
\end{equation}
where $\left|\psi^{\left(0\right)}\left(t\right)\right\rangle $ is
the corresponding approximate state vector representing the slowly
changing part of the exact state-vector $\left|\psi\left(t\right)\right\rangle $.
The slowly changing state-vector $\left|\psi^{\left(0\right)}\left(t\right)\right\rangle $
deviates little from the exact time-evolution of the state vector
$\left|\psi\left(t\right)\right\rangle $ if the adiabatic condition
(\ref{eq:adiabatic_condition}) holds.
The effective Floquet Hamiltonian corresponding to the transformed
Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:W-definition}) reads
\begin{equation}
\hat{W}^{\left(0\right)}=\frac{\mathbf{p}^{2}}{2m}+\hat{W}_{\mathrm{SOC}}+\hat{V}_{\mathrm{total}}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\,,\label{eq:W^0-definition}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\hat{V}_{\mathrm{total}}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)=\frac{1}{2m}\left\langle \left[\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)\right]^{2}\right\rangle +V_{\mathrm{ex}}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\label{eq:V_total}
\end{equation}
is the total scalar potential and
\begin{equation}
\hat{W}_{\mathrm{SOC}}=-\frac{1}{2m}\left[\mathbf{\hat{A}}^{\left(0\right)}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\cdot\mathbf{p}+\mathbf{p}\cdot\mathbf{\hat{A}}^{\left(0\right)}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\right]\label{eq:W_SOC}
\end{equation}
describes the SOC emerging via the zeroth Fourier component of the
oscillating vector potential: $\mathbf{\hat{A}}^{\left(0\right)}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)=\left\langle \mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)\right\rangle =\frac{1}{2\pi}\intop_{-\pi}^{\pi}\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\theta\right)d\theta$.
Here the brackets $\left\langle \ldots\right\rangle $ signify the
zero-frequency component (the time average) of an oscillating operator.
In this way, the effective Hamiltonian $\hat{W}^{\left(0\right)}$
is determined by the time averages of the oscillating vector potential
$\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$ and its square.
The vector potential $\mathbf{\hat{A}}^{\left(0\right)}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$ generally contains three non-commuting Cartesian components
leading to the 3D SOC.
Note that the Floquet adiabatic approach applied here corresponds to the zero
order of the high frequency expansion \cite{Goldman2014,Eckardt2015,Bukov2015,Novicenko19PRA}
of the effective Floquet Hamiltonian $W_{\mathrm{eff}}=\hat{W}^{\left(0\right)}+O\left(1/\omega\right)$.
The present perturbation analysis relies on the condition (\ref{eq:adiabatic_condition})
involving the Fourier components of the time-periodic operator $\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)=\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t+2\pi\right)$
given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:A-definition}). The operator $\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$
emerges via the $\mathbf{r}$-dependence of the ratio $\frac{\mathcal{F}\left(\omega t\right)}{\hbar\omega}\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$
featured in the exponent of the unitary transformation $\hat{R}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$.
Therefore the operator $\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$
is determined by the the spatial
changes of the ratio $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)/\omega$, and
the Floquet adiabatic condition (\ref{eq:adiabatic_condition}) requires
the smallness of the spatial changes of the operator $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$
rather than on the smallness of the operator $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$
itself with respect to the driving frequency $\omega$.
The condition
(\ref{eq:adiabatic_condition}) can hold even if the matrix elements
of the periodic driving $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)f\left(\omega t\right)$
are not small compared to the driving energy $\hbar\omega$. In such a situation the high frequency expansion of the effective Hamiltonian \cite{Goldman2014,Eckardt2015,Bukov2015,Novicenko19PRA} is not applicable
in the original representation where the evolution is given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:Schroed-time-dep-H}). Yet it is applicable in the transformed representation corresponding to the equation of motion~(\ref{eq:Schroed-time-dep-K_R}). Therefore the present approach allows
one to realize the SOC which is much larger than the one relying
on the perturbation treatment in the original representation, as it was done in a very recent study~\cite{Cheng19arXiv}. The adiabatic condition (\ref{eq:adiabatic_condition}) will be analyzed
in more details for a spin in an oscillating magnetic field in Sec.
\ref{subsec:Adiabatic-condition}.
Returning to the original representation, the adiabatic evolution
of the state vector is given by
\begin{equation}
\left|\phi\left(t\right)\right\rangle \equiv\left|\phi\left(\omega t,t\right)\right\rangle \approx \hat{R}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)\left|\psi^{\left(0\right)}\left(t\right)\right\rangle \,.\label{eq:phi_inverse transformation}
\end{equation}
Since $\hat{R}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)=\hat{R}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t+2\pi\right)$,
the original state-vector $\left|\phi\left(\omega t,t\right)\right\rangle =\left|\phi\left(\omega t+2\pi,t\right)\right\rangle $
is $2\pi$ periodic with respect to the first variable. Therefore
$\hat{R}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$ describes the fast micromotion
of the original state vector $\left|\phi\left(\omega t,t\right)\right\rangle $.
Additionally the state-vector $\left|\phi\left(\omega t,t\right)\right\rangle $
changes slowly with respect to the second variable due to the slow
changes of the transformed state-vector $\left|\psi^{\left(0\right)}\left(t\right)\right\rangle $.
\subsection{Equation for $\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$
and its expansion\label{sec:Analysis-of operator A}}
To obtain an equation for the vector potential ${\mathbf{\hat{A}}=\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)}$,
let us treat it as a function of the coordinate $\mathbf{r}$ and
a parameter $c=c\left(\omega t\right) \equiv \mathcal{F}\left(\omega t\right)/\hbar\omega$.
Differentiating $\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)=\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r};c\right)$
with respect to $c$ for fixed $\mathbf{r}$, and using Eqs.~(\ref{eq:R-Definition})
and (\ref{eq:A-definition}), one arrives at the following differential equation
for the Cartesian components $\hat{A}_{u}$ of the vector potential
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial\hat{A}_{u}}{\partial c}=\hbar\frac{\partial\hat{V}}{\partial u}+i\left[\hat{V},\hat{A}_{u}\right]\,\quad(u=x,y,z)\,,\label{eq:A-dif equation}
\end{equation}
subject to the initial condition
\begin{equation}
\hat{A}_{u}=0\,\quad\mathrm{for}\quad c=0\,.\label{eq:A-initial condition}
\end{equation}
A solution to Eq.~(\ref{eq:A-dif equation}) can be expanded in the
powers of $c\propto1/\omega$, giving
\begin{align}
\hat{\mathbf{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right) & =\frac{\mathcal{F}\left(\omega t\right)}{\omega}\boldsymbol{\nabla}\hat{V}+i\frac{\mathcal{F}^{2}\left(\omega t\right)}{2!\hbar\omega^{2}}\left[\hat{V},\boldsymbol{\nabla}\hat{V}\right]\nonumber \\
& +i^{2}\frac{\mathcal{F}^{3}\left(\omega t\right)}{3!\hbar^{2}\omega^{3}}\left[\hat{V},\left[\hat{V},\boldsymbol{\nabla}\hat{V}\right]\right]+\cdots\,.\label{eq:A-expansion-general}
\end{align}
If for any $\mathbf{r}$ and $\mathbf{r}^\prime$ the commutator $\left[\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right),\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}^{\prime}\right)\right]=0$, then
only the first term remains in the expansion (\ref{eq:A-expansion-general}):
\begin{equation}
\hat{\mathbf{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)=\frac{\mathcal{F}\left(\omega t\right)}{\omega}\boldsymbol{\nabla}\hat{V}\,,\label{eq:A-Abelian}
\end{equation}
giving $\left\langle \mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)\right\rangle =\mathbf{\hat{A}}^{\left(0\right)}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)=0$.
In that case no SOC is generated, and the time average $\left\langle \left[\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)\right]^{2}\right\rangle $
provides an extra trapping potential in Eq.~(\ref{eq:V_total}).
In particular, this applies to a state-independent potential $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)=V\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$
for which the time-periodic Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:H_full}) describes
the Kapitza problem \cite{Bukov2015}.
Here we go beyond the situation where $\left[\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right),\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}^{\prime}\right)\right]=0$,
so the commutators are non-zero in the expansion (\ref{eq:A-expansion-general}).
As a result, the vector potential $\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$
has a non-zero average $\mathbf{\hat{A}}^{\left(0\right)}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\ne0$
providing the SOC which acts in all three dimensions. Such a 3D SOC
can be realized for a spinful atom in an inhomogeneous magnetic field
oscillating in time, to be considered in Section \ref{sec:Spin-in-oscillating}.
In that case the vector potential $\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$
is obtained exactly in Eq.~(\ref{eq:A-spin-solution-general}) which is valid for
an arbitrary driving frequency, not necessarily small compared to
the strength of the periodic driving. Thus the solution (\ref{eq:A-spin-solution-general})
effectively takes into account all the terms in the expansion of $\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$ given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:A-expansion-general}).
\subsection{Ramping of the periodic perturbation\label{subsec:Ramping-of-the}}
Up to now the operator $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$ defining
the periodic driving in the Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:H_full}) was considered
to be time-independent, so the driving was strictly periodic in time. The analysis
can be extended to a situation where the operator $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$
has an extra slow temporal dependence \cite{Novicenko2017,Novicenko19PRA,Bigelow19Arxiv}.
This can describe ramping of the periodic perturbation. It is quite
common to have no periodic driving at an initial time $t=t_{\mathrm{in}}$
and ramp up the driving slowly afterwards over the time much large
than the driving period $T=2\pi/\omega$. This can be described by
a slowly changing factor $\alpha\left(t\right)$ multiplying $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$:
\begin{equation}
\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r},\alpha\left(t\right)\right)=\alpha\left(t\right)\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\,,\label{eq:V(r,alpha)}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha\left(t\right)$ changes smoothly from $\alpha\left(t\right)=0$
at the initial time $t=t_{\mathrm{in}}$ to $\alpha\left(t\right)=1$
at the final stage of the ramping. In particular, Eq.~(\ref{eq:V(r,alpha)})
with $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$ given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:V-spin})
describes a spin in an oscillating magnetic field with a
slowly ramped amplitude $\mathbf{B}(\mathbf{r},\alpha\left(t\right))=\alpha\left(t\right)\mathbf{B}(\mathbf{r})$.
The slow temporal dependence of $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r},\alpha\left(t\right)\right)$
featured in the unitary transformation $\hat{R}$ provides an additional
term $\hat{W}_{\mathrm{add}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t,t\right)$ to the
transformed Hamiltonian $\hat{W}\left(\omega t,t\right)$ \cite{Novicenko19PRA}:
\begin{equation}
\hat{W}_{\mathrm{add}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t,t\right)=-i\hbar\dot{\alpha}\hat{R}^{\dagger}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t,\alpha\right)\frac{\partial\hat{R}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t,\alpha\right)}{\partial\alpha}.
\label{eq:W_add}
\end{equation}
The operator $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r},\alpha\left(t\right)\right)$
commutes with itself at different times, $\left[\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r},\alpha\left(t\right)\right),\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r},\alpha\left(t^{\prime}\right)\right)\right]=0$,
giving
\begin{equation}
\hat{W}_{\mathrm{add}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t,t\right)=-\frac{\mathcal{F}\left(\omega t\right)\dot{\alpha}}{\omega}\frac{\partial \hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r},\alpha\right)}{\partial\alpha}.
\label{eq:Wadd}
\end{equation}
Since $\left\langle \mathcal{F}\left(\omega t\right)\right\rangle =0$,
the extra term $\hat{W}_{\mathrm{add}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t,t\right)$
averages to zero and thus has no zero Fourier component $\hat{W}_{\mathrm{add}}^{\left(0\right)}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t,t\right)=0$.
In this way, the ramping of the periodic driving described by Eq.~(\ref{eq:V(r,alpha)})
does not provide an extra contribution to the effective Hamiltonian
and thus does not affect the effective dynamics of the system.
\section{Spin in time-oscillating magnetic field\label{sec:Spin-in-oscillating}}
\subsection{Vector potential}
The general formalism is illustrated by considering motion of a spinful
atom in a time-oscillating magnetic field with the interaction operator
$\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$ given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:V-spin}).
In that case the operator $\mathbf{\hat{A}}=\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$
can be derived exactly for an arbitrary strength of the magnetic field.
Specifically, by solving Eq.~(\ref{eq:A-dif equation}) one arrives
at the following Cartesian components of the vector potential $\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$:
\begin{align}
\hat{A}_{u}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right) & =a\mathcal{F}\frac{\left(\mathbf{B}\cdot\partial\mathbf{B}/\partial u\right)\left(\mathbf{B}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}\right)}{B^{3}}\nonumber \\
+ & \sin\left(a\mathcal{F}\right)\frac{\left[\left(\mathbf{B}\times\partial\mathbf{B}/\partial u\right)\times\mathbf{B}\right]\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}}{B^{3}}\nonumber \\
+ & \left[\cos\left(a\mathcal{F}\right)-1\right]\frac{\left(\mathbf{B}\times\partial\mathbf{B}/\partial u\right)\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}}{B^{2}}\,,\label{eq:A-spin-solution-general}
\end{align}
where
\begin{equation}
a=\frac{Bg_{F}}{\omega}\,,\label{eq:a}
\end{equation}
defines the frequency of the magnetic interaction in the units of
the driving frequency. Here we keep implicit the time dependence of
the oscillating function $\mathcal{F}=\mathcal{F}\left(\omega t\right)$,
as well as the $\mathbf{r}$-dependence of $\mathbf{B}=\mathbf{B}(\mathbf{r})$
and $a=a(\mathbf{r})$. The derivation of Eq.~(\ref{eq:A-spin-solution-general})
is analogous to the one presented in the Appendix of Ref.~\cite{Novicenko19PRA}
subject to replacement of the time-derivatives $\partial V/\partial t$
and $\partial\mathbf{B}/\partial t$ by the space-derivatives $-\partial V/\partial u$
and $-\partial\mathbf{B}/\partial u$, respectively.
\subsection{Time averaged vector potential and SOC term\label{subsec:Time-averaged-vector-potential}}
To simplify the subsequent analysis, we assume the original Hamiltonian
(\ref{eq:H_full}) to have a time reversal symmetry. This is the case
if the function $f\left(\omega t\right)$ describing the periodic
driving is even: $f\left(\omega t\right)=f\left(-\omega t\right)$
(subject to a proper choice of the origin of time). Consequently the
function $\mathcal{F}\left(\omega t\right)=\omega\int_{0}^{t}f\left(\omega t^{\prime}\right)dt^{\prime}$
featured in the vector potential $\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)$
is an odd function: $\mathcal{F}\left(\omega t\right)=-\mathcal{F}\left(-\omega t\right)$.
In particular, this holds for a harmonic driving with
\begin{equation}
f\left(\omega t\right)=\cos\left(\omega t\right)\,\quad\,\mathrm{and}\quad\mathcal{F}\left(\omega t\right)=\sin\left(\omega t\right).\label{eq:f-harmonic}
\end{equation}
For $\mathcal{F}\left(\omega t\right)=-\mathcal{F}\left(-\omega t\right)$
the first two lines of Eq.~(\ref{eq:A-spin-solution-general}) are
odd functions of time and thus average to zero, giving
\begin{equation}
\hat{A}_{u}^{\left(0\right)}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)=\frac{\left\langle \cos\left(a\mathcal{F}\right)\right\rangle-1}{B^{2}}\left(\mathbf{B}\times\partial\mathbf{B}/\partial u\right)\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}\,.\label{eq:A^(0)-spin-solution-general}
\end{equation}
Note that for the harmonic driving (\ref{eq:f-harmonic}), the time
average $\left\langle \cos\left(a\mathcal{F}\right)\right\rangle $
is given by the Bessel functions of the first kind:
\begin{equation}
\left\langle \cos\left(a\mathcal{F}\right)\right\rangle =\mathcal{J}_{0}\left(a\right)\,,\quad\mathrm{with}\quad\mathcal{J}_{0}\left(a\right)=\frac{1}{2\pi}\intop_{-\pi}^{\pi}e^{ia\sin\theta}d\theta\,.\label{eq:average-Bessel}
\end{equation}
Substituting Eq.~(\ref{eq:A^(0)-spin-solution-general}) into (\ref{eq:W_SOC}),
the SOC term takes the form
\begin{align}
&\hat{W}_{\mathrm{SOC}} = \nonumber \\
&\frac{1}{2m} \left[\frac{1-\left\langle \cos\left(a\mathcal{F}\right)\right\rangle }{B^{2}}\mathbf{Z}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}+\mathbf{Z}^\dagger\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}\frac{1-\left\langle \cos\left(a\mathcal{F}\right)\right\rangle }{B^{2}}\right]\label{eq:W_SOC-spin} \,,
\end{align}
where
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{Z}=\mathbf{B}\times\sum_{u=x,y,z}\frac{\partial \mathbf{B}}{\partial u}p_{u}\label{eq:Z-general} \,,
\end{equation}
is an orbital operator, which makes it clear that Eq.~(\ref{eq:W_SOC-spin}) represents SOC.
In addition to the SOC term $\hat{W}_{\mathrm{SOC}}$, the effective Hamiltonian
(\ref{eq:W^0-definition}) contains also the $\left\langle \left[\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)\right]^{2}\right\rangle $
term which is featured in scalar potential $V_{\mathrm{total}}\left(r\right)$ given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:V_total}).
This contribution is analyzed in Appendix \ref{sec:A^2-term} for
specific configurations of the magnetic field.
The form of the SOC term in Eq.~(\ref{eq:W_SOC-spin}) is valid for an arbitrary magnetic configuration. However, to give a concrete example and to make the physics more clear, in the next Subsection we consider a cylindrically symmetric magnetic field given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:B-linear}). Subsequently in Sec.~\ref{sec:Monopole-field} we analyze an important particular situation where the magnetic field takes the form of a monopole, in which case we can take advantage of the spherical symmetry of the system and simplify the calculations. In the Appendix~\ref{sec:Appendix-A} we present details on how to generate various effective magnetic fields with a non-zero divergence field including the cylindrically symmetric magnetic field (\ref{eq:B-linear}) and the effective monopole field (\ref{eq:B-monopole}).
\subsection{Cylindrical magnetic field\label{subsec:Linear-magnetic-field}}
\subsubsection{Magnetic field\label{subsec:Magnetic-field}}
Let us consider the magnetic field $\mathbf{B}=\mathbf{B}(\mathbf{r})$
which changes linearly in space and has a cylindric symmetry:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{B}(\mathbf{r})=\alpha_{\bot}\left(x\mathbf{e}_{x}+y\mathbf{e}_{y}\right)+\alpha_{z}z\mathbf{e}_{z}\,,\label{eq:B-linear}
\end{equation}
where the ratio between $\alpha_{z}$ and $\alpha_{\bot}$ is considered
to be arbitrary. By taking $\alpha_{z}=-2\alpha_{\bot}$, Eq.~(\ref{eq:B-linear})
describes a quadrupole magnetic field \cite{Suchet_2016}. On the
other hand, for $\alpha_{z}\ne-2\alpha_{\bot}$ the cylindrically
symmetric magnetic field has a non-zero divergence and thus does not
obey the Maxwell equation $\boldsymbol{\nabla} \cdot \mathbf{B}(\mathbf{r})=0$.
In particular, this is the case for a spherically symmetric monopole
field corresponding to $\alpha_{z}=\alpha_{\bot}=\alpha$ and considered in Sec.~\ref{sec:Monopole-field}.
\subsubsection{SOC operator \label{subsec:SOC-operator}}
The operator $\mathbf{Z}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}$ entering
Eq.~(\ref{eq:W_SOC-spin}) for the SOC operator
$\hat{W}_{\mathrm{SOC}}$ reads for the cylindrically symmetric magnetic field (\ref{eq:B-linear})
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{Z}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}=\mathbf{Z}^\dagger\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}=\alpha_{\bot}^{2}L_{z}\hat{F}_{z}+\alpha_{\bot}\alpha_{z}\left(L_{x}\hat{F}_{x}+L_{y}\hat{F}_{y}\right)\,,\label{eq:Z.F}
\end{equation}
where $L_{x}$, $L_{y}$ and $L_{z}$ are the Cartesian components
of the OAM operator $\mathbf{L}=\mathbf{r}\times\mathbf{p}$. Note that the function $\left(1-\left\langle \cos\left(a\mathcal{F}\right)\right\rangle \right)/B^{2}$ featured in Eq.~(\ref{eq:W_SOC-spin}) is cylindrically symmetric and thus preserves the $z$-projection of the OAM for the magnetic field (\ref{eq:B-linear}).
The term $L_{z}\hat{F}_{z}$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z.F}) provides the
spin-dependent shift to eigenenergies of the OAM operator $L_{z}$.
On the other hand, the term $L_{x}\hat{F}_{x}+L_{y}\hat{F}_{y}=L_{+}\hat{F}_{-}+L_{-}\hat{F}_{+}$
represents transitions between different spin and OAM projection states
described by the raising / lowering operators $L_{\pm}=L_{x}\pm i L_{y}$
and $\hat{F}_{\pm}=\hat{F}_{x}\pm i \hat{F}_{y}$. Therefore
the present SOC has some similarities to the coupling between the
spin and OAM induced by Raman laser beams carrying optical vortices
\cite{Marzlin97PRL,Ruostekoski04PRL,Nandi04PRA,Juzeliunas2004,Juzeliunas2005,Bigelow08PRA,Bigelow09PRL,Pu15PRA,Qu15PRA,Lin18PRL-a,Lin18PRL-b,Zhang19PRL}.
Yet, unlike the Raman case now the coupling between the spin and OAM
is described by all three OAM projections $L_{x}$, $L_{y}$ and $L_{z}$
as long as $\alpha_{\bot}\ne0$ and $\alpha_{z}\ne0$, so the coupling
is truly three dimensional. In particular for a monopole magnetic
field where $\alpha_{\bot}=\alpha_{z}=\alpha$, Eqs.~(\ref{eq:W_SOC-spin})
and (\ref{eq:Z.F}) yield
a spherically symmetric coupling between the spin and OAM $\propto \mathbf{L}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}$ presented by Eq.~(\ref{eq:W_SOC-Monopole}) below.
\section{Monopole field\label{sec:Monopole-field}}
\subsection{Effective Hamiltonian for monopole field\label{subsec:Effective-Hamiltonian-for}}
For $\alpha_{z}=\alpha_{\bot}=\alpha$, Eq.~(\ref{eq:B-linear}) reduces
to the centrally symmetric monopole-like magnetic field
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{B}=\alpha\mathbf{r}=\frac{2\omega}{r_{0}g_{F}}\mathbf{r}\,,\label{eq:B-monopole}
\end{equation}
where $r_{0}=2\omega/\alpha g_{F}$ defines the radius $r=r_{0}$
at which a characteristic frequency of the magnetic interaction $g_{F}B/2=\omega r/r_{0}$
becomes equal to the driving frequency $\omega$. In such a situation, the operator $\mathbf{Z}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}= \alpha^2 \mathbf{L}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}$
commutes with the spherically
symmetric magnetic field $B=\alpha r$, so ordering of operators is not important in the SOC term (\ref{eq:W_SOC-spin}), giving
\begin{equation}
\hat{W}_{\mathrm{SOC}}=\hbar\omega_{\mathrm{SOC}}\left(r\right)\frac{\mathbf{L}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}}{\hbar^{2}}\,,\label{eq:W_SOC-Monopole}
\end{equation}
where the frequency
\begin{equation}
\omega_{\mathrm{SOC}}\left(r\right)=\frac{\hbar}{m}\frac{1-\left\langle \cos\left(2r\mathcal{F}/r_{0}\right)\right\rangle }{r^{2}}\,\label{eq:omega_SOC-Explicit}
\end{equation}
characterizes the SOC strength. On the other hand, the term $\left\langle \left[\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)\right]^{2}\right\rangle $
featured in the total scalar potential $V_{\mathrm{total}}\left(r\right)$ is
given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:A^2-spin-solution-Monopole-vector-result-averaged})
in Appendix \ref{sec:A^2-term}. Combining Eqs.~(\ref{eq:W^0-definition}),
(\ref{eq:V_total}), (\ref{eq:W_SOC-Monopole}), (\ref{eq:omega_SOC-Explicit})
and (\ref{eq:A^2-spin-solution-Monopole-vector-result-averaged}),
the effective Hamiltonian takes the form
\begin{align}
\hat{W}^{\left(0\right)}=& \frac{p^{2}}{2m}+\hbar\omega_{\mathrm{SOC}}\left(r\right)\left[\frac{\mathbf{L}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}}{\hbar^{2}}+\frac{r^{2}\mathbf{F}^{2}-\left(\mathbf{r}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}\right)^{2}}{\hbar^{2}r^{2}}\right] \nonumber \\
&+\frac{2}{mr_{0}^{2}}\left\langle \mathcal{F}^{2}\right\rangle \frac{\left(\mathbf{r}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}\right)^{2}}{r^{2}}+V_{\mathrm{ex}}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\,,
\label{eq:W^0-result-general}
\end{align}
where the spin-dependent operator $\left(\mathbf{r}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}\right)^{2}$ emerges from the $\left\langle \left[\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)\right]^{2}\right\rangle $ term entering the total scalar potential (\ref{eq:V_total}). Generally the operator $\left(\mathbf{r}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}\right)^{2}$
does not commute with $\mathbf{L}^{2}$, and thus mixes the states
with different orbital quantum numbers $l$. Specifically, the term $\left(\mathbf{r}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}\right)^{2}$ can provide coupling between orbit and spin or even spin tensor involving the radius vector $\mathbf{r}$ rather than the momentum operator, as in ref. \cite{Zhang17PRL}. However, no such extra SOC appears for the spin-$1/2$ atom to be considered next.
\subsection{Spin-$1/2$\label{subsec:Spin 1/2}}
\subsubsection{Effective Hamiltonian}
Let us now consider the effective Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:W^0-result-general})
for a spin-$1/2$ atom for which
\begin{equation}
\hat{\mathbf{F}}=\frac{\hbar}{2}\hat{\boldsymbol{\sigma}}\,,\label{eq:F spin 1/2}
\end{equation}
where $\hat{\boldsymbol{\sigma}}=\hat{\sigma}_{x}\mathbf{e}_{x}+\hat{\sigma}_{y}\mathbf{e}_{y}+\hat{\sigma}_{z}\mathbf{e}_{z}$
and $\hat{\sigma}_{x,y,z}$ are the Pauli matrices. In that case the
operator $\left(\mathbf{r}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}\right)^{2}=\hbar^{2}r^{2}/4$
is spin-independent and spherically symmetric, making $\mathbf{L}^{2}$
a conserving quantity. Using $2\mathbf{L}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{F}}=\hat{\mathbf{J}}^{2}-\mathbf{L}^{2}-\mathbf{F}^{2}$,
the effective Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:W^0-result-general}) takes the
form
\begin{equation}
\hat{W}^{\left(0\right)}=\frac{p^{2}}{2m}+\hbar\omega_{\mathrm{SOC}}\left(r\right)\left(\frac{\hat{\mathbf{J}}^{2}-\mathbf{L}^{2}}{2\hbar^{2}}+\frac{1}{8}\right)+V_{\mathrm{ex}}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\,,\label{eq:W^0-result_spin_1/2}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\hat{\mathbf{J}}=\mathbf{L}+\hat{\mathbf{F}}\,\label{eq:J-definition}
\end{equation}
is the total angular momentum, and a uniform energy shift $\hbar^{2}\left\langle \mathcal{F}^{2}\right\rangle /2mr_{0}^{2}$
has been omitted in Eq.~(\ref{eq:W^0-result_spin_1/2}).
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{SOC}
\caption{\label{fig:SOC_plot} The radial dependence of the SOC energy $\omega_{\mathrm{SOC}}\left(r\right)$ given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:omega_SOC-Explicit}) for the sinusoidal driving
(\ref{eq:f-harmonic}) for which $\left\langle \cos\left(2r\mathcal{F}/r_{0}\right)\right\rangle =\mathcal{J}_{0}\left(2r/r_{0}\right)$.
The distance is measured in the units of $r_{0}$ and the frequency
is measured in the units of the SOC frequency $\omega_{0}=\omega_{\mathrm{SOC}}(0)$ given
by Eq.~(\ref{eq:omega_0}). }
\end{figure}
As one can see in Fig.~\ref{fig:SOC_plot}, the SOC frequency $\omega_{\mathrm{SOC}}\left(r\right)$
decreases with the radius $r$ and goes as $r^{-2}$ for distances
exceeding the SOC radius $r_{0}$:
\begin{equation}
\omega_{\mathrm{SOC}}\left(r\right)\approx\frac{\hbar}{mr^{2}}\,\quad\,\mathrm{for}\quad r\gg r_{0}\,.\label{eq:omega_SOC-Explicit-asymptotic}
\end{equation}
Such an asymptotic behavior of $\omega_{\mathrm{SOC}}\left(r\right)$
does not depend on the magnetic field strength, and is determined
exclusively by the ratio $\hbar/m$. The asymptotic Hamiltonian
\begin{equation}
\hat{W}^{\left(0\right)}=\frac{p^{2}}{2m}+\frac{1}{2mr^{2}}\left(\hat{\mathbf{J}}^{2}-\mathbf{L}^{2}+\frac{\hbar^{2}}{4}\right)+V_{\mathrm{ex}}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\,, \quad\left(r\gg r_{0}\right)\label{eq:W^0-result_spin_1/2-3}
\end{equation}
contains a contribution $\propto-\mathbf{L}^{2}$ which cancels the
centrifugal term featured in the kinetic energy operator
\begin{equation}
\frac{p^{2}}{2m}=-\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}\left[\frac{1}{r^{2}}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(r^{2}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\right)\right]+\frac{\mathbf{L}^{2}}{2mr^{2}}\,.\label{eq:E_kin}
\end{equation}
Thus, if the atomic eigenfunctions extend over distances exceeding
the radius $r_{0}$, the corresponding eigen-energies are determined
predominantly by the total angular momentum $\hat{\mathbf{J}}^{2}$ and
are nearly degenerate with respect to the orbital quantum number $l=j\mp1/2$
for fixed $j$ and fixed radial quantum number $n_{r}$, showing a
peculiar manifestation of the SOC. This is confirmed by numerical
calculations presented in Sec.\ref{subsec:Eigenstates-spin1/2} and
displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:E_j,l-harmonic-with-higher-levels}. The
long-range behavior of $\omega_{\mathrm{SOC}}\left(r\right)$ makes
the SOC effects significant not only for the lower atomic states, but also also for higher ones situated
further away from the center. Note that for an electron in a Coulomb
potential $\propto-1/r$ the SOC strength is shorter ranged and goes
as $\propto r^{-3}$ \cite{Landau:1987}, affecting mostly the lower
electronic states situated closer to $r=0$.
The SOC alone does not trap the atoms. Therefore an external trapping
potential $V_{\mathrm{ex}}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$ is needed to have
bound states, like in the case of the light induced geometric potentials
\cite{Juzeliunas2005,Juzeliunas2006}. The external potential can
be chosen freely. For example, one can take $V_{\mathrm{ex}}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$
to be a spherical harmonic trapping potential
\begin{equation}
V_{\mathrm{ex}}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)=\frac{m}{8}\eta^{2}\omega_{0}^{2}r^{2},\label{eq:V-ex-harmonic}
\end{equation}
where $\eta$ defines the trapping frequency $\omega_{\mathrm{ex}}=\eta\omega_{0}/2$
and $\omega_{0}=\omega_{\mathrm{SOC}}\left(0\right)$ is the SOC frequency
at zero distance. For the sinusoidal driving (\ref{eq:f-harmonic})
one has
\begin{equation}
\omega_{0}=\frac{\hbar}{mr_{0}^{2}}\,.\label{eq:omega_0}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Angular states\label{subsec:Eigenstates-spin1/2} }
In what follows we shall consider a spherically symmetric external potential $V_{\mathrm{ex}}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)=V_{\mathrm{ex}}\left(r\right)$. The Hamiltonian $\hat{W}^{\left(0\right)}$ given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:W^0-result_spin_1/2})
contains the commuting operators $\hat{\mathbf{J}}^{2}$ and $\mathbf{L}^{2}$
characterized by the eigenvalues $\hbar^{2}j\left(j+1\right)$ and
$\hbar^{2}l\left(l+1\right)$. The eigenstates $\left|j,l,f,m_{j}\right\rangle $
of $\hat{W}^{\left(0\right)}$ are thus described by the quantum numbers
$j$, $l$, $f$ and $m_{j}$, with $l-f\le j\le l+f$ and $f=1/2$.
The eigenstates $\left|j,l,f,m_{j}\right\rangle =\left|j,l,f,m_{j}\left(\theta,\phi\right)\right\rangle $
are degenerate with respect to projection of the total angular momentum
$-j\le m_{j}\le j$. They can be cast in terms of the angular momentum
states $Y_{l,m}\left(\theta,\phi\right)$ (the spherical harmonics)
and the spin states $\left|f,m_{f}\right\rangle $ with $f=1/2$:
\begin{align}
\left|j,l,f,m_{j}\left(\theta,\phi\right)\right\rangle =& \sum_{m_{l}=-l}^{l}\sum_{m_{f}=\pm\frac{1}{2}}Y_{l,m_{l}}\left(\theta,\phi\right)\left|f,m_{f}\right\rangle \nonumber \\
&\times \left\langle l,m_{l},f,m_{f}\right.\left|j,m_{j}\right\rangle \,,\label{eq:Angular states}
\end{align}
where $\theta$ and $\phi$ are the polar and azimuthal angles, $\left\langle l,m_{l},f,m_{f}\right.\left|j,m_{j}\right\rangle $
is the Clebsch--Gordan coefficient, and the summation is over the projections
of the spin and the orbital angular momentum with $m_{l}+m_{f}=m_{j}$.
\subsubsection{Radial eigen-equation}
The full eigenstate of the effective Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:W^0-result_spin_1/2})
contains also the radial part
\begin{equation}
\left|\psi_{n_{r},j,l,f}\left(r,\theta,\phi\right)\right\rangle =\left|j,l,f,m_{j}\left(\theta,\phi\right)\right\rangle \psi_{n_{r},j,l,f}\left(r\right)\,,\label{eq:Full-state-vector}
\end{equation}
where $n_{r}$ is a radial quantum number. Substituting
\begin{equation}
\psi_{n_{r},j,l,f,m_{j}}\left(r\right) \equiv \frac{\phi_{n_{r},j,l,f,m_{j}}\left(r\right)}{r}\,,\label{eq:Radial function substitution}
\end{equation}
one arrives at the eigenvalue equation for the scaled radial function
$\phi_{n_{r},j,l,f,m_{j}}\left(r\right)$
\begin{align}
&\left[-\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial r^{2}}+V_{j,l}\left(r\right)\right]\phi_{n_{r},j,l,f,m_{j}}\left(r\right)\nonumber \\
&=E_{n_{r},j,l}\phi_{n_{r},j,l,f,m_{j}}\left(r\right),
\label{eq:Eigenvalue equation radial-Substituted}
\end{align}
subject to the condition $\phi_{n_{r},j,l,f,m_{j}}\left(0\right)=0$,
where
\begin{align}
V_{j,l}\left(r\right)=&\frac{1}{2}\left[j\left(j+1\right)-l\left(l+1\right)+\frac{1}{4}\right]\hbar\omega_{\mathrm{SOC}}\left(r\right)\nonumber \\
&+\frac{\hbar^{2}l\left(l+1\right)}{2mr^{2}}+V_{\mathrm{ex}}\left(r\right),\label{eq:V-radial-explicit}
\end{align}
is the radial potential and $E_{n_{r},j,l}$ is an eigen-energy.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.99\columnwidth]{Harmonic_Legended}
\caption{\label{fig:E_j,l-harmonic-with-higher-levels} Dependence of eigen-energies $E_{n_{r},j,l}$ on $j$ for $l=j\mp1/2$ and up to five lowest radial
quantum numbers $n_{r}$. The harmonic trapping potential (\ref{eq:V-ex-harmonic})
is added. Panel~(a) corresponds to a softer trap with $\eta=0.5$; panel~(b) corresponds to a tighter trap with $\eta=2$.
The spectrum is calculated for the sinusoidal (\ref{eq:f-harmonic})
driving for which $\left\langle \cos\left(2r\mathcal{F}/r_{0}\right)\right\rangle =\mathcal{J}_{0}\left(2r/r_{0}\right)$.}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Analysis of eigen-energies\label{subsec:Analysis-of-eigenenergies}}
Figure \ref{fig:E_j,l-harmonic-with-higher-levels} displays the dependence
of the eigen-energies $E_{n_{r},j,l}$ on $j$ for $l=j\mp1/2$ and up
to five lowest radial quantum numbers $n_{r}$. The calculations are
carried out for the sinusoidal driving, Eq.~(\ref{eq:f-harmonic}),
and the harmonic trapping potential given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:V-ex-harmonic})
with $\eta=0.5$ and $\eta=2$. For a softer trap ($\eta=0.5$) and
$j\ge3/2$, there is an almost perfect degeneracy of the eigen-energies
$E_{n_{r},j,l}$ with the same $j$ and $n_{r}$ but different $l=j\mp$1/2.
For such a softer trap the atomic wave-functions extend to distances
$r\gg r_{0}$ in which $\omega_{\mathrm{SOC}}\left(r\right)\approx\hbar/mr^{2}$, corresponding to the strong driving regime ($g_{F}B/2\gg \omega$).
Consequently the $l$-dependent part of the SOC term cancels the centrifugal
term in Eq.~(\ref{eq:V-radial-explicit}), and the eigenstates depend
weakly on $l$.
For a tighter trap ($\eta=2$) the atom is localized
closer to the center leading to a larger difference in the eigen-energies
$E_{n_{r},j,l}$ with different $l=j\mp1/2$ but the same $j$ and
$n_{r}$.
It is noteworthy that an infinite set of degenerate eigenstates (3D
Landau levels \cite{Congjun-Wu13PRL}) is formed if a particle is
subjected to the SOC term $\pm\omega_{\mathrm{C}}\mathbf{L}\cdot\hat{\boldsymbol{\sigma}}$
with a constant frequency $\omega_{\mathrm{C}}$, and a 3D isotropic
harmonic trap is added with the frequency $\omega_{\mathrm{C}}$ \cite{Ui-Takeda84PTP,Bagchi2001,Congjun-Wu13PRL}.
The eigenstates with $j=l\mp1/2$ then have eigen-energies $\hbar\omega_{\mathrm{C}}\left(2n_{r}+1\mp1/2\right)$
which depend only on the principal quantum number $n_{r}$ and thus
are degenerate with respect to the $l$ and $j$. In the present study
the situation is different. The SOC frequency $\omega_{\mathrm{SOC}}\left(r\right)$
decreases with the radius and has a special asymptotic behavior at
large distances, $\omega_{\mathrm{SOC}}\left(r\right)\approx\hbar/mr^{2}$,
leading to pairs of close energy levels with $l=j\pm1/2$ for fixed
$j$, as discussed above.
For the sinusoidal driving, Eq.~(\ref{eq:f-harmonic}), the difference
in the radial potentials with $l=j\pm1/2$ for fixed $j$
\begin{align}
\Delta V_{j}\left(r\right)&=V_{j,l = j+1/2}\left(r\right)-V_{j,l=j-1/2}\left(r\right) \nonumber \\
&= \frac{\hbar\left(2j+1\right)\mathcal{J}_{0}(2r/r_{0})}{mr^{2}},
\label{eq:V-radial-difference}
\end{align}
is determined by the Bessel function $\mathcal{J}_{0}(2r/r_{0})$ which is positive
for distances $2r/r_{0}$ smaller than $2.4$. Consequently the ground
state with $j=1/2$ and $l=0$ has a slightly lower energy than the
one with $j=1/2$ and $l=1$, as one can see in Fig.~\ref{fig:E_j,l-harmonic-with-higher-levels}.
The situation can be reversed by adding an extra anti-trapping potential
for small $r$. Such a potential pushes the atomic probability distribution
to a region of larger distances, $2r/r_{0}>2.4$, where the Bessel function $\mathcal{J}_{0}(2r/r_{0})$
becomes negative and reaches the maximum negative value of $-0.36$
at $2r/r_{0}=3.83$. Figure \ref{fig:Energy levels with r_*neq 0}
shows the difference in the ground states energies $\Delta E=E_{j=\frac{1}{2},l=1}-E_{j=\frac{1}{2},l=0}$
for the external trapping potential $V_{\mathrm{ex}}\left(r\right)$
composed of a spherically symmetric harmonic potential with with $\eta=0.5$
(upper plot) or $\eta=2$ (lower plot), and an additional hard core
potential of a radius $r=r_{*}$ preventing the atom to be at distances
$r\le r_{*}$. For $\eta=0.5$ ($\eta=2$) the energy difference $\Delta E$
becomes negative at $r_{*}/r_{0}=0.14$ ($r_{*}/r_{0}=0.55$) and
reaches the maximum negative value of $\Delta E=-0.019\hbar\omega_{0}$
($\Delta E=-0.084\hbar\omega_{0}$) at $r_{*}/r_{0}=0.55$ ($r_{*}/r_{0}=0.97$).
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.99\columnwidth]{Delta_E_vs_r}
\caption{\label{fig:Energy levels with r_*neq 0} The energy difference $\Delta E=E_{j=\frac{1}{2},l=1}-E_{j=\frac{1}{2},l=0}$
vs. the radius $r_{*}$ of the additional hard core potential for
an atom in a harmonic trapping potential (\ref{eq:V-ex-harmonic})
with $\eta=0.5$ (panel~(a)) and $\eta=2$ (panel~(b)). The calculations
are done for the sinusoidal driving (\ref{eq:f-harmonic}) for which
$\left\langle \cos\left(2r\mathcal{F}/r_{0}\right)\right\rangle =\mathcal{J}_{0}\left(2r/r_{0}\right)$.}
\end{figure}
In this way, the ground state of the system can be the state with
$j=1/2$ and the orbital quantum number equal to $l=1$ rather than
$l=0$. For conventional spherically symmetric systems, such as the
hydrogen-like atoms, the ground state is always characterized by $l=0$
and thus is not affected by the SOC. The formation of the ground state
with $l=1$ is now facilitated by the time-periodic driving which
induces a longer-ranged SOC $\propto1/r^{2}$ and allows one to reverse
the sign of the potential difference $\Delta V_{j}\left(r\right)$
in Eq.~(\ref{eq:V-radial-difference}) due to the change of sign
in the Bessel function $\mathcal{J}_{0}\left(2r/r_{0}\right)$. Note
that the periodic driving can be also used to reverse the sign of the matrix
elements of tunneling of atoms in optical lattices \cite{Kenkre1986PRB,Arimondo07PRL,Arimondo2012,Struck11NP}.
By shaking the lattice sufficiently strongly, the Bessel function
renormalizes the tunneling matrix elements making them to change the
sign \cite{Arimondo07PRL,Arimondo2012,Struck11NP}.
\section{Adiabatic conditions and implementation\label{sec:Adiabatic-conditions-and-Implementation}}
\subsection{Adiabatic condition\label{subsec:Adiabatic-condition}}
The general adiabatic condition (\ref{eq:adiabatic_condition}) was
discussed in Sec.\ref{subsec:Floquet-adiabatic-approach}. Now we
will consider in more details the adiabatic condition for an atom
in the magnetic field. Using Eqs.~(\ref{eq:W-definition}), (\ref{eq:adiabatic_condition}), (\ref{eq:A-spin-vector-general-alternative-App})
and (\ref{eq:d_123-monopole-App}), one arrives at the adiabatic condition
for the atom in a centrally symmetric magnetic field
\begin{equation}
\omega\gg\omega_{0}\quad\mathrm{and}\quad\omega\gg \omega_{\mathrm{kin}} ,\label{eq:adiabatic_condition-Monopole-Specific}
\end{equation}
where $\omega_{0}=\hbar/mr_{0}^{2}$ is the SOC frequency and $\hbar\omega_{\mathrm{kin}}$
is the kinetic energy of the atomic motion. The first requirement
in Eq.~(\ref{eq:adiabatic_condition-Monopole-Specific}) is due to
the $\left[\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r},\omega t\right)\right]^{2}$ term in the transformed Hamiltonian $\hat{W}$, Eq.~(\ref{eq:W-definition}), the second one coming
from the mixed terms $\mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\cdot\mathbf{p}$ and $\mathbf{p} \cdot \mathbf{\hat{A}}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$.
A condition similar to Eq.~(\ref{eq:adiabatic_condition-Monopole-Specific})
can be obtained also for a more general cylindrically symmetric magnetic
field given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:B-linear}).
The adiabatic condition (\ref{eq:adiabatic_condition-Monopole-Specific})
does not rely on the smallness of the frequency of the magnetic interaction
$g_{F}B\left(r\right)/2=\omega r/r_{0}$ compared to the driving frequency
$\omega$, so we do not restrict ourselves to distances smaller than
the SOC radius $r_{0}$. We only require the SOC frequency $\omega_{0}$
and the atomic kinetic frequency $\omega_{\mathrm{kin}}$ to be much
smaller than the driving frequency $\omega$. Hence the present approach allows
one to study the SOC at distances exceeding the ones accessible via
the perturbative treatment in the original representation. Specifically, the SOC frequency
$\omega_{0}=\hbar/mr_{0}^{2}$ can now be considerably larger than the one accessible by means of the
original perturbation approach~\cite{Cheng19arXiv}
applicable if the radius of the atomic cloud is much smaller than the SOC radius $r_0$.
The frequency
of magnetic interaction $g_{F}B\left(r\right)/2=\omega r/r_{0}$ reaches
the driving frequency at $r=r_{0}$. Consequently one can keep $r_{0}$
fixed by simultaneously increasing both the magnetic field strength
and the driving frequency until the latter $\omega$ becomes sufficiently
large compared to the SOC frequency $\omega_{0}$ to fulfill the adiabatic
condition (\ref{eq:adiabatic_condition-Monopole-Specific}).
In many-body systems there can be additional losses due to atom-atom
interactions. The two-body losses have been studied recently for a
periodic driving of the form $\hbar k_{0}\sigma_{z}z\cos\left(\omega t\right)$
\cite{Ketterle19Floquet-heating}. For the driving energy $\hbar\omega$
exceeding both the kinetic energy and the the SOC energy $\hbar^{2}k_{0}^{2}/2m$,
the two-body heating rate was shown to increase as $\sqrt{\hbar\omega}$
due to an increase of the final density of states and the energy of
the quantum absorbed $\hbar\omega$ \cite{Ketterle19Floquet-heating}.
Yet the probability of such absorption events is proportional to $1/\sqrt{\hbar\omega}$
and thus goes to zero in the limit of an infinitely large driving
frequency. Thus the many-body heating can be minimized by increasing
the driving frequency and removing from the trap a handful of very
fast atoms which absorb the driving quantum $\hbar\omega$. This is
essentially the idea of evaporative cooling \cite{Metcalf1999}. If
$\hbar\omega$ exceeds the trap depth, then those few atoms absorbing
the quantum of $\hbar\omega$ are automatically ejected from the trap
which becomes shallow at large energies / large distances. Such a
trap can be produced optically by focusing a number of laser beams
within the atomic cloud. The many-body effects will be explored in
more details in a separate study.
\subsection{Implementation \label{subsec:Implementation}}
In analyzing the 3D SOC induced by the oscillating magnetic field
$\mathbf{B}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)f\left(\omega t\right)$ we used a cylindrically or spherically
symmetric magnetic fields with the amplitude $\mathbf{B}(\mathbf{r})$ given by Eqs.~(\ref{eq:B-linear}) or (\ref{eq:B-monopole}).
Such a magnetic field generally has a non-zero divergence and thus
does not obey the Maxwell equation.
Yet one can produce interaction between the atom and the magnetic field
characterized by an effective magnetic field with a non-zero divergence. In particular, one can generate
the spherically symmetric monopole field given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:B-monopole}). As explained in details in Appendix~\ref{sec:Appendix-A}, this can be done by taking the actual (real) magnetic field $\mathbf{B}\mathrm{_{real}}$ entering the original interaction operator $\hat{V}_{\mathrm{real}}\left(\mathbf{r},t\right)=g_{F}\hat{\mathbf{F}}\cdot\mathbf{B}_{\mathrm{\mathrm{real}}}\left(\mathbf{r},t\right)$
to contain a time-independent bias magnetic field $B_{0}\mathbf{e}_{z}$
and an extra spatially inhomogeneous magnetic field proportional to the time-periodic function $f(\omega t)$:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{B}\mathrm{_{real}}\left(\mathbf{r},t\right)=B_{0}\mathbf{e}_{z}+[\mathbf{B}_{1}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)+\mathbf{B}_{2}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\cos(\omega_{\mathrm{B}}t)]f(\omega t)\,\label{eq:B-orig-main-text}
\end{equation}
where the frequency $\omega_{\mathrm{B}}$ is considered to be in an exact resonance with magnetic level splitting induced by the bias field: $\omega_{\mathrm{B}} = g_F B_{0}$. Furthermore $\omega_{\mathrm{B}}$ is taken to be much larger than the frequency of the periodic driving: $\omega_{\mathrm{B}} \gg \omega$. Transforming the spin to the frame rotating at the frequency $\omega_{\mathrm{B}}$ via the unitary transformation $U$ given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:U}), one can then apply the rotating wave approximation (RWA) and neglect the fast oscillating terms $\propto \exp(\pm \mathrm{i}\omega_{\mathrm{B}}t)$ and $\propto \exp(\pm 2\mathrm{i}\omega_{\mathrm{B}}t)$
in the transformed interaction operator.
Consequently one arrives at the interaction of the spin with the time-periodic effective magnetic field $\mathbf{B}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)f(\omega t)$ characterized by the amplitude (see the Appendix~\ref{sec:Appendix-A} for more details)
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{B}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)=\frac{1}{2}B_{2x}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\mathbf{e}_{x}+\frac{1}{2}B_{2y}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\mathbf{e}_{y}+B_{1z}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)\mathbf{e}_{z}\,.\label{eq:B_eff-main text}
\end{equation}
In this way, one makes use of two unitary transformations. The transformation $U$ given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:U}) eliminates the fast spin precession around the bias magnetic field at the frequency $\omega_{\mathrm{B}}$. This provides an effective coupling of the atom with the effective magnetic field given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:B_eff-main text}). Subsequently one applies another unitary transformation $R$ given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:R-Definition}) which eliminates the interaction operator $g_{F}\hat{\mathbf{F}}\cdot\mathbf{B}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)f(\omega t)$. The position-dependence of the unitary operator $R=R\left(\mathbf{r},t\right)$ yields then the SOC due to the spin-dependent momentum shift in the kinetic energy term of Eq.(\ref{eq:W-definition}).
Using such an approach one can create various effective magnetic fields $\mathbf{B}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$ which do not necessarily obey the Maxwell equations. In particular, by taking $\mathbf{B}_{1}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$ and $\mathbf{B}_{2}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$ to be the quadrupole magnetic fields, one generates the cylindrically symmetric field or the spherically symmetric the monopole field given by Eqs.~(\ref{eq:B-linear}) and (\ref{eq:B-monopole}) respectively, see Appendix~\ref{sec:Appendix-A} and ref. \cite{Pu18PRL}.
The method works if the frequency of the magnetic level splitting
$\omega_{B}$ is much larger than the driving frequency
$\omega$. In the experiment \cite{Lin2011} with $^{87}\mathrm{Rb}$
atoms, the magnetic splitting frequency $\omega_{B}=2\pi\times4.81$MHz
far exceeds the recoil frequency $\omega_{\mathrm{rec}}$ which equals to
$2\pi\times 3.77\mathrm{kHz}$ for the $780\mathrm{nm}$ $5^{2}S_{1/2}\rightarrow5^{2}P_{3/2}$
optical transition. Note that the bias magnetic field induces also
the quadratic Zeeman shift (QZS) with a frequency equal approximately
to $6\omega_{rec}$ in the experiment \cite{Lin2011}. The unwanted
QZS can be reduced by decreasing the bias magnetic field. For example,
by reducing $\omega_{B}$ to $2\pi\times50$kHz, the QZS
decreases to $0.001\omega_{rec}$, which is in the range of the few
Hz and thus can be completely neglected.
On the other hand, QZS can be used to produce an effective quasi-spin
$1/2$ system for atoms characterized by larger spins \cite{Han15PRA,Shteynas19PRL}.
For this the oscillating magnetic field should be in resonance with
a selected pair of magnetic levels, and the QZS makes the coupling
with other spin states out of resonance. For example, the magnetic
field could resonantly couple the $m_{F}=-1$ and $m_{F}=0$ states
of the $F=1$ manifold of $^{87}\mathrm{Rb}$ or $^{23}\mathrm{Na}$
atoms \cite{Shteynas19PRL} representing the quasi-spin up and down
states, leaving the detuned $m_{F}=1$ state uncoupled, similar to
experiments on the Raman-induced SOC \cite{Lin2011}. To create the
quasi-spin $1/2$ system, the driving frequency $\omega$ should be
smaller than the frequency of the quadratic Zeeman shift $\omega_{q}$.
As mentioned above, $\omega_{q}$ equals to a few recoil frequencies
in the experiment \cite{Lin2011}. The QZS can be further increased
by increasing the bias magnetic field to reach the condition $\omega_{q}\gg\omega_{\mathrm{rec}}$,
so the driving frequency $\omega$ can be of the order of the recoil
frequency $\omega_{\mathrm{rec}}$ or a little above it. Therefore
the SOC frequency $\omega_{0}=\hbar/mr_{0}^{2}$ should then be smaller
than the recoil frequency to fulfill the adiabatic requirements (\ref{eq:adiabatic_condition-Monopole-Specific}).
For example, for $^{87}$Rb atoms, $\omega_{0}$ could be of the order
of a few tens to a few hundreds of Hz, which is comparable to
typical trapping frequencies. This provides the SOC radius $r_{0}$
of the order of a few optical wave-lengths. In this way, by taking
a width of an optical trap to be of the order of ten optical wave-lengths,
the SOC radius $r_{0}$ would be within the trapped atomic cloud,
and the atoms would experience a substantial SOC in the cloud.
\section{Concluding remarks\label{sec:Concluding-remarks}}
We have considered a method of creating the non-Abelian geometric
potential and thus the 3D SOC for the center-of-mass motion of the
particle subjected to periodic driving. The periodic perturbation
is a product of a position-dependent Hermitian operator $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$
and a fast oscillating periodic function $f\left(\omega t\right)$
with a zero average. To have a significant SOC, we have analyzed a
situation where the matrix elements of the periodic operator $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)f\left(\omega t\right)$
are not necessarily small compared to the driving energy $\hbar\omega$,
so that one cannot apply the high frequency expansion of the effective
Floquet Hamiltonian \cite{Goldman2014,Eckardt2015,Bukov2015,Novicenko2017}
in the original representation. To by-pass the problem, we have applied
a unitary transformation which eliminates the original periodic perturbation
and yields an oscillating vector potential term. The resulting periodic
perturbation is no longer proportional to the driving frequency $\omega$,
so the perturbation treatment is applicable to much stronger driving
(and thus over a larger range of distances) than in the original representation.
We have considered a situation where $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$
depends on internal (spin or quasi-spin) degrees of freedom of the
particle, and thus the operator $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$
does not necessarily commute with itself at different positions: $\left[\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right),\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}^{\prime}\right)\right]\ne0$.
Consequently the adiabatic evolution of the system within a Floquet
band is accompanied by a non-Abelian (non-commuting) geometric vector
potential providing the 3D SOC.
The periodic driving plays a vital role in our analysis. Without the periodic driving the interaction is given by a time-independent operator $V\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$, like in ref. \cite{Pu18PRL}. In that case the spin adiabatically follows the magnetic field and is fully polarized along local field direction \cite{Pu18PRL}. In the present situation, the interaction operator $V\left(\mathbf{r}\right)f(\omega t)$ contains also the periodic function $f(\omega t)$ with the zero average. Therefore the spin no longer adiabatically follows the magnetic field and thus is no longer polarized along the local magnetic field. Specifically, the operator $V(r)f(\omega t)$ provides fully degenerate Floquet bands \cite{Novicenko19PRA}. The position-dependence of these Floquet eigenstates yields the spin-dependent momentum shift and thus the spin-orbit coupling. Therefore the current situation is very different from the case of the time-independent interaction $V\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$ where the eigen-energies of $V\left(\mathbf{r}\right)$ are non-degenerate and thus the spin is polarized \cite{Pu18PRL}.
The general formalism has been illustrated by analyzing motion of a spinful atom in a magnetic field oscillating in time, subsequently concentrating on a spin-1/2 atom in a cylindrically symmetric magnetic field. This yields the SOC involving coupling between the spin and the orbital motion described by all three components of the OAM operator $\mathbf{L}$. In particular, the time-oscillating monopole-type magnetic
field $\mathbf{B}\propto\mathbf{r}$ generates the 3D SOC of the $\mathbf{L}\cdot\mathbf{F}$
form. The strength of this SOC goes as $1/r^{2}$ for larger distances,
rather than $1/r^{3}$, as for electrons in the Coulomb potential.
Such a long-ranged SOC significantly affects not only the lower
states of the trapped atom, but also the higher ones. In particular,
the states with $l=j\pm1/2$ are nearly degenerate with fix $j$ and
$n_{r}$ for an atom characterized by the (quasi-)spin $1/2$. In the presence of a harmonic external trapping potential, the
ground state with $j=1/2$ and $l=0$ has a slightly lower energy
than the one with $j=1/2$ and $l=1$. The situation can be reversed
by adding an extra anti-trapping potential for small $r$, which makes
the ground state of the system to be characterized by the orbital
quantum number $l=1$. The $l=1$ ground state is affected by the
SOC, which can lead to interesting many-body phases to be explored
elsewhere. If the atom possesses higher spin, more complicated SOC terms can be generated. In this situation, the spin-dependent scalar potential featured in Eq.~(\ref{eq:W^0-result-general}) for the effective Hamiltonian $\hat{W}^{\left(0\right)}$, can lead to an additional coupling between orbit and spin or spin tensor. We plan to address this topic in a future study.
Previously coupling between the spin and the linear momentum $\mathbf{p}$
was considered for ultracold atoms using time-periodic sequences of
magnetic pulses \cite{Anderson2013,Xu2013,Luo16Sci_Rep,Shteynas19PRL}.
To generate the 2D or 3D coupling between the spin and linear momentum
$\mathbf{p}$, the periodic driving involves rapid changes of the
magnetic field direction \cite{Anderson2013,Xu2013}. This would be
rather complicated to implement experimentally. It is much more straightforward
to generate a sizable coupling between the spin and the OAM using
the method considered here. For this one applies a simpler magnetic
field with properly designed spatial and temporal profiles rather
than the alternating magnetic pulses. Therefore the current scheme
is more realistic and can be implemented using experimental techniques
currently available.
The 2D and 3D SOC can be also generated optically by using a degeneracy
of eigenstates of the atom-light coupling operator \cite{Ruseckas2005,Stanescu2007,Jacob2007,Juzeliunas2008PRA,Stanescu2008,Campbell2011,Anderson2012PRL,Huang16NP,Meng16PRL,Spielman19_2D_SOC},
which involves a considerable amount of efforts \cite{Campbell2011,Huang16NP,Meng16PRL,Spielman19_2D_SOC}.
The present approach does not require such a degeneracy. Instead,
the periodic driving yields degenerate Floquet states for the time-periodic
interaction operator $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)f\left(\omega t\right)$
in a straightforward way \cite{Novicenko19PRA}.
The spatial and temporal
dependence of the operator $\hat{V}\left(\mathbf{r}\right)f\left(\omega t\right)$
provides the oscillating vector potential and hence the SOC.
The present
SOC has also some similarities to the coupling between the spin and
OAM induced by Raman laser beams carying optical vortices \cite{Marzlin97PRL,Ruostekoski04PRL,Nandi04PRA,Juzeliunas2004,Juzeliunas2005,Bigelow08PRA,Bigelow09PRL,Pu15PRA,Qu15PRA,Lin18PRL-a,Lin18PRL-b,Zhang19PRL}. Yet, unlike the Raman case, now the coupling between the spin and OAM is described by all three OAM projections $L_{x}$, $L_{y}$ and $L_{z}$, so the SOC is truly three dimensional. Furthermore, our current scheme does not involve laser fields, and hence does not suffer from Raman-induced heating.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We acknowledge helpful discussions with Arnoldas Deltuva, Julius Ruseckas
and Congjun Wu. This research has received funding from European Social
Fund (project No. 09.3.3--LMT--K--712--02--0065) under grant agreement with the Research Council of Lithuania (LMTLT). HP acknowledges support from the US NSF and the Welch Foundation (Grant No. C-1669).
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
\label{sec:intro}
\begin{comment}
(MENTION MORE HOSTS AND MAYBE A PLOT OF SENSITIVITIES TO BOTH THIS AND SAGAN; ALSO INCLUDE SPECTRO-INTERFEROMETRY)
\end{comment}
The Large Binocular Telescope (LBT), located on Mt. Graham, Arizona, USA, is a stepping stone to next-generation extremely large telescopes (ELTs). The LBT is equipped with two telescopes on a single mount, both of which have 8.4 m primary mirrors and adaptive secondary mirrors to remove wavefront aberrations induced by the atmosphere. Both telescopes can be used simultaneously as separate unit telescopes (as long as they stay within co-pointing limits), or they can be used together to perform aperture synthesis and thus obtain resolutions at baselines that reach from one primary mirror to the other. Interferometry with the LBT allows this facility to reach resolutions and sensitivities approaching those of the multisegmented ELTs of the future.\footnote{See Appendix \ref{sec:appendix_glossary} for a quick-reference of the various acronyms and other terms used in this article.}
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[trim={4cm, 1.5cm, 3.0cm, 1.0cm}, clip=True, width=0.23\linewidth]{images/aberr_opd.png}
\includegraphics[trim={4cm, 1.5cm, 3.0cm, 1.0cm}, clip=True, width=0.23\linewidth]{images/aberr_tip.png}
\includegraphics[trim={4cm, 1.5cm, 3.0cm, 1.0cm}, clip=True, width=0.23\linewidth]{images/aberr_tilt.png}
\includegraphics[trim={4cm, 1.5cm, 3.0cm, 1.0cm}, clip=True, width=0.23\linewidth]{images/aberr_perfect.png}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.6cm}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:aberr_exmaples}
Empirical full-aperture Fizeau illuminations on LMIRcam exhibiting differential aberrations. Left to right: differential OPD; differential tip; differential tilt; and a near-perfect illumination, though the optical path location within the coherence envelope is unknown. Greyscale is linear. Each side of the subplots is $\approx 3/4$ asec. }
\end{figure}
The first adaptive-optics-corrected interferometric fringes were obtained with the LBT in 2012 \cite{hinz2012first}. Since then, the Large Binocular Telescope Interferometer (LBTI) has performed most science interferometry in ``nulling'' mode as part of the HOSTS survey \cite{ertel2018hosts} to detect exozodiacal dust disks at sensitivities down to the order to tens of solar system zodiacal disks. A second interferometric mode, ``Fizeau'', involves beam overlap in the focal plane and paints out $(u,v)$-space out to the 22.7-m edge-to-edge mirror separation.
\begin{comment}
However, the nature of the modulation transfer function (MTF) in this mode means that it samples the $(u,v)$ plane no further than the baselines equivalent to one primary mirror aperture (IS THIS RIGHT??).
\end{comment}
In \cite{spalding2018towards} we described some of the remaining obstacles to commissioning the Fizeau mode. Firstly, the science and phase optical trains have a greater non-common-path configuration than in nulling mode, and greater care has to be taken to co-align each pair of beams. In nulling mode, the beam combination happens once, upstream of the phase and the NOMIC science camera. (Nulling is currently not possible with LMIRcam.) The phase-sensing camera is blind to the illumination pattern on the science detectors in both nulling and Fizeau mode, but in the Fizeau mode the problem is worse because the science and phase beam pairs have to interfere separately. (See Appendix \ref{sec:appendix_align} and illustrations in \cite{spalding2018towards}.)
The Fizeau-mode illumination on the science detector also has more degrees of freedom than in nulling mode. In nulling mode, the science detector illumination is (to first order) an Airy function. In Fizeau mode, the illumination exhibits fringes from the interference of the two beams on the detector itself. But even if the plane of the phase detector is at the center of the coherence envelope and the phase loop is closed, the illumination on the science detector can exhibit differential tip, tilt, or optical path difference (Fig.\ \ref{fig:aberr_exmaples} and Appendix \ref{sec:appendix_align}). If the plane of the science detector is indeed outside of the coherence envelope, no fringes will be visible, and the PSF converges to an Airy function of incoherently-overlapped beams.
\begin{comment}
As long as it is able to close the phase loop, it makes no difference whether the science data is being taken in nulling or Fizeau mode. The center of the coherence envelope would be sought by manually tuning the optical path difference (OPD) between both beams with internal mirrors until OPD-dependent changes in the illumination amplitude were visible. (This is a characteristic of pupil-plane overlap of the beams: amplitude changes are, in effect, a function of time, and not position in the focal plane.)
\end{comment}
To counteract the decoupling between the phase and science channels in Fizeau mode, we are developing a correction code that automates as much of the alignment process as possible, and uses the science detector illumination in realtime to provide corrective movements to internal mirrors and to setpoints of the phase-tracking proportional–-integral–-derivative (PID) control loop.
In this article, we briefly describe the currently-available Fizeau modes in Sec. \ref{sec:currently_available}, changes to the telescope and instrument in the past year in Sec. \ref{sec:expanding}, the alignment and correction software development in Sec. \ref{sec:corr_code}, and lessons learned from on-sky tests in Sec. \ref{sec:lessons}. We mention future steps and conclude in Sec. \ref{sec:future}.
\begin{comment}
\noindent
Hardware discussion: hysteresis, slop issues and how they should affect us \\
\noindent
(PIC: NULLING, PSF THERE; NULLING, PSF NOT THERE; FIZEAU, NO FRINGES; FIZEAU, WITH FRINGES)
\noindent
Revisiting the MTF: how do simulations with spider arms compare to the MTF we've actually seen?
\end{comment}
\section{Currently available Fizeau modes}
\label{sec:currently_available}
\noindent
The number of targets observed with LBTI's Fizeau mode remain very few in number. Table \ref{table:current_targets} shows the targets which have appeared in either conference proceedings articles or the peer-reviewed literature. All of those observations were made without active phase control, which requires very bright and point-like targets (see Table \ref{table:observing_reqs} and Fig.\ \ref{fig:PhaseCam_vis_limits}). There exist additional science Fizeau datasets, including one with partial phase control, which are currently undergoing reduction. Here we describe the currently-available Fizeau modes.
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\caption{LBTI Fizeau targets in the literature}
\label{table:current_targets}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\begin{tabular}{| c | c | c | l | c |}
\hline
\textit{Target} & \textit{Mode} & \textit{Wavelength} & \textit{Remarks} & \textit{Ref} \\
\hline
CH Cyg + calib & Fizeau-Airy & 4 $\mu$m & \begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}}Test target; decrease in fringe\\visibility appears in CH Cyg\\because of stellar outflows.\end{tabular} & \cite{hinz2012first,hill2013large} \\
\hline
Trapezium asterism & Fizeau-Airy & 4 $\mu$m &\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}}Test target; demonstration of\\co-phasing across $\approx$7 arcsec\end{tabular} & \cite{hinz2014commissioning} \\
\hline
Vega & Fizeau-Airy & 11 $\mu$m & Test target & \cite{hoffmann2014operation} \\
\hline
LkCa 15 + calibs & NRM & 2.2 and 3.7 $\mu$m &\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}}Used baselines contained within\\each 8.4-m primary\end{tabular} & \cite{sallum2015accreting,Sallum_2017} \\
\hline
MWC 349A + calib & NRM & 3.8 $\mu$m & \begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}}Used baselines across the\\23-m dual aperture\end{tabular} & \cite{sallum2017improved,Sallum_2017} \\
\hline
Io + calibs & Fizeau-Airy & 4.8 $\mu$m & \begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}}First science target in full-aperture\\Fizeau mode; ``lucky'' fringing\end{tabular} & \cite{leisenring2014fizeau,conrad2015spatially,conrad2016role,de2017multi} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\noindent
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Current observing target requirements for Fizeau observations (updated from \cite{spalding2018towards}).}
\label{table:observing_reqs}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\begin{tabular}{| l | l | l |}
\hline
\textit{Parameter} & \textit{Requirement} & \textit{Remarks} \\
\hline
DEC & $\gtrsim -5^{\circ}$ & \begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}Constrained by the need for $\leq$1.2'' seeing \end{tabular} \\
\hline
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}}$R$-band brightness \\ of AO guide star \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}$m_{R}\lesssim$12.5 mag (for 300 deformable\\modes, 40$\times$40 pupil subapertures,\\1 kHz)\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}The SOUL upgrade has been made to both\\the left and right telescopes. More precise\\limits remain to be determined. Note AO\\guide stars have been acquired as far as $\sim$30''\\off-axis from the science target\end{tabular} \\
\hline
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}$K$-band brightness\\of phase star\end{tabular}& \begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}} $m_{K}\lesssim4.7$ for correction as slow\\as 520 Hz \end{tabular}& \begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}} For fringe tracking with PhaseCam at \\standard detector binning. In principle the\\phase star can be up to a few arcseconds\\away from the science target. \end{tabular} \\
\hline
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}Visibility $V^{2}$\\of phase star\end{tabular}& \begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}$V^{2}\gtrsim 0.6$ in $K_{S}$-band works;\\$0.6\gtrsim V^{2}\gtrsim 0.3$ is uncharacterized;\\$V^{2}\lesssim0.3$ fails\end{tabular}& \begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}} PhaseCam cannot lock onto extended\\ sources. (See Fig.\ \ref{fig:PhaseCam_vis_limits}.) \end{tabular} \\
\hline
Science wavelength &
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}} $L$-, $M$-, or $N$-bands \\ (limited sensitivity in $K$-band) \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}Limited $K$-band is possible by reflecting some\\of this into PhaseCam and some of it towards\\LMIRcam. \end{tabular} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\noindent
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{images/phasecam_visibilities.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.7cm}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:PhaseCam_vis_limits}
PhaseCam visibility limitations. The visibility curve corresponds to that expected for a solid disk in the $Ks$-band (2.15 $\mu$m). Green lines are set down at stellar widths based on the $K$-band uniform disk approximation for all 137 stars on which PhaseCam has ever successfully closed, and which also appear in the JMMC Stellar Diameter Catalog \cite{chelli2016pseudomagnitudes}. (These stellar diameters are calculated with polynomial fits and magnitudes in two different bands, though some of these stars have also had their diameters measured directly with interferometry.) Most of these stars were observed as science or calibrator targets for the HOSTS survey \cite{ertel2018hosts}. The red line is set down at the $H$-band width of Arcturus \cite{lacour2008limb}, on which PhaseCam fails to close.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Fizeau-Airy mode}
The classical LBTI Fizeau PSF is that produced using filled sub-apertures, without any additional wavelength dispersion. (See Fig.\ \ref{fig:aberr_exmaples}, or \ref{fig:airy_demos} or bottom-left panels in Fig.\ \ref{fig:tilt_spie}.) This PSF is a multiplication of an Airy function with a corrugation from the separation of the two sub-pupils. The filled apertures maximize the probed $(u,v)$ space, and as such it is best suited for reconstructing detailed images.
\begin{comment}
(EXAMPLE PSF)
\end{comment}
\subsection{Non-redundant phase masking (NRM)}
LBTI currently has two sets of pupil masks which are peppered with holes to provide non-redundant baselines across the pupil. One set of masks has a pattern of 12 holes, the other 24. At a steep cost of throughput, these baselines---either contained within a single telescope aperture or across both apertures---allow a fine characterization of the stellar PSF and its subsequent removal. With fast readouts, ``closure phase'' across triangles of baselines provides a form of phase control even in the absence of a mechanical phase control.
\begin{comment}
: snowflakes
\end{comment}
\subsection{Fizeau-grism mode (i.e., spectrointerferometry)}
This mode involves the dispersion of the Fizeau-Airy PSF with a grism. This effectively extends the coherence envelope by reducing the wavelength bandpass to the wavelengths received by each row of pixels perpendicular to the dispersion axis. This mode is useful for low-spectral-resolution spectroscopy of bright targets at high spatial resolution. This is particularly useful if the object is extended enough that the fringe visibility is too low in Fizeau-Airy mode. (See Fig.\ \ref{fig:grism_demos}.) \footnote{The Fizeau-Airy PSF can be thought of as an marginalization along the dispersion axis of the Fizeau-grism PSF. Fringes may have high contrast in the Fizeau-grism PSF, but fringes which are slightly displaced in each row of pixels can wash out after integrating over those rows of pixels.}
\begin{comment}
(EXAMPLE PSF)
(grism resolution)
(Applicability esp to extendeded sources?)
\end{comment}
\section{Expanding the science capabilities}
\label{sec:expanding}
\begin{comment}
(CHECK THROUGH ALL NOTES SINCE SUMMER 2018)
\end{comment}
\subsection{Hardware changes to telescope}
AO correction is a prerequisite for sensitive infrared interferometry by pooling science photons into a high-Strehl PSF with minimal speckle noise, a frozen fringe pattern, and a minimal footprint on top of the high sky background. Up to one year ago, the two AO systems and the LBTI wavefront sensors could correct for atmospheric aberrations at up to 1.0 kHz on bright targets, using up to 30$\times$30 correction subapertures in the pupil. In the summer of 2018, the left-side telescope LBTI wavefront sensor was upgraded as part of the SOUL project with detectors with less read noise and faster readouts \cite{pinna2016soul,christou2018adaptive}.
The SOUL upgrade increased the maximum correction frequency from 1.0 to 1.7 kHz, the maximum number of subapertures from 30$\times$30 to 40$\times$40, and the maximum number of controlled mirror modes from 400 to 500. In January and February 2019, the right-side wavefront sensor was also upgraded with SOUL. These upgrades will offer higher Strehl and greater tolerance of atmospheric conditions. In addition, work is ongoing to improve the vibration feed-forward system Optical Path Difference and Vibration Monitoring System Plus (OVMS+), so as to feed in better predicted changes in pathlength to the phase-sensing PID loop \cite{bohm2016ovms,bohm2017improving}. (See Sec. \ref{subsec:phase_ctrl}.) This will reduce the phase noise in closed phase loop while doing interferometry, and reduce the probability that the phase loop will break entirely.
The most recent comparison of the quality of the OVMS feed-forward to the phase loop was on UT 2019 April 20, where pathlength changes were 0.57 $\mu$m rms with the phase loop closed but without OVMS, and 0.43 $\mu$m rms with the phase loop closed and OVMS on (Fig.\ \ref{fig:ovms_demo}). During a phase-controlled Fizeau observation on UT 2018 May 7, path length rms was as low as 0.30 $\mu$m.
\begin{comment}(CHECK WITH AMALI ABOUT THESE DATES; WORK WAS DONE N FALL OF 2018 TOO?; ALSO 2.2.3 IN CHRISTOU 2018; ALSO ASK AMALI IF THERE WERE ANY OTHER RELEVANT HARDWARE/SOFTWARE CHANGES SINCE SUMMER 2018). \end{comment}
\begin{comment}
How did the control radius change, pre- and post-soul?
(Phil took data with and without it on in Apr 2018; comparison? can I extract this from FITS headers?)
\end{comment}
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{images/ovms_demo.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.7cm}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:ovms_demo}
Improvement from the OVMS feed-forward to the phase loop, from UT 2019 April 20.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Phase control}
\label{subsec:phase_ctrl}
Phase control coupled with the Fizeau mode improves the sampling of Fourier space at high frequencies \cite{patru2017lbti}. This sampling of Fourier space can be quantified with the complex optical transfer function (OTF), which has an amplitude (the modulation transfer function, or MTF) and a phase (the phase transfer function, or PTF). The MTF of the LBT in Fizeau mode has a characteristic triple-peaked shape along the long baseline, and which stretches out to frequencies equivalent to the edge-to-edge mirror separation. (See Figs. \ref{fig:cross_mtf}, \ref{fig:contours}.)
LBTI has been controlling the OPD between the two telescope beams since 2013 with the Phasecam camera, which is based on a PICNIC detector \cite{defrere2014co}. However, the detector was installed in anticipation of correcting the phase on very bright, unresolved stars in the HOSTS target list \cite{weinberger2015target,jordan_fftcam}. As such, the read noise of this detector limits phase-controlled targets to $Ks\lesssim4.7$. Fringe visibility also decreases for more extended targets due to the angular diversity of the wavefronts, to the point where PhaseCam cannot lock onto an object if it is extended, even if it is bright enough. In Fig.\ \ref{fig:PhaseCam_vis_limits} we show the visibility limits of PhaseCam.
The PhaseCam PID software remains in the same state as it was at the completion of the HOSTS survey in 2018. The phase loop was closed for the first time during a Fizeau science observation in May 2018, and Fig.\ \ref{fig:contours} shows examples of the MTF with and without phase control. Though there are no immediate plans for modifying the PID loop itself, we are supplementing the PID loop with software which uses the PhaseCam $H$-band illumination to automatically correct $Ks$-band phase ``jumps'' \cite{maier2018two}, which occur when an atmospherically-induced phase shift happens quickly enough that the PID loop latches on to the wrong fringe. (Until now, corrections have required manual intervention.)
It should be noted that science can be done \textit{without} phase control, albeit at reduced sensitivity. The Fizeau correction code described below will also be able to partly compensate for an open phase loop by analyzing the science detector illuminations and making periodic pathlength corrections.
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[trim={0.5cm, 1.8cm, 7.5cm, 2.2cm}, clip=True, width=0.7\linewidth]{images/fizeau_ctrl_status_spie.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.6cm}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:code_status}
The sequence of steps which the Fizeau alignment and correction loop will automate. The parts of this code are at various stages of testing and implementation. For more description of the alignment steps, see Sec. \ref{subsec:initial_align}; for steps at the science stage, see Sec. \ref{subsec:corrxn_code}.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Fizeau alignment/correction code development}
Over the past year we have been writing software to make alignments immediately prior to Fizeau observations, and to run a correction loop to remove differential aberrations on the science detector during observations (Fig.\ \ref{fig:code_status}). The pathfinding version of this code is being written in Python, together with INDI \cite{indiweb} telescope and instrument control commands. See Sec. \ref{sec:corr_code} for more details.\\
\begin{comment}
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{l}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{images/panel_01.pdf} \\
\begin{small}
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}\textbf{Just before closing phase loop.}\\Science detector Airy PSFs have been roughly overlapped, but\\the Fizeau PSFs exhibit OPD, tip, and tilt aberrations.\\Fringes are visible on all detectors, but are moving between \\frames. Fringes on PhaseCam (PC) are at a random angle.\end{tabular}
\hspace{2cm}
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}Pathlength setpoint: 0\\Tip setpoint: 0\\Tilt setpoint: 0\end{tabular}
\end{small} \\
\hline \\
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{images/panel_02.pdf} \\
\begin{small}
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}\textbf{Just after closing phase loop.}\\PhaseCam PID phase loop analyzes the Fourier transforms of the\\PhaseCam camera image and starts to adjust FPC in piston to put\\bright fringe at center, and FPC in tip/tilt to rotate the fringes vertically\end{tabular}
\hspace{1.2cm}
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}Pathlength setpoint: 0\\Tip setpoint: 0\\Tilt setpoint: Nominal nonzero value.\end{tabular}
\end{small} \\
\hline \\
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{images/panel_03.pdf} \\
\begin{small}
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}\textbf{Phase loop has converged.}\\A bright fringe is at the center of the PhaseCam pupil, though\\the OPD is not necessarily at the center of the coherence envelope\\on PhaseCam.
\end{tabular}
\hspace{1.9cm}
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}Pathlength setpoint: 0\\Tip setpoint: 0\\Tilt setpoint: Nominal nonzero value.\end{tabular}
\end{small} \\
\hline \\
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{images/panel_04.pdf} \\
\begin{small}
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}\textbf{Nonzero pathlength setpoint has been sent.}\\Fringes on the PhaseCam pupil are now offset. OPD aberrations\\are now zero on the science detectors.\\
\end{tabular}
\hspace{1.6cm}
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}Pathlength setpoint: 180 degrees\\Tip setpoint: 0\\Tilt setpoint: Nominal nonzero value.\end{tabular}
\end{small} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:cartoon_1}
A simulated sequence of images to represent what one would see on the science detectors and PhaseCam during the alignment sequence, and after perturbations to the phase loop setpoints.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{l}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{images/panel_05.pdf} \\
\begin{small}
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}\textbf{Nonzero tip setpoint has been sent.}\\Fringes on the PhaseCam pupil are rotated because both tip (y) and\\ tilt (x) setpoints are nonzero. Tip aberrations are now zero on the\\science detectors.\end{tabular}
\hspace{1.5cm}
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}Pathlength setpoint: 0\\Tip setpoint: Nonzero\\Tilt setpoint: Nominal nonzero value.\end{tabular}
\end{small} \\
\hline \\
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{images/panel_06.pdf} \\
\begin{small}
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}\textbf{Nonzero, non-nominal tilt setpoint has been sent.}\\Fringes on the PhaseCam pupil assume a different frequency\\along the horizontal. Tilt aberrations are now zero on the\\science detectors.\end{tabular}
\hspace{2.2cm}
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}Pathlength setpoint: 0\\Tip setpoint: 0\\Tilt setpoint: Nonzero, non-nominal value.\end{tabular}
\end{small} \\
\hline \\
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{images/panel_07.pdf} \\
\begin{small}
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}\textbf{Based on the Fourier transforms of the science detector}\\\textbf{illuminations, setpoints for OPD, tip, and tilt have been}\\\textbf{sent to remove all three of these aberrations from}\\\textbf{the science PSFs.}\\ Fringes on the PhaseCam pupil assume a frequency and rotation\\corresponding to these setpoints.\end{tabular}
\hspace{1.5cm}
\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}l@{}}Pathlength setpoint: Nonzero\\Tip setpoint: Nonzero\\Tilt setpoint: Nonzero, non-nominal value.\end{tabular}
\end{small} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:cartoon_2}
Continuation of Fig.\ \ref{fig:cartoon_1}.}
\end{figure}
\end{comment}
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[height=5.6cm, trim={1.5cm, 0.5cm, 2cm, 0.5cm}, clip=True]{images/br_alpha_mtfs.pdf}
\includegraphics[height=5.6cm, trim={1.5cm, 0cm, 2cm, 0cm}, clip=True]{images/mtfs_lmir_nomic.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.6cm}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:cross_mtf}
Left: MTFs for LBTI's 4.01-4.08 $\mu$m filter. Black is generated using a simulated polychromatic PSF. Blue is a sampling of empirical MTFs when phase control was active. Red is the same number of samples without phase control. Vertical lines show spatial scales in AU for Taurus-Auriga, the nearest large star-forming complex at 140 pc, and in meters the equivalent baselines of a stopped-down primary mirror and the center-to-center mirror baseline. The decrease in amplitude of the high-frequency lobes of the empirical MTFs is consistent with predictions of \cite{patru2017lbti} for MTFs in the presence of AO residuals, differential piston errors, or phase smearing during an integration. Furthermore, these MTFs are polychromatic and have finite coherence envelope lengths. A nonzero OPD from the center of the coherence envelope will also decrease the PSF fringe contrast and the amplitude of the high-frequency lobes of the MTF. Right: A cross-section of the MTF along the long baseline, for different wavelengths accessible to the LBTI's science cameras LMIRcam (1.2--5 $\mu$m) and NOMIC (8--12 $\mu$m). Vertical lines again indicate spatial scales corresponding to Taurus-Auriga. }
\end{figure}
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth, trim={0cm, 23cm, 0cm, 0cm}, clip=True]{images/contour_mtfs.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth, trim={0cm, 7cm, 0cm, 23cm}, clip=True]{images/contour_mtfs.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth, trim={0cm, 0cm, 0cm, 28cm}, clip=True]{images/contour_mtfs_bbox.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.6cm}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:contours}
Top row: Contour plots of the MTFs of eight different PSFs, showing how phase control puts more power into the high-frequency lobes. All colors and contours are linear, and are set to those of the MTF in the top left. Top row: MTFs with phase control. Bottom row: MTFs without phase control. White dotted lines are for reference. There appears a slight asymmetry along the short baseline of the location of the high-frequency node peak (i.e., there is a slight slant to the phase-controlled fringes on the detector; see rightmost panel in Fig.\ \ref{fig:aberr_exmaples}). This asymmetry along the short baseline is not evident in the MTFs without phase control.}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-3cm}
\begin{comment}
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[height=4 cm]{images/coherence_envel_lmir_place.png}
\includegraphics[height=4 cm]{images/opd_angle_spc_mapping_place}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:example}
Left: Comparison of coherence envelope sizes for LMIR, NOMIC, and PhaseCam. Right: Repeatability of finding center of coherence envelope.}
\end{figure}
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
\noindent
Effect of seeing/safe skips on PhaseCam loop on past phase-controlled data \\
\noindent
(CHECK UNDER WHAT SEEING, EL CONDITIONS WE WERE ABLE TO DO FIZEAU AND CLOSE THE PHASE LOOP POST-SOUL)
MAKE A TABLE WITH A ROW FOR EACH FIZEAU/NULLING DATASET WITH PhaseCam
- K-BAND BRIGHTNESS OF TARGET
- LINE-OF-SIGHT SEEING
- PWV
- AO STATUS: PRE-SOUL OR SOUL?
- TARGET VISIBILITY
- SCIENCE WAVELENGTH
- DEC
- R-BAND (AO)
- FIZEAU OR NULLING
(KT's advice on the visibility plot: Explain what the context is for PhaseCam’s visibility limits: is this typical for other interferometers? What would you expect theoretically? Put some more framing around this plot.)
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
(Add Sirius, UDK = 6.105 mas; Procyon, UDK = 5.568 mas}
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
COMPARISON WITH OTHER INTERFEROMETERS; HOW DO THEY PERFORM? \\
SEE PATRU II AND USE R23 QUALITY CRITERION
SEE PATRU II plots to decide whether we need better AO or phase control
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
(PH: See how much the MTF degrades as fcn of OPD difference)
\end{comment}
\section{Fizeau alignment/correction code}
\label{sec:corr_code}
\subsection{Initial alignment}
\label{subsec:initial_align}
After the AO loops are closed, a script overlaps the Airy PSFs on the detector by sending small movement commands to the telescopes. Next, the OPD between both beams is brought to zero, or at least as close to the middle of the coherence envelope as can be determined. This is done by dispersing the illuminations with a grism. This expands the coherence envelope along each row of pixels in ($x,y$)-space, and the angle of the fringes can be found by taking a Fourier transform and localizing the corresponding `bump' in the 2D MTF of the Fourier transform, in ($\zeta,\eta$)-space.
If the dispersion axis of the grism is parallel to the $y$-axis, the OPD is approximately proportional to the tangent of the angle between the $+x$-axis and a line normal to the fringes, or equivalently, of the bump in Fourier space with the $+\zeta$-axis. (See Fig.\ \ref{fig:grism_demos}.) The HPC mirror is shifted along a translation stage until the pathlength causes the fringes to be parallel to the grism dispersion axis on the detector (or equivalently, the angle of the bump in Fourier space is brought to zero). Since the wavelengths vary along the grism illumination, there will be some dispersion of the power in Fourier space. This effect is not important at this stage, as long as the fringes can be made as parallel with the grism dispersion axis as possible.
\footnote{For any intermediary wavelength $\lambda_{S}<\lambda<\lambda_{L}$ between the shortest and longest wavelengths $\lambda_{S}$ and $\lambda_{L}$, the angles $\alpha$ with which fringes at those wavelengths form with the dispersion axis of the grism on the detector are $\frac{tan[\alpha(\lambda_{S})]}{tan[\alpha(\lambda)]} = \frac{\lambda}{\lambda_{S}}$. In the small angle limit, the variation in these angles along the bandpass is $\alpha(\lambda_{S})/\alpha(\lambda) \approx \lambda/\lambda_{S}$. The most atmospherically transmissive region of the 2.8-4.2 $\mu$m grism is roughly 3.3-4.2 $\mu$m, for which $\alpha(\lambda_{S})/\alpha(\lambda_{L}) \approx 1.27$. An alternative strategy is to make all the fringes from the detector parallel by remapping the coordinates from OPD and wavelength to phase and wavenumber: $\tau\rightarrow\phi$, $\lambda\rightarrow\kappa$ (e.g., \cite{improvements,practical}).}
The center of the coherence envelope can also be found without a grism by scanning in OPD, fitting a curve to the amplitude of the high-frequency lobe of the MTF, and shifting the HPC to put the optical path difference at the center of the coherence envelope (see Figs. \ref{fig:airy_demos}, \ref{fig:greystuff}).
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth, trim={0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm}, clip=True]{images/grism_angle_demo_001452.png}
\vline
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth, trim={0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm}, clip=True]{images/grism_angle_demo_001443.png}
\vline
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth, trim={0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm}, clip=True]{images/grism_angle_demo_001431.png}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.6cm}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:grism_demos}
Empirical Fizeau-grism illuminations on LMIRcam at different OPD (stretched in x for display) and their MTFs (in logarithmic greyscale). The angle in red is determined by finding the bump in Fourier space corresponding to the frequency content of the fringes. Numbers correspond to those in the left-hand plot of Fig.\ \ref{fig:greystuff}.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth, trim={0cm 1.5cm 0cm 1cm}, clip=True]{images/psf_mtf_demo_3.pdf}
\vline
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth, trim={0cm 1.5cm 0cm 1cm}, clip=True]{images/psf_mtf_demo_8.pdf}
\vline
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth, trim={0cm 1.5cm 0cm 1cm}, clip=True]{images/psf_mtf_demo_2.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.6cm}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:airy_demos}
Simulated Fizeau-Airy illuminations at different OPD and their MTFs (both in logarithmic greyscale; the MTF contours are all on the same color scale). The middle lobe of the MTFs corresponds to spatial information from baselines within each 8.25-m aperture. Off-center lobes encode the high frequencies from baselines stretching across both LBT sub-apertures. Numbers correspond to those in the right-hand plot of Figs. \ref{fig:greystuff}.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[height=5.5cm, trim={0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm}, clip=True]{images/grism_angle2.pdf}
\includegraphics[height=5.5cm, trim={0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm}, clip=True]{images/fft_ampl_fcn_opd.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.6cm}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:greystuff}
Left: Fringe angles as found from empirical grism illuminations on LMIRcam, with a best-fit tangent line in grey. Angles $0\degree < \theta < 5\degree$ have been masked to avoid confusion with power in Fourier space from low frequencies. Numbered points correspond to the illuminations in Fig.\ \ref{fig:grism_demos}. Right: The amplitude of the high-frequency lobe in the MTF of simulated polychromatic 3.4-4.0 $\mu$m PSFs (corresponding to the `StdL' filter in Fig.\ \ref{fig:coh_size}), as a function of path length distance from the center of the coherence envelope. When the OPD is zero, the high-frequency fringes have maximum contrast. At nonzero OPD, the contrast washes out as different wavelengths are at different levels of constructive and destructive interference. The grey region spans a range of $\pm5$ $\mu$m, which is the allowable range of optical path change before the phase loop opens. Numbered points correspond to the illuminations in Fig.\ \ref{fig:airy_demos}.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The correction code}
\label{subsec:corrxn_code}
Once the OPD is small enough so that it is well within the coherence envelope of PhaseCam, and if line-of-sight seeing allows, the phase loop can be closed. This loop sends corrective movement commands to the FPC mirror (Fig.\ \ref{fig:pid_diag}).
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth, trim={5cm 5.3cm 5cm 8cm}, clip=True]{images/ubc_1.pdf}
\hspace{0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth, trim={5cm 5cm 3cm 6cm}, clip=True]{images/ubc_2.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:pid_diag}
Left: The basic mechanism for removing NCPA with a Fizeau correction loop. Readouts from the science detectors in LMIRcam and/or NOMIC are analyzed and are used to calculate setpoints of the PhaseCam PID phase loop. Right: A schematic of the current phase correction, with dashed boxes to indicate components under development. Note the current ``PID'' loop currently just contains the ``I'' (integral-over-history) portion. (Compare with Fig.\ 5 in \cite{defrere2016nulling}.)}
\end{figure}
But even with a closed phase loop, aberrations can appear on the science detectors. The correction code, which supplements the phase loop, uses readouts from the science detectors and
\begin{enumerate}
\item Finds the coarse centroid of the PSF by smoothing the detector subarray and finding the pixel with the maximum number of counts.
\item Makes a cut-out of the subarray around the centroid.
\item Fast-Fourier transforms the cut-out.
\item Analyzes the MTF (amplitude) and PTF (phase) of the transform.
\end{enumerate}
Whereas the location within the coherence envelope can be sensed using the amplitude of the MTF, the differential aberrations described in Sec. \ref{sec:intro} can be sensed using the slope of the PTF (for tip-tilt), or by detecting a stairstep pattern in the PTF (for OPD).
Differential tip $\Theta_{y}$ and tilt $\Theta_{x}$ can be calculated from the slope of the PTF $\Omega_{y}$ in y and $\Omega_{x}$ in x as
\begin{equation}
\vec{\Theta}
=
\begin{bmatrix}
\Theta_{x} \\
\Theta_{y}
\end{bmatrix}
=
\begin{bmatrix}
\Omega_{x}N_{x} \\
\Omega_{y}N_{y}
\end{bmatrix}
\left(\frac{PS\cdot\Delta}{\pi} {\rm pix}_{DFT} \right)
\label{eqn:ptf}
\end{equation}
\noindent
where $N_{i}$ is the number of pixels along the $i$ axis of the subarray to be Fourier transformed, $PS$ is the plate scale\footnote{For LMIRcam, 10.7 mas/pix$_{det}$ \cite{spalding2019dewarp}; for NOMIC, 18 mas/pix$_{det}$ \cite{hoffmann2014operation}.}, and $\Delta$ is the sampling spacing in the plane of the detector (i.e., one detector pixel pix$_{det}$). The unit pix$_{DFT}$ is one `pixel' in the discrete Fourier transform of the image. (See Appendix \ref{sec:appendix_ptf} for a derivation.)
\begin{figure} [!htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.88\linewidth]{images/tilt_spie.pdf} \\
\hline \\
\vspace{-0.8cm} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{images/psf_400_sec.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\linewidth, trim={0cm 1cm 0cm 0cm}, clip=True]{images/fft_amp_400sec.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\linewidth, trim={0cm 1cm 0cm 0cm}, clip=True]{images/fft_arg_400sec.png} \\
\vspace{-0.4cm} \\
\hline \\
\vspace{-0.8cm} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{images/psf_1200_sec.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\linewidth, trim={0cm 1cm 0cm 0cm}, clip=True]{images/fft_amp_1200sec.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\linewidth, trim={0cm 1cm 0cm 0cm}, clip=True]{images/fft_arg_1200sec.png} \\
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:tilt_spie}
Simulated retrieval of differential tilt. Injected tilt takes a random walk, while the injected tip and OPD are zero. In the current version of the correction code, tilt can masquerade as OPD if the absolute tilt is greater than the angle corresponding to the plate scale (PS) for one pixel. Dotted lines indicate the locations in time of the PSFs (in logarithmic greyscale), MTFs, and PTFs shown in the bottom rows.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{images/filter_lcs.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.6cm}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:coh_size}
Coherence envelope sizes $L_{c}=\lambda_{c}^{2}/\Delta \lambda$ of various filters for PhaseCam (purple), LMIRcam (blue), and NOMIC (red). Envelopes can be expanded at the science detectors with the use of grisms.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Code performance on simulated data}
Simulated data was generated with monochromatic, 3.7 $\mu$m, diffraction-limited LBT Fizeau PSFs with three degrees of freedom: OPD and differential tip and tilt. Three synthetic datasets of 10k frames were generated: one dataset in which the OPD did a random walk from frame to frame, while differential tip and tilt remained zero; a second dataset in which only tip did a random walk, and a third dataset in which only tilt did a random walk.
\begin{comment}
Do improvement and get a good analysis of the fourth dataset where OPD, tip, and tilt did simultaneous and independent random walks.
(QUANTIFY THE DEGREE OF RETRIEVAL)
When OPD, tip, and tilt vary simultaneously, XXXXXXX.
\end{comment}
Fig.\ \ref{fig:tilt_spie} shows an example retrieval, using Eqn. \ref{eqn:ptf}, for a dataset in which the differential tilt does a random walk. The retrieved values wrap around the positive or negative plate scale, though in principle it is possible to break this degeneracy since the PSF will elongate as the Airy PSFs move apart.
\begin{comment}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Fizeau alignment/correction code invasiveness levels}
\label{table:sources_opd_tt}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\begin{tabular}{| l | l | c | c | l |}
\hline
\textit{Mode} & \textit{Primary data} & \textit{\begin{tabular}{@{}c@{}}Commands to\\ mirrors/wheels?\end{tabular}} & \textit{\begin{tabular}{@{}c@{}}Commands to\\ telescope?\end{tabular}} & \textit{Remarks}\\
\hline
Fake FITS &\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}}Simulated or old Fizeau\\FITS data\end{tabular}& N & N & - \\
\hline
Artificial source &\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}}Live region-of-interest\\detector subarrays, or\\ FITS files immediately\\after being written\end{tabular} & Y & N & \begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}}Detector is illuminated\\by an artificial source\\or thermal emission\\through a pinhole\end{tabular} \\
\hline
Science & " " & Y & Y & On-sky only \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\noindent
\end{center}
\end{table}
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
The retrieved OPD loops around outside the range $-\lambda/2 < OPD < +\lambda/2$, and indeed, a monochromatic PSF will be identical for multiples of $\lambda$.
As implemented now, OPD changes can cause spurious non-zero values for tilt (which involves the Airy PSFs separating along the x-axis, the same axis along which the fringes move with OPD changes). This is because XXXXXXXX (BAD CENTERING? CHECK THE PSFS). (CAN IT BE CORRECTED/COUNTERACTED?) True tip aberrations do not lead to spurious retrievals of the other quantities. If tilt does go beyond the plate scale, this can lead to a spurious nonzero OPD change. This is because XXXXXXXX (CHECK THE PSFS).
The total amount of scatter of the retrieved values around the injected values (after accounting for the rolling-over of values) is XXXXXX. Thus the aberrations can be accurately sensed, with negligible overhead.
This exercise illustrates some fundamental limits: 1.) OPD jumps on PhaseCam can also have counterparts on the science detector, since there is a strong degeneracy in OPD, expecially if the science filter is narrowband, which leads to a wide coherence envelope; 2.) tips or tilts beyond a magnitude of XXXXXX would have to be counteracted with (WHAT? WILL DEPEND ON WHAT ASPECT OF THE PSF CAUSES THE ROLLING)
Code latencies; (DIAGRAM IN THE STYLE OF WHAT PAUL SHOWED ME, AND INDICATING LATENCIES)
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{images/opd_alone.pdf}
\vline
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{images/tip_alone.pdf}\\
\hline
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{images/tilt_alone.pdf}
\vline
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{images/all_together_1st_test.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:synth_results}
Retrievals of optical parameters from synthetic Fizeau data which have been injected with OPD, tip, and tilt random walks. \textbf{In the top-left set of four rows}, we have injected only OPD variations. We show absolute injected OPD in the top row; the wrapped injected (light blue) and retrieved (red) OPD values in the second row; injected and recovered tip in the third row; and injected and recovered tilt in the fourth row. It can be seen that OPD variations can masquerade as tilt, even though the OPD itself can be recovered accurately. \textbf{Top-right set of rows}: variations are in injected tip only. \textbf{Top-left set of rows}: variations are in injected tilt only. \textbf{Bottom-right set of rows}: variations are in injected OPD, tip, and tilt simultaneously.}
\end{figure}
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
\section{CODE PERFORMANCE BASED ON OLD FIZEAU DATA}
\end{comment}
\subsection{On-sky engineering tests}
Ultimately, tests of our correction code must be done on-sky: genuine Fizeau PSFs manifest the imperfect AO correction, NCPA effects, optical ghosts, speckles corresponding to the PSFs of the individual unit telescopes of the LBT, time-dependent detector and photon noise, and phase noise (especially if the phase loop is open, in which case there is significant phase ``smearing'', even in fast readouts).
In the fall of 2018 and spring of 2019 we carried out a series of on-sky engineering tests of different parts of the Fizeau correction code. Our objectives were to test routines in the consecutive order in which they would be executed for science observations: the overlapping of the Airy PSFs, putting in a grism and dialing the OPD to find the center of the coherence envelope, removing the grism, and then calculating PhaseCam setpoints in realtime as data is being taken.
\subsection{Mechanical issues}
Once corrective movements are calculated---be they setpoints to the phase PID loop or explicit mirror movement commands---the quality of the implementation is an additional issue to consider. It should be noted that the fast and slow pathlength corrector mirrors are currently operating without direct feedback about where the mirrors actually are. \footnote{Capacitive sensors were originally built in to the design, but it was found that their response rates conflicted with the phase PID loop. In addition, at cryogenic temperatures the gap between the capacitive plates increases to the point where their sensitivity was lost, unless large voltages were applied, in which case there would be greater risk of shorting.} Setpoints to the phase PID loop are reliably implemented, because the phase PID loop seeks to match the setpoints with the Fourier-space image of the PhaseCam illumination. However, for alignment during setup or work in open-phase-loop, hysteresis in the mirror PZTs can be a problem.
We tested for hysteresis in the FPC and HPC mirrors by finding the centers of thermal pinhole images of the telescope chamber. The pinhole locations were found with the \texttt{astropy} implementation of \texttt{DAOPHOT} \cite{stetson1987daophot,price2018astropy}. In Fig.\ \ref{fig:fpc_hyst_large} we show an example of a hysteresis test on the FPC. We find that, for commanded movements as large as 100 mas over a total commanded range of 600 mas, hysteresis leads to $\approx10-20$ \% positional uncertainty. This repeatability allows for counteraction by re-scaling the commanded mirror movements.
\begin{figure} [!ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[height=7cm, trim={0cm, 0cm, 0cm, 0.9cm}, clip=True]{images/fpc_large.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.9cm}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:fpc_hyst_large}
FPC hysteresis for 100 mas commanded movements. Commanded tip (y) and tilt (x) movements are in grey, with empirical results from two different trials for each in red. There were two sets of tip-tilt hysteresis tests, separated by thermal cycles and months of time. Numbers indicate the sequence of positions; i.e., 0 $->$ 1 $->$ 2 $->$ 3 etc. Hysteresis leads to the offsets between step pairs 0/6, 1/5, and 2/4. In terms of the offset distance between points 0 and 6 over the total movement, the hysteresis is $\approx10-20$ \%. (The undershooting by $\approx50$ is due to an underestimated scale factor in the software.) Orange and black bars in the upper right indicate relevant scales ($\lambda/D$ from one primary mirror, $\lambda/Bcc$ for the center-to-center baseline between the primary mirrors, and $\lambda/Bee$ for the edge-to-edge baseline between the primary mirrors) at wavelengths accessible to the two cameras. To provide a rough sense of the centroiding uncertainty, the unfilled circle has a radius of the mean radial distance of a set of eight found PSF positions from the average position, during a sequence of frames where the FPC was not commanded to move.}
\end{figure}
\begin{comment}
The only disadvantage is that the ``ground truth'' values of the aberrations is inaccessible. Nevertheless, we try the same tests as above with on-sky data to see if there is any suspicious scatter (or whatever) in the retrieved values.
We have found in the past that vibrations induced by a different instrument obligate us to ask that it go into hibernation before an observing run where we hope to do interferometry.
If both telescopes are looking at a star, it is good to center the wavefront sensors and then to send a new preset to allow the telescope control system (TCS) to balance the offloading (OF WHAT? TIP-TILT ONLY? SEE JOHN H.).
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth, trim={0cm, 2.5cm, 0cm, 0cm}, clip=True]{images/setup1.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{images/setup2.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:sine}
A decision tree of the current Fizeau setup procedure, read left to right}
\end{figure}
\end{comment}
\section{Lessons learned from on-sky tests}
\label{sec:lessons}
Some of the lessons we learned from on-sky tests in the fall of 2018 and spring of 2019 were as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item When iteratively moving the unit telescopes themselves (and not instrument mirrors) to overlap the Airy PSFs, there can be slop if the commanded movement is equivalent to the distance on the detector from the current to the desired pixel location and is $\gtrsim$1 asec. Convergence may be made more efficient by rescaling the commanded movements.
\item If the Airy illuminations have been overlapped on the science detector, inserting a grism upstream introduces a focus offset and causes the grism illuminations to spring apart on the detector by a fraction of an arcsecond. This small separation is tolerable insofar as the fringes are still distinct enough for bringing the OPD to zero, and the additional overhead of overlapping the grism illuminations is not necessary, unless the science observation itself will be in Fizeau-grism mode. (See Sec. \ref{subsec:initial_align}).
\item The phase loop can be closed after the AO SOUL upgrade. On UT 2019 Feb 24 the PhaseCam loop was closed for the first time following the SOUL upgrade on both telescopes, for up to roughly half a minute at a time in good but somewhat unstable seeing. For now, however, it would be advisable to keep the AO correction at 1 kHz for interferometry because SOUL has been found to be rather unstable in tip-tilt at faster speeds, which can break the phase loop.
\item Side-to-side nodding with the telescopes in Fizeau mode is repeatable. This nodding is done by physically moving the telescopes, and also a lens wheel upstream of PhaseCam which has pairs of lenses at staggered radial positions. Switching from one set of lenses to another re-centers the illumination on PhaseCam after the telescopes have been moved.
\item In open-phase-loop Fizeau, it might be preferable to nod up-down with the telescopes to avoid introducing OPD changes.
\item If fringes have high visibility on the science detector in Fizeau-grism mode, we can retrieve OPD values that reliably correct the gross path length using the HPC mirror. This is the case even when the phase loop is open and there is atmospheric jitter in the fringes.
\item If PhaseCam pupils are well-aligned and the phase loop is closed, but the PSFs are not aligned on LMIRcam, one can adjust a pupil steering mirror (PSM) upstream of PhaseCam in small amounts. The phase PID loop will keep the fringes aligned as before on PhaseCam, but the alignment on LMIRcam will change because the PID loop will move the FPC. But this is also not time-efficient, so it is best to complete the co-alignment in open phase loop if possible.
\item There is a risk of translation stages getting stuck after a cryo-cycle. One (unproven) possibility is that volatiles migrate to the bearings when warming up the cryostat. It is adviseable to exercise the stages before cool-down, and before interferometry.
\end{itemize}
\begin{comment}
(n.b. we took lots of frames on UT Apr. 19)
\noindent
(ON MAY 17, I EXPERIENCED THE SPC STAGE GETTING STICKY; SEE CONVERSATION ON SLACK; SEE IF WE CAN MECHANICALLY EXPLAIN THIS) \\
\noindent
(SEE RESEARCH LOG FOR FEB 18 ABOUT THE GRISM FORMALISM)
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
(capacitive sensors: INCLUDE ILLUSTRATION FROM LBTIGENERAL2019 2019 MARCH 13)
\subsection{Mechanics of the degrees of freedom}
The FPC mount is made of (TBD)
The SPC mount is made of (TBD)
(IMAGE OF THE FPC and SPC, WITH LABELS)
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{images/DSC_2584.JPG}}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption[An image of the (TBD), with labels. (Image courtesy of Oli Durney.)]
{ \label{fig:hyst}
Hysteresis (dominant at large movements?) and slop (dominant at small movements?).}
\end{figure}
HYSTERESIS AND SLOP: THEIR ORIGINS AND AMPLITUDES
(KT: note a preliminary hysteresis measurement of ‘N percent’. Also, Given the hysteresis errors, what effects would you expect this to lead to in the PSF? (Or the MTF) Is is noticeable? What is the analogue to the Rayleigh criterion for determining when you are ‘Fizeau-overlapped’?)
See Fig.\ \ref{fig:hyst}
HOW WELL CAN WE CORRECT ABERRATIONS? STRATEGIES?
\subsection{Telescope-scale vibrations}
(See IT 7697 on 128 Hz vibration)
(12 Hz vibration? check ITs)
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[height=6.4cm, trim={0cm, 0cm, 0cm, 0.35cm}, clip=True]{images/fpc_small.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.9cm}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:fpc_hyst_small}
FPC Hysteresis for 10-20 mas movements. Note the orange and black bars are 1/10 of the scales indicated in Fig.\ \ref{fig:fpc_hyst_large}. The unfilled circle has the same radius as in Fig.\ \ref{fig:fpc_hyst_large}.
}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[height=6cm, trim={5cm, 0cm, 5cm, 1.5cm}, clip=True]{images/spc_cross.pdf}
\includegraphics[height=6cm, trim={5cm, 0cm, 5cm, 1.5cm}, clip=True]{images/spc_small_pl.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[height=6cm, trim={1cm, 0cm, 1cm, 1.5cm}, clip=True]{images/spc_large_pl.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.9cm}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:spc_hyst_pl}
SPC pinhole movements. Upper left: for commanded 100-500 mas tip-tilt. Upper right: for pathlength movements of 0.1-10 $\mu$m and back, but no commanded tip-tilt. Bottom: for pathlength movements of 1000-3000 $\mu$m and back, but no commanded tip-tilt. The unfilled circle has the same radius as in Figs. \ref{fig:fpc_hyst_large} and \ref{fig:fpc_hyst_small}.
}
\end{figure}
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
\begin{figure} [ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[height=6cm, trim={1.5cm, 1cm, 1.5cm, 2cm}, clip=True]{images/fpc_spc_loop.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.9cm}
\caption[example]
{ \label{fig:loops}
Commanded loops on both the FPC and SPC.
}
\end{figure}
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
Lessons from this (TENTATIVE):
\begin{itemize}
\item Hysteresis for large (DEFINE) movements can cause the PSF movement to undershoot by a factor of roughly a half
\item Slop for small (DEFINE) movements can cause the PSF to make movements roughly (TBD) as large as the commanded one
\item Possible strategies include (TBD)
\end{itemize}
(From notes, 2019 July 12: PH was worried about the time response of the capacitive sensors. The way PI is implemented, the capacitive sensor ... you can’t put the PZT into os- cillation. In previous tests, they got 1 msec responses without capacitive sensors acting. Since then, we’ve gotten better at tuning the PI loop by testing on the modulator PZT upstream of the WFSs. Secondly, at cryo, the capacitors moved too far apart. But that can be fixed by putting them closer together at room temperature.)
(WHAT OTHER MECHANICAL MODIFICATIONS WOULD BE USEFUL FOR MINIMIZING HYSTERESIS, SLOP, STICKINESS; AND MAXIMIZING EFFICIENCY, STABILITY)
\end{comment}
\section{Conclusion and Future directions}
\label{sec:future}
The software- and hardware-based commissioning of LBTI's Fizeau mode is underway. Over the past year, we have taken off-sky and on-sky engineering data for the purposes of writing code to automatize the alignment process, and remove NCPA during observations. There is still development and a number of improvements yet to be made, however, and we have been granted more on-sky engineering time in the fall 2019 observing season to do so.
In the meantime, we are working on data reduction pipelines for Fizeau data which has already been taken, and we continue to take Fizeau observations among the various science programs of the LBTI queue. In spring 2018, there were three Fizeau science programs (that is, not engineering programs) in the LBTI queue; in fall 2018, four; and in spring 2019, two.
In fall 2019 we will also begin installing capacitive sensors behind the corrector mirrors to provide closed-loop feedback on the mirror positions. We will start by upgrading the HPC, and, if this is successful, we will upgrade the FPC.
\begin{comment}
There is also a niche for post-processing development of non-phase-controlled data.
\end{comment}
Further into the future, all of the current Fizeau correction code will fade from Python into a lower-level language like C. We will also build a webpage interface for the Fizeau mode, modeled on our PhaseCam control webpage, so as to make Fizeau mode observations as user-friendly and as useful as possible.
|
\section{Introduction}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
The study of the dynamical behaviour of a bounded operator $A$ on a Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}$ consists
of studying the orbits $\{ A^n f: \ n\in \mathbb{N}_0\}$ for $f\in \mathcal{H}$.
The literature is full of examples with characterizations of the operators $A$ such that
there exists an orbit satisfying a particular property, and sometimes also characterizations of the initial vector
for such orbits. For instance, if $\mathcal{H}$ is separable and infinite dimensional,
the orbit $\{ A^n f \}$ is an orthonormal basis if and only if $A$ is the forward shift
with respect to the basis $e_n := A^nf$, for $n\ge 0$. Actually, this can be taken as the definition
of the forward shift with respect to a given ordered basis $\{ e_n\}_{n \ge 0}$. Moreover, it
is not hard to see that the only vectors with this property are $\lambda e_0$, where
$\lambda \in \mathbb{C}$, with $|\lambda|=1$.
Less restrictive requirements for an orbit is that of being a frame or even a Bessel sequence.
Motivated by a time-space sampling problem, in \cite{acmt} the authors characterize the
diagonalizable operators $A$ and the vectors $f\in \mathcal{H}$ such that the orbit
$\{ A^n f\}_{n\ge 0}$ is a frame for a Hilbert
space of numerable dimension. The problem is modeled with the space
$\mathcal{H} = \ell^2(\mathbb{N})$, but with the right definitions the result is valid for
finite dimension.
A fortiori, in \cite{accmp} it is shown that any normal operator $A$ that admits an orbit as a frame
must be diagonalizable, so the above result applies to normal operators as well.
The normality of $A$ allows the use of the spectral theorem, which
in conjunction with the fact that some orbit is a frame forces the operator to be diagonalizable.
Then, $\{ A^n f\}$ is a frame if and only if the sequence of eigenvalues $\{ \lambda_j \}$
is an interpolating sequence for the Hardy space of the disk $H^2( \mathbb{D} )$, and
$$
f = \{ d_j (1-|\lambda_j|^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}: j\in \mathbb{N} \} \in \ell^2(\mathbb{N}),
$$
where $C^{-1} \le d_j \le C$ for all $j\in \mathbb{N}$ and some $C>0$
(see also \eqref{niunii} below and the subsequent comment).
The result holds for finite dimension, taking $\ell^2(J)$, where $J\subset \mathbb{N}$ is finite,
and accepting interpolating sequences also as those that perform finite interpolation in $H^2( \mathbb{D} )$.
In \cite{cmpp} the authors consider the problem of characterizing the normal operators
$A$ and vectors $f_1, \ldots , f_m\in \ell^2(\mathbb{N})$, where $m\in \mathbb{N}$,
such that the union of orbits $\{ A^nf_j, \, n\in \mathbb{N}, \, 1\le j\le m \}$ is a frame.
They obtained a characterization where, as before, $A$ has to be diagonalizable, the eigenvalues form
a union of at most $m$ interpolating sequences for $H^2( \mathbb{D} )$, and there are two more conditions,
the last of which is not well understood and difficult to handle.
In the present paper we give a different, more intuitive and geometric characterization,
which shows to what extent the pseudo-hyperbolic metric of $ \mathbb{D} $ plays a role in the structure
of the eigenvalues and their interaction with the vectors $f_j$.
To do so, we need some tools from the theory of $H^2( \mathbb{D} )$, such as
interpolating sequences, reproducing kernels and model spaces, which we establish
in the next section.
Finally, in proving the above characterization we found a result of independent interest
(Thm.\@ \ref{difere}), which gives an upper bound for the Bessel constant of
the difference of normalized reproducing kernels in $H^2 = H^2( \mathbb{D} )$
under some geometric conditions of their base points.
\subsection{The Hardy space $H^2$ and the model subspaces}
\noindent
Write $\varphi_0(z)=\phi_0(z) =z$ and for $\lambda\neq 0$,
$$\varphi_{\lambda}(z) = \frac{\lambda-z}{1-\overline{\lambda} z}
\, \ \ \mbox{ and }\ \ \,
\phi_{\lambda}(z) = \frac{\overline{\lambda}}{|\lambda_i|} \, \varphi_{\lambda}(z).
$$
If $\{\lambda_i\}$ is a sequence in $ \mathbb{D} $, the Blaschke product
$$ B(z) = \prod_{i} \phi_{\lambda_i}(z) \mbox{ converges} \ \Leftrightarrow \ \,
\sum_i (1-|\lambda_i|^2) < \infty ,
$$
where the convergence is uniform on compact sets and $\{\lambda_i\}$ is called a Blaschke sequence.
Every function $f\in H^2$ factorizes as $f=gB$, where $g\in H^2$ has no zeros on $ \mathbb{D} $ and
$B$ is the Blaschke product of the zeros of $f$. If the zeros $\{ \lambda_j \}$ have single multiplicities,
the orthogonal complement $K_B :=(BH^2)^\bot$ of the
closed subspace $BH^2$ of $H^2$ is generated by
$$k_{\lambda_j}(z) = \frac{(1-|\lambda_j|^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}}{(1-\overline{\lambda}_jz)},
$$
the normalizations of the reproducing kernels $K_{\lambda_j}(z)=(1-\overline{\lambda}_jz)^{-1}$.
The name means that $\langle f,K_{\lambda}\rangle = f(\lambda)$ for every $f\in H^2$.
Blaschke products are special cases of inner functions, which are
functions $u\in H^\infty$ whose radial limit at the boundary satisfies $|u(e^{i\theta})|=1$
for almost every $e^{i\theta} \in \partial \mathbb{D} $. The model spaces are $K_u := (uH^2)^\bot$,
which by Beurling's theorem \cite{beu} are the closed backward shift invariant subspaces of $H^2$.
They are called model spaces because the compression of the forward shift to $K_u$ is a model
for a broad class of contractions (see \cite{nfbk}).
A sequence $\{\lambda_j\}$ in $ \mathbb{D} $ is called interpolating (for $H^2$) if
$$E f := \{ \langle f, k_{\lambda_j} \rangle \} \in \ell^2, \ \, \forall f\in H^2
\ \mbox{ and every }\ w\in\ell^2 \ \mbox{ is of this form.}
$$
That is, $E: H^2 \to \ell^2$ is onto.
Here we allow the set of indexes of $\ell^2$ to be the set of natural numbers or a finite section, so finite sequences of different points
will also be called interpolating.
When the above holds, $\{ \lambda_i \}$ is the zero set of a Blaschke product $u$, and the restriction of
$E$ to the model space $E_u: K_u \to \ell^2$ is invertible. Therefore
$$
\| E_u^{-1} \|^{-2} \,\| f\|^2 \leq \sum |\langle f, k_{\lambda_i} \rangle|^2 \leq \| E_u \|^{2} \,\| f\|^2 ,
\ \hspace{0.4cm} \forall f\in K_u.
$$
This is equivalent to say that $\{ k_{\lambda_i} \}$ is a Riesz basis for $K_u$, or without specifying $u$,
that it is a Riesz sequence (see \cite[Lect.\@ 6, 1]{nik}).
This means that there are constants $C_0, \, C_1 >0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{dupy}
C_0 \,\sum_j |c_j|^2 \leq \|\sum_j c_j k_{\lambda_j} \|^2 \leq C_1 \,\sum_j |c_j|^2 ,
\ \hspace{0.4cm} \forall \{ c_j\}\in \ell^2.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, $\{\lambda_j\}$ in $ \mathbb{D} $ is called interpolating (for $H^\infty$) if
$$\forall w\in \ell^\infty(J) \ \mbox{ there is }\ f\in H^\infty \ \mbox{ such that }\
f(\lambda_j) = w_j, \ \, \forall j\in J
$$
(again $J= \mathbb{N}$ or it is finite).
The problem of characterizing interpolating sequences for $H^\infty$ was considered
by several authors until Carleson obtained the definitive version in \cite{carin}.
In \cite{shsh} Shapiro and Shield provided a different proof and showed that
interpolating sequences are the same for all $H^p$, where $1\le p \le \infty$.
For a Blaschke sequence $\{ \lambda_i \}$ write $B$ for its Blaschke product and $B_j = \prod_{i: \, i\neq j} \phi_{\lambda_i}$.
The sequence is interpolating if and only if
$$
\delta(B) := \inf_j |B_j(\lambda_j)| >0 .
$$
A sequence satisfying this condition is usually called uniformly separated.
When this happens, $B_j(\lambda_j)^{-1} B_j\in H^2$,
with $\| B_j(\lambda_j)^{-1} B_j \| \le \delta^{-1}$ (here $\delta:= \delta(B)$), and
$$
f_i = k_{\lambda_i} \ \mbox{ and } \ g_i = \frac{B_i}{B_i(\lambda_i)} \, k_{\lambda_i}
\ \mbox{ are biorthogonal sequences in $K_B$.}
$$
Therefore, when $\{ c_i \} \in \ell^2$, the (unique) function $g\in K_B$ that interpolates
$\langle g, k_{\lambda_j} \rangle = c_j$ for all $j$ is $g(z) = \sum_i c_i g_i(z)$.
Any function $F\in H^2$ satisfying $\langle F, k_{\lambda_j} \rangle = c_j$ for all $j$ has the form
$F = g + Bh$, where $g$ is as above, $h\in H^2$, and $\|F\|^2 = \|g\|^2 + \|h\|^2$
(since $K_B= (BH^2)^\bot$ and multiplication by $B$ is an isometry).
In particular, $g\in K_B$ is the function of minimum norm that satisfies
$\langle g, k_{\lambda_j} \rangle = c_j$ for all $j$. Consequently, \cite[Lemma 3]{shsh} gives us
\begin{equation}\label{ddta}
\| g \|^2 \le (2/\delta^4) (1-2\log\delta) \sum |c_i|^2,
\end{equation}
where $\delta = \delta(B)$.
Also, the constants $C_0$ and $C_1$ of \eqref{dupy} depend only on $\delta$.
Indeed, a more general statement will be given for $C_1$ in Proposition \ref{carlbe}.
For $C_0$ notice that \eqref{ddta} together with Lemma \ref{dualy} imply that
$$
\sum_i |\langle f, g_i \rangle|^2 \le C_\delta \|f \|^2, \hspace{7mm} \forall f\in K_{B},
$$
where $C_\delta$ is the constant of \eqref{ddta}.
In particular, when $f= \sum_j c_j k_{\lambda_j}$, for $\{ c_j \} \in \ell^2$,
we obtain the first inequality in \eqref{dupy} with $C_0= C^{-1}_\delta$.
The pseudo-hyperbolic metric in $ \mathbb{D} $ is given by $\rho(z,w)= |\varphi_z(w)|$, and
we denote the open ball
$$\Delta(z,r) = \{ w\in \mathbb{D} : \ \rho(z,w) <r \},\, \mbox{ where } 0<r<1,
$$
with the usual convention $\overline{\Delta(z,r)}$ for the closed ball. Also, we will use that
Blaschke products satisfy the Lipschitz condition $\rho(B(z), B(w)) \le \rho(z,w)$ for $z,\, w\in \mathbb{D} $,
and the elementary equality
\begin{equation}\label{1menos}
1-|\varphi_v(z)|^2 = \frac{(1-|v|^2)(1-|z|^2)}{|1-\overline{v}z|^2}.
\end{equation}
\section{Basic necessary conditions}
\noindent
Let $\ell^2=\ell^2(J)$, where $J=\mathbb{N}$ or it is finite, and suppose that $A:\ell^2 \to \ell^2$ is a normal operator such that
there are $m$ vectors $a^1, \ldots , a^m\in\ell^2$ so that
$$
\mathcal{F}:= \{ A^n a^i: \ n\in \mathbb{N}\cup\{0\} , \ i=1, \ldots , m\}
$$
is a frame. If this happens, by exploiting the spectral theorem for normal operators it was shown in
\cite[Thm.\@ 5.6]{accmp} that $A$ is diagonalizable. So, from now on we assume that $A$ is a diagonal operator
with respect to the standard basis with eigenvalues $\{\lambda_j\}$. Next we aim to show some of the basic
properties that the $\lambda_j's$ and the vectors $a^i$ ($1\le i\le m$) must satisfy in order for
$\mathcal{F}$ to be a frame.
Let $e_{j_0}$ be the $j_0$ element of the standard basis and $a^i\in \ell^2$ for $i=1, \ldots, m$. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum_n \sum_{i=1} ^m |\langle A^n a^i , e_{j_0} \rangle|^2
&=& \sum_n |\lambda_{j_0}^{2}|^{n} \Big[|a^1_{j_0}|^2 +\cdots + |a^m_{j_0}|^2\Big] \\
&=& \frac{ |a^1_{j_0}|^2 +\cdots + |a^m_{j_0}|^2 }{1-|\lambda_{j_0}|^{2} } .
\end{eqnarray*}
So, the lower bound for a frame implies that this expression is bounded below away from zero, implying that
$\sum_j (1-|\lambda_{j}|^{2}) \lesssim \sum_j \sum_{i=1}^m |a^i_{j}|^2 < \infty$, hence $\lambda_j$
is a Blaschke sequence.
Additionally, the Bessel constant (the upper frame constant) on the standard basis gives
$$
C_0 (1-|\lambda_{j}|^{2}) \le \sum_{i=1} ^m |a^i_{j}|^2 \le C_1 (1-|\lambda_{j}|^{2}) .
$$
In order to simplify notation it is convenient to consider a normalization $\tilde{a}^i$ of the vectors $a^i$.
For $i=1,\ldots ,m\,$ write
$$\alpha^i_j = \overline{a^i_j} (|a^1_{j}|^2+\cdots +|a^m_{j}|^2)^{-\frac{1}{2}}
\ \ \mbox{ and }\ \
\tilde{a}^i_j = \overline{\alpha^i_j} (1-|\lambda_{j}|^{2})^{\frac{1}{2}}, \ (j\in J).
$$
Then $\sum_{i=1}^m|\alpha^i_j|^2 =1$ and $a^i = d \cdot \tilde{a}^i$, a coordinate to coordinate product,
where $d\in \ell^\infty(J)$ is given by
$$
\sqrt{C}_0 \le d_j= \left[ \frac{|a^1_{j}|^2+\cdots +|a^m_{j}|^2}{1-|\lambda_{j}|^{2}}
\right]^{\frac{1}{2}} \le \sqrt{C}_1 .
$$
That is, any $m$ vectors $a^1,\ldots, a^m \in \ell^2(J)$ such that the union of the respective
$A$-orbits satisfies the lower and upper frame bounds when tested against the standard basis,
can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{niunii}
a_j^i = d_j \, \tilde{a}_j^i = d_j \, \overline{\alpha^i_j} (1-|\lambda_{j}|^{2})^{\frac{1}{2}},
\ \ \mbox{ for $j\in J\,$ and $\,1\le i\le m$},
\end{equation}
where $C^{-1} \le d_j\le C\,$ for some $\,C\ge 1\,$ and $\,\sum_{i=1}^m|\alpha^i_j|^2 =1\,$
for all $j\in J$.
Moreover, it is clear that
$\{ A^n a^i \!: \, n\ge 0, \, 1\le i\le m \}$ is a frame (a Bessel sequence)
if and only if $a^i$ are given by \eqref{niunii} and
$\{ A^n \tilde{a}^i \!: \, n\ge 0, \, 1\le i\le m \}$ is a frame (respectively, a Bessel sequence).
So, from now on we work with $\tilde{a}^i$ for $1\le i\le m$.\vspace{1mm}
Write $\tilde{b} = \{ (1-|\lambda_{j}|^{2})^{\frac{1}{2}} \} \in \ell^2(J)$,
and let $c\in \ell^2(J)$, where $J$ could be finite. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum_n |\langle A^n \tilde{b} , c \rangle|^2 &=&
\sum_n \sum_{i,j} \lambda_i^n \overline{\lambda}_j^n (1-|\lambda_i|^2)^{\frac{1}{2}} (1-|\lambda_j|^2)^{\frac{1}{2}} \,
\overline{c}_i c_j \nonumber \\
&=&
\sum_{i,j} \sum_n \lambda_i^n \overline{\lambda}_j^n (1-|\lambda_i|^2)^{\frac{1}{2}} (1-|\lambda_j|^2)^{\frac{1}{2}} \,
\overline{c}_i c_j \ \nonumber \\
&=&
\sum_{i,j} \frac{ (1-|\lambda_i|^2)^{\frac{1}{2}} (1-|\lambda_j|^2)^{\frac{1}{2}} }{1- \lambda_i \overline{\lambda}_j} \,
\overline{c}_i c_j
\nonumber \\
&=& \sum_{i} \sum_{j} \langle c_j k_{\lambda_j}, c_i k_{\lambda_i}\rangle
\ = \ \| \sum_{j}c_j k_{\lambda_j}\|^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
It follows that
\begin{equation}\label{kcat}
\ \ \ \ \sum_n |\langle A^n \tilde{a}^i , c \rangle|^2 = \| \sum_{j}\alpha^i_j c_j k_{\lambda_j}\|^2
\ \ \ \mbox{ for $1\le i\le m$}.
\end{equation}
In particular, when $m=1$, the orbit $\{ A^n \tilde{a}^1, n\ge0\}$ is a frame for $\ell^2$ if and only if
$\{k_{\lambda_j} \}$ is
a Riesz basis for the subspace $K_u =(uH^2)^\bot$, where $u$ is the Blaschke product with zeros $\lambda_j$.
By the previous section this happens if and only if $\{ \lambda_j\}$ is an interpolating sequence
(see \cite[Thm.\@ 3.14]{acmt}).
\subsection{Carleson measures and Bessel sequences}
A positive measure $\mu$ on $ \mathbb{D} $ is called a Carleson measure if
$$\int |f|^2 d\mu \le C^2_2 \|f\|^2\ \ \ \ \forall \ f\in H^2.
$$
It is well known (see \cite[I, Thm.\@5.6]{gar}) that $\mu$ is Carleson if and only if
$$\mu(Q) \le C \ell(Q)$$
for every angular square $Q= \{ re^{i\theta}: 1-\ell \le r <1, \ |\theta -\theta_0| \le \ell \} ,$
where $\ell = \ell(Q)$.
The smallest constant $C$ is called the Carleson norm of $\mu$ and is
denoted by $\| \mu \|_\ast$. Also, the optimal $C_2$
and $\| \mu \|_\ast$ are equivalent quantities.
Carleson measures and interpolating sequences are closely related, as we shall see in the next lemma.
For a sequence $\{ \lambda_j \}$ in $ \mathbb{D} $ consider the purely atomic measure
$\mu= \sum_j (1-|\lambda_j|^2) \delta_{\lambda_j}$, where
$\delta_\lambda$ is the probability measure with mass concentrated at $\lambda\in \mathbb{D} $.
Observe that $\mu( \mathbb{D} ) = \sum_j (1-|\lambda_j|^2) <\infty$ if and only if
$\{\lambda_j\}$ is a Blaschke sequence. Furthermore, it is well known that the following holds.
\begin{lemma}\label{becar}
Let\/ $S= \{ \lambda_j \}$ be a sequence in $ \mathbb{D} $ and $\mu= \sum_j (1-|\lambda_j|^2) \delta_{\lambda_j}$.
Then
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(1)] $S$ is a finite union of interpolating sequences if and only if $\mu$ is Carleson.
\item[(2)] $S$ is interpolating if and only if $\mu$ is Carleson and
$\rho (\lambda_j , \lambda_k) \ge \beta >0$ when $j\neq k$ (i.e.: $S$ is separated).
\end{enumerate}
When {\em (2)} holds and $B$ is the respective Blaschke product, $\delta(B)$ can
be estimated from $\mu$ and $\beta$, and vice versa.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assertion (1) is proved in \cite[Lemma 21]{mc-s}. Assertion (2) can be found in \cite[VII, Thm.\@1.1]{gar}.
The same theorem shows the equivalence of (2) with $S$ being uniformly separated and the
relations between the various parameters are established.
\end{proof}
\noindent The following basic and well-known result on Bessel sequences can be found, for instance,
in \cite[pp.\@ 51-53]{ole}.
\begin{lemma}\label{dualy}
For a sequence $\{ f_j \}$ in $\mathcal{H}$, the next assertions are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(1)] $T (\{ c_j \}) = \sum c_j f_j$ is a bounded operator from $\ell^2$ to $\mathcal{H}$:
$$\| \sum c_j f_j\|^2 \le \| T \|^2 \, \sum |c_j|^2.
$$
\item[(2)] $T^\ast f = \{ \langle f, f_j\rangle \}$ is a bounded operator from $\mathcal{H}$ to $\ell^2$:
$$
\sum |\langle f, f_j\rangle|^2 \le \| T^\ast \|^2 \, \|f\|^2.
$$
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\noindent
In \cite{phi} Philipp uses the notion of Carleson measure on spectral measures to characterize
orbits of normal operators that are Bessel sequences. This connection becomes particularly
clear when dealing with reproducing kernels, as our next result shows.
First, notice that
by \eqref{kcat}, $\{ A^n \tilde{a}^1 , \ldots , A^n \tilde{a}^m \}$
is a Bessel sequence with constant $\le B^2$ if and only if
$\{ \alpha^1_j k_{\lambda_j} ,\ldots ,\alpha^m_j k_{\lambda_j} \}$ is Bessel with constant $\le B^2$.
\begin{propos}\label{carlbe}
The sequence $\{ A^n \tilde{a}^1 , \ldots , A^n \tilde{a}^m \}$ is Bessel with constant $\le B^2$
if and only if the measure $\mu:= \sum_{i} (1-|\lambda_i|^2) \delta_{\lambda_i}$ is Carleson,
where if\/ $C\ge 0$ is such that
$$\int |f|^2 d\mu \le C^2 \|f\|^2, \ \ \ \mbox{ for }\ f\in H^2,$$
then we can take $B^2 \le C^2 \le m B^2$.
\end{propos}
\begin{proof}
If
\begin{equation}\label{nuy}
\big\| \sum_{j}\alpha^1_j c_j k_{\lambda_j}\big\|^2 +\cdots +
\big\| \sum_{j}\alpha^m_j c_j k_{\lambda_j}\big\|^2 \le B^2 \, \sum_{j}|c_j|^2,
\end{equation}
the inequality holds for each member of the left sum.
Hence, Lemma \ref{dualy} says that for all $f\in H^2$,
\begin{align*}
\sum_{j}\sum_{i=1}^m |\alpha^i_j|^2 \, |\langle f, k_{\lambda_j}\rangle |^2
&= \sum_{i=1}^m \sum_{j} |\langle f, \alpha^i_j k_{\lambda_j}\rangle |^2
\ \le \ B^2 \sum_{i=1}^m\|f\|^2.
\end{align*}
Since $|\alpha^1_j|^2+\cdots+|\alpha^m_j|^2=1$, then
$\mu:= \sum_{j} (1-|\lambda_j|^2) \delta_{\lambda_j}$ is Carleson with
$$\int |f|^2 d\mu \le mB^2 \|f\|^2, \ \ \ \ \mbox{ for $f\in H^2$.}
$$
\noindent
Reciprocally, if $\mu$ is Carleson with $\sum_{j}|\langle f, k_{\lambda_j}\rangle |^2 \le C^2 \|f\|^2$,
by Lemma \ref{dualy},
$$\big\| \sum_{j}\alpha^i_j c_j k_{\lambda_j}\big\|^2 \le C^2 \, \sum_{j}|\alpha^i_j|^2 |c_j|^2
\ \ \ \mbox{ for $1\le i\le m\,$}
$$
and $\{ c_j \} \in \ell^2$. Adding for $1\le i\le m$ we get \eqref{nuy} with $B^2 = C^2$.
\end{proof}
\noindent The following estimate for the distance between two normalized reproducing kernels in $H^2$
is sharp and can be found in \cite[Lemma\@ B7]{cmpp}:
\begin{equation}\label{labubu}
\| k_v-k_w \|^2 \le 2 \rho(v,w)^2 \hspace{7mm} \forall v,w \in \mathbb{D} .
\end{equation}
\vspace{0.1mm}
\begin{theo}\label{kasem}
Let $S = \{\lambda_j \}$ be a sequence such that $\sum_{i} (1-|\lambda_i|^2) \delta_{\lambda_i}$ is Carleson
and let $m\in \mathbb{N}$.
Then there is a constant $D>0$ satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{mini}
D^2 \, \sum_{j} |c_j|^2 \le
\sum_{i=1}^m \big\| \sum_{j}\alpha^i_j c_j k_{\lambda_j}\big\|^2
\hspace{6mm} \ \forall c\in \ell^2 .\vspace{-2mm}
\end{equation}
if and only if there is\/ $\eta>0$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(1)] $\Delta(\lambda_j , \eta)$ contains no more than m points of $S$
counting repetitions for all $j$.
\item[(2)]
if\/ $\lambda_{j_1} , \ldots, \lambda_{j_p}$ ($p\le m$) are the points of $S$ in
$\Delta(\lambda_{j_1}, \eta)$ counting repetitions, the related matrix satisfies
$$
D_0^2
\left\|
\begin{bmatrix}
c_{j_1} \\
\vdots \\
c_{j_p} \\
\end{bmatrix}
\right\|^2_{\mathbb{C}^p}
\le
\left\|
\begin{bmatrix}
\alpha^1_{j_1} & ... &\alpha^1_{j_p} \\
\vdots & & \vdots \\
\alpha^m_{j_1} & ... &\alpha^m_{j_p}\\
\end{bmatrix}
%
\begin{bmatrix}
c_{j_1} \\
\vdots \\
c_{j_p} \\
\end{bmatrix}
\right\|^2_{\mathbb{C}^{m \times 1}}
\ \ \ \forall (c_{j_1},\ldots, c_{j_p}) \in \mathbb{C}^p,
$$
where $D_0>0$ does not depend on $p$ or the $\alpha$'s .
\end{enumerate}
\end{theo}
\begin{proof}[Proof of necessity for Theorem \ref{kasem}]
First we show that there exist an $\eta$ such that (1) holds.
Suppose otherwise that for any $\eta >0$ there are at least m+1 points
$\lambda_{j_0}, \lambda_{j_1},\ldots , \lambda_{j_m}$ of $S$ counting repetitions, such that
\begin{equation}\label{etu1}
\lambda_{j_0}, \lambda_{j_1}, \ldots , \lambda_{j_m}\in \Delta(\lambda_{j_0}, \eta).
\end{equation}
To simplify notation we assume that $j_s = s$ for $s=0,\ldots,m$.
Taking $c= (c_0, \ldots, c_m , 0 , \ldots ) \in \ell^2$, each summand of
the right side of \eqref{mini} is
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{ \hspace{3mm} \big\| \sum_{j=0}^m\alpha^i_j c_j k_{\lambda_j}\big\|^2 = }\\*[-1mm] &=&
\Big\| \Big[\sum_{j=0}^m c_j \alpha^i_j\Big] k_{\lambda_0} + c_1 \alpha^i_1 [k_{\lambda_1}-k_{\lambda_0} ]
+ \cdots + c_m \alpha^i_m [k_{\lambda_m}-k_{\lambda_0} ]\Big\|^2 ,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $1\le i\le m$. If we take a normalized vector $c\in \mathbb{C}^{m+1}$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{bmatrix}
\alpha^1_0 & \ldots & \alpha^1_m \\
\vdots & & \vdots \\
\alpha^{m}_0 & \ldots & \alpha^{m}_m
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
c_0 \\
\vdots \\
c_m \\
\end{bmatrix}
=
\begin{bmatrix}
0 \\
\vdots \\
0 \\
\end{bmatrix},
\end{equation*}
by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and \eqref{labubu}, the right side of \eqref{mini} becomes
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{ \sum_{i=1}^m \big\| c_1 \alpha^i_1 [k_{\lambda_1}-k_{\lambda_0} ]
+ \cdots + c_m \alpha^i_m [k_{\lambda_m}-k_{\lambda_0} ] \big\|^2 \le } \hspace{15mm} \\*[-2mm]
&\le&
m \sum_{i=1}^m \Big( \big\| c_1 \alpha^i_1 [k_{\lambda_1}-k_{\lambda_0} ]\big\|^2
+ \cdots + \big\|c_m \alpha^i_m [k_{\lambda_m}-k_{\lambda_0} ] \big\|^2 \Big) \\
&\le&
m 2\eta^2 \sum_{i=1}^m \big(|c_1 \alpha^i_1|^2 + \cdots + |c_m \alpha^i_m|^2 \big) \le 2m\eta^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, \eqref{mini} applied to this particular case says that $D^2 \le 2m \eta^2$.
This means that \eqref{etu1} can't happen for $\eta < D/\sqrt{2m}$.\\
\noindent
Assume now that $\eta$ satisfies (1)
and suppose that
for $1\le p\le m$, we have
$$
\lambda_{j_1}, \ldots , \lambda_{j_p}\in \Delta(\lambda_{j_1}, \eta).
$$
As before, we write $j=1, \ldots , p$ instead of $j_1, \ldots, j_p$. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
\big\| \sum_{j=1}^p\alpha^i_j c_j k_{\lambda_j}\big\|^2 \! &=& \!
\Big\| \Big[\sum_{j=1}^p c_j \alpha^i_j\Big] k_{\lambda_1} + c_1 \alpha^i_1 [k_{\lambda_2}-k_{\lambda_1} ]
+ \cdots + c_p \alpha^i_p [k_{\lambda_p}-k_{\lambda_1} ] \Big\|^2 \\
&\hspace{-47mm}\le& \hspace{-25mm} m\left[
\Big\| \Big[\sum_{j=1}^p c_j \alpha^i_j\Big] k_{\lambda_1} \Big\|^2 +
\| c_1 \alpha^i_1 [k_{\lambda_2}-k_{\lambda_1} ] \big\|^2
+ \cdots + \| c_p \alpha^i_p [k_{\lambda_p}-k_{\lambda_1} ]\|^2 \right] .
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent So, if $c= (c_1, \ldots, c_p , 0 , \ldots ) \in \ell^2$, by \eqref{mini} applied to this case
and \eqref{labubu},
\begin{eqnarray*}
D^2 \sum_{j=1}^p |c_j|^2 &\le & \sum_{i=0}^m
\big\| \sum_{j=1}^p\alpha^i_j c_j k_{\lambda_j}\big\|^2 \\
&\le&
\sum_{i=0}^m m\left(
\Big|\sum_{j=1}^p c_j \alpha^i_j\Big|^2 + 2 \eta^2 |c_1 \alpha^i_1|^2
+ \cdots + 2 \eta^2 |c_p \alpha^i_p|^2 \right) ,
\end{eqnarray*}
which clearly implies that
$$
D^2
\left\|
\begin{bmatrix}
c_{ 1} \\
\vdots \\
c_{ p} \\
\end{bmatrix}
\right\|^2_{\mathbb{C}^p}
\le
m\left\|
\begin{bmatrix}
\alpha^1_{ 1} & ... &\alpha^1_{ p} \\
\vdots & & \vdots \\
\alpha^m_{ 1} & ... &\alpha^m_{ p}\\
\end{bmatrix}
%
\begin{bmatrix}
c_{ 1} \\
\vdots \\
c_{ p} \\
\end{bmatrix}
\right\|^2_{\mathbb{C}^{m \times 1}}
\! \! \! +2m\eta^2
\left\|
\begin{bmatrix}
c_{ 1} \\
\vdots \\
c_{ p} \\
\end{bmatrix}
\right\|^2_{\mathbb{C}^p}
$$
for every $(c_{ 1},\ldots, c_{ p}) \in \mathbb{C}^p$.
Thus, if $\Upsilon$ denotes the above matrix and $c\in \mathbb{C}^p$ is normalized,
when $2m \eta^2 < D^2$ we get
$$
0<D_0^2=\frac{D^2- 2m \eta^2}{m} \le \| \Upsilon c\|^2 .
$$
\end{proof}
\subsection{Differences of normalized reproducing kernels}
For $E\subset \mathbb{D} $ and $0<r<1$ we write $\Omega_r(E):= \{ z\in \mathbb{D} : \rho(z,E)\le r \}$.
\begin{lemma}
Let $\mu_0= \sum (1-|\lambda_j|^2) \delta_{\lambda_j}$ be a Carleson measure, $0<r<1$
and\/ $\lambda'_j \in \Delta(\lambda_j, r)$.
Then $\mu_r= \sum (1-|\lambda'_j|^2) \delta_{\lambda'_j}$ is a Carleson measure
such that for some constant $C(r) \ge 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{omy}
C(r)^{-1} \, \|\mu_r\|_{\ast} \le \|\mu_0\|_{\ast} \le C(r) \, \|\mu_r\|_{\ast} .
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By \cite[p.$\,$3]{gar} any $z\in \overline{\Delta(\lambda_j, r)}$ satisfies $|z| \le \varphi_{|\lambda_j|} (-r)$.
Then \eqref{1menos} implies that for any angular square $Q\subset \mathbb{D} $,
$$
\mu_r(\Omega_r(Q)) \ge \sum_{\lambda_j \in Q} (1-|\varphi_{|\lambda_j|} (-r)|^2)
= \sum_{\lambda_j \in Q} \frac{(1-|\lambda_j|^2)(1-r^2)}{(1 + |\lambda_j| r)^2 }
\ge \frac{1-r}{1+r} \mu_0(Q) .
$$
If $Q_r$ is the smallest angular square containing $\Omega_r(Q)$, there is $c(r) \ge 1$ such that
$\ell(Q_r) \le c(r) \ell(Q)$. Hence,
$$
\left[\frac{1-r}{1+r} \right] \, \frac{\mu_0(Q)}{c(r)\ell(Q)} \le \frac{\mu_r(Q_r)}{\ell(Q_r)} ,
$$
implying that
$$
\|\mu_0\|_{\ast} \le \frac{1+r}{1-r} c(r) \, \|\mu_r\|_{\ast} = C(r) \, \|\mu_r\|_{\ast}.
$$
Hence the lemma follows by symmetry.
\end{proof}
\vspace{1mm}
\noindent In what follows a Bessel sequence $\{ f_j \}$ in $H^2$, that is,
$$
\sum_j |\langle f ,f_j\rangle |^2 \le B^2 \|f\|^2 \ \ \ \ \forall f\in H^2, \vspace{-3mm}
$$
we write $\mathcal{B}^2(\{ f_j\})$ for the smallest constant $B^2$.\\
\begin{coro}\label{muss}
Let $\mu_0= \sum (1-|\lambda_j|^2) \delta_{\lambda_j}$ be a Carleson measure, $0<r<1$
and $\lambda'_j \in \overline{\Delta(\lambda_j, r)}$.
Then $\{ k_{\lambda'_j} \}$ is Bessel with
$\mathcal{B}^2( \{ k_{\lambda'_j}\} ) \le C(r, \|\mu_0\|_\ast)$.
\end{coro}
\begin{proof}
By \eqref{omy} $\mu_r= \sum (1-|\lambda'_j|^2) \delta_{\lambda'_j}$ is a Carleson
measure with $\| \mu_r \|_\ast$ depending on $r$ and $\| \mu_0 \|_\ast$.
Therefore, the comments preceding Lemma \ref{becar} say that
there is $C_r\ge 0$ depending on $\| \mu_r \|_\ast$ such that
$$\int |f|^2 d\mu_r \le C_r^2 \|f\|^2, \ \ \ \mbox{ for }\ f\in H^2.$$
Thus, $\{ k_{\lambda'_j} \}$ is Bessel with
$\mathcal{B}\big(\{ k_{\lambda'_j} \}\big)\le C_r^2$ by Prop.$\ $\ref{carlbe}.
\end{proof}
\vspace{1.5mm}
\noindent
If $\lambda_1, \ldots , \lambda_N\in \mathbb{D} $ and $\lambda'_j \in \Delta( \lambda_j, \eta)$
for some $0<\eta <1$, then \eqref{labubu} implies that the Bessel constant
$$
\mathcal{B}^2\big( \{ k_{\lambda_j}-k_{\lambda'_j} \}\big) \le 2N \eta^2.
$$
Next we see how to control this constant for infinitely many values of $\lambda_j$.
Together with Theorem \ref{kasem}, this is the main result of the paper.
\begin{theo}\label{difere}
Let $\mu_0= \sum (1-|\lambda_j|^2) \delta_{\lambda_j}$ be a Carleson measure, $0<r<1$,
and $\lambda'_j \in \Delta( \lambda_j, \eta)$, where\/ $0<\eta <r$.
Then there is a constant $C>0$ depending only on $r$ and $\{ \lambda_j \}$
such that
$$
\mathcal{B}\big(\{ k_{\lambda_i}-k_{\lambda'_i}\} \big) \le C \eta.
$$
\end{theo}
\begin{proof}
Since by Lemma \ref{becar}, $\{\lambda_i \}$ is a finite union of interpolating sequences,
we can assume that it is interpolating.
Let $B$ be the Blaschke product with zeros $\lambda_i$, write $B_i= B/ \phi_{\lambda_i}$
(i.e.: $B$ with the factor $\phi_{\lambda_i}$ removed) and recall that
$\delta(B) = \inf_i |B_i(\lambda_i)|>0$.
We prove first the result for $f\in K_B$, which by \eqref{ddta} can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{tupi}
f= \sum_i c_i \frac{B_i}{B_i(\lambda_i)} k_{\lambda_i},
\ \mbox{ with $c\in \ell^2\ $ and }\ \|f\| \le C_\delta \|c\|_{\ell^2} ,
\end{equation}
where $C_\delta>0$ is a constant depending only on $\delta(B)$.
So,
\begin{align}
\langle f , k_{\lambda_j}-k_{\lambda'_j} \rangle &=
\Big\langle c_j \frac{B_j}{B_j(\lambda_j)} k_{\lambda_j} , k_{\lambda_j}-k_{\lambda'_j} \Big\rangle +
\Big\langle \sum_{i: i\ne j} c_i \frac{B_i}{B_i(\lambda_i)} k_{\lambda_i}, k_{\lambda_j}-k_{\lambda'_j} \Big\rangle \nonumber\\
&= c_j \left(1- \frac{B_j(\lambda'_j)}{B_j(\lambda_j)} \langle k_{\lambda_j} , k_{\lambda'_j} \rangle \right)-
\Big\langle \sum_{i: i\ne j} c_i \frac{B_i}{B_i(\lambda_i)} k_{\lambda_i}, k_{\lambda'_j} \Big\rangle \nonumber\\
&= D_j -R_j . \ \label{qu1}
\end{align}
$$
\hspace{-12mm}\mbox{To estimate } \ \,
D_j =
\frac{c_j}{B_j(\lambda_j)}
\left[B_j(\lambda_j)- B_j(\lambda'_j) +
B_j(\lambda'_j) ( 1- \langle k_{\lambda_j} , k_{\lambda'_j} \rangle ) \right]
$$
we notice that
\begin{equation}\label{qu2}
|D_j| \le
\left|\frac{c_j}{B_j(\lambda_j)}\right| \,
\left[ 2\rho(\lambda_j , \lambda'_j) + \sqrt{2}\rho(\lambda_j , \lambda'_j) \right]
\le |c_j| \, 4 \frac{\rho(\lambda_j , \lambda'_j)}{\delta(B)},
\end{equation}
where the first inequality comes from
$\rho(B_j(\lambda_j), B_j(\lambda'_j)) \le \rho(\lambda_j, \lambda'_j)\,$
and from \eqref{labubu}.
To estimate $R_j$ write $B_{i,j}= B/ (\phi_{\lambda_i}\phi_{\lambda_j})$.
For $0<r<1$ consider the analytic function $F_j: \overline{\Delta(\lambda_j , r)} \to \mathbb{C}$ given by
$$
F_j(\lambda') =
\sum_{i: i\ne j} \frac{c_i}{B_i(\lambda_i)}\, \langle B_{i,j} k_{\lambda_i}, K_{\lambda'} \rangle ,
$$
where $K_\lambda(z) = (1-\overline{\lambda}z)^{-1}$ is the reproducing kernel for $H^2$.
By the maximum modulus principle $F_j$ attains its maximum on the boundary of $ \Delta(\lambda_j , r)$.
That is, there is $\lambda''_j \in \partial\Delta(\lambda_j , r)$ (i.e.: $\rho(\lambda_j , \lambda''_j)=r$) such that
$$
|F_j(\lambda')| \le |F_j(\lambda''_j)| \ \mbox{ for every }\ \lambda' \in \overline{\Delta(\lambda_j , r)}.
$$
Since $\lambda' = \varphi_{\lambda_j}(w)$ with $0\le |w| \le r$,
a straightforward estimate from formula \eqref{1menos} gives
$$
\left[\frac{1-r}{1+r}\right] (1-|\lambda_j|^2)
\le (1-|\lambda'|^2) \le
\left[\frac{1+r}{1-r}\right] (1-|\lambda_j|^2) ,
$$
implying that
\begin{equation}\label{atla}
(1-|\lambda'|^2) |F_j(\lambda')|^2 \le C_1(r)\, (1-|\lambda''_j|^2) |F_j(\lambda''_j)|^2
\end{equation}
for some constant $C_1(r) >0$. Since
$|\phi_{\lambda_j} (\lambda''_j)| = \rho(\lambda_j, \lambda''_j) =r$, then
\begin{align*}
r(1-|\lambda''_j|^2)^{\frac{1}{2}} |F_j(\lambda''_j)| &=
\Big| \phi_{\lambda_j} (\lambda''_j)\sum_{i: i\ne j} \frac{c_i}{B_i(\lambda_i)}\, \langle B_{i,j} k_{\lambda_i}, k_{\lambda''_j} \rangle \Big| \\
&= \Big| \sum_{i: i\ne j} \frac{c_i}{B_i(\lambda_i)}\,
\langle B_{i} k_{\lambda_i}, k_{\lambda''_j} \rangle \Big| \\
&\le \Big| \sum_{i} \frac{c_i}{B_i(\lambda_i)}\,
\langle B_{i} k_{\lambda_i}, k_{\lambda''_j} \rangle \Big| + \Big|\frac{c_j}{B_j(\lambda_j)}\,
\langle B_{j} k_{\lambda_j}, k_{\lambda''_j}\rangle \Big|.
\end{align*}
Consequently, the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality gives
\begin{align}
r^{2}\sum_j (1-|\lambda''_j|^2) |F_j(\lambda''_j)|^{2}
&\le 2\sum_j |\langle f, k_{\lambda''_j}\rangle|^2 + 2\sum_j \Big|\frac{c_j}{B_j(\lambda_j)}\Big|^2 \nonumber\\
&\le 2\mathcal{B}(\{k_{\lambda''_j}\})^2 \|f\|^2 + 2\delta(B)^{-2}\sum_j |c_j|^2 \nonumber\\
&\le C_2(r, \| \mu_0 \|_\ast , \delta(B))\sum_j |c_j|^2 , \ \label{tagdd}
\end{align}
where the last inequality holds by \eqref{tupi} and because by Corollary \ref{muss}
the Bessel constant $\mathcal{B}\big(\{ k_{\lambda''_j} \}\big)^2$
has a bound that depends only on $r$ and $\| \mu_0 \|_\ast$.
\noindent
So, if $\rho(\lambda_j, \lambda'_j) \le \eta \le r$, \eqref{atla} and \eqref{tagdd} yield
\begin{align}
\sum_j \Big| \sum_{i: i\ne j} \frac{c_i}{B_i(\lambda_i)}\,
\langle B_{i} k_{\lambda_i}, k_{\lambda'_j} \rangle \Big|^2
&=
\sum_j |\phi_{\lambda_j}(\lambda'_j)|^2 \, \Big| \sum_{i: i\ne j} \frac{c_i}{B_i (\lambda_i)}\,
\langle B_{i,j} k_{\lambda_i}, k_{\lambda'_j} \rangle \Big|^2 \nonumber \\
&=
\sum_j |\phi_{\lambda_j}(\lambda'_j)|^2 (1-|\lambda'_j|^2) | F_j(\lambda'_j)|^2 \nonumber\\
&\le \eta^2 \, C_3(r, \| \mu_0 \|_\ast , \delta(B))\sum_j |c_j|^2 . \ \ \label{qu3}
\end{align}
Inserting inequalities \eqref{qu2} and \eqref{qu3} in \eqref{qu1}, and using Cauchy-Schwarz again,
we obtain
\begin{align*}
\sum_j |\langle f , k_{\lambda_j}-k_{\lambda'_j} \rangle|^2 &\le
\eta^2 \, 2\!\left[\frac{4^2}{\delta(B)^2} + C_3(r, \| \mu_0 \|_\ast , \delta(B))\right]
\sum_j |c_j|^2 .
\end{align*}
Since $c_j=\langle f,k_{\lambda_j}\rangle$, this proves the theorem for $f\in K_B$. A general $h\in H^2$ decomposes as $h= f +Bg$, where
$f\in K_B$, $g\in H^2$ and $\|h\|^2=\|f\|^2 + \|g\|^2$. Thus,
$$
\langle f+Bg, k_{\lambda_j}-k_{\lambda'_j} \rangle
=\langle f, k_{\lambda_j}-k_{\lambda'_j} \rangle - B(\lambda'_j) \langle g, k_{\lambda'_j} \rangle ,
$$
and since $|B(\lambda'_j)| = \rho(B(\lambda_j), B(\lambda'_j)) \le \rho(\lambda_j, \lambda'_j) \le \eta$,
\begin{align*}
\sum_j |\langle f+Bg, k_{\lambda_j}-k_{\lambda'_j} \rangle|^2 &\le
2\sum_j |\langle f, k_{\lambda_j}-k_{\lambda'_j} \rangle|^2 + 2\eta^2 \sum_j | \langle g, k_{\lambda'_j} \rangle|^2 \\
&\le
\eta^2 C(r, \| \mu_0 \|_\ast , \delta(B)) \, (\|f\|^2 + \|g\|^2),
\end{align*}
where the last inequality uses the result for $f\in K_B$ and Corollary \ref{muss}.
\end{proof}
\section{Separation conditions}
\noindent
{\bf Definition.}
We say that a sequence (finite or not) $S$ in $ \mathbb{D} $ is $m$-separated (with radius $\ge \beta$) if
every pseudo-hyperbolic ball $\Delta(z, \beta)$, with $z\in S$, has no more than $m$ points of
$S$ including repetitions.\\
\noindent It is clear that if we take $0<\beta_1 < \beta$ in the above definition then $S$ is also
$m$-separated with radius $\ge\beta_1$. Also, $(m-1)$-separated implies $m$-separated, and $1$-separated simply means
separated, as in (2) of Lemma \ref{becar}.
Since the order of a sequence will not be relevant in what follows,
we operate with them as if they were sets with pointwise multiplicities.
So, for instance, the union of two sequences has the points of both with the sum
of multiplicities and some order.
\begin{lemma}\label{vx1}
Let $S$ be an $m$-separated sequence in $ \mathbb{D} $ with radius $\ge \beta$.
Then $S$ splits into at most $m$ separated sequences (finite or not) with radius $\ge \beta/4m$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider the balls $\Delta(z_n, \beta/4m)$ including repetitions of the $z_n\in S$.
Let $U\subset \bigcup_{z_n\in S} \Delta(z_n, \beta/4m)$ be a connected component. Hence, $U$ is a union
of these balls and we show that there cannot be more than $m$ of them (including repetitions). Otherwise,
$$U \supset \Delta(z_{n(1)}, \beta/4m) \cup \ldots \cup \Delta(z_{n(m+1)}, \beta/4m) ,
$$
where the union of balls is connected and has pseudo-hyperbolic diameter $\le 2(m+1) \beta/4m\le \beta$.
Consequently, $\Delta(z_{n(1)}, \beta)$ contains the points
$z_{n(j)}$ for $j=1, \ldots , m+1$, contradicting the hypothesis. Therefore
$$U = \Delta(z_{n(1)}, \beta/4m) \cup \ldots \cup \Delta(z_{n(k)}, \beta/4m) ,
\ \mbox{ where $k\le m$}.
$$
If we accept the empty set and finite sequences then $S = \bigcup_{j=1}^m S_j$, where
$S_j = \{z_{n(j)}\in U: \, U \mbox{ is a connected componente}\}$ for $1\le j\le m$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{vx2}
Let $S$ be an $m$-separated sequence in $ \mathbb{D} $.
Then there is a set $J\subset \{ 1, \ldots , m\}$ and parameters\/ $0< \eta_p < \gamma_p<1$, for $p\in J$,
such that $S$ splits into subsequences $S_p\, (p\in J)$ (finite or infinite), so that when $p\in J$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] There is a single multiplicity sequence $S'_p \subset S_p$
such that
$$S_p = \bigcup \{ \Delta( z'_n(p), \eta_p )\cap S : \ z'_n(p)\in S'_p\},$$
where each $\Delta( z'_n(p), \eta_p )$ has $p$ points of $S_p$ counting
multiplicities.
\item[(ii)] $\rho (z'_n(p), z'_k(p)) > \gamma_p\ $ if $\ n\ne k$.
\item[(iii)] $\rho (S_p, S_k) > (4/5)\gamma_p\ $ if $\ p> k$, and\/ $p, k\in J$.
\item[(iv)]
Once $\gamma_p$ is obtained by reverse induction we can choose $0<\eta_p < \gamma_p$ arbitrarily small,
eventually lowering the index $p$ until $S_p \neq \emptyset$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By hypothesis there is a radius $\beta_m >0$ such that $S$ is $m$-separated of radius $\ge \beta_m$.
Hence, by the previous lemma, $S$ splits into at most $m$ separated
sequences $T_1, \ldots, T_m$ of separation $\ge \beta_m/4m: = \gamma_m$
(some could be empty or finite).
Chose any $0<\eta_m < \gamma_m /10$, and set
$$
S'_m = \{ z'_n \in T_m : \Delta(z'_n , \eta_m) \mbox{ has just $m$ points of $S$ counting repetitions}\},
$$
and let $S_m$ be the sequence of all the points of $S$ in those balls.
If $S_m= \emptyset$, we reindex the parameters $\gamma_m$ and $\eta_m$ as
$\gamma_{m-1}$ and $\eta_{m-1}$, respectively, declare that $m\not\in J$ and
keep the process with $m-1$ instead of $m$.
Notice that by definition, $S_m=\emptyset\,$ if and only if $\,S'_m=\emptyset$, which holds if $\,T_m=\emptyset$.
If $S_m\neq \emptyset$, we keep $m\in J$ and notice that each of the balls has one and only one point
of each $T_q\ (1\le q\le m)$, because the distance between two different points in $T_q$ is $\ge \gamma_m$.
Thus,
\begin{equation}\label{dory}
\rho (z'_n, z'_k) > \gamma_m \ \mbox{ if $n\ne k$}, \, \mbox{ and }\ \,
\rho(S_m, S\setminus S_m) > \gamma_m - 2 \eta_m\ge \frac{4}{5}\gamma_m.
\end{equation}
If the remaining $S\setminus S_m$ is empty we are done. Otherwise it is a $(m-1)$-separated sequence
(with radius $\ge \eta_m/2$).
Indeed, if there is $z\in S\setminus S_m$ such that $\Delta (z, \eta_m/2)$ has at least
$m$ points of $S\setminus S_m$ counting multiplicities, then this ball has at least one point
$z'$ of $T_m$, and consequently $\Delta (z', \eta_m)$ has at least $m$ points
of $S$. In addition, since $\eta_m < \gamma_m/10<\beta_m$, it cannot have more than $m$ points of $S$.
Thus, $\Delta (z', \eta_m)$ has exactly $m$ points of $S$, implying that
all the points of $S$ in $\Delta (z', \eta_m)$ are in $S_m$, a contradiction.
Therefore, we can repeat the process above with $S\setminus S_m$ instead of $S$,
$m-1$ instead of $m$ and $\beta_{m-1}:= \eta_m/2$.
So, again there is $\gamma_{m-1}>0$ analogously defined and we can choose
$0<\eta_{m-1} < \gamma_{m-1} /10 $, otherwise arbitrary, to define
analogous $S'_{m-1}$ and $S_{m-1}$ as before, just observing that
they could be empty, in which case $m-1\not\in J$ and we lower the index from $m-1$ to $m-2$.
We keep this process going until we exhaust all the points of $S$.
Since the construction repeats condition \eqref{dory} for each $p\in J$, we get that if $p\in J$,
$$\rho (z'_n, z'_k) > \gamma_p \ \mbox{ for $z'_n, z'_k \in S'_p\ $ with $n\ne k$}
$$
and
$$
\rho(S_p, S\setminus {\textstyle \bigcup} \{ S_q: q\in J, \, q\ge p\} ) > \gamma_p - 2 \eta_p\ge \frac{4}{5}\gamma_p.
$$
Thus, if $p, k\in J$, with $p>k$, then $S_k\subset S\setminus \bigcup \{ S_q: q\in J, \, q\ge p\}$,
and consequently
$$
\rho(S_p, S_k ) \ge \frac{4}{5}\gamma_p.
$$
Therefore (ii) and (iii) hold. Also, (i) and (iv) hold by construction.
\end{proof}
\vspace{1mm}\noindent
Suppose that $S=\{ \lambda_j\}$ is $m$-separated and $\sum (1-|\lambda_j|^2) \delta_{\lambda_j}$ is a
Carleson measure. By Lemma \ref{vx1} and Lemma \ref{becar}, $S$ is the union of at most
$m$ interpolating sequences. More importantly for our purpose,
each $S_p = \{ \lambda_j(p) : \, j\ge 1 \}$ of the decomposition
given by Lemma \ref{vx2} is a finite union of interpolating sequences.
Let $B_p$ be the Blaschke product whose zeros are $S_p$ counting multiplicities,
or $B_p\equiv 1$ if $S_p=\emptyset$.
It is then known (see \cite{kerr}) that
\begin{equation}\label{vchi}
\inf\{ |B(z)| : \rho(z, S_p) \ge \gamma \}>0 \, \ \mbox{ for any } \gamma>0.
\end{equation}
That is, $B_p$ is bounded below away from zero at any fixed positive distance of its zeros,
which fails for arbitrary Blaschke products. Now define
$$
A_q := \prod_{p=1, \, p\neq q}^m B_p
\ \ \mbox{ and }\ \
f_q^i = \sum_j c_j(q) \alpha_j^i(q) k_{\lambda_j(q)} \in K_{B_q},
$$
for $1\le i, q\le m$\/ and $\{c_j(q)\}_j\in \ell^2$,
where \/$|\alpha_j^1(q)|^2 +\cdots + |\alpha_j^m(q)|^2=1$
for all $1\le q \le m\,$ and $j\ge 1$. Also, notice that $f^i_q=0= c_j(q)$ if $B_q \equiv 1$.
Since the zeros of $A_q$ are $\bigcup_{p=1, \, p\neq q}^m S_p $ and by (iii) of Lemma \ref{vx2},
$$\rho \Big(\bigcup_{p=1, \, p\neq q}^m S_p , S_q\Big)>0,
$$
it follows from \eqref{vchi} that
$$0 < \varepsilon_q = \inf \{ |A_q(\lambda_j(q))|: \, j\ge 1 \}.
$$
We also need an elementary fact about Toeplitz operators.
If $g\in \mbox{\( H^{\infty} \)}( \mathbb{D} )$, it is easy to prove that
the normalized reproducing kernels for $H^2$ are eigenvalues of the Toeplitz operator
$T_{\overline{g}}$ such that $T_{\overline{g}} k_\lambda = \overline{g(\lambda)} k_\lambda$. \\
\noindent
The next proposition will allow us to reduce the proof of sufficiency of Theorem \ref{kasem} to
a particular case. We keep the above notations.
\begin{propos}\label{blakees-m}
If
\begin{equation}\label{lox}
\sum_{i=1}^m \| f_q^i \|^2 \ge D_q ^2 \sum_j |c_j(q)|^2
\end{equation}
for all\/ $1\le q\le m$ and $\{c_j(q)\}_j \in \ell^2$, then
$$
m \sum_{i=1}^m \| f_1^i + \cdots + f_m^i \|^2 \ge
\min_{1\le q\le m} \{D_q^2 \varepsilon_q^2\} \sum_{q=1}^m \sum_j |c_j(q)|^2 .
$$
\end{propos}
\begin{proof}
Since $T_{\overline{A}_q}$ is a contraction on $H^2$, for each $1\le i\le m$,
\begin{align*}
\| f_1^i + \cdots + f_m^i \|^2 &\ge \| T_{\overline{A}_q} (f_1^i + \cdots + f_m^i) \|^2
\, =\, \| T_{\overline{A}_q} f_q^i \|^2 \\*[1mm]
&= \big\| \sum_j c_j(q) \alpha_j^i(q) \overline{A_q(\lambda_j(q))} k_{\lambda_j(q)} \big\|^2
\end{align*}
for $1\le q\le m$. So, by \eqref{lox},
$$
\sum_{i=1}^m \| f_1^i + \cdots + f_m^i \|^2 \ge D_q^2 \sum_j |c_j(q)|^2 \, |A_q(\lambda_j(q))|^2
\ge D_q^2 \sum_j |c_j(q)|^2 \varepsilon_q^2 .
$$
Adding these inequalities for $1\le q\le m$, we obtain
$$
m\sum_{i=1}^m \| f_1^i + \cdots + f_m^i \|^2 \ge \sum_{q=1}^m D_q^2 \varepsilon_q^2 \sum_j |c_j(q)|^2
\ge \min_{1\le q\le m} \{D_q^2 \varepsilon_q^2\} \, \sum_{q=1}^m \sum_j |c_j(q)|^2 .
\vspace{-5mm}
$$
\end{proof}
\subsection{The sufficiency of Theorem \ref{kasem}}
\noindent Finally, the proof of Theorem \ref{kasem} needs the following elementary inequality.
\begin{lemma}
If $x, y_1 , \ldots , y_p \in H^2$, with $p\le m$, then
\begin{equation}
\Big\| x+ \sum_{k=1}^p y_k \Big\|^2 \ge \frac{\| x \|^2}{2} - m\sum_{k=1}^p \| y_k \|^2 .
\label{ichito}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This follows using Cauchy-Schwarz's inequality twice. For $y\in H^2$,
$\| x \|^2 \le 2 \| x+y \|^2 + 2 \| y \|^2$,
so $\| x+y \|^2 \ge \| x \|^2/2 - \| y \|^2$.
Then,
$$
\Big\| x+ \sum_{k=1}^p y_k \Big\|^2 \ge \frac{\| x \|^2}{2} - \Big\| \sum_{k=1}^p y_k \Big\|^2
\ge \frac{\| x \|^2}{2} - p\sum_{k=1}^p \| y_k \|^2 .
\vspace{-4mm}
$$
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of sufficiency for Theorem \ref{kasem}]
\hspace{1mm} Since by (1) of the theorem, $S=\{\lambda_j\}$ is $m$-separated and
$\mu= \sum_{i} (1-|\lambda_i|^2) \delta_{\lambda_i}$ is a Carleson measure,
Lemma \ref{vx2} and the comments that follow the lemma apply to $S$.
Therefore, we have the decomposition of the lemma
$$
S= \bigcup_{p\in J} S_p, \ \mbox{ with } J\subset \{1,\ldots , m\},
$$
where by (iv) we can choose $\eta_p<\eta$ for all $p\in J$
(here $\eta$ is the parameter of Theorem \ref{kasem}).
This guarantees that the sequences $S_p$ satisfy (2) of the theorem for each
ball appearing in (i) of Lemma \ref{vx2}.
Furthermore, Proposition \ref{blakees-m} reduces the problem of proving \eqref{mini} for the sequence $S$
to prove it for each sequence $S_p$ from the above decomposition.
Therefore we fix an arbitrary $p$ between $1$ and $m$.
The subsequence $S'_p$ in (i) of Lemma \ref{vx2} is
separated with radius of separation $\ge \gamma_p$, so Lemma \ref{becar} says that
it is itself interpolating.
We re-index $S_p$ as follows: write $S'_p= \{ \lambda_j(1) : j\ge 1 \}$ and
$\{ \lambda_j(\nu) : 1\le \nu\le p\}$ for the $p$ elements of $S_p$ that are in
$\Delta( \lambda_j(1) , \eta_p)$. Therefore
$$
S_p = \{ \lambda_j(\nu) : 1\le \nu\le p, \ 1\le j\} ,
$$
and the respective parameters of Theorem \ref{kasem} write as
$c_j(\nu)$ and $\alpha_j^i(\nu)$, for $1\le \nu\le p, \ 1\le j$ and $1\le i\le m$.
We see that for each $1\le i\le m$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{ \big\| \sum_{j\ge 1} \sum_{\nu=1}^p c_j(\nu) \alpha_j^i(\nu) k_{\lambda_j(\nu) }\big\|^2 = }
\nonumber \\
&=& \hspace{-1mm}
\Big\| \sum_{j\ge 1} \Big[
\Big(\sum_{\nu=1}^p c_j(\nu) \alpha_j^i(\nu) \Big)\, k_{\lambda_j(1)} +
\sum_{\nu=2}^p c_j(\nu) \alpha_j^i(\nu)\, \big(k_{\lambda_j(\nu)}- k_{\lambda_j(1)}\big)\Big] \Big\|^2
\nonumber \\
&\hspace{-4mm}\mbox{}&
\hspace{6mm}
\ge \, \frac{1}{2} \Big\|
\sum_{j\ge 1} \Big(\sum_{\nu=1}^p c_j(\nu) \alpha_j^i(\nu) \Big)\, k_{\lambda_j(1)} \Big\|^2 -
\nonumber \\
&\ &
\hspace{6mm}
-\ m \sum_{\nu=2}^p \Big\| \sum_{j\ge 1} c_j(\nu) \alpha_j^i(\nu)\,
\big( k_{\lambda_j(\nu)}- k_{\lambda_j(1)}\big) \Big\|^2,
\label{jd0}
\end{eqnarray}
where the inequality holds by \eqref{ichito}.
If $B$ is the Blaschke product with zeros $\{\lambda_j(1)\}_j$, Lemma \ref{becar} says that
$\delta(B)$ is estimated depending on $\gamma_p$ and the measure $\mu$ associated to $S$.
Thus, the comments that follow \eqref{ddta}
imply that
$\{ k_{\lambda_j(1)}: \, j\ge 1\}$ is a Riesz sequence with lower constant
$D_1^2$ independent of $\eta_p$ (only depends on $\gamma_p$ and $\mu$).
Hence,
$$
\big\|
\sum_{j\ge 1} \big(\sum_{\nu=1}^p c_j(\nu) \alpha_j^i(\nu) \big)\, k_{\lambda_j(1)} \big\|^2
\ge D_1^2
\sum_{j\ge 1} \big|\sum_{\nu=1}^p c_j(\nu) \alpha_j^i(\nu) \big|^2,
$$
and taking into account that, with the new indexation, the last condition of the theorem rewrites as
$$
D_0^2
\left\|
\begin{bmatrix}
c_j(1) \\
\vdots \\
c_j(p) \\
\end{bmatrix}
\right\|^2_{\mathbb{C}^p}
\le
\left\|
\begin{bmatrix}
\alpha_j^1(1) & ... &\alpha_j^1(p) \\
\vdots & & \vdots \\
\alpha_j^m(1) & ... &\alpha_j^m(p)\\
\end{bmatrix}
%
\begin{bmatrix}
c_j(1) \\
\vdots \\
c_j(p) \\
\end{bmatrix}
\right\|^2_{\mathbb{C}^{m \times 1}}\hspace{-8mm},
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \forall
\begin{bmatrix}
c_j(1) \\
\vdots \\
c_j(p) \\
\end{bmatrix}
\in \mathbb{C}^p,
$$
we obtain
\begin{equation}
\sum_{i=1}^m \big\|
\sum_{j\ge 1} \big(\sum_{\nu=1}^p c_j(\nu) \alpha_j^i(\nu) \big)\, k_{\lambda_j(1)} \big\|^2
\ge D_1^2 D_0^2
\sum_{j\ge 1} \sum_{\nu=1}^p \big|c_j(\nu) \big|^2. \label{jd1}
\end{equation}
Observe that, as with $D_1$, the constant $D_0$ does not depend on $\eta_p$,
since it only depends on the $\eta\,$ in condition (2) of Theorem \ref{kasem}.
To estimate the second term of \eqref{jd0} we notice that since $\eta_p<\eta$, by Theorem \ref{difere}
there is a constant $C_S>0$ depending only on the original sequence $S$ (and therefore is independent of $\eta_p$), such that
\begin{align}
\big\| \sum_{j\ge 1} c_j(\nu) \alpha_j^i(\nu)\, \big( k_{\lambda_j(\nu)}- k_{\lambda_j(1)}\big)\big\|^2
&\le
\mathcal{B}\big( \{k_{\lambda_j(\nu)}- k_{\lambda_j(1)}\}\big)^2\sum_{j\ge 1} \big| c_j(\nu) \alpha_j^i(\nu)\big|^2
\nonumber \\
&\le C_S^2 \eta_p^2\sum_{j\ge 1} \big| c_j(\nu) \alpha_j^i(\nu)\big|^2 ,\nonumber
\end{align}
for all $2\le \nu \le p$ and $1\le i\le m$. Thus
\begin{equation}
\sum_{i=1}^m \sum_{\nu=2}^p \big\| \sum_{j\ge 1}
c_j(\nu) \alpha_j^i(\nu)\, \big( k_{\lambda_j(\nu)}- k_{\lambda_j(1)}\big)\big\|^2
\le C_S^2 \eta_p^2 \sum_{\nu=2}^p \sum_{j\ge 1} \big| c_j(\nu)\big|^2 .\label{jd2}
\end{equation}
If we insert \eqref{jd1} and \eqref{jd2} into \eqref{jd0}, we get
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{ \sum_{i=1}^m \Big\| \sum_{j\ge 1} \sum_{\nu=1}^p
c_j(\nu) \alpha_j^i(\nu) k_{\lambda_j(\nu) }\Big\|^2 \ge } \nonumber \\
&\ge&
\frac{1}{2} D_1^2 D_0^2
\sum_{j\ge 1} \sum_{\nu=1}^p \big|c_j(\nu) \big|^2 -
m C^2_S \eta_p^2 \sum_{\nu=2}^p \sum_{j\ge 1} \big| c_j(\nu)\big|^2 \\
&\ge&
\Big(\frac{1}{2} D_1^2 D_0^2 - m C^2_S \eta_p^2 \Big)
\sum_{j\ge 1} \sum_{\nu=1}^p \big|c_j(\nu) \big|^2 .
\end{eqnarray*}
We can take $\eta_p$ small enough for the expression between brackets to be $\ge (1/4) D_1^2 D_0^2$,
which proves the theorem.
\end{proof}
\noindent
We go back to our original problem.
By \cite[Thm.\@ 5.6]{accmp} any normal operator $N$ on a Hilbert space that admits
a finite union of orbits as a frame is diagonalizable.
Therefore $N$ is unitarily equivalent to an operator $A$ as in:
\begin{theo}
Let $A$ be a diagonal operator with respect to the standard basis
in $\ell^2(J)$, where $J= \mathbb{N}$ or it is finite, and let $a^1, \ldots , a^m \in \ell^2(J)$.
Then $\{ A^n a^i: \, n\in \mathbb{N}_0, \, 1\le i\le m\}$ is a frame if and only if
\begin{itemize}
\item Each $a^i$ is given by \eqref{niunii} for $\,i=1, \ldots , m$.
\item The sequence of eigenvalues $\{ \lambda_j : \, j\in J\}$ of $A$ and the double sequence
$\{ \alpha^i_j : \, j\in J, \,1\le i\le m\}$ appearing in \eqref{niunii} satisfy Theorem \ref{kasem}.
\end{itemize}
\end{theo}
\noindent
We finish the paper with a comment on the tails of the orbits and further remarks,
keeping the previous notations and assumptions. If $n_0\ge 1$ is an integer,
the calculation leading to \eqref{kcat} gives
$$
\sum_{n\ge n_0} |\langle A^n \tilde{a}^i , c \rangle|^2 =
\big\| \sum_{j}\alpha^i_j c_j \overline{\lambda}^{n_0}_j k_{\lambda_j}\big\|^2
\ \ \ \mbox{ for $1\le i\le m$}.
$$
Therefore, if \eqref{mini} holds and we write $\mathcal{I}=\{ j: \lambda_j \neq 0 \}$,
$$
\sum_{i=1}^m \sum_{n\ge n_0} |\langle A^n \tilde{a}^i , c \rangle|^2 \ge
D^2 \, \sum_{j} |\overline{\lambda}^{n_0}_j c_j|^2 \ge
D^2\, \min_{j\in \mathcal{I}} \{|\lambda_j|^{n_0}\} \, \sum_{j\in \mathcal{I}} |c_j|^2,
$$
for all $c\in \ell^2$, where $\lambda_j \not \to 0$ by (1) of Theorem \ref{kasem}.
This means that $\{ A^n \tilde{a}^i : \, n\ge n_0, \, 1\le i\le m\}$ is a frame
for $(\mbox{Ker}\, A)^\bot$.\\
\noindent
In \cite[Thm.$\,$3.4]{CHP} the authors characterize the bounded operators $T$ on a separable Hilbert space
of infinite dimension $\mathcal{H}$
(and the vectors $f\in \mathcal{H}$) such that $\{ T^n f: \, n\in\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\}\}$ is a frame, as
those that are similar to the forward shift on $H^2$ or its compression to
one of the spaces $K_u$, where $u$ is an inner function other than a finite Blaschke product.
As said before, a more precise statement was given in \cite{acmt} when $T$ is diagonal,
and the case of a normal operator $T$ was reduced to the diagonal case in \cite{accmp}.
This result is also deduced in \cite{CHP} as a consequence of their general theorem and known facts about model spaces.
Techniques from the theory of model spaces are also used for studying frames and Bessel sequences in
\cite{H-J-W} and \cite{Jorge-Ma}.
Theorem \ref{kasem} here is more related to a particular case of model spaces $K_u$, in which $u$ is a finite
product of interpolating Blaschke products.
|
\section{Introduction}
Please follow the steps outlined below when submitting your manuscript to
the IEEE Computer Society Press. This style guide now has several
important modifications (for example, you are no longer warned against the
use of sticky tape to attach your artwork to the paper), so all authors
should read this new version.
\subsection{Language}
All manuscripts must be in English.
\subsection{Dual submission}
Please refer to the author guidelines on the ICCV 2019 web page for a
discussion of the policy on dual submissions.
\subsection{Paper length}
Papers, excluding the references section,
must be no longer than eight pages in length. The references section
will not be included in the page count, and there is no limit on the
length of the references section. For example, a paper of eight pages
with two pages of references would have a total length of 10 pages.
Overlength papers will simply not be reviewed. This includes papers
where the margins and formatting are deemed to have been significantly
altered from those laid down by this style guide. Note that this
\LaTeX\ guide already sets figure captions and references in a smaller font.
The reason such papers will not be reviewed is that there is no provision for
supervised revisions of manuscripts. The reviewing process cannot determine
the suitability of the paper for presentation in eight pages if it is
reviewed in eleven.
\subsection{The ruler}
The \LaTeX\ style defines a printed ruler which should be present in the
version submitted for review. The ruler is provided in order that
reviewers may comment on particular lines in the paper without
circumlocution. If you are preparing a document using a non-\LaTeX\
document preparation system, please arrange for an equivalent ruler to
appear on the final output pages. The presence or absence of the ruler
should not change the appearance of any other content on the page. The
camera ready copy should not contain a ruler. (\LaTeX\ users may uncomment
the \verb'\iccvfinalcopy' command in the document preamble.) Reviewers:
note that the ruler measurements do not align well with lines in the paper
--- this turns out to be very difficult to do well when the paper contains
many figures and equations, and, when done, looks ugly. Just use fractional
references (e.g.\ this line is $095.5$), although in most cases one would
expect that the approximate location will be adequate.
\subsection{Mathematics}
Please number all of your sections and displayed equations. It is
important for readers to be able to refer to any particular equation. Just
because you didn't refer to it in the text doesn't mean some future reader
might not need to refer to it. It is cumbersome to have to use
circumlocutions like ``the equation second from the top of page 3 column
1''. (Note that the ruler will not be present in the final copy, so is not
an alternative to equation numbers). All authors will benefit from reading
Mermin's description of how to write mathematics:
\url{http://www.pamitc.org/documents/mermin.pdf}.
\subsection{Blind review}
Many authors misunderstand the concept of anonymizing for blind
review. Blind review does not mean that one must remove
citations to one's own work---in fact it is often impossible to
review a paper unless the previous citations are known and
available.
Blind review means that you do not use the words ``my'' or ``our''
when citing previous work. That is all. (But see below for
tech reports.)
Saying ``this builds on the work of Lucy Smith [1]'' does not say
that you are Lucy Smith; it says that you are building on her
work. If you are Smith and Jones, do not say ``as we show in
[7]'', say ``as Smith and Jones show in [7]'' and at the end of the
paper, include reference 7 as you would any other cited work.
An example of a bad paper just asking to be rejected:
\begin{quote}
\begin{center}
An analysis of the frobnicatable foo filter.
\end{center}
In this paper we present a performance analysis of our
previous paper [1], and show it to be inferior to all
previously known methods. Why the previous paper was
accepted without this analysis is beyond me.
[1] Removed for blind review
\end{quote}
An example of an acceptable paper:
\begin{quote}
\begin{center}
An analysis of the frobnicatable foo filter.
\end{center}
In this paper we present a performance analysis of the
paper of Smith \etal [1], and show it to be inferior to
all previously known methods. Why the previous paper
was accepted without this analysis is beyond me.
[1] Smith, L and Jones, C. ``The frobnicatable foo
filter, a fundamental contribution to human knowledge''.
Nature 381(12), 1-213.
\end{quote}
If you are making a submission to another conference at the same time,
which covers similar or overlapping material, you may need to refer to that
submission in order to explain the differences, just as you would if you
had previously published related work. In such cases, include the
anonymized parallel submission~\cite{Authors14} as additional material and
cite it as
\begin{quote}
[1] Authors. ``The frobnicatable foo filter'', F\&G 2014 Submission ID 324,
Supplied as additional material {\tt fg324.pdf}.
\end{quote}
Finally, you may feel you need to tell the reader that more details can be
found elsewhere, and refer them to a technical report. For conference
submissions, the paper must stand on its own, and not {\em require} the
reviewer to go to a tech report for further details. Thus, you may say in
the body of the paper ``further details may be found
in~\cite{Authors14b}''. Then submit the tech report as additional material.
Again, you may not assume the reviewers will read this material.
Sometimes your paper is about a problem which you tested using a tool which
is widely known to be restricted to a single institution. For example,
let's say it's 1969, you have solved a key problem on the Apollo lander,
and you believe that the ICCV70 audience would like to hear about your
solution. The work is a development of your celebrated 1968 paper entitled
``Zero-g frobnication: How being the only people in the world with access to
the Apollo lander source code makes us a wow at parties'', by Zeus \etal.
You can handle this paper like any other. Don't write ``We show how to
improve our previous work [Anonymous, 1968]. This time we tested the
algorithm on a lunar lander [name of lander removed for blind review]''.
That would be silly, and would immediately identify the authors. Instead
write the following:
\begin{quotation}
\noindent
We describe a system for zero-g frobnication. This
system is new because it handles the following cases:
A, B. Previous systems [Zeus et al. 1968] didn't
handle case B properly. Ours handles it by including
a foo term in the bar integral.
...
The proposed system was integrated with the Apollo
lunar lander, and went all the way to the moon, don't
you know. It displayed the following behaviours
which show how well we solved cases A and B: ...
\end{quotation}
As you can see, the above text follows standard scientific convention,
reads better than the first version, and does not explicitly name you as
the authors. A reviewer might think it likely that the new paper was
written by Zeus \etal, but cannot make any decision based on that guess.
He or she would have to be sure that no other authors could have been
contracted to solve problem B.
\medskip
\noindent
FAQ\medskip\\
{\bf Q:} Are acknowledgements OK?\\
{\bf A:} No. Leave them for the final copy.\medskip\\
{\bf Q:} How do I cite my results reported in open challenges?
{\bf A:} To conform with the double blind review policy, you can report results of other challenge participants together with your results in your paper. For your results, however, you should not identify yourself and should not mention your participation in the challenge. Instead present your results referring to the method proposed in your paper and draw conclusions based on the experimental comparison to other results.\medskip\\
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\fbox{\rule{0pt}{2in} \rule{0.9\linewidth}{0pt}}
\end{center}
\caption{Example of caption. It is set in Roman so that mathematics
(always set in Roman: $B \sin A = A \sin B$) may be included without an
ugly clash.}
\label{fig:long}
\label{fig:onecol}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Miscellaneous}
\noindent
Compare the following:\\
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\verb'$conf_a$' & $conf_a$ \\
\verb'$\mathit{conf}_a$' & $\mathit{conf}_a$
\end{tabular}\\
See The \TeX book, p165.
The space after \eg, meaning ``for example'', should not be a
sentence-ending space. So \eg is correct, {\em e.g.} is not. The provided
\verb'\eg' macro takes care of this.
When citing a multi-author paper, you may save space by using ``et alia'',
shortened to ``\etal'' (not ``{\em et.\ al.}'' as ``{\em et}'' is a complete word.)
However, use it only when there are three or more authors. Thus, the
following is correct: ``
Frobnication has been trendy lately.
It was introduced by Alpher~\cite{Alpher02}, and subsequently developed by
Alpher and Fotheringham-Smythe~\cite{Alpher03}, and Alpher \etal~\cite{Alpher04}.''
This is incorrect: ``... subsequently developed by Alpher \etal~\cite{Alpher03} ...''
because reference~\cite{Alpher03} has just two authors. If you use the
\verb'\etal' macro provided, then you need not worry about double periods
when used at the end of a sentence as in Alpher \etal.
For this citation style, keep multiple citations in numerical (not
chronological) order, so prefer \cite{Alpher03,Alpher02,Authors14} to
\cite{Alpher02,Alpher03,Authors14}.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\fbox{\rule{0pt}{2in} \rule{.9\linewidth}{0pt}}
\end{center}
\caption{Example of a short caption, which should be centered.}
\label{fig:short}
\end{figure*}
\section{Formatting your paper}
All text must be in a two-column format. The total allowable width of the
text area is $6\frac78$ inches (17.5 cm) wide by $8\frac78$ inches (22.54
cm) high. Columns are to be $3\frac14$ inches (8.25 cm) wide, with a
$\frac{5}{16}$ inch (0.8 cm) space between them. The main title (on the
first page) should begin 1.0 inch (2.54 cm) from the top edge of the
page. The second and following pages should begin 1.0 inch (2.54 cm) from
the top edge. On all pages, the bottom margin should be 1-1/8 inches (2.86
cm) from the bottom edge of the page for $8.5 \times 11$-inch paper; for A4
paper, approximately 1-5/8 inches (4.13 cm) from the bottom edge of the
page.
\subsection{Margins and page numbering}
All printed material, including text, illustrations, and charts, must be kept
within a print area 6-7/8 inches (17.5 cm) wide by 8-7/8 inches (22.54 cm)
high.
Page numbers should be included for review submissions but not for the
final paper. Review submissions papers should have page numbers in the
footer with numbers centered and .75 inches (1.905 cm) from the bottom
of the page and start on the first page with the number 1.
Page numbers will be added by the publisher to all camera-ready papers
prior to including them in the proceedings and before submitting the
papers to IEEE Xplore. As such, your camera-ready submission should
not include any page numbers. Page numbers should automatically be
removed by uncommenting (if it's not already) the line
\begin{verbatim}
\end{verbatim}
near the beginning of the .tex file.
\subsection{Type-style and fonts}
Wherever Times is specified, Times Roman may also be used. If neither is
available on your word processor, please use the font closest in
appearance to Times to which you have access.
MAIN TITLE. Center the title 1-3/8 inches (3.49 cm) from the top edge of
the first page. The title should be in Times 14-point, boldface type.
Capitalize the first letter of nouns, pronouns, verbs, adjectives, and
adverbs; do not capitalize articles, coordinate conjunctions, or
prepositions (unless the title begins with such a word). Leave two blank
lines after the title.
AUTHOR NAME(s) and AFFILIATION(s) are to be centered beneath the title
and printed in Times 12-point, non-boldface type. This information is to
be followed by two blank lines.
The ABSTRACT and MAIN TEXT are to be in a two-column format.
MAIN TEXT. Type main text in 10-point Times, single-spaced. Do NOT use
double-spacing. All paragraphs should be indented 1 pica (approx. 1/6
inch or 0.422 cm). Make sure your text is fully justified---that is,
flush left and flush right. Please do not place any additional blank
lines between paragraphs.
Figure and table captions should be 9-point Roman type as in
Figures~\ref{fig:onecol} and~\ref{fig:short}. Short captions should be centered.
\noindent Callouts should be 9-point Helvetica, non-boldface type.
Initially capitalize only the first word of section titles and first-,
second-, and third-order headings.
FIRST-ORDER HEADINGS. (For example, {\large \bf 1. Introduction})
should be Times 12-point boldface, initially capitalized, flush left,
with one blank line before, and one blank line after.
SECOND-ORDER HEADINGS. (For example, { \bf 1.1. Database elements})
should be Times 11-point boldface, initially capitalized, flush left,
with one blank line before, and one after. If you require a third-order
heading (we discourage it), use 10-point Times, boldface, initially
capitalized, flush left, preceded by one blank line, followed by a period
and your text on the same line.
\subsection{Footnotes}
Please use footnotes\footnote {This is what a footnote looks like. It
often distracts the reader from the main flow of the argument.} sparingly.
Indeed, try to avoid footnotes altogether and include necessary peripheral
observations in
the text (within parentheses, if you prefer, as in this sentence). If you
wish to use a footnote, place it at the bottom of the column on the page on
which it is referenced. Use Times 8-point type, single-spaced.
\subsection{References}
List and number all bibliographical references in 9-point Times,
single-spaced, at the end of your paper. When referenced in the text,
enclose the citation number in square brackets, for
example~\cite{Authors14}. Where appropriate, include the name(s) of
editors of referenced books.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|}
\hline
Method & Frobnability \\
\hline\hline
Theirs & Frumpy \\
Yours & Frobbly \\
Ours & Makes one's heart Frob\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Results. Ours is better.}
\end{table}
\subsection{Illustrations, graphs, and photographs}
All graphics should be centered. Please ensure that any point you wish to
make is resolvable in a printed copy of the paper. Resize fonts in figures
to match the font in the body text, and choose line widths which render
effectively in print. Many readers (and reviewers), even of an electronic
copy, will choose to print your paper in order to read it. You cannot
insist that they do otherwise, and therefore must not assume that they can
zoom in to see tiny details on a graphic.
When placing figures in \LaTeX, it's almost always best to use
\verb+\includegraphics+, and to specify the figure width as a multiple of
the line width as in the example below
{\small\begin{verbatim}
\usepackage[dvips]{graphicx} ...
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]
{myfile.eps}
\end{verbatim}
}
\subsection{Color}
Please refer to the author guidelines on the ICCV 2019 web page for a discussion
of the use of color in your document.
\section{Final copy}
You must include your signed IEEE copyright release form when you submit
your finished paper. We MUST have this form before your paper can be
published in the proceedings.
{\small
\bibliographystyle{ieee}
\section{Introduction}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{images/sequence-example-final.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Illustration of a case in which temporal information is highly beneficial. In the current frame (bottom), both the sign on the left and the car on the right are mostly occluded and cannot be accurately classified. By including unlabeled information from previous frames, we can infer their type and propagate this information through time, in order to correctly classify them in the present.}
\label{sequence-example}
\end{figure}
Visual understanding of complex scenes is an essential component of advanced real-world systems. A particularly popular and challenging application involves self-driving cars, which make extreme demands on system performance and reliability. There has been remarkable progress in this area and many sophisticated methods based on deep neural networks have been proposed \cite{DBLP:journals/pami/ShelhamerLD17,DBLP:journals/corr/RonnebergerFB15,DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1802-02611,DBLP:journals/corr/ZhaoSQWJ16}. A major contributing factor to their success is the availability of large-scale, densely annotated, public datasets. When it comes to semantic segmentation, data for training and refining single frame models is now quite diverse \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/CordtsORREBFRS16,DBLP:journals/corr/LinMBHPRDZ14}. In contrast, obtaining detailed annotations for individual video frames is more time consuming and costly, which makes frame-level supervision for video segmentation inherently difficult.
Since videos are sequences of images, one could segment individual images independently, ignoring the time dimension. However, the time dimension is a rich source of information, and is required for accurate predictions in some cases. For example, in Figure~\ref{sequence-example}, we show that objects which are mostly occluded in the current frame, can be inferred by including information from previous frames. Videos provide additional information such as long-range temporal interactions among objects, casual relations among events and motion of objects in the scene. Based on these observations, one can propagate information through time in order to leverage temporal dependencies. The question is how to make image segmentation models suitable for handling the spatio-temporal dimension. The key challenge is effectively exploiting the information that is available in the temporal dimension when ground truth annotations are scarce and frame-level supervision is impossible.
We propose a spatio-temporal deep neural network for semantic video segmentation by using consecutive frames from a video. The proposed network architecture combines a lightweight fully-convolutional U-Net architecture \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/RonnebergerFB15} with temporal units that are employed at intermediate levels of the convolutional network in order to propagate spatial information through time.
The main contributions of our work are the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item We present a novel, deep, end-to-end trainable architecture for semantic video segmentation that leverages the temporal dimension in order to propagate spatial information.
\item We propose a lightweight module for transforming traditional, fully convolutional networks into spatio-temporal FCNs. Specifically, without substantially increasing the model complexity, the proposed method can be easily added in already published state-of-the-art methods.
\item We show that the model is able to correctly classify objects that cannot be accurately detected in the current frame by inferring them from previous frames. By incorporating cheap, unlabeled, temporal data we are able to significantly outperform the frame-by-frame baseline on the CityScapes dataset.
\item We show that current state of the art approaches which model temporality between the encoder and the decoder are suboptimal for capturing motion information.
\end{itemize}
\section{Related work}
State of the art approaches for semantic image segmentation are based on fully-convolutional networks (FCNs) \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1802-02611, DBLP:journals/corr/ZhaoSQWJ16,DBLP:journals/corr/RonnebergerFB15}. In U-Net \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/RonnebergerFB15}, the authors propose a symmetric network in which the encoder gradually reduces the feature maps and captures higher semantic information while the decoder module gradually recovers the spatial information. Skip connections through concatenation are used in order to exchange information between the encoder and the decoder. In order to capture contextual information at multiple scales, models such as PSPNet \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/ZhaoSQWJ16} perform spatial pyramid pooling. DeepLabv3+ \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1802-02611} applies several parallel dilated convolution with different rates, while also making use of the encoder decoder paradigm in order to recover object boundaries
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.28\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/arch/unet-tcn_final_final.png}
\caption{Modelling temporality between the encoder and decoder}
\label{fig:temporal_bottleneck}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.28\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/arch/unet-temporal-skip_final_final.png}
\caption{Modelling temporality at every skip connection level}
\label{fig:temporal_skip}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.28\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/arch/unet-temporal-encoder_final_final.png}
\caption{Proposed method - Propagating temporal features in the encoder}
\label{fig:temporal_encoder}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.12\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/arch/legend_final.png}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Overview of different approaches to model temporality in U-Net based architectures.}
\label{overview-methods}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
FCNs are not designed to model temporal dependencies. In order to bypass this problem, a naive solution is to concatenate multiple consecutive frames and make this the input of the FCN, resulting in an extra time dimension. Learning a representative set of 3D spatio-temporal convolution kernels is challenging and computationally intensive due to the high complexity of 3D kernels and the required amount of training videos. The performance gained by applying such a method is below 2\% on the Sports-1M benchmark, for the video classification task \cite{6165309}. In order to extend FCNs to video data and avoid the added complexity of 3D kernels, we can split them into two components: one to model spatial information and one to model temporal information. Two-stream fully-convolutional networks fuse motion and spatial information in a unified framework \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/JainXG17a,DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1709-06750,DBLP:journals/corr/TokmakovAS17}. The hypothesis is that optical flow allows the model to retain the benefits of motion information, while still capturing global video information. Unfortunately, optical flow is often inaccurate, particularly around object boundaries. Another drawback is that they depend on optical flow models pretrained on different datasets, since large datasets with ground truth for both tasks do not exist.
The combination of fully-convolutional networks with temporal recurrent units can solve many of the pitfalls of the previous approach. State of the art approaches first apply spatial filters by using a fully-convolutional encoder network, then a recurrent unit to model the temporality and finally use a decoder to get the desired output \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/NilssonS16,DBLP:journals/corr/FayyazSSFK16,DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1809-03327,DBLP:journals/corr/LeaFVRH16}. In \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/NilssonS16}, the authors describe an end-to-end architecture which combines a convolutional architecture and a spatio-temporal transformer layer that is able to propagate labeling information through time. In \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/FayyazSSFK16}, the spatio-temporal FCN is introduced, which uses a layer grid of Long-Short Term Memory (LSTM) models in between the FCN encoder and FCN decoder. In \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1809-03327}, the authors place a ConvLSTM \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/ShiCWYWW15} between the fully convolutional encoder and decoder for the task of video object segmentation, which concerns the segmentation of foreground objects from the background. For recognizing actions in videos, \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/LeaFVRH16} uses Temporal Convolutional Networks (TCNs) to process the features extracted by a pretrained FCN from multiple frames of a video. For the same task, \cite{ballas-2015-delving} learns spatio-temporal filters by stacking ConvGRUs at different locations in a pretrained deep convolutional neural network and iterating through video frames. In this direction, factorized spatio-temporal convolutional network (FSTCN) was proposed in \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/SunJYS15} for human action recognition. This network factorizes the standard 3D CNN model as a sequential process of learning 2D spatial kernels in the lower layers, followed by learning 1D temporal kernels in the upper layers.
Our work closely relates to \cite{ballas-2015-delving}, \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/LeaFVRH16}, \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1809-03327} and \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/SunJYS15}. Similar to \cite{ballas-2015-delving}, we also employ temporal units at every level of a FCN. However, we also propagate temporal features to subsequent convolutional layers. Furthermore, both \cite{ballas-2015-delving} and \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/LeaFVRH16} use a pre-trained, frozen CNN as a feature extractor, unlike our model, which is end-to-end trainable. Similar to \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/SunJYS15,DBLP:journals/corr/LeaFVRH16,DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1809-03327}, we also transform traditional fully convolutional networks into spatio-temporal convolutional networks. However, the architectures presented in \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/SunJYS15,DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1809-03327} use only one temporal module, in between a fully-convolutional encoder and a fully-connected decoder, respectively fully-convolutional decoder. In \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/LeaFVRH16}, the authors stack multiple 1D convolutions to process the features extracted by a pre-trained frozen FCN from multiple video frames. These methods only learn temporal combinations for the features of only one convolutional layer. In our model, we learn different temporal combinations for every convolutional layer features and propagate them forward through the network to the next convolutional layers.
\section{Approach}
The purpose of this work is to adapt a fully-convolutional semantic segmentation network so that it can model the temporal dimension and be applied on video data. Given a sequence of $T$ video frames $I_1, I_2, ..., I_T$ the task is to predict semantic segmentations for each video frame. Ground truth annotations are only present for the last frame, $I_T$.
\subsection{Where to model temporality?}
In this section, we will discuss in detail different approaches for employing temporal units in an encoder-decoder network in order to propagate information through time. The visual illustration of how our proposed methods aggregate information from adjacent video frames is presented in Figure~\ref{overview-methods}.
\subsubsection{Frame-by-frame} We apply a U-Net-based fully-convolutional architecture~\cite{DBLP:journals/corr/RonnebergerFB15} for frame-by-frame image segmentation. When applying this method on a sequence of frames, each segmentation output is independent of previous frames. U-Net architectures follow the encoder-decoder architecture. Every step in the decoder consists of an upsampling of the feature map and a concatenation with the corresponding feature maps from the encoder (skip-connections). We train only on images $I_T$ that have ground truth $G_T$, resulting in a fully supervised approach for the frame-by-frame method.
In our U-Net \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/RonnebergerFB15} implementation, a block of the encoder network includes one $3 \times 3$ convolutional layer, followed by a batch normalization layer \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/IoffeS15}, LeakyReLU non-linearity and maxpooling. Compared to the original paper, we use more blocks and reduce the number of convolutional layers in a block. This results in an accuracy/speed trade-off, where we halve the epoch training time with a minimal drop in segmentation accuracy. Reducing the training time is especially helpful for the temporal modules, where the amount of data that needs to be processed increases linearly with the number of annotated images. In the decoder, upsampling is done using strided transposed convolutions. We use the same normalization technique as the encoder, and ReLU for non-linearity \cite{Nair:2010:RLU:3104322.3104425}.
\subsubsection{Between the encoder and decoder (bottleneck)}
Similar to \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/SunJYS15,DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1809-03327}, temporality can be modeled between the encoder and decoder, the bottleneck. We feed the $T$ consecutive images $I_{1...T}$ as input to the FCN encoder in order to obtain features $F_{1...T}^{(L)}$ from the last encoder convolutional block $L$. These features $F_{1...T}^{(L)}$ are processed as a sequence by a temporal unit in order to model the temporal dimension and then sent to the decoder in order to obtain the segmentation prediction $Y_T$. An overview of this method can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:temporal_bottleneck}.
\subsubsection{At every skip connection level}
Along the lines of \cite{ballas-2015-delving}, temporality can be modelled at every skip connection level. This way, the decoder sees how spatial features from every convolutional level change in time and is able to better make use of temporal information to produce the final segmentation. Formally, before concatenating the features $F^{(l)}_{1...T}$ extracted by the $l$\textsuperscript{th} encoder convolutional block, we apply the same temporal forward procedure as before. An overview of this method can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:temporal_skip}.
\subsubsection{Proposed method: Propagating temporal features in the encoder}
A drawback of the previous approaches is the fact that only the decoder uses features that include temporal information, through the use of skip connections and the bottleneck connection. Encoder features that are propagated forward do not include any temporal information and are independent of previous frames. To circumvent this, features $F_{1...T}^{(l)}$ resulted from applying a temporal forward procedure are sent as input to the next spatial convolutional block. This way, we ensure that the encoder benefits from the temporal connections as well. An overview of this method can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:temporal_encoder}.
\subsection{How to model temporality?}
In this section, we propose several temporal modules, focusing on maintaining the segmentation performance of the network while decreasing the memory and training time overhead.
\subsubsection{ConvLSTM}
One example of a machine learning technique that learns temporal features is a Long Short-Term Memory Network (LSTM) \cite{Hochreiter:1997:LSM:1246443.1246450}. These have been combined with FCNs \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/VinyalsTBE14,DBLP:journals/corr/WangYMHHX16} in order to learn spatial and temporal filters. 3D feature maps of shape $C \times H \times W$ are flattened into 1D vectors of size $CHW$, where $C$ represents the channels, $H$ the height and $W$ the width of the feature maps. A disadvantage of this approach is that the data that flows through the LSTM is 1D, and as such we lose spatial information. Furthermore, as feature maps become bigger, the size of the vectorized features increases quadratically. One aproach that mitigates this issue and is suitable for dealing with sequence of images is the ConvLSTM \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/ShiCWYWW15}. It is a recurrent model, just like the LSTM, but internal matrix multiplications are exchanged with convolution operations. As a result, the data that flows through the ConvLSTM cells keep the input dimension, instead of being just 1D vectors of features.
The total number of parameters
is equal to $ 4C^2K^2$, where $K$ is the spatial kernel size, and is set to 3 in our experiments, independent of the input feature map shape.
\subsubsection{Temporal Networks (TN)}
Although ConvLSTMs have shown very good performance at sequence modelling tasks, stacking multiple instances of them in a network is costly, both in training time and in memory requirements. Recent work \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1803-01271,DBLP:journals/corr/LeaFVRH16}, has shown that convolutions can be used for sequence modelling. The main advantage of using convolutions is that they have low memory requirements for training. Furthermore, unlike \mbox{ConvLSTM}, they are parallelizable, which results in faster training and inference.
\par{\textbf{TN block.}} The architecture of our TN block is inspired from \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1803-01271}. Within a block, the TN has two layers of dilated convolution and ReLU non-linearity \cite{Nair:2010:RLU:3104322.3104425}. We also make use of the residual connection introduced in \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/HeZRS15}. The final output of a TN block is the output of the convolutions added to the input x of the block.
\par{\textbf{Pointwise TN.}} We adapt the TN block architecture, by making use of pointwise 1D convolutions (kernel size is 1). We treat the time dimension as the convolution channel dimension and convolve over the flattened 1D vector $CHW$. The main advantage of this approach is that regardless of feature map shape, we always need $T^2$ parameters for our temporal network.
In the original TCN paper \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1803-01271}, the authors use $CHW$ as the convolutional channel dimension and convolve over $T$. Padding is used in order to maintain the output sequence length, which can result in artifacts, especially for short sequences. Furthermore, we would need $(CHW)^2K$ parameters, where $K$ is the temporal kernel size. It is obvious to see that stacking such temporal networks at the first convolutional layers is not possible, due to the amount of parameters. These are not issues for our modified Pointwise~TN.
\par{\textbf{2DHW TN.}} An issue with our previous Pointwise TN approach is the fact that we treat each pixel in each channel independently. We tackle this issue by using 2D convolutions in our TN block. The incoming feature maps of shape $T \times C \times H \times W$ are reshaped to $TC \times H \times W$. We treat the $TC$ dimension as the convolution channel dimension and convolve over $H \times W$. The total number of parameters is $T^2C^2K^2$, where the temporal kernel size $K$ is set to 2 in our experiments.
\section{Experiments}
\subsection{Dataset}
For training the segmentation models, we use the CityScapes dataset \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/CordtsORREBFRS16}. The dataset consists of 5000 video sequences of high quality images (1024 $\times$ 2048 resolution), partitioned into 2975 train, 500 validation and 1525 test sequences. The videos are captured from 50 different cities in Germany and Switzerland, under different weather conditions. The authors have divided each video into 30 images and segmented each 20\textsuperscript{th} frame. In the \textit{conventional} version of the dataset we only have access to the video frames that have ground truth annotations. In order to make use of temporality, we use the \textit{sequence} version of the dataset, where we have access to all 30 frames, not just the annotated one. The original RGB frames and annotations are reshaped to $256 \times 512$ for memory and speed concern. For data augmentation, operations of random horizontal flip, random gaussian blur and color jitter are applied. The same data preprocessing is used for both frame-by-frame and sequence models. It is important to note that state of the art frame-by-frame segmentation models \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1802-02611,DBLP:journals/corr/ZhaoSQWJ16} pretrain their networks on the \textit{coarse} dataset, which contains an extra 20000 coarsely annotated images. This is not possible in our case, since no \textit{sequence} version exists for these extra images.
\subsection{Training}
For training the frame-by-frame model, we only use images that have ground truth. For the sequence models, we sample 4 consecutive images (14\textsuperscript{th}, 16\textsuperscript{th}, 18\textsuperscript{th} and 20\textsuperscript{th}) as the input to train the proposed networks. Based on the ground truth label on the 20\textsuperscript{th} frame, we can construct the training set. Cross entropy loss function is used to solve the discriminative segmentation task. We follow the standard protocol of using 19 semantic labels for evaluation without considering the void label. For the frames without ground truth annotations, loss is set to 0. To train the proposed networks efficiently we use the Adam optimizer \cite{Kingma2015AdamAM}, with the learning rate set to $1e^{-4}$. L2 regularization with weight decay rate of $5e^{-4}$ is used to avoid over-fitting. We also clip the gradient norm to not exceed the threshold of 5. We optimized these hyper-parameters for the frame-by-frame model and used the same values for the temporal models. The performance is measured in terms of mean pixel intersection-over-union (mIoU), averaged across multiple runs.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Quantitative results on the CityScapes validation set for the proposed methods, where we model temporality at the bottleneck, every skip connection level and in the encoder as well.}\label{results_ours}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|}
\hline
Method & mIoU class \\
\hline
U-Net \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/RonnebergerFB15} reimplementation & 0.572 $\pm$ 0.0017 \\
U-Net ours & 0.563 $\pm$ 0.0012 \\
\hline
U-Net Pointwise TN bottleneck & 0.575 $\pm$ 0.0015 \\
U-Net Pointwise TN skip & 0.596 $\pm$ 0.0015 \\
U-Net Pointwise TN encoder & \textbf{0.614} $\pm$ 0.0025 \\
\hline
U-Net 2DHW TN bottleneck & 0.582 $\pm$ 0.0016 \\
U-Net 2DHW TN skip & 0.603 $\pm$ 0.0015\\
U-Net 2DHW TN encoder & \textbf{0.622} $\pm$ 0.0017 \\
\hline
U-Net ConvLSTM bottleneck & 0.581 $\pm$ 0.0018 \\
U-Net ConvLSTM skip & 0.612 $\pm$ 0.0021 \\
U-Net ConvLSTM encoder & \textbf{0.631} $\pm$ 0.0024 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Quantitative results on the CityScapes test set for the proposed temporal encoder methods. We compare our method against other methods that perform inference at $256 \times 512$ resolution.}\label{results_test_ours}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|}
\hline
Method & mIoU class & \# params \\
\hline
U-Net frame-by-frame (ours) & 0.568 & 183M \\
U-Net Pointwise TN & 0.605 & 183M\\
U-Net 2DHW TN & 0.614 & 541M\\
U-Net ConvLSTM & \textbf{0.622} & 585M\\
\hline
Fast-SCNN \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1902-04502} & 0.519 & - \\
SegNet \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/BadrinarayananK15} & 0.561 & - \\
ENet \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/PaszkeCKC16} & 0.583 & - \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-4mm}
\end{table}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{images/where-to-model.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Qualitative results on the CityScapes validation set of the effect of different temporal module locations. White boxes highlight differences. We have used Pointwise TNs as a temporal module in this example.}
\label{where-to-model}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{images/temporal_consistency.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Examples of semantic segmentations in consecutive video frames from the CityScapes demo video. White boxes highlight differences. We have used Pointwise TNs as a temporal module in this example.}
\label{temporal-consistency}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Quantitative evaluation} We compare the different temporal module locations and types using a U-Net architecture both qualitatively and quantitatively. In Table~\ref{results_ours}, we show that placing a temporal module between the encoder and decoder (baseline) increases the performance only by 1-2 percentage points, with any type of temporal module, when compared to the frame-by-frame baseline. Similarly, placing any type of temporal module at every skip connection level increases the mIoU by 3-4 percentage points. Most notably, also propagating these features to the next convolutional layers in the encoder results in a 5-6 percentage points performance increase. These results highlight that our temporal model significantly outperforms both the frame-by-frame image segmentation model and the baseline in which we only model temporality between the encoder and the decoder. Furthermore, we see that replacing ConvLSTMs with our Pointwise TNs only results in a 2 percentage point performance drop, while using only $T^2$ additional parameters instead of $4C^2K^2$. This results in a model with less than a third in size and thus 40\% faster training time in our implementation. In order to get results for the test set, we submitted our results to the CityScapes benchmark website. We have upsampled our predictions 4 times using nearest neighbour interpolation. The results can be seen in Table~\ref{results_test_ours} and further validate our hypothesis. We compare our results against other methods that perform inference at $256 \times 512$ resolution. Lastly, in order to check that the performance increase comes from the temporal information and not from the increased model complexity, we have sent the current frame 4 times as input for the temporal models. We have also concatenated the 4 consecutive images along the channel dimension, and sent it as input to the fully convolutional network. In both cases, the performance was similar or worse than the frame-by-frame segmentation model.
\subsection{Qualitative evaluation}
\par{\textbf{Temporal module locations.}}
In Figure~\ref{where-to-model}, we show several representative situations, in which our proposed approach to model temporality outperforms other methods. Observe how both the frame-by-frame and the baseline model struggle to segment objects that are mostly occluded in the current frame. Our poposed method is able to correct larger parts of inaccurate segmentation by leveraging the information available in the unlabeled temporal frames. We can conclude that only placing a temporal module between the encoder and decoder is suboptimal for capturing motion information.
\par{\textbf{Temporal modules.}}
We qualitatively evaluate the performance of different temporal modules for our proposed method of propagating the temporal features in the encoder. The results can be seen in Figure~\ref{propagating-information}. Although ConvLSTMs show the best performance, both qualitatively and quantitatively, Pointwise TNs achieve almost the same performance, with much fewer parameters, resulting in lower memory requirements and faster training. We can see that all 3 temporal modules are able to correctly classify objects that cannot be accurately detected in the current frame by inferring them from previous frames.
\par{\textbf{Temporal consistency.}}
We also qualitatively evaluate the temporal consistency of our semantic video segmentation method. We use the 3 demo videos provided in the CityScapes dataset, that are 600, 1100 and 1200 frames long, respectively. For each output of our proposed method, the previous 4 frames were sent as input, resulting in a sliding window approach. Typical errors made by models that rely on single-frame estimates include partly segmented objects, temporal inconsistencies and flickering. In Figure~\ref{temporal-consistency}, we show that some of these errors are corrected when we are using the proposed temporal module. This behaviour is consistent across multiple sequences.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{images/cityscapes_visualization.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Qualitative results on the CityScapes validation set of the effect of different temporal modules for our proposed method. White boxes highlight differences.}
\label{propagating-information}
\end{figure*}
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper, we proposed a novel spatio-temporal neural network combining FCNs to model spatial information and temporal units to include temporal information. The proposed network was built on an encoder-decoder framework, which takes multiple continuous frames of a driving scene as input and outputs their semantic segmentation. We investigated different ways to model temporality in our network, as the temporal dimension is highly informative and can be critical in certain scenarios, such as autonomous driving. Starting with the conventional approach of placing a temporal module in between our encoder and decoder (baseline), we show that this method is suboptimal and that placing a temporal module after every encoder block results in much stronger propagation of temporal information and achieves significantly better results. In the qualitative results, we show that the proposed network is able to correctly classify objects that are mostly occluded in the current frame, by inferring them from the previous frames. This further illustrates the effectiveness of our method, as both the baseline and the frame-by-frame model are unable to correctly infer them.
Furthermore, we experimented with different modules to model temporality. Although ConvLSTMs showed the best performance, stacking multiple instances of them in a network is costly, both in training speed and memory requirements. We tackle this issue by using Pointwise TNs, which achieve almost the same performance as the \mbox{ConvLSTM} while using a very low number parameters, which results in significantly lower memory requirements and faster \mbox{training}.
The module can be easily added in state of the art methods, \eg DeepLab \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1802-02611}, by placing temporal modules after spatial convolutional modules. Preliminary experiments in this direction showed only minimal improvement. In \mbox{U-Net} architectures, temporality is injected in the final decoder layers through the use of skip connections. As newer models do not rely on skip connections, a solution is to add temporal modules in between convolutional layers in the decoder as well. Future work is needed to investigate the effectiveness of including temporality in such models. \href{https://github.com/mhashas/Exploiting-Temporality-For-Semi-Supervised-Video-Segmentation}{Code} has been made available.
{\small
\bibliographystyle{ieee}
\section{Introduction}
Please follow the steps outlined below when submitting your manuscript to
the IEEE Computer Society Press. This style guide now has several
important modifications (for example, you are no longer warned against the
use of sticky tape to attach your artwork to the paper), so all authors
should read this new version.
\subsection{Language}
All manuscripts must be in English.
\subsection{Dual submission}
Please refer to the author guidelines on the ICCV 2019 web page for a
discussion of the policy on dual submissions.
\subsection{Paper length}
Papers, excluding the references section,
must be no longer than eight pages in length. The references section
will not be included in the page count, and there is no limit on the
length of the references section. For example, a paper of eight pages
with two pages of references would have a total length of 10 pages.
Overlength papers will simply not be reviewed. This includes papers
where the margins and formatting are deemed to have been significantly
altered from those laid down by this style guide. Note that this
\LaTeX\ guide already sets figure captions and references in a smaller font.
The reason such papers will not be reviewed is that there is no provision for
supervised revisions of manuscripts. The reviewing process cannot determine
the suitability of the paper for presentation in eight pages if it is
reviewed in eleven.
\subsection{The ruler}
The \LaTeX\ style defines a printed ruler which should be present in the
version submitted for review. The ruler is provided in order that
reviewers may comment on particular lines in the paper without
circumlocution. If you are preparing a document using a non-\LaTeX\
document preparation system, please arrange for an equivalent ruler to
appear on the final output pages. The presence or absence of the ruler
should not change the appearance of any other content on the page. The
camera ready copy should not contain a ruler. (\LaTeX\ users may uncomment
the \verb'\iccvfinalcopy' command in the document preamble.) Reviewers:
note that the ruler measurements do not align well with lines in the paper
--- this turns out to be very difficult to do well when the paper contains
many figures and equations, and, when done, looks ugly. Just use fractional
references (e.g.\ this line is $095.5$), although in most cases one would
expect that the approximate location will be adequate.
\subsection{Mathematics}
Please number all of your sections and displayed equations. It is
important for readers to be able to refer to any particular equation. Just
because you didn't refer to it in the text doesn't mean some future reader
might not need to refer to it. It is cumbersome to have to use
circumlocutions like ``the equation second from the top of page 3 column
1''. (Note that the ruler will not be present in the final copy, so is not
an alternative to equation numbers). All authors will benefit from reading
Mermin's description of how to write mathematics:
\url{http://www.pamitc.org/documents/mermin.pdf}.
\subsection{Blind review}
Many authors misunderstand the concept of anonymizing for blind
review. Blind review does not mean that one must remove
citations to one's own work---in fact it is often impossible to
review a paper unless the previous citations are known and
available.
Blind review means that you do not use the words ``my'' or ``our''
when citing previous work. That is all. (But see below for
tech reports.)
Saying ``this builds on the work of Lucy Smith [1]'' does not say
that you are Lucy Smith; it says that you are building on her
work. If you are Smith and Jones, do not say ``as we show in
[7]'', say ``as Smith and Jones show in [7]'' and at the end of the
paper, include reference 7 as you would any other cited work.
An example of a bad paper just asking to be rejected:
\begin{quote}
\begin{center}
An analysis of the frobnicatable foo filter.
\end{center}
In this paper we present a performance analysis of our
previous paper [1], and show it to be inferior to all
previously known methods. Why the previous paper was
accepted without this analysis is beyond me.
[1] Removed for blind review
\end{quote}
An example of an acceptable paper:
\begin{quote}
\begin{center}
An analysis of the frobnicatable foo filter.
\end{center}
In this paper we present a performance analysis of the
paper of Smith \etal [1], and show it to be inferior to
all previously known methods. Why the previous paper
was accepted without this analysis is beyond me.
[1] Smith, L and Jones, C. ``The frobnicatable foo
filter, a fundamental contribution to human knowledge''.
Nature 381(12), 1-213.
\end{quote}
If you are making a submission to another conference at the same time,
which covers similar or overlapping material, you may need to refer to that
submission in order to explain the differences, just as you would if you
had previously published related work. In such cases, include the
anonymized parallel submission~\cite{Authors14} as additional material and
cite it as
\begin{quote}
[1] Authors. ``The frobnicatable foo filter'', F\&G 2014 Submission ID 324,
Supplied as additional material {\tt fg324.pdf}.
\end{quote}
Finally, you may feel you need to tell the reader that more details can be
found elsewhere, and refer them to a technical report. For conference
submissions, the paper must stand on its own, and not {\em require} the
reviewer to go to a tech report for further details. Thus, you may say in
the body of the paper ``further details may be found
in~\cite{Authors14b}''. Then submit the tech report as additional material.
Again, you may not assume the reviewers will read this material.
Sometimes your paper is about a problem which you tested using a tool which
is widely known to be restricted to a single institution. For example,
let's say it's 1969, you have solved a key problem on the Apollo lander,
and you believe that the ICCV70 audience would like to hear about your
solution. The work is a development of your celebrated 1968 paper entitled
``Zero-g frobnication: How being the only people in the world with access to
the Apollo lander source code makes us a wow at parties'', by Zeus \etal.
You can handle this paper like any other. Don't write ``We show how to
improve our previous work [Anonymous, 1968]. This time we tested the
algorithm on a lunar lander [name of lander removed for blind review]''.
That would be silly, and would immediately identify the authors. Instead
write the following:
\begin{quotation}
\noindent
We describe a system for zero-g frobnication. This
system is new because it handles the following cases:
A, B. Previous systems [Zeus et al. 1968] didn't
handle case B properly. Ours handles it by including
a foo term in the bar integral.
...
The proposed system was integrated with the Apollo
lunar lander, and went all the way to the moon, don't
you know. It displayed the following behaviours
which show how well we solved cases A and B: ...
\end{quotation}
As you can see, the above text follows standard scientific convention,
reads better than the first version, and does not explicitly name you as
the authors. A reviewer might think it likely that the new paper was
written by Zeus \etal, but cannot make any decision based on that guess.
He or she would have to be sure that no other authors could have been
contracted to solve problem B.
\medskip
\noindent
FAQ\medskip\\
{\bf Q:} Are acknowledgements OK?\\
{\bf A:} No. Leave them for the final copy.\medskip\\
{\bf Q:} How do I cite my results reported in open challenges?
{\bf A:} To conform with the double blind review policy, you can report results of other challenge participants together with your results in your paper. For your results, however, you should not identify yourself and should not mention your participation in the challenge. Instead present your results referring to the method proposed in your paper and draw conclusions based on the experimental comparison to other results.\medskip\\
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\fbox{\rule{0pt}{2in} \rule{0.9\linewidth}{0pt}}
\end{center}
\caption{Example of caption. It is set in Roman so that mathematics
(always set in Roman: $B \sin A = A \sin B$) may be included without an
ugly clash.}
\label{fig:long}
\label{fig:onecol}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Miscellaneous}
\noindent
Compare the following:\\
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\verb'$conf_a$' & $conf_a$ \\
\verb'$\mathit{conf}_a$' & $\mathit{conf}_a$
\end{tabular}\\
See The \TeX book, p165.
The space after \eg, meaning ``for example'', should not be a
sentence-ending space. So \eg is correct, {\em e.g.} is not. The provided
\verb'\eg' macro takes care of this.
When citing a multi-author paper, you may save space by using ``et alia'',
shortened to ``\etal'' (not ``{\em et.\ al.}'' as ``{\em et}'' is a complete word.)
However, use it only when there are three or more authors. Thus, the
following is correct: ``
Frobnication has been trendy lately.
It was introduced by Alpher~\cite{Alpher02}, and subsequently developed by
Alpher and Fotheringham-Smythe~\cite{Alpher03}, and Alpher \etal~\cite{Alpher04}.''
This is incorrect: ``... subsequently developed by Alpher \etal~\cite{Alpher03} ...''
because reference~\cite{Alpher03} has just two authors. If you use the
\verb'\etal' macro provided, then you need not worry about double periods
when used at the end of a sentence as in Alpher \etal.
For this citation style, keep multiple citations in numerical (not
chronological) order, so prefer \cite{Alpher03,Alpher02,Authors14} to
\cite{Alpher02,Alpher03,Authors14}.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\fbox{\rule{0pt}{2in} \rule{.9\linewidth}{0pt}}
\end{center}
\caption{Example of a short caption, which should be centered.}
\label{fig:short}
\end{figure*}
\section{Formatting your paper}
All text must be in a two-column format. The total allowable width of the
text area is $6\frac78$ inches (17.5 cm) wide by $8\frac78$ inches (22.54
cm) high. Columns are to be $3\frac14$ inches (8.25 cm) wide, with a
$\frac{5}{16}$ inch (0.8 cm) space between them. The main title (on the
first page) should begin 1.0 inch (2.54 cm) from the top edge of the
page. The second and following pages should begin 1.0 inch (2.54 cm) from
the top edge. On all pages, the bottom margin should be 1-1/8 inches (2.86
cm) from the bottom edge of the page for $8.5 \times 11$-inch paper; for A4
paper, approximately 1-5/8 inches (4.13 cm) from the bottom edge of the
page.
\subsection{Margins and page numbering}
All printed material, including text, illustrations, and charts, must be kept
within a print area 6-7/8 inches (17.5 cm) wide by 8-7/8 inches (22.54 cm)
high.
Page numbers should be included for review submissions but not for the
final paper. Review submissions papers should have page numbers in the
footer with numbers centered and .75 inches (1.905 cm) from the bottom
of the page and start on the first page with the number 1.
Page numbers will be added by the publisher to all camera-ready papers
prior to including them in the proceedings and before submitting the
papers to IEEE Xplore. As such, your camera-ready submission should
not include any page numbers. Page numbers should automatically be
removed by uncommenting (if it's not already) the line
\begin{verbatim}
\end{verbatim}
near the beginning of the .tex file.
\subsection{Type-style and fonts}
Wherever Times is specified, Times Roman may also be used. If neither is
available on your word processor, please use the font closest in
appearance to Times to which you have access.
MAIN TITLE. Center the title 1-3/8 inches (3.49 cm) from the top edge of
the first page. The title should be in Times 14-point, boldface type.
Capitalize the first letter of nouns, pronouns, verbs, adjectives, and
adverbs; do not capitalize articles, coordinate conjunctions, or
prepositions (unless the title begins with such a word). Leave two blank
lines after the title.
AUTHOR NAME(s) and AFFILIATION(s) are to be centered beneath the title
and printed in Times 12-point, non-boldface type. This information is to
be followed by two blank lines.
The ABSTRACT and MAIN TEXT are to be in a two-column format.
MAIN TEXT. Type main text in 10-point Times, single-spaced. Do NOT use
double-spacing. All paragraphs should be indented 1 pica (approx. 1/6
inch or 0.422 cm). Make sure your text is fully justified---that is,
flush left and flush right. Please do not place any additional blank
lines between paragraphs.
Figure and table captions should be 9-point Roman type as in
Figures~\ref{fig:onecol} and~\ref{fig:short}. Short captions should be centered.
\noindent Callouts should be 9-point Helvetica, non-boldface type.
Initially capitalize only the first word of section titles and first-,
second-, and third-order headings.
FIRST-ORDER HEADINGS. (For example, {\large \bf 1. Introduction})
should be Times 12-point boldface, initially capitalized, flush left,
with one blank line before, and one blank line after.
SECOND-ORDER HEADINGS. (For example, { \bf 1.1. Database elements})
should be Times 11-point boldface, initially capitalized, flush left,
with one blank line before, and one after. If you require a third-order
heading (we discourage it), use 10-point Times, boldface, initially
capitalized, flush left, preceded by one blank line, followed by a period
and your text on the same line.
\subsection{Footnotes}
Please use footnotes\footnote {This is what a footnote looks like. It
often distracts the reader from the main flow of the argument.} sparingly.
Indeed, try to avoid footnotes altogether and include necessary peripheral
observations in
the text (within parentheses, if you prefer, as in this sentence). If you
wish to use a footnote, place it at the bottom of the column on the page on
which it is referenced. Use Times 8-point type, single-spaced.
\subsection{References}
List and number all bibliographical references in 9-point Times,
single-spaced, at the end of your paper. When referenced in the text,
enclose the citation number in square brackets, for
example~\cite{Authors14}. Where appropriate, include the name(s) of
editors of referenced books.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|}
\hline
Method & Frobnability \\
\hline\hline
Theirs & Frumpy \\
Yours & Frobbly \\
Ours & Makes one's heart Frob\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Results. Ours is better.}
\end{table}
\subsection{Illustrations, graphs, and photographs}
All graphics should be centered. Please ensure that any point you wish to
make is resolvable in a printed copy of the paper. Resize fonts in figures
to match the font in the body text, and choose line widths which render
effectively in print. Many readers (and reviewers), even of an electronic
copy, will choose to print your paper in order to read it. You cannot
insist that they do otherwise, and therefore must not assume that they can
zoom in to see tiny details on a graphic.
When placing figures in \LaTeX, it's almost always best to use
\verb+\includegraphics+, and to specify the figure width as a multiple of
the line width as in the example below
{\small\begin{verbatim}
\usepackage[dvips]{graphicx} ...
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]
{myfile.eps}
\end{verbatim}
}
\subsection{Color}
Please refer to the author guidelines on the ICCV 2019 web page for a discussion
of the use of color in your document.
\section{Final copy}
You must include your signed IEEE copyright release form when you submit
your finished paper. We MUST have this form before your paper can be
published in the proceedings.
{\small
\bibliographystyle{ieee}
|
\section*{Introduction}
The strong no loop conjecture for Artin algebras states that any simple module $S$ with $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(S,S) \neq 0$ has infinite projective dimension, see for example conjecture (7) in the conjectures section of \cite{ARS}. This conjecture was recently proven for quiver algebras in \cite{ILP}.
In this article we show that the analogous statement is true for any indecomposable module over a Nakayama algebra:
\begin{theorem*}
Let $A$ be a Nakayama algebra with an indecomposable module $M$. In case $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$, we have that $M$ has infinite projective dimension.
\end{theorem*}
We also note by explicit examples that the previous theorem is not true when replacing the condition $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$ by $\operatorname{Ext}_A^i(M,M) \neq 0$ for any fixed $i \geq 2$.
As a corollary of the previous theorem, we obtain a new proof of the result that the Loewy length of Nakayama algebras with finite global dimension and $n$ simple modules is bounded by $2n-1$ which was first obtained by Gustafson in \cite{Gus}.
The extreme no loop conjecture states that for a simple module $S$ in a general finite dimensional algebra $A$, we have that $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(S,S) \neq 0$ implies $\operatorname{Ext}_A^i(S,S) \neq 0$ for infinitely many $i$. This conjecture is proven only for some small class of algebras such as monomial algebras and is discussed for example at the end of the article \cite{ILP}.
We show that a very strong form of the extreme no loop conjecture holds for arbitrary indecomposable modules in Brauer tree algebras.
\begin{theorem*}
Let $A$ be a Brauer tree algebra and $M$ an indecomposable $A$-module with $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$. Then $\operatorname{Ext}_A^i(M,M) \neq 0$ for all $i >0$.
\end{theorem*}
For Gorenstein Nakayama algebras we show that the extreme no loop conjecture holds for any indecomposable module, giving a much stronger result in the Gorenstein case compared to our first theorem:
\begin{theorem*}
Let $A$ be a Nakayama algebra that is Gorenstein with an indecomposable module $M$ such that $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$. Then $\operatorname{Ext}_A^i(M,M) \neq 0$ for infinitely many $i>0$.
\end{theorem*}
I thank Gjergji Zaimi for allowing me to include his quick proof of (1) in theorem 1.2. The results of this article are motivated by experiments with the GAP-package QPA, see \cite{QPA}.
\section{Non-rigid modules over Nakayama algebras}
We assume that all algebras are Artin algebra and modules are right modules unless otherwise stated. We can assume without loss of generality that algebras are connected and we let $J$ denote the Jacobson radical of an algebra and $D$ the natural duality of an Artin algebra.
Recall that a module $M$ over an Artin algebra $A$ is called rigid in case $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M)=0$ and we call it non-rigid in case $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$.
In this section we give an elementary translation when an indecomposable module over a Nakayama algebra is non-rigid and use that to prove our main results.
We assume that the reader is familiar with the basics on representation theory and homological algebra of Artin algebras. We refer to the books \cite{ARS} and \cite{AnFul} for chapters on Nakayama algebras and to \cite{Mar} on the calculation of projective resolutions in Nakayama algebras.
For a given Nakayama algebra $A$ we denote by $c_i$ the Loewy length of the indecomposable projective module $e_i A$ when fixing a complete set of primitive orthogonal idempotents $e_i$. Note that Nakayama algebras $A$ are uniquely characterised by the condition that every indecomposable module is uniserial and thus can be written in the form $e_i A/e_i J^k$ for some $k$ with $1 \leq k \leq c_i$.
As usual we assume that the $c_i$ are defined for all $i \in \mathbb{Z}$ by setting $c_i=c_k$ in case $i=k$ modulo $n$ when $n$ denotes the number of simple modules of the algebra.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma}
Let $A$ be a Nakayama algebra with $n$ simple modules and $M=e_iA/e_iJ^k$ and $N=e_sA/e_s J^t$ indecomposable non-projective $A$-modules.
\begin{enumerate}
\item In case $t \geq k$, we have $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(N,M) \cong \operatorname{Hom}_A(\Omega^1(N),M)$.
\item $M$ is non-rigid if and only if $n \leq k \leq c_i -n$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Let $0 \rightarrow \Omega^1(N) \rightarrow P \rightarrow N \rightarrow 0$ be the short exact sequence such that $P \rightarrow N \rightarrow 0$ is a projective cover of $N$.
We apply the functor $\operatorname{Hom}_A(-,M)$ to this short exact sequence to obtain:
$$0 \rightarrow \operatorname{Hom}_A(N,M) \xrightarrow{f} \operatorname{Hom}_A(P,M) \xrightarrow{g} \operatorname{Hom}_A(\Omega^1(N),M) \xrightarrow{h} \operatorname{Ext}_A^1(N,M) \rightarrow 0.$$
Note that $\operatorname{Hom}_A(N,M)=\operatorname{Hom}_A(e_sA/e_s J^t, e_i A / e_i J^k)$ is given by left multiplication maps of the form $l_z$ with $z \in (e_i A/e_i J^k)e_s$ such that $z J^t=0$. But since we assume that $t \geq k$, the condition $z J^t=0$ is automatic for $z \in (e_i A/e_i J^k)e_s$.
Thus $\operatorname{Hom}_A(N,M) \cong (e_i A/e_i J^k)e_s$ and $\operatorname{Hom}_A(P,M)= \operatorname{Hom}_A(e_sA, e_i A/ e_i J^k)= (e_iA/e_iJ^k)e_s$ have the same length. Since $f$ is an injective map between modules of the same length, it is an isomorphism. The above exact sequence thus gives us $ker(g)=Im(f)=\operatorname{Hom}_A(P,M)$ and thus $g=0$. This shows that $ker(h)=Im(g)=0$ and thus $h$ is injective, but by the above exact sequence it is also surjective. Thus $h$ is an isomorphism and we obtain $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(N,M) \cong \operatorname{Hom}_A(\Omega^1(N),M)$.
\item By (1) applied with $N=M$, $M$ is non-rigid if and only if $\operatorname{Hom}_A(\Omega^1(M),M) \neq 0$.
Note that $\Omega^1(M) \cong e_{i+k} A/ e_{i+k} J^{c_i-k}$ and thus
$\operatorname{Hom}_A(\Omega^1(M),M)=\operatorname{Hom}_A(e_{i+k} A/ e_{i+k} J^{c_i-k}, e_i A / e_i J^k)$.
The maps in $\operatorname{Hom}_A(e_{i+k} A/ e_{i+k} J^{c_i-k}, e_i A / e_i J^k)$ are given by $l_z$ where $l_z \in \operatorname{Hom}_A(e_{i+k} A, e_i A / e_i J^k) \cong (e_i A/e_i J^k)e_{i+k}$ are given by left multiplication with an element $z \in (e_i A/e_i J^k)e_{i+k}$ such that $z e_{i+k} J^{c_i-k}=0$. This shows that $\operatorname{Hom}_A(e_{i+k} A/ e_{i+k} J^{c_i-k}, e_i A / e_i J^k) \cong (e_i J^{\max(0,2k-c_i)}/e_i J^k) e_{i+k}$, where we interpret $J^0=A$.
Now $(e_i J^{\max(0,2k-c_i)}/e_i J^k) e_{i+k} \neq 0$ is equivalent to $k \geq n$ and $\max(0,2k-c_i) \leq s+(t-1)n=k-n$ when $k=s+tn$ for some $s$ with $0 \leq s \leq n-1$ and $t \geq 1$.
Now note that the conditions $n \leq k$ and $\max(0,2k-c_i) \leq k-n$ are equivalent to $n \leq k \leq c_i -n$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem} \label{theorem 1}
Let $A$ be a Nakayama algebra $M$ an indecomposable non-projective $A$-module.
\begin{enumerate}
\item In case $M$ is non-rigid, also $\Omega^1(M)$ is non-rigid.
\item In case $M$ is non-rigid, it has infinite projective dimension and infinite injective dimension.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Assume $A$ has $n$ simple modules.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Assume $M=e_i A / e_i J^k$ is non-rigid, which by \ref{lemma} (2) is equivalent to $n \leq k \leq c_i-n$.
By \ref{lemma} (2), $\Omega^1(M)=e_{i+k} A/e_{i+k}J^{c_i-k}$ is non-rigid if and only if $n \leq c_i -k \leq c_{i+k} - n$. We thus have to show that $n \leq k \leq c_i-n$ implies $n \leq c_i -k \leq c_{i+k} - n$.
The inequality $n \leq c_i-k$ follows immediately from the assumption that $M$ is non-rigid. The second inequality $c_i-k \leq c_{i+k} -n$ follows from observing that
$$c_{i+k}-c_i=c_{i+k}-c_{i+n}=\sum_{j=n+1}^{k}(c_{i+j}-c_{i+j-1})\geq \sum_{j=n+1}^k (-1)=n-k$$
(here we used that $c_l-c_{l-1} \geq -1$ for a general Kupisch series of a Nakayama algebra).
After rearranging the terms we get $c_i-k \leq c_{i+k}-n$ as desired.
\item Assume $M$ is non-rigid. By (1) of this theorem also $\Omega^1(M)$ is non-rigid and thus by induction $\Omega^k(M)$ for all $k \geq 1$ is non-rigid and thus especially non-projective. This gives that $M$ has infinite projective dimension.
To see that $M$ also has infinite injective dimension, note that $\operatorname{Ext}_{A^{op}}(D(M),D(M)) \cong \operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$ and thus $D(M)$ has infinite projective dimension, which is equivalent to $M$ having infinite injective dimension by applying the duality $D$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary} \label{corollary}
Let $A$ be a Nakayama algebra with finite global dimension. Then $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M)=0$ for all indecomposable $A$-modules $M$.
\end{corollary}
We apply our main result to give a result on bounds on the Loewy length of Nakayama algebras with finite global dimension that was first obtained in \cite{Gus}.
\begin{proposition}
Let $A$ be a Nakayama algebra with Loewy length $L(A)$ and $n$ simple modules.
\begin{enumerate}
\item In case $L(A) \geq 2n$, there exists an indecomposable non-rigid $A$-module.
\item In case $A$ has finite global dimension, we have $L(A) \leq 2n-1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Assume $A$ has Loewy length at least $2n$ and let $P=e_i A$ be an indecomposable projective module with Loewy length $c_i \geq 2n$. Let $M:=e_i A/ e_i J^k$ with $k=n$. Then we clearly have $n \leq k \leq c_i-n$ and thus by \ref{lemma} (2) $M$ is non-rigid.
\item Assume to the contrary that $A$ has finite global dimension but $L(A) \geq 2n$. Then by (1), $A$ has an indecomposable non-rigid module $M$, which contradicts \ref{corollary}. Thus we need to have $L(A) \leq 2n-1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
The next example shows that it is in general not true that an indecomposable module $M$ over a Nakayama algebra $A$ with $\operatorname{Ext}_A^i(M,M) \neq 0$ for some $i \geq 2$ has infinite projective dimension. We also give an example that shows that in general we have that $\operatorname{Ext}_A^{n}(M,M)$ is not isomorphic to $\operatorname{Hom}_A(\Omega^{n}(M),M)$ for Nakayama algebras for $n \geq 2$, despite this being true for $n=1$ by \ref{lemma} (1).
\begin{example}
Let $A$ be the Nakayama algebra given by quiver and relations with Kupisch series $[2,2,...,2,3]$ with $n \geq 2$ entries where all but the last entry are equal to 2. $A$ has finite global dimension
equal to $n$ and there is a unique simple module $S_0$ with projective dimension equal to $n$ but $\operatorname{Ext}_A^n(S_0,S_0) \neq 0$.
There also exists a unique indecomposable module $M$ with dimension vector $[1,0,...,0,1]$ (with exactly two non-zero entries) such that $\operatorname{Ext}_A^{n}(M,M)$ is zero but $\operatorname{Hom}_A(\Omega^{n}(M),M)$ is one-dimensional.
\end{example}
The next example shows that our main theorem can not be extended to general uniserial modules over general Artin algebras. I thank Jeremy Rickard for bringing this example to my attention.
\begin{example}
Let $Q$ be the Kroenecker quiver and $A=kQ$ the Kroenecker algebra.
Then there exist two-dimensional indecomposable $A$-modules (that are especially uniserial) which are non-rigid, see for example \cite{ARS} section 7 in chapter VIII.
But since $A$ is hereditary, it has finite global dimension and thus all those uniserial non-rigid modules have finite projective dimension.
\end{example}
\section{Selfextension for selfinjective Nakayama algebras}
Assume in this section that algebras are connected and non-semisimple.
Recall that a Nakayama algebra is selfinjective if and only if it has constant Kupisch series, so that $c_i=w$ for all $i$.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma 2}
Let $A$ be a selfinjective Nakayama algebra with Loewy length $w \geq 2$ and let $M=e_i A/ e_i J^k$ be an indecomposable non-projective $A$-module such that $k \leq \frac{w}{2}$.
Then we have $\operatorname{Ext}_A^l(M,M) \cong \operatorname{Hom}_A(\Omega^l(M),M)$ for all $l \geq 1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We use that $\operatorname{Ext}_A^l(M,M) \cong \operatorname{Ext}_A^1(\Omega^{l-1}(M),M)$ for $l \geq 1$.
Now note that $\Omega^{2u}(M) \cong e_{i+uw}A/e_{i+uw}J^k$ for all $u \geq 0$ and $\Omega^{2u+1}(M) \cong e_{i+uw+k}A/e_{i+uw+k}J^{w-k}$. By our assumption we have $w-k \geq k$. Thus for all $r \geq 1$, the module $\Omega^r(M)$ has Loewy length greater than or equal to the Loewy length $k$ of $M$.
By (1) of \ref{lemma}, we have that $\operatorname{Ext}_A^l(M,M) \cong \operatorname{Ext}_A^1(\Omega^{l-1}(M),M) \cong \operatorname{Hom}_A(\Omega^1(\Omega^{l-1}(M)),M) \cong \operatorname{Hom}_A(\Omega^l(M),M).$
\end{proof}
We note that the previous lemma is not true in general without the assumption $k \leq \frac{w}{2}$ as the next example shows:
\begin{example}
Let $A=K[x]/(x^3)$ with Loewy length $w=3$ and $M=J$ the Jacobson radical of $A$, so that $M=A/J^2$ and $k=2>\frac{3}{2}$.
Then $\operatorname{Ext}_A^2(M,M)$ is 1-dimensional but $\operatorname{Hom}_A(\Omega^2(M),M)$ is 2-dimensional.
\end{example}
\begin{theorem} \label{theorem 2}
Let $A$ be a selfinjective Nakayama algebra with Loewy length $w \geq 2$ and let $M=e_iA/e_i J^k$ be an indecomposable non-projective $A$-module with $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$. Then we have $\operatorname{Ext}_A^i(M,M) \neq 0$ for all $i>0$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
\underline{Case 1:} First assume that $k \leq \frac{w}{2}$.
In this case \ref{lemma 2} tells us that $\operatorname{Ext}_A^l(M,M) \cong \operatorname{Hom}_A(\Omega^l(M),M)$. As in the proof of \ref{lemma 2}, we have $\Omega^{2u}(M) \cong e_{i+uw}A/e_{i+uw}J^k$ for all $u \geq 0$ and $\Omega^{2u+1}(M) \cong e_{i+uw+k}A/e_{i+uw+k}J^{w-k}$.
Note that by \ref{lemma}, $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$ is equivalent to $n \leq k \leq w-n$.
Now for $u \geq 0$:
$$\operatorname{Hom}_A(\Omega^{2u}(M),M)=\operatorname{Hom}_A(e_{i+uw}A/e_{i+uw}J^k, e_i A/e_i J^k) \cong (e_i A/e_i J^k)e_{i+wu} \neq 0,$$
since $k \geq n$.
And for $u \geq 0$:
$$\operatorname{Hom}_A(\Omega^{2u+1}(M),M)=\operatorname{Hom}_A(e_{i+uw+k}A/e_{i+uw+k}J^{w-k},e_iA/e_iJ^k) \cong (e_i A/e_i J^k)e_{i+uw+k}.$$
To see the last isomorphism, note that the maps in $\operatorname{Hom}_A(e_{i+uw+k}A/e_{i+uw+k}J^{w-k},e_iA/e_iJ^k)$ correspond to left multiplications $l_z$ with $z \in (e_iA/e_iJ^k)e_{i+uw+k}$ such that $z e_{i+uw+k}J^{w-k}=0$. But by our assumption we have $w-k \geq k$ so that the condition $z e_{i+uw+k}J^{w-k}=0$ is automatic for $z \in (e_iA/e_iJ^k)e_{i+uw+k}$.
Thus $\operatorname{Hom}_A(\Omega^{2u+1}(M),M) \cong (e_i A/e_i J^k)e_{i+uw+k} \neq 0$ since $k \geq n$. \newline
\underline{Case 2:} Now assume that $k > \frac{w}{2}$ with $M=e_iA/e_i J^k$. Then the module $\Omega^1(M)= e_{i+k}A/e_{i+k}J^{w-k}$ has Loewy length $t=w-k \leq \frac{w}{2}$ and we can use our result from case 1 as we explain in the rest of the proof.
Now we use that $\operatorname{Ext}_A^l(M,M) \cong \operatorname{Ext}_A^l(\Omega^p(M), \Omega^p(M))$ for all $p \geq 0$. This holds since in general we have $\operatorname{Ext}_A^l(X,Y) \cong \underline{Hom_A}(\Omega^l(X),Y)$ and since $\Omega$ is a stable equivalence for selfinjective algebra, see for example theorem 8.4. and theorem 9.6. in chapter IV. in \cite{SkoYam}.
Thus we can apply our result from case 1 to obtain that $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(\Omega^1(M),\Omega^1(M)) \cong \operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$ implies that $\operatorname{Ext}_A^l(\Omega^1(M),\Omega^1(M)) \neq 0$ for all $l \geq 1$.
Since $\operatorname{Ext}_A^l(\Omega^1(M), \Omega^1(M)) \cong \operatorname{Ext}_A^l(M,M)$ we obtain our result also in the case $k > \frac{w}{2}$.
\end{proof}
Recall that Brauer tree algebras are exactly the special biserial symmetric representation-finite algebras. For a more explicit definition in terms of quiver and relations, we refer for example to section 4. chapter IV. in \cite{SkoYam}. A well known and important result for Brauer tree algebras is that they are exactly those symmetric algebras that are stable equivalent to symmetric Nakayama algebras, see for example \cite{ARS}, chapter X.3.
\begin{theorem}
Let $A$ be a Brauer tree algebra and $M$ an indecomposable $A$-module with $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$. Then $\operatorname{Ext}_A^i(M,M) \neq 0$ for all $i >0$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $F: \underline{mod-A} \rightarrow \underline{mod-B}$ be a stable equivalent where $B$ is a symmetric Nakayama algebra. By \cite{ARS} proposition 1.12. (b) in chapter X, the stable equivalence $F$ commutes with $\Omega$, which means that $F \Omega_A \cong \Omega_B F$.
Now let $M$ be an indecomposable $A$-module with $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$.
Note that since $\operatorname{Ext}^l(X,Y) \cong \underline{Hom}(\Omega^l(X),Y)$ for general modules $X,Y$ in a symmetric algebra and since $F$ commutes with $\Omega$ we have that $F$ preserves $\operatorname{Ext}$, meaning that $\operatorname{Ext}_A^l(X,Y) \cong \operatorname{Ext}_B^l(F(X),F(Y))$ in general.
Thus we also have $\operatorname{Ext}_B^1(F(M),F(M)) \neq 0$ and by \ref{theorem 2}, we get $\operatorname{Ext}_B^l(F(M),F(M)) \neq 0$ for all $l >0$ since $B$ is a symmetric Nakayama algebra.
But then we also have $\operatorname{Ext}_A^l(M,M) \cong \operatorname{Ext}_B^l(F(M),F(M)) \neq 0$ for all $l >0$.
\end{proof}
In the rest of the article we assume that algebras are finite dimensional over a field $K$.
In the following we denote for two $A$-modules $M,N$ by $\operatorname{Ext}_A^{*}(M,N)$ the direct sum $\bigoplus\limits_{l=0}^{\infty}{\operatorname{Ext}_A^l(M,N)}$. Note that for $M=N$ this is a ring via the Yoneda product and one can also use the Yoneda product to make $\operatorname{Ext}_A^{*}(M,N)$ a $\operatorname{Ext}_A^{*}(M,M)$-right module.
We call a finite dimensional algebra $A$ \emph{ext-finite} in case for every indecomposable $A$-module $M$ we have that $\operatorname{Ext}_A^{*}(M,A/J)$ is a finitely generated $\operatorname{Ext}_A^{*}(M,M)$-module.
Recall that the Hochschild cohomology ring of an algebra $A$ with enveloping algebra $A^e=A^{op} \otimes_K A$ is defined as $HH^{*}(A):=\operatorname{Ext}_{A^e}^{*}(A,A)$.
An algebra is said to satisfy the (fg)-condition in case $HH^{*}(A)$ is noetherian and $\operatorname{Ext}_A^{*}(A/J,A/J)$ is finitely generated as an $HH^{*}(A)$-module. Algebras that satisfy the (fg)-condition are ext-finite, see \cite{Sol} chapter 5 for this and related results about algebras with the (fg)-condition. Many important classes of algebras satisfy the (fg)-condition such as group algebras or representation-finite selfinjective algebras. We refer to the introduction of \cite{ES} for more example and results. An algebra $A$ is called \emph{Gorenstein} in case the left and right injective dimension of the regular module are finite and equal. It is known that algebras with the (fg)-condition are Gorenstein, see for example \cite{Sol} theorem 5.9.
The Gorenstein homological algebra of Nakayama algebras has been studied by Ringel in \cite{Rin}.
We say that an indecomposable module $M$ satisfies the \emph{strong no loop condition} in case $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$ implies that $M$ has infinite projective dimension.
\begin{theorem} \label{theorem 3}
Let $A$ be an ext-finite algebra and $M$ an indecomposable module satisfying the strong no loop condition. Then $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$ implies $\operatorname{Ext}_A^{i}(M,M) \neq 0$ for infinitely many $i>0$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $M$ satisfy the strong no loop condition and assume $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$ so that $M$ has infinite projective dimension. Assume now that $\operatorname{Ext}_A^{i}(M,M) \neq 0$ for infinitely many $i>0$ is wrong and there exists a natural number $n$ with $\operatorname{Ext}_A^l(M,M)=0$ for all $l >n$. Let $x_1,...,x_m$ be generators of $\operatorname{Ext}_A^{*}(M,A/J)$ over $\operatorname{Ext}_A^{*}(M,M)$ with $x_i \in \operatorname{Ext}_A^{n_i}(M,A/J)$. Assume $g=n_1$ is the largest number of the $n_i$. Then $\operatorname{Ext}_A^r(M,A/J)=0$ for all $r >gn$, since every element in $\operatorname{Ext}_A^{*}(M,A/J)$ is a linear combination of the $x_i$ with coefficients from $\operatorname{Ext}_A^{*}(M,M)$. But $\operatorname{Ext}_A^r(M,A/J)=0$ for all $r >gn$ implies that $M$ has finite projective dimension, which is a contradiction. Thus we must have $\operatorname{Ext}_A^{i}(M,M) \neq 0$ for infinitely many $i>0$
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
Let $A$ be an ext-finite algebra and $M$ be a module such that $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item In case $M$ is simple and $A$ a quiver algebra, we have $\operatorname{Ext}_A^i(M,M) \neq 0$ for infinitely many $i>0$.
\item In case $A$ is selfinjective we have $\operatorname{Ext}_A^i(M,M) \neq 0$ for infinitely many $i>0$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}
\item This follows directly from \ref{theorem 3} together with the fact that the strong no loop conjecture holds for quiver algebras.
\item This follows from the fact that any non-projective module over a selfinjective algebra has infinite projective dimension.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
The previous corollary applies in particular to group algebras.
Combining the previous corollary with our first main result on Nakayama algebras, we obtain:
\begin{theorem}
Let $A$ be a Nakayama algebra that is Gorenstein with an indecomposable module $M$ such that $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$. Then $\operatorname{Ext}_A^i(M,M) \neq 0$ for infinitely many $i>0$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By \cite{Nag} Nakayama algebras that are Gorenstein satisfy the (fg)-condition.
The theorem is now an immediate consequence of \ref{theorem 3} since by \ref{theorem 1} any indecomposable module $M$ over a Nakayama algebra with $\operatorname{Ext}_A^1(M,M)$ has infinite projective dimension.
\end{proof}
|
\section*{Introduction}
A minimum length scale of the order of Planck length is a feature of many models of quantum gravity (QG) that seek to unify quantum mechanics and gravitation~\cite{Garay1995a}.
But, the existence of such a length scale has so far eluded experimental verification. Direct detection of the Planck length, $10^{-35}\,\mathrm{m}$, is infeasible with
current and foreseeable technology because the effects of quantum gravity are expected to become directly relevant only at energies of the order of Planck energy,
$10^{19}\,\mathrm{GeV}$, which is 15 orders of magnitude larger than the energy scales achievable in the Large Hadron Collider today. So in order to experimentally probe quantum gravity, we must rely on indirect tests of
signatures of Planck length.
One class of indirect tests of a minimal length scale is based on observations of photon arrival times from gamma-ray bursts in distant galaxies~\cite{Amelino-Camelia1998a}.
Such experiments, however, are hard to control as they rely on a wide range of hard to verify model assumptions. These include, but are not limited to, the properties of the
models of the origins of gamma-ray bursts and the perturbations due to billions of light years of interstellar medium traversed by the gamma-rays. Furthermore, the precision
of such experiments is difficult to extend due to limitations on the distance to observable gamma-ray bursts and the maximal energy of the gamma-rays. This motivates the quest
for highly controlled table-top experiments to test for Planck scale physics \cite{Pikovski2012a,Albrecht2014a,Bawaj2015a,Bosso2017b,Kumar2018a,Bushev2019a}.
The underlying concept on which several such table-top experiments rely upon is the deformations of the canonical commutation relations of position and momentum as a consequence of a variety
of formulations of quantum gravity~\cite{Maggiore1993a,Garay1995a,Scardigli1999a,Adler1999a,Ahluwalia2000a}. These deformations are a phenomenological approach to modelling the
existence of a minimum length scale in quantum gravity and different models of quantum gravity involve different forms of modification of the commutator~\cite{Kempf1995a,Maggiore1993b,Ali2009a}.
Here we focus on a paradigmatic model~\cite{Kempf1995a}
\begin{equation}
\left[ x, p \right] = i \hbar \left( 1 + \frac{\beta_{0}}{ (M_{\mathrm{p}} c)^{2} } p^{2}\right),
\label{Eq:Beta_deformation}
\end{equation}
where $M_{\mathrm{p}}=2.176435\times 10^{-8}\, \mathrm{kg}$ and $c = 299792458 \,\mathrm{m s^{-1}}$ are the Planck mass and speed of light respectively and the variables $x$ and $p$ are the $x-$components of the position and momentum respectively. $\beta_{0}$ is a
dimensionless parameter which is expected to be of the order of unity if the minimal length scale is of the order of Planck length, but it is not fixed by
theory. Measuring or placing bounds on this parameter is thus an open experimental challenge.
One approach to bounding the value of $\beta_{0}$ is to use single particle systems, for example, using measurements of Landau levels, of the Lamb shift, or of electron tunnelling through a potential barrier~\cite{Das2008a}.
However, the best bound obtained with these methods is $\beta_{0} < 10^{20}$, which is far from the expected $\beta_{0} \sim 1$.
To improve the bounds significantly, recent experimental proposals suggest using massive composite systems rather than elementary particles.
These experiments aim to exploit the fact that the quantum gravity signal is enhanced with larger momenta, which result from larger system mass.
Experiments and proposals in this direction include those based on the change in resonant frequency of a harmonic oscillator~\cite{Bawaj2015a,Bushev2019a,Marin2012a}, the change in broadening times of large molecular wave-packets~\cite{Villalpando2019a}, and optomechanical schemes~\cite{Pikovski2012a,Bosso2017b,Kumar2018a}.
However, the implications of using multi-particle systems to probe quantum gravity are not clear. This is because the deformations of the canonical commutation relations like Eq.~\eqref{Eq:Beta_deformation} have been derived for point particles and not for centre of mass (COM)
modes of multi-particle objects~\cite{Amelino-Camelia2013a}.
The deformations for the COM modes are expected to decrease with the number of constituent particles in the test object~\cite{Amelino-Camelia2013a,Magueijo2003a}, but the exact expression for this suppression is not known and therefore needs to be bounded by experiment.
Studies of the soccer-ball problem~\cite{Amelino-Camelia2011a,Hossenfelder2014a,Amelino-Camelia2017a}, which arises in a different framework of quantum gravity, also point toward a suppression of the Planck-scale corrections with number of particles.
Even if the scaling with particle number of this suppression was known, the question of what
constitutes a fundamental particle remains open.
To address these challenges, we define a new parameter that accounts for the suppression of quantum gravity corrections with the number of constituent particles, irrespective of how these particles are defined.
Such a parameter may be obtained from theory once a full quantum description of gravity is available, and meanwhile it can be estimated or bounded from experimental observations.
We study past experiments and propose new experiments to obtain bounds on this and established parameters of quantum gravity deformations.
\section*{Results}
\subsection*{Overview}
To account for the unknown scaling
law that governs the suppression of corrections to the canonical commutation relations with the number of particles, we define the parameter $\alpha$
such that the deformation is suppressed by $N^{\alpha}$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\left[ x, p \right] = i \hbar \left( 1 + \frac{\beta_{0}}{ N^{\alpha} (M_{\mathrm{p}} c)^{2} } p^{2}\right)
\label{Eq:Beta_deformation_alpha}
\end{equation}
where $N$ is the number of constituent particles in the test object.
The reason for considering such a polynomial scaling with number of particles $N$ (with exponent $\alpha$) is the expected polynomial dependence in quasi-rigid macroscopic bodies, i.e., those whose centre-of-mass momenta are the sum of constituents' individual momenta~\cite{Amelino-Camelia2013a}.
Once phenomenological evidence of deformed commutator models begins to accumulate, more refined models can be considered accounting for differences in the exact nature of commutator deformation experienced by bodies with different nature of interaction.
Furthermore, we note that other models of quantum gravity could be considered, for instance, those involving non-commuting spacetime coordinates.
However, our focus is on deformed position and momentum commutators because these underlie proposed tabletop tests of quantum gravity.
In this work, we argue that the inclusion and hence estimation of $\alpha$ is essential for the rigorous interpretation of any experiment that
uses composite test objects to measure $\beta_{0}$. We propose to assess any such experiment by the exclusion area in a two-dimensional parameter
space spanned by $\alpha$ and $\beta$ and carry out such an analysis for three experiments. While the precise value of $\alpha$ is unknown, it is commonly
accepted that it needs to be positive ~\cite{Amelino-Camelia2013a,Magueijo2003a}. We shall see that the best bounds that can be calculated from
recent experiments based on micro- and nano-scale quantum harmonic oscillators \cite{Bawaj2015a,Bushev2019a} are in fact negative for $\beta_0=1$
(and in fact any $\beta_0< 10^6$).
Here we show that measured data of a macroscopic pendulum reveals the first positive
bound on $\alpha$ for any value of $\beta_{0} > 10^{-2}$ based on a careful analytical examination of the effect of deformations of the canonical
commutation relations (Eq.~\eqref{Eq:Beta_deformation_alpha}) on the time period of a pendulum. Specifically, we obtain $\alpha > 0.07$ for a
value of $\beta_{0}=1$ which is expected in various models of quantum gravity. The reason for this significant enhancement of the bound over
those obtained from micro- and nano-scale quantum harmonic oscillators can be traced back to the low achievable momenta in those experiments
which in turn lead to very weak deformations of the canonical commutation relations, for example, in the second term in Eq.~\eqref{Eq:Beta_deformation_alpha}.
We argue that our bound on $\alpha$ can be improved further by moving a pendulum to a vacuum set-up with optimised low damping suspension or
by moving to diamagnetically levitated systems which exhibit extremely low damping rates \cite{Bhattacharya2017a,Zheng2019a} on earth and promise even
better values when located in a space probe.
We begin with a study of the effects of deformed canonical commutation relations proposed in theories of quantum gravity on the time period of
a macroscopic pendulum and use these analytical results to place a bound on the parameter $\alpha$. Since a pendulum is not strictly a harmonic
oscillator, we extend the calculations of corrections to the time period of a harmonic oscillator to that of a pendulum. The time period of a
pendulum as a function of its amplitude can be determined experimentally with considerable precision. Using data from one such experiment \cite{Smith1964a}
we provide the first positive bound on $\alpha$ and moreover, suggest refined experiments for substantially improved bounds.
\subsection*{Correction to time period of pendulum}
\label{Sec:Timeperiod}
Here we calculate the corrections to the time period of a pendulum due to quantum gravity deformations of the canonical commutation relations so that
it can then be compared against experimental data. We consider a pendulum of mass $m$ and length $L$. Its Hamiltonian is
\begin{equation}
H = \frac{p^{2}}{ 2 m} \cos^{2} \theta - m g L \cos \theta
\label{Eq:H}
\end{equation}
where $p$ is the generalised momentum conjugate to $x$ and $\theta$ is the angle between the radius vector and the vertical, i.e., $\theta = \sin^{-1}\left(x/L\right)$.
The time period can be obtained from the Hamiltonian in two ways. Here, we take the approach that defines a new momentum operator which satisfies the standard
canonical commutation relations and hence the standard Heisenberg equations of motion. In this approach the Hamiltonian is modified. In an alternative, equivalent,
approach the Hamiltonian can be left unchanged while the equations of motion are modified due to the deformed commutator~\cite{Nozari2005b}. Here we follow the first
method due to ease of calculation.
For illustrative purposes, we perform the calculations using classical mechanics but later show that the results hold even by performing quantum calculations with deformed commutators.
Here, we deform the standard Poisson brackets in analogy to the deformation of the canonical commutation relation due to quantum gravity~\cite{Benczik2002a,Nozari2008a,Pedram2012a}, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\left\{ x, p \right\} = 1 + \beta p^{2}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\beta = \frac{\beta_{0}}{N^{\alpha} (M_{\mathrm{p}} c)^{2}}.
\label{Eq:beta}
\end{equation}
To ensure that the equations of motion are unchanged, a new momentum operator $\tilde{p}$ is defined such that we recover the standard Poisson bracket, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\left\{ x, \tilde{p} \right\} = 1.
\end{equation}
Without the small momentum assumption of Refs.~\cite{Bawaj2015a,Bushev2019a}, we find that $\tilde{p}$ is related to $p$ as
\begin{equation}
\tilde{p}= \frac{ \tan^{-1} \left(\sqrt{\beta} p \right) }{\sqrt{\beta}}.
\label{Eq:NewP}
\end{equation}
Writing the Hamiltonian in terms of the new momentum operator $\tilde{p}$, we note that it is modified to
\begin{equation}
H = \frac{1}{ 2 m \beta} \tan^{2} \left(\sqrt{\beta} \tilde{p} \right) \cos^{2} \theta - m g L \cos \theta.
\label{Eq:ModH}
\end{equation}
This modification of the Hamiltonian compared to Eq.~\eqref{Eq:H} ensures that the equations of motion remain unchanged with respect to $x$ and $\tilde{p}$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\dot{x} = \frac{\partial H}{\partial \tilde{p}}
= \frac{\cos^{2} \theta}{ m \sqrt{\beta}} \tan \left(\sqrt{\beta} \tilde{p} \right)\sec^{2} \left(\sqrt{\beta} \tilde{p} \right).
\label{Eq:xt_pendulum}
\end{equation}
Separating the variables and integrating over half a time period as detailed in the Methods, we obtain the time period for small amplitudes $A$ and small $\beta$ as approximately
\begin{equation}
T_{2 \pi} \approx 2 \pi \sqrt{\frac{L}{g}}
\left( 1 + \frac{A^{2}}{16 L^{2}} - \frac{\beta_{0} m^{2} g }{2 N^{\alpha} (M_{\mathrm{p}} c)^{2} L} A^{2} \right).
\label{Eq:TP_approx}
\end{equation}
Here, we have calculated the correction to the time period to first order in the quantum gravity parameter $\beta$.
We argue that if $\beta$ were not, in fact, small, then a much larger deviation in the time period would be observed.
In such a case, more detailed calculations would be required to obtain accurate bounds.
We show that the time period of a pendulum obtained from experimental data in the next section corroborates this assumption.
In the Methods section, we show that the Poisson equation approach and a fully quantum mechanical calculation yield the same result for the time period of a harmonic
oscillator. This shows that the calculated expression for the time period (Eq.~\eqref{Eq:TP_approx}) is not merely a
consequence of using classical dynamics but extends to the quantum regime and thus provides further evidence for the correctness of our approach.
The detailed calculations are presented in the Methods section, but we summarise the arguments here. To perform these calculations, we start
with the eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of the quantum harmonic oscillator derived in Ref.~\cite{Kempf1995a}. Since ladder operators are
defined differently due to commutator deformation, we use a generalised Heisenberg algebra~\cite{Pedram2013a} to find the action of the ladder
operators on the eigenstates. Using this algebra, we derive the expressions for the position and momentum operators in terms of the ladder operators.
With this, the operators are well defined. In order to choose the most classical pure state in our calculations, we choose a definition of coherent
states, the Gazeau-Klauder states~\cite{Gazeau1999a}, such that the states remain coherent states during the evolution under this Hamiltonian.
Calculating the expectation value of the position operator with respect to these Gazeau-Klauder coherent states, we recover the classical calculations.
As a side remark we note that these matching results also connects two different approaches to studying deformed commutators, namely modifying the Poisson bracket~\cite{Benczik2002a,Nozari2008a,Pedram2012a} and modifying the commutator~\cite{Kempf1995a,Ali2011a,Brau1999a}.
These two approaches have so far been thought to be separate~\cite{Scardigli2015a}.
\subsection*{Bounds on QG parameters from experimental data}
\label{Sec:Exp}
Having calculated the correction to the time period of a pendulum, we use experimental data from precise measurements of the time period of a pendulum to place bounds on the quantum gravity parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta_{0}$ using Eq.~\eqref{Eq:TP_approx}.
To this end, we consider an experiment~\cite{Smith1964a} which measures the time-period of a pendulum as a function of its amplitude.
The experimental data is represented in Fig.(3) of \cite{Smith1964a}, which plots the measured time-period as a function of the square of the amplitude.
The figure contains data from two experiments: one using a conventional suspension of the pendulum and another using a cycloidal suspension.
In this manuscript, we consider only the conventional suspension because such an experiment can be modelled by the calculations shown in the previous section.
We extracted the data of the experiment with the conventional suspension from Fig.(3) to calculate the slope and intercept.
From Eq.~\eqref{Eq:TP_approx}, we see that the intercept $T_{0}$ of this line is $2 \pi \sqrt{\frac{L}{g}} $ and the slope is $ 2 \pi \sqrt{\frac{L}{g}} \left( \frac{1}{16 L^{2}} - \frac{\beta_{0} m^{2} g }{2 N^{\alpha} (M_{\mathrm{p}} c)^{2} L} \right).$
Since the expression for the slope of this plot includes corrections from quantum gravity, we calculate the slope from the extracted data from Fig.(3) to compare with theory.
This data is reported and the method of extraction of the data is detailed in Sec~\ref{Sec:Data}.
We use the data extracted to perform a linear fit.
The reported error of measurements is $2\%$ in amplitude measurement and $3 \times 10^{-5}~\mathrm{s}$ in time-period measurement~\cite{Smith1964a}.
However, additional error arising from the datapoint extraction have to be accounted for.
For this, we use the size of the markers as a conservative estimate.
This leads to an error of $5 \times 10^{-3}~\mathrm{m}^{2}$ in the square of the amplitude and $10^{-4}~\mathrm{s}$ in the time period measurements.
We use the extracted data and account for both the sources of errors to perform a linear fit using the orthogonal distance regression method~\cite{Boggs1992a}.
This fit yields a reduced $\chi^{2}$ value of $0.07$, which indicates that the extracted data points do indeed agree with the linear fit.
We note that the current work is only a blueprint that uses experimental data from 1964 and such an analysis can be repeated with improved experiments to determine tighter and more precise bounds.
From this fit we obtain the value of the intercept
\begin{equation}
T_{0} = \SI{3.4730 \pm 0.0001}{s}.
\end{equation}
Using this value and following the analysis of Ref.~\cite{Smith1964a}, we can precisely infer the effective length of the pendulum to be
\begin{equation}
L = g \left( \frac{T_0}{2 \pi} \right)^{2}= \SI{2.9954 \pm 0.0002}{m}.
\end{equation}
In this calculation, the local value of acceleration due to gravity $g = \SI{9.80393}{m.s^{-2}}$ has been used~\cite{Smith1964a}.
The pendulum is an iron cylinder of radius $\SI{2.54}{cm}$ and height $\SI{5.08}{cm}$ and a mass of approximately $\SI{1.22}{kg}$.
Using the obtained value of the length $L$ and mass $m$, the slope is numerically evaluated to be
\begin{equation}
2 \pi \sqrt{\frac{L}{g}} \left( \frac{1}{16 L^{2}} - \frac{\beta_{0} m^{2} g }{2 N^{\alpha} (M_{\mathrm{p}} c)^{2} L} \right) = 0.0242 - 0.197 \frac{\beta_{0}}{N^{\alpha}}.
\label{Eq:SlopeTheory}
\end{equation}
The uncertainty in the obtained slope due to uncertainty in the derived length of the pendulum is $9 \times 10^{-5}$, which is small enough to be ignored in the following calculations.
From the linear fit of the data, the slope of the line is obtained to be $0.0232 \pm 0.0012$ ($95\%$ confidence interval).
We see that for the fit and Eq.~\eqref{Eq:SlopeTheory} to be consistent, we obtain $ -0.0012 < \frac{\beta_{0}}{N^{\alpha}} < 0.011$.
For $\beta_{0}$ positive,
\begin{equation}
\beta_{0}N^{-\alpha} < 10^{-2}.
\end{equation}
For the determination of $N$ we assume that the nucleons form the elementary particles which leads to $N = 7.32 \times 10^{26}$
and therefore we obtain $\alpha > 0.07$ for $\beta_{0}=1$. Note that the bound on $\alpha$ is quite insensitive to the precise number of nucleons.
We note that such tight bounds were possible in our work as compared to those of previous works because the nonlinearities in a pendulum can be computed precisely.
In other systems, the intrinsic nonlinearities are unknown and therefore contribute to larger bounds on quantum gravity parameters.
These bounds can therefore be made tighter by including the effect of dissipation on the change in frequency of a pendulum.
We propose that future experiments measure the amount of dissipation and include its effect on the slope and intercept of the $T$ versus $A^{2}$ plot in order for the bounds to be more precise.
We note that dissipation is not a feature of classical systems alone and quantum systems such as those proposed for other tests also couple to the environment, and this dissipation should be considered as well.
Recent experiment using oscillators in the quantum regime have been used to provide bounds on $\beta_0$ under the assumption that
$\alpha=0$. We argue however that any test of consequences of deformed canonical commutation relations due to quantum gravity need
to account for both $\alpha$ and $\beta_{0}$.
The best bound on $\alpha$ from the experiments of Ref.~\cite{Bawaj2015a} is $\alpha > -0.33$ for $\beta_{0}=1$. Similarly, from Ref.~\cite{Bushev2019a}
we obtain $\alpha > -0.25$. Note that these bounds are significantly worse than those obtained in the
present work using the data from \cite{Smith1964a}. In Fig.~\ref{Fig:Scaling} we present the parameter ranges that have been excluded
in the $\alpha,\beta_{0}$-plane in the three experiments discussed here.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Lines}
\caption{\textbf{Excluded regions of parameter space from different experiments.}
This figure depicts the values of the two quantum gravity parameters $\beta_{0}, \alpha$ that are excluded based on experimental observations.
Solid lines represent bounds obtained from experimental data and dashed lines represent expected bounds from proposed experiments.
The shaded areas represent the region excluded by these experiments.
The present work based on \cite{Smith1964a} provides the largest excluded region of parameters which, in particular, excludes the key point $\beta_{0}=1, \alpha = 0$, thereby showing that suppression of quantum gravity deformations should be accounted for if $\beta_{0} \sim 1$ as expected from quantum gravity models.
The proposal to use massive levitated diamagnetic objects described in the text promises significant improvement in bounds if the optimistic parameters required for such an experiment can be obtained.
\label{Fig:Scaling}}
\end{figure}
\subsection*{Diamagnetic levitation for enhanced tests of QG}
In order to explore how far we can possibly bound the $\alpha$-parameter, here we propose an experiment that relies on the precise measurement
of the oscillation frequency of a diamagnetic levitated particle to obtain enhanced bounds on the quantum gravity parameters.
In an experiment on a space probe, such as LISA pathfinder, one could imagine to levitate a particle
in a uniform magnetic field gradient. In this case the frequency of oscillation would be~\cite{Pedernales2020a}
\begin{equation}
\omega = \sqrt{\frac{1}{\rho \mu_0} \chi_{\mathrm{v}} \left(\frac{dB}{dx}\right)^2}
\end{equation}
where $\rho$ is the mass density of the object, $\mu_0$ is the vacuum permeability, $\chi_{\mathrm{v}}$ is the
magnetic volume susceptibility of the material and we assume a constant magnetic field gradient.
The change in frequency resulting from deformed commutators can be obtained from Eq.~\eqref{Eq:TP_approx} and is given by
\begin{equation}
\Delta \omega = \frac{\beta_{0} m^{2} \omega^{3} A^{2}}{2 N^{\alpha} (M_{\mathrm{p}} c)^{2}} .
\end{equation}
The oscillation frequency of levitated objects can be measured very precisely due to very low damping rates.
Here we assume, optimistically, that the damping rate is the only source of error in frequency measurement.
At low pressures of $266 \times 10^{-10}\,\mathrm{Pa}$, the damping rate is expected to be $\gamma=1.2 \times 10^{-7}
\, \mathrm{Hz}$~\cite{Epstein1924a,Slezak2018a}. If, in the experiment, no deviation from the expected frequency
is observed, then $\Delta \omega \lesssim \gamma/\sqrt{N_{\mathrm{m}}}$ where $N_{\mathrm{m}}$ is the number of measurements taken.
We calculate the bounds that one would obtain if such an experiment can be performed. We consider optimistic parameters
of a gold sphere of diameter $\SI{10}{cm}$ that is levitated in a uniform magnetic field gradient of $10^{3}\,\mathrm{T/m}$
that is initially displaced with an amplitude of $\SI{10}{cm}$. The density and magnetic volume susceptibility of gold are
$\rho = 19300\,\mathrm{kg/m^{3}}$ and $\chi_{\mathrm{v}} = 3.287 \times 10^{-5}$~\cite{Dupree1973a} respectively.
This leads to the frequency of oscillations $\omega = 36.71$ Hz, from which we estimate that for $\beta_{0}=1$, we obtain $\alpha>0.35$ for a single measurement $N_{\mathrm{m}}=1$.
However, we realise that such estimates are based on optimistic assessments of all the involved parameters.
More realistically, the error in the frequency might not limited by damping alone and the different parameters feasible in a single experiment might be somewhat suboptimal once all components are integrated together.
Thus, we can conservatively assume that the actual precision in frequency is three orders of magnitude worse than the optimistic value suggested above, i.e., $\Delta \omega \lesssim 10^{-4}$ Hz, we obtain the bounds $\alpha > 0.24$ for $\beta_{0} = 1$.
The region of parameter space that can be excluded from such an experiment is shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Scaling}. This bound may be improved by performing the experiment in space, where
the pressure is about 2000 times lower which leads to a further reduction in $\gamma$.
\subsection*{Using optomechanical tests to bound $\alpha$}
Experiments to place bounds on quantum gravity parameters are not restricted to the framework of measuring the change in frequency of oscillators.
Here we show that other schemes can also be used to placed stringent bounds on $\alpha$ if appropriate initial states are considered.
Specifically, we consider the optomechanical scheme of a light pulse striking a mechanical resonator repeatedly and acquiring a phase that depends
on quantum gravity corrections to the canonical commutation relations~\cite{Pikovski2012a,Bosso2017b,Kumar2018a}. In this scheme, the mechanical
resonator is initially in a thermal state very close to the ground state.
After interacting with the resonator, the field of the light pulse is~\cite{Pikovski2012a}
\begin{equation}
\braket{a_\ell} \approx \xi
\mathrm{e}^{-i 2 \lambda^{2} N_{p} -i \left(4/3 \right) \beta \hbar m \omega \lambda^4 N_{p}^3 }
\end{equation}
where $\xi$ is the amplitude of the coherent state $\ket{\xi}$ of light, $N_{p}$ is the mean photon number in the light pulse and $\lambda$ is the optomechanical interaction strength. As before, $m$ and $\omega$ are the mass and frequency of the oscillator.
We see that the phase acquired by light has a term dependent on $\beta$, which originates from the additional contribution from quantum gravity.
Using the experimental parameters of Ref.~\cite{Pikovski2012a} and the error analysis of Ref.~\cite{Kumar2018a}, and assuming that experiment
returns a null result, we obtain the bound $\beta_{0} N^{-\alpha} < 10^{6}$ which leads to $\alpha > -0.3$ for $\beta_{0}=1$. The excluded
parameter range is presented in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Scaling}.
This bound can be improved if, instead of the ground state, the resonator is initially in a coherent state with a large enough momentum.
In this case, the output field is given by
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\braket{a_\ell} \approx& \, \xi
\mathrm{e}^{-i 2 \lambda^{2} N_{p} -i \left(4/3 \right) \beta \hbar m \omega \lambda^4 N_{p}^3 + i \beta \lambda^{2} N_{p} 2 \braket{p}^{2}}
\end{split}
\end{align}
for the initial state of the oscillator in a coherent state with mean initial momentum $\braket{p}$.
To understand better the mass dependence of the quantum gravity terms, we consider the mass dependence of $\lambda$ using an established model~\cite{Pikovski2012a}
\begin{equation}
\lambda = \frac{4 \mathcal{F}}{\lambda_{\mathrm{L}}} \sqrt{\frac{\hbar}{m \omega}}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{F}$ is the finesse of the cavity and $\lambda_{\mathrm{L}}$ is the wavelength of light used.
With this scaling of $\lambda$ with the mass $m$, we see that the first negative term scales as $\frac{1}{m}$ while the second one scales as $m$.
Hence, we see that the extra term arising from a non-zero initial momentum can, in principle, be made large by choosing a more massive oscillator.
Making the optimistic assumption that all other parameters remain the same but we increase the mass to $10^{-3}\, \mathrm{kg}$ a positive bound on $\alpha$ would be achieved.
While such a large mass is likely to reduce the optomechanical coupling it nevertheless suggests that the measurement of the phase of the output light for macroscopic systems may provide another method to obtain a good bound on the deformation parameters.
\section*{Discussion}
Quantum gravity suggests corrections to the canonical commutation relations that are proportional
to a parameter $\beta_{0}$.
This parameter is expected to be of order of unity if physics exhibits a minimum length of order of the Planck length
but is also expected to scale as $N^{-\alpha}$ where $N$ is the number of constituent particles of the test mass -- a
consequence of the soccer ball problem of quantum gravity. We strongly argue that any test of such physics needs to account
for both parameters $\alpha$ \textit{and} $\beta_{0}$ in its analysis.
We perform an analysis of several quantum regime experiments in
those terms to show that they cannot provide positive bounds on $\alpha$ while we find that a macroscopic pendulum can
provide the first positive bound on $\alpha$ assuming $\beta_{0} = 1$. This shows that the suppressions with the number
of particles cannot be ignored in tests of quantum gravity and that entering the deep quantum regime is not essential
for the observation of quantum gravity corrections to physical dynamics.
Our results pertaining to the time period are derived using the method of deformed Poisson brackets~\cite{Benczik2002a,Nozari2008a,Pedram2012a}. We
also put this method on a more rigorous footing by connecting it to the calculations based on deformed commutators~\cite{Kempf1995a,Ali2011a,Brau1999a}
and show that the two results match. Hence our work connects these two approaches that have thus far been considered independent~\cite{Scardigli2015a}.
Finally, we show that the suppression of quantum gravity deformations is not just restricted to this one framework of oscillator frequency measurement.
For instance, we consider the optomechanical system of Refs.~\cite{Pikovski2012a,Bosso2017b,Kumar2018a} and verify that broadly analogous considerations hold.
We discuss possible advanced experimental designs and the parameter requirements to allow for entering tests in the $\alpha>1$ regime that is suggested by various models of quantum gravity.
\section*{Methods}
\label{Sec:Methods}
\subsection*{Time period of pendulum: detailed calculations}
In this section, we obtain the expression for the time period of a pendulum using classical mechanics.
This is done by solving the equation of motion for the modified Hamiltonian obtained in the calculation of the correction to time period of pendulum in the Results section.
From the expression for the energy in Eq.~\eqref{Eq:ModH}, the total energy in the system is $E = -m g L \cos \phi$, where $\phi$ is the angular amplitude.
The redefined momentum $\tilde{p}$~\eqref{Eq:NewP} can be expressed in terms of the angular displacement $\theta$ and amplitude $\phi$ as
\begin{equation}
\tilde{p} = - \frac{1}{\sqrt{\beta}} \tan^{-1} \left( \sqrt{ 2 m^{2} g L f(\theta) \beta} \right)
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
f(\theta) := \frac{ \cos \theta - \cos \phi }{\cos^{2} \theta}.
\end{equation}
The equation of motion Eq.~\eqref{Eq:xt_pendulum} can be rewritten in terms of $\theta$ as
\begin{equation}
\dot{\theta} L \cos \theta = - \frac{\cos^{2} \theta}{ m \sqrt{\beta}} \sqrt{ 2 m^{2} g L f(\theta) \beta} \left(1+ 2 m^{2} g L f(\theta) \beta \right)
\end{equation}
and simplified to
\begin{equation}
\dot{\theta} = - \cos \theta \sqrt{ 2 \frac{g}{L} f(\theta)} \left(1+ 2 m^{2} g L f(\theta) \beta \right).
\label{Eq:ClassicalDE}
\end{equation}
Separating variables and integrating over half a cycle, we obtain the time period for half an oscillation
\begin{equation}
\frac{T_{2\pi}}{2} = \int_{-\phi}^{\phi} \mathrm{d} \theta \frac{1}{ \cos \theta \sqrt{ 2 \frac{g}{L} f(\theta)} \left(1+ 2 m^{2} g L f(\theta) \beta \right)} .
\end{equation}
Since $\beta \ll 1$, as can be numerically verified from the above equation, the expression can be simplified to
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
T_{2 \pi} \approx \sqrt{\frac{2 L}{g}} \int_{-\phi}^{\phi} \mathrm{d} \theta & \left\{ \frac{1}{ \sqrt{ \cos \theta - \cos \phi} } \right.
\\
& \left. - \frac{ \beta 2 m^{2} g L \sqrt{ \cos \theta - \cos \phi} }{ \cos^{2} \theta} \right\}.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Furthermore, for small amplitudes, we can approximate the time-period to
\begin{equation}
T_{2 \pi} \approx 2 \pi \sqrt{\frac{L}{g}}
\left( 1 + \frac{\phi^{2}}{16} - \frac{\beta}{2} m^{2} g L \phi^{2} \right)
\label{Eq:PedulumApprox}
\end{equation}
and in terms of the amplitude $A$, where $A = \phi L$, it can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
T_{2 \pi} \approx 2 \pi \sqrt{\frac{L}{g}}
\left( 1 + \frac{A^{2}}{16 L^{2}} - \frac{\beta_{0} m^{2} g }{2 N^{\alpha} (M_{\mathrm{p}} c)^{2} L} A^{2} \right)
\end{equation}
which is the expression that has been used to compare with experiments.
\subsection*{Rigorous calculations using deformed commutators}
In this section, we perform detailed calculations in a quantum mechanical framework to find the time-dependent position of a harmonic oscillator modified by quantum gravity.
To do so, we start by using the energy eigenvalues and eigenstates derived quantum-mechanically in Refs.~\cite{Kempf1995a,Chang2002a} for deformed commutators.
We then choose appropriate definitions of the ladder operators and derive the position operator in terms of these ladder operators.
The definition of a coherent state is chosen such that the state remains invariant under evolution of the Hamiltonian.
In the following calculations, we work in the momentum basis where the operators $\hat{x}$ and $\hat{p}$ are defined by their action on the momentum wave-functions as
\begin{align}
\hat{x} \psi(p)&= i \hbar (1 + \beta p^{2}) \frac{\partial \psi(p)}{\partial p}
\label{Eq:x}
\\
\hat{p}\psi(p) &= p\psi(p).
\label{Eq:p}
\end{align}
Solving the Schr\"odinger equation $\hat{H} \psi_{n}(p) = E_{n} \psi_{n}(p)$ with Hamiltonian
\begin{equation}
\hat{H} = -\frac{\hbar^{2} m \omega^{2} }{2} \left( (1 + \beta p^{2}) \frac{\partial}{\partial p} \right)^{2} + \frac{p^{2}}{2 m},
\end{equation}
the energy eigenvalues are found to be~\cite{Kempf1995a}
\begin{equation}
E_{n} = \hbar \omega \left( n + \frac{1}{2} \right) \left( \sqrt{1 + \frac{1}{16 r} } + \frac{1}{4 \sqrt{r} }\right) + \frac{\hbar \omega}{4 \sqrt{r}} n^{2}
\label{Eq:eigenval}
\end{equation}
for $1/r = (2 \beta m \hbar \omega)^{2}$.
The eigenfunctions in the momentum basis are~\cite{Chang2002a}
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\psi_{n}(p) &= (-i)^{n} 2^{\lambda} \Gamma(\lambda) \sqrt{ \frac{n! (n + \lambda) \sqrt{\beta} }{ 2 \pi \Gamma(n + 2 \lambda)} } (1 - s^{2})^{\lambda/2} C_{n}^{\lambda}(s)
\\
&=: z_{n} (1 - s^{2})^{\lambda/2} C_{n}^{\lambda}(s)
\end{split}
\label{Eq:eigenfunc}
\end{align}
where $C_{n}^{\lambda}(s)$ are Gegenbauer polynomials and
\begin{align}
s &= \frac{\sqrt{\beta} p}{\sqrt{1 + \beta p^{2}}} \\
\lambda &= \frac{1}{2} + \sqrt{\frac{1}{4} + \frac{1}{(m \hbar \omega \beta)^{2}} }.
\end{align}
The phase $(-i)^{n}$ has been introduced here so that in the limit $\beta \to 0$, we recover results from quantum mechanics, namely $\hat{a} = \sqrt{\frac{m \omega}{2 \hbar}} \hat{x} + \frac{i}{\sqrt{2 m \hbar \omega}} \hat{p}$.
In the rest of the calculations, we work in the Fock basis $\left\{ \ket{n} \right\}$, using the eigenvalues given by Eq.~\eqref{Eq:eigenval} and the eigenfunctions $\psi_{n}(p) = \braket{p|n}$ given by Eq.~\eqref{Eq:eigenfunc}.
The number operator $\hat{n}$ is defined such that $\hat{n} \ket{n} = n \ket{n}$.
Next we describe the Generalised Heisenberg algebra that is used in the subsequent calculations of the position and momentum operators.
The algebra of the ladder operators should be modified to account for the deformed commutators.
Using the version of generalised Heisenberg algebra used in Ref.~\cite{Pedram2013a}, we find the action of the annihilation operator on an energy eigenstate to be
\begin{equation}
\hat{a} \ket{n} = \sqrt{n \left( 1 + \nu + \nu n \right)} \ket{n-1}
\label{Eq:Annihilation}
\end{equation}
for $\nu = \beta m \hbar \omega / 2$.
The number operator is related to the ladder operators as
\begin{equation}
\hat{a}^{\dag} \hat{a} = \hat{n} \left( 1 + \nu + \nu \hat{n} \right).
\end{equation}
Also, the commutator is derived to be
\begin{equation}
\left[ \hat{a}, \hat{a}^{\dag} \right] \approx 1 + 2 \nu (1 + \hat{a}^{\dag} \hat{a})
\end{equation}
to first order in $\beta$.
Now we are ready to derive the expression for the position and momentum operators in terms of the ladder operators.
These calculations will eventually enable the calculation of the trajectory of the oscillator.
The relationship between $\hat{x}$ and $\hat{a}$ is obtained by starting with the equation Eq.\eqref{Eq:Annihilation} in the momentum basis, i.e,
\begin{equation}
\hat{a} \psi_{n}(p) = \sqrt{n \left( 1 + \nu + \nu n \right)} \psi_{n-1}(p)
\end{equation}
and using recursion relations of the Gegenbauer polynomials to express $\psi_{n-1}(p)$ in terms of $\psi_{n}(p)$.
This gives us the operator $\hat{a}$ in the momentum basis which can be expressed in terms of the operators $\hat{x}$ and $\hat{p}$.
This relation is then inverted to obtain $\hat{x}$ in terms of the ladder operators.
Using the following recursion relations
\begin{align}
(n + 2 \lambda) C_{n}^{\lambda}(s) &= \frac{ \mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} s} C_{n+1}^{\lambda}(s) - s \frac{ \mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} s} C_{n}^{\lambda}(s)
\\
(1 - s^{2}) \frac{ \mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} s} C_{n}^{\lambda}(s) &= (n + 2 \lambda) s C_{n}^{\lambda}(s) - (n + 1) C_{n+1}^{\lambda}(s)
\end{align}
of Gegenbauer polynomials, we obtain the action of the annihilation operators on the wavefunction to be
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\hat{a} \psi_{n} =& \, i \sqrt{\frac{ \left( 1 + \nu + \nu n \right) (n + \lambda -1) (\lambda + n) \beta}{(n + 2 \lambda -1) (1 + \beta p^{2})}}
\times \\
& \left\{ \frac{1 + \beta p^{2}}{\beta (\lambda + n) } \frac{ \mathrm{d} }{\mathrm{d} p}
+p \right\} \psi_{n}.
\label{Eq:aExact}
\end{split}
\end{align}
Since the $\psi_{n}$ form a complete basis~\cite{Kempf1995a}, Eq.~\eqref{Eq:aExact} can be written in operator form in the limit of $\beta \ll 1$ using the definitions of the position and momentum operators,~\eqref{Eq:x} and~\eqref{Eq:p}, to obtain
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\hat{a} =&\, \sqrt{\frac{m \omega}{2 \hbar}} \left[ \hat{x} - \beta \left\{ \frac{ 1}{2} \hat{p}^{2} \hat{x} + \frac{m \hbar \omega}{4} \hat{x} \right\} \right]
\\
&+ \frac{i}{\sqrt{2 m \hbar \omega}} \left[ \hat{p}
+ \frac{\beta}{4} \left\{ - 2 \hat{p}^{3} + \hbar m \omega \hat{p} (1 + 4 \hat{n}) \right\} \right].
\end{split}
\end{align}
We invert this relation to find $\hat{x}$
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\hat{x} =& \, \sqrt{\frac{\hbar}{2 m \omega}} \left( \hat{a} + \hat{a}^{\dag} \right)
\\
& + \frac{\beta}{4} \sqrt{\frac{\hbar^{3} m \omega }{2}} \left( \hat{a}^{\dag} \hat{a}^{2} + \hat{a}^{\dag 2} \hat{a} -\hat{a}^{3} - \hat{a}^{\dag 3} \right)
\end{split}
\label{Eq:xtoa}
\end{align}
and similarly $\hat{p}$
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\hat{p} = & \, i \sqrt{\frac{\hbar m \omega}{2}} \left( \hat{a}^{\dag} - \hat{a} \right)
\\
& + i \beta \frac{(\hbar m \omega)^{3/2} }{4 \sqrt{2}} \left( \hat{a}^{\dag} \hat{a}^{2} - \hat{a}^{\dag 2} \hat{a} + \hat{a}^{3} - \hat{a}^{\dag 3} + 2 \hat{a} - 2 \hat{a}^{\dag} \right)
\label{Eq:ptoa}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
in terms of the ladder operators.
Next we move to the definition of the generalised coherent state.
To define the most classical pure state, a natural choice is a coherent state, but due to the Hamiltonian being modified from deformed commutators, our usual definition of coherent states no longer hold because the coherent state does not remain one after evolution under this Hamiltonian.
Hence, here we introduce generalised coherent states that are suited for this modified Hamiltonian.
These states are the Gazeau-Klauder states which were introduced in Ref.~\cite{Gazeau1999a}.
Here, we describe them in detail, closely following the details in Ref.~\cite{Gazeau1999a}.
Since a coherent state $\ket{\alpha}$ is parametrised by one complex number, we generalise it slightly by considering states parametrised by two real parameters $\ket{J, \gamma}$.
To ensure that $\ket{J, \gamma}$ behaves like a classical state, we demand that it satisfies the following conditions with respect to a given Hamiltonian $H$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
The continuity condition
\begin{equation}
(J', \gamma') \rightarrow (J, \gamma) \implies \ket{J', \gamma'} \rightarrow \ket{J, \gamma}
\end{equation}
\item
Resolution of identity
\begin{equation}
\int \mathrm{d} \mu (J, \gamma) \ket{J, \gamma} \bra{J, \gamma} = \mathds{1}
\end{equation}
\item
Temporal stability such that the time-evolved state is always a generalised coherent state
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{e}^{-i H t/\hbar} \ket{J, \gamma} = \ket{J, \gamma + \omega t}
\label{Eq:TimeEvol}
\end{equation}
\item
The energy of the state only depends on $J$
\begin{equation}
\braket{J, \gamma | H | J, \gamma} = \hbar \omega J.
\label{Eq:ActionId}
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
The conditions in Eqs.~\eqref{Eq:TimeEvol} and~\eqref{Eq:ActionId} are defined with respect to a Hamiltonian, and so coherent states do not satisfy them with respect to a modified Hamiltonian and we need these generalised states.
If the eigenvalues and eigenstates of the Hamiltonian are defined such that
\begin{equation}
H \ket{n} = \hbar \omega e_{n }\ket{n},
\end{equation}
we can verify that the definition of the generalised coherent state
\begin{equation}
\ket{J, \gamma} = \frac{1}{N(J)} \sum_{n} \frac{J^{n/2} \mathrm{e}^{-i \gamma e_{n}}}{\sqrt{\rho_{n}}} \ket{n}
\label{Eq:Gazeau-Klauder}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\rho_{n} &= \prod_{k=1}^{n} e_{k}\\
N(J)^{2} &= \sum_{n} \frac{J^{n}}{\rho_{n}}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
satisfies all the above properties.
As an example, we consider the harmonic oscillator Hamiltonian.
Here, the eigenvalues are given by $H \ket{n} = \hbar \omega n \ket{n}$ (after ignoring the constants) and therefore in this case, $e_{n} = n$.
Therefore, from the definitions of $\rho_{n}$ and $N(J)$, we see that the Gazeau-Klauder state is
\begin{equation}
\ket{J, \gamma} = \mathrm{e}^{-J/2} \sum_{n} \frac{J^{n/2} \mathrm{e}^{-i \gamma n}}{\sqrt{n!}} \ket{n},
\end{equation}
which is exactly the definition of a coherent state $\ket{\xi}$ if we define $\xi = \sqrt{J} \mathrm{e}^{-i \gamma}$.
Thus we see that the Gazeau-Klauder state reduces to the coherent state when the Hamiltonian is the harmonic oscillator Hamiltonian.
For the Hamiltonian modified with deformed commutators, we see that the eigenvalues can be written as~\eqref{Eq:eigenval}
\begin{equation}
E = \hbar \omega \left( n + \nu n + \nu n^{2} + \frac{1}{2} (1 + \nu) \right)
\end{equation}
and therefore, ignoring the constants,
\begin{equation}
e_{n} = n \left( 1 + \nu + \nu n \right).
\end{equation}
Note that here the states $\ket{J, \gamma + \omega t}$ for different $t$ are not necessarily the same as $\ket{J, \gamma + \omega t + 2\pi}$, because $\omega$ is not related directly to the measured frequency but is merely a parameter in the Hamiltonian of Eq.~\eqref{Eq:eigenval}.
Finally, we can calculate the trajectory of the oscillator.
Using the rules of the generalised Heisenberg algebra, and the expressions for the position and momentum operators derived in the above section, we calculate the expectation value of position and momentum in this state and obtain
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\braket{J,\gamma | \hat{x} | J, \gamma} =& \sqrt{\frac{2 \hbar J}{ m \omega}} \cos{\gamma}
+ \beta \sqrt{2 \hbar^{3} m \omega } \left\{ \frac{J^{3/2} }{4} \cos{\gamma}
\right. \\ &
\left. - \frac{J^{3/2} }{4} \cos{3 \gamma} - \sqrt{J} (1+J) \gamma \sin{\gamma} \right\}
\end{split}
\label{Eq:xExp}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\braket{J,\gamma | \hat{p} | J, \gamma} =& \, - \sqrt{2 \hbar m \omega J} \sin{\gamma}
\\
& + \beta \frac{(\hbar m \omega)^{3/2} }{2 \sqrt{2}} \left\{ J^{3/2} \sin{\gamma} + J^{3/2} \sin{3 \gamma}
\right.
\\ &
+ 2 J^{1/2} \sin{\gamma}
- 4 \gamma \sqrt{J}(1+J) \cos{\gamma}
\left.
\right\}.
\end{split}
\label{Eq:pExp}
\end{equation}
Since these states satisfy the relation $\mathrm{e}^{-i H t/\hbar} \ket{J, \gamma} = \ket{J, \gamma + \omega t}$, the time-evolved expectation values are easily obtained by replacing $\gamma$ with $\gamma + \omega t$.
In these calculations, we have assumed not only that $\beta \ll 1$ but also $\beta \gamma \ll 1$ and $\beta \omega t \ll 1$.
We choose the initial state such that the oscillator starts at rest with non-zero amplitude, i.e., $\braket{p(0)} = 0$ and $\braket{x(0)} = A$.
This condition is satisfied when $\gamma = 0$ and $J = \frac{m \omega A^{2}}{2 \hbar}$, as can be seen from Eqs.~\eqref{Eq:pExp} and~\eqref{Eq:xExp}.
Therefore, for this initial state, the expectation value of position is
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\braket{x(t)} =& A \cos{\omega t} + \beta \frac{m^{2} \omega^{2} A^{3}}{2} \sin{\omega t}
\\
& \times \left\{ \cos{\omega t} \sin{\omega t} - \omega t \left(1+ \frac{2 \hbar}{m \omega A^{2}} \right) \right\}.
\end{split}
\label{Eq:xt}
\end{equation}
The classical limit of Eq.~\eqref{Eq:xt} ($\hbar \to 0$) satisfies the low amplitude limit of the differential equation~\eqref{Eq:xt_pendulum} obtained classically, thus showing that we obtain identical results with both the methods used.
Potential future directions include connecting our formalism, which is based on the Gazeau-Klauder coherent states, with that of Ref.~\cite{Bosso2017a}, which starts with a somewhat different definition of creation and annihilation operators.
Another important open problem is to go beyond coherent states as the initial states to thermal states.
Our analysis can straightforwardly be applied to thermal states in principle, but the definition of a thermal state under the deformed commutators is unclear.
\subsection*{Data from experiment of Ref.~\cite{Smith1964a}}
\label{Sec:Data}
Table~\ref{Tab:ExpData} contains the data extracted from the experimental results obtained in Ref.~\cite{Smith1964a}.
This data was extracted by magnifying from Fig.~3 of the paper, setting the figure as a plot background and plotting markers over the figure such that the plot points coincide exactly with the points in the background.
The coordinates of the plotted points were recorded as the extracted data.
\begin{table}\centering
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c}
\toprule
$A^{2} (\mathrm{cm}^{2})$ & $T_{2 \pi} (\mathrm{s})$ &~\hspace*{0.5cm}& $A^{2} (\mathrm{cm}^{2})$ & $T_{2 \pi} (\mathrm{s})$\\
\midrule
43 & 3.47315 &~\hspace*{0.5cm}& 709 & 3.47468 \\
52 & 3.47308 &~\hspace*{0.5cm}& 837 & 3.47498 \\
132 & 3.47341 &~\hspace*{0.5cm}& 1020 & 3.47538\\
168 & 3.47342 &~\hspace*{0.5cm}& 1228 & 3.47583 \\
204 & 3.47351 &~\hspace*{0.5cm}& 1404 & 3.47633 \\
244 & 3.47363 &~\hspace*{0.5cm}& 1760 & 3.47705 \\
293 & 3.47373 &~\hspace*{0.5cm}& 1850 & 3.47736 \\
360 & 3.47396 &~\hspace*{0.5cm}& 2115 & 3.47801 \\
387 & 3.47394 &~\hspace*{0.5cm}& 2160 & 3.47798 \\
443 & 3.47409 &~\hspace*{0.5cm}& 2295 & 3.47847 \\
578 & 3.47438 &~\hspace*{0.5cm}& & \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Measured data of the time-period of a pendulum as a function of its amplitude extracted from Ref.~\cite{Smith1964a}.}
\label{Tab:ExpData}
\end{table}
\section*{Data availability statement}
All data generated or analysed during this study are extracted from Ref.~\cite{Smith1964a} and are available in this article in Table~\ref{Tab:ExpData}.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
This work was supported by the ERC Synergy grant BioQ. We gratefully acknowledge illuminating discussion
with Gerold Brackenhofer on the measurement of pendulum oscillations and especially for bringing Ref.~\cite{Smith1964a} to our attention. We are also grateful to Shai Machnes for making available the
QLib Mathematica package which was used in simplifying the quantum mechanical calculations. We thank Sandro Donadi, Igor Pikovski and David Vitali for helpful comments and discussions.
\section*{Author Contributions}
M.B.P. conceived the idea and supervised the project and S.P.K performed calculations and drafted the
manuscript. Both authors discussed the results and edited the manuscript.
\section*{Competing interests}
The authors declare no competing interests.
\section*{References}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
With increasingly available observations from telescopes, astronomy has become one of the most data-intensive fields of study today. The introduction of high-resolution detectors in recent astronomical projects has led to a rapid growth in both data volume and data complexity. To fully utilize information from the vast datasets, it is then essential (and often has a great potential for new discoveries) to combine observations across multiple wavelengths, at varying time domains, and sometimes between different messengers. Over the last decade, studies in the field of catalog cross-matching have made significant progress using statistical and computational tools. \citet{2008ApJ...679..301B} introduced a reliable framework for symmetric cross-identification of multiple observations based on Bayesian hypothesis testing, which has provided superior results on handling astrometric uncertainties in simulations \citep{2009ApJ...705..739H}. Their methods have also been successfully applied in several studies for cross-matching with unknown proper motions \citep{2010ApJ...719...59K}, to incorporate photometry of galaxies \citep{2014A&A...563A..14M}, or to study radio morphology \citep{2013ASPC..475...33F} and galaxy clustering \citep{2017A&C....20...83M}. A review of methods is also available in \citet{2015AnRSA...2..113B}. More recent studies have also introduced combinatorial optimization methods for cross-identifying associations for 2-way matching \citep{2016AJ....152...86B} and for N-way matching \citep{2019ApJ...870...51S}. While the above studies have opened a door for developing new systems and algorithms to address many different problems, new challenges are presented each day to many astronomers for various scientific demands. Among others, a particularly challenging practice arises in cross-matching small images such as those taken by the Hubble Space Telescope (HST).
Unlike large survey projects such as the Sloan Digital Sky Survey \citep[SDSS;][]{2000AJ....120.1579Y} designed to provide a catalog, the HST is not used as a survey telescope in general. For more than twenty-five years, the HST has been operated under many independent programs targeting specific astronomical objects or sky regions using different detectors. The resultant HST data is a diverse collection of information from all observations made in the past including overlapping exposures at different angles and observations detected in different filters at different timelines. Cross-matching Hubble images to register the detected sources to a known catalog is more than matching nearby sources as studied in the aforementioned research. It also involves a step of positional adjustment of the images to better align the overlapping sources before matching.
While traditional image registration using the World Coordinate System \citep[WCS;][]{2002A&A...395.1061G} standard transformations and a guide star catalog is adequate for typical exposures, and automatic tools are available for blind registration to surveys \citep{2010AJ....139.1782L}, deep and narrow exposures, such as those taken by the HST, continue to be challenging due to the limited number of calibrators in the field of view.
\citet{2012ApJ...761..188B} introduced a novel efficient method driven by the challenges of building the Hubble Source Catalog \citep[HSC;][]{2016AJ....151..134W}.
Using 3D rotations, they were able to cross-calibrate sources across the HST visits (telescope pointings) to obtain an improved relative astrometry. With the number of standard stars increased in the aligned images, there is an increased chance of further matching these astrometrically corrected images to the lower density, large reference catalogs.
To align the overlapping HST images, \citet{2012ApJ...761..188B} introduced a 3D infinitesimal rotation vector, which represents the axis and the angle of the rotation for an image. In the context of small corrections, the 3D rotation is also preferred over the traditional transformation performed on the tangent plane, since it avoids many expensive evaluations of the trigonometric functions. The shifts of the images are then determined by minimizing the separations between paired sources and calibrators that are close on the celestial sphere. This approach essentially arrives at the optimization of a quadratic cost function. The algorithm works effectively when the initial image offset is small, but the issue raises for large residuals that can overpower small values in estimation. The current solution to this problem in HSC is to pre-determine approximately matched pairs using the \textit{pre-offsets} method and a Bayesian likelihood comparison approach \citep{2016AJ....151..134W, 2012ApJ...761..188B}.
A drawback of this method is that it uses a grid of limited resolution for obtaining the registration. In this study, we propose a new approach that is free from the step of pre-defining the set of nearly matched pairs and is free of grid resolution issues. To solve for the best transformation, we formulate a robust objective function that can tolerate a large number of erroneous associations in the initial set of candidate matches.
The paper is organized as follows.
Section \ref{sec_method} presents the robust Bayesian approach and its connection to $M$-estimation with an illustration of some of the implementation considerations.
Section \ref{sec_dis} discusses the results on the simulated and the real catalogs.
Section \ref{sec_final} concludes the study.
\section{Methodology}
\label{sec_method}
The goal is to cross-register the source lists from multiple exposures, images or visits that have (even just partial) overlaps. We form groups of these source lists and work with their astrometric registration separately.
At the core of our iterative procedure is a simpler step that can correct the registration of a single source list (from one visit) onto a set of calibrators, whose direction is assumed to be perfectly known. This simpler problem is also very challenging in the presence of many false calibrators that are not actual guide stars. A robust treatment of that problem is the main focus of this paper. The iterative solution that cycles through the individual source lists using the candidate associations as calibrators has been discussed in detail by \citet{2012ApJ...761..188B}.
\subsection{Correcting to Calibrators}
Before carrying out the alignment of sources and calibrators, we need to first determine a set of initial associations. These candidate matches are obtained by considering for every source in the catalog, all calibrators within an angular separation of $R$; this would depend on the astrometry of the relevant catalogs. We index all these possible associations by $q \in \{1, \ldots, N\}$.
Let $\boldsymbol{r}_q$ represent the direction (3D unit vector) of the source and its corresponding calibrator's direction $\boldsymbol{c}_q$ in the $q$th association. Note that the same source in a catalog will typically appear in multiple associations, i.e., different $q$, depending on $R$.
An infinitesimal 3D rotation given by some $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ vector yields the updated direction
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:transformation}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{r}_q^{\prime}(\boldsymbol{\omega}) = \boldsymbol{r}_q+\boldsymbol{\omega}\times \boldsymbol{r}_q$}\,.
\end{equation}
The second term is a small offset perpendicular to the original $\boldsymbol{r}_q$, which preserves the normality of $\boldsymbol{r}_q'$, with $\boldsymbol{r}_q'$ approximately an unit vector after transformation. The shift depends on the length and direction of $\boldsymbol{\omega}$. When $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ is co-linear with the image center, the transformation is a rotation around that axis, but if it is perpendicular to it, we get a simple shift in the tangent plane. The power of the above formula comes from the fact that it can describe both rotation and translation in the plane of the image, while being linear in the components of $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ vector.
\color{black}
\subsection{Bayesian Formalism}
The approach introduced here considers the possibility that a (potentially large) fraction of the initial associations do not correspond to the same astronomical object.
Our goal is to simultaneously find the optimal transformation and identify the true associations.
Beyond the parameter of interest $\boldsymbol{\omega}$, we introduce a set of binary variables \mbox{$\beta\!=\!\{\beta_q\}$} to represent the two possible states for each candidate association $q$, which we will refer to as ``good'' and ``bad''. The former is an association belonging to the same object, but they are mixed with many false or bad ones.
In addition, let $\gamma$ denote the probability of an association being ``good'', i.e., truly corresponding to the same object.
First we formulate the problem in the Bayesian framework defining the likelihood function and the prior density function. Next we discuss the marginalization of the posterior to find a robust estimate of the calibration.
Let $p(\boldsymbol{\omega},\beta,\gamma)$ represent the joint prior probability density function (PDF) of all model parameters.
Given a set of source-calibrator pairs data \mbox{$D\!=\!\{(\boldsymbol{r}_q, \boldsymbol{c}_q)\}$} and the likelihood function $p(D\lvert\boldsymbol{\omega},\beta,\gamma)$, one can obtain the posterior PDF on $\boldsymbol{\omega},\beta,\gamma$ using Bayes' rule.
After marginalizing over the nuisance parameters $\beta$ and $\gamma$ we get the posterior distribution on $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ (conditioned on the data set):
\begin{equation}\label{eq:post1}
p(\boldsymbol{\omega}|D)\propto \int\!d\gamma \sum_{\beta}\,p(\boldsymbol{\omega}, \beta, \gamma)\,p(D|\boldsymbol{\omega},\beta,\gamma)\,.
\end{equation}
We note that the sum over $\beta$ considers all possible combinations of the individual $\beta_q$ components. If there are $N$ candidate associations, there are $2^N$ possibilities to consider, which is typically a very large number even for images with only a few thousand detections. Hence, the direct evaluation of the above sum would be computationally prohibitive due to the combinatorially large number of terms, but in our case it can be done analytically.
On the one hand, the joint prior density function
has simplified dependencies because the transformation can be assumed to be independent from the calibrators, so the product of the conditional probabilities become
\color{black}
\begin{equation}
p(\boldsymbol{\omega},\beta,\gamma) =
p(\boldsymbol{\omega})\,p(\gamma)\,p(\beta|\gamma).
\end{equation}
On the other hand, the likelihood function $p(D|\boldsymbol{\omega},\beta,\gamma)$ depends only on $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ and $\beta$, which we can write as
\begin{equation}
L(\boldsymbol{\omega},\beta) = \left[\prod_{q:\,\beta_{q}=1} \ell_{q}^G (\boldsymbol{\omega})\right]
\left[\prod_{q:\,\beta_{q}=0} \ell_{q}^B (\boldsymbol{\omega})\right]
\end{equation}
where $\ell_{q}^{G}(\boldsymbol{\omega})$ and $\ell_{q}^{B}(\boldsymbol{\omega})$ are the ``good'' and ``bad'' member likelihood functions respectively.
A natural choice for the member likelihood function which describes the directional uncertainty is the Von Mises-Fisher distribution \citep{Fisher295} --- a spherical analogue to the Gaussian. Alternatively, one can also model the bivariate normal distribution on a unit sphere with a Kent distribution \citep{1993sasd.book.....F, ley2017}.
In our approach, we choose to model with the Von Mises-Fisher distribution. For the observed direction $\boldsymbol{x}$ and the direction of the mode $\boldsymbol{r}$, the PDF of the Fisher distribution is defined as
\begin{equation}
F(\boldsymbol{x};\boldsymbol{r},\kappa) = \frac{\kappa}{4\pi\sinh\kappa}\exp (\kappa\,\boldsymbol{r} \boldsymbol{x})
\end{equation}
with the compactness parameter $\kappa$. For the typical small astrometric uncertainty, one can use the flat-sky approximation locally where a (bivariate) normal distribution describes the uncertainty in the tangent plane, in which case \mbox{$\kappa\!=\!1/\sigma^2$}, where $\sigma$ is the astrometric uncertainty. For a known point-spread function (PSF) associated with each point source, we can take $\sigma$ as the individual positional error for each source, which is typically a fraction of the PSF width. Alternatively, we use a constant systematic positional error for all sources, ignoring any variation in astrometric accuracy in this case.
The ``good'' member likelihood function thus can be written as
\begin{equation}
\ell_{q}^{G}(\boldsymbol{\omega})=F\!\left(\boldsymbol{c}_{q};\boldsymbol{r}_{q}^{\prime}(\boldsymbol{\omega}),\kappa\right)
\end{equation}
where \mbox{$\boldsymbol{r}_{q}^{\prime}(\boldsymbol{\omega})$} describes the transformation using infinitesimal rotation, see Equation~\eqref{eq:transformation}.
The ``bad'' member likelihood function can be assumed to be isotropic, i.e., uniform over the field of the image,
\begin{equation}
\ell_{q}^{B}(\boldsymbol{\omega})=\frac{1}{\mathbf{A}}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{A}$ is the area of the image.
Considering the prior probability on $\beta$ given $\gamma$ for the good and bad pairs explicitly such that
\begin{equation}
p(\beta|\gamma) = \left[\prod_{q:\, \beta_{q} =1} \gamma \right]\left[\prod_{q:\, \beta_{q} =0} (1-\gamma) \right],
\end{equation}
the joint posterior probability distribution of $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ from Equation~\eqref{eq:post1} is then given as
\begin{align} \label{eq:post2}
\begin{split}
& p(\boldsymbol{\omega}|D) \propto
p(\boldsymbol{\omega}) \times \\
& \int\!\!d\gamma\, p(\gamma)\sum_{\beta}\left[\prod_{q:\, \beta_{q} =1} \gamma \ell_{q}^{G}( \boldsymbol{\omega}) \right]
\!\!
\left[\prod_{q:\,\beta_{q}=0}\!(1\!-\!\gamma) \ell_{q}^{B}(\boldsymbol{\omega})\right].
\end{split}
\end{align}
We can analytically marginalize over all combinatorial possibilities described by recognizing that the sum over $\beta$ is a product of the mixture,
\footnote{Equation~\eqref{eq:post2} is also known as the Bernoulli Mixture Model which can be solved with maximum-likelihood type estimation using EM algorithm \citep{dempster1977}.}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:post3}
p(\boldsymbol{\omega}|D)\propto
p(\boldsymbol{\omega})\!\!\int\!\!d\gamma\,p(\gamma)\!\prod_{q}\!\left[\gamma\ell_{q}^{G}(\boldsymbol{\omega})+
(1\!-\!\gamma)\ell_{q}^{B}(\boldsymbol{\omega})\right]
\end{equation}
which is a much simpler formula to work with. Numerically, one can map out the marginal posterior using sampling methods such as Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) or calculate the expectation value of $\boldsymbol{\omega}$.
In practice, the product over $q$ in the above result is surprisingly insensitive to the (small) value of $\gamma$.
In fact, a simple Dirac delta prior \mbox{$p(\gamma)\!=\!\delta(\gamma-\gamma_*)$} is suitable with reasonable choices of $\gamma_*$.
Since $\gamma_*$ is just the fraction of the true associations, we can estimate its value based on the input catalogs or even find its maximum likelihood estimate, see \citet{2015AnRSA...2..113B}.
For example, with $N_1$ sources and $N_2$ calibrators, the crudest estimate is the minimum of the two divided by the total number of possible associations within some search radius $R$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:gamma}
\gamma_{*}=\frac{\min(N_1, N_2)}{N}\,.
\end{equation}
This is really an upper bound of $\gamma$ but is a suitable estimate for the following procedure.
Substituting the member likelihood functions and a fixed $\gamma_*$ yields an ``effective'' likelihood function
\begin{equation} \label{eq:maxfn}
L^{\!*}\!(\boldsymbol{\omega})=\!
\prod_{q}
\left[\frac{\gamma_{*}}{2\pi\sigma^{2}}
\exp\left\{\!-\frac{\left[\boldsymbol{c}_{q} - (\boldsymbol{r}_{q}\!+\!\boldsymbol{\omega}\!\times\!\boldsymbol{r}_{q})\right]^{2}}
{2\sigma^{2}}\right\} +\frac{1\!-\!\gamma_{*}}{\mathbf{A}}\right]
\end{equation}
Where efficiency is imperative, such as the Hubble Source Catalog where hundreds of millions of detections appear somethings in thousands of overlapping visits drive the computation cost high, a simple shortcut is to maximize this function to obtain a solution for $\omega$ that is robust against the overwhelmingly large fraction of bad associations.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{robust_rho.pdf}
\caption{The robust $\rho$-function (\textit{solid blue line}) limits the influence of outliers in comparison to a quadratic objective (\textit{dashed red line}).}
\label{fig:rho_fn}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Connection to \textit{M}-estimation}
When all pairs are ``good'', i.e. $\gamma_{*}=1$, Equation~\eqref{eq:maxfn} yields the least-squares problem as introduced in \citet{2012ApJ...761..188B}. As the fraction of good pairs decreases, the effective likelihood function gains heavier tails making the optimization more difficult.
Estimation with the problem of high unbalancedness has been discussed in previous literature of \citet{brown2001}, with \citet{2006ApJ...652..610P} proposed a Bayesian approach for numerical computation. In this study, to find the optimum, we borrow ideas from robust statistics \citep{Huber1981, maronna2006} to reformalize our objective function in Equation~\eqref{eq:maxfn}.
Let the separation between the $q$-th source-calibrator pair to be $\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{q}\!=\!\boldsymbol{c}_{q}\!-\!\boldsymbol{r}_{q}$. For any given $\gamma_{*}$, instead of maximization, we minimize the negative logarithm of the likelihood function in Equation~\eqref{eq:maxfn} and thus arrive at the following objective function
\begin{equation} \label{eq:rho}
\tilde{\boldsymbol{\omega}}=
\arg\min_{\boldsymbol{\omega}}\sum_{q}\,
\rho\left(\frac{ \left|\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{q}-\boldsymbol{\omega}\times\boldsymbol{r}_{q} \right|}{\sigma}\right)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation*}
\textrm{with} \quad
\rho(x) = -\ln
\left(
\frac{\gamma_{*}}{2\pi\sigma^2}\ e^{-x^2/2} \,+\, \frac{1\!-\!\gamma_{*}}{\mathbf{A}}
\right).
\end{equation*}
As illustrated in Figure~\eqref{fig:rho_fn}, this $\rho$-function is quadratic for small residuals, but constant for large values - limiting the contribution of bad pairs to the objective.
We note that $\rho$ is a function of $x^2$ only and this problem formally is much like $M$-estimation in robust statistics.
As first introduced by \citet{huber1964}, an $M$-estimator is a maximum-likelihood type estimator, which minimizes a function of errors instead of the sum of their squares to achieve more robustness. For instance, in the problem of finding the best fit given a sequence of data points $(X_i, Y_i)$, a maximum-likelihood estimator $\hat{\theta}$ minimizes the sum of squared errors of
\begin{equation}
\sum_{i} (Y_{i}- X_{i}\theta)^{2}
\end{equation}
for $Y_i=\theta X_i+\epsilon_i$, where $\epsilon_i$ are normally distributed error terms and are assumed to be independent. With $M$-estimation, the estimator $\hat{\theta}$ is determined by minimizing a function of the errors
\begin{equation}
\sum_{i} \rho(Y_{i}- X_{i}\theta)
\end{equation}
for $\rho$ to be a non-constant function. More detailed discussions on the choice and the properties of the $\rho$-function can be found in literature and textbooks of robust statistics \citep{huber1964, Huber1981, maronna2006}.
The solution exists requiring the gradient of the objective function equals to zero. Since no closed-form solution exists for an $M$-estimation, a general approach is to use an Iteratively Reweighted Least-Squares (IRLS) method \citep{maronna2006}. In this study, we solve the problem by iterating between
(i) solving for $\tilde{\boldsymbol{\omega}}$ using $A\,\tilde{\boldsymbol{\omega}}=b$
with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:solve}
\begin{array}{ccc}
A =\displaystyle \sum_{q} \frac{w_{q}}{\sigma^{2}}
\left(I-\boldsymbol{r}_{q}\!\otimes\boldsymbol{r}_{q}\right) & \textrm{and} &
b = \displaystyle \sum_{q}
\frac{w_{q}}{\sigma^{2}}
\left(\boldsymbol{r}_{q}\!\times\boldsymbol{c}_{q}\right)
\end{array}
\end{equation}
assuming constant $w_q$ weights,
and
(ii) re-evaluating those weights based on the new $\tilde{\boldsymbol{\omega}}$ as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:wq}
w_{q}=W\left(\frac{\left|\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{q}-\tilde{\boldsymbol{\omega}}\times\boldsymbol{r}_{q}\right|}{\sigma}\right)
\end{equation}
with
\mbox{$W(t)=\rho'(t)/t$}.
Equation~\eqref{eq:solve}%
\footnote{The operator $\otimes$ represents the dyadic (or outer) product of the 3D (column) vectors.}
is very similar to the least-squares estimate \citep{2012ApJ...761..188B} but includes the new weighting scheme where the iterative update Equation~\eqref{eq:wq} enters.
We find this procedure converges quickly in practice.
\color{black}
\subsection{Practical Considerations}
In practice, large systematic offsets are expected to cause difficulties primarily for two reasons.
When using big search radii, (1) the typical initial separation of sources will be significantly larger than the astrometric uncertainties, and (2) the fraction of true associations will become tiny.
First, if the angular separations are much larger than the astrometric uncertainty, which we denote by $\sigma$, the robust $\rho$-function will have small gradients and the weights can shrink to the values that are numerically indistinguishable from zero. This numerical issue could halt the iterative procedure. We alleviate this by using large $\sigma$ values at the beginning of the iterations if needed and let it converge to the true astronometry as the solutions improve.
Second, the large fraction of bad candidates can be tackled by a computationally efficient algorithm.
We recall that the 3D transformation described by $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ vector is able to simultaneously correct for translation and rotation in the tangent plane. For small field of views, which is the most relevant limit, even relatively large rotation will yield small displacements in the tangent plane, hence big corrections are primarily required for large shifts. This means that the initial difference vectors \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Delta}_q$}
will be typically clustered for the good associations. In fact, this is the reason why heuristic methods using 2D histograms were successful in the past \citep{2015ASPC..495...65L}.
Instead of searching in circles of increasing radii (as we originally introduced the method with threshold $R$), we can look for the right candidates in larger and larger rings with fixed width. While the number of candidates still increase, the growth is not quadratic, only linear.
In this paper we adopt to use rings with widths of 10$\sigma$.
To eliminate the possibility of the true associations falling on the boundary of two rings, we also overlap the rings by half their widths considering only $\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{q}$ that fall in those rings.
Sequentially starting from the smallest ring (or even in parallel), we can proceed to find the best transformation in each ring, and test the quality of the transformation. If the solution converges on some random pairs, the number of these will be very small, because of the small probability of the noise producing a systematic pattern. For good associations, the initial $\gamma_*$ estimate will be closes to the mean of $\{w_q\}$ weights.
\section{Discussion}
\label{sec_dis}
We focus on observations of the Hubble Space Telescope's Advanced Camera for Surveys in the Wide Field Channel \citep[HST/ACS/WFC;][]{ACS2018} and study simulated visits to test the limitations of the new methods before applying it to calibrating real data to the Gaia DR2 catalog \citep{2018A&A...616A...2L}.
The Hubble Legacy Archive (HLA) discussed in \cite{2006ASPC..351..406J, 2012ApJ...761..188B} has
sources lists that were produced by the DAOPhot \citep{1987PASP...99..191S} and the Source Extractor \citep{1996A&AS..117..393B} softwares on the combined (whitelight) images within each HST visit \citep{2008ASPC..394..481W}.
Other than the source directions, the source lists of the HLA also provide information such as the orientations, magnitudes and morphology of the detected sources \citep{2008ASPC..394..478M}.
\color{black}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{catalog.pdf}
\caption{Left: Two simulated catalogs (blue and orange dots) before applying a systematic transformation. Right: After transformation, the sources are not aligned. The large blue and red dots correspond to one randomly chosen object whose detections are connected with a red line. The circle encloses all false candidates matched to the large blue dot shown with blue thin lines.}
\label{fig:2dcat}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Simulated catalogs}
Our mock objects are point sources with random directions generated in a small field of view, which adapts the ACS/WFC image parameters of \mbox{$202''\!\times{}202''$} in size with approximately 1500 source detections. Each point is taken as an unit vector representing the pointing direction to the actual star coordinates on the celestial sphere. The astrometric uncertainty is taken with the HST positional accuracy of approximately 0.04 arcsec. Additional to the directional information, each object is assigned with a random stellar property $u_{01}$ drawn from an uniform distribution between 0 and 1.
From the mock universe, catalogs are generated in pairs by (1) assigning random perturbations to the mock objects with a chosen astrometric uncertainty $\sigma$; (2) selecting overlapping sources from the two catalogs by an interval constraint on the source property $u_{01}$; and (3) transforming the catalog pair with a random 3D rotation vector $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ drawn from a normal distribution. The estimation is then performed on the transformed catalog pairs, and our goal is to recover the $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ vectors applied.
As an example to illustrate the simulation settings, the left panel of Figure~\eqref{fig:2dcat} is a 2D projection of a pair of the generated catalogs before transformation (point sources colored in blue and orange respectively). The right panel of Figure~\eqref{fig:2dcat} represents the same catalog pair after an $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ vector is applied. Additionally, Figure~\eqref{fig:2dcat} (right panel) also shows the challenges presented for cross-matching the two catalogs when the image offset is large and a larger search radius is used. For instance, for the singled-out source detection in one catalog (highlighted blue center), comparing to the many bad matchings represented by the blue lines within the search radius $R$ (red circle), obviously there is in fact only one true matching in the other catalog (red dot) where this pair of sources corresponds to the same underlying object.
\subsection{Testing the Limits}
Applying the same simulation settings but with different rotation vectors, we illustrate the cross-matching results of our new method on a set of catalog pairs for different search radii and different image offsets in this section. As for comparison, the traditional least-squares method is also tested under the same conditions. The method accuracy is reported by comparing the average initial offset of the true pairs between the two catalogs to the average offset of the pairs after correction.
We compare both the least-squares method and our robust method in two ways. We first test the estimation accuracy affected by the choice of the search radius for images with a small initial offset. As most of the Hubble image offsets are tenths of an arcsec, this test is performed on two images with an initial offset approximately 0.1 arcsec for generality. Since the offset is small, instead of searching over rings, we pair all nearby observations within a single search radius of $R$ for maximum $R$ to be 200 arcsec. The estimation results are shown in Figure~\eqref{fig:comparison1}. Referring to the top panel of the plot, as $R$ increases, both methods recover the correct rotation for \mbox{$R\!<\!1$} arcsec. For \mbox{$R\!>\!1$} arcsec, the least-squares method starts to break down. Our new robust estimate, on the other hand, can find the accurate rotation vector under large $R$. Here we also note that the slight initial decline in the estimation accuracy between 0.1 and 0.2 arcsec search radii is due to that we have not included a sufficient number of true pairs when using a smaller search radius than the image offset.
The bottom plot of Figure~\eqref{fig:comparison1} represents the measurement of $\gamma$ of our robust method. The green line represents the average of the weights $w_q$ given in Equation~\eqref{eq:wq} and the red line is the estimated probability of the good pairs, $\gamma_*$, from Equation~\eqref{eq:gamma}. This plot shows that $\gamma_*$ is consistent with the fraction of the true associations determined in estimation when we recover the correct rotation. This also reinforces that our choice of the the good $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ estimates in rings with mean of $w_{q}$ approximately $\gamma_{*}$ is practical.
Furthermore, we compare the two methods on images with increasing initial offsets and test for the method limitations. For efficient testing, here we applied the maximum upper bound of the search radii to be 10\% more than the maximum initial offset of the ground truth in each test. Since the least squares method is most accurate when the initial set of pairs are approximately matched. To draw a fair comparison of the two methods, we first determine the best rotation vectors in the optimal rings using our robust method, and obtain the set of pairs from the corresponding ring. This is also the set of most likely mathchings over all rings. The least squares estimation is then performed on the likely matched pairs in the optimal rings. The estimation results for both methods are reported as shown in Figure~\eqref{fig:comparison2}, and the grey solid line is the zero transformation line regarded as a reference. The correct rotation is only obtained when the average offset after correction is approximately $\sigma$. Any other estimate result deviates from $\sigma$ closes to the reference line is considered as an inaccurate solution. Refererring to the plot, we see that for images with a small initial offset ($<$ 0.4 arcsec), both our robust estimate and the least-squares estimate correct the astrometry to approximately $\sigma$. As the initial offset increases to above 0.4 arcsec, the least-squares algorithm fails to find a correction. This finding also coincides with the current limitation to the least-squares algorithm implemented in HSC. On the other hand, our robust estimate is accurate for large offsets beyond 100 arcsec.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.87\columnwidth]{L2R_samll.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of least-squares estimation with the new robust estimation tested on two images with a small offset (\textit{grey dashed line}) and with increasing search radius. The top panel shows the offset of two images before and after correction. The bottom panel indicates the estimated $\gamma_{*}$ (red solid line) and computed average weights $\bar{w}_q$ (blue dashed line) probability of good pairs.}
\label{fig:comparison1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.87\columnwidth]{L2_M_large.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of the two methods with increasing average initial offset of images. The robust method is successful for images with large initial offset beyond 100 arcsec. The least-squares method corrects the astrometry for offsets less than 0.4 arcsec. Both estimations are performed on pairs within the same rings.}
\label{fig:comparison2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{rings_hst_11664_22_wfc3_uvis.pdf}
\caption{Differences in the sky coordinates across the Hubble and the Gaia sources. Each point corresponds to the RA and Dec coordinate differences in a particularly challenging field. The left panels show the offset vectors across associations (within a search radius) in the original Hubble and Gaia catalogs. The right panels illustrate the same after the robust transformation is performed. The center red points correspond to the associations that our procedure flags as good matches, which are also shown in detail in the bottom panels. Despite an offset of over 90 arcsec between the two catalogs, we have not only found the correct associations but the overall transformation also makes the ``good'' matches a tighter scatter, see comparison in the bottom two panels.}
\label{fig:hla-gaia}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Matching Hubble and Gaia}
The new method was first applied to the HLA and Gaia observations to register the Hubble visits on Gaia's reference frame.
While most cases required small tweaks to the coordinates systems, occasionally the Hubble images are completely off target, where previous methods broke down.
A collection of tricks were used to first create a crude registration using the 2D histogram method mentioned earlier and an $\boldsymbol{\omega}$-transformation as a follow-up.
Even then, some cases required manual intervention to find the best registration.
With the novel robust method all cases are handle by a single procedure that outperforms the previous approach.
Here we discuss a most challenging scenario when the Hubble pointing is off by more than 90 arcsec.
The example we include here is taken at a field located near the plane of the Milky Way approximately 8 degrees from the galactic center. We cross-match the HLA source list of approximately 600 detections to Gaia's 10,000 sources in the relevant area.
We find over one million candidate associations using an angular separation threshold of 120 arcsec. Among these we expect to find less than 600 true matches, which makes the contamination extremely large.
We approach the solution dividing the candidates into rings the same way we saw it in the simulations. The attempts to solve for a robust $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ fail in smaller rings (very low sum of weights) but a clear signal indicates a good solution at a ring just beyond 90 arcsec separations.
Figure~\eqref{fig:hla-gaia} illustrates the original offset vectors (left panels) and the residual differences after the robust transformation (right panels).
Simultaneously, our procedure selects the ``good'' associations shown in red, which are highlighted in the bottom panels.
Looking at these in detail we notice that not only the enormous systematic offset is removed but the scatter becomes significantly tighter, which indicates that we needed needed more than a simple translation to obtain a better astrometry.
\section{Summary}
\label{sec_final}
In this study, we have proposed a novel mathematical approach based on Bayesian and robust statistics for cross-registering astronomical catalogs tailored to observations with a small field of view. Our preliminary study on simulations to the HST observations has shown promising results on improving the astrometric accuracy over the state-of-art method. The new method successfully recovers transformations with a high astrometric accuracy under large search radii and even when the initial image offsets are very large. Unlike most previous methods, our new approach requires no pre-determination of the approximately matched pairs which also solves the grid resolution issues in the existing approaches. In addition to the simulation results, we have illustrated the power of our new method in a complex real scenario of cross-registering the Hubble images to the Gaia catalog. This also shows a potential of our robust method for improving the HSC astrometry by cross-matching to the Gaia DR2 in future.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors thank the anonymous reviewer for a thorough and insightful report.
A.B. gratefully acknowledges support from NSF grant CMMI1452820 and ONR grant N000141812096.
T.B. gratefully acknowledges support from NSF Grant AST-1412566 and NASA via the awards NNG16PJ23C and STScI-49721 under NAS5-26555.
|
\section{Two-Pass E2E ASR \label{sec:2pass}}
\subsection{Model Architecture}
The proposed two-pass architecture is shown in Figure \ref{fig:2pass_architecture}.
We denote the parameterized input acoustic frames as $\mathbf{x}=(\mathbf{x}_1 \ldots \mathbf{x}_T)$,
where $\mathbf{x}_t \in \mathbb{R}^d$ are log-mel filterbank energies in
this work ($d=80$) and $T$ denotes the number of frames in $\mathbf{x}$.
In the first pass, each acoustic frame $\mathbf{x}_t$ is passed through a shared encoder,
consisting of a multi-layer LSTM, to get output $\mathbf{e}_t$, which is passed to an RNN-T
decoder for producing $\mathbf{y}_r$ at each time step in a streaming fashion.
In the second pass, the output of the shared encoder of all frames
$\mathbf{e}=(\mathbf{e}_1 \ldots \mathbf{e}_T)$ is passed to a LAS decoder.
During training, the LAS decoder computes output $\mathbf{y}_l$ according to $\mathbf{e}$. During decoding it may additionally use $\mathbf{y}_r$ as described below.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{figs/2pass_only.png}
\caption{{Two-Pass Architecture}}
\label{fig:2pass_architecture}
\vspace{-0.2in}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Decoding \label{sec:2pass-decoding}}
We explore using the LAS decoder in two different decoding modes in this work. Specifically,
\begin{itemize}
\item In the ``2nd beam search'' mode, it produces output $\mathbf{y}_l$ from $\mathbf{e}$
alone, ignoring $\mathbf{y}_r$, the output of the RNN-T decoder.
\item In the ``rescoring'' mode, we first pick the top-K hypotheses from the RNN-T decoder.
We then run the LAS decoder on each sequence in the teacher-forcing mode, with
attention on $\mathbf{e}$, to compute a score, which combines log probability of the
sequence and the attention coverage penalty~\cite{Jan17}.
The sequence with the highest LAS score is picked as the output sequence.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Training}
In this section, we describe the training stategies for the two-pass model.
\subsubsection{Combined Loss}
In theory we can train a two-pass model from random initialization with the
following combined loss, where $\mathbf{y}^*$ represents the ground truth transcript:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{L}_{\texttt{combined}}(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}^*) = \lambda \mathbf{L}_{\texttt{RNNT}}(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}^*) + (1 - \lambda) \mathbf{L}_{\texttt{LAS}}(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}^*)
\label{eq:2pass-loss}
\end{equation}
In the above equation, $\lambda$ is a hyperparameter, which we set to be 0.5 in our setup to equally weight the RNN-T and LAS losses.
In practice we find training directly from scratch to be unstable, mainly because the losses for RNN-T and LAS are in drastically different ranges when training from scratch. Therefore, we take a multi-step process to train the model:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Train an RNN-T model as in~\cite{Ryan19};
\item Take the encoder trained in step (1), freeze it, and train a LAS decoder
as in~\cite{CC18}.
\item ``Deep finetuning'': train the shared encoder and both decoders at the same time with the combined loss.
\end{enumerate}
\subsubsection{MWER training}
One of the drawbacks of the loss in Equation \ref{eq:2pass-loss} is that the second-pass LAS decoder is optimized independently of the RNN-T decoder. This means that there is a mismatch between the training and decoding strategies outlined in Section \ref{sec:2pass-decoding}.
To address this, we use an additional training step to further refine the LAS decoder to minimize errors, following the MWER training process introduced in~\cite{prabhavalkar2018minimum}. Specifically, given input $\mathbf{x}$, groundtruth transcript $\mathbf{y}^*$,
the probability computed by LAS $P(\mathbf{y}_m|\mathbf{x})$ for any given target sequence $\mathbf{y}_m$ with
teacher-forcing (where $m=r$ if $\mathbf{y}_m$ is given by RNN-T and $m=l$ if $\mathbf{y}_m$ is given by LAS), we refine the pre-trained two-pass model as follows.
First, we run a beam search with one of the decoders $m$ from the two-pass model to get a set of hypotheses $H_m=\{h_1, \ldots, h_b\}$ where $b$ is the beam-size.
To make the MWER training match decoding, the generation of $H_m$ depends on the
target decoding mode.
For a LAS decoder to be used in the ``2nd beam search'' mode, we compute $H_m$ by
running beam search with the LAS decoder itself on $\mathbf{x}$ ($m=l$).
For a LAS decoder
to be used in the ``rescoring'' mode, on the other hand, we compute $H_m(\mathbf{x})$ by
running beam search with the first-pass RNN-T decoder ($m=r$).
For each sequence $\mathbf{y}_m \in H_m$, let $W(\mathbf{y}^*, \mathbf{y}_m)$ be the number of word errors of
$\mathbf{y}_m$, let $\overline{W}(\mathbf{y}^*, H_m) = \frac{1}{|H_m|}\sum_{\mathbf{y}_m \in H_m}{W(\mathbf{y}^*,
\mathbf{y}_m)}$ be the mean number of word errors for $H_m$, and let $\hat{W}(\mathbf{y}^*, \mathbf{y}_m) =
W(\mathbf{y}^*, \mathbf{y}_m) - \overline{W}(\mathbf{y}^*, H_m)$ be the relative word error rate of
$\mathbf{y}_m$ in $H_m$.
We also let $\hat{P}(\mathbf{y}_m|\mathbf{x}, H_m) = \frac{P(\mathbf{y}_m|\mathbf{x})}{\sum_{\mathbf{y}_i \in
H_m}P(\mathbf{y}_i|\mathbf{x})}$ represent the conditional probability LAS decoder assigns
to hypothesis $\mathbf{y}_m$ among all hypotheses in $H_m$. The MWER loss is defined as
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{L}_{\texttt{MWER}}(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}^*) = \sum_{\mathbf{y}_m \in H_m(\mathbf{x})}\hat{P}(\mathbf{y}_m | \mathbf{x}, H_m) \hat{W}(\mathbf{y}^*, \mathbf{y}_m)
\label{eq:mwer}
\end{equation}
We train the LAS decoder to minimize a combination of the MWER loss and the
maximum-likelihood cross-entropy loss:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{L}_{\texttt{MWER}}(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}^*) + \lambda_{\texttt{MLE}}\log{P(\mathbf{y}^*|\mathbf{x})}
\label{eq:mwer_ce}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda_{\texttt{MLE}}$ is a hyperparameter that experimentally we set to be $\lambda_{\texttt{MLE}} = 0.01$ following \cite{prabhavalkar2018minimum}.
\section{Conclusions \label{sec:conclusions}}
In this paper, we present a two-pass E2E solution. Specifically, we use a second-pass LAS decoder to rescore hypotheses from a first-pass RNN-T system. We find that this approach gives a 17\% to 22\% reduction in WER compared to RNN-T only, and increases latency by less than 200ms.
\section{Experimental Details \label{sec:experiments}}
\subsection{Data Sets}
Our experiments are conducted on a $\sim$30,000 hour training set consisting of
43 million English utterances.
The training utterances are anonymized and hand-transcribed, and are
representative of Google's voice search traffic in the United States.
Multi-style training (MTR) data are created by artificially corrupting the clean
utterances using a room simulator, adding varying degrees of noise and
reverberation with an average SNR of 12dB~\cite{Chanwoo17}.
The noise sources are drawn from YouTube and daily life noisy environmental
recordings.
The main test sets we report results on include $\sim$14K short utterances (\emph{SU}) less than 5.5 seconds long and $\sim$16K long utterances (\emph{LU}) greater than 5.5 seconds, both extracted from Google traffic.
To evaluate the performance of contextual biasing, we report
performance on a contacts test set, which consists of requests to call/text contacts. This set is created by mining contact names from
the web, and synthesizing TTS utterances in each of these categories using
a concatenative TTS approach with one voice~\cite{Gonzalvo16}. Noise is then artificially added to the TTS data, similar to the process
described above \cite{Chanwoo17}.
To bias model predictions towards contacts, we construct a biasing FST on a list
of contact phrases and perform shallow-fusion between the biasing FST and E2E
model during inference.
We refer the reader to \cite{Pundak18} for more details regarding E2E
shallow-fusion biasing.
\subsection{Model Architecture Details}
All experiments use 80-dimensional log-Mel features, computed with a 25ms window
and shifted every 10ms.
Similar to~\cite{Golan16}, at the current frame, $t$, these features are stacked
with 2 frames to the left and downsampled to a 30ms frame rate.
The same encoder network described in~\cite{Ryan19} is used for all experiments.
It consists of 8 LSTM layers, where each layer has 2,048 hidden units followed
by a 640-dimensional projection layer.
We insert a time-reduction layer with the reduction factor $N=2$ after the
second LSTM layer of encoder.
The RNN-T decoder contists of a prediction network and a joint network. The
prediction network has 2 LSTM layers of 2,048
hidden units and a 640-dimensional projection per layer as well as an embedding
layer of 128 units. The outputs of encoder and prediction network are fed to a
joint network that has 640 hidden units. The LAS decoder consists of multi-head
attention~\cite{Vaswani17} with four attention heads, which is fed into 2 LSTM
layers of 2,048 hidden units and a 640-dimensional projection layer. It has an
embedding layer of 96 units. Both decoders are trained to predict 4,096 word
pieces~\cite{Schuster2012}, which are derived using a large corpus of text
transcripts.
The total size of the RNN-T model is 114M parameters, and the additional
second-pass LAS decoder is 33M parameters. All models are trained in
Tensorflow~\cite{AbadiAgarwalBarhamEtAl15} using the Lingvo
\cite{shen2019lingvo} toolkit on $8 \times 8$ Tensor Processing
Units (TPU) slices with a global batch size of 4,096.
\subsection{Measuring Latency}
As computing devices may vary, we use a simplified model of computation to
estimate latency. First, we assume that the bandwidth $K$ on CPU is 10GB/second; this
number is within the range of modern mobile CPUs. We also make the non-optimal
assumption that each hypothesis is computed independently, meaning that the
major operations are matrix/vector multiplies, the time of which will be
dominated by the speed of loading matrix parameters into the CPU.
Assuming no interrupts or batching across beam search hypotheses, the
latency is calculated from Equation \ref{eq:latency} when doing fixed beam
decoding/rescoring with $H$ hypotheses over $N$ tokens. When using an adaptive beam, where a lattice is generated,
we assume $H \cdot N$ is now replaced by the number of lattice arcs when calculating latency.
\begin{equation}
\textnormal{latency} = \frac{1}{K} \cdot H \cdot N \cdot M_{\textnormal{decoder}}
\label{eq:latency}
\end{equation}
where $M_{\textnormal{decoder}}$ denotes the number of bytes in the decoder part of the model.
We report latency on the 90\%-tile \emph{LU} set which has longer utterances.
We assume the 90\%-tile contains roughly 295 audio frames and a target
sequence of $N = 28$ tokens. Finally, $M_{\textnormal{decoder}}$ is
33MB, assuming 33M parameters of the LAS decoder which are quantized, which
we have found has a negligible degradation in accuracy \cite{Ryan19}.
Our goal is to ensure that the second-pass latency on the 90\%-tile is under
200ms to that user-perceived latency is minimized \cite{Miller1968}.
\section{Introduction \label{sec:introduction}}
There continues to be a growing popularity with end-to-end models (E2E) for speech recognition~\cite{Ryan19,CC18,Graves12, GravesMohamedHinton13,RaoSakPrabhavalkar17,Chan15, KimHoriWatanabe17,ChiuRaffel17}.
These models, which fold the acoustic, pronunciation and language models (AM, PM, LMs) into a single network, have shown competitive results compared to conventional ASR systems which have separate AM, PM, and LMs.
E2E models are particularly attractive for on-device ASR, as they can outperform
on-device conventional models \cite{McGraw16} of comparable size.
Running ASR on-device with direct user interaction, presents numerous challenges.
First, the recognition results must be streaming. That is, words should appear on the screen as soon as they are spoken. Second, the model must have a small latency (i.e., the delay between the user speaking and the text appearing ), thus running at or faster than real-time on mobile devices. Third, the model must be able to utilize user context \cite{Petar15} (e.g., list of contacts, song names, etc.) to improve recognition accuray. Recently, we presented a RNN-T E2E model that satisfies these constraints~\cite{Ryan19}.
However, the RNN-T model's quality still lags behind that of a large conventional model \cite{Golan16}.
Non-streaming E2E models, such as Listen, Attend and Spell (LAS) \cite{Chan15}, have shown competitive performance to a large conventional model \cite{CC18}. However, LAS models are not streaming as they must attend to the entire audio segment, making it challenging to use them in interactive applications.
In two-pass decoding, the second pass model is often used to improve the initial outputs from first-pass models by using lattice rescoring~\cite{Ortmanns1997} or n-best reranking~\cite{Schwartz1991}. Keeping user-perceived latency low while obtaining the quality gains is the main challenge with applying second-pass models. Language model rescoring is commonly been used for multi-pass decoding~\cite{sundermeyer2015,liu2016,kumar2017,Anjuli18}, but more recently has been used with a LAS model to rescore hypotheses from a first-pass conventional model~\cite{RohitAnal17}. We can think of LAS decoder, which takes acoustic information from the encoder and language model information from previous predictions, as being strictly stronger than second-pass language models. Thus, in this work, we explore using the LAS model for second-pass processing.
Specifically, we explore a two-pass architecture in which an RNN-T decoder and a LAS decoder share an encoder network. Sharing the encoder allows us to reduce model size and computation cost compared with having dedicated encoders for RNN-T and LAS.
During inference, the RNN-T model produces streaming predictions while in the end the LAS decoder finalizes the prediction. We explore tradeoffs by running the LAS decoder as a beam search versus rescoring hypotheses from RNN-T.
Our experiments are conducted on a $\sim$30,000 hour voice
search task. We find that with LAS second-pass beam search,
we can get a 15\% relative improvement over first-pass RNN-T
for a shorter utterance (SU) test set, but the model degrades
on longer utterances (LU), a common problem for
attention models~\cite{Jan15}. In contrast, second-pass
rescoring gives us a much better tradeoff for SU and LU compared
to beam-search. Next, we experiment with ways to improve the
rescoring model WER by changing the training objective function
to more closely match rescoring. Specifically, we apply a
minimum word error rate (MWER) training strategy \cite{prabhavalkar2018minimum}
where hypotheses from RNN-T are used as inputs to the LAS decoder
and the LAS decoder is trained to minimize expected word error
rates. In addition, we reduce computation cost by running the
first-pass RNN-T model with an adaptive beam \cite{Lowerre76}
and pruning the first-pass lattice before rescoring. Overall,
we find that our proposed LAS rescoring model provides 17\% to 22\%
relative improvement in WER compared to a first-pass
RNN-T model, without a degradation in biasing accuracy. In
addition, the second-pass LAS decoder increases finalization latency by
less than 200ms, which has been considered the limit of acceptable
interactive latency \cite{Miller1968}.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section \ref{sec:2pass} describes the two-pass architecture and various inference strategies explored in this paper. Experiments are presented in Section \ref{sec:experiments} while results are discussed in Section \ref{sec:results}. Finally, Section \ref{sec:conclusions} concludes the paper and discusses future work.
\section{Acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{IEEEbib}
\newpage
\section{Results \label{sec:results}}
\subsection{2nd Beam Search}
Table \ref{table:2ndbeam} shows the results running the LAS decoder in the 2nd
beam-search mode.
For comparison, the table also shows two baselines \texttt{B0-B1}, namely an
RNN-T only and a LAS-only model.
All results are obtained with fixed beam-size of $H=8$ hypotheses.
Experiment \texttt{E0} indicates that when the encoder is held fixed and
initialized from an RNN-T model, the LAS decoder performs worse than a LAS-only
model with a dedicated encoder (\texttt{B1}), demonstrating the challenges in
sharing a single encoder with different types of decoders by adapting the LAS
decoder alone.
When we jointly train the encoder and both decoders in a model initialized from
\texttt{E0}, the model quality (\texttt{E1}) improved in both SU and LU over
\texttt{E0}.
Overall we find that 2nd beam search improves over RNN-T (\texttt{B0}) on SU but
degrades on LU, a common issue with attention models for long utterances
\cite{Jan15}.
\begin{table} [h!]
\centering
\caption{WER Results, LAS Beam Search.}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|} \hline
Exp-ID & Model & SU & LU \\ \hline
\textit{B0} & RNN-T & 6.9 & 4.3 \\ \hline
\textit{B1} & LAS-only & 5.4 & 4.6 \\ \hline
\textit{E0} & Frozen Shared Enc & 6.3 & 5.1 \\ \hline
\textit{E1} & Deep Finetuned & 6.0 & 4.7 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:2ndbeam}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{table}
In addition, we also study the change in estimated latency and model quality change as
the LAS decoder beam size is varied, as shown in Table \ref{table:2ndbeamops}.
The table indicates that while SU and LU performance remains stable, contacts biasing
WER degrades significantly with a smaller beam.
Contextual biasing is very challenging with E2E models, which do poorly with proper noun
recognition \cite{Pundak18}.
It is critical to have enough number of hypotheses in a beam search to ensure
that proper noun biasing phrases do not fall off the beam.
Hence biasing requires the LAS decoder to run with a beam of 8, which increases
two-pass latency by over 700ms, which is far above our allowable limit.
\begin{table} [h!]
\centering
\caption{LAS Performance vs. Beam Size.}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|} \hline
Beam Size & SU & LU & Contacts & Latency (ms) \\ \hline
2 & 6.1 & 4.8 & 9.4 & 184.8 \\ \hline
4 & 6.0 & 4.7 & 7.7 & 369.6 \\ \hline
8 & 6.0 & 4.7 & 6.8 & 739.2 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:2ndbeamops}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{table}
\subsection{Rescoring}
The RNN-T-only model (\texttt{B0}) has an oracle WER of 2.2 on SU and 1.5 on
LU, much lower than its WER of 6.9 on SU and 4.3 on LU.
This motivates us to explore rescoring RNN-T hypothesis with the LAS decoder.
Table \ref{table:rescoring} compares the performance of running LAS with beam
search (\texttt{E1}) to with rescoring (\texttt{E2}).
The table shows that rescoring takes a small hit in WER on SU compared to beam
search, probably because the first-pass RNN-T decoder, with a much higher SU WER
of 6.9 (\texttt{B0}), generates a set of hypotheses with slightly lower quality
than those generated by the LAS decoder during beam search.
However, rescoring's quality on LU is much better than that of beam search,
likely because RNN-T (\texttt{B0}) performs much better on longer utterances
compared to LAS.
Overall, LAS rescoring not only improves SU WER significantly upon the first
pass RNN-T, but also improves WER for LU, demonstrating that rescoring is able
to combine the strengths of RNN-T and LAS.
\begin{table} [h!]
\centering
\caption{WER results, LAS Rescoring.}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|} \hline
Exp-ID & Decoding & SU & LU \\ \hline
\textit{B0} & RNN-T & 6.9 & 4.3 \\ \hline
\textit{B1} & LAS-only & 5.4 & 4.6 \\ \hline
\textit{E1} & Beam Search & \textbf{6.0} & 4.7 \\ \hline
\textit{E2} & Rescoring & 6.2 & \textbf{4.0} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:rescoring}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{table}
Next, Table \ref{table:2ndrescops} shows WER on SU, LU and a contacts biasing
set, as well as the latency, as the number of rescoring beams is
varied.
For these experiments, the 1st-pass RNN-T model is run with a fixed beam size of 8.
The table indicates that we can prune the number of rescored hypotheses to 4, with no
loss in accuracy on any test set.
Overall, rescoring 4 hypotheses requires half the latency compared to the
2nd beam search decoding with 8 hypotheses in Table \ref{table:2ndbeamops}.
Since rescoring gives us the best tradeoff between quality and computation cost,
we will focus only on rescoring and present further improvements in the next
section.
\begin{table} [h!]
\centering
\caption{LAS Performance vs. Rescoring Beam Size.}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|} \hline
Rescoring Beam & SU & LU & Contacts & Latency (ms) \\ \hline
2 & 6.2 & 4.0 & 7.5 & 184.8 \\ \hline
4 & 6.2 & 4.0 & 7.1 & \textbf{369.6} \\ \hline
8 & 6.2 & 4.0 & 7.1 & 739.2 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:2ndrescops}
\vspace{-0.2in}
\end{table}
\subsection{Further Rescoring Improvements}
\subsubsection{Adaptive Beam}
To bridge the gap between two-pass 2nd beam search vs. rescoring on SU, we explore increasing the first-pass RNN-T beam size.
Table \ref{table:adaptive} shows that as beam size is increased (\texttt{E2-E4}), both WER and oracle WER improve, but at a cost of increased first-pass computation cost.
To address this, we look at an adaptive beam search strategy \cite{Lowerre76}. Specifically, we prune first-pass beam candidates if the they are too far in threshold from the current best candidate, where the threshold optimizes first-pass latency following \cite{Ryan19}.
The table shows that with an adaptive beam (\texttt{E5}), we can achieve similar WER to a fixed but large beam.
\begin{table} [h!]
\centering
\caption{Two-pass rescoring with fixed vs. adaptive beam.}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
Exp-ID & First-pass & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SU} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{LU} \\
& Max Beam Size & WER & oracle & WER & oracle \\ \hline
\textit{E2} & Fixed, 8 & 6.2 & 2.2 & 4.0 & 1.5 \\ \hline
\textit{E3} & Fixed, 10 & 6.1 & 2.1 & 4.0 & 1.4 \\ \hline
\textit{E4} & Fixed, 16 & 6.1 & 1.9 & 4.0 & 1.3 \\ \hline
\textit{E5} & Adaptive, 10 & 6.1 & 2.1 & 3.9 & 1.4 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:adaptive}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{table}
The adaptive-beam also has the additional benefit that it generates a lattice to use for rescoring, rather than an N-best list. A lattice is less dense than an N-best list, which should improve rescoring latency. As a reminder, latency in Equation \ref{eq:latency} is now calculated by looking at the total arcs in the lattice.
Two-pass rescoring is run on the top 4 hypotheses from first pass decoding in
both cases, following results from Table \ref{table:2ndrescops}.
Table ~\ref{table:adaptiveops} show that with an adaptive beam and lattice rescoring, we get a 2X reduction in latency compared to a fixed beam with N-best rescoring.
Overall, the two-pass rescoring decoder with adaptive beam fits within our 200ms latency budget.
\begin{table} [h!]
\centering
\caption{LAS Performance vs. Rescoring Beam Size.}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|} \hline
Strategy & SU & LU & Contacts & Latency (ms) \\ \hline
1st-pass Fixed & 6.2 & 4.0 & 7.1 & 369.6 \\
N-best Rescoring & & & & \\ \hline
1st-pass Adaptive & 6.1 & 3.9 & 7.1 & \textbf{171.6} \\
Lattice Rescoring & & & & \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:adaptiveops}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{MWER}
Finally, we report two-pass results after MWER training our model. Table
\ref{table:embr} shows that MWER improves rescoring WER for both SU and LU by
8\% relative. Overall, the two-pass rescoring model gives a 19\% relative reduction in both SU and LU
\begin{table} [h!]
\centering
\caption{Two-pass rescoring results after MWER training.}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|} \hline
Exp-ID & Model & SU & LU & Contacts \\ \hline
\textit{B0} & RNN-T only & 6.9 & 4.3 & \\ \hline
\textit{E5} & No MWER & 6.1 & 3.9 & 7.1 \\ \hline
\textit{E6} & MWER & \textbf{5.6} & \textbf{3.5} & \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:embr}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{table}
\subsection{Comparison To Large Conventional Model}
A goal of our work is to achieve in an E2E system with comparable performance to
a large conventional model \cite{Golan16}. In this light, we compare the
performance of our proposed two-pass rescoring model to a large conventional
model through a ``side-by-side'' (SxS) evaluation with previously unseen utterances.
In this experiment, each utterance is transcribed by both the conventional and
two-pass models. We collect 500 utterances where the transcription differs
between the two models, and send these utterances to be rated by two human
transcribers. Each transcript is rated as either a win by two-pass over the
conventional model (only two-pass is correct), a loss in two-pass over the
conventional model (only the conventional model is correct), or neutral (both models are correct or incorrect).
Unlike automatic WER evaluations, this side-by-side evaluation allows raters to decide that two different transcripts are both correct; this sometimes leads to different conclusions
than an automatic evaluation would.
We report the following statistics to quantitatively evaluate the SxS:
\begin{itemize}
\item Changed: \% of utterancs in which the two models produced different hypotheses
\item Wins: \# of utts the two-pass hypothesis is correct and conventional model is incorrect
\item Losses: \# of utts the two-pass hypothesis is incorrect and conventional model is correct
\item Neutral: \# of utts the two-pass and conventional model are both correct or incorrect
\item p-Value: Statical significance of WER change with two-pass compared to conventional model
\end{itemize}
Table \ref{table:sxs} shows that the two-pass model changes about 13\% of traffic. The two-pass model has slightly more losses (61) than wins (48) compared to the conventional model, but the majority of the hypotheses have a neutral rating (391) between the two systems. Overall, the p-Value shows the performance difference between the two models is statistically insignificant.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\caption{SxS results for Conventional vs. Two-pass}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
Changed (\%) & Win & Loss & Neutral & p-Value \\ \hline
13.2 & 48 & 61 & 391 & 10.0\%-20.0\% \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:sxs}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{table}
A further analysis of errors is shown in Table \ref{table:wins_and_losses}. The two-pass model is trained with an order of magnitude less text-only data compared to the conventional model, and thus loses on proper nouns and in sentences requiring a stronger LM. On the contrary, since the two-pass model is trained in the written domain and learns text normalization implictly, it wins in this area compared to the conventional model which has a separate rule-based text-norm step.
\begin{table} [h!]
\centering
\caption{Analysis of Errors of Conventional vs. Two-Pass Model.}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|} \hline
& Category & Conventional & Two-Pass \\ \hline
Loss & Proper Noun & \footnotesize{alice's restaurant} & \footnotesize{\red{allison's restaurant}} \\
& weak LM & \footnotesize{47-in sony plasma tv} & \footnotesize{47-in sony \red{pricing} tv} \\ \hline
Win & Text-norm & \footnotesize{www nytimes.com} & \footnotesize{\green{www.nytimes.com}} \\
& Text-norm & \footnotesize{john smiths office} & \footnotesize{john \green{smith's} office} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-0.1 in}
\label{table:wins_and_losses}
\end{table}
\section{Results \label{sec:results}}
\subsection{2nd Beam Search}
Table \ref{table:2ndbeam} shows the results running the LAS decoder in the 2nd
beam-search mode.
For comparison, the table also shows two baselines \texttt{B0-B1}, namely an
RNN-T only and a LAS-only model, trained separately from scratch.
All results are obtained with fixed beam-size of $H=8$.
Experiment \texttt{E0} indicates that when the encoder is initialized from an
RNN-T model and held fixed, the LAS decoder performs worse than a LAS-only model
with a dedicated encoder (\texttt{B1}), demonstrating the challenges in sharing
a single encoder with different types of decoders by adapting the LAS decoder
alone.
When we jointly train the encoder and both decoders in a model initialized from
\texttt{E0}, the model quality (\texttt{E1}) improved in both SU and LU over
\texttt{E0}.
Overall we find that 2nd beam search improves over RNN-T (\texttt{B0}) on SU but
degrades on LU, a common issue with attention models for long utterances
\cite{Jan15}.
\begin{table} [h!]
\centering
\caption{WER Results, LAS Beam Search.}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|} \hline
Exp-ID & Model & SU & LU \\ \hline
\textit{B0} & RNN-T & 6.9 & 4.5 \\ \hline
\textit{B1} & LAS-only & 5.4 & 4.5 \\ \hline
\textit{E0} & Frozen Shared Enc & 6.4 & 5.3 \\ \hline
\textit{E1} & Deep Finetuned & 6.1 & 4.8 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:2ndbeam}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{table}
\subsection{Rescoring}
We noticed that the RNN-T-only model (\texttt{B0}) has much lower oracle WERs
than its decoding WERs.
This motivates us to explore rescoring RNN-T hypothesis with the LAS decoder.
Table \ref{table:rescoring} compares the performance of running LAS with beam
search (\texttt{E1}) to with rescoring (\texttt{E2}).
The table shows that rescoring takes a small hit in WER on SU compared to beam
search, probably because the first-pass RNN-T decoder, with a much higher SU WER
of 6.9 (\texttt{B0}), generates a set of hypotheses with slightly lower quality
than those generated by the LAS decoder during beam search.
However, rescoring's quality on LU is much better than that of beam search,
likely because RNN-T (\texttt{B0}) performs much better on longer utterances
compared to LAS.
Overall, LAS rescoring not only improves SU WER significantly upon the first
pass RNN-T, but also improves WER for LU, demonstrating that rescoring is able
to combine the strengths of RNN-T and LAS. Since rescoring gives us the best
tradeoff between quality on SU and LU, we will focus only on rescoring and
present further improvements in the next section.
\begin{table} [h!]
\centering
\caption{WER results, LAS Rescoring.}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|} \hline
Exp-ID & Decoding & SU & LU \\ \hline
\textit{B0} & RNN-T & 6.9 & 4.5 \\ \hline
\textit{B1} & LAS-only & 5.4 & 4.5 \\ \hline
\textit{E1} & Beam Search & \textbf{6.1} & 4.8 \\ \hline
\textit{E2} & Rescoring & 6.2 & \textbf{4.1} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:rescoring}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{table}
\subsection{Further Rescoring Improvements}
\subsubsection{Adaptive Beam}
To bridge the gap between two-pass 2nd beam search vs. rescoring on SU, we first
explore increasing the diversity of rescoring candidates with a larger
first-pass RNN-T beam.
Table \ref{table:adaptive} shows that as beam size is increased
(\texttt{E2-E4}), the WER improves, but naturally at cost of proportionally
increased first-pass computation cost.
To address this, we look at an adaptive beam search strategy \cite{Lowerre76}.
Specifically, we prune first-pass beam candidates if they are too far in
threshold from the current best candidate, where the threshold optimizes
first-pass latency following \cite{Ryan19}.
The table shows that with an adaptive beam (\texttt{E5}), we can achieve similar
WER to a fixed but large beam (\texttt{E3}).
\begin{table} [h!]
\centering
\caption{Rescoring WER with first-pass fixed vs. adaptive beam.}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|} \hline
Exp-ID & First-pass Max Beam Size & SU & LU \\ \hline
\textit{E2} & Fixed, 8 & 6.2 & 4.1 \\ \hline
\textit{E3} & Fixed, 10 & 6.2 & 4.1 \\ \hline
\textit{E4} & Fixed, 16 & 6.1 & 4.1 \\ \hline \hline
\textit{E5} & Adaptive, 10 & 6.2 & 4.0 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:adaptive}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{table}
The adaptive-beam also has the additional benefit that it generates a lattice to
use for rescoring, rather than an N-best list. Rescoring a lattice is more
efficient than rescoring an N-best list, as it avoids duplicate computation on
the common prefixes between candidate sequences, and thus should reduce latency.
As a reminder, latency in
Equation \ref{eq:latency} is now calculated by looking at the total arcs in the lattice.
Table ~\ref{table:adaptiveops} compares adaptive beam to
a fixed beam with N-best rescoring, where we rescore all first-pass hypotheses.
The table show that with an adaptive beam and lattice rescoring, we can reduce latency
compared to a fixed beam with N-best rescoring. However, the latency is still above our budget.
\begin{table} [h!]
\centering
\caption{Latency vs. Rescoring Methods.}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|} \hline
Strategy & Latency (ms) \\ \hline
1st-pass Fixed, N-best Rescoring & 369.6 \\ \hline
1st-pass Adaptive, Lattice Rescoring & \textbf{247.5} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:adaptiveops}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{table}
To reduce latency further, we explore reducing the number of maximum arcs in the
lattice rescored at each step. Table ~\ref{table:2ndrescops} shows we can limit the
rescored hypotheses to 4, which we find does not degrade accuracy and also reduces
latency. Overall, the second-pass decoder rescoring an adaptive-beam lattice
fits within our 200ms latency budget.
\begin{table} [h!]
\centering
\caption{Two-Pass Performance vs. Las Rescoring Beam Size.}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|} \hline
Beam Size & SU & LU & Contacts & Latency (ms) \\ \hline
2 & 6.2 & 4.0 & 7.5 & - \\ \hline
4 & \textbf{6.2} & \textbf{4.0} & \textbf{7.1} & \textbf{171.6} \\ \hline
8 & 6.2 & 4.0 & 7.1 & 247.5 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:2ndrescops}
\vspace{-0.2in}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{MWER}
Finally, we report two-pass results after MWER training our model.
Since the LAS decoder will be used for rescoring, we use RNN-T to provide
the candidate hypotheses for LAS decoder MWER training.
Table \ref{table:embr} shows that MWER improves rescoring WER for both SU and LU by
8\% relative. Overall, the two-pass rescoring model gives a 17\% and 22\%
relative reduction in both SU and LU, respectively.
\begin{table} [h!]
\centering
\caption{Two-pass rescoring results after MWER training.}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|} \hline
Exp-ID & Model & SU & LU & Contacts \\ \hline
\textit{B0} & RNN-T only & 6.9 & 4.5 & 7.0 \\ \hline
\textit{E6} & No MWER & 6.2 & 4.0 & 7.1 \\ \hline
\textit{E7} & MWER & \textbf{5.7} & \textbf{3.5} & \textbf{7.0} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:embr}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{table}
\subsection{Comparison To Large Conventional Model}
A goal of our work is to achieve in an E2E system with comparable performance to
a large conventional model \cite{Golan16}. In this light, we compare the
performance of our proposed two-pass rescoring model to a large conventional
model through a ``side-by-side'' (SxS) evaluation with previously unseen utterances.
In this experiment, each utterance is transcribed by both the conventional and
two-pass models. We collect 500 utterances where the transcription differs
between the two models, and send these utterances to be rated by two human
transcribers. Each transcript is rated as either a win by two-pass over the
conventional model (only two-pass is correct), a loss in two-pass over the
conventional model (only the conventional model is correct), or neutral (both models are correct or incorrect).
Unlike automatic WER evaluations, this side-by-side evaluation allows raters to decide that two different transcripts are both correct; this sometimes leads to different conclusions
than an automatic evaluation would.
We report the following statistics to quantitatively evaluate the SxS:
\begin{itemize}
\item Changed: \% of utterancs in which the two models produced different hypotheses
\item Wins: \# of utts the two-pass hypothesis is correct and conventional model is incorrect
\item Losses: \# of utts the two-pass hypothesis is incorrect and conventional model is correct
\item Neutral: \# of utts the two-pass and conventional model are both correct or incorrect
\item p-Value: Statical significance of WER change with two-pass compared to conventional model
\end{itemize}
Table \ref{table:sxs} shows that the two-pass model changes about 13\% of traffic. The two-pass model has slightly more losses (61) than wins (48) compared to the conventional model, but the majority of the hypotheses have a neutral rating (391) between the two systems. Overall, the p-Value shows the performance difference between the two models is statistically insignificant.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\caption{SxS results for Conventional vs. Two-pass}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
Changed (\%) & Win & Loss & Neutral & p-Value \\ \hline
13.2 & 48 & 61 & 391 & 10.0\%-20.0\% \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:sxs}
\vspace{-0.05in}
\end{table}
A further analysis of errors is shown in Table \ref{table:wins_and_losses}. The two-pass model is trained with an order of magnitude less text-only data compared to the conventional model, and thus loses on proper nouns (PN) and also due to a weak language-model (wLM). On the contrary, since the two-pass model is trained in the written domain and learns text normalization (TN) implictly, it wins in this area compared to the conventional model which has a separate rule-based text-norm step.
\begin{table} [h!]
\centering
\caption{Analysis of Errors of Conventional vs. Two-Pass Model.}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|} \hline
& Type & Conventional & Two-Pass \\ \hline
Loss & PN & \footnotesize{alice's restaurant} & \footnotesize{\red{allison's restaurant}} \\
& wLM & \footnotesize{47-in sony plasma tv} & \footnotesize{47-in sony \red{pricing} tv} \\ \hline
Win & TN & \footnotesize{www nytimes.com} & \footnotesize{\green{www.nytimes.com}} \\
& TN & \footnotesize{john smiths office} & \footnotesize{john \green{smith's} office} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-0.15in}
\label{table:wins_and_losses}
\end{table}
|
\section{Introduction}
The time-dependent quantum harmonic oscillator (TDHO) is an important system in several branches of physics and has been a source of novel concepts for the past seven decades. It is a natural scenario for the study of many important topics as time-dependent hamiltonians,
foundations of quantum mechanics, mathematical theorems and the increasingly important squeezed states. Such states appear, for instance,
in quantum optics \cite{WALLS-1983, LOUDON-1987, WU-1987, TEICH-1989, PERINA-1991, DODONOV-2002, DODONOV-2003, dutt-2015, SCHNABEL-2017, Raffa2019},
in cosmology \cite{GRISHCHUK-1990, Lo-ST-1991, GRISHCHUK-1993, ALBRECHT-1994, HU-1994, EINHORN-2003,KIEFER-2007}, and in some approaches to the dynamical Casimir effect, particularly, those based on analogue models \cite{DODONOV-2005, JOHANSSON-2009,JOHANSSON-2010,DODONOV-2010,WILSON-2011,FUJII-2011,LAHTEENMAKI-2013,FELICETTI-2014}.
The main property of squeezed states is that they provide variances of certain quadratures smaller than the value associated to coherent states \cite{BO-STURE-1985, WODKIEWICZ-1985, GAZEAU-2009}, enhancing the sensitivity of several systems \cite{VAHLBRUCH-2007, GIOVANNETTI-2011}.
Some remarkable examples are in telecommunications \cite{SLAVIK-2010, Fedorov2016, Pogorzalek2019},
spin-squeezed states \cite{Leroux2010, Hosten-2016, Bao2020}
and some variations of the Landau problem with a time-dependent magnetic field \cite{Dodonov2018,Dodonov2019}.
Moreover, when squeezed states of light are employed, an astonishing improvement in the detection rate at LIGO \cite{Barsotti2018, Tse2019}
and a sensitivity enhancement in the shot noise limit at the Advanced Virgo gravitational wave detector \cite{Acernese2019} are observed.
The more general case of a driven TDHO has already been formally solved by different methods and approaches.
The first solution came from Husimi in 1953 \cite{Husimi-1953} where he used an ansatz of a gaussian type
to show that the formal solution of this problem can be obtained from the corresponding classical solution.
Further important contributions were made by Lewis and Riesenfeld \cite{LEWIS-1969}, Popov and Perelomov \cite{Popov-1969},
and Malkin, Man'ko and collaborators \cite{Malkin-1970, Man'Ko-1970}.
An extensive list of references in this line can be found in \cite{DODONOV-2005}.
In these papers the authors introduced the use of invariants for time-dependent hamiltonians,
a method still very used nowadays \cite{nagiyev-2019, zelaya-2020}.
Algebraic solutions for the driven TDHO have been known since the 80's,
see for instance the papers of Ma and Rhodes \cite{Rhodes-1989}, with further contributions from Lo \cite{C.F.LO-1990}.
In these papers it is shown that the time evolution operator (TEO) at any instant can be expressed as a product of
a squeezing operator, a Glauber operator and a rotation operator, apart from an overall phase factor.
Other authors have also investigated the TDHO considering different initial states and
specific time-dependent parameters \cite{DODONOV-1979, ABDALLA-1985,CHENG-1988,GERRY-1990,CFLO-1990,CFLO-1991,Kumar-1991,
Twamley-1993,JANSZKY-1994,Pedrosa-1997,Pedrosa.I.A.-1997,Lima-2008,Buyukasik2019}.
Some particular cases with exact known solutions, namely the sudden and linear frequency modulations have also been considered
\cite{JANSZKY-1986, Kumar-1991, JANSZKY-1992, JANSZKY-TE-1994, MOYA-2003, 2019-AJP-Tiba}.
It is worth mentioning that previous solutions of the TDHO
based on algebraic methods are not very practical for numerical implementations, since the final expressions
are written in terms of functions that satisfy non-linear differential equations involving the time-dependent
parameters under consideration. In this work, our main purpose is to establish a procedure
for solving this system in such a way that no matter which time-dependent functions for the parameters are considered, one will be able
to calculate the quantum state of the system at any instant and with the desired precision for any initial state.
Using operator ordering techniques, similar to those used in Refs.\cite{truax-1985, CHENG-1988, Rhodes-1989, Rau-1996, paredes-2020},
based on BCH-like relations of the \textit{su}(1,1) Lie algebra and
a time-splitting approach exploring the composition property of the TEO,
we obtain an iterative analytical solution given by simple recurrence relations
presented in the form of generalized continued fractions. The TEO is written in terms
of the \textit{su}(1,1) Lie algebra generators and therefore is ready for application over
any initial state.
In order to prove the usefulness of our method we consider the HO initially in its fundamental state and
we study its time-evolution for a variety of non-trivial frequency modulations. At first, these frequency modulations
are chosen in order to reproduce some results from literature.
Secondly, we analyse and compare two important cases:
the parametric resonance modulation and the so-called Janszky-Adam scheme \cite{JANSZKY-1992}.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{Meth}
we introduce the system studied and a detailed discussion of our method, the main theoretical result of this work.
In Section \ref{RAD} we perform some numerical implementations and use our results to compare the efficiency on squeezing among different procedures.
Section \ref{C} is left for the conclusions and final remarks.
\section{Time-dependent Harmonic oscillator}\label{Meth}
Let us consider a one-dimensional harmonic oscillator (HO) with arbitrary time-dependent parameters, namely, its mass $m(t)$ and frequency $\omega(t)$, whose hamiltonian is given by
\begin{equation}
\hat{H}(t)=\frac{\hat{p}^{2}}{2m(t)}+\frac{1}{2}m(t)\omega^{2}(t)\hat{q}^2\, .
\label{eq:HOVF}
\end{equation}
%
Our purpose is to determine the time-evolution operator (TEO) of the HO at an arbitrary subsequent time.
However, this is not an easy task, since the hamiltonian is a time-dependent one and, hence, the computation of the TEO is quite intricate.
In fact, from its definition
%
\begin{equation}
\left|\psi(t)\right\rangle = \hat{U}(t,0)\left|\psi(0)\right\rangle \, ,
\label{Definicao-U}
\end{equation}
and the Schr\"odinger equation (we are using $\hbar = 1$),
%
\begin{equation}
i\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\left|\psi(t)\right\rangle=\hat{H}(t)\left|\psi(t)\right\rangle\, ,
\label{eq:Schro-Eq}
\end{equation}
it is immediate to see that the TEO
satisfies the following differential equation,
\begin{equation}
i\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\hat{U}(t,0)=\hat{H}(t)\hat{U}(t,0)\, ,
\label{eq:Schro-TEO}
\end{equation}
with the initial condition $ \hat{U}(0,0) = 1\!\! 1$, whose solution
can be written as the formal expression \cite{Sakurai-Book-2014}
\begin{equation}
\hat{U}(t,0) = T\left\{\exp\left[-i\int_0^t{\hat H}(t^\prime) dt^\prime\right]\right\}\, ,
\label{eq:DysonB}
\end{equation}
where $T$ means time ordering operator. This expression is known as Dyson series and
its application to the problem at hand is extremely difficult. Instead of using Dyson series
it is more convenient, as we shall see, to appeal to the composition property of the TEO which follows directly from
definition (\ref{Definicao-U}), namely,
\begin{equation}
\hat{U}(t,0)=\hat{U}(t,t_{N-1})\hat{U}(t_{N-1},t_{N-2})\cdots\hat{U}(t_{1},0)\, .
\label{eq:compoTEO}
\end{equation}
Although for finite time intervals the expressions $\hat{U}(t_j,t_{j-1})$, with $j = 1,2,...,N-1$, are quite involved since the problem under consideration has a time-dependent hamiltonian (they are given, essentially by Dyson series), if we take
$\tau\rightarrow 0$ ($\tau=t_{j}-t_{j-1}; j=1,2,...N$) and $N\rightarrow\infty$ with $N\tau = t$, we can write the TEO as an infinite product of simple infinitesimal time-evolution operators, namely,
\begin{equation}
\hat{U}(t,0) = \lim_{\substack{N\rightarrow\infty\\ N\tau = t}}e^{-i\hat{H}(N\tau)\tau}e^{-i\hat{H}\left((N-1)\tau\right)\tau}\cdots\;e^{-i\hat{H}(\tau)\tau} \, .
\label{eq:TEOin}
\end{equation}
Our iterative method is based on the above equation.
Let us introduce, as usual in algebraic methods for the HO, the annihilation $\hat{a}$ and creation $\hat{a}^{\dagger}$ operators
\begin{equation}
\hat{a}\equiv\sqrt{\frac{m_{0}\omega_{0}}{2}}\left(\hat{q}+i\frac{\hat{p}}{m_{0}\omega_{0}}\right) \; ;\;\;\;\;
\hat{a}^{\dagger}\equiv\sqrt{\frac{m_{0}\omega_{0}}{2}}\left(\hat{q}-\frac{i}{m_{0}\omega_{0}}\hat{p}\right) \, ,
\label{eq:instantbasist0}
\end{equation}
where $m(t=0)\equiv m_{0}$, $\omega(t=0)\equiv\omega_{0}$ and $\left[\hat{a},\hat{a}^{\dagger}\right]=1$.
We recall that we are working in the the Schr\"odinger picture. Therefore, inverting the above equations and substituting the expressions of operators $\hat p$ and $\hat q$ in terms of the operators $\hat{a}$ and $\hat{a}^{\dagger}$ into Eq. (\ref{eq:HOVF}), we obtain after a straightforward calculation
\begin{equation}
\hat{H}(t)=2\omega(t)\cosh\bigl[2\rho(t)\bigr]\hat{K}_{c}+\omega(t)\sinh\bigl[2\rho(t)\bigr]\left(\hat{K}_{+}+\hat{K}_{-}\right),\\
\label{eq:HamLie}
\end{equation}
where we defined
\begin{equation}
\rho(t)\equiv\frac{1}{2}\ln{\left(\frac{m(t)\omega(t)}{m_{0}\omega_{0}}\right)} \, .
\label{eq:compdgr}
\end{equation}
as well as the operators
\begin{equation}
\hat{K}_{+} := \frac{\hat{a}^{\dagger^{2}}}{2}, \:\: \hat{K}_{-} := \frac{\hat{a}^{2}}{2} \:\:\:\: \mbox{and} \:\:\:\: \hat{K}_{c} :=
\frac{\hat{a}^{\dagger}\hat{a}+\hat{a}\hat{a}^{\dagger}}{4}\, .\\
\label{eq:LieAlgebraGen}
\end{equation}
It is straightforward to show that the above operators satisfy the following commutation relations
\begin{equation}
\left[\hat{K}_{+},\hat{K}_{-}\right]=-2\hat{K}_{c} \:\: \mbox{and} \:\: \left[\hat{K}_{c},\hat{K}_{\pm}\right]=\pm\hat{K}_{\pm}\, ,
\label{eq:algebraK}
\end{equation}
so that they can be identified as the three generators of the \textit{su}(1,1) Lie algebra. This fact will allows us to use appropriate BCH-like formulas for this Lie algebra to obtain the TEO of the system.
For future convenience, let us now introduce the so-called vacuum squeezed states (a detailed discussion can be found in Ref.\cite{Barnett-1997}).
A single-mode vacuum squeezed state $\vert z\rangle$ (referred to, henceforth, simply by squeezed state) of the initial hamiltonian $\hat{H}_{0}\equiv\hat{H}(t=0)$,
can be obtained by application of the squeezing operator ${\hat S}(z)$ on the fundamental state, $\vert z\rangle = {\hat S}(z) \vert 0\rangle$, with ${\hat S}(z)$ defined by
\begin{equation}
\label{gensqop}
\hat{S}(z)\equiv\exp \left\{-\frac{z}{2}\left.\hat{a}^{\dagger}\right.^{2}+\frac{z^{*}}{2}\hat{a}^{2}\right\} \, ,
\end{equation}
where $z = r e^{i\varphi}$ is a complex number. With the aid of ordering theorems the squeezed state can be written as a superposition
of the even energy eigenstates \cite{Barnett-1997}
\begin{equation}
\left|z\right\rangle=\sqrt{\mbox{sech}(r)}\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{\sqrt{(2n)!}}{n!}
\left[-\frac{1}{2}e^{(i\varphi)}\tanh(r)\right]^{n}\left|2n\right\rangle.
\label{eq:squeezed}
\end{equation}
Note that $z$, and hence $r$ and $\varphi$, determines uniquely the squeezed state. In order to interpret $r$ and $\varphi$, it is convenient to introduce
the quadrature operator ${\hat Q}_\lambda$, defined by \cite{Barnett-1997}
\begin{equation}
\hat{Q}_{\lambda}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left[e^{i\lambda} \hat{a}^{\dagger}+e^{-i\lambda} \hat{a}\right] \, .
\label{eq:quadratureop}
\end{equation}
The quadrature operators satisfy the commutation relation $[{\hat Q}_\lambda,{\hat Q}_{\lambda + \pi/2}] = i$.
It is evident from the previous definition that
$\hat{Q}_{\lambda=0} = (\hat{a}^{\dagger} + \hat{a})/\sqrt{2} \propto \hat{q}$ and
$\hat{Q}_{\lambda=\pi/2} = i(\hat{a}^{\dagger} - \hat{a})/\sqrt{2} \propto \hat{p}$.
It can be shown that the variance of the quadrature operator in a squeezed state is given by \cite{Barnett-1997}
\begin{equation}
\left(\Delta Q_\lambda \right)^2 =
\frac{1}{2}\left[e^{2r} \sin^{2}\left(\lambda-\varphi/2\right)+e^{-2r} \cos^{2}\left(\lambda-\varphi/2\right)\right]\,
\label{eq:quadratureopvariance}
\end{equation}
and the harmonic oscillator is said to be squeezed if the variance of one of the quadratures is smaller than $\frac{1}{2}$. Note the explicit dependence of $\left(\Delta Q_\lambda\right)^2$ with $r$ and $\varphi$. Further, from the previous equation we see that
\begin{equation}
\frac{e^{-2r}}{2} \le \left(\Delta Q_\lambda \right)^2 \le \frac{e^{2r}}{2}\, ,
\end{equation}
which justifies the interpretation of $r$ as the squeezing parameter (SP). Parameter $\varphi$ is referred to as the squeezing phase (Sph).
\subsection{Time evolution}\label{Evl}
In this subsection we shall obtain the TEO of the system through an iterative method. To simplify calculations, but without any loss of generality, we consider the explicit time-dependence of the HO lying only in the frequency, such that $m(t)=1$.
\subsubsection{Time-Splitting}\label{timespli}
Let us consider a time discretization in small intervals of equally size $\tau$ and let the frequency function $\omega(t)$ be considered constant in each of these intervals as follows \cite{JANSZKY-1994}
\begin{alignat}{2}
\omega(t)=\left\{
\begin{array}{ccc}
\omega_{0} & \mbox{for} & t\leq 0 \\
\omega_{1} & \mbox{for} & 0<t\leq\tau \\
\vdots & & \vdots \\
\omega_{j} &\mbox{for} & (j-1)\tau<t\leq j\tau \\
\vdots & & \vdots \\
\omega_{N} & \mbox{for} & (N-1)\tau<t\leq N\tau \\
\end{array} \right.
\label{eq:discrete}
\end{alignat}
where $\omega_j$ can be taken as any value assumed by $\omega(t)$ with $t_{j-1} < t \le t_j$. For convenience, we choose $\omega_{j} :=\omega(j\tau)$.
Recall that $N\tau=t$ and an exact result is obtained only in the limit $N\rightarrow\infty$ ($\tau\rightarrow 0$). Note also that we chose time-dependent frequencies that are constant and equal to $\omega_0$ from $-\infty$ to $t=0$.
Once $t_j - t_{j-1} = \tau$, for any $j$, Eq. (\ref{eq:compoTEO}) takes the form
\begin{equation}
\hat{U}(t,0)=\hat{U}(N\tau,(N-1)\tau)\cdots\hat{U}(2\tau,\tau)\hat{U}(\tau,0) \, .
\label{eq:GenTEO}
\end{equation}
Assuming $N$ is as large as we want, we may approximate the hamiltonian in each time interval $t_{j-1} < t \le t_j$, denoted by $H_j$, as a constant one. Hence, from
Eq. (\ref{eq:HamLie}) we may write
\begin{equation}
\hat{H}_{j}=2\omega_{j}\cosh(2\rho_{j})\hat{K}_{c}+\omega_{j}\sinh(2\rho_{j})\left(\hat{K}_{+}+\hat{K}_{-}\right) \, ,
\label{eq:HamLiegen}
\end{equation}
where from Eq. (\ref{eq:compdgr}) it is clear that $\rho_{j}=\frac{1}{2}\ln{\left(\frac{\omega_{j}}{\omega_{0}}\right)}$.
Since all $H_j$ are now considered as time-independent hamiltonians, the TEO for each time interval, ${\hat U}(t_j,t_{j-1})$, with $j = 1,2,...,N$, can be written as $\hat{U}_{j} := {\hat U}(t_j,t_{j-1}) = e^{-i\hat{H}_{j}\tau}$. Therefore, using Eq. (\ref{eq:HamLiegen}), we can write
\begin{equation}
\hat{U}_{j}=e^{\lambda_{j+}\hat{K}_{+}+\lambda_{jc}\hat{K}_{c}+\lambda_{j-}\hat{K}_{-}},
\label{eq:TEOjk}
\end{equation}
where we defined
\begin{alignat}{1}
\label{truej1}
&\lambda_{j+} = \lambda_{j-}=-i\omega_{j}\tau \sinh(2\rho_{j}) \, , \\
\label{truej2}
&\lambda_{jc} = - 2i\omega_{j}\tau \cosh(2\rho_{j}) \, .
\end{alignat}
Using well known BCH relations of the $su(1,1)$ Lie algebras \cite{Barnett-1997, 2019-AJP-Tiba}, it is possible to write Eq. (\ref{eq:TEOjk}) as a product of exponentials of the Lie algebra generators in a suitable order, namely,
\begin{equation}
\hat{U}_{j}=e^{\Lambda_{j+}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\ln(\Lambda_{jc})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\Lambda_{j-}\hat{K}_{-}},
\label{eq:jTEO}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\Lambda_{jc}=\left(\cosh(\nu_{j})-\frac{\lambda_{jc}}{2\nu_{j}} \sinh(\nu_{j})\right)^{-2} \:\:\:\:\: \mbox{and} \:\:\:\:\:
\label{truej5}
\Lambda_{j\pm}=\frac{2\lambda_{j\pm} \sinh(\nu_{j})}{2\nu_{j} \cosh(\nu_{j})-\lambda_{jc}\sinh(\nu_{j})} \, ,
\end{equation}
with $\nu_{j}$ given by
\begin{equation}
\label{truej6}
\nu_{j}^{2} = \frac{1}{4}\lambda_{jc}^{2}-\lambda_{j+}\lambda_{j-}.
\end{equation}
Inserting Eqs. (\ref{truej1}) and (\ref{truej2}) into Eq. (\ref{truej6}) it is straightforward to show that $\nu_{j}=\pm i\omega_{j}\tau$, and substituting the obtained result into Eqs. (\ref{truej5}), consequently we obtain
\begin{alignat}{1}
\label{truej8}
& \Lambda_{jc}=\left(\cos(\omega_{j}\tau)+i\cosh(2\rho_{j})\sin(\omega_{j}\tau)\right)^{-2}, \\
\label{truej9}
&\Lambda_{j\pm}=\frac{-i \sinh(2\rho_{j})\sin(\omega_{j}\tau)}{\cos(\omega_{j}\tau)+i\cosh(2\rho_{j})\sin(\omega_{j}\tau)}.
\end{alignat}
Therefore, using Eqs. (\ref{Definicao-U}), (\ref{eq:GenTEO}) and (\ref{eq:jTEO}) the state of the system at an arbitrary instant $t>0$
can be written as the following product of operators
\begin{alignat}{1}
\left|\psi(t)\right\rangle =& e^{\Lambda_{N+}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\ln(\Lambda_{Nc})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\Lambda_{N-}\hat{K}_{-}} \, e^{\Lambda_{(N-1)+}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\ln(\Lambda_{(N-1)c})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\Lambda_{(N-1)-}\hat{K}_{-}}\; \cdots\cr
&\cdots\; e^{\Lambda_{2+}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\ln(\Lambda_{2c})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\Lambda_{2-}\hat{K}_{-}} \, e^{\Lambda_{1+}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\ln(\Lambda_{1c})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\Lambda_{1-}\hat{K}_{-}}\left|\psi(0)\right\rangle.
\label{eq:finalstate}
\end{alignat}
This formula is not yet suitable for numerical applications but, as we shall see in the next subsection, it is the starting point for the deduction of a very convenient recurrence relation which will be the core of our iterative method.
\subsubsection{Iterative method and TEO}\label{RF}
Here we shall show that the composition of $N$ operators $U_{j}$ of the form of Eq. (\ref{eq:jTEO}),
can be written as another operator with the same form, as is the case of the TEO in Eq. (\ref{eq:finalstate}).
In fact, this is possible since any $U_{j}$ is an element of the Lie group and, as it is well known,
the composition of two or more elements of a group yields to another element of the group \cite{GILMORE-2012}.
Since we assume $\omega(t)$ is constant by parts, as defined in Eq. (\ref{eq:discrete}),
then any change in the frequency is abrupt, \textit{i.e}, a jump.
It is worth mentioning that a HO with a jump in the frequency is one of the few cases
of frequency modulation with analytical solution.
A detailed study of the later can be found in Ref.\cite{2019-AJP-Tiba}.
In order to obtain a recurrence formula we initially calculate the composition of the first two elements
present in the TEO of Eq. (\ref{eq:finalstate}), namely,
\begin{equation}
\hat{U}(2\tau,0)=e^{\Lambda_{2+}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\ln(\Lambda_{2c})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\Lambda_{2-}\hat{K}_{-}}\, e^{\Lambda_{1+}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\ln(\Lambda_{1c})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\Lambda_{1-}\hat{K}_{-}} \, .
\label{eq:GenTEO2}
\end{equation}
Since we want to write the above operator product as another $U_{j}$,
we shall use ordering techniques to move the operators until obtaining the desired configuration.
In the following discussion we will use the well known BCH relations \cite{Barnett-1997}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:BCHclasic}
e^{\hat{A}}\hat{B}e^{-\hat{A}}=\hat{B}+\left[\hat{A},\hat{B}\right]+\frac{1}{2!}\left[\hat{A},\left[\hat{A},\hat{B}\right]\right]+
\frac{1}{3!}\left[\hat{A},\left[\hat{A},\left[\hat{A},\hat{B}\right]\right]\right]+\ldots \, ,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
e^{\hat{A}}f\left(\hat{C}\right)e^{-\hat{A}}=f\left(e^{\hat{A}}\hat{C}e^{\hat{-A}}\right) \, .
\label{eq:BCHfunc}
\end{equation}
Using the identity as $\mathds{1}=e^{\Lambda_{1+}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{-\Lambda_{1+}\hat{K}_{+}}$ and Eq. (\ref{eq:BCHfunc}) in Eq. (\ref{eq:GenTEO2}), we obtain
\begin{alignat}{1}
\hat{U}(2\tau,0)=&e^{\Lambda_{2+}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\ln(\Lambda_{2c})\hat{K}_{c}} e^{\Lambda_{1+}\hat{K}_{+}}\, \left(e^{-\Lambda_{1+}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\Lambda_{2-}\hat{K}_{-}}e^{\Lambda_{1+}\hat{K}_{+}}\right) \, e^{\ln(\Lambda_{1c})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\Lambda_{1-}\hat{K}_{-}} \cr
=&e^{\Lambda_{2+}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\ln(\Lambda_{2c})\hat{K}_{c}} e^{\Lambda_{1+}\hat{K}_{+}}\, \left(e^{\left\{\sigma_{+}\hat{K}_{+}+\sigma_{c}\hat{K}_{c}+\sigma_{-}\hat{K}_{-}\right\}}\right) \, e^{\ln(\Lambda_{1c})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\Lambda_{1-}\hat{K}_{-}} \, ,
\label{eq:GenTEO3}
\end{alignat}
where
\begin{equation}
\sigma_{+}=\Lambda_{2-}(\Lambda_{1+})^{2} \:\:\: \mbox{;} \:\:\: \sigma_{c}=2\Lambda_{2-}\Lambda_{1+} \:\:\: \mbox{and} \:\:\:
\sigma_{-}=\Lambda_{2-} \, .
\label{eq:sigmas}
\end{equation}
Now, for the embraced exponential in Eq. (\ref{eq:GenTEO3}) we can use the factorised representation Eq. (\ref{eq:jTEO}) to write
\begin{alignat}{1}
\hat{U}(2\tau,0)=&e^{\Lambda_{2+}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\ln(\Lambda_{2c})\hat{K}_{c}} e^{\Lambda_{1+}\hat{K}_{+}}\, \left(e^{\Sigma_{+}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\ln(\Sigma_{c})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\Sigma_{-}\hat{K}_{-}}\right) \, e^{\ln(\Lambda_{1c})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\Lambda_{1-}\hat{K}_{-}} \cr
=&e^{\Lambda_{2+}\hat{K}_{+}}\,\left(e^{\ln(\Lambda_{2c})\hat{K}_{c}} e^{(\Lambda_{1+}+\Sigma_{+})\hat{K}_{+}}\right)\, e^{\ln(\Sigma_{c})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\Sigma_{-}\hat{K}_{-}} e^{\ln(\Lambda_{1c})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\Lambda_{1-}\hat{K}_{-}} \, ,
\label{eq:GenTEO4}
\end{alignat}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Sigmapfin}
\Sigma_{+}=\frac{(\Lambda_{1+})^{2}\Lambda_{2-}}{1-\Lambda_{2-}\Lambda_{1+}} \, , \:\:\:\:
\Sigma_{c}=\left(1-\Lambda_{2-}\Lambda_{1+}\right)^{-2} \:\:\:\: \mbox{and} \:\:\:\:
\Sigma_{-}=\frac{\Lambda_{2-}}{1-\Lambda_{2-}\Lambda_{1+}} \, .
\end{equation}
Following a similar protocol, \textit{i.e.}, insertion of the identity as
$\mathds{1}=e^{-\ln(\Lambda_{2c})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\ln(\Lambda_{2c})\hat{K}_{c}}$
followed by the use of Eqs. (\ref{eq:BCHclasic}) and (\ref{eq:BCHfunc}),
the embraced quantity in Eq. (\ref{eq:GenTEO4}) results in
\begin{alignat}{1}
\hat{U}(2\tau,0)=& e^{\Lambda_{2+}\hat{K}_{+}}\,\left(e^{\left\{(\Lambda_{1+}+\Sigma_{+})\Lambda_{2c}\,\hat{K}_{+}\right\}}e^{\ln(\Lambda_{2c})\hat{K}_{c}}\right)\, e^{\ln(\Sigma_{c})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\Sigma_{-}\hat{K}_{-}} e^{\ln(\Lambda_{1c})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\Lambda_{1-}\hat{K}_{-}} \cr
=&e^{\left\{\Lambda_{2+}+\Lambda_{2c}(\Lambda_{1+}+\Sigma_{+})\right\}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\ln(\Lambda_{2c}\Sigma_{c})\hat{K}_{c}}
\left(e^{\Sigma_{-}\hat{K}_{-}}e^{\ln(\Lambda_{1c})\hat{K}_{c}}\right)e^{\Lambda_{1-}\hat{K}_{-}}\, .
\label{eq:GenTEO5}
\end{alignat}
As before, the embraced exponential product in the above equation is reordered by introducing
this time the identity as $\mathds{1}=e^{\ln(\Lambda_{1c})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{-\ln(\Lambda_{1c})\hat{K}_{c}}$
followed by the use of Eqs. (\ref{eq:BCHclasic}) and (\ref{eq:BCHfunc}) as
\begin{alignat}{1}
\hat{U}(2\tau,0)=& e^{\left\{\Lambda_{2+}+\Lambda_{2c}(\Lambda_{1+}+\Sigma_{+})\right\}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\ln(\Lambda_{2c}\Sigma_{c})\hat{K}_{c}}
\left(e^{\ln(\Lambda_{1c})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\Sigma_{-}\Lambda_{1c}\hat{K}_{-}}\right)e^{\Lambda_{1-}\hat{K}_{-}}\, \cr
=&e^{\bigl(\Lambda_{2+}+\Lambda_{2c}(\Lambda_{1+}+\Sigma_{+})\bigl)\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\ln(\Lambda_{2c}\Lambda_{1c}\Sigma_{c})\hat{K}_{c}}
e^{(\Sigma_{-}\Lambda_{1c}+\Lambda_{1-})\hat{K}_{-}}\, .
\label{eq:GenTEO6}
\end{alignat}
Finally, substitution of the big sigmas, Eq. (\ref{eq:Sigmapfin}), in the above equation results in
\begin{equation}
\hat{U}(2\tau,0)=
e^{(\Lambda_{2+}+\frac{\Lambda_{2c}\Lambda_{1+}}{1-\Lambda_{2-}\Lambda_{1+}})\hat{K}_{+}}
e^{\ln\left(\frac{\Lambda_{2c}\Lambda_{1c}}{(1-\Lambda_{2-}\Lambda_{1+})^{2}}\right)\hat{K}_{c}}
e^{(\Lambda_{1-}+\frac{\Lambda_{2-}\Lambda_{1c}}{1-\Lambda_{2-}\Lambda_{1+}})\hat{K}_{-}} \, .
\label{eq:2compfin}
\end{equation}
The recurrence relation for the composition of $N$ operators $U_{j}$
is a natural consequence of the previous result.
For convenience, let us first define
\begin{equation}
\alpha_{1}=\Lambda_{1+} \:\:\:\:\: \mbox{;} \:\:\:\:\: \beta_{1}=\Lambda_{1c} \:\:\:\:\: \mbox{and} \:\:\:\:\: \gamma_{1}=\Lambda_{1-} \, .
\label{eq:alphagammabeta1}
\end{equation}
Then, if we write Eq. (\ref{eq:2compfin}) as
\begin{equation}
\hat{U}(2\tau,0)=e^{\alpha_{2}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\ln(\beta_{2})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\gamma_{2}\hat{K}_{-}} \, , \\
\label{eq:2compgamalta}
\end{equation}
comparison of the last two equations with Eq. (\ref{eq:2compfin}) allows us to make the identifications
\begin{equation}
\alpha_{2}=\Lambda_{2+}+\frac{\alpha_{1}\Lambda_{2c}}{1-\alpha_{1}\Lambda_{2-}} \:\:\: \mbox{,} \:\:\:\:\:\:
\beta_{2}=\frac{\beta_{1}\Lambda_{2c}}{\left(1-\alpha_{1}\Lambda_{2-}\right)^{2}} \:\:\:\:\: \mbox{and} \:\:\:\:\:
\label{beta2}
\gamma_{2}=\gamma_{1}+\frac{\Lambda_{2-}\beta_{1}}{1-\alpha_{1}\Lambda_{2-}} \, .
\end{equation}
It is worth emphasizing that the above relations are obtained no matter the ordering followed to move the operators,
as long as the final operator have the structure of an $U_{j}$. Therefore, from Eqs. (\ref{eq:2compgamalta}) and (\ref{beta2}), the TEO is given by
\begin{equation}
\hat{U}(t,0)=
e^{\alpha_{N}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\ln(\beta_{N})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\gamma_{N}\hat{K}_{-}} \, ,
\label{eq:GenTEO1}
\end{equation}
where coefficients $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ are given by the following expressions
\begin{equation}
\alpha_{N}=\Lambda_{N+}+\frac{\alpha_{(N-1)}\Lambda_{Nc}}{1-\alpha_{(N-1)}\Lambda_{N-}} \:\:\: \mbox{,} \:\:\:\:\:\:
\beta_{N}=\frac{\beta_{(N-1)}\Lambda_{Nc}}{\left(1-\alpha_{(N-1)}\Lambda_{N-}\right)^{2}} \:\:\:\:\: \mbox{and} \:\:\:\:\:
\label{eq:betaN}
\gamma_{N}=\gamma_{(N-1)}+\frac{\Lambda_{N-}\beta_{(N-1)}}{1-\alpha_{(N-1)}\Lambda_{N-}} \, .
\end{equation}
We recall that $N\tau=t$ and the exact result is obtained by taking the limit $N\rightarrow\infty$ ($\tau\rightarrow 0$) in the above expressions.
However, since to perform numerical calculations we must set the value of $N$, once its value is found that guarantees the convergence, we can say
that our result is as exact as our computer allows us to increase $N$ above it convergence value. From Eqs. (\ref{eq:finalstate}) and (\ref{eq:GenTEO1}) we obtain the state vector
\begin{equation}
\left|\psi(t)\right\rangle =e^{\alpha_{N}\hat{K}_{+}}e^{\ln(\beta_{N})\hat{K}_{c}}e^{\gamma_{N}\hat{K}_{-}} \left|\psi(0)\right\rangle.
\label{eq:finalstatef}
\end{equation}
Note that the coefficient $\alpha$ in Eq. (\ref{eq:GenTEO1}) is independent of $\beta$ and $\gamma$.
This enables us to write it in the following convenient form
\begin{equation}
\alpha_{j}=\Lambda_{j+}-\frac{\Lambda_{jc}}{\Lambda_{j-}-\frac{1}{\Lambda_{(j-1)+}-
\frac{\Lambda_{(j-1)c}}
{\Lambda_{(j-1)-} \, -\frac{1}{\ddots \Lambda_{2+}-\frac{\Lambda_{2c}}{\Lambda_{2-}-\frac{1}{\Lambda_{1+}}}}}}} \\
\label{eq:gammarecursive}
\end{equation}
The above expression is a generalized continued fraction (GCF) for which some topics such as convergence can be investigated.
Notice that Eq. (\ref{eq:gammarecursive}) enables an easy numerical implementation. GCFs lie in the context of complex analysis and are specially useful to study analyticity of functions as well as number theory among other fields. For an interested reader we suggest Ref.\cite{Kinchin-1997}.
Note that, from Eq. (\ref{eq:finalstatef}) we are able to calculate the final state provided any initial state is given.
However, to do numerical calculations and in order to prove the usefulness of our method, we shall consider
the initial state as the fundamental state $\left|\psi(0)\right\rangle=\left|0\right\rangle$.
This will enables us to reproduce and analyse some well known results from literature.
From Eq. (\ref{eq:LieAlgebraGen}) we have the following results
\begin{equation}
\hat{K}_{-}\left|n\right\rangle=\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{n(n-1)}\left|n-2\right\rangle \:\:\: \mbox{,} \:\:\:\:\:\:
\hat{K}_{+}\left|n\right\rangle=\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{(n+1)(n+2)}\left|n+2\right\rangle \:\:\:\:\: \mbox{and} \:\:\:\:\:
\hat{K}_{c}\left|n\right\rangle=\frac{1}{2}\left(n+\frac{1}{2}\right)\left|n\right\rangle \, .
\label{eq:rules}
\end{equation}
Using the above equations and the well known expansion $e^{\hat{A}}=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}{\frac{1}{n!}\hat{A}^{n}}$
(valid for a general operator $\hat{A}$) in Eq. (\ref{eq:finalstatef}), it can be shown that
\begin{equation}
\left|\psi(t)\right\rangle=\sqrt{\left|(\beta_{N})\right|^{1/2}}\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{\sqrt{(2n)!}}{n!}
\left[\frac{1}{2}\left|\alpha_{N}\right|e^{i\vartheta_{N}}\right]^{n}\left|2n\right\rangle,
\label{eq:wfinalg2}
\end{equation}
where the overall phase was removed by the redefinitions
\begin{equation}
\alpha_{N}=\left|\alpha_{N}\right|e^{i\vartheta_{N}}, \:\:\:\: \mbox{and}\:\:\:\: \beta_{N}=\left|\beta_{N}\right|e^{i\chi_{j}}.
\label{eq:phasecoeffg2}
\end{equation}
Note that, for any $j=1,2,...,N$, the relation
\begin{equation}
\left|\alpha_{j}\right|^{2}+\left|\beta_{j}\right| = 1
\label{eq:modulustrig}
\end{equation}
must be satisfied, as it can be straightforwardly checked.
Summing up: we have shown that any change in the frequency (as well as in the mass) of a HO, initially in its fundamental state,
brings the system into a squeezed state of the initial hamiltonian $\hat{H}_{0}$: $\left|\psi(t)\right\rangle=\left|z(t)\right\rangle$, with $z(t)=r(t) e^{i\varphi(t)}$. The corresponding SP and Sph can be computed by comparing Eqs. (\ref{eq:wfinalg2}) and (\ref{eq:squeezed}), a procedure which leads to
\begin{equation}
r(t)=\tanh^{-1}\left|\alpha_{N}\right|, \:\:\:\: \mbox{and}\:\:\:\: \varphi(t)=\vartheta_{N}\pm n\pi \:\: \mbox{with} \:\:(n=1,2,...)
\label{eq:phaseparamsque}
\end{equation}
Observe that the state is totally defined by the complex coefficient $\alpha_{j}$, since its modulus gives the SP
$r(t)$ and its phase $\vartheta_N$ gives the Sph $\varphi(t)$.
\section{Numerical implementations and discussions} \label{RAD}
In this section, we will apply our iterative method, described previously, for a variety of frequency modulations.
The numerical calculations will be implemented in the platform \textit{Mathematica},
where each frequency function will be discretized using very small intervals. We have established the optimal amount of such intervals for a given frequency function by studying the convergence of the method, so we can assure that the minimum used of 150.000 points (jumps) is good enough to perform a physical analysis.
Initially, in order to check the consistency of our method,
in subsection \ref{AR} we recover some interesting results for the variances obtained by Adams and Janszky
in Ref.\cite{JANSZKY-1994} by using a non-trivial frequency modulation.
In this reference, the authors considered time-dependent frequencies that
return asymptotically to their original values as $t\rightarrow \infty$.
In the last subsection, we consider time-dependent frequencies corresponding to
two very efficient ways of generating squeezing states, namely,
the parametric resonance modulation and the so-called Janszky-Adam (J-A) scheme \cite{JANSZKY-1992}.
Choosing appropriately the parameters for both frequency modulations, we compare them and show that
squeezing with the Adams-Janszky scheme is more efficient.
In the following discussion, we shall use the particular definition of the scaled quadrature operators
used by Janszky in Ref.\cite{JANSZKY-1994}, given by $1/\sqrt{2}$ times the quadrature operator
defined in Eq. (\ref{eq:quadratureop}). As a consequence,
squeezing occurs when the variance is smaller than the coherent limit given by $1/4$ instead of $1/2$.
Despite our results are valid for any initial frequency,
for convenience we choose in all our numerical calculations $\omega_{0}=1$.
Also we will use dimensionless quantities in the analysis.
\subsection{Checking the method}\label{AR}
In order to get confidence in our method, in this subsection we will recover a well known result of the literature involving a harmonic oscillator with a time-dependent frequency.
Our main purpose here is to obtain the squeezing parameter as well as the variance of a quadrature operator for the system discussed in Ref. \cite{JANSZKY-1994}. Following this reference we consider a non-oscillatory frequency function of the type:
\begin{equation}
\omega(t)=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\: \omega_{0} \:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\: \mbox{for} \:\:\:\:\:\: t\leq 0 \cr
\omega_{0}\left[1+ \frac{\omega_{0} t}{2} \exp\left(-\frac{\omega_{0} t}{B}\right)\right] \:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\: \mbox{for} \:\:\:\:\:\: t>0\, ,
\end{array} \right.
\label{eq:frequency2}
\end{equation}
where $B$ is a dimensionless positive parameter.
In Fig.(\ref{fig:ExponentialDecres}.a) we plot the previous frequency as a function of time for different values of $B$. Note that these frequencies are
functions that start increasing, but after passing by their maximum values, they approach monotonically and asymptotically their original values. Also, note that the larger the parameter $B$, the longer it takes the frequency to return to its initial value $\omega_0$. In Fig.(\ref{fig:ExponentialDecres}.b), applying the method developed previously, we plot the squeezing parameter $r(t)$ as a function of time for the three frequencies plotted in Fig.(\ref{fig:ExponentialDecres}.a). We see that $r(t)$ has an oscillatory behavior which crudely follows the shape of the corresponding time-dependent frequency. Notice that the oscillations in $r(t)$ tend to cease as the frequency asymptotically returns to its original value and the squeezing parameter evolves to a constant value which depends on $B$. This is a direct consequence of the fact that the final value of the frequency is the same as the initial one.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=16.0cm]{Combined.png}
\caption{From Eq. (\ref{eq:frequency2}) are plotted in the same time interval: (a) the frequency functions and, the time-evolution of (b) the SP and of (c) the quadrature variance. The curves associated to the three different values of the parameter are $B=0.5\pi$ (dashed line), $B=3\pi$ (dotted line) and $B=5\pi$ (solid line).}
\label{fig:ExponentialDecres}
\end{figure}
In Fig.(\ref{fig:ExponentialDecres}.c) applying again our method we plot the time-evolution of the quadrature variance. This variance has an oscillatory behavior even after the oscillations in the squeezing parameter tends to cease. This oscillatory behavior even after $r(t)$ has achieved a constant value is due solely to the squeezing phase term
present in Eq. (\ref{eq:quadratureopvariance}).
Our results are in total agreement with those appearing in Janszky's paper \cite{JANSZKY-1994}.
In fact, we have extended our analysis into a larger time-interval, from $\omega_{0}t=30$ (Janszky's paper) to $\omega_{0}t=150$,
enabling us to see the behaviour in the asymptotic limit.
Since the time-dependent frequencies considered in this subsection are quite non-trivial, we can be very confident with our method and results.
It is worth mentioning that in Janszky's paper \cite{JANSZKY-1994} only the time-dependence of the quadrature is plotted, but not the time-dependence of the SP.
\subsection{Parametric Resonance}\label{PR}
Here we shall use a pulsating frequency function in the study of quantum parametric resonance. We shall show that in the resonance condition the mean value of the SP grows linearly with time, showing a certain characteristic angular coefficient, while for the non-resonance cases it has oscillatory behaviour (like beatings), with larger amplitude and period when closer to the resonance condition. After that, we also characterize the complex map (fingerprint) of the final state.
Let us consider the following frequency function
\begin{equation}
\omega(t)=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\: \omega_{0} \:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\: \mbox{for} \:\:\:\:\:\: t\leq 0 \cr\cr
\frac{1}{2}\left[\left(\omega_{0}+\omega_{l}\right)+\left(\omega_{0}-\omega_{l}\right)
\cos\left(\epsilon \omega_{0}t\right)\right] \:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\: \mbox{for} \:\:\:\:\:\: t > 0
\end{array} \right.
\label{eq:frequency3}
\end{equation}
where $\omega_{l}$ is the maximum value reached by $\omega(t)$. Recall that $\omega_{0}=1$ and we fixed $\omega_{l}=1.04$, both in arbitrary units, for latter convenience. In Fig.(\ref{fig:ParRes}.a) we plot the above time-dependent frequency as a function of $\omega_{0}t$ for different values of the dimensionless parameter $\epsilon$. This parameter allows one to tune the parametric resonance phenomenon which occurs when $\epsilon\omega_{0}$ equals
twice the value denoted by reference frequency $\omega_R = \frac{\omega_{0}+\omega_{l}}{2}$,
which is the time average value of the harmonic oscillator frequency $\omega(t)$.
The parametric resonance condition is then achieved with $\epsilon=2.04$.
The other values of $\epsilon$ were chosen so that they are close but smaller than the resonant value\footnote{We could have chosen values for $\epsilon$ close but greater than $2.04$, but the results would have been the same.}.
In Fig.(\ref{fig:ParRes}.b) we plot the SP as a function of time for different values of $\epsilon$. The main characteristic shown in this figure is that at the resonance condition, the average value of the SP grows linearly with time, indefinitely, in contrast to what happens in the non-resonance cases, where the average value of the SP starts growing, achieves a maximum value and then diminishes until it vanishes and then starts the process again, presenting a periodic behaviour. Note that as $\epsilon$ approaches the resonant value, $\epsilon = 2.04$, the period of oscillation of $r(t)$ becomes larger, tending to infinity as $\epsilon \rightarrow 2.04$. It is worth mentioning that at the resonance condition the average energy is always increasing.
In Fig.(\ref{fig:ParRes}.c) we plot the variance of the chosen quadrature as a function of time. Note that the characteristic time of the variance oscillations is associated with the squeezing phase dynamics, while the amplitudes of those oscillations are related to the mean value of the SP (see Eq. (\ref{eq:quadratureopvariance})). As a consequence, the non-resonant cases exhibit modulations as beats while at parametric resonance, since the average SP grows linearly with time, the modulations of the oscillations (the envelopes enclosing the oscillations) are exponentially increasing at the top of the oscillations and exponentially decreasing at the bottom of the oscillations.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=16.0cm]{Mixed3.png}
\caption{(a) The frequency functions and, in the same time interval, the time-evolution of (b) the SP and (c) the quadrature variance. In (b), it is also shown the behavior of SP for the initial dynamics. The curves associated to the three different values of the parameter are $\epsilon=1.96$ (dashed line), $\epsilon=2.0$ (dotted line) and $\epsilon=2.04$ (solid line and resonance case).}
\label{fig:ParRes}
\end{figure}
In Fig.(\ref{fig:Resonance}) we used Eq. (\ref{eq:phaseparamsque}) to plot, in the complex plane, the dynamics of the complex function $z = r e^{i\varphi} = \tanh^{-1}\left|\gamma\right| e^{i(\vartheta\pm\pi)}$, where $\left|z\right\rangle=\left|r e^{i \phi}\right\rangle$ is the (squeezed) state of the system, as it was similarly done in Ref.\cite{GERRY-1990}. This is a geometric representation containing all relevant information about the dynamics of the system and can be considered as a fingerprint of the dynamics of the state. The non-resonant cases are plotted in Figs.(\ref{fig:Resonance}.a) and (\ref{fig:Resonance}.b). For these cases, the curves are limited and bounded by a maximum radii in the complex plane of $z$, since, when out of resonance, the squeezing parameter ($r = \vert z\vert$) has a maximum value. The closer to the resonant condition, the larger the radius in the complex plane of the curves that describes the dynamics of the system. This can be seen by inspection of Figs.(\ref{fig:Resonance}.a) and (\ref{fig:Resonance}.b), since the larger radius corresponds to the larger value of $\epsilon$. At the resonance condition, as shown in Fig.(\ref{fig:Resonance}.c), there is no enclosing circle and the curve is given by a growing spiral since $|z|$ increases exponentially indefinitely.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=16cm]{ResonHori.png}
\caption{Plot of the time-evolution in the interval $0\leq t\leq 120$ of the complex number $z$ characterizing the final state of the system for the frequency function given in Eq. (\ref{eq:frequency3}) and for the different values of the parameter: (a) $\epsilon=1.96$, (b) $\epsilon=2.0$ and (c) $\epsilon=2.04$ (resonance case).}
\label{fig:Resonance}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Janszky-Adam scheme $\times$ parametric resonance}\label{JAS}
The Janszky-Adam (J-A) scheme is known as a very strong squeezing model by frequency modulation in the harmonic oscillator \cite{FUJII-2015} and useful, for instance, in the description of a confined light field strongly coupled to a two-level system, or qubit, in the dispersive regime \cite{joshi-2017}. It uses sudden jumps between two fixed frequencies appropriately synchronized \cite{JANSZKY-TE-1994, JANSZKY-1992} and these abrupt frequency changes produce a high degree of squeezing \cite{Kumar-1991}.
In Fig.(\ref{fig:JanzskyModel}.a), the time-dependent frequency of the HO in the Janszky-Adam model is plotted. It consists, as mentioned above, of periodic sudden jumps between two constant frequencies, namely $\omega_{0}$ and $\omega_{1}$ (chosen to be 1.0 and 1.5 in arbitrary units in Fig.(\ref{fig:JanzskyModel}.a)). The respective time intervals in each frequency are suitable chosen to optimize the increasing in the SP.
In Fig.(\ref{fig:JanzskyModel}.b), we apply our method to plot the SP as a function of time corresponding to such a frequency modulation. First, note that there is an increasing of $r(t)$ only when the frequency jumps from $\omega_{0}$ to $\omega_{1}$, but not when the frequency jumps back from $\omega_1$ to the initial frequency $\omega_0$. In fact, after the frequency abruptly changes from $\omega_1$ to its original value $\omega_0$ the SP remains constant in time until the next jump from $\omega_{0}$ to $\omega_{1}$. This can be understood in the following way:
after the jump from $\omega_{0}$ to $\omega_{1}$ we showed that the state of the HO is a squeezed state of the original hamiltonian $\hat H_0$ (a HO with constant frequency $\omega_{0}$), and it is known that the time-evolution described by $e^{-i\hat H_0 t/\hbar}$ of a squeezed state with respect to hamiltonian $\hat H_0$ does not change the value of the SP (though the variance of a quadrature operator oscillates with time due to its dependence on the squeezing phase $\varphi$). That is why in Fig.(\ref{fig:JanzskyModel}.b) we have plateaus whenever
$\omega(t) = \omega_0$. Our description should be contrasted with that appearing in Refs.\cite{JANSZKY-TE-1994, JANSZKY-1992}, where it is suggested that the SP suffer abrupt (discontinuous) changes as the frequency jumps from $\omega_{0}$ and $\omega_{1}$ and from $\omega_{1}$ back to $\omega_{0}$. However, this is only an apparent disagreement since here the SP is always considered with respect to the original hamiltonian $\hat H_0$, while in the above mentioned papers, though not explicitly stated, squeezing is considered with respect to the instantaneous hamiltonian.
It is worth mentioning that since finite changes in the HO frequency cause only finite changes in the corresponding hamiltonian, the physical state of the HO evolves continuously in time since
%
\begin{equation}
\lim_{\delta\rightarrow 0} e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\hat H \delta} \vert\psi(t)\rangle = \vert\psi(t)\rangle\, .
\end{equation}
%
Hence, the same thing occurs with the SP, it can not suffer discontinuous changes, unless it is defined with respect to the instantaneous hamiltonian (which is not our case).
%
In Ref.\cite{2019-AJP-Tiba}, we analyze a simplified version of the Janszky-Adam model which consists of one sudden frequency change from $\omega_{0}$ to $\omega_{1} > \omega_0$ (at $t=0$) followed by another sudden change from $\omega_1$ back to the initial frequency $\omega_{0}$ after a time interval $\textsl{T}$. We obtain an exact analytical solution with the aid of algebraic methods based on Lie algebras and use this problem to unveil some qualitative aspects of squeezing processes by abrupt frequency changes. Particularly, we show why there is no change in the SP when the frequency jumps back to its original.
Note that, as in the parametric resonance case, the mean value of the SP grows linearly. As a consequence, it can be shown that both frequency modulations have a similar fingerprint in the complex space \textit{i.e.}, the curve exhibits a spiral like behavior, since the modulus of $z$ increases without bound, as in Fig.(\ref{fig:Resonance}.c).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=15.0cm]{freqSP.png}
\caption{(a) Plot of the frequency modulation function of the J-A scheme. (b) Time-evolution of the SP.}
\label{fig:JanzskyModel}
\end{figure}
Finally, in order to compare which process between the parametric resonance model and the Janszky-Adam scheme is more effective to squeeze the HO, we plot in Fig.(\ref{fig:JanzskyModel2}.a) the frequency modulations corresponding to these two models. Of course, for our comparison to make sense, we must choose appropriately the parameters in both models. Since the parametric resonance model to be used is that described by Eq. (\ref{eq:frequency3}), it is natural to choose both modulations between the same minimum and maximum frequency values, and the amplitude is small, between 1.00 and 1.04 (in arbitrary units). In Fig.(\ref{fig:JanzskyModel2}.b) we plot the SP as a function of time for both models with the above choices for the parameters involved. Although both curves have the same general form and show squeezing parameters that increase without bound, it is evident from Fig.(\ref{fig:JanzskyModel2}.b) that the Janszky-Adam scheme is more efficient to squeeze than the parametric resonance (a similar conclusion was obtained by Galve and Lutz \cite{Galve-2009}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=15.0cm]{definitive.png}
\caption{(a) Plot of the frequency function for the J-A scheme and the parametric resonance model in time with the same minimum and maximum values, and (b) the resulting SP as a function of time.}
\label{fig:JanzskyModel2}
\end{figure}
\section{CONCLUSIONS} \label{C}
In this paper, using algebraic methods and appropriate BCH-like relations of Lie algebras we developed an iterative method for solving the problem of a harmonic oscillator with an arbitrary time-dependent frequency. Although the problem of a harmonic oscillator with a time-dependent frequency had already been formally solved
by algebraic methods (see, for instance, Refs.\cite{Rhodes-1989, C.F.LO-1990}), our method has the advantage of being very well adapted for numerical calculations no matter the time dependence on the frequency. In other methods, only a few particular cases of time-dependent frequencies can be handled easily. As it was already known in the literature, we have shown that a time-dependent frequency gives rise to a squeezed state. Our results enable us to follow the state of the system at any time and with the desired precision. As a consistence test, in order to get more confidence in our method, we first recovered some important results found in the literature \cite{JANSZKY-1994}. Then, we considered other important cases, namely, {\it (i)} the parametric resonance model and {\it (ii)} the Janszky-Adam scheme.
By computing the squeezing parameter and the variances of quadrature operators for these models, we showed that the latter is the most efficient method for squeezing.
We think our method may be useful for a deeper understanding of squeezing procedures as well as of general time-dependent problems involving Lie algebras.
Our method seems to be computationally attractive for the study of shortcuts to adiabaticity \cite{Chen-2010, Del-Campo-2011, guery-2019},
harmonic traps \cite{Grossmann-1995, schneiter-2020, qvarfort-2020},
and problems with coupled HO's \cite{urzua-2019, urzua-2-2019}
Moreover, since the HO with a time-dependent frequency appears in many different areas in physics, from quantum optics to quantum field theory in flat space-time (for instance in the dynamical Casimir effect) as well as in curved spacetimes (for instance in cosmological particle creation), we hope our method may inspire alternative ways of attacking problems of particle creation in general time-dependent backgrounds.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The authors acknowledge R. Acosta Diaz, D. R. Herrera, L. Garcia, C. M. D. Solano, Reinaldo F. de Melo e Souza, M. V. Cougo-Pinto, A. Z. Khoury and P.A. Maia Neto for enlightening discussions. The authors thank the brazilian agencies for scientific and technological research CAPES, CNPq and FAPERJ for partial financial support.
\newpage
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
\biboptions{sort&compress}
|
\section{Introduction}
Topological classification of matter is nowadays one of the fundamental methods to understand various phenomena
in condensed matter physics \cite{Kane:2005aa,Qi:2008aa,Schnyder:2008aa,Teo:2010fk,Hasan:2010fk,Qi:2011kx}.
In addition to time reversal, particle-hole, and chiral symmetries, crystalline point group symmetries enrich periodic tables
of topological insulators and superconductors \cite{Fu:2011aa,Morimoto:2013aa,Shiozaki:2014aa,Kruthoff:2017aa}.
Topological classification has also opened a new venue to explore topological phenomena
in metamaterials such as phononic systems \cite{Kane:2013aa,Kariyado:2015aa},
photonic crystals \cite{Wang:2009aa,Khanikaev:2012aa}, and so on.
Experimentally, edge states associated with topological properties of bulk play a crucial role as observables.
This is the bulk-edge correspondence \cite{Hatsugai:1993fk}.
The recent discovery of higher-order topological insulators (HOTI)
\cite{Benalcazar:2017aa,Benalcazar:2017ab,Schindler:2018aa, Hayashi:2018aa,Hashimoto:2017aa}
has led us to a renewed interest
in the bulk-edge correspondence.
For conventional topological insulators, bulk topological invariants are directly related to gapless boundary states
\cite{Hatsugai:1993fk,Kane:2005aa}.
In HOTI, on the other hand, both of them seem trivial, that is, bulk topological invariants vanish and boundary states are gapped out.
Nevertheless, higher-order boundary states such as corner or hinge states show up. These states are guaranteed by
higher-order topological invariants of the bulk, e.g., one-dimensional (1D) Berry-Zak phases in two- and higher-dimensional systems.
This implies that there is still ``higher-order" bulk-edge correspondence \cite{1908.00011}.
HOTI have been attracting much current interest
\cite{Langbehn:2017aa,Song:2017aa,Ezawa:2018aa,Ezawa:2018ab,Liu:2017aa,Khalaf:2018cr,Matsugatani:2018aa,Fukui:2018aa,
Calugaru:2019aa},
and observed experimentally in various metamaterial systems
\cite{Imhof:2018aa,Zhang:2019ab,Ota:2019aa}.
One of the typical models for HOTI
is a two-dimensional (2D) generalization \cite{Benalcazar:2017aa,Benalcazar:2017ab, Liu:2017aa}
of the SSH model \cite{Su:1979aa}.
Consider a tight-binding model on the square lattice with nearest-neighbor hoppings only,
as shown in Fig. \ref{f:lat} ($\phi=0$).
Then, the model is a simple decoupled SSH model
$H=h_{{\rm SSH},x}\otimes 1+1\otimes h_{{\rm SSH},y}$ in the momentum space,
where $h_{{\rm SSH},j}$
stands for the 1D SSH Hamiltonian toward the $j$ direction
\cite{Benalcazar:2017aa,Benalcazar:2017ab, Liu:2017aa}.
Therefore, it is obvious that the model shows corner states
as the edge states of the 1D SSH models.
Remember that
these edge states are
protected by the chiral symmetry of each chain $\{h_{{\rm SSH},j},\sigma\}=0$,
where $\sigma$ is a certain matrix depending on the representation.
Its topological invariant is the quantized polarization (Berry-Zak phase) \cite{Ryu:2002fk}.
Therefore, the corner states of this model are also ensured by the
quantized polarizations for both directions \cite{Liu:2017aa}.
On the other hand, BBH introduced $\pi$-flux per plaquette to this model, as shown in Fig. \ref{f:lat} with $\phi=\pi$.
In this case, the Hamiltonian can be written as
$H=h_{{\rm SSH},x}\otimes 1+\sigma\otimes h_{{\rm SSH},y}$ in the momentum space.
Because of the anti-commutability of the $x$ and $y$ sectors, the model becomes gapful.
Its ground state is characterized by the topological quadrupole moment
\cite{Benalcazar:2017aa,Benalcazar:2017ab},
or the product formula of topological invariants in the mathematical context \cite{Hayashi:2018aa}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.9\linewidth]{fig1_60.eps}
\caption{
The lattice on which the model is defined. The thin and thick lines stand for the alternating
bond strength. The SSH unit cell is colored orange.
The $j$ arrow shows the Peierls phase factor $e^{i(j-\frac{1}{2})\phi}$
for a uniform flux $\phi=2\pi p/q$ per plaquette.
The magnetic unit cell is surrounded by the red square.
}
\label{f:lat
\end{center}
\end{figure}
These two models studied so far are the 2D SSH model with 0-flux and $\pi$-flux.
With $0$-flux, the half-filled ground state is basically gapless and the corner states are embedded in the bulk spectrum,
whereas a magnetic field giving $\pi$-flux per plaquette is too strong to realize in experiments.
Therefore, the quest for the possibility of HOTI in an arbitrary magnetic field is not only a theoretical interest
but also
extends the possibility of experimental observations of HOTI in real materials.
In this paper, we generalize these two models
by introducing generic magnetic flux $\phi$
which interpolates the simple 2D SSH model at $\phi=0$ and the BBH model at $\phi=\pi$.
We show that in the Hofstadter butterfly, there appear several gaps at half-filling separated by gap-closings.
To investigate the topological properties of these gapped states, we use the entanglement technique
developed by the authors Refs. \cite{Fukui:2014qv,Fukui:2015fk} and successfully applied to the BBH model \cite{Fukui:2018aa}.
We show that this method is simple enough to compute eP characterizing HOTI
even if the bands of the system split into many Landau levels.
We argue that there appear half-filled HOTI even in a weak field regime which may be accessible by experiments.
Previously, another model interpolating those with 0-flux and $\pi$-flux was proposed in
\cite{1812.06990}, which introduced a local flux with zero mean. In contrast to this model, our model in the present paper
includes a uniform magnetic flux, and it seems more feasible in experiments.
This paper is organized as follows.
In the next section, we present the model Hamiltonian and show several numerical results including Hofstadter buttery
spectra and corner states.
In Sec. \ref{s:ep}, we introduce eP as topological invariants characterizing HOTI in a magnetic field, and show
several numerical examples of computed eP.
In Sec. \ref{s:ex}, we briefly discuss the experimental feasibility of the HOTI in a weak magnetic field regime,
introducing symmetry-breaking potentials.
In Sec. \ref{s:sum}, we give the summary and discussion.
\section{2D SHH model in a magnetic field}\label{s:modelt
In this section, we introduce the 2D SSH model Hamiltonian in a uniform magnetic field.
In Sec. \ref{s:model}, we present the matrix elements of the Bloch Hamiltonian, and discuss the
symmetries of the model. The fundamental reflection symmetries are modified due to the magnetic flux.
These symmetries play a crucial role in the quantization of the eP, as will be discussed in Sec. \ref{s:ep}.
We next discuss the possibility of the HOTI realized in the Hofstadter butterfly spectra in Sec. \ref{s:but},
and show several examples of corner states in Sec. \ref{s:cor}.
These are indeed characterized by the nontrivial eP, as will be demonstrated in Sec. \ref{s:ep}.
\subsection{Model}\label{s:model
The model is defined on the square lattice with the nearest neighbor hopping,
\begin{alignat}1
H(\phi)=\sum_{\langle i,j\rangle} t_{i,j}c_i^\dagger c_j+\mbox{H.c.}=\sum_k\bm c_k^\dagger {\cal H}(k,\phi)\bm c_k,
\label{OriHam
\end{alignat}
where $t_{i,j}$ is given by $t_{j+\hat x,j}=t_x$ and $t_{j+\hat y,j}=e^{i(j_x-1/2)\phi}t_y$. Here
the real parameters $t_x$ and $t_y$ are $t_x=\gamma_x,\,t_y=\gamma_y$ within unit cells,
whereas $t_x=\lambda_x,\,t_y=\lambda_y$
between unit cells, as illustrated in Fig. \ref{f:lat}.
We basically set $\gamma_x=\gamma_y\equiv\gamma$ and $\lambda_x=\lambda_y\equiv\lambda\,(=1)$.
A uniform flux $\phi=2\pi p/q$ per plaquette is introduced in the Landau gauge.
For such a gauge fixing and choice of the magnetic unit cell,
it may be natural to choose the Brillouin zone as $|k_x|\le\pi/q$ and $|k_y|\le \pi/2$.
\subsubsection{Hamiltonian in the momentum representation}
The Hamiltonian in the momentum space in Eq. (\ref{OriHam})
is given by
\begin{alignat}1
{\cal H}(k,\phi)=
\begin{pmatrix}
{\cal H}_x(k_x)&{\cal H}_y(k_y,\phi)\\
{\cal H}_y^\dagger(k_y,\phi)&{\cal H}_x(k_x)
\end{pmatrix},
\end{alignat}
where ${\cal H}_x(k_x)$ and ${\cal H}_y(k_y,\phi)$ are $q\times q$ matrices associated with the hopping
toward the $x$ and $y$ directions, respectively. They are explicitly given by
\begin{alignat}1
&{\cal H}_x(k_x)=
\left(
\begin{array}{ccccccc}
0&\gamma_x&&&&&e^{-iqk_x}\lambda_x\\
\gamma_x&0&\lambda_x&&&&\\
&\lambda_x&0&\gamma_x&&&\\
&&\gamma_x&&&&\\
&&&&\ddots&&\\
&&&&&&\gamma_x\\
e^{iqk_x}\lambda_x&&&&&\gamma_x&0
\end{array}
\right),
\nonumber\\
&{\cal H}_{y}(k_y,\phi)=
\mbox{diag}\left(\cdots,\underbrace{h_j(k_y,\phi)}_{j{\rm th}},\cdots \right),
\nonumber\\
&\quad h_j(k_y,\phi)\equiv\gamma_ye^{i\left(j-\frac{1}{2}\right)\phi}+\lambda_ye^{-2ik_y-i\left(j-\frac{1}{2}\right)\phi}.
\end{alignat}
Note that ${\cal H}_x^*(k_x)={\cal H}_x(-k_x)$, and ${\cal H}_y^\dagger(k_y,\phi)={\cal H}_y^*(k_y,\phi)={\cal H}_y(-k_y,-\phi)$.
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
\includegraphics[width=.13\linewidth]{fig2a_org.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.13\linewidth]{fig2b_50.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.13\linewidth]{fig2c.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.13\linewidth]{fig2d.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.13\linewidth]{fig2e.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.13\linewidth]{fig2f.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.13\linewidth]{fig2g.eps}
\end{tabular}
\caption{
Hofstadter butterfly spectra for $\gamma=0$, $\gamma=0.1$, $\gamma=0.3$, $\gamma=0.5$, $\gamma=0.7$,
$\gamma=0.9$, and $\gamma=1$.
}
\label{f:series_Hof
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Symmetries}
As discussed in Refs. \cite{Benalcazar:2017aa,Benalcazar:2017ab}, reflection symmetries play a
crucial role in the quantization of the topological quadrupole moment.
In the present model, however, they change not only the sign of the momentum but also
the sign of the magnetic field such that
\begin{alignat}1
&M_x{\cal H}(k_x,k_y,\phi)M_x^{-1}={\cal H}(-k_x,k_y,-\phi),
\nonumber\\
&M_y{\cal H}(k_x,k_y,\phi)M_y^{-1}={\cal H}(k_x,-k_y,-\phi).
\label{OriTraLaw
\end{alignat}
To show above, note that
the reflection in the $x$ direction induces the exchange of sites in the magnetic unit cell, $j\,(+q)\rightarrow q-j+1\,(+q)$.
This can be represented by the use of the following $q\times q$ matrix
\begin{alignat}1
\Sigma=
\begin{pmatrix}
&&&&&1\\
&&&1&&\\
&\iddots&&&&\\
1&&&&&
\end{pmatrix},
\end{alignat}
which induces the following transformations:
\begin{alignat}1
\Sigma{\cal H}_x(k_x)\Sigma^{-1}&={\cal H}_x(-k_x),
\nonumber\\
\Sigma{\cal H}_y(k_y,\phi)\Sigma^{-1}&=
\mbox{diag}\left(\cdots,\underbrace{h_{q-j+1}(k_y,\phi)}_{=h_j(k_y,-\phi)},\cdots \right)
\nonumber\\
&={\cal H}_y(k_y,-\phi).
\end{alignat}
Therefore, we can define $M_x$ by
\begin{alignat}1
M_x=\begin{pmatrix}\Sigma&\\&\Sigma\end{pmatrix}.
\end{alignat}
This leads to the transformation law with respect to the $x$-reflection in Eq. (\ref{OriTraLaw}).
The reflection in the $y$ direction induces $j\leftrightarrow j+q$. Therefore, the following $M_y$,
\begin{alignat}1
M_y=\begin{pmatrix}&\mbox{1}\hspace{-0.25em}\mbox{l}\\\mbox{1}\hspace{-0.25em}\mbox{l}&\end{pmatrix},
\end{alignat}
where $\mbox{1}\hspace{-0.25em}\mbox{l}$ stands for the $q\times q$ unit matrix,
gives the reflection law with respect to the $y$ direction in Eq. (\ref{OriTraLaw}).
On the other hand, under time reversal $T=K$, where $K$ stands for the complex conjugation,
the transformation law of ${\cal H}(k,\phi)$ reads
\begin{alignat}1
&T{\cal H}(k_x,k_y,\phi)T^{-1}={\cal H}(-k_x,-k_y,-\phi).
\label{TimRev
\end{alignat}
Combining Eq. (\ref{OriTraLaw}) with Eq. (\ref{TimRev}),
we can define anti-unitary reflection symmetries $\tilde M_j=M_jT$ ($j=x,y$),
under which the Hamiltonian transforms as
\begin{alignat}1
&\tilde M_x{\cal H}(k_x,k_y,\phi)\tilde M_x={\cal H}(k_x,-k_y,\phi),
\nonumber\\
&\tilde M_y{\cal H}(k_x,k_y,\phi)\tilde M_y={\cal H}(-k_x,k_y,\phi).
\label{Sym
\end{alignat}
In what follows, we omit the dependence on $\phi$, considering the system with fixed $\phi$.
\subsection{Hofstadter butterfly spectra}\label{s:but
We show in Fig. \ref{f:series_Hof} how Hofstadter butterfly spectra change between two limiting cases
$\gamma=0$ and $\gamma=1$.
We observe the following:
(1) For small $\gamma$, the spectrum show a large gap at half-filling except for $\phi\sim0$,
implying that
the half-filled ground states for any finite flux
may be adiabatically deformed to the BBH ground state, and hence
the HOTI phase seems robust against magnetic fields.
Thus, the decoupled SSH model at $\phi=0$
opens a gap immediately if a small magnetic field is applied,
and these gapped ground states would be in the same class as the BBH model.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=.45\linewidth]{fig3a.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.45\linewidth]{fig3b.eps}
\end{tabular}
\caption{
Hofstadter butterfly spectra for (a) $\gamma=0.35$ and (b) $\gamma=0.45$.
The spectra in $\pi<\phi<2\pi$ are symmetric with respect to $\phi=\pi$.
}
\label{f:hof
\end{center}
\end{figure}
(2) As $\gamma$ becomes larger, the gap becomes smaller, and around $\gamma\sim0.4$, a gap-closing
occurs at $\phi=\pi/2$.
Even after the gap-closing, one can observe a smaller but finite gap
surviving in the weak field regime $0<\phi<\pi/2$, as can be seen in Fig. \ref{f:hof}.
On one hand, with $\phi$ fixed, the states in this gap can be continuously deformed into those
with smaller $\gamma$, and eventually reach those in the leftmost panel of Fig. \ref{f:series_Hof} without any gap-closings.
This implies that they are HOTI.
On the other hand, with $\gamma$ fixed,
they can no longer be deformed into those around $\phi=\pi$ due to a gap-closing around $\phi\sim\pi/2$.
Therefore, it is desirable to determine their topological properties directly.
(3) As $\gamma$ becomes much larger, the gap around $\phi=\pi$ shrinks and
eventually vanishes at $\gamma=1\,(=\lambda)$.
Then, the HOTI phase disappears from the butterfly.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig4a_50.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig4b_50.eps}
\\
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig4c.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig4d.eps}
\end{tabular}
\caption{
(a, b) The energies of the model with full open boundary conditions in the case of $\gamma=0.45$.
Insets show degenerate four zero energy states.
(c, d) Occupied charge per SSH unit cell.
Left (a, c) and right (b, d) are under flux $\phi=2\pi/3$ and $\phi=2\pi/10$, respectively.
The system size is $60\times60$ sites ($30\times30$ SSH unit cells).
}
\label{f:corner
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Corner states}\label{s:cor
In what follows, we restrict our discussions to the model with $\gamma=0.45$ in Fig. \ref{f:hof}(b),
and calculate the corner charges at two values of magnetic flux $\phi$.
In Fig. \ref{f:corner}, we show the spectrum of the model with full open boundary conditions.
Figure \ref{f:corner} (a) is the case with flux $\phi=2\pi/3$, which may be adiabatically connected to the BBH model.
One observes degenerate four zero energy states in the bulk gap
whose wave functions are localized at four corners, as seen in Fig. \ref{f:corner}(c).
These give indeed corner charge $\sim\pm 0.494$ (charge deviation from 2 within $3\times3$ unit cells around each corner).
This suggests that the gapped ground state belongs to topological quadrupole phase with
corner charges $\pm1/2$.
Even in the isolated gap in the weak field regime, one can also observe
degenerate zero energy states in a small energy gap in Fig. \ref{f:corner}(b).
Although the peaks and valleys of the occupied charges at corners do not look very sharp in Fig. \ref{f:corner}(d),
the corner charge can be estimated as $\pm 0.435$ and
$\pm 0.492$, respectively, within $3\times3$ and $5\times5$ unit cells around each corner.
Therefore, the distribution of the corner charge is rather broad, but its total amount
would be $\pm 1/2$.
Thus, the question is whether the states in the weak field regime belong to the HOTI phase.
To address the question, we apply the entanglement techniques to this system developed in Refs. \cite{Fukui:2014qv,Fukui:2015fk}
and
applied to the HOTI phase of the BBH model \cite{Fukui:2018aa}.
Also important is the stability of the zero energy states among an extremely small gap, which will be
discussed in Sec. \ref{s:ex}.
\section{Entanglement polarization}\label{s:ep
In this section, we introduce the eP which can be topological invariants characterizing the HOTI.
We discuss first the eP for the bulk in Sec. \ref{s:ep_bulk}, and next the eP for the edge states
in Sec. \ref{s:ep_edge}, which is useful to lift the
degeneracy of the edge states and characterize each of them separately.
\subsection{Entanglement polarization for the bulk}\label{s:ep_bulk
We divide the total system into a subspace $A$ and its complement $\bar{A}$, and derive the entanglement
Hamiltonian (eH) $H^{A}$ and $H^{\bar{A}}$ as follows.
Let $|G\rangle$ be the half-filled ground state of the model with a flux $\phi$.
Then, by tracing out $\bar A$ in the density matrix $\rho=|G\rangle\langle G|$,
we obtain eH, ${H}^{A}$, as
${\rm tr}\,_{\bar{A}}\,\rho\propto e^{-H^{A}}$.
Since for noninteracting systems, the eH thus defined also reduce to
noninteracting Hamiltonians \cite{Peschel:2003uq}, one can define the Berry connections
associated with the eigenfunctions of the eH, which are denoted by $A^A_\mu(k_x,k_y)$ with $\mu=x,y$.
The integration of $A^A_x(k_x,k_y)$ and $A_y^A(k_x,k_y)$, respectively, over $k_x$ and $k_y$
defines the eP, $p^A_x$ and $p^A_y$ \cite{Fukui:2018aa}.
For details, see the Appendix.
To characterize the HOTI, we introduce two kinds of partitions:
One is $A=\{1,2,\ldots,q\}\equiv\,\downarrow$ sites,
and the other is $A=\{1,3,\ldots,q-1,q+1,q+3,\ldots,2q-1\}\equiv{L(\rm eft)}$ sites in the magnetic unit cell in Fig. \ref{f:lat}.
Here, left means the left sites in the SSH unit cell.
Their complements are denoted as $\uparrow$ and $R$(ight), respectively.
In what follows, we often use $\sigma=\,\downarrow$ or $\uparrow$ and $\tau={L}$ or $R$, and $-\sigma$ and $-\tau$ stand for
the complement of $\sigma$ and $\tau$, respectively.
As shown in the Appendix, the symmetry properties Eq. (\ref{Sym}) force such eP quantized as $0$ or $1/2$.
Thus, the set of bulk eP, $(p^\sigma_x,p^\tau_y)$, can be topological invariants
characterizing the HOTI.
Let us calculate eP for the two cases in Fig. \ref{f:corner}.
First of all, we mention that the eS under
$\phi=2\pi/3$ and $\phi=2\pi/10$ are indeed gapped, although the gap under $\phi=2\pi/10$ is
rather small.
Therefore, it is possible to compute eP for occupied state $(\xi>1/2)$.
Using the link variable technique for the Berry connections \cite{FHS05},
we have $(p^\sigma_x,p^\tau_y)=(1/2,1/2)$
in both cases $\phi=2\pi/3$ and $\phi=2\pi/10$.
The nontrivial $p^\sigma_x=1/2$ implies that the 1D single chain toward the $x$ direction specified by $\sigma$,
if disentangled from another chain $-\sigma$, is topologically equivalent to the
SSH chain with edge states.
Thus, each chain $\sigma$ or $-\sigma$ has potentially edge states at zero energy.
However, the edge states are lifted toward nonzero energies as a result of the coupling between the chains
$\pm\sigma$.
These form gapped edge states, still localized near the edges along the $y$ direction.
What $p^\tau_y=1/2$ means is likewise.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig5a.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig5b.eps}
\end{tabular}
\caption{
Spectra of the model with open (periodic) boundary condition toward the $x$ ($y$) direction,
in the case of $\gamma=0.45$. (a, b) are under
flux $\phi=2\pi/3$ and $\phi=2\pi/10$, respectively.
}
\label{f:edge_x
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Entanglement polarization for the edge states}\label{s:ep_edge
So far we derived the eP for the bulk ground states.
The two bulk ground states have indeed nontrivial eP, implying the existence of
gapped edge states, if the open boundary condition is imposed in one direction.
This is one of the characteristic properties of the HOTI.
Therefore, we switch our attention to the discussion of the edge states.
\subsubsection{Edge states}
In Fig. \ref{f:edge_x}, we show the spectra of the model with open boundary condition in the $x$ direction.
Since each Landau level has a nontrivial Chern number, one can observe various
edge states in between the Landau levels at nonzero energy, but {\it no edge states across the zero energy. }
Therefore, gapped edge states associated with the SSH zero energy states, even if they exist, are embedded
somewhere in the spectra, although it is hard to distinguish them from others.
Even if these states are identified, they are spectrally degenerate,
although spatially separated at the left and right ends, as in the case of the BBH model.
\subsubsection{Entanglement edge state polarization}
It should be noted that the entanglement technique, applied to the system with boundaries,
enables us to carry out such an identification of the single edge state
and to compute its eP, which may be referred to as entanglement edge state polarization (eESP).
To this end,
let us construct the projection operator $P_{\rm G}$ in Eq. (\ref{ProOpeG})
using the wave functions of the ground states
with open boundary condition in the $x$ direction, i.e., those of Fig. \ref{f:edge_x}.
Let us introduce similar partitions $A=\sigma$, or $A=\tau$, extending the magnetic unit cell into
whole finite chains in the $x$ direction.
Then, we obtain $P_{\rm G}^A(k_y)=P^AP_{\rm G}(k_y)P^A$,
from which we compute the eS and eP including the edge states.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig6a.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig6b.eps}
\\
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig6c.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig6d.eps}
\end{tabular}
\caption{
The entanglement spectra for Fig. \ref{f:edge_x}. Left (a, c) and right (b, d) are under
flux $\phi=2\pi/3$ and $\phi=2\pi/10$, respectively.
The inset shows the spectrum near $\xi=1$.
}
\label{f:ent_edge
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In Figs. \ref{f:ent_edge}(a) and \ref{f:ent_edge}(b), we show the eS, $\xi^{\downarrow}(k_y)$.
One can clearly observe (doubly-degenerate) zero energy states indicated by the green lines.
Thus, we can reproduce the zero energy edge states in the topological SSH phase.
To check this argument, let us introduce anisotropy of the hopping parameters.
First, consider the system with $(\gamma_x,\lambda_x)=(0.45,1)$ and $(\gamma_y,\lambda_y)=(1,0.45)$ which has the bulk eP,
$(p^\sigma_x,p^\tau_y)=(1/2,0)$.
This case has the same spectra
$\xi^\downarrow(k_y)$ as in Figs. \ref{f:ent_edge}(a) and \ref{f:ent_edge}(b) with zero energy states.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig7a.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig7b.eps}
\end{tabular}
\caption{
eS with anisotropic hopping parameters $(\gamma_x,\lambda_x)=(1,0.45)$ and $(\gamma_y,\lambda_y)=(0.45,1)$ under $\phi=2\pi/10$.
}
\label{f:anisotropic
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Second, consider the system with $(\gamma_x,\lambda_x)=(1,0.45)$ and $(\gamma_y,\lambda_y)=(0.45,1)$
which has the bulk eP, $(p^\sigma_x,p^\tau_y)=(0,1/2)$. This case shows similar spectra but with no zero energy states,
as in Fig. \ref{f:anisotropic}(a), where only the case with $\phi=2\pi/10$ is shown.
Thus, disentanglement between two chains $\sigma=\,\uparrow, \downarrow$ enables to reveal the gapped edge states
associated with each 1D chain as the zero energy edge states.
To reveal the property of these gapped edge states,
let us next consider the partition $\tau$,
which lifts the degeneracy of gapped edge states at the left and right ends as follows:
For example, $\tau=L$
includes only the left end. Therefore, the edge states localized at the left and right ends are, respectively, almost
occupied and unoccupied in the partition $\tau=L$.
Thus, we can spectrally separate the edge states at the left and right ends.
In Figs. \ref{f:ent_edge}(c) and \ref{f:ent_edge}(d), we show the eS, $\xi^{L}(k_y)$, for the partition $\tau={L}$.
One can observe $\xi=1$ and $\xi=0$ states indicated by red lines.
For these states, numerical calculations of the eP show that
we obtain $1/2$ eESP both for $\xi=1$ and $\xi=0$ states, implying that these are 1D SSH topological states propagating
toward the $y$ direction along the edges perpendicular to the $x$ direction.
Therefore, if the open boundary condition is further imposed in the $y$ direction, zero energy edge states
appear. These are nothing but the corner states.
To check this argument, let us again introduce anisotropic hopping parameters.
The system with $(\gamma_x,\lambda_x)=(0.45,1)$ and $(\gamma_y,\lambda_y)=(1,0.45)$ has the same spectrum
$\xi^{L}(k_y)$ with $\xi=1$ and $\xi=0$ states. However, their eESP are 0, implying that these gapped edge states
are trivial dimerized states. Therefore,
even if the open boundary condition is further imposed in the $y$ direction, no edge states appear.
The system with $(\gamma_x,\lambda_x)=(1,0.45)$ and $(\gamma_y,\lambda_y)=(0.45,1)$ shows no
$\xi=1$ and $\xi=0$ states, as shown in Fig. \ref{f:anisotropic}(b).
\section{Experimental feasibility}\label{s:ex
In this section, we briefly discuss the experimental feasibility of the HOTI.
As we showed in Sec. \ref{s:model}, a wide gap is open for $0<\phi\le\pi$ at half-filling, if $\gamma$ is small.
However, this gap converges to 0 for $\phi\rightarrow0$, as can be seen in Fig. \ref{f:series_Hof}, implying that
the simple SSH model with $\phi=0$ can be considered as a critical point of the HOTI phase.
Near this critical point, the HOTI seem to be unstable against small perturbations and/or disorder.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=.47\linewidth]{fig8a.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.52\linewidth]{fig8b_50.eps}
\\
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig8c.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig8d.eps}
\end{tabular}
\caption{
(a) eP of the bulk, $p_x^\downarrow$, and (b) energies with full open boundary conditions,
corresponding to Figs. \ref{f:corner}(a) and \ref{f:corner}(c) ($\gamma=0.45$ $\phi=2\pi/3$).
The staggered potential is included, blue $\delta=0.1$ and red $\delta=0.5$.
(c, d) show the occupied charges per SSH unit cell with $\delta=0.1$ and $\delta=0.5$, respectively.
}
\label{f:bre1
\end{center}
\end{figure}
However, as we will discuss below, the HOTI phase is robust against the staggered potential which opens a large gap,
\begin{alignat}1
H_{\rm st}=\delta\sum_j (-1)^{j_x+j_y} c_j^\dagger c_j,
\label{Sta
\end{alignat}
and therefore, there may still be the possibility of experimental observations of the corner states in a weak field regime.
Since the staggered potential breaks reflection symmetries (\ref{OriTraLaw}) and (\ref{Sym}),
the eP are no longer quantized, and hence, the symmetry-protected corner states would vanish continuously as $\delta$ increases.
Nevertheless, if the symmetry-protected states without staggered potentials, which is referred to as {\it the mother states},
are in the HOTI phase,
the corner states may be robust enough; we could observe their signature in experiments, as will be demonstrated below.
Furthermore, the staggered potential yields a large gap, which may stabilize the corner states against disorder.
Let us start illustrating such an indirect observation of the corner states in Fig. \ref{f:bre1},
which corresponds to Figs. \ref{f:corner}(a) and \ref{f:corner}(c).
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=.47\linewidth]{fig9a.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.52\linewidth]{fig9b_50.eps}
\\
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig9c.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig9d.eps}
\end{tabular}
\caption{
The same as Fig. \ref{f:bre1} but with $\phi=2\pi/10$, corresponding to Figs. \ref{f:corner}(b) and \ref{f:corner}(d).
}
\label{f:bre2
\end{center}
\end{figure}
As already mentioned, the mother state in this case has eP $(p_x^\sigma,p_y^\tau)=(1/2,1/2)$.
Such quantized eP change continuously if a finite $\delta$ in Eq. (\ref{Sta}) is introduced, as shown in Fig. \ref{f:bre1}(a).
Accordingly, the degenerate four zero energy states in the mother state in Fig. \ref{f:corner}(a)
are lifted into two pairs of positive and negative energy states in Fig. \ref{f:bre1}(b).
The lifted pairs of zero energy mother states still yield
the corner charges observed in Figs. \ref{f:bre1}(c) and \ref{f:bre1}(d).
This is also valid even if the gap of the mother states are very small.
In Fig. \ref{f:bre2}, we show how the corner states change due to the finite staggered potentials for the mother state
in Figs. \ref{f:corner}(b) and \ref{f:corner}(d).
Since the gap of the mother state is small, lifted pairs of the zero energy states are soon absorbed into bulk spectrum, as in Fig. \ref{f:bre2}(b),
even if $\delta$ is small. Therefore, we cannot recognize any signature of the zero energy states of the mother state in the spectrum.
Nevertheless, the corner charges survive even for a large $\delta=0.5 $ compared to the bulk gap $\sim0.1$,
as can be seen in Figs. \ref{f:bre2}(c) and \ref{f:bre2}(d).
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=.47\linewidth]{fig10a_50.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig10b.eps}
\\
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig10c.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=.49\linewidth]{fig10d.eps}
\end{tabular}
\caption{
(a) Energies with full open boundary conditions for the model with
$\gamma=0.3$ and $\phi=2\pi/60$. Black dots show the energies of the mother state (i.e., with $\delta\sim0$ and
$w=0$), whereas blue and
red ones include the staggered potential $\delta=0.5$ as well as
onsite disorder potential $\delta_j$ with $w=0.1$ and $w=0.3$, respectively.
(b-d) show
the occupied charge disributions for black, blue, and red cases above.
}
\label{f:bre3
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Finally, we show the corner charges for a system with small $\gamma=0.3$, corresponding to the
third panel from left in Fig. \ref{f:series_Hof}, with a rather weak magnetic field $\phi=2\pi/60$.
Although the gap of the mother state is extremely small, as seen in Fig. \ref{f:bre3}(a) (black dots),
the corner states can be observed clearly in Fig. \ref{f:bre3}(b).
This holds true even if one introduces a large staggered potential yielding a large bulk gap similar to
the previous examples.
Once a large gap is open, the corner states are expected robust against disorder, although they are not protected by symmetries.
To exemplify this, let us introduce an onsite disorder potential
\begin{alignat}1
H_{\rm d}=\sum_j\delta_jc_j^\dagger c_j,
\end{alignat}
where $\delta_j$ is a random real number restricted to $|\delta_j|<w$.
In Figs. \ref{f:bre3}(c) and \ref{f:bre3}(d), we show the distribution of the occupied charges in the SSH unit cells,
in which one can distinguish corner charges from random bulk distribution, even for strong disorder
$w\sim\gamma,\delta$.
This holds valid even for the critical model at $\phi=0$, in which the zero energy corner states are embedded in the bulk spectrum.
Therefore, we conclude that through the surviving corner states against the staggered potential,
one still has the possibility of
observing a signature of the symmetry-protected corner states of the mother model.
We finally emphasize that even if the gap is extremely small in a weak field regime,
the states belong to the same HOTI phase of the BBH state at least for a small $\gamma$.
\section{Summary and discussion}\label{s:sum
In summary, we studied the 2D SSH model in a uniform magnetic field which interpolates simple SSH model and
the BBH model including $\pi$ flux.
In other words, we extend the original Hofstadter butterfly
by introducing the bond-alternation parameter $\gamma/\lambda$.
We showed that in such a generalized butterfly spectrum spanned by $\gamma/\lambda$ and $\phi$,
the HOTI phase could exist in a rather wide region.
In the gapped region around $\pi$, the HOTI states belong to the topological quadrupole phase of the BBH model.
Therefore, if C$_4$ symmetry is broken, we expect that the models show the topological phase transition
due to the gap-closing of the edge states.
Namely, the model would be in boundary-obstructed topological phases (BOTP) recently proposed by the authors of Ref. \cite{1908.00011}.
It may be quite interesting to investigate whether HOTI in other gapped regions in the butterfly spectrum
belong to the BOTP.
\acknowledgements
This work was supported in part by Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research Numbers 17K05563 and 17H06138
from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.
|
\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}%
{-3.5ex \@plus -1ex \@minus -.2ex}%
{2.3ex \@plus.2ex}%
{\normalfont\large\bfseries}}
\renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}%
{-3ex\@plus -1ex \@minus -.2ex}%
{1.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
{\normalfont\normalsize\bfseries}}
\renewcommand\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{3}{\z@}%
{-2.5ex\@plus -1ex \@minus -.2ex}%
{1.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
{\normalfont\normalsize\bfseries}}
\def\@runningauthor{}\newcommand{#1}}[1]{\def#1}{#1}}
\def\@runningtitle{}\newcommand{#1}}[1]{\def#1}{#1}}
\renewcommand{\ps@plain}{%
\renewcommand{\@evenhead}{\footnotesize\scshape \hfill#1}\hfill}
\renewcommand{\@oddhead}{\footnotesize\scshape \hfill#1}\hfill}}
\pagestyle{plain}
\g@addto@macro\bfseries{\boldmath}
\makeatother
\newcommand\blfootnote[1]{%
\begingroup
\renewcommand\thefootnote{}\footnote{#1}%
\addtocounter{footnote}{-1}%
\endgroup
}
\let\OLDthebibliography\thebibliography
\renewcommand\thebibliography[1]{
\OLDthebibliography{#1}
\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}
\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt plus 0.3ex}
}
\setlist{leftmargin=*, itemsep=2pt, topsep=2pt, parsep=0pt, partopsep=5pt}
\newenvironment{verification}{\renewcommand{\proofname}{Verification}\begin{proof}}{\end{proof}}
\newcommand*{\doi}[1]{\href{\detokenize{#1}}{doi: \detokenize{#1}}}
\pagestyle{plain}
\renewcommand*{\backref}[1]{}
\renewcommand*{\backrefalt}[4]{%
\ifcase #1 (Not cited.)%
\or (Cited on page~#2.)%
\else (Cited on pages~#2.)%
\fi}
\DeclareMathOperator{\snf}{SNF}
\DeclareMathOperator{\gjb}{GJB}
\DeclareMathOperator{\rad}{rad}
\DeclareMathOperator{\dev}{dev}
\DeclareMathOperator{\ind}{ind}
\DeclareMathOperator{\aff}{Aff}
\DeclareMathOperator{\rind}{r-ind}
\DeclareMathOperator{\spa}{span}
\DeclareMathOperator{\wt}{wt}
\DeclareMathOperator{\rank}{rank}
\DeclareMathOperator{\prank}{p-rank}
\DeclareMathOperator{\tworank}{2-rank}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Grank}{\Gamma-rank}
\DeclareMathOperator{\supp}{supp}
\theoremstyle{plain}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}
\newtheorem{result}[theorem]{Result}
\newtheorem{fact}[theorem]{Fact}
\newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}
\theoremstyle{definition}
\newtheorem{conjecture}[theorem]{Conjecture}
\newtheorem{example}[theorem]{Example}
\newtheorem{openproblem}[theorem]{Open Problem}
\newtheorem{openquestion}[theorem]{Open Question}
\newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}
\newtheorem{remark}[theorem]{Remark}
\newtheorem{observation}[theorem]{Observation}
\numberwithin{theorem}{section}
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\numberwithin{table}{section}
\usepackage[labelsep=period]{caption}
\usepackage{algpseudocode}
\usepackage[Algorithmus,section]{algorithm}
\algnewcommand{\IfOneRow}[1]{\State\algorithmicif\ #1,}
\algnewcommand{\EndifOneRow}{}
\algdef{SE}[SUBALG]{Indent}{EndIndent}{}{\algorithmicend\ }%
\algtext*{Indent}
\algtext*{EndIndent}
\captionsetup[algorithm]{
labelfont = bf,
labelsep = period
}
\makeatletter
\renewcommand{\ALG@name}{Algorithm}
\makeatother
\newcommand{\mathbb F}{\mathbb F}
\newcommand{\mathbb Z}{\mathbb Z}
\newcommand{\mathbb N}{\mathbb N}
\newcommand{\mathcal{M}^{\#}}{\mathcal{M}^{\#}}
\newcommand{\mathcal{M}_{r,s}^{\#}}{\mathcal{M}_{r,s}^{\#}}
\title{Cubic bent functions outside the completed Maiorana-McFarland class}
#1}{Cubic bent functions outside the completed Maiorana-McFarland class}
\author{
Alexandr A. Polujan
\qquad Alexander Pott\\
\small Faculty of Mathematics\\[-0.8ex]
\small Institute of Algebra and Geometry\\[-0.8ex]
\small Otto von Guericke University \\[-0.8ex]
\small Universit\"{a}tsplatz 2, 39106, Magdeburg, Germany\\
\small\tt <EMAIL>,ovgu.de$\}$, <EMAIL>
}
#1}{A.\ A.\ Polujan, A.\ Pott}
\makeatletter
\let\Date\@date
\makeatother
\begin{document}
\maketitle
\thispagestyle{empty}
\begin{abstract}
\noindent In this paper we prove that in opposite to the cases of 6 and 8 variables, the Maiorana-McFarland construction does not describe the whole class of cubic bent functions in $n$ variables for all $n\ge 10$. Moreover, we show that for almost all values of $n$, these functions can simultaneously be homogeneous and have no affine derivatives. \blfootnote{The first version of this work~\cite{PolujanPott2019} was presented in the ``Eleventh International Workshop on Coding and Cryptography (WCC 2019)''.}
\ \\
\noindent\textbf{Keywords}: Cubic bent functions, Homogeneous functions, Affine derivatives, Equivalence of Boolean functions, Completed Maiorana-McFarland class.
\ \\
\noindent\textbf{Mathematics Subject Classification (2010)}: 05B10, 06E30, 14G50, 94C30.
\end{abstract}
\section{Introduction}
Bent functions, introduced by Rothaus in~\cite{ROTHAUS1976300}, are Boolean functions having the maximum Hamming distance from the set of all affine functions. Being extremal combinatorial objects, they have been intensively studied in the last four decades, due to their broad applications to cryptography, coding theory and theory of difference sets.
Cubic bent functions, i.e. bent functions of algebraic degree three, attracted a lot of attention from researchers, partly because small algebraic degree of these functions allows to investigate them exhaustively, when the number of variables is not too large. For instance, all cubic bent functions in six and eight variables are well-understood: the classification is given in~\cite{Braeken2006,ROTHAUS1976300}, the enumeration was obtained in~\cite{LangevinL11,Preneel1993}, and all these functions belong to the completed Maiorana-McFarland class $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$~\cite{Braeken2006,Dillon1972}. A couple of infinite families of cubic bent functions were constructed recently, however, some of them~\cite{CanteautCK08,Leander06} are proved to be the members of $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$, while some of them are not analyzed yet~\cite{DobbertinLCCFG06,Mesnager2014NewCubicBents}. Therefore, it is not clear, whether an $n$-variable cubic bent function can be outside the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class whenever $n\ge10$. At the same time, cubic bent functions, which are homogeneous or have no affine derivatives, are of a special interest.
A cubic function has no affine derivatives, if all its non-trivial first-order derivatives are quadratic, what makes cryptographic systems with such components more resistant to certain differential attacks. It is well-known that cubic bent functions without affine derivatives exist for all even $n\ge6,n\neq8$, as it was shown in in~\cite{Canteaut2003DecomposingBF,HOU1998149}. Recently Mandal, Gangopadhyay and St\u{a}nic\u{a} in~\cite{MandalCubicNoAffDers} constructed two classes of cubic bent functions without affine derivatives inside $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ and proved their mutual inequivalence. They also suggested to find such functions outside the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class and evaluate their significance for cryptographic applications~\cite[Section 1.6]{MandalCubicNoAffDers}.
A Boolean function is called homogeneous, if all the monomials in its algebraic normal form have the same algebraic degree. Homogeneous cubic bent functions were firstly considered by Qu, Seberry and Pieprzyk in~\cite{QuSP99}, motivated by faster evaluation in cryptographic systems. The only known homogeneous bent functions are quadratic and cubic, moreover, it is not known, whether a homogeneous bent functions of higher degrees exist. While the characterization of homogeneous quadratic bent functions is well-known~\cite[Chapter 15]{MacWilliamsSloane}, it is in general a difficult task to construct a homogeneous cubic bent function. The only known primary construction was given by Seberry, Xia and Pieprzyk in~\cite{SeberryConstruction}. They proved, that a proper linear transformation of variables can bring special non-homogeneous cubic bent function from $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ to a homogeneous one. Unfortunately, all functions of this type have many affine derivatives. Another approach is based on the concatenation of homogeneous cubic bent functions in a small number of variables via direct sum. The known computational construction methods of such functions include:
\begin{itemize}
\item The tools from the modular invariant theory, as it was shown by Charnes, R\"otteler and Beth in~\cite{Charnes2002};
\item The significant reduction of the search space, suggested by Meng et al. in~\cite{MengNovel2004}.
\end{itemize}
Using these approaches, the mentioned authors constructed a lot of homogeneous cubic bent functions in a small number of variables $6\le n\le12$. However, since all these examples have not been analyzed with respect to being outside the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class and having no affine derivatives, it is not clear, which properties can the concatenations of these functions have.
The aim of this paper is two-fold. First, we analyze the known homogeneous cubic bent functions in ten and twelve variables from~\cite{Charnes2002,MengNovel2004} and show, that some of these functions do not belong to the the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class and all of them are different from the primary construction of Seberry, Xia and Pieprzyk~\cite{SeberryConstruction}. Moreover, some of them have no affine derivatives. Secondly, we extend these results for infinite families, by showing, that proper direct sums of these functions inherit the properties of its summands. Consequently, we prove that for any $n\ge8$ there exist cubic bent functions inside $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$, but different from the primary construction~\cite{SeberryConstruction}. Further, we consider cubic bent functions with respect to the following three properties: outside $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$, without affine derivatives, and homogeneous. We show, that $n$-variable cubic bent functions with at least two of the three mentioned properties exist for all $n\ge n_0$, where $n_0$ depends on the selected combination of properties. In this way, we prove that in general the whole class of cubic bent functions in $n$ variables is not described by the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class, whenever $n\ge10$. Finally, we show existence of cubic bent functions without affine derivatives outside $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$, thus solving a recent open problem by Mandal, Gangopadhyay and St\u{a}nic\u{a}~\cite[Section 1.6]{MandalCubicNoAffDers}.
The paper is organized in the following way. In Subsection~\ref{subsection: Preliminaries} we introduce some basic notions and background on Boolean functions. Section~\ref{section: Geometric Invariants of Boolean functions} describes geometric invariants of Boolean functions, which we use in the next section in order to distinguish inequivalent functions. Section~\ref{section: Homogeneous cubic bent functions} deals with the construction of new homogeneous cubic bent functions from old. First, in Subsection~\ref{subsection: The known examples and constructions} we survey the known homogeneous bent functions, provide the classification of known examples and show, that some of them are not in the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class. In Subsection~\ref{subsection: Homogeneous cubic bent functions, different from the primary construction}, we show that proper concatenations of homogeneous cubic functions can never be equivalent to the primary construction. Finally, in Subsection~\ref{subsection: New from old} we introduce an approach, aimed to produce many homogeneous functions from a single given one without increasing the number of variables, and illustrate its application for homogeneous cubic bent functions in 12 variables. Section~\ref{section: Bent functions outside M} deals with the construction of cubic bent functions outside the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class, using the direct sum. In Subsection~\ref{subsection: MSubspaces} we provide a sufficient condition, explaining how one should select bent functions $f$ and $g$, such that the direct sum $f\oplus g$ is outside $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$. In Subsection~\ref{subsection: Application} we show, that certain cubic bent functions in $6\le n\le12$ variables satisfy our new sufficient condition and thus lead to infinitely many cubic bent functions outside the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class, which are homogeneous or do not have affine derivatives. The paper is concluded in Section~\ref{section: Conclusion} and cubic bent functions, used in the paper, are given in the Appendix~\ref{section: Appendix}.
\subsection{Preliminaries}\label{subsection: Preliminaries}
Let $\mathbb F_2=\{0,1\}$ be the finite field with two elements and let $\mathbb F_2^n$ be the vector space of dimension $n$ over $\mathbb F_2$. Mappings $f\colon \mathbb F_2^n\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ are called \emph{Boolean functions} in $n$ variables. A Boolean function on $\mathbb F_2^n$ can be uniquely expressed as a multivariate polynomial in the ring $\mathbb F_2[x_1,\dots,x_n]/(x_1\oplus x_1^2,\dots,x_n\oplus x_n^2)$. This representation is unique and called the \emph{algebraic normal form} (denoted further as ANF), that is,
$$f(\mathbf{x})=\bigoplus\limits_{\mathbf{v}\in\mathbb F_2^n}c_{\mathbf{v}} \left( \prod_{i=1}^{n} x_i^{v_i} \right),$$
where $\mathbf{x} = (x_1,\dots, x_n)\in\mathbb F_2^n$, $c_{\mathbf{v}}\in\mathbb F_2$ and $\mathbf{v} = (v_1,\dots, v_n)\in\mathbb F_2^n$. The \textit{complement} of a Boolean function $f$ is defined by $\bar{f}:= f\oplus 1$. The \emph{algebraic degree} of a Boolean function $f$, denoted by $\deg(f)$, is the algebraic degree of its ANF. We call a Boolean function $d$\emph{-homogeneous}, if all the monomials in its ANF have the same degree $d$, and simply \emph{homogeneous}, if the degree is clear from the context.
With a Boolean function $f\colon\mathbb F_2^n\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ one can associate the mapping $D_{\mathbf{a}}f(\mathbf{x}):=f(\mathbf{x} \oplus \mathbf{a})\oplus f(\mathbf{x})$, which is called the \textit{first-order derivative} of a function $f$ in the \emph{direction} $\mathbf{a}\in\mathbb F_2^n$. Derivatives of higher orders are defined recursively, i.e. the \emph{$k$-th order derivative} of a function $f$ is given by $D_{\mathbf{a}_k}D_{\mathbf{a}_{k-1}}\ldots D_{\mathbf{a}_1}f(\mathbf{x}):=D_{\mathbf{a}_k}(D_{\mathbf{a}_{k-1}}\ldots D_{\mathbf{a}_1}f)(\mathbf{x})$. For instance, the \emph{second-order derivative} of $f$ is given by $D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f(\mathbf{x}):=D_{\mathbf{b}}(D_{\mathbf{a}}f)(\mathbf{x})=f(\mathbf{x} \oplus \mathbf{a} \oplus \mathbf{b})\oplus f(\mathbf{x} \oplus \mathbf{a}) \oplus f(\mathbf{x} \oplus \mathbf{b}) \oplus f(\mathbf{x})$. The point $\mathbf{a}\in\mathbb F_2^n$ is called a \emph{fast point} of a function $f\colon\mathbb F_2^n\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ if it satisfies $\deg(D_\mathbf{a}f) < \deg(f)-1$ and a \emph{slow point}, if $\deg(D_\mathbf{a}f)=\deg(f)-1$. The set of fast points $\mathbb{FP}_f$ forms a vector subspace and its dimension is bounded by $\dim(\mathbb{FP}_f) \le n-\deg(f)$, as it was shown in~\cite{DuanLai10}. A cubic function has \emph{no affine derivatives}, if $\dim(\mathbb{FP}_f)=0$, i.e. all its non-trivial first-order derivatives are quadratic functions.
The \emph{direct sum} of two functions $f\colon\mathbb F_2^n\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ and $g\colon\mathbb F_2^m\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ is a function $h\colon\mathbb F_2^{n+m}\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$, defined by $h(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}):=f(\mathbf{x})\oplus g(\mathbf{y})$. We also define the \emph{$k$-fold direct sum} $k\cdot f\colon \mathbb F_2^{k\cdot n}\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ as $k\cdot f(\mathbf{x}_1,\ldots,\mathbf{x}_k):=f(\mathbf{x}_1)\oplus\dots\oplus f(\mathbf{x}_k),\mbox{ for }\mathbf{x}_i \in \mathbb F_2^n.$
\begin{definition}
A Boolean function $f\colon\mathbb F_2^n\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ is called \emph{bent}, if for all $\mathbf{a}\in\mathbb F_2^n$ with $\mathbf{a}\neq\mathbf{0}$ and all $b\in\mathbb F_2$ the equation $D_{\mathbf{a}}f(\mathbf{x})=b$ has $2^{n-1}$ solutions $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb F_2^n$.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
It is well-known, that bent functions in $n$ variables exist only for $n$ even and have degree at most $n/2$ (see~\cite{ROTHAUS1976300}).
\end{remark}
On the set of all Boolean functions one can introduce an equivalence relation in the following way: two functions $f,f'\colon\mathbb F_2^n\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ are called \emph{equivalent}, if there exists a non-degenerate affine transformation $A\in AGL(n,2)$ and an affine function $l(\mathbf{x})=\langle \mathbf{a},\mathbf{x} \rangle_n\oplus b$ on $\mathbb F_2^n$ (where $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb F_2^n$, $b\in\mathbb F_2$ and $\langle \cdot,\cdot \rangle_n$ is a non-degenerate bilinear form on $\mathbb F_2^n$), such that $f'(\mathbf{x})=f(\mathbf{x}A)\oplus l(\mathbf{x})$ holds for all $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb F_2^n$.
Further we will analyze inequivalence of Boolean functions with the help of incidence structures and linear codes. Recall that an \emph{incidence structure} is a triple $\mathbb{S}=(\mathcal{P}, \mathcal{B}, \mathcal{I}),$ where $\mathcal{P}=\{p_1,\ldots,p_v\}$ is a set of elements called \emph{points} and $\mathcal{B}=\{ B_1,\ldots,B_b \}$ is a set of elements called \emph{lines}, and $\mathcal{I} \subseteq \mathcal{P} \times \mathcal{B}$ is a binary relation, called \emph{incidence relation}. The \emph{incidence matrix} of $M(\mathbb{S})=(m_{ij})$ of $\mathbb{S}$ is a binary $b\times v$ matrix with $m_{ij}=1$ if $p_j\in B_i$ and $m_{ij}=0$ otherwise. Two incidence structures $\mathbb{S}$ and $\mathbb{S}'$ are \emph{isomorphic}, if there are permutation matrices $P$ and $Q$ such that $P \cdot M(\mathbb{S}) \cdot Q=M(\mathbb{S}')$.
The \emph{linear code} of $\mathbb{S}$ over $\mathbb F_2$ is the subspace $\mathcal{C}(\mathbb{S})$ of $\mathbb F_2^v$, spanned by the row vectors of the incidence matrix $M(\mathbb{S})$. It is clear, that the incidence matrix $M(\mathbb{S})$ and the linear code $\mathcal{C}(\mathbb{S})$ depend on the labeling of the points and lines of $\mathbb{S}$, however these objects are essentially unique up to row and column permutations. We refer to~\cite{Ding:CodesfromDS,Ding:DesignsFromCodes} about incidence structures and their linear codes.
Finally, we will use the following notation for vectors and matrices: $\mathbf{j}_n$ is the \emph{all-one-vector} of length $n$, by $\mathbf{I}_n$ and $\mathbf{J}_n$ we denote the \emph{identity matrix} and the \emph{all-one-matrix} of order $n$. The \emph{all-zero-matrix} of order $n$ and size $r\times s$ is denoted by $\mathbf{O}_{n}$ and $\mathbf{O}_{r,s}$ respectively.
\subsection{The completed generalized Maiorana-McFarland class of Boolean functions}\label{subsubsection: Classification and Maiorana-McFarland Test}
The \emph{generalized Maiorana-McFarland class} $\mathcal{M}_{r,s}$ of Boolean functions in~$n=r+s$ variables~\cite[p. 354]{carlet_2010} is the set of Boolean functions of the form
\begin{equation}\label{equation: Maiorana-McFarland Representation}
f_{\pi,\phi}(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) = \langle \mathbf{x},\pi(\mathbf{y}) \rangle_r\oplus \phi(\mathbf{y}),
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb F_2^r,\ \mathbf{y}\in\mathbb F_2^s$, $\phi$ is an arbitrary Boolean function on $\mathbb F_2^s$ and $\pi\colon\mathbb F_2^s\rightarrow\mathbb F_2^r$ is some mapping. A function $f$ belongs to the \emph{completed generalized Maiorana-McFarland class} $\mathcal{M}_{r,s}^{\#}$, if it is equivalent to some function from $\mathcal{M}_{r,s}$. In the case $r=s$, which corresponds to the \emph{original Maiorana-McFarland class} of bent functions $\mathcal{M}$, a function $f$ is bent if and only if the mapping $\pi$ is a permutation \cite[p. 325]{carlet_2010}. The completed version of $\mathcal{M}$ is denoted by $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$. We will call~\eqref{equation: Maiorana-McFarland Representation} a \emph{Maiorana-McFarland representation} of a given function $f$ on $\mathbb F_2^n$, if there exists a non-degenerate linear transformation $A$, s.t. $f(\mathbf{z}A)=f_{\pi,\phi}(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})$ for some mappings $\pi$ and $\phi$.
A characterization of the completed Maiorana-McFarland class $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ of bent functions is given in~\cite[p. 102]{Dillon1974} and~\cite[Lemma 33]{CanteautDDL06}. In the case of the $\mathcal{M}_{r,s}^{\#}$ class, the proof is similar.
\begin{proposition}\label{proposition: MM} Let $f$ be a Boolean function on $\mathbb F_2^n$ with $n=r+s$. The following statements are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The function $f$ belongs to the $\mathcal{M}_{r,s}^{\#}$ class.
\item There exists a vector subspace $U$ of dimension $r$ such that the second order derivatives $D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f$ vanish for all $\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}\in U$, that means $D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f=0$.
\item\label{proposition: MM part (iii)} There exists a vector subspace $U$ of dimension $r$ such that the function $f$ is affine on every coset of $U$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
Motivated by this characterization, we introduce $\mathcal{M}$-subspaces of Boolean functions, as those, which satisfy the second statement of the Proposition~\ref{proposition: MM}.
\begin{definition}\label{definition: MSubspace}
We will call a vector subspace $U$ an \emph{$\mathcal{M}$-subspace} of a Boolean function $f\colon\mathbb F_2^n\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$, if for all $\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}\in U$ the second-order derivatives $D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f$ are constant zero functions, i.e $D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f=0$. We denote by $\mathcal{MS}_r(f)$ the collection of all $r$-dimensional $\mathcal{M}$-subspaces of $f$ and by $\mathcal{MS}(f)$ the collection
$$\mathcal{MS}(f):=\bigcup\limits_{r=1}^{n} \mathcal{MS}_r(f).$$
\end{definition}
The following invariant, called linearity index~\cite[p. 82]{Yas97}, measures the maximal possible number of variables of linear functions in a Maiorana-McFarland representation~\eqref{equation: Maiorana-McFarland Representation} of a Boolean function.
\begin{definition}\label{definition: Linearity Index}
The \emph{linearity index} $\ind(f)$ of a Boolean function $f\colon\mathbb F_2^n\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ is the maximal possible $r$, such that $f\in\mathcal{M}_{r,s}^{\#}$. In terms of $\mathcal{M}$-subspaces, the linearity index of $f$ is given by $\ind(f)=\max\limits_{U\in \mathcal{MS}(f)}\dim(U)$.
\end{definition}
\begin{example}\label{example: M-subspace}
Let $f(\mathbf{x}):=x_1 x_4\oplus x_2 x_5\oplus x_3 x_6\oplus x_1 x_2 x_3$ be a cubic Maiorana-McFarland bent function on $\mathbb F_2^6$. Second-order derivatives of $f$ are given by the function $D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f(\mathbf{x})=c_{\mathbf{0}}(\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b})\oplus (a_3 b_2 \oplus a_2 b_3) x_1 \oplus (a_3 b_1 \oplus a_1 b_3 )x_2 \oplus (a_2 b_1 \oplus a_1 b_2 )x_3$, where the constant term $c_{\mathbf{0}}(\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b})$ depends on $\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}$ and is given by $c_{\mathbf{0}}(\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}):=a_1 (a_2 b_3 \oplus a_3 b_2 \oplus b_2 b_3) \oplus b_1(a_2 a_3 \oplus a_2 b_3 \oplus a_3 b_2) \oplus a_1 b_4 \oplus a_2 b_5 \oplus a_3 b_6 \oplus a_4 b_1 \oplus a_5 b_2 \oplus a_6 b_3$.
One can check that the subspace $U=\scalebox{1}{$\langle (0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0), (0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0), (0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1)\rangle$}$ is an $\mathcal{M}$-subspace of $f$, since its second-order derivatives $D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f$, which correspond to all two-dimensional vector subspaces $\langle\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}\rangle $ of $U$, are constant zero functions
$$
\scalebox{0.83}{$\begin{gathered}
\scalebox{1}{$\left\langle
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right\rangle\mapsto 0$},
\scalebox{1}{$\left\langle
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right\rangle\mapsto 0$},
\scalebox{1}{$\left\langle
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right\rangle\mapsto 0$},
\scalebox{1}{$\left\langle
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right\rangle\mapsto 0$},
\\
\scalebox{1}{$\left\langle
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right\rangle\mapsto 0$},
\scalebox{1}{$\left\langle
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right\rangle\mapsto 0$},
\scalebox{1}{$\left\langle
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right\rangle\mapsto 0$}.
\end{gathered}$}
$$
\end{example}
Now we describe a naive algorithm, which one can use to construct the collection $\mathcal{MS}_r(f)$ for a given function $f$ and a fixed $r$. For a more efficient algorithm we refer to~\cite[Algorithm 2]{CanteautDDL06}.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Construct the collection $\mathcal{MS}_r(f)$.}
\label{algorithm: f in M}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require A Boolean function $D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f:\mathbb F_2^{n}\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ and $2 \le r \le n$.
\Ensure The collection $\mathcal{MS}_r(f)$.
\State\textbf{Construct} $\mathcal{MS}_2(f):=\{ \langle \mathbf{a},\mathbf{b} \rangle: \dim(U)=2 \mbox{ and }D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f=0 \}$.
\ForAll{subspaces $U\in \mathcal{MS}_2(f)$}
\Repeat
\State \textbf{Determine} subspaces $\tilde{U}=\langle U,\tilde{\mathbf{u}} \rangle$ for all $\tilde{\mathbf{u}}\notin U$, such that for any two-dimensional \Indent vector subspace $ \langle\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}\rangle\subseteq U$ second-order derivatives $D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f=0$. \EndIndent
\State \textbf{Put} $U\gets \tilde{U}$ for the obtained subspaces $\tilde{U}$.
\Until{$\dim(U)=r$.}
\State \textbf{Output} subspaces $U$ of dimension $r$.
\EndFor
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{remark}\label{remark: Compute ind(f)}
Algorithm~\ref{algorithm: f in M} can be used to compute the linearity index of a given function $f$ in the following way: $\ind(f)$ is the biggest $r$, for which $\mathcal{MS}_r(f)\ne\varnothing$.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{remark: How to construct a linear mapping}
For a given $\mathcal{M}$-subspace $U\in\mathcal{MS}_r(f)$ of a function $f\colon\mathbb F_2^n\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ one can construct an invertible matrix $A_U$, which brings $f$ to its Maiorana-McFarland representation~\eqref{equation: Maiorana-McFarland Representation}, i.e. $f(\mathbf{z}A_U)=\langle \mathbf{x} , \pi(\mathbf{y}) \rangle_r \oplus \phi(\mathbf{y})$, with $\mathbf{z}\in\mathbb F_2^n$, $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb F_2^r$ and $\mathbf{y}\in\mathbb F_2^s$, in the following way: since the values of $\langle \mathbf{x} , \pi(\mathbf{y}) \rangle_r \oplus \phi(\mathbf{y})$ on the coset $\mathbb F_2^r\oplus \mathbf{y}$ for $\mathbf{y}\in\mathbb F_2^s$ coincide with the values of $f$ on the coset $U\oplus \bar{\mathbf{u}}$ for $\bar{\mathbf{u}}\in \bar{U}$, we can construct $A_U$ using the change of basis formula
\begin{equation}\label{equation: Linear Transform}
A_U=
\left(
\begin{array}{c|c}
\mathbf{O}_{r,s} & \mathbf{I}_{r} \\
\hline
\mathbf{I}_{s} & \mathbf{O}_{s,r}
\end{array}
\right)
\cdot
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\gjb(\bar{U}) \\
\hline
\gjb(U)
\end{array}
\right).
\end{equation}
Here $\gjb(U)$ denotes the \emph{Gauss-Jordan basis} of a vector space $U$ and $\bar{U}$ is the \emph{complement} of $U$, i.e. $\dim(U)+\dim(\bar{U})=n$ and $U \cap \bar{U}=\{ \mathbf{0} \}$, which we compute as in~\cite[Subsection 4]{CanteautDDL06}.
\end{remark}
\section{Geometric invariants of Boolean functions}\label{section: Geometric Invariants of Boolean functions}
In this section we study invariants of Boolean functions, which arise from certain binary matrices. We call these invariants \emph{geometric}, since any $(0,1)$-matrix defines an incidence structure, and hence a finite geometry, and will use them in the next section to distinguish inequivalent homogeneous cubic bent functions.
\subsection{Incidence structures from Boolean functions}\label{subsection: Geometric Invariants}
For a subset $A$ of an additive group $(G,+)$ the \emph{development} $\dev(A)$ of $A$ is an incidence structure, whose points are the elements in $G$, and whose lines are the translates $A + g := \{a+g:a\in A \}$. For a Boolean function $f\colon\mathbb F_2^n\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$, we will use developments of two types:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\dev(D_f)$, the development of the \emph{support} $D_f:=\{\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb F_2^n\colon f(\mathbf{x})=1\}$, and
\item $\dev(G_f)$, the development of the \emph{graph} $G_f:=\{(\mathbf{x},f(\mathbf{x})):\mathbf{x} \in \mathbb F_2^n \}$.
\end{itemize}
For the combinatorial properties of supports and graphs of bent functions as well as for their developments we refer to~\cite[Section 3]{Pott16}. We also note the following advantage of $\dev(G_{f})$ over $\dev(D_{f})$: equivalent Boolean functions $f,f'$ on $\mathbb F_2^n$ lead to isomorphic incidence structures $\dev(G_f)$ and $\dev(G_{f'})$, but at the same time $\dev(D_f)$ and $\dev(D_{f'})$ can be non-isomorphic~\cite[Example 9.3.28]{KholoshaPott2013}. For this reason we will mostly be interested in combinatorial invariants, like $p$-ranks~\cite[p. 787]{DukesWilson2007} or Smith normal forms~\cite[p. 494]{Gockenbach:2019057}, of the incidence matrix $M(\dev(G_{f}))$.
\begin{definition}
A diagonal matrix $D$ with non-negative entries $d_1, d_2,\dots,d_n$ such that $d_1 | d_2 | \cdots | d_n$ is called the \emph{Smith normal form} of an integral matrix $A$ of order~$n$, if there exist integral matrices $U$ and $V$ with $\det(U), \det(V) = \pm 1$, such that $UAV = D$. The diagonal entries $d_i$ are called \emph{elementary divisors} of $A$. The $p$-rank of $A$ is the rank of $A$ over the field $\mathbb F_p$.
\end{definition}
Throughout the paper we will use the following \emph{geometric invariants} of Boolean functions $f\colon \mathbb F_2^n\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$, which are defined as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\tworank(f)$ is the $\tworank$ of $M(\dev(D_f))$, for bent functions $\tworank$s have been extensively studied in~\cite{Weng20071096,Weng2008};
\item $\Grank(f)$ is the $\tworank$ of $M(\dev(G_f))$, $\Grank$s were mostly studied in the context of inequivalence of vectorial mappings~\cite{DBLP:conf/ima/EdelP09,EdelP09};
\item $\snf(f)$ is the Smith normal form of the incidence matrix $M(\dev(G_f))$, given by the multiset $\snf(f)=\{*d_1^{m_1},\dots, d_{k}^{m_k}*\}$, where $d_i|d_{i+1}$ and $m_i$ is the multiplicity of $d_i$.
\end{itemize}
\noindent Finally we emphasize, that $\Grank(f)$ and $\snf(f)$ are invariants under equivalence for all Boolean functions $f\colon\mathbb F_2^n\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$, while $\tworank(f)$ is invariant under equivalence only for Boolean functions $f$ with $\deg(f)\ge2$.
\subsection{The relation between geometric invariants}\label{subsection: The relation between geometric invariants}
In this subsection we show, that $\Grank$ and $\tworank$ coincide for all non-constant Boolean functions. We also show, how a small modification of the incidence matrix $M(\dev(D_f))$ can help to compute the Smith normal form of a Boolean function $f$ in a more efficient way. Finally, we partially specify elementary divisors for bent functions.
First, we will use the following notation for incidence matrices of developments
\begin{equation*}
M_f:=M(\dev(D_f))=(f(\mathbf{x} \oplus \mathbf{y}))_{\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}\in\mathbb F_2^n} \mbox{ and } N_f:=M(\dev(G_f)).
\end{equation*}
Note that, since $(\mathbf{x} \oplus \mathbf{y},1)\in G_f \Leftrightarrow f(\mathbf{x} \oplus \mathbf{y})=1$ and $(\mathbf{x} \oplus \mathbf{y},0)\in G_f \Leftrightarrow \bar{f}(\mathbf{x} \oplus \mathbf{y}) =1$, we can write $N_f$ without loss of generality as the following block-matrix, where $V_i:=\{ (\mathbf{x},i) \colon \mathbf{x} \in \mathbb F_2^n\}$ for a fixed $i\in\mathbb F_2$:
\begin{equation}\label{equation: Block-Matrix of dev(Gf)}
N_f = \ \begin{blockarray}{ccc}
V_1 & V_0 \\
\begin{block}{(cc)c}
M_{f} & M_{\bar{f}} & V_0\\
M_{\bar{f}} & M_{f} & V_1\\
\end{block}
\end{blockarray}.
\end{equation}
Now we summarize some well-known statements about higher-order derivatives, which we will use to show the connection between geometric invariants of Boolean functions.
\begin{result}\label{result: Properties of Higher-order Derivatives}\cite{Lai1994} Let $f$ be a Boolean function on $\mathbb F_2^n$ and $\mathbf{a}_1,\dots,\mathbf{a}_k\in\mathbb F_2^n$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\mathbf{a}_1,\dots, \mathbf{a}_k$ are linearly dependent, then $D_{\mathbf{a}_k}D_{\mathbf{a}_{k-1}}\ldots D_{\mathbf{a}_1}f=0$.
\item Let now $\mathbf{a}_1,\dots, \mathbf{a}_k$ be linearly independent. The derivatives of $f$ are independent of the order in which the derivation is taken, i.e. the equality $$D_{\mathbf{a}_k}D_{\mathbf{a}_{k-1}}\ldots D_{\mathbf{a}_1}f(\mathbf{x}) = D_{\mathbf{a}_{\pi(k)}}D_{\mathbf{a}_{\pi(k-1)}}\ldots D_{\mathbf{a}_{\pi(1)}}f(\mathbf{x})= \bigoplus\limits_{\mathbf{a}\in \langle \mathbf{a}_1,\dots,\mathbf{a}_k \rangle}f(\mathbf{x}\oplus \mathbf{a})$$
holds for any permutation $\pi$ on $\{ 1,\ldots,k \}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{result}
In the next theorem we prove that for Boolean functions of degree at least two the $\Grank$ and $\tworank$ coincide and show, that all the information about the $\snf(f)$ can be recovered from a matrix obtained through a small modification of $M_f$.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem: Relations between two and gamma ranks}
Let $f$ be a Boolean function on $\mathbb F_2^n$. Then the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\deg(f)\ge 1$, then the all-one-vector $\mathbf{j}_{2^{n}}$ can be expressed as a sum of an even number of vectors from the linear code $\mathcal{C}(\dev(D_f))$.
\item If $\deg(f)<1$, then $\Grank(f)=2$, otherwise $\Grank(f)=\rank(f)$.
\item $\snf(f)=\{*d_1^{m_1},\dots, d_{k}^{m_k},0^{2^n-1}*\}$, where all $d_i$'s are elementary divisors of the matrix
$\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
M_{f} & \mathbf{j}_{2^n}^T \\
\mathbf{j}_{2^n} & 2 \\
\end{array}
\right)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
\emph{1.} It was shown in~\cite[Lemma 3.1]{Weng20071096}, that $\mathbf{j}_{2^n}\in\mathcal{C}(\dev(D_f))$. We will prove this statement, by expressing $\mathbf{j}_{2^n}$ as a sum of an even number of vectors from the linear code $\mathcal{C}(\dev(D_f))$. Let $d$ denotes the degree of a function $f$. First, we observe that the number of slow points of a function $f$ is bounded from below by $2^n-2^{n-d}$. Thus there exist a sequence of slow points $\mathbf{a}_1,\dots,\mathbf{a}_d$, such that the $d$-th order derivative $D_{\mathbf{a}_d}D_{\mathbf{a}_{d-1}}\ldots D_{\mathbf{a}_1}f$ is the constant one function. Finally since the following equality holds for all $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb F_2^n$ due to Result~\ref{result: Properties of Higher-order Derivatives}
\begin{equation*}
D_{\mathbf{a}_d}D_{\mathbf{a}_{d-1}}\ldots D_{\mathbf{a}_1}f(\mathbf{x}) = \bigoplus\limits_{\mathbf{a} \in \langle \mathbf{a}_1,\dots, \mathbf{a}_d \rangle}f(\mathbf{x}\oplus \mathbf{a})=1,
\end{equation*}
one can see, the all-one-vector $\mathbf{j}_{2^n}$ is as a sum of $2^d$ elements of $\mathcal{C}(\dev(D_f))$.
\noindent
\emph{2.} Assume that the matrix $N_f$ is of the form~\eqref{equation: Block-Matrix of dev(Gf)}. Performing elementary row and column operations one can bring the matrix $N_f$ to the form
\begin{equation*}
N_f
\overset{\mbox{\scalebox{0.6}{(I)}}}{\rightsquigarrow}\;
\begin{pmatrix}
M_{f} &M_{\bar{f}} \\
\mathbf{J}_{2^n} &\mathbf{J}_{2^n}
\end{pmatrix}
\overset{\mbox{\scalebox{0.6}{(II)}}}{\rightsquigarrow}\;
\begin{pmatrix}
M_{f} & \mathbf{J}_{2^n} \\
\mathbf{J}_{2^n} &\mathbf{O}_{2^n}
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{equation*}
Note, that elementary column operations change the linear code $\mathcal{C}(\dev(D_f))$, however its dimension, which is equal to $\Grank(f)$, remains the same. If $\deg(f)<1$, i.e. $f$ is a constant function, clearly $\Grank(f)=2$. By the previous statement $\mathbf{j}_{2^n}$ can be expressed as a sum of an even number of rows of $M_f$. Since the matrix $M_f$ is symmetric, the vector $\mathbf{j}_{2^n}^T$ can be expressed as a sum of an even number of columns of the matrix $M_f$. In this way, the matrix $N_f$ can be brought to the form
\begin{equation*}
N_f
\overset{\mbox{\scalebox{0.6}{(I)-(II)}}}{\rightsquigarrow}\;
\begin{pmatrix}
M_{f} & \mathbf{J}_{2^n} \\
\mathbf{J}_{2^n} &\mathbf{O}_{2^n}
\end{pmatrix}
\overset{\mbox{\scalebox{0.6}{(III)}}}{\rightsquigarrow}\;
\begin{pmatrix}
M_{f} & \mathbf{O}_{2^n} \\
\mathbf{O}_{2^n} &\mathbf{O}_{2^n}
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation*}
and hence $\Grank(f)=\rank(f)$.
\noindent\emph{3.}
Performing elementary row and column operations, as in the proof of the previous statement, but over the ring $\mathbb Z$, one can bring the matrix $N_f$ to the form
\begin{equation*}
N_f\rightsquigarrow
\left(
\begin{array}{c|c}
\begin{array}{cc}
M_{f} & \mathbf{j}_{2^n}^T \\
\mathbf{j}_{2^n} & 2 \\
\end{array} & \mathbf{O}_{2^n+1,2^n-1} \\
\hline
\mathbf{O}_{2^n-1,2^n+1} & \mathbf{O}_{2^n-1,2^n-1}
\end{array}
\right).
\end{equation*}
In this way, $\snf(f)=\{*d_1^{m_1},\dots, d_{k}^{m_k},0^{2^n-1} *\}$, where $d_i$'s are elementary divisors of the matrix
$\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
M_{f} & \mathbf{j}_{2^n}^T \\
\mathbf{j}_{2^n} & 2 \\
\end{array}
\right)$.
\end{proof}
\noindent In the following proposition we partially specify the SNF of a bent function.
\begin{proposition}\label{proposition: All information about SNF}
Let $f$ be a bent function on $\mathbb F_2^n$ and its Smith normal form given by $\snf(f)=\{*d_1^{m_1},\dots, d_{k}^{m_k},0^{2^n-1} *\}$. Then the following holds.
\begin{enumerate}
\item All elementary divisors $d_i$ in the $\snf(f)$ are powers of two.
\item $\Grank(f)=m_1$, where $m_1$ is the multiplicity of one in the $\snf(f)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
\noindent \emph{1.} Let $d_1|d_2|\ldots|d_{2^{n+1}}$ be elementary divisors and $\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\ldots,\alpha_{2^{n+1}}$ be eigenvalues of the matrix $N_f$ respectively. By~\cite[Theorem 6]{NEWMAN19911}, for all $1\le i_1<\dots<i_k\le2^{n+1}$ and $k=1,\ldots,2^{n+1}-1$ the following relation between products of elementary divisors and eigenvalues holds: $d_1\cdots d_k | \alpha_{i_1}\cdots \alpha_{i_k}$. Since $\alpha_{i_1}\cdots \alpha_{i_k} | \alpha_{i_1}^2\cdots \alpha_{i_k}^2$ it is enough to show, that all nonzero $\alpha_{i}^2$ are powers of two. Since $N_f$ is symmetric, we have $N_f^2=N_fN_f^T$. By~\cite[Lemma 1.1.4]{Pott1995FiniteGeometry}, the matrix $N_fN_f^T$ has eigenvalue $2^{2n}$ (multiplicity 1), $2^{n}$ (multiplicity $2^{n}$) and $0$ (multiplicity $2^{n}-1$). Thus the product of any $k$ nonzero elementary divisors of $N_f$ is $2^l$ for some $l$, and hence all $d_i$ are powers of two. Finally, since the $p$-rank is the number of elementary divisors, coprime with $p$ and all elementary divisors are powers of two, we conclude that $\Grank(f)=m_1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{remark: Symmetry in SNF}
We computed $\snf(f)$ for many $n$-variable bent functions of different degrees on $\mathbb F_2^n$ with $6\le n\le12$. Based on our numerical experiments, we observe the following kind of symmetry in the $\snf(f)$ of a bent function $f$ on $\mathbb F_2^n$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\snf(f)=\{*d_1^{m_1},\dots, d_{n}^{m_n},0^{2^n-1}*\}$, where all elementary divisors $d_i$ are of the form $d_i=2^{i-1}$ for $i=1,\dots,n$.
\item Multiplicities of elementary divisors $m_i$ satisfy $m_n=1,\;m_{n-1}=m_1-2$ and $ m_{n/2-i}=m_{n/2+i}$ for $i=1,\dots,n/2-2$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{remark}
We do not know how to prove this statement in general and we make the following conjecture.
\begin{conjecture}\label{conjecture: Symmetry in SNF}
The $\snf(f)$ of a bent function $f$ on $\mathbb F_2^n$ satisfies Remark~\ref{remark: Symmetry in SNF}.
\end{conjecture}
\section{Homogeneous cubic bent functions}\label{section: Homogeneous cubic bent functions}
In this section we first survey the known homogeneous cubic bent functions. We also classify the known examples in 10 and 12 variables, constructed in~\cite{Charnes2002,MengNovel2004} by using sophisticated computational approaches, and show that:
\begin{itemize}
\item Some of them are not covered by the Maiorana-McFarland construction;
\item All of them are not equivalent to the only one known analytic construction (for this reason we will call it later ``the primary construction'') of Seberry, Xia and Pieprzyk, given in~\cite{SeberryConstruction}.
\end{itemize} Subsequently, we extend the latter result to an arbitrary number of variables, by proving, that proper concatenations of homogeneous cubic bent functions in a small number of variables can never be equivalent to the primary construction. Finally we provide a construction method, aimed to generate a lot of homogeneous bent functions from a single given example. Using this approach we construct many new homogeneous cubic bent functions in 12 variables and show, that some of them are not equivalent to all the previously known ones.
\subsection{The known examples and constructions}\label{subsection: The known examples and constructions}
The existence of homogeneous cubic bent functions on $\mathbb F_2^n$ for all $n\ge6$ was shown in two independent ways. Seberry, Xia and Pieprzyk in~\cite[Theorem 8]{SeberryConstruction} proved that one can construct such functions on $\mathbb F_2^n$ for all even $n\ne 8$, from special Maiorana-McFarland functions by a proper change of basis. We will call their construction \emph{primary} and denote any $n$-variable function of this type by $h^n_{pr.}$.
\begin{result}\label{result: Seberry et al. construction}
~\cite[Theorem 6]{SeberryConstruction} Let $f_{id,\phi}$ be a Maiorana-McFarland bent function on $\mathbb F_2^{2m}$ where $\phi$ is a homogeneous cubic function without affine derivatives on $\mathbb F_2^{m}$. Then there exists a nonsingular matrix $T$, such that $h^n_{pr.}(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}):=f_{id,\phi}((\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})T)$ is a homogeneous cubic bent function.
\end{result}
Another approach, suggested by Charnes, R\"otteler and Beth in~\cite{Charnes2002}, consists of two steps. First, they constructed homogeneous cubic bent functions in a small number of variables using the tools from modular invariant theory, and second, they extended these examples to an arbitrary number of variables, using the direct sum construction.
\begin{result}\label{result: Direct sum of hom. bents}\cite[Theorem 2]{SeberryConstruction}
The direct sum $h(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})=f(\mathbf{x})\oplus g(\mathbf{y})$ is $d$-homogeneous bent on $\mathbb F_2^{n+m}$ if and only if the functions $f$ and $g$ are $d$-homogeneous bent on $\mathbb F_2^n$ and $\mathbb F_2^m$ respectively.
\end{result}
\noindent Further we classify the known homogeneous cubic bent functions in a small number of variables and show, that some of them are not the members of the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem: Analysis in 10,12 variables}
The homogeneous cubic bent functions in $n=10$ or $n=12$ variables from~\cite[p. 149]{Charnes2002} and~\cite[p. 15]{MengNovel2004} satisfy:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $n=10$, there are 4 equivalence classes, with 2 of them being outside the completed Maiorana-McFarland class $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$.
\item If $n=12$, there are 5 equivalence classes, which are subclasses of $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
First, we compute the Smith normal forms for the mentioned homogeneous cubic bent functions and check whether those, having the same ones, are equivalent. We check equivalence of bent functions via equivalence of linear codes~\cite[Theorem 9]{EdelP09} and isomorphism of designs~\cite[Corollary 10.6]{Bending1993} in \texttt{Magma}~\cite{MR1484478}. Consequently, we found 4 and 5 equivalence classes in 10 and 12 variables, respectively. We denote representatives of the obtained classes by $h^n_i$ and list them in the Appendix~\ref{section: Appendix}. We provide only the first $n/2$ elementary divisors for the Smith normal forms of bent functions due to Remark~\ref{remark: Symmetry in SNF}.
\begin{table}[H]
\caption{First $n/2$ elementary divisors of the Smith normal form $\snf(h^n_i)$ for the known homogeneous cubic bent functions from~\cite[p. 149]{Charnes2002} and~\cite[p. 15]{MengNovel2004}.}
\label{table: Invariant SNF}
\centering
\begin{subtable}[t]{.45\linewidth}
\centering
\scalebox{0.93}{
\begin{tabular}{|c|l|}
\hline
$h^{10}_i$ & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\snf(h^{10}_i)$} \\ \hline
$h^{10}_1$ & $\{*1^{20}, 2^{86}, 4^{130}, 8^{143}, 16^{268},\dots *\}$ \\ \hline
$h^{10}_2$ & $\{*1^{20}, 2^{78}, 4^{138}, 8^{147}, 16^{260},\dots *\}$ \\ \hline
$h^{10}_3$ & $\{*1^{20}, 2^{108}, 4^{110}, 8^{129}, 16^{292},\dots *\}$ \\ \hline
$h^{10}_4$ & $\{*1^{22}, 2^{154}, 4^{90}, 8^{81}, 16^{332},\dots *\}$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{subtable}%
\begin{subtable}[t]{.55\linewidth}
\centering
\scalebox{0.93}{
\begin{tabular}{|c|l|}
\hline
$h^{12}_i$ & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\snf(h^{12}_i)$} \\ \hline
$h^{12}_{1}$ & $\{*1^{22}, 2^{142}, 4^{276}, 8^{493}, 16^{630}, 32^{972},\dots *\}$ \\ \hline
$h^{12}_{2}$ & $\{*1^{22}, 2^{126}, 4^{276}, 8^{517}, 16^{646}, 32^{924},\dots *\}$ \\ \hline
$h^{12}_3$ & $\{*1^{24}, 2^{127}, 4^{260}, 8^{525},16^{674}, 32^{878},\dots *\}$ \\ \hline
$h^{12}_4$ & $\{*1^{22}, 2^{104}, 4^{256}, 8^{525}, 16^{698}, 32^{888},\dots *\}$ \\ \hline
$h^{12}_5$ & $\{*1^{26}, 2^{196}, 4^{392}, 8^{419}, 16^{490}, 32^{1052},\dots *\}$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{subtable}%
\end{table}
\noindent Further we use the parallel implementation of Algorithm~\ref{algorithm: f in M} in \texttt{Mathematica}~\cite{WolframMathematica112} in order to check, whether the functions $h^n_i$ belong to $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$. As a result, only functions $h^{10}_3$ and $h^{10}_4$ do not belong to the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class, while all the functions $h^{12}_i$ are in $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$. Finally, we list all the $\mathcal{M}$-subspaces of functions from $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ in the Appendix~\ref{section: Appendix}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Homogeneous cubic bent functions, different from the primary construction}\label{subsection: Homogeneous cubic bent functions, different from the primary construction}
Using the facts about $\tworank$s and the relation between $\Grank$ and $\tworank$, obtained in the previous section, we derive the following corollary.
\begin{corollary}\label{corollary: Granks of bent functions}
Let $f$ and $g$ be Boolean functions on $\mathbb F_2^n$ and $\mathbb F_2^m$, respectively, with $\deg(f)\ge 1$ and $\deg(g) \ge 1$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Let $h$ be a Boolean function on $\mathbb F_2^{n}\times\mathbb F_2^{m}$ defined as the direct sum of functions $f$ and $g$, then
\begin{equation}\label{equation: Gamma-rank of the direct sum}
\Grank(h)=\Grank(f)+\Grank(g)-2.
\end{equation}
\item Let $f_{id,\phi}$ be a Maiorana-McFarland bent function on $\mathbb F_2^n$, then
\begin{equation}\label{equation: Minimal Rank Functions}
\Grank(f_{id,\phi})=n+2 \mbox{ if and only if }\deg(\phi)\le3.
\end{equation}
\item For the primary construction of homogeneous cubic bent functions $h^n_{pr.}$ on $\mathbb F_2^n$ we have \\
$\Grank(h^n_{pr.})= n+2$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
The first and the second claims hold, since the statements~\eqref{equation: Gamma-rank of the direct sum} and~\eqref{equation: Minimal Rank Functions} were proven in~\cite{Weng20071096,Weng2008} for $\tworank$s, and by Theorem~\ref{theorem: Relations between two and gamma ranks} we know, that $\tworank$s and $\Grank$s coincide for all non-constant Boolean functions. Finally, the third claim follows from~\eqref{equation: Minimal Rank Functions} and the definition of the primary construction.
\end{proof}
\noindent Now we proof the existence of homogeneous cubic bent functions, different from the primary construction.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem: Non-Seberry functions}
There exist homogeneous cubic bent functions on $\mathbb F_2^n$, inequivalent to the primary construction $h^n_{pr.}$, whenever $n\ge8$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We construct a homogeneous cubic bent function $h_n$ in $n=6i+8j+10k+12l$ variables with $j+k+l\neq0$ as the following concatenation:
\begin{equation}
h_n:=i\cdot h^6_* \oplus j\cdot h^8_* \oplus k\cdot h^{10}_* \oplus l\cdot h^{12}_*,
\end{equation}
where $h^6_*$ and $h^8_*$ are arbitrary homogeneous cubic bent functions in $6$ and $8$ variables respectively, and $h^{10}_*,h^{12}_*$ are arbitrary homogeneous cubic bent functions in $10$ and $12$ variables from Table~\ref{table: Invariant SNF}. Since any homogeneous cubic bent function in $6$ variables is equivalent to the primary construction $h^6_{pr.}$, we have $\Grank(h^6_*)=8$. One can check that for any cubic bent function $h^8_*$ in $8$ variables we have $\Grank(h^8_*)\in\{14,16\}$. By Proposition~\ref{proposition: All information about SNF} one can see, that $\Grank$s of functions $h^{10}_*$ and $h^{12}_*$ are multiplicities of the entry one in Table~\ref{table: Invariant SNF}. Finally, comparing the lower bound of the $\Grank(h_n)$ with $\Grank(h^n_{pr.})$, one can see immediately that
$$
\begin{aligned}
\Grank(h_n) & \ge 8i + 14j + 20 k + 22 l - 2 (i + j + k + l-1) \\
& = n + 2 + 4(j+2(k+l))>n+2=\Grank(h^n_{pr.})
\end{aligned}$$
and hence the function $h_n$ is never equivalent to $h^n_{pr.}$ for all $n\ge 8$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Constructing new homogeneous functions from old, without increasing the number of variables}\label{subsection: New from old}
In this subsection we show, that in some cases one can use the power of the Maiorana-McFarland construction to produce a lot of homogeneous bent functions, provided that a single one, member of the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class, is given. Our approach is based on a generalization of the following observation.
\begin{observation}
Let $f:=h^{12}_3$ and $g:=h^{12}_4$. Our computations show, that homogeneous cubic bent functions $f$ and $g$ have a common $\mathcal{M}$-subspace $U$ of dimension $6$, which together with its complement $\bar{U}$ is given by:
\begin{equation}\label{equation: MSubspace from the Observation}
\gjb(U)=\left(\begin{array}{c|c|c}
1 \; 1 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\mathbf{O}_{1,10}} \\ \hline
\mathbf{O}_{5,2} & \mathbf{I}_5 & \mathbf{I}_5
\end{array}\right)\quad\mbox{and}\quad
\gjb(\bar{U})=\left(\begin{array}{c|c|c}
0 \; 1 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\mathbf{O}_{1,10}} \\ \hline
\mathbf{O}_{5,2} & \mathbf{O}_5 & \mathbf{I}_5
\end{array}\right).
\end{equation}
By Remark~\ref{remark: How to construct a linear mapping} one can bring functions $f$ and $g$ to their Maiorana-McFarland representations~\eqref{equation: Maiorana-McFarland Representation} using the same linear invertible transformation $A_U$, given by~\eqref{equation: Linear Transform}:
$$f(\mathbf{z}A_U)=f_{\pi,\phi}(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})\quad\mbox{and}\quad g(\mathbf{z}A_U)=g_{\pi,\psi}(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}),$$
where $\pi\colon\mathbb F_2^6\rightarrow\mathbb F_2^6$ is a permutation and $\phi,\psi\colon\mathbb F_2^6\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ are Boolean functions. In this way, one can construct homogeneous function $g$ from the function $f$ as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{equation: Very Good Linear Transformation}
g(\mathbf{z}):=f_{\pi,\phi\oplus\omega}((\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})T),\mbox{ where }\omega:=\phi\oplus\psi \mbox{ and }T:=A^{-1}_U.
\end{equation}
\end{observation}
Let $h_{\pi,\phi}\colon\mathbb F_2^n\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ be a bent function from the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}_{r,s}$ class, which is equivalent to a $d$-homogeneous one, i.e. there exist an invertible matrix $T$ of order $n$, such that $h_{\pi,\phi}((\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})T)$ is $d$-homogeneous. We will denote by $\Omega_T(h_{\pi,\phi})$ the set
\begin{equation*}
\Omega_T(h_{\pi,\phi}):=\{ \omega\colon\mathbb F_2^s\rightarrow\mathbb F_2 \; | \; h_{\pi,\phi\oplus\omega}((\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})T) \mbox{ is }d\mbox{-homogeneous bent}\}.
\end{equation*}
This is the set of all Boolean functions $\omega$ on $\mathbb F_2^s$, which preserve $d$-homogeneity and bentness of the function $h_{\pi,\phi\oplus\omega}$ with respect to the linear transformation $T$.
\begin{proposition}\label{proposition: Ideal of Functions}
Let $h_{\pi,\phi}$ be a Maiorana-McFarland bent function on $\mathbb F_2^{2m}$, which is equivalent to a $d$-homogeneous bent function, i.e. there exist an invertible matrix $T$, such that $h_{\pi,\phi}((\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})T)$ is $d$-homogeneous bent. Then the set $\Omega_T(h_{\pi,\phi})$ is a vector space over $\mathbb F_2$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $\omega_1,\omega_2\in \Omega_T(h_{\pi,\phi})$ with $\omega_1\neq\omega_2$ and $\omega:=\omega_1\oplus\omega_2$. We will show that $\omega\in \Omega_T(h_{\pi,\phi})$. Let the invertible matrix $T$ be of the form $T=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A & B\\C & D\end{array}\right)$ with all the submatrices of order $m$. First, we observe that $0\in\Omega_T(h_{\pi,\phi})$ and for any $\omega_i\in \Omega_T(h_{\pi,\phi})$ we have
$$ h_{\pi_,\phi\oplus\omega_i}((\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})T)=h_{\pi_,\phi}((\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})T)\oplus \omega_i(\mathbf{x}B \oplus \mathbf{y}D),$$
from what follows, that $\omega_i(\mathbf{x}B \oplus \mathbf{y}D)$ is either $d$-homogeneous or constant zero function, since $h_{\pi_,\phi}((\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})T)$ is $d$-homogeneous. Thus $\omega\in \Omega_T(h_{\pi,\phi})$, since bentness of $h_{\pi_,\phi\oplus\omega}$ is independent on the choice of a function $\omega$ on $\mathbb F_2^m$ and $\omega(\mathbf{x}B \oplus \mathbf{y}D)$ is a $d$-homogeneous function.
\end{proof}
Note that for a homogeneous bent function $h_{\pi,\phi}\in\mathcal{M}^{\#}_{r,s}$ the set $\Omega_T(h_{\pi,\phi})$ is not a vector space in general. Nevertheless, for a given homogeneous bent function $h\in\mathcal{M}^{\#}_{r,s}$ one can still construct the set $\Omega_T(h_{\pi,\phi})$, in order to get more, possibly inequivalent, homogeneous functions. We will summarize these ideas in the form of an algorithm below.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{New $d$-homogeneous bent functions from a single one in $\mathcal{M}_{r,s}^{\#}$.}
\label{algorithm: New from Old}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require Homogeneous bent function $h:\mathbb F_2^{n}\rightarrow\mathbb F_2,h\in\mathcal{M}_{r,s}^{\#}$ of degree $d$.
\Ensure The set $H$ of new $d$-homogeneous bent functions from $\mathcal{M}_{r,s}^{\#}$.
\State \textbf{Put} $H\gets \{ \}$.
\ForAll{$\mathcal{M}$-subspaces $U \in \mathcal{MS}_r(h)$}
\State \textbf{Construct} a linear mapping $A_U$ as in Remark~\ref{remark: How to construct a linear mapping}, in order to get the \Indent Maiorana-McFarland representation~\eqref{equation: Maiorana-McFarland Representation}, i.e. $h_{\pi,\phi}(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}):=h(\mathbf{z}A_U)$. \EndIndent
\State \textbf{Put} $H\gets H\cup \{ h_{\pi,\phi\oplus\omega}((\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})T)\colon \omega \in \Omega_{T}(h_{\pi,\phi}) \} $, where $T:=A_{U}^{-1}$.
\EndFor
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{remark}\label{remark: New homogeneous functions}
Using Algorithm~\ref{algorithm: New from Old} and the mapping $T$, defined in~\eqref{equation: Very Good Linear Transformation}, one can construct $2^{\binom{6}{3}}$ new homogeneous cubic bent functions from any of functions $h^{12}_3$ and $h^{12}_5$, members of the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class. Such a big number of new functions can be explained in the following way. Let $h\in \{h^{12}_3, h^{12}_5\}$. First, we observe that the image of $\mathbf{y}$ after the linear transformation $\mathbf{y}\mapsto\mathbf{y}'=\mathbf{x}B \oplus \mathbf{y}D$ is given by:
\begin{equation}\label{equation: Image of y}
\mathbf{y}\mapsto\mathbf{y}'=(x_1 \oplus x_2, x_3 \oplus y_2, x_4 \oplus y_3, x_5 \oplus y_4, x_6 \oplus y_5, y_1 \oplus y_6).
\end{equation}
Since any two coordinates of the vector $\mathbf{y}'$ do not contain common variables $x_i$ and $y_j$, the linear transformation, defined in~\eqref{equation: Image of y}, is homogeneity-preserving. Thus, $\Omega_{T}(h_{\pi,\phi})$ is generated by monomials $\omega\colon\mathbb F_2^6\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ of degree $3$, and hence $|\Omega_T(h_{\pi,\phi})|=2^{\binom{6}{3}}$. Finally, we note that some of the constructed homogeneous cubic bent functions are not equivalent to any of the known one, since their Smith normal forms, listed in Table~\ref{table: New Homogeneous Cubic Bent Functions}, are different from those given in Table~\ref{table: Invariant SNF}.
\begin{table}[H]
\caption{First $n/2$ elementary divisors of the Smith normal form $\snf(h^n_i)$ for the new homogeneous cubic bent functions $h^{12}_{6},h^{12}_{7}$ in $12$ variables.}
\label{table: New Homogeneous Cubic Bent Functions}
\centering
\scalebox{1}{
\begin{tabular}{|c|l|}
\hline
$h^{12}_i$ & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\snf(h^{12}_i)$} \\ \hline
$h^{12}_{6}$ & $\{*1^{24}, 2^{123}, 4^{292}, 8^{497}, 16^{674}, 32^{878},\dots *\}$ \\ \hline
$h^{12}_{7}$ & $\{*1^{24}, 2^{123}, 4^{272}, 8^{516}, 16^{674}, 32^{880},\dots *\}$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
\end{remark}
\begin{theorem}
There are at least 7 pairwise inequivalent homogeneous cubic bent functions on $\mathbb F_2^{12}$, inequivalent to $h^{12}_{pr.}$.
\end{theorem}
Finally we want to emphasize the fundamental difference between the primary construction $h^n_{pr.}$ and functions, constructed in Remark~\ref{remark: New homogeneous functions}. For the primary construction of homogeneous cubic bent function $h^n_{pr.}$ one needs to find a special Boolean function $\phi$ of degree 3, such that the non-homogeneous cubic Maiorana-McFarland function $f_{id,\phi}$ is homogeneous after the change of coordinates. In some sense, the identity permutation $id$ has a ``defect'', which makes $f_{id,0}$ never equivalent to a homogeneous cubic function. But the specific choice of a cubic function $\phi$ helps to repair it. Since the functions constructed in Remark~\ref{remark: New homogeneous functions} are in that sense ``defect free'', it is essential to construct such functions systematically.
\begin{openproblem}
Are there infinite families of permutations $\pi\colon\mathbb F_2^m\rightarrow\mathbb F_2^m$, such that for some non-degenerate linear transformation $T$ the function $f_{\pi,\psi}((\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})T)$ is homogeneous cubic bent for all homogeneous cubic functions $\psi\colon\mathbb F_2^m\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$?
\end{openproblem}
\section{Bent functions outside the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class via direct sum construction}\label{section: Bent functions outside M}
In this section we show how one can choose bent functions $f$ and $g$, such that the direct sum $f\oplus g$ is not a member of the completed Maiorana-McFarland class $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$. The idea of the approach is based on the following observation: if one can measure the maximum dimension of \emph{relaxed} $\mathcal{M}$\emph{-subspaces} (which we introduce below) of the components $f$ and $g$, then one can provide an upper bound for the linearity index $\ind(f\oplus g)$ and if it small enough, then $f\oplus g\notin \mathcal{M}^{\#}$.
Finally, using this recursive approach, we prove the series of results about the existence of cubic bent functions outside the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class, which can simultaneously be homogeneous and have no affine derivatives.
\subsection{The sufficient condition in terms of relaxed $\mathcal{M}$-subspaces}\label{subsection: MSubspaces}
Further, we identify $\mathbb F_2^{n+m}$ with $\mathbb F_2^n\times \mathbb F_2^m$. In this way, any vector $\mathbf{v}\in\mathbb F_2^{n+m}$ is uniquely represented by a pair $(\mathbf{v}_\mathbf{x},\mathbf{v}_\mathbf{y})$, where $\mathbf{v}_\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb F_2^n$ and $\mathbf{v}_\mathbf{y}\in\mathbb F_2^m$. Now let $U\in\mathcal{MS}(h)$, i.e. for all $\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}\in U$ we have, that second-order derivatives satisfy $D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}h=0$. This takes place if and only if $D_{\mathbf{a}_{\mathbf{x}},\mathbf{b}_{\mathbf{x}}}f=D_{\mathbf{a}_\mathbf{y},\mathbf{b}_\mathbf{y}}g=c_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}$, where $c_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}\in\mathbb F_2$ is a constant, depending on $\mathbf{a}$ and $\mathbf{b}$, since $g$ and $h$ do not have common variables. This observation leads to the following generalization of $\mathcal{M}$-subspaces (see Definition~\ref{definition: MSubspace}).
\begin{definition} We will call a vector subspace $U$ a \emph{relaxed} $\mathcal{M}$\emph{-subspace} of a Boolean function $f\colon\mathbb F_2^n\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$, if for all $\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}\in U$ second order derivatives $D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f$ are either constant zero or constant one functions, i.e $D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f=0$ or $D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f=1$. We denote by $\mathcal{RMS}_r(f)$ the collection of all $r$-dimensional relaxed $\mathcal{M}$-subspaces of $f$ and by $\mathcal{RMS}(f)$ the collection $$\mathcal{RMS}(f):=\bigcup\limits_{r=1}^{n} \mathcal{RMS}_r(f).$$
\end{definition}
While the linearity index of a Boolean function (see Definition~\ref{definition: Linearity Index}) is defined as the maximal possible dimension of its $\mathcal{M}$-subspace, it is reasonable to define its analogue for relaxed $\mathcal{M}$-subspaces.
\begin{definition}
For a Boolean function $f\colon\mathbb F_2^n\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ its \emph{relaxed linearity index} $\rind(f)$ is defined by $\rind(f):=\max\limits_{U\in \mathcal{RMS}(f)}\dim(U)$.
\end{definition}
\begin{example}
Let $f\colon\mathbb F_2^6\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ be the function from Example~\ref{example: M-subspace}. One can check, that the subspace $U=\scalebox{1}{$\langle (0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1), (0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0), (0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1)\rangle$}$ is a relaxed $\mathcal{M}$-subspace of $f$, since its second-order derivatives $D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f$, which correspond to all two-dimensional vector subspaces $\langle\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}\rangle $ of $U$, are constant zero or constant one functions
$$\scalebox{0.83}{$
\begin{gathered}
\scalebox{1}{$\left\langle
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right\rangle\mapsto 0$},
\scalebox{1}{$\left\langle
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right\rangle\mapsto 1$},
\scalebox{1}{$\left\langle
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right\rangle\mapsto 1$},
\scalebox{1}{$\left\langle
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right\rangle\mapsto 0$},
\\
\scalebox{1}{$\left\langle
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right\rangle\mapsto 0$},
\scalebox{1}{$\left\langle
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right\rangle\mapsto 1$},
\scalebox{1}{$\left\langle
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right\rangle\mapsto 1$}.
\end{gathered}$}
$$
\end{example}
Now we present some properties of collections of $\mathcal{M}$-subspaces as well as of relaxed ones.
\begin{proposition}
Let $f\colon\mathbb F_2^n\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ be a Boolean function and let $n=r+s$. The following hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\mathcal{MS}(f)\subseteq \mathcal{RMS}(f)$.
\item $\left| \mathcal{MS}_r(f) \right|$ and $\left| \mathcal{RMS}_r(f) \right|$ as well as $\ind(f)$ and $ \rind(f)$ are invariants under equivalence.
\item $\ind(f)\le\rind(f)$ and $f\notin\mathcal{M}^{\#}_{r,s}$ for all $r>\rind(f)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
\emph{1.} This follows from the definitions of collections $\mathcal{MS}(f)$ and $\mathcal{RMS}(f)$.
\noindent \emph{2.} Let $f$ and $f'$ be equivalent, i.e. $f'(\mathbf{x})=f(\mathbf{x}A)\oplus l(\mathbf{x})$. Assume $U\in\mathcal{RMS}_r(f)$ and
let $U'=UA^{-1}$ with $\mathbf{a}',\mathbf{b}'\in U'$. Denoting $\mathbf{y}=\mathbf{x}A$, one can see from the following computations
\[\arraycolsep=1.0pt\def1.0{1.0}
\begin{array}{rcl}
D_{\mathbf{a}',\mathbf{b}'}f'(\mathbf{x}) & = & f'(\mathbf{x}\oplus \mathbf{a}' \oplus \mathbf{b}') \oplus f'(\mathbf{x}\oplus \mathbf{a}') \oplus f'(\mathbf{x} \oplus \mathbf{b}') \oplus f'(\mathbf{x}')\\
& = & f(\mathbf{y}\oplus \mathbf{a}\oplus \mathbf{b}) \oplus f(\mathbf{y}\oplus \mathbf{a}) \oplus f(\mathbf{y}\oplus \mathbf{b}) \oplus f(\mathbf{y})=D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f(\mathbf{y})\\
\end{array}
\]
that $U'\in\mathcal{RMS}_r(f')$. Since $A^{-1}$ maps different subspaces to different ones, we have that $\left| \mathcal{RMS}_r(f) \right|=\left| \mathcal{RMS}_r(f') \right|$ and $\left| \mathcal{MS}_r(f) \right|=\left| \mathcal{MS}_r(f') \right|$. Since $\dim(U)=\dim(U')$, we have
$\ind(f)=\ind(f')$ and $ \rind(f)=\rind(f')$.
\noindent\emph{3.} First, since $\mathcal{MS}(f)\subseteq \mathcal{RMS}(f)$ the inequality $\ind(f)\le\rind(f)$ holds. The statement $f\notin\mathcal{M}^{\#}_{r,s}$ for all $r>\rind(f)$ now follows from the maximality of the linearity index.
\end{proof}
In the next theorem we will show, that each relaxed $\mathcal{M}$-subspace of $f\oplus g$ is contained in another relaxed $\mathcal{M}$-subspace from $\mathcal{RMS}(f\oplus g)$, constructed via the direct product of relaxed $\mathcal{M}$-subspaces of $f$ and $g$.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem: MM Subspaces of Direct Sums}
Let $h(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}):=f(\mathbf{x})\oplus g(\mathbf{y}),\mbox{ for }\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb F_2^{n}$ and $\mathbf{y}\in\mathbb F_2^{m}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{theorem: Properties of MSubspaces, part i} If $V\in \mathcal{RMS}(f)$ and $W\in \mathcal{RMS}(g)$, then $V\times W\in\mathcal{RMS}(h)$.
\item\label{theorem: Properties of MSubspaces, part ii} For any $ U\in \mathcal{RMS}(h)$ there exist $V\in \mathcal{RMS}(f)$ and $W\in \mathcal{RMS}(g)$, such that $U\subseteq V\times W$.
\item\label{theorem: Properties of MSubspaces, part iii} $\rind(h) \le \rind(f) + \rind(g)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
\emph{1.} Let $ U=V\times W$. Since $V\in\mathcal{RMS}(f)$ and $ W\in\mathcal{RMS}(g)$, then for all $\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{v}_2\in V$ holds $D_{\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{v}_2}f=c_{\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{v}_2}$ and for all $\mathbf{w}_1,\mathbf{w}_2\in W$ holds $D_{\mathbf{w}_1,\mathbf{w}_2}g=c_{\mathbf{w}_1,\mathbf{w}_2}$, where $c_{\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{v}_2}$ and $c_{\mathbf{w}_1,\mathbf{w}_2}$ are some constants. In this way, for all pairs $\mathbf{u}_1=(\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{w}_1)$ and $\mathbf{u}_2=(\mathbf{v}_2,\mathbf{w}_2)$ holds
$D_{\mathbf{u}_1,\mathbf{u}_2}h=D_{\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{v}_2}f\oplus D_{\mathbf{w}_1,\mathbf{w}_2}g=c_{\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{v}_2}\oplus c_{\mathbf{w}_1,\mathbf{w}_2}$ and, hence, $ U\in\mathcal{RMS}(h)$.
\noindent \emph{2.} Recall that any vector $\mathbf{v}\in\mathbb F_2^{n+m}$ is identified with a pair $(\mathbf{v}_\mathbf{x},\mathbf{v}_\mathbf{y})$, where $\mathbf{v}_\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb F_2^n$ and $\mathbf{v}_\mathbf{y}\in\mathbb F_2^m$. We define two vector subspaces $V\subseteq\mathbb F_2^n$ and $W\subseteq\mathbb F_2^m$ as follows:
\begin{equation*}\label{equation: V and W}
V=\spa(\{\mathbf{u}_\textbf{x}\colon \mathbf{u}\in U \})\mbox{ and } W=\spa(\{\mathbf{u}_y\colon \mathbf{u}\in U \}).
\end{equation*}
We will show, that $V\in\mathcal{RMS}(f)$ and $W\in\mathcal{RMS}(g)$. We define two functions $f',g'\colon\mathbb F_2^{n+m}\rightarrow\mathbb F_2^{n+m}$ as $f'(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}):=f(\mathbf{x})$ for all $\mathbf{y}\in\mathbb F_2^m$ and $g'(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}):=g(\mathbf{y})$ for all $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb F_2^n$. Since $ U\in \mathcal{RMS}(h)$, then for all $\mathbf{u}_1,\mathbf{u}_2\in U$ the equality
\begin{equation}\label{equation: MM subspace of direct sum}
D_{\mathbf{u}_1,\mathbf{u}_2}h(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})=D_{\mathbf{u}_1,\mathbf{u}_2}f'(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})\oplus D_{\mathbf{u}_1,\mathbf{u}_2}g'(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})=c_{\mathbf{u}_1,\mathbf{u}_2}
\end{equation}
holds for all $(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})\in\mathbb F_2^{n+m}$.
Let $\mathbf{x}_1,\mathbf{x}_2\in\mathbb F_2^n$ and consider the following equalities
\begin{align}
\label{equation: first} D_{\mathbf{u}_1,\mathbf{u}_2}f'(\mathbf{x}_1,\mathbf{y})\oplus D_{\mathbf{u}_1,\mathbf{u}_2}g'(\mathbf{x}_1,\mathbf{y})= &c_{\mathbf{u}_1,\mathbf{u}_2}\\
\label{equation: second}
D_{\mathbf{u}_1,\mathbf{u}_2}f'(\mathbf{x}_2,\mathbf{y})\oplus D_{\mathbf{u}_1,\mathbf{u}_2}g'(\mathbf{x}_2,\mathbf{y})= &c_{\mathbf{u}_1,\mathbf{u}_2},
\end{align}
which hold for any $\mathbf{y}\in\mathbb F_2^m$ due to~\eqref{equation: MM subspace of direct sum}. Adding equation~\eqref{equation: first} to~\eqref{equation: second}, one gets $D_{\mathbf{u}_1,\mathbf{u}_2}f'(\mathbf{x}_1,\mathbf{y})=D_{\mathbf{u}_1,\mathbf{u}_2}f'(\mathbf{x}_2,\mathbf{y})$ since $g'$ depends on the variable $\mathbf{x}$ ``fictively''. Now, since
$f'$ depends on the variable $\mathbf{y}$ ``fictively'', we get that for all $\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{v}_2\in V$ the equality $D_{\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{v}_2}f(\mathbf{x}_1)=D_{\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{v}_2}f(\mathbf{x}_2)$ holds for all $\mathbf{x}_1,\mathbf{x}_2\in\mathbb F_2^n$ and hence $D_{\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{v}_2}f=c_{\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{v}_2}$ (one can think about $\mathbf{v}_1$ and $\mathbf{v}_2$ as $\left( \mathbf{u}_1 \right)_{\mathbf{x}}$ and $\left( \mathbf{u}_2 \right)_{\mathbf{x}}$, respectively). Thus we have shown, that $V\in\mathcal{RMS}(f)$. Since $f$ and $g$ are interchangeable, we get $W\in\mathcal{RMS}(g)$.
Clearly, $ U\subseteq V\times W$ and by the previous statement we have $V\times W\in\mathcal{RMS}(h)$.
\noindent\emph{3.} Let $U\in\mathcal{RMS}(h)$ and $\dim(U)=\rind(h)$. By the previous statement there exist $V\in \mathcal{RMS}(f)$ and $W\in \mathcal{RMS}(g)$, such that $U\subseteq V\times W$. Now, using the following series of inequalities
\begin{align*}
\rind(h)=\dim(U)&\le \dim (V\times W)= \dim (V)+\dim(W)\\
&\le \max\limits_{V\in \mathcal{RMS}(f)}\dim\left(V\right)+ \max\limits_{W\in\mathcal{RMS}(g)}\dim\left(W\right)\\
&=\rind(f)+\rind(g).
\end{align*}
we complete the proof.
\end{proof}
The next corollary provides a sufficient condition on bent functions $f$ and $g$ for $f\oplus g$ being not in the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class in terms of their relaxed $\mathcal{M}$-subspaces.
\begin{corollary}\label{corollary: Sufficient condition for outside M}
Let $f\colon\mathbb F_2^n\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ and $g\colon\mathbb F_2^m\rightarrow\mathbb F_2$ be two Boolean bent functions. If $f$ and $g$ satisfy $\rind(f)<n/2$ and $\rind(g) \le m/2$, then $f\oplus k \cdot g\notin\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ on $\mathbb F_2^{n+km}$ for all $k\in\mathbb N$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{remark}
Throughout the paper we will call a Boolean function $f$ on $\mathbb F_2^n$ \emph{strongly extendable}, if $\rind(f)<n/2$ and \emph{weakly extendable}, if $\rind(f)=n/2$. In this way, if one wants to extend a strongly extendable function $f$ with Corollary~\ref{corollary: Sufficient condition for outside M}, it is enough to take a weakly extendable function $g$, while for the extension of a weakly extendable function $g$ one has to take a strongly extendable function $f$.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{remark: Compute rind(f)}
For a given function $f$ one can compute the relaxed linearity index $\rind(f)$ in the same way as the linearity index $\ind(f)$, but with only one change. Instead of the second-order derivative $D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f$, given by its ANF
$$D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f(\mathbf{x})=\bigoplus\limits_{\substack{\mathbf{v}\in\mathbb F_2^n}}c_{\mathbf{v}}({\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b})} \left( \prod_{i=1}^{n} x_i^{v_i} \right),$$
where coefficients $c_\mathbf{v}$ depend on $\mathbf{a}$ and $\mathbf{b}$, one considers the \emph{``relaxed'' second-order derivative} $RD_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f$, defined by $RD_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f(\mathbf{x}):= D_{\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}}f(\mathbf{x})\oplus c_\mathbf{0}(\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b})$ and use it as the input of Algorithm~\ref{algorithm: f in M} in the way already described in Remark~\ref{remark: Compute ind(f)}.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Application to homogeneous cubic bent functions without affine derivatives}\label{subsection: Application}
In order to use Corollary~\ref{corollary: Sufficient condition for outside M} for the construction of cubic bent functions outside $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$, which can be homogeneous or have no affine derivatives, we need to find first such functions in a small number of variables and check, whether they are weakly or strongly extendable.
First we check, whether the equivalence classes of cubic bent functions in six~\cite[p. 303]{ROTHAUS1976300} and eight~\cite[p. 102]{Braeken2006} variables, contain functions with the mentioned properties. Since all cubic bent functions in 6 and 8 variables are members of the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class, as it was shown in~\cite[p. 37]{Dillon1972} and~\cite[p. 103]{Braeken2006} respectively, the best what one expects to find is a weakly extendable cubic bent function. In this way:
\begin{itemize}
\item The only (up to equivalence) weakly extendable cubic bent function in 6 variables is the third Rothaus' function~\cite[p. 303]{ROTHAUS1976300}, denoted here by $R_3$. It has no affine derivatives and is not equivalent to any homogeneous cubic bent function.
\item An example of weakly extendable homogeneous cubic bent function in 8 variables is given by the function $h^8_1$. Like any other cubic bent function in eight variables, it has affine derivatives~\cite{HOU1998149}.
\end{itemize}
Now we analyze homogeneous cubic bent functions in 10 and 12 variables.
\begin{itemize}
\item An example of a strongly extendable cubic bent function in 10 variables is represented by the function $h^{10}_4$, which is simultaneously homogeneous and has no affine derivatives.
\item Since all the mentioned functions in 12 variables belong to the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class, they can not be strongly extendable. Nevertheless, among them we found a weakly extendable homogeneous function $h^{12}_5$ without affine derivatives.
\end{itemize}
We summarize these data in Table~\ref{table: Good Examples} and list all the used functions in the Appendix~\ref{section: Appendix}.
\begin{table}[H]
\centering
\caption{Extendable cubic bent functions in a small number of variables.}\label{table: Good Examples}
\scalebox{1}{
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$\#$ of variables, $n$ & $6$ & $8$ & $10$ & $12$ \\ \hline
$\rind$ & $3$ & $4$ & $4$ & $6$ \\ \hline
Is homogeneous? & $\mathbf{\times}$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ \\ \hline
Has no aff. derivatives? & $\checkmark$ & $\mathbf{\times}$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$\\ \hline
Example & $R_3$ & $h^8_1$ & $h^{10}_4$ & $h^{12}_5$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
Now we proceed to the proof of our main theorem: the series of existence results about cubic bent functions with nice cryptographic properties.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem: Existence 1} On $\mathbb F_2^n$ there exist:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Cubic bent functions outside $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ for all $n\ge 10$.
\item Cubic bent functions without affine derivatives outside $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ for all $n\ge 26$.
\item Homogeneous cubic bent functions outside $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ for all $n\ge 26$.
\item Homogeneous cubic bent functions without affine derivatives outside $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ for all $n\ge 50$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
In all the four cases the idea of the proof is the same: construct a strongly extendable Boolean function $h_n$ in $n=6i+8j+10k+12l$ variables of the form
\begin{equation}\label{equation: Main Construction}
h_n:=i\cdot R_3 \oplus j\cdot h^8_1 \oplus k\cdot h^{10}_4 \oplus l\cdot h^{12}_5
\end{equation}
and find the minimal value $n_0$, such that for all $n\ge n_0$ the function $h_n$ inherits the properties of its components from Table~\ref{table: Good Examples}. Since the only strongly extendable function is $h^{10}_4$ in $10$ variables, we require that in all the four cases below $k\ne 0$:
\noindent \emph{Case 1.} Since the first case has nothing to do with homogeneity and having no affine derivatives, one can use all the components from Table~\ref{table: Good Examples}. Clearly, the smallest value of $n$ is $n_0=16$ and in order to cover the missing values of $n\in \{12,14\}$, we construct a function $h_n'$ of the form
\begin{equation*}
h_{n}'(x_{1},\ldots,x_{n}):=h^{10}_4(x_{1},\ldots,x_{10})\oplus Q_k(x_{11},\ldots,x_{n})\mbox{ with } k=n-10.
\end{equation*}
Here $Q_{k}:=f_{id,0}$ is the quadratic bent function in $k$ variables, defined by the ``standard'' inner product on $\mathbb F_2^{k}$. Since for the quadratic bent function $Q_{k}$ its relaxed linearity index $\rind(Q_{k})=k$, we can not use Corollary~\ref{corollary: Sufficient condition for outside M}. However, by the second part of Theorem~\ref{theorem: MM Subspaces of Direct Sums}, one can verify, that $h_n'\notin\mathcal{M}^{\#}$, by showing, that none of the vector subspaces $U$ of the form $$\{U\subseteq V \times W\colon V\in\mathcal{RMS}(h^{10}_4),W\in\mathcal{RMS}(Q_k)\}$$ is an $\mathcal{M}$-subspace of the function $h_n'$.
\noindent \emph{Case 2.}
Since there are no weakly extendable homogeneous cubic bent functions in six variables, we can use only components $h^{8}_1,h^{10}_4,h^{12}_5$ in the equation~\eqref{equation: Main Construction}. One can see, that the smallest value of $n$ is $n_0=26$ and the missing values are in the set $\{14,16,24\}$.
\noindent \emph{Case 3.} First, we observe that the direct sum of two functions has no affine derivatives, if and only if both of them have no affine derivatives. Hence, the only functions we can use are $R_3,h^{10}_4,h^{12}_5$. In this way, the smallest value of $n$ is $n_0=26$ and the missing values are in the set $\{12,14,18,24\}$.
\noindent \emph{Case 4.} Finally, since the only extendable functions, which are simultaneously homogeneous and have no affine derivatives are $h^{10}_4$ and $h^{12}_5$, we observe, that the smallest value of $n$ is $n_0=50$ and the missing values of $n$ are in the set $\{12,14,16,18,24,26,28,36,38,48\}$, which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{Conclusion}\label{section: Conclusion}
In this paper we proved the existence of cubic bent functions outside the completed Maiorana-McFarland class $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ on $\mathbb F_2^n$ for all $n\ge 10$ and showed that for almost all values of $n$ these functions can simultaneously be homogeneous and have no affine derivatives. The reason, why some values of $n$ are not covered by our proof is explained by the non-existence of examples with desired properties in 6 and 8 variables, which are necessary for the used recursive framework.
In general, we expect that homogeneous cubic bent functions without affine derivatives outside $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ exist for all even $n\ge10$ and we leave this as an open problem. Since our proof technique is based on the direct sum construction of functions, some of them being members of $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$, the functions constructed in such a way will presumably have bad cryptographic primitives (see~\cite[p. 330]{carlet_2010}). Thus, we suggest the following problem.
\begin{openproblem}
Construct homogeneous cubic bent functions without affine derivatives outside the $\mathcal{M}^{\#}$ class without the use of the direct sum.
\end{openproblem}
The next problem, which we would like to address, is related to the normality of cubic bent functions. Recall that a Boolean function $f$ on $\mathbb F_2^n$ is said to be normal (weakly normal), when it is constant (affine, but not constant) respectively, on some affine subspace $U$ of $\mathbb F_2^n$ of dimension $\lceil n / 2\rceil$. In this case $f$ is said to be normal (weakly normal) with respect to the flat $U$. It is well-known that all quadratic bent functions are normal. Moreover, one can also construct non-normal as well as non-weakly normal bent functions of all degrees $d\ge4$, as it follows from~\cite[Fact 22]{CanteautDDL06}. At the same time all cubic bent functions in $n=6$ variables are normal or weakly-normal, while for $n=8$ they are proved to be normal~\cite{Charpin04}.
Since the functions $h^{10}_3$ and $h^{10}_4$ do not belong to the completed Maiorana-McFarland class, they are good candidates to be checked for the normality. Based on our parallel implementation of~\cite[Algorithm 1]{CanteautDDL06} in \texttt{Mathematica}~\cite{WolframMathematica112} we observe, that the function $h^{10}_3$ is normal on the flat $48\oplus \langle \mbox{g3},\mbox{8p},\mbox{4q},\mbox{2m},\mbox{1j} \rangle$ and the function $h^{10}_4$ is normal on the flat $5\oplus \langle \mbox{i5},\mbox{8h},\mbox{6n},\mbox{1g},\mbox{f}\rangle$. Here we describe each binary vector of a flat by 32-base representation, using the following alphabet
\begin{equation}\label{equation: alphabet}
0\mapsto0,\ldots,\mbox{f}\mapsto15,\mbox{g}\mapsto16,\ldots,\mbox{v}\mapsto31.
\end{equation}
In this way, since one still has no examples of non-weakly normal cubic bent functions, it is reasonable to ask the following question.
\begin{openproblem}
Do non-weakly normal cubic bent functions exist?
\end{openproblem}
\noindent Finally we list all the homogeneous cubic bent functions used in the paper.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The authors would like to thank Pantelimon St\u{a}nic\u{a} for providing homogeneous cubic bent functions from~\cite[p. 149]{Charnes2002}.
\bibliographystyle{spmpsci}
|
\section{Introduction}
Knowledge-based question answering (KBQA) aims to answer natural language questions over knowledge bases (KBs) such as DBpedia and Freebase. Formal query generation is an important component in many KBQA systems \cite{ConstraintQG,KBQA,CQAEMNLP}, especially for answering complex questions. Given entity and relation linking results, formal query generation aims to generate correct executable queries, e.g., SPARQL queries, for the input natural language questions. An example question and its formal query are shown in Figure \ref{fig:intro}. Generally speaking, formal query generation is expected to include but not be limited to have the capabilities of (\romannumeral1) recognizing and paraphrasing different kinds of constraints, including triple-level constraints (e.g., \emph{``movies"} corresponds to a typing constraint for the target variable) and higher level constraints (e.g., subgraphs). For instance, \emph{``the same ... as"} represents a complex structure shown in the middle of Figure \ref{fig:intro}; (\romannumeral2) recognizing and paraphrasing aggregations (e.g., ``how many" corresponds to \textsc{Count}); and (\romannumeral3) organizing all the above to generate an executable query \cite{QueryBuilding, SQG}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{example.pdf}
\caption{An example for complex question and query}
\label{fig:intro}
\end{figure}
There are mainly two kinds of query generation approaches for complex questions. (\romannumeral1) Template-based approaches choose a pre-collected template for query generation \cite{KBQA,TemplateQAWWW17}. Such approaches highly rely on the coverage of templates, and perform unstably when some complex templates have very few natural language questions as training data.
(\romannumeral2) Approaches based on semantic parsing and neural networks learn entire representations for questions with different query structures, by using a neural network following the encode-and-compare framework \cite{CQAEMNLP,SQG}. They may suffer from the lack of training data, especially for long-tail questions with rarely appeared structures. Furthermore, both above approaches cannot handle questions with unseen query structures, since they cannot generate new query structures.
To cope with the above limitations, we propose a new query generation approach based on the following observation: the query structure for a complex question may rarely appear, but it usually contains some substructures that frequently appeared in other questions. For example, the query structure for the question in Figure \ref{fig:intro} appears rarely, however, both \emph{``how many movies"} and \emph{``the same ... as"} are common expressions, which correspond to the two query substructures in dashed boxes. To collect such frequently appeared substructures, we automatically decompose query structures in the training data. Instead of directly modeling the query structure for the given question as a whole, we employ multiple neural networks to predict query substructures contained in the question, each of which delivers a part of the query intention. Then, we select an existing query structure for the input question by using a combinational ranking function. Also, in some cases, no existing query structure is appropriate for the input question. To cope with this issue, we merge query substructures to build new query structures.
The contributions of this paper are summarized below:
\begin{itemize}\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}
\item We formalize the notion of query structures and define the substructure relationship between query structures.
\item We propose a novel approach for formal query generation, which firstly leverages multiple neural networks to predict query substructures contained in the given question, and then ranks existing query structures by using a combinational function.
\item We merge query substructures to build new query structures, which handles questions with unseen query structures.
\item We perform extensive experiments on two KBQA datasets, and show that SubQG significantly outperforms the existing approaches. Furthermore, SubQG achieves a promising performance with limited training data and noisy entity/relation linking results.
\end{itemize}
\section{Preliminaries}
\label{sect:pre}
An entity is typically denoted by a URI and described with a set of properties and values. A fact is an $\langle entity, property, value\rangle$ triple, where the value can be either a literal or another entity. A KB is a pair $\mathcal{K}=(\mathcal{E},\mathcal{F})$, where $\mathcal{E}$ denotes the set of entities and $\mathcal{F}$ denotes the set of facts.
A \emph{formal query} (or simply called \emph{query}) is the structured representation of a natural language question executable on a given KB. Formally, a query is a pair $\mathcal{Q}=(\mathcal{V},\mathcal{T})$, where $\mathcal{V}$ denotes the set of vertices, and $\mathcal{T}$ denotes the set of labeled edges. A vertex can be either a variable, an entity or a literal, and the label of an edge can be either a built-in property or a user-defined one. For simplicity, the set of all edge labels are denoted by $\mathcal{L}_e(\mathcal{Q})$. In this paper, the built-in properties include \textsc{Count}, \textsc{Avg}, \textsc{Max}, \textsc{Min}, \textsc{MaxAtN}, \textsc{MinAtN} and \textsc{IsA} (\textsc{rdf:type}), where the former four are used to connect two variables. For example, $\langle?Var1,\textsc{Count},?Var2\rangle$ represents that $?Var2$ is the counting result of $?Var1$. \textsc{MaxAtN} and \textsc{MinAtN} take the meaning of \textsc{Order By} in SPARQL \cite{ConstraintQG}. For instance, $\langle?Var1,\textsc{MaxAtN},2\rangle$ means \textsc{Order By} \textsc{Desc}$(?Var1)$ \textsc{Limit 1 Offset 1}.
To classify various queries with similar query intentions and narrow the search space for query generation, we introduce the notion of \emph{query structures}. A query structure is a set of structurally-equivalent queries. Let $\mathcal{Q}_a=(\mathcal{V}_a,\mathcal{T}_a)$ and $\mathcal{Q}_b=(\mathcal{V}_b,\mathcal{T}_b)$ denote two queries. $\mathcal{Q}_a$ is structurally-equivalent to $\mathcal{Q}_b$, denoted by $\mathcal{Q}_a\cong\mathcal{Q}_b$, if and only if there exist two bijections $f:\mathcal{V}_a\rightarrow\mathcal{V}_b$ and $g:\mathcal{L}_e(\mathcal{Q}_a)\rightarrow\mathcal{L}_e(\mathcal{Q}_b)$ such that:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*),itemsep=0pt]
\item $\forall v\in\mathcal{V}_a$, $v$ is a variable $\Leftrightarrow f(v)$ is a variable;
\item $\forall r\in\mathcal{L}_e(\mathcal{Q}_a)$, $r$ is a user-defined property $\Leftrightarrow g(r)$ is a user-defined property; if $r$ is a built-in property, $g(r)=r$;
\item $\forall v\forall r\forall v' \langle v,r,v'\rangle\in\mathcal{T}_a$ $\Leftrightarrow$ $\langle f(v),g(r),f(v')\rangle$ $\in\mathcal{T}_b$.
\end{enumerate}
The query structure for $\mathcal{Q}_a$ is denoted by $\mathcal{S}_a=[\mathcal{Q}_a]$, which contains all the queries structurally-equivalent to $\mathcal{Q}_a$. For graphical illustration, we represent a query structure by a representative query among the structurally-equivalent ones and replace entities and literals with different kinds of placeholders. An example of query and query structure is shown in the upper half of Figure~\ref{fig:query}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{query.pdf}
\caption{Illustration of a query, a query structure and query substructures}
\label{fig:query}
\end{figure}
For many simple questions, two query structures, i.e., $(\{?Var1,Ent1\}, \{\langle ?Var1,Prop1,$ $Ent1\rangle\})$ and $(\{?Var1,Ent1\},\{\langle Ent1,Prop1,$ $?Var1\rangle\})$, are sufficient. However, for complex questions, a diversity of query structures exist and some of them share a set of frequently-appeared substructures, each of which delivers a part of the query intention. We give the definition of \emph{query substructures} as follows.
Let $\mathcal{S}_a=[\mathcal{Q}_a]$ and $\mathcal{S}_b=[\mathcal{Q}_b]$ denote two query structures. $\mathcal{S}_a$ is a query substructure of $\mathcal{S}_b$, denoted by $\mathcal{S}_a\preceq\mathcal{S}_b$, if and only if $\mathcal{Q}_b$ has a subgraph $\mathcal{Q}_c$ such that $\mathcal{Q}_a\cong\mathcal{Q}_c$. Furthermore, if $\mathcal{S}_a=[\mathcal{Q}_a]\preceq\mathcal{S}_b=[\mathcal{Q}_b]$, we say that $\mathcal{Q}_b$ has $\mathcal{S}_a$, and $\mathcal{S}_a$ is contained in $\mathcal{Q}_b$.
For example, although the query structures for the two questions in Figures~\ref{fig:intro} and \ref{fig:query} are different, they share the same query substructure $(\{?Var1,$ $?Var2,Class1\},\{\langle ?Var1,\textsc{Count},?Var2\rangle,$ $\langle ?Var1, \textsc{IsA}, Class1\rangle\})$, which corresponds to the phrase ``how many movies". Note that, a query substructure can be the query structure of another question.
The goal of this paper is to leverage a set of frequent query (sub-)structures to generate formal queries for answering complex questions.
\section{The Proposed Approach}
In this section, we present our approach, SubQG, for query generation. We first introduce the framework and general steps with a running example (Section \ref{sec:framework}), and then describe some important steps in detail in the following subsections.
\subsection{Framework}
\label{sec:framework}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{framework2.pdf}
\caption{Framework of the proposed approach}
\label{fig:framework}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:framework} depicts the framework of SubQG, which contains an offline training process and an online query generation process.
\textbf{Offline.} The offline process takes as input a set of training data in form of $\langle question, query \rangle $ pairs, and mainly contains three steps:\\
\textbf{1. Collect query structures.} For questions in the training data, we first discover the structurally-equivalent queries, and then extract the set of all query structures, denoted by $\mathbf{TS}$.\\
\textbf{2. Collect frequent query substructures.} We decompose each query structure $\mathcal{S}_i=(\mathcal{V}_i, \mathcal{T}_i) \in \textbf{TS}$ to get the set for all query substructures. Let $\mathcal{T}_j$ be a non-empty subset of $\mathcal{T}_i$, and $\mathcal{V}_{\mathcal{T}_j}$ be the set of vertices used in $\mathcal{T}_j$. $\mathcal{S}_j=(\mathcal{V}_{\mathcal{T}_j}, \mathcal{T}_j)$ should be a query substructure of $\mathcal{S}_i$ according to the definition. So, we can generate all query substructures of $\mathcal{S}_i$ from each subset of $\mathcal{T}_i$. Disconnected query substructures would be ignored since they express discontinuous meanings and should be split into smaller query substructures. If more than $\gamma$ queries in training data have substructure $\mathcal{S}_j$, we consider $\mathcal{S}_j$ as a frequent query substructure. The set for all frequent query substructures is denoted by $\mathbf{FS^*}$.\\
\textbf{3. Train query substructure predictors.} We train a neural network for each query substructure $\mathcal{S}^*_i \in \mathbf{FS^*}$, to predict the probability that $\mathcal{Q}^y$ has $\mathcal{S}^*_i$ (i.e., $\mathcal{S}^*_i \preceq [\mathcal{Q}^y]$) for input question $y$, where $\mathcal{Q}^y$ denotes the formal query for $y$. Details for this step are described in Section \ref{sec:subPredict}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{frameworkExample.pdf}
\caption{An example for online query generation}
\label{fig:online}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Online.} The online query generation process takes as input a natural language question $y$, and mainly contains four steps:\\
\textbf{1. Predict query substructures.} We first predict the probability that $\mathcal{S}^*_i \preceq [\mathcal{Q}^y]$ for each $\mathcal{S}^*_i \in \mathbf{FS^*}$, using the query substructure predictors trained in the offline step. An example question and four query substructures with highest prediction probabilities are shown in the top of Figure \ref{fig:online}.\\
\textbf{2. Rank existing query structures.} To find an appropriate query structure for the input question, we rank existing query structures ($\mathcal{S}_i\in \mathbf{TS}$) by using a scoring function, see Section \ref{sec:structureRank}.\\
\textbf{3. Merge query substructures.} Consider the fact that the target query structure $[\mathcal{Q}^y]$ may not appear in $\mathbf{TS}$ (i.e., there is no query in the training data that is structurally-equivalent to $\mathcal{Q}^y$), we design a method (described in Section \ref{sec:merge}) to merge question-contained query substructures for building new query structures. The merged results are ranked using the same function as existing query structures.
Several query structures (including the merged results and the existing query structures) for the example question are shown in the middle of Figure \ref{fig:online}.\\
\textbf{4. Grounding and validation.} We leverage the query structure ranking result, alongside with the entity/relation linking result from some existing black box systems \cite{EARL} to generate executable formal query for the input question. For each query structure, we try all possible combinations of the linking results according to the descending order of the overall linking score, and perform validation including grammar check, domain/range check and empty query check. The first non-empty query passing all validations is considered as the output for SubQG. The grounding and validation results for the example question are shown in the bottom of Figure \ref{fig:online}.
\subsection{Query Substructure Prediction}
\label{sec:subPredict}
In this step, we employ an attention based Bi-LSTM network \cite{Attention} to predict $\textrm{Pr}[\mathcal{S}^*_i\,|\,y]$ for each frequent query substructure $\mathcal{S}^*_i\in \mathbf{FS^*}$, where $\textrm{Pr}[\mathcal{S}^*_i\,|\,y]$ represents the probability of $\mathcal{S}^*_i \preceq [\mathcal{Q}^y]$. There are mainly three reasons that we use a predictor for each query substructure instead of a multi-tag predictor for all query substructures:
(\romannumeral1) a query substructure usually expresses part of the meaning of input question. Different query substructures may focus on different words or phrases, thus, each predictor should have its own attention matrix;
(\romannumeral2) multi-tag predictor may have a lower accuracy since each tag has unbalanced training data;
(\romannumeral3) single pre-trained query substructure predictor from one dataset can be directly reused on another without adjusting the network structure, however, the multi-tag predictor need to adjust the size of the output layer and retrain when the set of frequent query substructures changes.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{network.pdf}
\caption{Attention-based BiLSTM network}
\label{fig:network}
\end{figure}
The structure of the network is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:network}. Before the input question is fed into the network, we replace all entity mentions with \emph{ $\langle$Entity$\rangle$ } using EARL \cite{EARL}, to enhance the generalization ability. Given the question word sequence \{$w_1,...,w_T$\}, we first use a word embedding matrix to convert the original sequence into word vectors \{$\mathbf{e}_1,...,\mathbf{e}_T$\}, followed by a BiLSTM network to generate the context-sensitive representation \{$\mathbf{h}_1,...,\mathbf{h}_T$\} for each word, where
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{h}_t = [\textsc{Lstm}(\mathbf{e}_{t},\overrightarrow{\mathbf{h}}_{t-1});\textsc{Lstm}(\mathbf{e}_{t},\overleftarrow{\mathbf{h}}_{t+1})] .
\end{equation}
Then, the attention mechanism takes each $\mathbf{h}_t$ as input, and calculates a weight $\alpha_t$ for each $\mathbf{h}_t$, which is formulated as follows:
\begin{align}
\alpha_t &= \frac{e^{\textrm{Att}(\mathbf{h}_t)}}{\sum^T_{k=1}e^{\textrm{Att}(\mathbf{h}_k)}} ,\\
\textrm{Att}(\mathbf{h}_t) &= \mathbf{v}_{att}^T\tanh(\mathbf{W}_{att}\mathbf{h}_t+\mathbf{b}_{att}),
\end{align}
where $\mathbf{W}_{att}\in\mathbb{R}^{|\mathbf{h}_t|\times|\mathbf{h}_t|}$, $\mathbf{b}_{att}\in\mathbb{R}^{|\mathbf{h}_t|}$ and $\mathbf{v}_{att}\in\mathbb{R}^{|\mathbf{h}_t|}$. Next, we get the representation for the whole question $\mathbf{q}^c$ as the weighted sum of $\mathbf{h}_t$:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{q}^c = \sum^T_{t=1}\alpha_t \mathbf{h}_t .
\end{equation}
The output of the network is a probability
\begin{equation}
\textrm{Pr}[\mathcal{S}^*_i\,|\,y] = \sigma(\mathbf{v}_{out}^T\mathbf{q}^c+b_{out}) ,
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{v}_{out}\in\mathbb{R}^{|\mathbf{q}^c|}$ and $b_{out}\in\mathbb{R}$.
The loss function minimized during training is the binary cross-entropy:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\textrm{Loss}(\mathcal{S}^*_i) = & -\smashoperator[r]{\sum_{\substack{(y,\mathcal{Q}^y)\in \mathbf{Train}\\ \textrm{s.t.} \,S^*_i \preceq [\mathcal{Q}^y]}}}\log(\textrm{Pr}[\mathcal{S}^*_i\,|\,y])\\
& -\smashoperator[r]{\sum_{\substack{(y,\mathcal{Q}^y)\in \mathbf{Train}\\ \textrm{s.t.} \,\mathcal{S}^*_i \npreceq [\mathcal{Q}^y]}}}\log(1-\textrm{Pr}[\mathcal{S}^*_i\,|\,y]),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{Train}$ denotes the set of training data.
\subsection{Query Structure Ranking}
\label{sec:structureRank}
In this step, we use a combinational function to score each query structure in the training data for the input question. Since the prediction result for each query substructure is independent, the score for query structure $\mathcal{S}_i$ is measured by joint probability, which is
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\textrm{Score}(\mathcal{S}_i\,|\,y) = &\smashoperator[r]{\prod_{\substack{\mathcal{S}^*_j\in\mathbf{FS^*}\\ \textrm{s.t.}\, \mathcal{S}^*_j\preceq \mathcal{S}_i}}}{\textrm{Pr}[\mathcal{S}^*_j\,|\,y]} \\
& \times \smashoperator[r]{\prod_{\substack{\mathcal{S}^*_j\in\mathbf{FS^*}\\ \textrm{s.t.}\, \mathcal{S}^*_j\npreceq \mathcal{S}_i}}}{(1-\textrm{Pr}[\mathcal{S}^*_j\,|\,y])}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Assume that $\mathcal{Q}^y\in \mathcal{S}_i$, $\forall \mathcal{S}^*_j\preceq \mathcal{S}_i$, we have $\mathcal{S}^*_j\preceq[\mathcal{Q}^y]$. Thus, $\textrm{Pr}[\mathcal{S}^*_j\,|\,y]$ should be 1 in the ideal condition. On the other hand, $\forall \mathcal{S}^*_j\npreceq \mathcal{S}_i$, $\textrm{Pr}[\mathcal{S}^*_j\,|\,y]$ should be 0. Thus, we have $\textrm{Score}(\mathcal{S}_i\,|\,y)=1$, and $\forall \mathcal{S}_k\neq \mathcal{S}_i$, we have $\textrm{Score}(\mathcal{S}_k\,|\,y)=0$.
\subsection{Query Substructure Merging}
\label{sec:merge}
We proposed a method, shown in Algorithm \ref{algo:merge}, to merge question-contained query substructures to build new query structures. In the initialization step, it selects some query substructures of high scores as candidates, since the query substructure may directly be the appropriate query structure for the input question. In each iteration, the method merges each question-contained substructures with existing candidates, and the merged results of high scores are used as candidates in the next iteration. The final output is the union of all the results from at most $K$ iterations.
\begin{algorithm}[!t]
\caption{Query substructure merging}
\label{algo:merge}
\SetCommentSty{textit}
{\small
\KwIn{Question $y$, freq. query substructures $\mathbf{FS}^*$}
$\mathbf{FS}^+ := \{\mathcal{S}^*_i\in\mathbf{FS}^* \,|\, \textrm{Pr}[\mathcal{S}^*_i\,|\,y]>0.5\}$\;
$\mathbf{M}^{(0)} := \{\mathcal{S}^*_i\in\mathbf{FS}^* \,|\, \textrm{Score}[\mathcal{S}^*_i\,|\,y]>\theta\}$\;
\For(\tcp*[f]{$K$ is maximum iterations}){$i=1$ to $K$}{
$\mathbf{M}^{(i)} := \emptyset$\;
\ForAll{$\mathcal{S}^*_i\in\mathbf{FS}^+, \mathcal{S}_j\in\mathbf{M}^{(i-1)}$}{
$\mathbf{M}^{(i)} := \mathbf{M}^{(i)} \cup \textrm{Merge}(\mathcal{S}^*_i,\mathcal{S}_j)$\;
}
$\mathbf{M}^{(i)} := \{\mathcal{S}_l\in\mathbf{M}^{(i)} \,|\, \textrm{Score}[\mathcal{S}_l\,|\,y]>\theta\}$\;
}
\Return $\bigcup_{i=0}^K \mathbf{M}^{(i)}$\;
}
\end{algorithm}
When merging different query substructures, we allow them to share some vertices of the same kind (variable, entity, etc.) or edge labels, except the variables which represent aggregation results. Thus, the merged result of two query substructures is a set of query structures instead of one. Also, the following restrictions are used to filter the merged results:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*),itemsep=0pt]
\item The merged results should be connected;
\item The merged results have $\leq \tau$ triples;
\item The merged results have $\leq \delta$ aggregations;
\end{enumerate}
An example for merging two query substructures is shown in Figure \ref{fig:merge}.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.92\columnwidth]{merge.pdf}
\caption{Merge results for two query substructures}
\label{fig:merge}
\end{figure}
\section{Experiments and Results}
In this section, we introduce the query generation datasets and state-of-the-art systems that we compare. We first show the end-to-end results of the query generation task, and then perform detailed analysis to show the effectiveness of each module. Question sets, source code and experimental results are available online.\footnote{\url{http://ws.nju.edu.cn/SubQG/}}
\subsection{Experimental Setup}
\paragraph{Datasets} We employed the same datasets as \citeauthor{QueryBuilding}(\citeyear{QueryBuilding}) and \citeauthor{SQG}(\citeyear{SQG}): (\romannumeral1) the large-scale complex question answering dataset (\textbf{LC-QuAD}) \cite{LC-QuAD}, containing 3,253 questions with non-empty results on DBpedia (2016-04), and (\romannumeral2) the fifth edition of question answering over linked data (\textbf{QALD-5}) dataset \cite{QALD}, containing 311 questions with non-empty results on DBpedia (2015-10). Both datasets are widely used in KBQA studies \cite{gAnswer, EARL}, and have become benchmarks for some annual KBQA competitions\footnote{\url{http://lc-quad.sda.tech}}\footnote{\url{http://qald.aksw.org/index.php?q=5}}. We did not employ the WebQuestions \cite{SemanticParsing} dataset, since approximately 85\% of its questions are simple. Also, we did not employ the ComplexQuestions \cite{ConstraintQG} and ComplexWebQuestions \cite{DecompositionQuestion} dataset, since the existing works on these datasets have not reported the formal query generation result, and it is difficult to separate the formal query generation component from the end-to-end KBQA systems in these works.
\paragraph{Implementation details}
All the experiments were carried out on a machine with an Intel Xeon E3-1225 3.2GHz processor, 32 GB of RAM, and an NVIDIA GTX1080Ti GPU. For the embedding layer, we used random embedding. For each dataset, we performed 5-fold cross-validation with the train set (70\%), development set (10\%), and test set (20\%). The threshold $\gamma$ for frequent query substructures is set to $30$, the maximum iteration number $K$ for merging is set to $2$, $\theta$ in Algorithm~\ref{algo:merge} is set to $0.3$, the maximum triple number $\tau$ for merged results is set to $5$, and the maximum aggregation number $\delta$ is set to $2$. Other detailed statistics are shown in Table \ref{tab:expSetup}.
\begin{table}[!t]
\captionof{table}{Datasets and implementation details}
\label{tab:expSetup}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c}
\hline & \small LC-QuAD & \small QALD-5 \\
\hline \small No. of questions (complex) & \small 3,253 (2,249) & \small 311 (192) \\
\small No. of query structures & \small 35 & \small 52 \\
\small No. of freq. substructures & \small 37 & \small 10 \\
\small Avg. training time & \small 1,102s & \small 272s \\
\small Avg. prediction time & \small 0.291s & \small 0.122s \\
\small Avg. query generation time & \small 0.356s & \small 0.197s \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{End-to-End Results}
We compared SubQG with several existing approaches. SINA \cite{Sina} and NLIWOD conduct query generation by predefined rules and existing templates. SQG \cite{SQG} firstly generates candidate queries by finding valid walks containing all of entities and properties mentioned in questions, and then ranks them based on Tree-LSTM similarity. CompQA \cite{CQAEMNLP} is a KBQA system which achieved state-of-the-art performance on WebQuesions and ComplexQuestions over Freebase. We re-implemented its query generation component for DBpedia, which generates candidate queries by staged query generation, and ranks them using an encode-and-compare network.
The average F1-scores for the end-to-end query generation task are reported in Table \ref{tab:end2end}. All these results are based on the gold standard entity/relation linking result as input. Our approach SubQG outperformed all the comparative approaches on both datasets. Furthermore, as the results shown in Table \ref{tab:complex}, it gained a more significant improvement on complex questions compared with CompQA.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Average F1-scores of query generation}
\label{tab:end2end}
\begin{adjustbox}{width=\columnwidth}
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c}
\hline & LC-QuAD & QALD-5 \\
\hline Sina \cite{Sina} & $0.24\,^\dag$ & $0.39\,^\dag$ \\
NLIWOD\,\footnotemark & $0.48\,^\dag$ & $0.49\,^\dag$ \\
SQG \cite{SQG} & $0.75\,^\dag$ & - \\
CompQA \cite{CQAEMNLP} & $0.772_{\pm 0.014}$ & $0.511_{\pm 0.043}$ \\
SubQG (our approach) & $\mathbf{0.846}_{\pm 0.016}$ & $\mathbf{0.624}_{\pm 0.030}$ \\
\hline
\multicolumn{3}{c}{$^\dag$ indicates results taken from \citet{QueryBuilding} and SQG.} \\
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
\end{table}
\footnotetext{\url{https://github.com/dice-group/NLIWOD}}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Average F1-scores for complex questions}
\label{tab:complex}
\begin{adjustbox}{width=.7\columnwidth}
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c}
\hline & LC-QuAD & QALD-5 \\
\hline CompQA & $0.673_{\pm 0.009}$ & $0.260_{\pm 0.082}$ \\
SubQG & $\mathbf{0.779}_{\pm 0.017}$ & $\mathbf{0.392}_{\pm 0.156}$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
\end{table}
Both SINA and NLIWOD did not employ a query ranking mechanism, i.e., their accuracy and coverage are limited by the rules and templates. Although both CompQA and SQG have a strong ability of generating candidate queries, they perform not quite well in query ranking. According to our observation, the main reason is that these approaches tried to learn entire representations for questions with different query structures (from simple to complex) using a single network, thus, they may suffer from the lack of training data, especially for the questions with rarely appeared structures. As a contrast, our approach leveraged multiple networks to learn predictors for different query substructures, and ranked query structures using combinational function, which gained a better performance.
The results on QALD-5 dataset is not as high as the result on LC-QuAD. This is because QALD-5 contains 11\% of very difficult questions, requiring complex filtering conditions such as \textsc{Regex} and numerical comparison. These questions are currently beyond our approach's ability. Also, the size of training data is significant smaller.
\subsection{Detailed Analysis}
\subsubsection{Ablation Study}
\label{sec:comp}
We compared the following settings of SubQG:
\textbf{Rank w/o substructures.} We replaced the query substructure prediction and query structure ranking module, by choosing an existing query structure in the training data for the input question, using a BiLSTM multiple classification network.
\textbf{Rank w/ substructures} We removed the merging module described in Section \ref{sec:merge}. This setting assumes that the appropriate query structure for an input question exists in the training data.
\textbf{Merge query substructures} This setting ignored existing query structures in the training data, and only considered the merged results of query substructures.
As the results shown in Table \ref{tab:ablation}, the full version of SubQG achieved the best results on both datasets. \emph{Rank w/o substructures} gained a comparatively low performance, especially when there is inadequate training data (on QALD-5). Compared with \emph{Rank w/ substructures}, SubQG gained a further improvement, which indicates that the merging method successfully handled questions with unseen query structures.
Table \ref{tab:ablation2} shows the accuracy of some alternative networks for query substructure prediction (Section \ref{sec:subPredict}). By removing the attention mechanism (replaced by unweighted average), the accuracy declined approximately 3\%. Adding additional part of speech tag sequence of the input question gained no significant improvement. We also tried to replace the attention based BiLSTM with the network in \cite{Staged}, which encodes questions with a convolutional layer followed by a max pooling layer. This approach did not perform well since it cannot capture long-term dependencies.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Average F1-scores for different settings}
\label{tab:ablation}
\begin{adjustbox}{width=\columnwidth}
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c}
\hline & LC-QuAD & QALD-5 \\
\hline SubQG & $\mathbf{0.846}_{\pm 0.016}$ & $\mathbf{0.624}_{\pm 0.030}$ \\
\hline Rank w/o substructures & $0.756_{\pm 0.012}$ & $0.383_{\pm 0.024}$ \\
Rank w/ substructures & $0.841_{\pm 0.014}$ & $0.614_{\pm 0.036}$ \\
Merge query substructures & $0.679_{\pm 0.020}$ & $0.454_{\pm 0.055}$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Accuracy of query substructure prediction}
\label{tab:ablation2}
\begin{adjustbox}{width=\columnwidth}
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c}
\hline & LC-QuAD & QALD-5 \\
\hline BiLSTM w/ attention & $\mathbf{0.929}_{\pm 0.002}$ & $0.816_{\pm 0.010}$ \\
\hline BiLSTM w/o attention & $0.898_{\pm 0.004}$ & $ 0.781_{\pm 0.009}$ \\
BiLSTM w/ attention + POS & $0.925_{\pm 0.004}$ & $\mathbf{0.818}_{\pm 0.007}$ \\
CNN in \cite{Staged} & $0.856_{\pm 0.006}$ & $0.740_{\pm 0.010}$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Results with Noisy Linking}
We simulated the real KBQA environment by considering noisy entity/relation linking results. We firstly mixed the correct linking result for each mention with the top-$5$ candidates generated from EARL \cite{EARL}, which is a joint entity/relation linking system with state-of-the-art performance on LC-QuAD. The result is shown in the second row of Table \ref{tab:noisy}. Although the precision for first output declined 11.4\%, in 85\% cases we still can generate correct answer in top-$5$. This is because SubQG ranked query structures first and considered linking results in the last step. Many error linking results can be filtered out by the empty query check or domain/range check.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Average Precision@$k$ scores of query generation on LC-QuAD with noisy linking}
\label{tab:noisy}
\begin{adjustbox}{width=\columnwidth}
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c}
\hline & Precision@1 & Precision@5 \\
\hline Gold standard & $0.842_{\pm 0.017}$ & $0.886_{\pm 0.014}$ \\
Top-5 EARL + gold standard & $0.728_{\pm 0.011}$ & $0.850_{\pm 0.009}$ \\
Top-5 EARL & $0.126_{\pm 0.012}$ & $0.146_{\pm 0.010}$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
\end{table}
We also test the performance of our approach only using the EARL linking results. The performance dropped dramatically in comparison to the first two rows. The main reason is that, for 82.8\% of the questions, EARL provided partially correct results. If we consider the remaining questions, our system again have 73.2\% and 84.8\% of correctly-generated queries in top-1 and top-5 output, respectively.
\subsubsection{Results on Varied Sizes of Training Data}
We tested the performance of SubQG with different sizes of training data. The results on LC-QuAD dataset are shown in Figure \ref{fig:trainingPercentage}. With more training data, our query substructure based approaches obtained stable improvements on both precision and recall. Although the merging module impaired the overall precision a little bit, it shows a bigger improvement on recall, especially when there is very few training data. Generally speaking, equipped with the merging module, our substructure based query generation approach showed the best performance.
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{trainingPercentage.pdf}
\caption{Precision, recall and F1-score with varied proportions of training data}
\label{fig:trainingPercentage}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Error Analysis}
\label{sec:error}
We analyzed 100 randomly sampled questions that SubQG did not return correct answers. The major causes of errors are summarized as follows:
\textbf{Query structure errors (71\%)} occurred due to multiple reasons. Firstly, 21\% of error cases have entity mentions that are not correctly detected before query substructure prediction, which highly influenced the prediction result. Secondly, in 39\% of the cases a part of substructure predictors provided wrong prediction, which led to wrong structure ranking results. Finally, in the remaining 11\% of the cases the correct query structure did not appear in the training data, and they cannot be generated by merging substructures.
\textbf{Grounding errors (29\%)} occurred when SubQG generated wrong queries with correct query structures. For example, for the question \emph{``Was Kevin Rudd the prime minister of Julia Gillard"}, SubQG cannot distinguish $\langle JG, primeMinister, KR\rangle$ from $\langle KR,$ $primeMinister,JG\rangle$, since both triples exist in DBpedia. We believe that extra training data are required for fixing this problem.
\section{Related Work}
Alongside with entity and relation linking, existing KBQA systems often leverage formal query generation for complex question answering \cite{ConstraintQG,LC-QuAD}. Based on our investigation, the query generation approaches can be roughly divided into two kinds: \emph{template}-based and \emph{semantic parsing}-based.
Template-based approaches transform the input question into a formal query by employing pre-collected query templates. \citeauthor{KBQA}(\citeyear{KBQA}) collect different natural language expressions for the same query intention from question-answer pairs. \citeauthor{QueryBuilding}(\citeyear{QueryBuilding}) re-implement and evaluate the query generation module in NLIWOD, which selects an existing template by some simple features such as the number of entities and relations in the input question. Recently, several query decomposition methods are studied to enlarge the coverage of the templates. \citeauthor{TemplateQAWWW17}(\citeyear{TemplateQAWWW17}) present a KBQA system named QUINT, which collects query templates for specific dependency structures from question-answer pairs. Furthermore, it rewrites the dependency parsing results for questions with conjunctions, and then performs sub-question answering and answer stitching. \citeauthor{DecompositionTemplate}(\citeyear{DecompositionTemplate}) decompose questions by using a huge number of triple-level templates extracted by distant supervision. Compared with these approaches, our approach predicts all kinds of query substructures (usually 1 to 4 triples) contained in the question, making full use of the training data. Also, our merging method can handle questions with unseen query structures, having a larger coverage and a more stable performance.
Semantic parsing-based approaches translate questions into formal queries using bottom up parsing \cite{SemanticParsing} or staged query graph generation \cite{Staged}.
gAnswer \cite{gAnswer,gAnswer2} builds up semantic query graph for question analysis and utilize subgraph matching for disambiguation.
Recent studies combine parsing based approaches with neural networks, to enhance the ability for structure disambiguation. \citeauthor{ConstraintQG}(\citeyear{ConstraintQG}), \citeauthor{CQAEMNLP}(\citeyear{CQAEMNLP}) and \citeauthor{SQG}(\citeyear{SQG}) build query graphs by staged query generation, and follow an encode-and-compare framework to rank candidate queries with neural networks.
These approaches try to learn entire representations for questions with different query structures by using a single network. Thus, they may suffer from the lack of training data, especially for questions with rarely appeared structures. By contrast, our approach utilizes multiple networks to learn predictors for different query substructures, which can gain a stable performance with limited training data. Also, our approach does not require manually-written rules, and performs stably with noisy linking results.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we introduced SubQG, a formal query generation approach based on frequent query substructures. SubQG firstly utilizes multiple neural networks to predict query substructures contained in the question, and then ranks existing query structures using a combinational function. Moreover, SubQG merges query substructures to build new query structures for questions without appropriate query structures in the training data. Our experiments showed that SubQG achieved superior results than the existing approaches, especially for complex questions.
In future work, we plan to add support for other complex questions whose queries require \textsc{Union}, \textsc{Group By}, or numerical comparison. Also, we are interested in mining natural language expressions for each query substructures, which may help current parsing approaches.
\section{Acknowledgments}
This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 61772264 and 61872172). We would like to thank Yao Zhao for his help in preparing evaluation.
\bibliographystyle{acl_natbib}
|
\section{Host Interfaces for Trusted Execution}
\label{sec:background}
\subsection{Trusted execution environments in clouds}
\label{sec:background:trusted_execution}
We assume that a cloud provider supports CPU-implemented \emph{trusted
execution environments~(TEEs)}. TEEs separate userspace code from the rest of
the system, including privileged software such as the
OS~\cite{tee_model}. Multiple TEE implementations are available, \eg Intel
SGX~\cite{sgx14}, ARM TrustZone~\cite{Trustzone} and AMD SEV~\cite{AMDSEV},
with others under way~\cite{lee2019keystone, multizone, optee}.
Intel's \emph{Software Guard Extensions}~(SGX)~\cite{sgx14} provide new CPU
instructions to create TEEs called \emph{enclaves}. Enclave memory is encrypted
and integrity-protected transparently by the CPU. The CPU controls transitions
from untrusted to enclave code, and only enclave code can access enclave
memory. Due to this isolation, enclave code has no I/O access but must use the
untrusted host.
Intel SGX also supports \emph{attestation}, allowing a remote party to validate
the enclave code. For this, the CPU (i)~measures the enclave's contents by
computing a hash; (ii)~signs the measurement hash; and (iii)~provides it to the
attesting party. The attestor can verify the signature and the hash.
\label{sec:background:app_model}
For the deployment of applications using TEEs, we focus on a
\emph{lift-and-shift} model~\cite{lift-shift}: users deploy unmodified Linux
binaries. For binary compatibility, this requires a \emph{TEE runtime
system}~\cite{baumann2014haven, arnautov2016scone,tsai2017graphene}, which
provides POSIX abstractions. TEE runtime systems must use functionality by the
untrusted host OS for operations outside of the trust domain of the TEE, \eg
when using I/O resources. We refer to the interface between the TEE runtime
system and the host as the \emph{host interface}.
\subsection{Security goals and threat model}
\label{sec:background:threat_model}
We want to prevent an adversary from compromising the \emph{confidentiality}
and \emph{integrity} of the application code and its input and output data.
We consider all software outside the TEE, including the host OS kernel, as
under adversarial control.
We assume that the TEE itself is trustworthy.
Existing attacks against TEEs, \eg Spectre~\cite{lsds_spectre},
Foreshadow~\cite{van2018foreshadow}, Zombieload~\cite{schwarz2019zombieload},
and controlled-channel attacks~\cite{xu2015controlled} are orthogonal to our
work. They exploit flaws in current TEE implementations and can be mitigated
through hardware and/or microcode changes~\cite{microcode_updates}. As the
maturity of TEE implementations, especially new open-source
ones~\cite{IntelSGX,AMDSEV,lee2019keystone}, grows over time, such attacks will
become rarer.
Cache side-channel attacks~\cite{MoghimiIE17, BrasserMDKCS17, GotzfriedESM17}
are not specific to TEEs and are enabled by micro-architectural resource
sharing. They require fundamental mitigations through compiler
techniques~\cite{Varys, DR.SGX, Hyperspace} and defensive
programming~\cite{osvik2006cache, sasy2018zerotrace, cui2018preserving}.
Our threat model instead focuses on attacks against the host interface because
they are easy to carry out and do not assume particular micro-architectural
behaviour. An adversary may compromise (i)~\emph{confidentiality}: they can
observe the parameters, frequencies and sequences of host calls. For example,
they can learn the disk I/O access pattern to determine the application or
workload being run---linear scans and repeated accesses are visible via the
host interface. This side channel discloses information about the TEE
execution; and compromise (ii)~\emph{integrity}: an adversary can modify the
input/output parameters of host calls, repeatedly perform arbitrary host calls
or interfere with their outside execution. For example, an adversary may trick
an enclave into exposing confidential data via \emph{Iago}
attacks~\cite{iago_attack} or hijack its control flow.
\renewcommand{\tabcolsep}{3pt}
\begin{table*}[tbp]
\scriptsize\linespread{0.75}\selectfont\centering
\caption{Security breakdown of parameters in host interface calls for existing
TEE runtime systems}
\label{tbl:TEEinterfaces}
\begin{tabular}{lll ccccc|ccccc}
\toprule
\multicolumn{1}{l}{\multirow{4}{*}{
\textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}TEE\\runtime\\system\end{tabular}}}}
&\multicolumn{1}{l}{\multirow{4}{*}{
\textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Function\end{tabular}}}}
&\multicolumn{1}{l}{\multirow{4}{*}{
\textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Number of\\ host calls
\end{tabular}}}}
&\multicolumn{5}{c}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}\textbf{Out parameters (impact confidentiality)} \\ More difficult to protect \\ $\xrightarrow{\hspace*{4cm}}$\end{tabular}}
&\multicolumn{5}{c}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}\textbf{In parameters (impact integrity)} \\ More difficult to protect \\ $\xrightarrow{\hspace*{4cm}}$ \end{tabular}}\\ \cmidrule(l{2pt}r{2pt}){4-8} \cmidrule(l{2pt}r{2pt}){9-13}
\multicolumn{1}{l}{}
&\multicolumn{1}{c}{}
&\multicolumn{1}{c}{}
&\multicolumn{1}{c}{{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Variable\\ size buffer\end{tabular}}}
&\multicolumn{1}{c}{{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Address\\ range \end{tabular}}}
&\multicolumn{1}{c}{{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Pure\\ identifier \end{tabular}}}
&\multicolumn{1}{c}{{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Impure\\ identifier \end{tabular}}}
&\multicolumn{1}{c}{{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Semantic \\parameters\end{tabular}}}
&\multicolumn{1}{c}{{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Variable\\ size buffer\end{tabular}}}
&\multicolumn{1}{c}{{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Address\\ range \end{tabular}}}
&\multicolumn{1}{c}{{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Pure\\ identifier \end{tabular}}}
&\multicolumn{1}{c}{{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Impure\\ identifier \end{tabular}}}
&\multicolumn{1}{c}{{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Semantic \\parameters\end{tabular}}}
\\ \midrule
\multirow{4}{*}{
\textbf{Panoply}~\cite{shinde2017panoply}}
&{{I/O}} &239 &11 &17 &96 &49 &139 &10 &2 &22 &24 &74
\\
&{{Events}} &22 &-- &-- &5 &-- &22 &-- &-- &2 &-- &8
\\
&{{Time}} &12 &-- &-- &-- &-- &7 &-- &-- &-- &-- &10
\\
&{{Threading}} &29 &1 &-- &10 &-- &17 &2 &-- &4 &-- &10
\\ \midrule
\multirow{4}{*}{\textbf{Graphene-SGX}~\cite{tsai2017graphene}}
&{{I/O}} &29 &3 &1 &18 &6 &19 &3 &2 &2 &4 &7
\\
&{{Events}} &1 &-- &-- &1 &-- &1 &-- &-- &-- &-- &1
\\
&{{Time}} &2 &-- &-- &-- &-- &1 &-- &-- &-- &-- &2
\\
&{{Threading}} &6 &-- &-- &-- &1 &4 &1 &-- &1 &-- &1
\\ \midrule
\multirow{4}{*}{\textbf{Haven}~\cite{baumann2014haven}}
&{{I/O}} &11 &1 &3 &6 &1 &7 &1 &-- &3 &-- &1
\\
&{{Events}} &6 &-- &-- &5 &-- &1 &-- &-- &1 &-- &3
\\
&{{Time}} &1 &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &1
\\
&{{Threading}} &6 &-- &-- &1 &-- &2 &-- &-- &1 &-- &--
\\ \midrule\midrule
\multirow{4}{*}{\textbf{SGX-LKL\xspace}}
&{{I/O}} &4 &2 &-- &-- &-- &2 &2 &-- &-- &-- &--
\\
&{{Events}} &2 &-- &-- &-- &-- &1 &-- &1 &-- &-- &2
\\
&{{Time}} &1 &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &1
\\
&{{Threading}} &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Host interfaces of current TEE runtime systems}
\label{sec:background:host_interfaces}
Next we analyse the security of the host interfaces of four existing TEE
runtime systems:
\tinyskip
\noindent
(1)~\emph{Panoply}~\cite{shinde2017panoply} minimises the size of the
\emph{trusted computing base}~(TCB) inside the TEE. It places the \emph{glibc}
standard C library~\cite{glibc} outside and implements a shim layer that
forwards calls. Panoply exposes the largest host interface because it delegates
all C library calls to the host.
\tinyskip
\noindent
(2)~\emph{SCONE}~\cite{arnautov2016scone} provides a modified \emph{musl}
standard C library~\cite{musl} alongside the application inside the
TEE. Compared to Panoply, SCONE has a larger TCB but a smaller host interface:
it forwards only system calls and not all libc calls to the host. It uses a
custom shim layer to protect I/O calls.
\tinyskip
\noindent
(3)~\emph{Graphene-SGX}~\cite{tsai2017graphene}
reduces the size of the host interface compared to Panoply and SCONE by
implementing a partial library OS inside the TEE. It relies on the host for
the file system, network stack, and threading implementations.
\tinyskip
\noindent
(4)~\emph{Haven}~\cite{baumann2014haven} uses the Drawbridge library
OS~\cite{Drawbridge} to execute Windows applications.
Drawbridge also provides file system and network stack implementations inside
the enclave.
\mypar{Types of host interface parameters} In our security analysis, we focus
on the parameters of host calls because they can leak information to the host
or compromise enclave integrity. We categorise parameters into five types,
ordered by the difficulty of protection from easiest to hardest:
(i)~\emph{variable-sized buffers} pass a user-defined byte array across the
host interface. They are used in file/network I/O operations (\eg the
\code{buf} and \code{count} parameters in the \code{read()}
call~\cite{readsystemcall});
(ii)~\emph{address ranges} represent parameters that refer to regions of
untrusted or trusted memory (\eg the parameters passed to \code{mmap()} and the
return value of \code{malloc()});
(iii)~\emph{pure/impure identifiers} point to entities:
pure identifiers only identify an entity (\eg a file descriptor) ; impure
identifiers also disclose information about the entity (\eg a path name); and
(iv)~\emph{semantic parameters} refer to parameters with opaque semantics
specific to the host call (\eg \code{mode} and \code{flags} for file access
operations).
\tinyskip
\noindent
\T\ref{tbl:TEEinterfaces} shows the number of host calls for each system, split
by function (I/O, events, time, threading).\footnote{For Panoply and
Graphene-SGX, the host calls are taken from the GitHub source
code~\cite{graphenesourcecode, panoplysourcecode}; for Haven, they are
obtained from the paper~\cite{baumann2014haven}. We do not breakdown SCONE's
interface because its implementation is not public. As SCONE forwards system
calls, its host interface is similar to Panoply's.} Panoply has a large
interface, with 302~calls in total; Graphene-SGX and Haven require 38~and
24~calls, respectively.
We break down the parameters according to the above types, distinguishing
between \emph{out} parameters, which are passed to the host and may compromise
confidentiality, and \emph{in} parameters, which are passed into the TEE and
may affect integrity. Return values of calls out of the enclave are considered
to be the same as \emph{in} parameters.
\mypar{Confidentiality attacks} To learn sensitive information, an adversary
may observe \emph{out} parameters:
\tinyskip
\noindent
(i)~\emph{Variable-sized buffers} may contain security-sensitive data. To
ensure confidentiality, such data must be encrypted and padded to a fixed
size. If the true size is exposed, an adversary may infer size-dependent
secrets. For example, in an image classification
application~\cite{KrizhevskySH17}, an adversary may learn the classification by
considering different result buffer lengths.
\T\ref{tbl:TEEinterfaces} shows that Panoply, Graphene-SGX and Haven use 11, 3
and 1 buffers, respectively, for I/O operations; Panoply also uses a buffer to
share messages between threads. Buffers are encrypted but their sizes are
disclosed. Haven has an in-enclave file system and writes data to the host disk
as fixed-sized blocks; SCONE divides files into fixed-size chunks for
authentication but reveals the number of chunks; Graphene-SGX and Panoply do
not provide transparent file encryption. SCONE, Panoply, and Graphene all
reveal file sizes.
\tinyskip
\noindent
(ii)~\emph{Address ranges} passed from the TEE to the host point to continuous
regions of untrusted memory. For I/O operations, Panoply, Graphene-SGX and
Haven expose 17, 1 and 3~address ranges, respectively. An adversary may observe
their usage pattern. For example, Panoply uses untrusted memory for
communication between enclaves that isolate application compartments. The usage
pattern reveals application-specific control flow, \eg secret-dependent
inter-enclave calls.
\tinyskip
\noindent (iii)~\emph{Pure/impure identifiers.} Panoply, SCONE, Graphene-SGX,
and Haven use a large number of identifiers for I/O operations, event handling
and threading. Similar to address ranges, passing identifiers to the host
reveals usage patterns. For example, Cash~\etal\cite{CashGPR15} show that an
adversary can learn database queries by observing record accesses, even if the
queries are executed within a TEE.
Generally, pure identifiers reveal less information than impure identifiers
(\eg file names), as pure identifiers can be chosen randomly. Preventing
information leakage by impure identifiers can only be done on a case-by-case
basis (\eg by replacing file names with hashes). The above systems do not
provide any protection for impure identifiers.
\tinyskip
\noindent
(iv)~\emph{Semantic parameters} have a context-specific meaning and therefore
cannot be encrypted transparently. Existing runtime systems
have a large number of unprotected semantic parameters. For example,
Graphene-SGX, Panoply, and Haven all rely on the host for thread
synchronisation. Graphene-SGX exposes address, operation, value and timeout
parameters of a \code{futex} host call. This gives an adversary detailed
information of the application state and enables attacks such as
\emph{AsyncShock}~\cite{weichbrodt2016asyncshock}, which exploit host control
of enclave threads.
\mypar{Integrity attacks} To compromise integrity, an adversary may tamper with
parameters. Integrity protecting \emph{in} parameters varies in difficulty
according to the parameter type:
\tinyskip
\noindent
(i)~\emph{Variable-sized buffers} passed to the TEE must have their integrity
protected. For I/O calls, Panoply, Graphene-SGX, and Haven use 10, 3 and 1
parameters with variable-sized buffers, respectively. Panoply and Graphene-SGX
also use variable-sized buffers for inter-enclave communication.
This exposes two means of integrity attacks: an adversary may modify (i)~the
buffer contents to violate data integrity; and (ii)~the buffer count to trigger
an overflow. To ensure buffer integrity, the contents must be protected by an
HMAC. The TEE must ensure the freshness of the HMAC, otherwise an adversary can
swap two valid buffers or perform a roll-back attack. Panoply protects the
integrity of the inter-enclave communication buffer using TLS but does not
protect file I/O; Graphene-SGX ensures the integrity of file I/O by maintaining
a Merkle tree of file chunk hashes inside the enclave. Neither Panoply,
Graphene-SGX nor Haven protect the integrity of network I/O for applications
without TLS support.
To prevent buffer overflow attacks, the TEE must check buffer lengths. All
analysed runtime systems do this.
\tinyskip
\noindent (ii)~\emph{Address ranges} are difficult to integrity check. For I/O
operations, Panoply and Graphene-SGX use 2~address ranges each. They check that
the ranges are fully inside or outside of TEE memory, preventing control flow
hijacking~\cite{BiondoCDFS18, lee2017hacking}.
An adversary, however, may still manipulate addresses by reusing old ranges to
roll back data, swapping ranges, or modifying ranges to corrupt data. The three
runtime systems are vulnerable to such attacks, and the only effective
mitigation is to avoid relying on untrusted address ranges.
\tinyskip
\noindent
(iii)~\emph{Pure/impure identifiers} are commonly used as \emph{in} parameters:
Panoply uses 46, 2, and 4 identifiers for I/O, events, and threading,
respectively; Graphene-SGX uses 6~identifiers for I/O and 1 for threading;
Haven uses 3, 1, and 1~identifiers for I/O, events and threading, respectively.
Adversaries may pass invalid or manipulated identifiers: if two file
descriptors are swapped, the enclave may access incorrect files. Such malicious
activity can be detected: Graphene-SGX maintains per-file HMACs, revealing
wrong file descriptors, and incorrect sockets are revealed by TLS.
\tinyskip
\noindent
(iv)~\emph{Semantic parameters} must have their integrity verified on a
case-by-case basis. All three systems use many semantic \emph{in} parameters
for I/O, events, time and threading operations.
For semantic parameters with few valid values, such as \code{errorcode} and
\code{signum}, the TEE can perform explicit checks; for ones with a larger
domain, such as \code{size}, bounds checks are possible. None of these checks
establish semantic correctness though.
Since both Panoply and Graphene-SGX rely on the host file system, they can only
check for the plausibility of returned file meta-data, such as
\texttt{st\_size} and \texttt{st\_blocks}.
\input{sgxlkl_host_interface_table}
\subsection{Designing a secure host interface}
\label{sec:background:sgxlkl}
While host interfaces of existing runtime systems as well as SDKs have also
been shown to contain implementation flaws~\cite{vanbulck2019tale}, the above
issues related to the host interface are more fundamental. We conclude that it
is non-trivial (and at worst impossible) to protect \emph{out} parameters from
leaking information and exposing access patterns and to verify the correctness
of \emph{in} parameters. Therefore, the first step in designing a secure host
interface is to keep it narrow and minimise the number of parameters. Only
functionality that cannot be provided within an enclave should be delegated to
the host.
In addition, we want to reduce the number and complexity of host call
parameters. By building on low-level calls instead of high-level POSIX
abstractions, the parameter types become simpler. For example, Panoply, SCONE,
and Graphene-SGX rely on the host file system and thus must expose impure
identifiers such as file names. A secure host interface should avoid delegating
high-level resource management to the host.
Based on these principles, \T\ref{tbl:TEEinterfaces} shows the host calls and
parameter types of \emph{SGX-LKL\xspace}, our TEE runtime system. It avoids address range
and pure/impure identifiers and only requires a few simple semantic parameters
of which all but one (\code{time}) have a fixed set of valid values or can be
bounds-checked.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
We described SGX-LKL\xspace, a TEE runtime system that is designed around a minimal and
oblivious host interface. SGX-LKL\xspace executes Linux binaries by using the Linux
kernel to provide POSIX abstractions inside of SGX enclaves, and it shuffles
disk blocks to hide access patterns from the host. Ignoring SGX paging effects,
SGX-LKL\xspace{}'s performance overhead is low, even for complex applications such as
TensorFlow.
\section{Evaluation}
\label{sec:eval}
To understand the performance impact of SGX-LKL\xspace{}'s design choices, we evaluate it
with real application workloads and micro-benchmarks. All experiments use
machines with Intel Xeon~E3-1280 4-core CPUs with 8\unit{MB} LLC and SGX~1
support, 64\unit{GB} RAM and a 10-Gbps NIC. The machines run Ubuntu Linux~18.04
(kernel~4.15.0-46) with SGX driver~v2.5.
The EPC size is 128\unit{MB}, and around 90\unit{MB} are available to user
applications. Since this limit is too low for some of our workloads but will
increase substantially in the future with new SGX
implementations~\cite{intelepcsizes}, we first evaluate SGX-LKL\xspace in software-only
mode\footnote{SGX-LKL\xspace executes the same code in both software and hardware modes.}
to ignore the overhead due to EPC paging. After that, we consider SGX-LKL\xspace in
hardware mode to validate how real-world SGX hardware impacts performance. When
using the oblivious host interface, we randomise the disk image and use a large
page cache size.
\subsection{Application performance}
\label{sec:eval:application}
We evaluate the performance of SGX-LKL\xspace with two data-intensive workloads,
TensorFlow~\cite{tf2016mart} and PARSEC~\cite{parsec08chris}.
\label{sec:eval:tensorflow}
\noindent
We use \textbf{TensorFlow}~(TF)~\cite{tf2016mart} for training and
inference. The models are selected from TF's benchmark
suite~\cite{tfbenchmark}, representing different type of networks, including
small (ResNet-34), large (AlexNet, ResNet-101) and deep and low-dimensional
(ResNet-50). The input datasets are CIFAR10~\cite{cifar} and a subset of
ImageNet~\cite{imagenet}. In SGX-LKL\xspace, all experiments are executed with and
without disk encryption and oblivious host calls. To avoid SGX paging effects,
we run in software mode with an enclave size of 12.5\unit{GB}.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth, trim=0 0 0 0,clip]{results_figs/tf_train_tpu.pdf}
\caption{Training throughput with TensorFlow}\label{fig:tf-training-tp}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth, trim=0 0 0 0,clip]{results_figs/tf_eval_tpu.pdf}
\caption{Inference throughput with TensorFlow}
\label{fig:tf-inference-tp}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth, trim=0 5 0 0,clip]{results_figs/tf_dist.pdf}
\caption{Distributed training throughput with TensorFlow}
\label{fig:tf-dist}
\end{figure}
In \F\ref{fig:tf-training-tp}, we report the training throughput with SGX-LKL\xspace in
different modes compared to native execution. SGX-LKL\xspace outperforms native in
software mode: the training throughput of ResNet-34, ResNet-50 and ResNet-101
is higher than native by 28\%, 33\% and 32\%, respectively.
SGX-LKL\xspace achieves better performance due to LKL's implementation of system calls as
standard function calls.
The results also show that the overhead of disk encryption and integrity
checking is negligible.
With oblivious host calls with disk encryption, SGX-LKL\xspace shows a slow-down: the
throughput for AlexNet decreases by 24\%~(ImageNet) and 37\%~(CIFAR10) compared
to software mode, or 14\% and 21\% compared to native execution. The impact of
oblivious host calls on the ResNet models is less: SGX-LKL\xspace{}'s performance is
almost equal to native. This is due to the different I/O characteristics:
AlexNet processes more images than ResNet per second, thus stressing the
oblivious host calls and requiring more shuffle operations.
In \F\ref{fig:tf-inference-tp}, we also explore inference throughput with SGX-LKL\xspace
in different modes compared to native.
The results show the same trend as training: the inference throughput is higher
than the native system by 22\% for AlexNet with ImageNet, 42\% for AlexNet with
CIFAR10, 29\% for ResNet-34, 26\% for ResNet 50, and 20\% for ResNet 101. The
throughput is lower than native with oblivious host calls by 79\% (AlexNet with
ImageNet), 15\% (AlexNet with CIFAR-10), 53\% (ResNet-101), 50\% (ResNet-50),
and 43\% (ResNet-34). We conclude that CPU-intensive networks are less affected
by the oblivious call interface, while I/O-intensive networks are more
affected.
To evaluate performance for distributed applications, we deploy TF with one
parameter server and a varying number of workers, using a batch size of
256.
\F\ref{fig:tf-dist} shows SGX-LKL\xspace's performance compared to native: without
network encryption, SGX-LKL\xspace's throughput is comparable to native: with 4~workers,
SGX-LKL\xspace's throughput is 3\% slower; with the Wireguard VPN, the
throughput decreases to 52\% for 4 workers; and with oblivious network I/O
using a constant rate of 200\unit{Mbps} per peer, the throughput reduces to
34\%. We believe that this is an acceptable security overhead that can be
compensated by scale out.
\label{sec:eval:parsec}
\noindent
To explore the performance of SGX-LKL\xspace with SGX hardware, we use
five~\textbf{PARSEC} benchmarks~\cite{parsec}, ranging from computer vision
algorithms to machine learning, with different working set sizes. We use four
threads, and the input size is ``simlarge''.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth, trim=0 45 0 0,clip]{results_figs/parsec_time.pdf}
\caption{Execution overhead for PARSEC workloads}
\label{fig:parsec-time}
\end{figure}
\label{sec:eval:diskio}
\F\ref{fig:parsec-time} shows the execution of SGX-LKL\xspace with different security
guarantees. Without oblivious host calls, SGX-LKL\xspace in software mode is 1.05$\times$
slower than native. The overhead for \textsf{streamcluster} is 1.07$\times$;
\textsf{fluidanimate} has the same performance as native; for \textsf{canneal}
and \textsf{blackscholes}, the slowdown is around 1.1$\times$ . We note that,
without EPC limits, SGX-LKL\xspace{}'s performance without oblivious calls is comparable
to native.
In hardware mode, the overhead of workloads with the small to medium working
set sizes is 1.3$\times$ (\textsf{streamcluster}), 1.4$\times$
(\textsf{blackscholes}) and 1.7$\times$ (\textsf{bodytrack}). With large
working sets, \textsf{fluidanimate} and \textsf{canneal} are slower by
4$\times$ and 15$\times$, respectively, which is due to the limited EPC size.
With oblivious host calls, \textsf{streamcluster} shows similar overheads in
software (2.4$\times$) and hardware modes (2.8$\times$). Since
\textsf{streamcluster} does not have input files, no shuffling is required, and
the overhead comes from the dummy calls; for benchmarks with input files, \eg
\textsf{blackscholes}, the overhead in hardware mode is higher (3.6$\times$)
due to shuffling. For \textsf{fluidanimate} and \textsf{canneal}, which have
large memory footprints, the overhead is up to 2$\times$ in software; in
hardware mode, it rises to 10$\times$ and 21$\times$, respectively, due to SGX
paging.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.97\columnwidth, trim = 0 45 0 0, clip]{results_figs/sgxlkl_disk_io_no_obl.pdf}
\caption{Disk performance with encryption/integrity protection}
\label{fig:disk}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Disk I/O performance}
We evaluate disk I/O performance by measuring the sequential read throughput
for an uncached 1\unit{GB} file on SSD. We consider: (i)~unencrypted; (ii)~full
disk encryption~(\textsf{FDE}) via \emph{dm-crypt} using AES-XTS; and (iii)~FDE
and integrity protection via \emph{dm-crypt} and \emph{dm-integrity} using
AES-GCM.
\F\ref{fig:disk} shows that SGX-LKL\xspace achieves near native performance without
encryption or integrity protection, fully saturating the SSD bandwidth of
approx.\ 510\unit{MB/sec}. With \textsf{FDE}, the throughput decreases to
320\unit{MB/sec} (62\%) of native throughput in hardware mode. Enabling
integrity protection further reduces throughput to around
230\unit{MB/sec}~(45\%). This shows the benefit of using x86-specific
cryptographic instructions.
\subsection{Network I/O performance}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth, trim = 0 10 0 0, clip]{results_figs/sgxlkl_net_io.pdf}
\caption{Network I/O throughput for different buffer sizes}
\label{fig:network}
\end{figure}
We evaluate network performance by measuring throughput for different buffer
sizes with \emph{iperf} v3.1.3~\cite{iperf3}.
\F\ref{fig:network} shows that throughput increases with larger buffer sizes:
for 256\unit{byte} packets, SGX-LKL\xspace reaches about 0.7$\times$ and 0.9$\times$ of
native throughput in hardware and software modes, respectively; for small
buffers, the throughput is client-bound. Native saturates the network bandwidth
of about 9.4\unit{Gbps} with 4\unit{KB} buffers. Here SGX-LKL\xspace reaches
5.1\unit{Gbps}~(0.5$\times$) in hardware and 5.7\unit{Gbps}~(0.6$\times$) in
software mode.
Due to its support for TCP segmentation offloading, SGX-LKL\xspace performs better with
larger buffers: with 64\unit{KB} buffers, it reaches a throughput of
8.4\unit{Gbps} (0.9$\times$) and 8.8\unit{Gbps} (0.9$\times$) for hardware and
software modes, respectively.
With Wireguard and 256\unit{byte} buffers, throughput for hardware and software
mode is 0.44\unit{Gbps} and 0.54\unit{Gbps}, respectively; with buffers larger
than 4\unit{KB}, the throughput increases to 2\unit{Gbps}, and decryption
becomes the bottleneck.
\section{Protecting the host interface}
\label{sec:hardening}
\subsection{Protecting disk I/O calls}
\label{sec:hardening:filesystem}
Host disk blocks must have their confidentiality and integrity protected. SGX-LKL\xspace
uses the Linux \emph{device mapper} subsystem~\cite{devicemapper}, which maps
virtual block devices, such as SGX-LKL\xspace{}'s virtio backend, to higher-level
devices, and allows I/O data to be transformed. File systems such as
\emph{ext4} use a virtual block device, and data is encrypted and integrity
protected transparently before it reaches the underlying device.
SGX-LKL\xspace uses different device mapper targets: (i)~\emph{dm-crypt}~\cite{dmcrypt}
provides full-disk encryption using AES in XTS mode with the sector number as
an initialisation vector; (ii)~\emph{dm-verity}~\cite{dmverity} offers
volume-level read-only integrity protection through a Merkle tree of disk block
hashes, with the root node stored in memory; and
(iii)~\emph{dm-integrity}~\cite{dmintegrity} provides key-based block-level
read/write integrity protection. \emph{dm-crypt} and \emph{dm-integrity} can be
combined for full disk encryption with read/write integrity via AES-GCM. For
AES-XTS/AES-GCM, SGX-LKL\xspace uses hardware AES-NI instructions.
SGX-LKL\xspace combines the different targets to provide both confidentiality and
integrity for block reads/writes, depending on the security requirements of the
application. For example, for an in-memory key-value store such as
\emph{Memcached}~\cite{memcached}, it is sufficient to protect the integrity of
a read-only disk with \emph{dm-verity}: the Memcached binary stored on disk
must have its integrity protected, but no further sensitive data is stored on
the disk. If the application itself is confidential or other application data
is written to disk, \emph{dm-crypt} can be used with either of the integrity
protection targets. SGX-LKL\xspace's use of LKL also allows it to support other device
mapper based protection targets such as \emph{dm-x}~\cite{chakraborti2017dmx},
which provides full volume-level read/write integrity and replay
protection. The use of different targets affects I/O performance, as we explore
in~\S\ref{sec:eval:diskio}.
\subsection{Protecting network I/O calls}
\label{sec:hardening:network}
SGX-LKL\xspace must guarantee the confidentiality and integrity of all network data.
Existing TEE runtime systems either require applications to have built-in
support for network encryption~\cite{baumann2014haven, tsai2017graphene,
shinde2017panoply} or use TLS~\cite{arnautov2016scone}. Some applications
though do not support TLS (\eg Tensorflow) or use other transport protocols
(\eg UDP-based streaming).
Instead, SGX-LKL\xspace exploits its TCP/IP network stack inside the enclave, which
enables it to provide transparent low-level network encryption. All data
received and sent via the \code{net\_read()} and \code{net\_write()} host calls
is automatically encrypted, authenticated and integrity-protected. To protect
all network traffic, SGX-LKL\xspace uses \emph{Wireguard}~\cite{wireguard}, a layer 3 VPN
protocol, currently proposed for inclusion in the Linux
kernel~\cite{inclusion}.
SGX-LKL\xspace sets up Wireguard at initialisation time and exposes the VPN to the
application through a network interface with its own IP address. An application
binding to this IP address is only reachable by trusted nodes in the VPN. Each
Wireguard \emph{peer} has a public/private key pair, which is bound to a VPN IP
address and an endpoint, an (IP, port)-pair through which the VPN is
accessible. Wireguard uses the asymmetric key pairs to establish ephemeral
symmetric session keys to protect messages using authenticated encryption, and
nonces to prevent replay attacks. In contrast to TLS, which uses certificates,
Wireguard identifies parties through public keys. It does not perform key
distribution---SGX-LKL\xspace binds keys to enclave identities and supports provisioning
of peers' keys (see~\S\ref{sec:attestation}).
\subsection{Protecting event and time calls}
\label{sec:hardening:protectingremaining}
For the remaining calls in Table~\ref{tab:hostinterface}, SGX-LKL\xspace must ensure that
an adversary cannot learn confidential data or compromise integrity by
providing invalid data.
\mypar{\code{net\_poll()}}
While the \code{eventmask} reveals if the enclave wants to receive/send
packets, this is already disclosed by the presence of \code{net\_read} and
\code{net\_write} calls. An adversary can return a wrong \code{eventmask}: as a
result, either the \code{net\_read} call fails, which can be handled
transparently, or an invalid packet is read that fails Wireguard's integrity
protection (see~\S\ref{sec:hardening:network}).
\mypar{\code{forward\_signal()}}
SGX-LKL\xspace must ensure that signals correspond to genuine events with valid signal
descriptions; otherwise an adversary can cause an application signal handler to
execute with invalid signal data. For signals due to hardware exceptions, SGX-LKL\xspace
ensures that the address lies within the enclave range (\eg \code{SIGSEGV}) or
replaces the address with the current instruction pointer for signals that
refer to a faulting instruction (\eg \code{SIGILL} and \code{SIGFPE}). SGX-LKL\xspace can
be configured to ignore user-controlled signals (\eg \code{SIGINT}).
\mypar{\code{time\_read()}}
A challenge to integrity is that the time cannot be trusted. An adversary may
return a timestamp that is not monotonically increasing and thus causes an
underflow when an application calculates a timespan. SGX-LKL\xspace therefore checks for
monotonicity for \code{CLOCK\_MONOTONIC\_*} clock sources.
Future TEE implementations may provide practical trustworthy time sources,
which SGX-LKL\xspace could use.
\subsection{Runtime attestation and secret provisioning}
\label{sec:attestation}
SGX-LKL\xspace must execute securely in an untrusted and potentially malicious
environment. For this, parties must (i)~remotely attest that they execute a
trustworthy version of SGX-LKL\xspace in an SGX enclave; (ii)~deploy applications
securely, \ie guaranteeing the confidentiality and integrity of application
code; and (iii)~provision applications with secrets such as cryptographic keys
and sensitive application configuration.
The above requirements go beyond attestation in current SGX
SDKs~\cite{intelsdk, openenclave}, which assume that all application code is
compiled into the library, and a single measurement suffices to verify
integrity. They also do not protect application confidentiality, and leave it
to applications to implement custom mechanisms for secret provisioning, which is
cumbersome.
SGX-LKL\xspace addresses these issues as part of three phases: (i)~\emph{application
provisioning}, (ii)~\emph{remote attestation} and (iii)~\emph{secret
provisioning}.
\F\ref{fig:deployment} shows the deployment workflow, involving three parties:
(i)~a \emph{service provider}~(SP) that wants to deploy an application and has
a trusted client. For a distributed application, this may involve deploying
multiple trusted peers; (ii)~an untrusted host controlled by a \emph{cloud
provider}~(CP) provides enclaves; and (iii)~the \emph{Intel Attestation
Service}~(IAS), which allows the SP to verify an enclave measurement.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/sgxlkl_deployment}
\caption{Deployment workflow for SGX-LKL\xspace}
\label{fig:deployment}
\end{figure}
\mypar{(1)~Application provisioning} In~\ctag{1}, the trusted client creates a
disk image with the application binary and its dependencies, \eg by exporting a
Docker container~\cite{docker}. SGX-LKL\xspace provides a \code{sgx-lkl-create} tool to
simplify image creation. The tool is based on
\emph{cryptsetup}~\cite{cryptsetup}, which configures \emph{dm-crypt} for disk
encryption/integrity protection. It outputs the encryption key and the root
hash of the Merkle tree for \emph{dm-verity} protection. In~\ctag{2}, the disk
image is sent to the CP. For attestation, the client generates a Wireguard
asymmetric key pair in~\ctag{3}.
\mypar{(2)~Remote attestation} In~\ctag{4}, the public attestation key and the
image disk ID are sent to the cloud host. The host creates an enclave with
\emph{libsgxlkl.so}\xspace (\ctag{5}). \emph{libsgxlkl.so}\xspace boots LKL, sets up networking and generates
its Wireguard key pair.
Now the enclave can be attested: \emph{libsgxlkl.so}\xspace creates a report with an enclave
measurement. SGX allows custom data to be included with the report, which SGX-LKL\xspace
uses to add the generated public key. The report is signed by a \emph{quoting
enclave}, and the quote, together with the enclave's public key, is returned
to the SP (\ctag{6}). In~\ctag{7}, the SP sends the quote to the IAS, which
returns a verification report that is checked.
\mypar{(3)~Secret provisioning} After successful attestation, the SP
establishes a secure channel with the enclave through its public
key. \emph{libsgxlkl.so}\xspace accepts only one Wireguard peer so that no other party can
communicate with the enclave.
In~\ctag{8}, the SP sends to the enclave: (i)~the disk encryption key; (ii)~the
root hash; (iii)~public keys of other trusted peers; and (iv)~configuration
data, including the executable path and its arguments. In~\ctag{9}, \emph{libsgxlkl.so}\xspace
mounts the disk and sets up device mapper for decryption/integrity. It adds the
new Wireguard peers, loads the application, and begins execution.
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
In healthcare~\cite{oliver2006healthgear, al2012security, zhang2010security}
and finance~\cite{chellappa2002perceived, kim2008trust}, it is challenging to
run sensitive workloads in public cloud environments due to security
concerns~\cite{csacloudthreats}. For example, when training a machine learning
model, both the training data and the model may be confidential, and the
integrity of the model must be ensured.
In clouds, the data and computation may be disclosed or corrupted due to
infrastructure bugs~\cite{gunawi2014bugs},
misconfigurations~\cite{techrepublicdropboxleaks}, rogue
administrators~\cite{insiderAttacks, duncan2012insider}, or external
attacks~\cite{gruschka2010attack, CloudAttacks}.
Modern Intel~\cite{sgx14}, ARM~\cite{Trustzone} and AMD~\cite{AMDSEV} CPUs
offer hardware support for \emph{trusted execution
environments}~(TEEs)~\cite{sabt2015trusted}. A TEE protects the
confidentiality and integrity of computation and data by shielding it from the
rest of the system. Intel's \emph{Software Guard Extensions}~(SGX)~\cite{sgx14}
add new instructions to execute code within isolated memory regions called
\emph{enclaves}. Enclaves are encrypted by the CPU.
Cloud providers have begun to roll out support for
TEEs~\cite{microsoftconfidential, ibmcloud}. This makes a ``lift-and-shift''
model---in which tenants move a whole application to a TEE---an attractive
proposition. TEE runtime systems, such as Haven~\cite{baumann2014haven},
SCONE~\cite{arnautov2016scone} and Graphene-SGX~\cite{tsai2017graphene}, have
demonstrated the feasibility of executing complete Linux applications inside
TEEs with acceptable performance overheads.
When applications inside a TEE require external resources, such as files, the
network or other OS functions, they must rely on the untrusted host OS. TEE
runtime systems therefore have a host interface, but its security implications
are poorly understood and handled: the host interface may (i)~accidentally
expose state from the TEE to the outside by leaking sensitive data in
calls~\cite{ta2006splitting}; (ii)~act as a side channel where the existence or
absence of a call reveals application state~\cite{wang2018interface}; and
(iii)~have a malicious implementation and thus compromise application integrity
inside the TEE~\cite{iago_attack}.
Existing TEE runtime systems vary in the types of interfaces that they expose
to hosts, and the nature of the interface is a consequence of their design.
We explore the opposite approach: we begin our design of a TEE runtime system
with a desired secure host interface, and then decide on the necessary system
support inside the TEE. We aim for a host interface with three properties:
(1)~\emph{minimality}---only functionality that cannot be provided inside the
TEE should be part of it; (2)~\emph{protection}---all data that crosses the
host interface must be encrypted and integrity-protected; and
(3)~\emph{obliviousness}---the presence or absence of host calls should not
disclose information about the application state.
We describe \textbf{SGX-LKL\xspace}, a new TEE runtime system that executes unmodified
Linux binaries inside SGX enclaves while exposing a minimal, data-protected
and oblivious host interface.\footnote{SGX-LKL\xspace is available as open-source
software: \url{https://github.com/lsds/sgx-lkl}.} The design of SGX-LKL\xspace makes
three contributions:
\tinyskip
\noindent
\textbf{(1)~Minimal host interface~(\S\ref{sec:design}).} SGX-LKL\xspace only requires
7~host interface calls, which expose low-level functionality for block-level
I/O for storage and packet-level I/O for networking. Higher-level POSIX
functionality is implemented in SGX-LKL\xspace by porting a complete Linux-based library
OS to an SGX enclave. SGX-LKL\xspace uses the \emph{Linux Kernel
Library}~(LKL)~\cite{purdila2010lkl} for a mature POSIX implementation with a
virtual file system layer and a TCP/IP network stack.
\tinyskip
\noindent
\textbf{(2)~Protected host interface~(\S\ref{sec:hardening}).} SGX-LKL\xspace ensures
that all I/O operations across the host interface are encrypted and
integrity-protected transparently: (i)~for file I/O, SGX-LKL\xspace uses an encrypted
Linux \emph{ext4} root file system image stored outside of the SGX enclave,
which is accessed using the Linux \emph{device mapper}
subsystem~\cite{devicemapper}; and (ii)~for network I/O, SGX-LKL\xspace creates a
\emph{virtual private network}~(VPN) overlay that secures all network
traffic. Layer-3 IP packets are encrypted by the in-kernel
Wireguard~\cite{wireguard} VPN implementation.
To verify the integrity of a SGX-LKL\xspace instance and provide cryptographic keys, SGX-LKL\xspace
supports a runtime attestation and provisioning process: it first attests the
integrity of the SGX-LKL\xspace implementation inside the SGX enclave and then provisions
the instance with the keys required to access the encrypted root file system
image and the VPN channels.
\tinyskip
\noindent
\textbf{(3)~Oblivious host interface~(\S\ref{sec:hardening:oblivious}).} To
prevent any information leakage as part of the host interface, SGX-LKL\xspace makes the
calls independent of the application workload inside of the SGX enclave:
(i)~it executes host calls in fixed batches, and each batch includes the same
number of calls by adding indistinguishable dummy calls; (ii)~for block I/O
requests, SGX-LKL\xspace uses an oblivious construction that reuses the existing
\emph{ext4} file system image format. The encrypted blocks in the file system
image are randomised and shuffled, which only exposes random access patterns
to the host. Between shuffles, SGX-LKL\xspace reads a block at most once by relying on
the in-enclave page cache; and (iii)~for network I/O, SGX-LKL\xspace sends fixed-size
packets and makes use of Linux' traffic shaping capabilities to ensure a
constant traffic bitrate between trusted nodes.
\tinyskip
\noindent
Our experimental evaluation shows that SGX-LKL\xspace{}'s host interface has a reasonable
performance overhead. With emulated SGX enclaves (to ignore current SGX memory
limitations) and oblivious calls, SGX-LKL\xspace trains common deep neural network models
using TensorFlow~\cite{tensorflow} with an overhead of 14\%--21\% on one
machine and 2.7$\times$--2.9$\times$ in a distributed deployment. With SGX
hardware, SGX-LKL\xspace runs PARSEC benchmarks that fit into SGX memory with an overhead
of 3.1$\times$ and 1.5$\times$ with and without oblivious calls, respectively.
\section{Minimising the host interface}
\label{sec:design}
\T\ref{tab:hostinterface} shows SGX-LKL\xspace{}'s host interface, which has only 7~calls
with functionality that cannot be provided inside enclaves.
\subsection{SGX-LKL\xspace{} host interface}
\label{sec:design:host_interface}
\mypar{I/O operations} SGX-LKL\xspace uses a low-level I/O interface: for disk I/O,
\code{disk\_read()} and \code{disk\_write()} read/write a disk block from/to a
persistent block device, respectively. Each call takes an \code{offset} into
the block device and a pointer \code{buf} to a buffer; for network I/O,
\code{net\_read()} and \code{net\_write()} receive and send fixed-size network
packets using buffer \code{buf}.
\mypar{Events} A \code{net\_poll()} call passes an \code{eventmask} to the host
with the network events that SGX-LKL\xspace is waiting for. The call blocks until network
packets are available to be read or outgoing packets can be sent. It returns
which events have occurred.
SGX-LKL\xspace must handle hardware exceptions, such as page access violations or illegal
instructions. An exception causes an enclave exit and transfers control to the
host kernel. A \code{forward\_signal()} call provides the signal description to
the enclave: the signal number \code{num}, the cause \code{code}, and the
associated memory address \code{addr}. The exception is then either processed
by SGX-LKL\xspace directly or forwarded to the application if it has registered a
corresponding signal handler.
\mypar{Time} The call \code{time\_read()} reads time from different clock
sources. It is used by application code and by SGX-LKL\xspace, \eg to generate timer
interrupts required by LKL (see~\S\ref{sec:design:system_support}).
\subsection{In-enclave OS functionality}
\label{sec:design:system_support}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.95\linewidth]{figs/sgxlkl_architecture}
\caption{SGX-LKL\xspace{} architecture}
\label{fig:architecture}
\end{figure}
Its host interface allows SGX-LKL\xspace to access low-level resources, but Linux
applications require higher-level POSIX abstractions. To bridge this gap, SGX-LKL\xspace
provides the following OS functions inside the enclave: (i)~file system
implementations; (ii)~a TCP/IP network stack; (iii)~threading and scheduling;
(iv)~memory management; (v)~signal handling; and (vi)~time. Rather than
invoking these OS functions through systems calls directly, applications link
against a standard C library~(\emph{libc}). Similar to other
systems~\cite{arnautov2016scone, tsai2017graphene}, SGX-LKL\xspace includes a libc
implementation to support unmodified dynamically-linked binaries.
\F\ref{fig:architecture} shows the SGX-LKL\xspace architecture. Next we describe the OS
functionality provided inside the enclave in detail. Components covered in this
section are shown in blue; the parts responsible for protecting the host
interface (shown in green) and for making the interface oblivious (shown in
orange) are described in \S\ref{sec:hardening} and
\S\ref{sec:hardening:oblivious}, respectively.
An untrusted loader, \emph{sgx-lkl-run}\xspace, creates the SGX enclave and loads the enclave
library \emph{libsgxlkl.so}\xspace, which runs alongside the application within the enclave.
\emph{libsgxlkl.so}\xspace includes a modified \emph{musl}~\cite{musl} C standard library that
redirects system calls to an in-enclave library OS provided by the \emph{Linux
Kernel Library}~(LKL)~\cite{purdila2010lkl}. LKL is an architecture port of
the Linux kernel to userspace. It enables SGX-LKL\xspace to make components such as the
Linux kernel page cache, work queues, file system and network stack
implementations, and crypto libraries available inside the enclave. As it is
intended to run in userspace, LKL expects a set of \emph{LKL host operations},
\eg to create threads or to allocate memory. Therefore, \emph{libsgxlkl.so}\xspace includes
further components for memory management, user-level threading, signal
handling and time.
\mypar{File systems} Existing TEE runtime systems~\cite{arnautov2016scone,
tsai2017graphene, shinde2017panoply} forward POSIX file operations to the
host. SGX-LKL\xspace cannot adopt this approach because it would expose
security-sensitive metadata, such as file names, file sizes and directory
structures. Instead, it provides complete in-enclave file system
implementations via the Linux \emph{virtual file system}~(VFS)
layer~\cite{vfs}. The VFS layer only requires two host operations for
block-level disk I/O (\code{disk\_read()} and \code{disk\_write()}, see
Table~\ref{tab:hostinterface}).
Applications operate on files through file descriptors as usual, which are
handled by the \emph{ext4} file system implementation of LKL. LKL forwards
block-level I/O requests to a \emph{virtio block device} backend implemented by
\emph{libsgxlkl.so}\xspace, which issues \code{disk\_read()} and \code{disk\_write()} calls. On
the host, the reads and writes are made to a single \emph{ext4} disk image
file. The image is mapped into memory by \emph{sgx-lkl-run}\xspace. Since the image file has a
fixed size, the read/write operations can be implemented efficiently by
memory-mapping the file and directly accessing the mapped region from within
the enclave.
This approach has three advantages: (i)~it maintains a small host interface
with only 2~disk I/O calls; (ii)~it ensures that individual file accesses are
not visible to the host, which can only observe reads/writes to disk block
offsets; and (iii)~the in-enclave VFS implementation supports different file
systems, such as the \code{/tmp}, \code{/proc} and \code{/dev} in-memory file
systems.
\mypar{TCP/IP network stack} To provide POSIX sockets, SGX-LKL\xspace uses LKL's TCP/IP
stack for in-enclave packet processing. This: (i)~minimises the host interface
because it only accesses a virtual network device to send/receive Ethernet
frames; (ii)~enables SGX-LKL\xspace to support any transport protocol (\eg UDP) without
extra host calls; and (iii)~exposes Linux features such as packet encryption
(see~\S\ref{sec:hardening:network}).
To send/receive network traffic, \emph{sgx-lkl-run}\xspace sets up a layer-2 TAP device. SGX-LKL\xspace
implements a corresponding \emph{virtio network device} backend inside the
enclave. To be notified about incoming/outgoing packets, the backend issues a
\code{net\_poll()} request. The return value indicates if the device is ready
for reading/writing packets using \code{net\_read()} and \code{net\_write()}.
\mypar{Memory management} SGX-LKL\xspace does not interact with the host for memory
allocations/deallocations but a limitation of SGX version~1 is that the enclave
size must be fixed at initialisation time.
SGX-LKL\xspace therefore pre-allocates enclave memory and provides low-level memory
management primitives inside the enclave. When an enclave is created, it
initially contains \emph{libsgxlkl.so}\xspace,
and an uninitialised heap area. The heap area is exposed through both LKL
functions (\code{mmap()}, \code{mremap()}, \code{munmap()}) and higher-level
\emph{libc} functions (\code{malloc()}, \code{free()}).
SGX-LKL\xspace supports both variable- and fixed-address anonymous mappings, and tracks
free pages via a heap allocation bitmap. It implements \code{mmap()} by
scanning the bitmap for consecutive free pages large enough for the requested
allocation. To support private file mappings, files are loaded into enclave
because SGX enclaves are bound to a linear address space.
SGX-LKL\xspace must support changes to page permissions, \eg when loading
libraries. Applications may also modify permissions directly: \eg the Java
Virtual Machine~(JVM) requires executable pages for just-in-time~(JIT)
compilation and changes of permissions for guard pages during garbage
collection. While SGX pages have their own permissions, SGX version~1 requires
permissions to be fixed on enclave creation.
As a workaround, SGX-LKL\xspace uses an extra \code{mem\_protect()} host call for SGX
version 1 execution. All enclave pages are created with full SGX page
permissions and the actual permissions are set via the host-controlled page
table permissions. Since relying on the host to manage page permissions is a
security risk, SGX version~2 adds the ability to control page permissions from
within the enclave.
\mypar{Thread management} SGX allows multiple host threads to enter an enclave,
The maximum number of \emph{enclave threads}, however, must be specified at
enclave creation time, which prevents dynamic thread creation. In addition, a
one-to-one mapping between enclave and application threads means that the
creation, joining as well as synchronisation of threads requires host OS
support, posing a security risk~\cite{weichbrodt2016asyncshock}.
Therefore, SGX-LKL\xspace implements user-level threading based on the \emph{lthread}
library~\cite{lthread} and provides synchronisation primitives inside the
enclave. A fixed number of host threads are assigned to enclave threads, which
enter the enclave at startup and only leave when idle. Application threads and
LKL kernel threads are \emph{lthreads}, managed via the standard
\emph{pthreads} interface. SGX-LKL\xspace implements \emph{futex} calls in-enclave to provide
synchronisation primitives such as mutexes and semaphores.
\mypar{Signals} Applications can register custom signal handlers to handle
exceptions, interrupts or user-defined signals. Some signals (\code{SIGALRM})
are handled entirely within the enclave; others (\code{SIGSEGV}, \code{SIGILL})
are caused by hardware exceptions, exit the enclave and return control to the
host OS. SGX-LKL\xspace forwards these signals from the host to in-enclave handlers.
During initialisation, \emph{sgx-lkl-run}\xspace registers signal handlers for all catchable
signals with the host. All signals are forwarded via
\code{forward\_signal()}, which hides application-specific handlers. SGX-LKL\xspace
then checks for a corresponding application-registered signal handler and, if
present, delivers the signal. Since application-registered signal handlers
are managed within the enclave, calls such as \code{sigaction()} and
\code{sigprocmask()} are supported without host interaction.
\mypar{Time} Applications, libraries and LKL frequently access time
information. In addition, SGX-LKL\xspace reads the current time between context switches
to reschedule blocked threads to trigger timer interrupts. Current SGX
implementations, however, do not offer a high-performance in-enclave time
source, and SGX-LKL\xspace relies on time provided by the host.
Instead of issuing expensive individual host calls, SGX-LKL\xspace uses the \emph{virtual
dynamic shared object}~(vDSO)~\cite{vdso} mechanism of the Linux kernel. The
kernel maps a small shared library to the address space outside of the
enclave. On each clock tick, the host kernel updates a shared memory location
with the current time for various clock sources, which are read from within the
enclave when a time-related call is made.
For high precision, the vDSO mechanism requires the \code{RDTSCP} instruction
to adjust for the time passed since the last vDSO update. In SGX version~1,
this instruction is not permitted inside enclaves. The accuracy of
\code{clock\_gettime()} in SGX-LKL\xspace thus depends on the frequency of vDSO updates;
SGX version~2 does not have this limitation.
\mypar{Illegal instructions} Applications may use the \code{RDTSC} instruction
to read the timestamp counter or \code{CPUID} to obtain CPU features. These
instructions, however, are illegal inside SGX version~1 enclaves.
SGX-LKL\xspace catches the resulting \code{SIGILL} exception and emulates the
instructions: \code{RDTSC} is executed outside the enclave, and the result is
forwarded via the \code{forward\_signal()} call; for \code{CPUID}, SGX-LKL\xspace caches
all \code{CPUID} information during enclave set-up. This eliminates the need
for an extra host call and also hides the \code{CPUID} request by the
application.
\section{Making the host interface oblivious}
\label{sec:hardening:oblivious}
As explained in \S\ref{sec:background:host_interfaces}, an adversary can
compromise application confidentiality by observing:
(i)~\emph{frequencies} of calls, \ie their number and time intervals. For
example, there may be more host calls when an application processes data on
disk, thus revealing execution information;
(ii)~\emph{sequences} of calls, \ie the call order and the relationships
between them. For example, an application may always execute reads before
writes, allowing an adversary to make inferences about the execution; and
(iii)~\emph{parameters} of calls. Although SGX-LKL\xspace encrypts data
blocks~(\S\ref{sec:hardening:filesystem}), the block offsets reveal file
locations. Observing the same offset discloses the data layout.
The main idea for mitigation against these side-channels is to make the host
call interface \emph{oblivious}~\cite{GoldreichO96ORAM}, \ie the sequence and
frequency of calls as well as observable parameters become workload
independent. We focus on the disk~(\S\ref{sec:oblivious:disk}) and
network~(\S\ref{sec:oblivious:network}) I/O host calls and discuss other calls
in \S\ref{sec:oblivious:discussion}.
\subsection{Disk I/O calls}
\label{sec:oblivious:disk}
SGX-LKL\xspace exposes two disk I/O calls to the host: \code{disk\_read()} and
\code{disk\_write()}. These read and write fixed-size encrypted blocks at the
specified offset (see~\S\ref{sec:hardening:filesystem}). To prevent these calls
from revealing information, SGX-LKL\xspace employs several techniques: (i)~regarding
frequencies, SGX-LKL\xspace \emph{discretises} the execution of read/write calls into
fixed time-interval rounds. In each round, it executes a fixed number of calls
in a \emph{batch}, potentially adding indistinguishable \emph{dummy} calls;
(ii)~regarding sequences, SGX-LKL\xspace makes the order of read/write calls
\emph{deterministic} per batch by issuing them in a predefined order, \eg
always executing reads before writes; and (iii)~regarding parameters, SGX-LKL\xspace
ensures that all call parameters appear \emph{random}, obscuring patterns. SGX-LKL\xspace
makes accesses \emph{oblivious} by using seemingly random \code{offset}
parameters. Repeated accesses to the same disk block appear indistinguishable.
\label{sec:oblivious:disk:freq}
\mypar{Hiding disk I/O accesses} sys discretises the execution of all calls
into fixed interval batches. Every $t$~time units, SGX-LKL\xspace performs a single
\code{disk\_read()} followed by a \code{disk\_write()}. When the LKL filesystem
layer~(see~\S\ref{sec:design:system_support}) issues a disk I/O call, instead
of submitting it directly to the host, it is added to a queue. SGX-LKL\xspace{}'s
\code{lthread} scheduler checks if enough time has elapsed, and then issues the
next call from the queue.
If there are too many read/write calls in the queue, the remaining calls are
delayed until the next batch. Conversely, if there are not enough read/write
calls from the application, SGX-LKL\xspace issues \emph{dummy} calls to random blocks in
order to pad that batch. This is done through dummy files in the file system
and reading/writing blocks of those files.
The timing parameter~$t$ must be tuned for good performance because
applications issue system calls at different rates: if $t$ is lower than the
application's call rate, SGX-LKL\xspace will issue more batches with dummy calls; if $t$
is too high, the application will make slow progress.
In our experiments, we use $t=\mathrm{0.1\unit{ms}}$, which works well across
a range of applications workloads.
\label{sec:oblivious:disk:param}
\mypar{Hiding disk I/O parameters} The call
parameters~(see~\T\ref{tab:hostinterface}) still leak information: (i)~the data
in \code{buf}; (ii)~the disk \code{offset}; and (iii)~the buffer
length~\code{len}. To hide \code{buf}, SGX-LKL\xspace adopts \emph{probabilistic
encryption}~\cite{probablistic-enc}, which re-encrypts data before writing
it~(see~\S\ref{sec:hardening:filesystem}). This prevents an adversary from
discerning if written data is old or new.
To hide the \code{offset}, two traces of block accesses must be
indistinguishable. File I/O calls from the application pass through the file
system layer, which may handle them from the in-enclave LKL page cache, or
expose them to the host. The file system layer stores the mapping from logical
to physical blocks. To hide repeated block accesses, SGX-LKL\xspace must:
(i)~\emph{randomise} the disk layout before application execution, hiding the
initial block mapping; and (ii)~\emph{shuffle} blocks by changing the mapping
in a manner opaque to the adversary.
Existing \emph{oblivious RAM}~(ORAM)~\cite{GoldreichO96ORAM,
StefanovCCS13PathORAM, wang2015circuit, devadas2016onion,
sumongkayothin2016recursive, liu2019h} constructions can be used to hide
block accesses. LKL's page cache is well-suited to employ square root
ORAM~\cite{GoldreichO96ORAM}---the page cache is analogous to a ``shelter''. As
it is private, it precludes the need to scan it in its entirety for each access
and allows data to be accessed directly. After a block was added to the page
cache, subsequent accesses to the same block are served directly, until the
page is removed, or flushed to disk. If evicted blocks are requested again, the
adversary would observe this. Therefore, SGX-LKL\xspace must \emph{obliviously reshuffle}
blocks before continuing execution~\cite{GoldreichO96ORAM}.
An \emph{oblivious shuffle} moves blocks around so that an adversary cannot
correlate the blocks before and after the shuffle. SGX-LKL\xspace uses a
\emph{k-oblivious shuffle}~\cite{patel2018cacheshuffle}.
This assumes that $k$ of the $n$~source blocks are in the private cache. The
algorithm then sequentially moves the $n$~blocks from the source (either from
the disk or from the cache) to the destination according to a randomly
generated permutation of the blocks.
\newcommand\mycommfont[1]{\footnotesize\textcolor{blue}{#1}}
\SetCommentSty{mycommfont}
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\footnotesize\linespread{0.8}
\SetAlgoLined
\SetNoFillComment
\KwData{ \hspace{0.2em} FDs: file descriptors of files to be shuffled \\ \hspace{3.1em} LP: logical to physical block mapping for file system}
\KwResult{LP\_n: new logical to physical block mapping for file system}
\For(\tcp*[h]{find file with largest size}){fd in FDs} {\label{alg:max:start}
file\_blk := num\_blocks(fd)\;
max\_blk := max(max\_blk, file\_blk)\;
num\_shuff\_blk := num\_shuff\_blk + file\_blk\; \label{alg:max:end}
}
\tcc{create donor files to be used for the swap}
free\_blk := get\_num\_free\_blocks\_in\_fs()\;\label{alg:freeblock}
num\_donors := free\_blk / max\_blk\;
donor\_files := init\_donors(num\_donors)\;\label{alg:donorfiles}
\tcc{generate new random permutation of source blocks}
src\_blks\_perm := map\_src\_blk\_to\_num(FDs)\;\label{alg:order}
src\_blk\_new\_perm := FisherYatesShuffle(src\_blk\_perm)\;\label{alg:fisher}
\For(\tcp*[h]{get fd \& block no. for id}){id in (0 .. num\_shuff\_blk)} {\label{alg:persource}
fd := fd\_for\_id(src\_blk\_new\_perm, id)\;\label{alg:sourcefd}
block\_no := blk\_no\_for\_id(src\_blk\_new\_perm, id)\;\label{alg:sourceblockno}
donor = pick\_rand\_donor(num\_donors)\;
\tcc{swap source block with donor block}
fetch\_source\_block(block\_no)\;\label{alg:unread}
ioctl(\code{\footnotesize{EXT4\_IOC\_MOVE\_EXT}}, fd, donors\_files[donor], block\_no)\;\label{alg:swap}
}
unlink\_all\_files(donor\_files)\;
\caption{Oblivious ext4 file system shuffle}\label{alg:shuffle}
\end{algorithm}
Alg.~\ref{alg:shuffle} describes the shuffle algorithm. We assume a list of
files that must be shuffled. To protect a single application workload, this
list can be obtained from a trace of opened files; otherwise all files on the
disk can be considered. We divide the disk blocks into: (i)~blocks that belong
to files that must be shuffled, \ie the source array of size~$n$; and (ii)~a
destination array of $n$~unallocated blocks.
First, the algorithm determines the size~$max\_blk$ of the largest file to be
shuffled~(lines~\ref{alg:max:start}--\ref{alg:max:end}) and the number of free
blocks~(line~\ref{alg:freeblock}). It uses this information to create donor
files~(line~\ref{alg:donorfiles}), each of size~$max\_blk$, to fill up the free
blocks. These donor files are used for swapping blocks with the source
files. Next, the algorithm assigns an ordering to the source file blocks that
need to be shuffled~(line~\ref{alg:order}), mapping the set of blocks to
natural numbers. It uses a \emph{Fisher-Yates shuffle}~\cite{Knuth98a} to
produce a random permutation of the blocks~(line~\ref{alg:fisher}). The
algorithm then performs an iteration per source block to be
shuffled~(line~\ref{alg:persource}). At each iteration, it determines the
source file descriptor and block number that maps to the current index
according to the new
permutation~(lines~\ref{alg:sourcefd}--\ref{alg:sourceblockno}). If the source
block is already in the page cache, an unread source block, if any, is accessed
and brought into the cache~(line~\ref{alg:unread}).
Finally, a random donor file is selected, and the source block is swapped with
the block from the donor file~(line~\ref{alg:swap}). The algorithm is
implemented at the LKL ext4 layer because the shuffled blocks must be
decrypted/encrypted by \emph{dm-crypt}, as discussed in
\S\ref{sec:hardening:filesystem}. The ext4 layer also stores the block mapping,
which needs to be modified when blocks are swapped. SGX-LKL\xspace uses the
\code{EXT4\_IOC\_MOVE\_EXT} \code{ioctl()} call for this, which exchanges the
blocks belonging to two different files, while also updating the underlying
metadata. Once all the block have been swapped, the dummy files are unlinked,
and the corresponding blocks become unallocated again.
Note that while the creation/unlinking of donor files is deterministic, the
locations of donor file blocks are random and thus indistinguishable from
regular file blocks. Accesses for both types are intermixed and thus also
indistinguishable.
SGX-LKL\xspace exposes two network I/O calls to the host: \code{net\_read()} and
\code{net\_write()}. These read and write a fixed number of bytes from the
network device (see~\S\ref{sec:hardening:network}). To hide the network
communication pattern, SGX-LKL\xspace uses fixed-size network packets and adds dummy
packets to generate a constant traffic rate between participating trusted
nodes~\cite{van2015vuvuzela, tyagi2017stadium}.
To achieve this, SGX-LKL\xspace uses the set of Wireguard peers as the participating
trusted nodes~(see~\S\ref{sec:hardening:network}). For each peer, SGX-LKL\xspace creates
a thread to send dummy packets with random payloads. These packets are
probabilistically encrypted by Wireguard and indistinguishable from regular
packets.
To ensure a constant traffic rate, SGX-LKL\xspace uses Linux' traffic shaping
capabilities~\cite{tc}. It sets the queueing discipline~(\emph{qdisc}) for the
the Wireguard interface to \emph{hierarchy token bucket}~(HTB)~\cite{tchtb},
which supports rate limits for network connections. For each peer, SGX-LKL\xspace adds an
HTB class filter for a per-peer rate limit. To optimise throughput of regular
packets, SGX-LKL\xspace only sends dummy packets when necessary to reach the rate
limit. It adds a \emph{PRIO} qdisc~\cite{tcprio} below each HTB class, which
prioritises packets with higher priority, and sets dummy packets' priority as
lowest. SGX-LKL\xspace pads all network packets to the MTU size to obtain fixed-size
packets.
This approach has an overhead proportional to the number of trusted nodes. To
scale to more clients and to hide the set of potential recipients, traffic
could alternatively be routed through a single trusted proxy~\cite{bittau2017prochlo,le2013towards,Chaum88}.
\subsection{Other host calls}
\label{sec:oblivious:discussion}
\myparr{Signals} caused by the application disclose information. For example,
if an application executes an illegal instruction, the resulting signal is
observable. SGX-LKL\xspace hides what instruction caused the signal but cannot hide the
exception~(see~\S\ref{sec:hardening:protectingremaining}). This is a limitation
of SGX---future implementations may handle exceptions without host involvement.
\mypar{Time} The host kernel updates a vDSO memory region with the current time
(see~\S\ref{sec:design:system_support}). It is read by the enclave, which is
observable by an adversary. However, the SGX-LKL\xspace scheduler accesses time
frequently on each context switch, and an adversary cannot distinguish between
accesses from SGX-LKL\xspace and the application, hiding application-specific access
patterns.
\section{Related Work}
\label{sec:related}
\mypar{TEE runtime systems} As mentioned in
\S\ref{sec:background:host_interfaces}, Haven~\cite{baumann2014haven},
SCONE~\cite{arnautov2016scone}, Graphene-SGX~\cite{tsai2017graphene}, and
Panoply~\cite{shinde2017panoply} are existing TEE runtime systems, but they
have wider host interfaces than SGX-LKL\xspace and do not support an oblivious host
interface.
Ryoan~\cite{hunt2018ryoan} uses SGX enclaves to sandbox data processing. It
makes the data flow independent from the content of the input data but does not
make the host interface oblivious.
\myparr{ORAM with TEEs} can conceal access patterns.
ZeroTrace~\cite{sasy2018zerotrace} combines SGX with ORAM to create oblivious
memory primitives. ObliDB~\cite{eskandarian2017oblidb} and
Oblix~\cite{mishra2018oblix} use Path ORAM~\cite{StefanovCCS13PathORAM} with SGX
to hide the access patterns of SQL queries. In Raccoon~\cite{rane2015raccoon},
Path ORAM hides array accesses that depend on secrets. By using ORAM, these
approaches can hide access pattern but hosts can still mount Iago attacks when
returning data blocks to the enclave.
\mypar{Oblivious file systems}
Obliviate~\cite{ahmad2018obliviate} is an oblivious file system for SGX
enclaves. It adapts an ORAM protocol to read/write a data file.
Privatefs~\cite{williams2012privatefs} is an ORAM-based parallel oblivious file
system, which suports concurrent accesses.
Oladi~\cite{crooks2018obladi} is a cloud-based key/value store that supports
oblivious transactions while protecting access patterns from cloud providers.
Bittau \etal\cite{bittau2017prochlo} introduce an oblivious architecture for
monitoring client software behaviour while protecting user privacy.
In constrast to SGX-LKL\xspace, these approaches do not offer a file system abstraction
with POSIX semantics.
\mypar{Unobservable communication} For message systems, hiding which users
communicate is challenging. Anonymous networks such as
Tor~\cite{dingledine2004tor} are susceptible to traffic analysis
attacks~\cite{hopper2010much, murdoch2005low}. Dining Cryptographers~(DC)
networks~\cite{chaum1988dining,wolinsky2012dissent,sirer2004eluding} provide
stronger guarantees by broadcasting messages to all users, but incur a high
overhead. More recently, Private Information
Retrieval~(PIR)~\cite{chor1995private, corrigan2015riposte} and differential privacy
techniques~\cite{van2015vuvuzela, backes2013anoa, tyagi2017stadium} add noise
to hide metadata. SGX-LKL\xspace can leverage this to blind communications.
|
\section*{Appendix}
We note the following properties of the flux ratio and the ergodicity ratio. Their values are very close to each other when $\gamma\approx 1$.
\begin{lemma}
If a game is ergodic with some constants $0<c_{\min}\le c_{\max}$, then there exists some constants $0<\delta_{\min}\le \delta_{\max}$,
\[
\forall \sigma:\quad \delta_{\min}\cdot\boldsymbol{1} \le \boldsymbol{x}^{\sigma} \le \delta_{\max}\cdot\boldsymbol{1}.
\]
Moreover
\[
\frac{1}{1-\gamma}\cdot \frac{c_{\min}}{c_{\max}}\le \delta_{\min}\le \delta_{\max} \le \frac{1}{1-\gamma}\cdot \frac{c_{\max}}{c_{\min}}.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We show the upper bound and the lower bound follows similarly.
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{x}^\sigma = \sum_{t=0}^\infty \gamma^t ({\bf P}_{\sigma}^{\top})^{t} \boldsymbol{1} \le \sum_{t=0}^\infty \gamma^t ({\bf P}_{\sigma}^{\top})^{t} \frac{\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{\sigma}}{c_{\min}}
\le \sum_{t=0}^\infty \frac{\gamma^t \boldsymbol{\lambda}^{\sigma}}{c_{\min}}
\le \sum_{t=0}^\infty \frac{\gamma^t c_{\max}}{c_{\min}}
=\frac{1}{1-\gamma}\cdot \frac{c_{\max}}{c_{\min}}.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
From the definition, we notice that the flux vector and the eigenvector of a strategy probability share very similar structure.
In fact, we can show the following property.
\begin{lemma}
\begin{align*}
\lim_{\gamma\rightarrow 1} \frac{\delta_{\max}}{\delta_{\min}}
= \frac{c_{\max}}{c_{\min}}
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\lambda^{\sigma} = \lim_{t\rightarrow\infty}(t)^{-1}\sum_{i=0}^{t-1} ({\bf P}_{\sigma}^\top)^i \boldsymbol{1}$,
then for any $\epsilon >0$ there exists $T \ge 0$ such that
\[
\forall t\ge T: \qquad\bigg\|\sum_{i=0}^{t-1}({\bf P}_{\sigma}^\top)^i \boldsymbol{1} - t\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{\sigma}\bigg\|_{\infty} \le t\epsilon.
\]
We now consider a fixed $\epsilon<1$, and let $\gamma \ge 1-\epsilon/T$, then we have $\gamma^{T-1} \ge 1 - 2\epsilon$.
We thus obtain,
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{x}^{\sigma} = \sum_{t=0}^{\infty} (\gamma {\bf P}_{\sigma}^{\top})^t \boldsymbol{1}
&=
\sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \gamma^{jT}({\bf P}_{\sigma}^{\top})^{jT}\sum_{i=0}^{T-1} \gamma^i({\bf P}_{\sigma}^{\top})^i \boldsymbol{1}\\
&\ge \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \gamma^{jT}({\bf P}_{\sigma}^{\top})^{jT}\sum_{i=0}^{T-1} (1-2\epsilon)({\bf P}_{\sigma}^{\top})^i \boldsymbol{1}\\
&\ge \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \gamma^{jT}({\bf P}_{\sigma}^{\top})^{jT}
(1-2\epsilon) T(\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{\sigma} - \epsilon\boldsymbol{1})\\
&\ge \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \gamma^{jT}({\bf P}_{\sigma}^{\top})^{jT}\cdot
(1-2\epsilon)\cdot T\cdot(1- \epsilon/c_{\min})\cdot \boldsymbol{\lambda}^{\sigma}\\
&\ge T\cdot \frac{\gamma^{T}}{1-\gamma^T}\cdot (1-2\epsilon)(1- \epsilon/c_{\min})\cdot c_{\min}
\end{align*}
On the other hand, we immediately have
\[
\boldsymbol{x}^{\sigma} \le \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \gamma^{jT}({\bf P}_{\sigma}^{\top})^{jT} T(\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{\sigma} + \epsilon\boldsymbol{1})
\le \frac{T\gamma^{T}}{1-\gamma^T}(1 +\epsilon/c_{\min})\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{\sigma}
\le \frac{T\gamma^{T}}{1-\gamma^T}(1 +\epsilon/c_{\min}) \cdot c_{\max}
\]
Hence we obtain,
\[
\frac{c_{\max}}{c_{\min}}= \frac{\delta_{\max}}{\delta_{\min}}
\cdot(1\pm 3\epsilon \pm 3\epsilon/c_{\min})
\]
for sufficiently small $\epsilon$.
Consider $\epsilon = \epsilon'c_{\min}$ for some sufficient small $\epsilon'< 1$.
We have
\[
3\epsilon + 3\epsilon/c_{\min}
\le 6\epsilon'.
\]
Since for any sufficiently small $\epsilon'$, there is always a $T$, hence a $\gamma$, s.t. the above formula holds, we conclude the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
In this paper we study the sample complexity of learning a near-optimal strategy in discounted two-player turn-based zero-sum stochastic games \cite{shapley1953stochastic,hansen2013strategy}, which we refer to more concisely as {\it stochastic games}. Stochastic games model dynamic strategic settings in which two players take turns and the state of game evolves stochastically according to some transition law.
This model
encapsulates a major challenge in multi-agent learning: other agents may be learning and adapting as well.
Further, stochastic games are a generalization of the Markov decision process (MDP), a fundamental model for reinforcement learning, to the two-player setting \cite{littman1994markov}.
MDPs can be viewed as degenerate stochastic games in which one of the players has no influence.
Consequently, understanding stochastic games is a natural step towards resolving challenges in reinforcement learning of extending single-agent learning to multi-agent settings.
There is a long line of research in both MDPs and stochastic games (for a more thorough introduction, see \cite{filar2012competitive, hansen2013strategy} and references therein). Strikingly, \cite{hansen2013strategy} showed that there exists a pure-strategy Nash equilibrium which can be computed in strongly polynomial time for stochastic games, if the game matrix is fully accessible and the discount factor is fixed. In reinforcement learning settings, however, the transition function of the game is unknown and a common goal is to obtain an approximately optimal strategy (a function that maps states to actions) that is able to obtain an expected cumulative reward of at least (or at most) the Nash equilibrium value no matter what the other player does. Unfortunately, despite interest in generalizing MDP results to stochastic games, currently the best known running times/sample complexity for solving stochastic games in a variety of settings are worse than for solving MDPs. This may not be surprising since in general stochastic games are harder to solve than MDPs, e.g., whereas MDPS can be solved in (weakly) polynomial time it remains open whether or not the same can be done for
stochastic games.
There are two natural approaches towards achieving sample complexity bounds for solving stochastic games. The first is to note that the popular stochastic value iteration, dynamic programming, and Q-learning methods all apply to stochastic games \cite{littman1994markov,hu2003nash,littman2001friend,perolat2015approximate}. Consequently, recent advances in these methods
\cite{kearns1999finite, sidford2018variance} developed for MDPs can be
directly generalized to solving stochastic games (though the sample complexity of these generalized methods has not been analyzed previously). It is tempting to generalize the analysis of sample optimal methods for estimating values \cite{azar2013minimax} and estimating policies \cite{sidford2018near} of MDPs to stochastic games. However, this is challenging as these methods rely on monotonicities in MDPs induced by the linear program nature of the problem \cite{azar2013minimax, sidford2018near}.
The second approach would be to apply strategy iteration or alternating minimization / maximization to reduce solving stochastic games to approximately solving a sequence of MDPs. Unfortunately, the best analysis of such a method \cite{hansen2013strategy} requires solving $\Omega(1/(1- \gamma))$ MDPs. Consequently, even if this approach could be carried out with approximate MDP solvers, the resulting sample complexity for solving stochastic games would be larger than that needed for solving MDPs. More discussion of related literatures is given in Section~\ref{sec:prev_work}.
Given the importance of solving stochastic games in reinforcement learning (e.g. \cite{hu1998multiagent, bowling2000analysis, bowling2001rational, hu2003nash, arslan2017decentralized}), this suggests the following fundamental open problem:
\emph{Can we design stochastic game learning algorithms that provably match the performance of MDP algorithms and achieve near-optimal sample complexities?}
In this paper, we answer this question in the affirmative in the particular case of solving discounted stochastic games with a generative model, i.e. an oracle for sampling from the transition function for state-action pairs. We provide an algorithm with the same near-optimal sample complexity that is known for solving discounted MDPs. Further, we achieve this result by showing how to transform particular MDP algorithms to solving stochastic games that satisfy particular two-sided monotonicity constraints.
Therefore, while there is a major gap between MDPs and stochastic games in terms of computation time for obtaining the exact solutions, this gap disappears when considering the sampling complexity between the two.
We hope this work opens the door to more generally extend results for MDP to stochastic games and thereby enable the application of the rich research on reinforcement learning to a broader multi-player settings with little overhead.
\subsection{The Model}
Formally, throughout this paper, we consider \emph{discounted turn-based two-player zero-sum stochastic games} described as the tuple $\mathcal{G}=(\mathcal{S}_{\min}, \mathcal{S}_{\max}, \mathcal{A}^1, {\bf P}, \boldsymbol{r}, \gamma)$. In these games there are two players, a \emph{min} or \emph{minimization} player which seeks to minimize the cumulative reward in the game and a \emph{max} or \emph{maximization} player which seeks to maximize the cumulative reward. Here, $\mathcal{S}_{\min}$ and $\mathcal{S}_{\max}$ are disjoint finite sets of \emph{states} controlled by the min-player and the max-player respectively and their union $\mathcal{S} := \mathcal{S}_{\min} \cup \mathcal{S}_{\max}$ is the set of all possible \emph{states of the game}. Further, $\mathcal{A}^1$ is a finite set of \emph{actions} available at each state, ${\bf P}: \mathcal{S} \times \mathcal{A}^1 \times \mathcal{S} \mapsto [0,1]$ is a \emph{transition probability function}, $\boldsymbol{r}: \mathcal{S} \times\mathcal{A}^1 \mapsto [0,1]$ is the payoff or \emph{reward function} and $\gamma\in(0,1)$ is a discount factor.\footnote{Standard reductions allow this result to be applied for rewards of a broader range \cite{sidford2018near}. Further, while we assume there are the same number of actions per-state, our results easily extend to the case where this is non-uniform; in this case our dependencies on $|\mathcal{S}| |\mathcal{A}^1|$ can be replaced with the number of state-action pairs.}
Stochastic games $\mathcal{G}=(\mathcal{S}_{\min}, \mathcal{S}_{\max}, \mathcal{A}^1, {\bf P}, \boldsymbol{r}, \gamma)$ are played dynamically in a sequence of turns, $\{t\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$, starting from some initial state $s^0 \in \mathcal{S}$ at turn $t = 0$. In each turn $t \geq 0$, the game is in one of the states $s^t \in \mathcal{S}$ and the player who controls the state $s^t$ chooses or \emph{plays} an
action $a^t$ from the action space $\mathcal{A}^1$. This action yields reward $r^t := r(s^t, a^t)$ for the turn and causes the next state $s^{t+1}$ to be chosen at random from $\cS$ where the transition probability $\Pr[s^{t + 1} = s' | s_1,...,s_t,a_1,...,a_t] = {\bf P}(s'~|~s^t, a^t)$.
The goal of the min-player (resp. max-player) is to choose actions to minimize (resp. maximize) the expected infinite-horizon discounted-reward or \emph{value} of the game $\sum_{t = 0}^{\infty} \gamma^t r^t$.
In this paper we focus on the case where the players play pure (deterministic) stationary strategies (policies), i.e. strategies which depend only on the current state. That is we wish to compute a \emph{min-player strategy} or \emph{policy}
$\pi_{\min}:\mathcal{S}_{\min}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^1$ which defines the action the min player chooses at a state in $\mathcal{S}_{\min}$ and \emph{max-player strategy} $\pi_{\max}:\mathcal{S}_{\max}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}^1$ which defines the action the max player chooses at a state in $\mathcal{S}_{\max}$.
We call a pair of min-player and max-player strategies $\sigma = (\pi_{\min}, \pi_{\max})$ simply a \emph{strategy}. Further, we let $\sigma(s) := \pi_{\min}(s)$ for $s\in \mathcal{S}_{\min}$ and $\sigma(s) := \pi_{\max}(s)$ for $s\in \mathcal{S}_{\max}$ and define the \emph{value function} or \emph{expected discounted cumulative reward} by $\boldsymbol{v}^{\sigma}$ where
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{\sigma}(s) = \boldsymbol{v}[\sigma](s):= \mathbb{E}\bigg[\sum_{t=0}^{\infty}\gamma^t\boldsymbol{r}(s^t, \sigma(s^t))~\Big|~s^0 = s\bigg] \quad \text{for all } s \in \mathcal{S}
\]
and the expectation is over the random sequence of states, $s^0, s^1, s^2, \ldots $ generated according to ${\bf P}$ under the strategy $\sigma$, i.e. $\Pr[s^{t + 1} = s'~|~s^t, s^{t - 1}, .... ,s^{0}] = {\bf P}(s'~|~s^t, \sigma(s^t))$ for all $t > 0$.
Our goal in solving a game is to compute an approximate {\it Nash equilibrium} restricted to stationary strategies \cite{nash1951non,marskin2001markov}.
We call a strategy $\sigma = (\pi_{\min}, \pi_{\max})$ an {\it equilibrium strategy} or \emph{optimal} if
\[
\max_{\pi_{\max}' : \cS_{\max} \rightarrow \cA} \boldsymbol{v}^{(\pi_{\min},\pi_{\max}')} \leq
\boldsymbol{v}^{\sigma} \leq \min_{\pi_{\min}' : \cS_{\min} \rightarrow \cA} \boldsymbol{v}^{(\pi_{\min}',\pi_{\max})}.
\]
and we call it $\epsilon$-optimal if these same inequalities hold up to an additive $\epsilon$ entrywise.
It is worth noting that the best response strategy to a stationary policy is also stationary \cite{fudenberg1991game} and
there always exists a pure stationary strategy attaining the Nash equilibrium \cite{shapley1953stochastic}. Consequently, it is sufficient to focus on deterministic strategies.
Throughout this paper we focus on solving stochastic games in the learning setting where the game is not fully specified. We assume that a \emph{generative model} is available which given any state-action pair, i.e. $s \in \cS$ and $a \in \cA$, can sample a random $s'$ independently at random from the transition probability function, i.e. $\Pr[s' = t] = {\bf P}(t ~|~s, a)$. Accessibility to a generative model is a standard and natural assumption (\cite{kakade2003sample, azar2013minimax, sidford2018near, agarwal2019optimality}) and corresponds to PAC learning.
The special case of solving a MDP given a generative model has been studied extensively (\cite{kakade2003sample, azar2013minimax, sidford2018variance, sidford2018near, agarwal2019optimality}) and is a natural proving ground towards designing theoretically motivated reinforcement learning algorithms.
\subsection{Our Results}
In this paper
we provide an algorithm that computes an $\epsilon$-optimal strategy using a sample size that matches the best known sample complexity for solving discounted MDPs.
Further, our algorithm runs in time proportional to the number of samples and space proportional to $|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|$. Interestingly, we achieve this result by showing how to run two-player variant of Q-learning such that the value-strategy sequences induced enjoy certain monotonicity properties. Essentially, we show that provided a value improving algorithm is sufficiently stable, then it can be extended to the two-player setting with limited loss.
This allows us to leverage recent advances in solving single player games to solve stochastic games with limited overhead. Our main result is given below.
\begin{theorem}[Main Theorem]
\label{mainthm}
There is an algorithm which given a stochastic game, $\mathcal{G} =(\mathcal{S}_{\min}, \mathcal{S}_{\max}, {\bf P}, \boldsymbol{r}, \gamma)$ with a generative model, outputs, with probability at least $1-\delta$,
an $\epsilon$-optimal strategy $\sigma$ by querying
$Z=\widetilde{O}(|\mathcal{S}| |\mathcal{A}^1| (1-\gamma)^{-3} \epsilon^{-2})$
samples, where $\epsilon\in(0,1)$ and $\widetilde{O}(\cdot)$ hides polylogarithmic factors. The algorithm runs in time $O(Z)$ and uses space $O(|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|)$.
\end{theorem}
Our sample and time complexities are optimal due to a known lower bound in the single player case by \cite{azar2013minimax}. It was shown in \cite{azar2013minimax} that solving any one-player MDP to $\epsilon$-optimality with high probability needs at least $\Omega(|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|(1-\gamma)^{-3} \epsilon^{-2})$ samples.
Our sample complexity upper bound generalizes the recent sharp sample complexity results for solving the discounted MDP \cite{sidford2018near, agarwal2019optimality}, and tightly matches the information-theoretic sample complexity up to polylogarithmic factors. This result provides the first and near-optimal sample complexity for solving the two-person stochastic game.
\input{prelim_sample.tex}
\section{Complexity Lower Bound for Policy and Strategy Iteration}
In this section, we establish complexity lower bounds for strategy iteration and we show that the minimal number of policy evaluations needed to achieve certain accuracy. The lower bounds suggest that the flux ratio is the central quantity that determines the complexity for solving MDP and stochastic games \sidford{way to strong a statement I think, at most it might govern policy / strategy iteration.}.
\subsection{Lower Bound for Policy Iteration}
We first study the complexity of policy iteration for the Markov decision problem, which is a special case of the two-player stochastic game.
We show that PI needs at least $\Omega(\delta_{\max}/\delta_{\min})$ number of policy evaluations to get an $\epsilon$-optimal policy.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:pi-hard}
There exists an MDP instance $(\mathcal{S},\mathcal{A}^1,{\bf P}, \boldsymbol{r},\gamma)$ with flux ratio $\delta_{\max}/\delta_{\min}$ and an initial policy $\pi^{(0)}$, such that
PI takes at least $\Omega(\delta_{\max}/\delta_{\min})$ iterations to obtain a $0.1$-optimal policy.
\end{theorem}
\paragraph{Hard instance of MDP (HI1)}
To prove the theorem, we first show the hard instance.
Consider an MDP with $T$ states $i=1,2, \ldots, T$.
Let $S$ be an integer with $S'=\Theta(\sqrt{T}) <\sqrt{T}$.
For each state $i\in[T-S'-1]\cup\{T\}$, let there be only one action denoted by $U$.
For each state $i\in [T-S', T-1]$, let there be two actions, the $R$ (right) action and the $U$ (uniform) action. The $R$ action moves the state to its rightward neighbor and the $U$ action transitions the state to a random state uniformly.
Therefore, for $i\in[T-S'-1, T]$, $P(i+1|i, R)=1$, and for $i,i'\in [T]$ we have $P(i'|i, U) = 1/T$.
All the rewards are $0$, i.e. $\boldsymbol{r}(i,U)=\boldsymbol{r}(i,R) =0$ for $i\in[T-1]$, except for the rightmost reward $r_T:=\boldsymbol{r}(T, U) = 1$.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{hardcase.png}
\caption{The hard MDP instance for policy iteration to correct one action at a time.}
\end{figure}
Let us consider two extreme policies, which we denote by $\pi^e$ and $\pi^0$.
The policy $\pi^0$ is to choose action $U$ at every state.
The policy $\pi^e$ is to choose $R$ action whenever it is possible, i.e., at every state $i$ such that $T-S'\le i<T$.
The transition probability matrix of these policies are
\[
{\bf P}_{\pi^0} = \left[
\begin{array}{cccc}
1/T& 1/T& \ldots& 1/T\\
1/T& 1/T& \ldots& 1/T\\
&&\ldots&\\
1/T& 1/T& \ldots& 1/T
\end{array}
\right]
\quad\text{and}
\quad
{\bf P}_{\pi^e} = \left[
\begin{array}{cccccc}
1/T& 1/T& \ldots& 1/T&1/T& 1/T\\
&& \textcolor{gray}{(T-S' - 1\text{ rows})} &&\\
1/T& 1/T& \ldots& 1/T& 1/T&1/T\\
0& \ldots & 1 & 0 &0&\ldots\\
0& \ldots & 0 & 1 &0&\ldots\\
0& \ldots & 0 & 0 &1&\ldots\\
&&\ldots&&\\
0&0&\ldots & 0&0& 1\\
1/T& 1/T& \ldots&1/T&1/T& 1/T
\end{array}
\right].
\]
Let $\boldsymbol{e}$ and $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$ be the stationary distributions of the two policies such that \[
{\bf P}_{\pi^0}^\top \boldsymbol{e} = \boldsymbol{e}\quad\text{and}\quad {\bf P}_{\pi^e}^\top\boldsymbol{\lambda} = \boldsymbol{\lambda}.
\]
They admit closed-form expressions as follows
\[
\boldsymbol{e} = [1,1,1\ldots, 1]^\top/T \quad\text{and}\quad
\boldsymbol{\lambda} = [1, 1, 1,\ldots, 1,2, \ldots, S', S'+1]^\top/\big[T-S'-1 + (S'+1)(S'+2)/2\big].
\]
All other policies will generate stationary distributions that are somewhat ``in between'' $\boldsymbol{e}$ and $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$, so that the ergodicity ratio of the constructed MDP instance is of the order $\sqrt{T}$. This is proved in the following Lemma \ref{lemma:ergodicity}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:ergodicity}
For any policy $\pi$, let $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_\pi$ be the invariant distribution for the above MDP instance.
Then there exits $T$ and $S'=\Theta(\sqrt{T})$ such that for any $\pi$,
\[
1/(2T) \le \boldsymbol{\lambda}_\pi(i) \le (S'+1) /T,\qquad i =1,\ldots,T.
\]
Therefore the ergodicity ratio of the constructed MDP instance satisfies
\[
c_{\max}/ c_{\min} \lesssim S' = \Theta(\sqrt{T}).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof
First, we show the upper bound for $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_\pi$.
We claim that for any policy $\pi$,
\[
\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(i)\le \frac{1}{T} \quad\text{for} \quad i\in [T-S'] \cup \{i:~ \pi(i-1) \neq R\}.
\]
Indeed, for each $j\in [T]$, we have
\[
{\bf P}\big[i|j, \pi(j)\big] = \left\{\begin{array}{ccc}
1/T &\text{for} & \pi(j)=U\\
0 & \text{otherwise} &
\end{array}\right.
\]
therefore \[
\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(i) =\sum_{j=1}^T\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(j) {\bf P}(i|j, \pi(j)) \le 1/T,
\]
as desired.
Next, for each $i\in \{j: \pi(j-1) = R\}$, let $s_i$ be the {\it leftmost} state such that $\pi$ chooses action $R$ in a chain of states $ s_i, s_i+1, \ldots, i-1$, i.e.,
\[
s_i = \min\{i'< i:\pi(i') = \pi(i'+1) =\ldots \pi(i-1) = R\}.
\]
We have $i-s_i \le S'$ since any policy can pick action $R$ for at most $S'$ states.
Let $n_i = i - s_i$, and we claim that
\[
\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(i)\le (n_i + 1) / T.
\]
We prove this claim by induction on $n_i$.
For $n_i = 1$, we have $\pi(i-1) = R$ and $\pi(i-2) = U$.
Recall that $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(i-1) \le 1/T$ as shown in the last claim.
We have,
\[
\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(i) = \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(i-1) +
\sum_{j\neq i-1}\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(j) {\bf P}(i|j, \pi(j))
\le \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(i-1) + 1/T\le 2/T,
\]
where the second inequality holds since ${\bf P}(i|j, \pi(j)) =0$ or $1/T$ for all $j\neq i-1$.
Suppose for $n_i = k-1$ the claim holds.
Then for $n_i=k$, we have,
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(i) &\le \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(i-1) + \sum_{j\neq i-1}\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(j){\bf P}(i|j,\pi(j)) \le k / T + 1/T\le (k+1)/T,
\end{align*}
as desired.
Next, we show the lower bound.
We denote an \emph{$R$-chain} in a policy $\pi$ as a tuple $(i', i)$ with $T-S'\le i'< i<T$ such that
\[
\pi(i'- 1) = U,\quad
\pi(i') = \pi(i'+1)=\ldots \pi(i-1) = R,\quad \text{and}\quad \pi(i) = U.
\]
Namely, the states $\{i', i'+1, \ldots, i\}$ form a maximal connected component by action $R$.
In an $R$-chain $(i', i)$, we call $i'$ the \emph{source}, $i$ the \emph{end}, and $i-i'$ the \emph{length}.
Suppose $\pi$ has $k$ $R$-chains.
Let these $R$-trains be $(s_1, s_1+l_1), (s_2, s_2+l_2), \ldots (s_k, s_k+l_k)$.
Let
\[
A := \{s_i: i\in [k]\} \cup \{j: j\text{ is not on an $R$-chain}\}
\]
We observe that every $i\in A$ is identical in terms of probability transition from other states into $i$.
Therefore, they must have the same probability in the invariant distribution $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}$.
We then have, for every $s\in A$,
\begin{align*}
1&=\sum_{j'\in A} \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(j') +
\sum_{j\not\in A}\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(j)= |A|\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(s) +
\sum_{i=1}^{k}\sum_{0\le j\le l_k}\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(s_k+j)\\
&\le |A|\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(s) + \sum_{i=1}^{k} \sum_{0\le j\le l_i} \frac{j+1}{T}
\le |A|\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(s) + \sum_{i=1}^{k} \frac{(l_i+2)(l_i+1)}{2T}.
\end{align*}
Note that $S'=\sum_{i} l_i=\Theta(\sqrt{T})$,
\[
\sum_{i=1}^{k} (l_i+2)(l_i+1)
\le 6 \sum_{i=1}^{k} l_i^2 \le 6 \Big(\sum_{i=1}^{k} l_i\Big)^2 \le T/2
\]
for appropriately chosen $S'$.
Thus,
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(s)\ge
\frac{1}{|A|}\cdot \bigg(1-\sum_{i=1}^{k} \frac{(l_k+2)(l_k+1)}{2T}\bigg) \ge \frac{1}{2T}.
\end{align*}
We further notice that, for each state $i$ on an $R$-chain with source $s$, we have $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(i) \ge \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\pi}(s)\ge 1/(2T)$, which completes the proof.
%
%
%
%
%
%
\end{proof}
Note that the flux ratio and ergodicity ratio can be arbitrarily close, as $\gamma\to1$. It can be seen that
$
\lim_{\gamma \rightarrow 1}(1-\gamma)\boldsymbol{f}^{\pi} =\boldsymbol{\lambda}^\pi.
$
Thus we have
$
\lim_{\gamma \rightarrow 1}\delta_{\max}/\delta_{\min} = c_{\max}/c_{\min} = \Theta(\sqrt{T}).
$
\paragraph{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:pi-hard}.}
\begin{proof}
We apply policy iteration (PI) to the MDP instance constructed above. Let the initial policy be $\pi^0$, which is to always choose action $U$.
We will show that the PI improves the policy by changing at most one action at a time.
Let $\pi^{(i)}$ denote the policy which chooses $U$ at states $1,2,\ldots,(T-i-1), T$ and chooses $R$ at states $T-i,\ldots,T-1$.
It suffices to show that the PI improves the policy according to the sequence
\[
\pi^{(0)} \rightarrow \pi^{(1)} \rightarrow \pi^{(2)}\ldots \rightarrow \pi^{\Theta(S')},
\]
thus the number of iterations needed is $\Theta(S')$, which is proportional to the flux ratio.
We prove this by induction.
Assuming that the current policy is $\pi^{(i-1)}$, we consider the next policy generated by PI.
Let us analyze its value function $\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi^{(i-1)}}$, and we let $\overline{v}^{(i-1)} = T^{-1}\sum_{s}\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi^{(i-1)}}(s)$.
By the Bellman equation for a fixed policy, we have
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi^{(i-1)}}(T) = r_T + \gamma \overline{v}^{(i-1)},&\quad
\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi^{(i-1)}}(T-j) = \gamma^j(r_T + \gamma \overline{v}^{(i-1)}) \quad\text{for } 1\le j \le i-1 \quad
\text{and} \quad \\
\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi^{(i-1)}}(T-j) &= \gamma \overline{v}^{(i-1)}\quad \text{for}\quad j\ge i.
\end{align*}
By solving the above equations, we obtain
\[
\overline{v}^{(i-1)} =
\frac{r_T (1 - \gamma ^i)}{T(1-\gamma)^2 - \gamma + i\gamma(1 - \gamma) + \gamma^{i+1}}.
\]
Next we consider the policy improvement step using $\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi^{(i-1)}}$. Denote $\boldsymbol{Q}$ as the Q-function of $\pi^{(i-1)}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Consider states $T-j$ such that $1\le j\le i-1$, the policy improvement step compares the following two values:
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{Q}(T-j, R) = \gamma^{j} (r_T + \gamma \overline{v}^{(i-1)})
\quad \text{and} \quad
\boldsymbol{Q}(T-j, U) = \gamma \overline{v}^{(i-1)}.
\end{align*}
Therefore as long as $\boldsymbol{Q}(T-j, R) > \boldsymbol{Q}(T-j, U)$ then the action will not be changed.
For this to happen, we can pick $\gamma = 1-1/\beta$ for $\beta=\Omega(T)$.
Then by using a Taylor expansion analysis we obtain $\overline{v}^{(i-1)} = \Theta(i\cdot r_T\cdot \beta/T)$ and $1-\gamma^j = \Theta(j/\beta)$.
Thus $\boldsymbol{Q}(T-j, R) = r_T + \gamma \overline{v}^{(i-1)} - O(ij/T\cdot r_T)$.
Notice that $ij/T<1$ by our construction. Therefore as long as $r_T >0$ we have $\boldsymbol{Q}(T-j, R) \ge \boldsymbol{Q}(T-j, U)$.
Hence, the $R$ action at these states will not be changed after one policy iteration.
\item
Consider states $T-j$ such that $i \le j\le S'$, we have
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}(T-j, U) = \gamma \overline{v}^{(i-1)} >
\boldsymbol{Q}(T-j, R) = \gamma^2 \overline{v}^{(i-1)}.
\]
Thus, the optimal action at these states is still to choose $U$ over $R$.
\item Since the current policy is not optimal, the policy iteration will generate a different policy. Therefore the only action that can be changed is the one at state $T-i$.
Indeed, we have
\[\boldsymbol{Q}(T-i, R) = r_T + \gamma \overline{v}^{(i-1)} - O(i^2/T\cdot r_T) \ge \boldsymbol{Q}(T-i, U) = \gamma \overline{v}^{(i-1)}.
\]
\end{enumerate}
Now we have verified that the next policy generated by the PI r is exactly $\pi^{(i)}$. By induction, we have shown that the PI will generate a sequence of policies where only one action is changed per policy evaluation.
Finally we show that the policy iteration needs $\Theta(S')$ steps to find a sufficiently accurate solution.
Let $i \le S'/4$.
We would like to compare
$\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi^{(i)}}$ with $\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi^{(S')}}$ as we have, by monotonicity of PI,
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi^{(S')}} - \boldsymbol{v}^{\pi^{(i)}}
\le \boldsymbol{v}^{\pi^{*}} - \boldsymbol{v}^{\pi^{(i)}}.
\]
Consider the state $T$.
We have
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi^{(i)}}(T)
&=r_T + \gamma \overline{v}^{(i)}
\le r_T + \gamma \Theta(i\cdot r_T\cdot \beta/T)
\le r_T + \Theta(1/4\cdot\gamma S' \cdot r_T\cdot \beta/T)
\end{align*}
and
$
\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi^{(S')}}(T)
=r_T + \gamma \Theta(S'\cdot r_T\cdot \beta/T)
$
as long as $T$ is sufficiently large.
Therefore,
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi^{(S')}}(T-1) - \boldsymbol{v}^{\pi^{(i)}}(T-1)
\ge \Theta(1/2\cdot \gamma S'\cdot r_T\cdot \beta/T) \gg r_T.
\]
Thus, after $\Theta(S')=\Theta(\sqrt{T})$ steps, the resulting policy is not yet $0.1$-optimal provided $r_T= 1$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Lower Bound for Strategy Iteration}
Next we extend the lower bound to strategy iteration (SI). Recall that each iteration of SI requires solving a new MDP instance by using the policy iteration.
Thus the total number of policy evaluations needed is quadratic in the flux ratio. In what follow we provide a matching lower bound.
\begin{theorem}\label{lowerbound}
Consider the strategy iteration of the form:
Initialize with some strategy $
\sigma^{(0)}:=[\pi_{\min}^{(0)}, \pi_{\max}^{(0)}]$ and conduct the following at the $i$-th iteration:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[I.] Obtain the optimal max-player strategy $\pi_{\max}^{(i)}$ against $\pi_{\min}^{(i-1)}$ using policy iteration that is initiated with $[\pi_{\min}^{(i-1)}, \pi_{\max}^{(i-1)}]$;
\item[II.] Compute the new min-player strategy $\pi_{\min}^{(i)}$ as the greedy strategy of $\boldsymbol{v}^{\sigma^{(i-1)}}$ for $\sigma^{(i-1)} = [\pi_{\min}^{(i-1)}, \pi_{\max}^{(i)}]$.
\end{enumerate}
Then there exists a 2TBSG instance with flux ratio $\delta_{\max}/\delta_{\min}$, and an initial strategy $\sigma^{(0)}$, such that the above
SI requires $\Omega(\delta^2_{\max}/\delta^2_{\min})$ policy evaluations to obtain an $0.1$-optimal policy.
\end{theorem}
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{hard_game.png}
\caption{The hard instance (HI2) for strategy iteration.\label{fig:hcgame}}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Hard instance of 2TBSG (HI2)}
Let there be five sets of states: $T$ dummy states, $S':=\Theta(\sqrt{T})$ min-player states, and $S'+1$ max-player states, $S_b:=\Theta(\sqrt{T})$ min-player boosting states, $S_b':=\Theta(\sqrt{T})$ max-player boosting states (Figure \ref{fig:hcgame}).
The dummy states are also controlled by the min player but there is only one possible action at these states.
We denote the min-player states as $s_{m_1}, s_{m_2}, \ldots, s_{m_{S'}}$.
For each min player state, it has two actions.
The $U$ (uniform) action transitions the state to every other state with a equal probability, with reward $0$.
The $R$ (right) action transitions $s_{m_{i}}$ to the next state $s_{m_{i-1}}$ and has a reward $r_{\delta}\ge 0$ (to be determined).
There is a goal state $s_g$.
From the min-player states to the goal state, there is a sequence of $S_b$ min-player boosting states,
$s_{b_1}, s_{b_2}, \ldots, s_{b_{S_b}}$.
These states has only one action $R$ and are chained together: $R$ transitions $s_{b_{S_b}}$ to $s_{b_{S_b-1}}$, $s_{b_{S_b-1}}$ to $s_{b_{S_b-2}}$, ..., $s_{b_{1}}$ to
$s_g$.
No reward is given to these actions.
The $R$ action transitions $s_{m_{1}}$ to $s_{b_{S_b}}$ with reward $r_{\delta}$.
$s_g$ has only one action which has a reward $-r_g$ (to be determined) and transitions to another state uniformly at random.
There is a sequence of max-player states $s_{M_1}, s_{M_2}, \ldots, s_{M_{S'}}$.
These states have two actions, one action $U$ transitions to another state uniformly at random, with reward $0$; one action $R$ transitions the state $s_{M_i}$ to $s_{M_{i-1}}$, with reward $-r_{\delta}'\le 0$ (to be determined).
The switching state $s_{*}$ has $S'$ actions which we denote as $a_1, a_2, \ldots, a_{S'}$.
The action $a_i$ will transition the state to state $s_{m_i}$ with reward $r_i$ (to be determined).
From the $s_{M_1}$ to the state $s_*$, there is a sequence of $S_b'$ max-player boosting states,
$s_{B_1}, s_{B_2}, \ldots, s_{B_{S'_b}}$.
These states have only one action $R$ and are chained together: $R$ transitions $s_{B_{S_b'}}$ to $s_{B_{S_b'-1}}$, $s_{B_{S_b'-1}}$ to $s_{B_{S_b'-2}}$, ..., $s_{B_{1}}$ to
$s_*$.
The $R$ action transitions the state $s_{M_{1}}$ to the state $s_{B_1}$ with reward $-r_{\delta}'$.
Initially, the min-player policy $\pi_{\min}^{(0)}$ and the max-player policy $\pi_{\max}^{(0)}$ play action $U$ at every state except $s_*$;
$\pi_{\max}^{(0)}(s_*) = a_{1}$.
\paragraph{High Level Intuition}
To begin our formal discussion of the hard instance, we first remark the high level intuition of the lower bound.
We construct the instance such that the min-player is somewhat decoupled from the max-player.
That said, starting from the min-player policy $\pi_{\min}^{(0)}$ that plays action $U$ at every state $s_{m_j}$, the algorithm changes only one action at an iteration.
For instance, at iteration $i\in[1, S']$, the min-player policy, $\pi^{(i)}_{\min}$, plays action $U$ at state $s_{m_j}$ for all $j\in [i+1, S']$ and plays action $R$ at state $s_{m_{j'}}$ for $j'\in [i]$. The number of $U$ actions decreases as the iteration number $i$ increases.
However, the max-player policy is largely affected by the current choice of the min-player.
We will show, by induction, that $\pi_{\max}^{(i-1)}$ plays action $a_{i-1}$ at the switching state $s_*$.
In the beginning of iteration $i$, the present min-player policy is still $\pi_{\min}^{(i-1)}$, which ``chains'' together states $s_{i-1}, s_{i-2}, \ldots, s_{1}, s_{b_{S_b}}, s_{b_{S_b-1}},$ $\ldots, s_g$ by action $R$.
Hence, the action $a_{i-1}$ connects the switching state $s_*$ to $s_{i-1}$, which is eventually connected to the goal state $s_g$ by the min-player policy.
Note that the goal state $s_g$ has a negative reward, therefore $a_{i-1}$ is highly sub-optimal against $\pi_{\min}^{(i-1)}$.
By appropriate choices of $r_1, r_2, \ldots, r_{S'}$, $r_{\delta}$, and $r_{g}$ we can guarantee that the next step of the algorithm would take the max-player policy $\pi_{\max}^{(i, 0)}$, which plays action $U$ at every max-player state $s_{M_j}$ and action $a_{i}$ at state $s_*$ (e.g., choose $r_1> r_2> r_3 >\ldots, r_{S'}$).
For the rest iterations of step I., the algorithm would take $\Theta(\sqrt{T})$ steps to improve the policy $\pi_{\max}^{(i, 0)}$ until it is approximately optimal against the present min-player policy. This is in analogous to the lower bound proof of PI (Theorem~\ref{thm:pi-hard}). But for all these improvement steps, the action at $s_*$ is $a_i$ without changing.
Since there are $\Theta(\sqrt{T})$ min-player states,
the overall number of policy evaluations would be $\Theta(T)$.
However, we will show that the flux ratio of the instance is $\Theta(\sqrt{T})$.
Thus we prove a quadratic lower bound of SI over the flux ratio.
\paragraph{Formal Analysis}
In this section, we prove Theorem~\ref{lowerbound} formally.
The ergodicity and flux ratio of the hard instance is presented in the next lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:ergodicity-strat}
For any strategy $\sigma$, let $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_\sigma$ be the invariant distribution on the hard instance, HI2.
Then for sufficiently large $T$, we have
\[
\Theta(1/T) \le \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\sigma} \le \Theta(\sqrt{T}) /T.
\]
\end{lemma}
The proof is similar to that of Lemma~\ref{lemma:ergodicity}.
For completeness, we put a proof in the appendix.
Now we are ready to show a lower bound for SI.
Note that $\gamma$ can be made arbitrarily close to $1$.
By Lemma~\ref{ratio:limit}, the hard instance has a flux ratio $\Theta(\sqrt{T})$ provided $\gamma$ sufficiently close to $1$.
To prove Theorem~\ref{lowerbound}, we first introduce some more notations.
\begin{definition}
We denote the min-player strategy $\pi^{(i)}_{\min}$ as follows:
\[
\pi^{(i)}_{\min}(s_{m_j}) = R \quad\text{for} \quad 1
\le j\le i, \quad \text{and}\quad \pi^{(i)}_{\min}(s_{m_{j'}}) = U \quad\text{for }j'>i.
\]
We also denote max-player strategy $\pi^{(i,z)}_{\max}$
for $z\in [0,S']$ as follows
\[
\pi^{(i,z)}_{\max}(s_{M_j}) = R \quad\text{for} \quad 1
\le j\le z, \quad \text{and}\quad \pi^{(i, z)}_{\max}(s_{M_{j'}}) = U \quad\text{for}\quad j'>z
\]
and $\pi^{(i,z)}_{\max}(s_{*}) = a_i$ for all $z\in [0,S']$.
\end{definition}
In what follows, we let
\[
r_{\delta}, r_{\delta}' = \Theta(1/\sqrt{T}), \gamma = 1-1/\beta \text{ with } \beta=\Omega(T), \quad\text{and}\quad S_b, S_b'> S'=\Theta(\sqrt{T}).
\]
The exact conditions of setting these values will become clear in the reminder of the text.
We now show some approximated values of the above policies in the next lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:vbar}
Let $\overline{v}[\sigma] = \boldsymbol{e}^{\top} \boldsymbol{v}^{\sigma}$.
Let $T'=(T+2S'+S_b+S_b'+2)$.
Then, for every $i\in [S'], z\in [0, S']$,
\begin{align*}
(1-\gamma)T'\cdot\overline{v}\Big[\big(\pi^{(i)}_{\min}, \pi^{(i, z)}_{\max}\big)\Big]
&= -(2+i+z+S_b+S_b') r_g + (1+z+S_b') r_i + c\sqrt{T}\quad\text{and}\quad\\
(1-\gamma)T'\cdot\overline{v}\Big[\big( \pi^{(i)}_{\min}, \pi^{(i+1, z)}_{\max}\big)\Big]
&= -(i+S_b+1) r_g + (1+z+S_b') r_i + O(1).
\end{align*}
for some $c\le1$ can be made arbitrarily small by controlling the ratio $S_b'/\sqrt{T}$ and provided $\gamma$ sufficiently close to $1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\textbf{Part I.} We first consider strategy, $\sigma=\big(\pi^{(i)}_{\min}, \pi^{(i,z)}_{\max}\big)$.
For the sake of representation, let $\overline{v} = \overline{v}\Big[(\pi^{(i)}_{\min}, \pi^{(i)}_{\max})\Big]$ and $\boldsymbol{v}=\boldsymbol{v}^{\sigma}$.
We also denote
\[
\Gamma[z] := \sum_{j=0}^{z-1}\gamma^j= \frac{1-\gamma^{z}}{1-\gamma}
\quad\text{and}\quad
B[z] := \sum_{j=1}^{z}\Gamma[j]
= \frac{\gamma z- \Gamma[z]}{1-\gamma}.
\]
In order to compute $\overline{v}$, we list the values of each state.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Min-player: for each $j\in [i]$: $\boldsymbol{v}(s_{m_j}) = \gamma^{j+S_b}(-r_g + \gamma \overline{v}) + \Gamma[j]\cdot r_\delta$;
\item Min-player: for each $j\in [i+1, S']$: $\boldsymbol{v}(s_{m_j}) =\gamma \overline{v}$;
\item Min-player-boosting: for each $j\in [S_b]$: $\boldsymbol{v}({s_{b_j}}) = \gamma^{j}(-r_g + \gamma \overline{v})$
\item Dummy: for each dummy state $s$: $\boldsymbol{v}(s) = \gamma \overline{v}$;
\item Max-player: for the switching state $s_*$: $\boldsymbol{v}(s_{*}) = r_i + \gamma^{i + S_b+1}\cdot (-r_g + \gamma \overline{v}) + \gamma\Gamma[i]\cdot r_{\delta}$;
\item Max-player: for each $j\in [z]$:
$\boldsymbol{v}(s_{M_j}) = \gamma^{j+S_b'}\cdot[r_i + \gamma^{i+S_b+1}\cdot(-r_g + \gamma \overline{v}) + \gamma\Gamma[i]\cdot r_\delta] - \Gamma[j]\cdot r_{\delta}'$;
\item Max-player: for each $j\in [z+1, S']$:
$\boldsymbol{v}(s_{M_j}) = \gamma \overline{v}$;
\item Max-player-boosting: for each $j\in [S_b']$: $\boldsymbol{v}({s_{b_j}}) = \gamma^{j} (r_i +\gamma^{
i + S_b+1} (-r_g + \gamma \overline{v}) + \gamma\Gamma[i]\cdot r_{\delta})$;
\item Goal: for state $s_g$: $\boldsymbol{v}(s_g) = -r_g + \gamma\overline{v}$;
\end{enumerate}
To computer the average value $\overline{v}$, we take a sum of the values of each state, i.e.,
\[
\boldsymbol{1}^\top \boldsymbol{v} = (T+2S'+S_b+S_b'+2)\cdot \overline{v}.
\]
For the sake of representation, we compute $(1-\gamma) \overline{v}$ under the limit of $\gamma\rightarrow 1$\footnote{Note this is without loss of generality since we can make $\gamma$ arbitrarily close to $1$.}.
In this case $\Gamma[z] \rightarrow z$, and $B[z]\rightarrow z(z-3)/2$.
Note that
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:sum-v}
\underset{\textcircled{1}}{\underline{\boldsymbol{1}^\top \boldsymbol{v} - \gamma\cdot (T+2S'+S_b+S_b'+2)\cdot \overline{v}}}
= (T+2S'+S_b+S_b'+2)\cdot \overline{v} \cdot(1-\gamma).
\end{align}
To compute $(1-\gamma) \overline{v}$, it suffices to compute the left hand side of the above equation.
We further notice that under the limit of $\gamma\rightarrow 1$, all the terms contributed by $\gamma \overline{v}$ can be canceled exactly.
For the rest of the terms, we can compute
\begin{align*}
\textcircled{1} &=
\underset{\text{from 1.-3.}}{\underline{i\cdot(-r_g) + (i-3)i/2\cdot r_\delta
+ S_b\cdot (-r_g)}}
+
\underset{\text{from 5.}}{\underline{r_i + (-r_g) + i\cdot r_\delta}}
\\
&\qquad+
\underset{\text{from 6.}}{\underline{z\cdot r_i + z\cdot (-r_g) + zi\cdot r_\delta - z(z-3)/2\cdot r_{\delta}'}} +
\underset{\text{from 8.-9.}}{\underline{S_b'\cdot r_i + S_b'\cdot (-r_g) + S_b'i\cdot r_\delta - r_g}}.
\end{align*}
Since $r_\delta, r_{\delta}'\in \Theta(1/\sqrt{T})$, we have $[(i-3)i/2+zi+S_b'i]\cdot r_{\delta} = O(\sqrt{T})$ and $(z-3)z/2\cdot r_{\delta}' = O(1)$.
Thus
\[
\textcircled{1} =
-(2+i+z+S_b+S_b') r_g + (1+z+S_b') r_i + c\sqrt{T}
\]
for some $c=\Theta(1)$.
\noindent\textbf{Part II.}
Next we consider $\sigma=\big(\pi^{(i)}_{\min}, \pi^{(i+1, z)}_{\max}\big)$.
Similarly, we compute the values.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Min-player: for each $j\in [i]$: $\boldsymbol{v}(s_{m_j}) = \gamma^{j+S_b}(-r_g + \gamma \overline{v}) + \Gamma[j]\cdot r_\delta$;
\item Min-player: for each $j\in [i+1, S']$: $\boldsymbol{v}(s_{m_j}) =\gamma \overline{v}$;
\item Min-player-boosting: for each $j\in [S_b]$: $\boldsymbol{v}({s_{b_j}}) = \gamma^{j}(-r_g + \gamma \overline{v})$
\item Dummy: for each dummy state $s$: $\boldsymbol{v}(s) = \gamma \overline{v}$;
\item Max-player: for the switching state $s_*$: $\boldsymbol{v}(s_{*}) = r_i + \gamma^2\overline{v}$;
\item Max-player: for each $j\in [z]$:
$\boldsymbol{v}(s_{M_j}) = \gamma^{j+S_b'}\cdot(r_i + \gamma^2 \overline{v}) - \Gamma[j]\cdot r_{\delta}'$;
\item Max-player: for each $j\in [z+1, S']$:
$\boldsymbol{v}(s_{M_j}) = \gamma \overline{v}$;
\item Max-player-boosting: for each $j\in [S_b']$: $\boldsymbol{v}({s_{b_j}}) = \gamma^{j} (r_i +\gamma^2\overline{v})$;
\item Goal: for state $s_g$: $\boldsymbol{v}(s_g) = -r_g + \gamma\overline{v}$;
\end{enumerate}
To compute $\overline{v}$, we consider the same formula as in \eqref{eqn:sum-v}.
Now we have
\begin{align*}
\textcircled{1} &=
\underset{\text{from 1.-3.}}{\underline{i\cdot(-r_g) + (i-3)i/2\cdot r_\delta
+ S_b\cdot (-r_g)}}
+
\underset{\text{from 5.-9.}}{\underline{r_i+z\cdot r_i - z(z-3)/2\cdot r_{\delta}'+ S_b'\cdot r_i - r_g}}.
\end{align*}
Again, since $r_\delta, r_{\delta}'\in \Theta(1/\sqrt{T})$, we have $[(i-3)i/2]\cdot r_{\delta} = O(1)$ and $(z-3)z/2\cdot r_{\delta}' = O(1)$.
Thus
\[
\textcircled{1} =
-(i+S_b+1) r_g + (1+z+S_b') r_i + O(1).
\]
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
For some choices of $S_b =\Theta(S_b') = \Theta(\sqrt{T})$ and $r_i = \Theta(r_g) = \Theta(1)$, we can have
\[
\overline{v}\Big[(\pi^{(i)}_{\min}, \pi^{(i, z)}_{\max})\Big]
= -\Theta(\sqrt{T}) <0 \quad\text{and}
\quad \overline{v}\Big[(\pi^{(i)}_{\min}, \pi^{(i+1, z)}_{\max})\Big] = \Theta(\sqrt{T}) >0.
\]
\end{remark}
To prove Theorem \ref{lowerbound},
it suffices to show, by assigning appropriate values to $r_1, r_2, \ldots, r_{S'}, r_{\delta}, r_{\delta}', r_g$, the strategy iteration follows the following path.
\paragraph{Algorithm Path}
\begin{enumerate}
\item The initial strategy is $(\pi_{\min}^{(0)},\pi_{\max}^{(0)})$;
\item At iteration $i$, the Step I is a PI for a fixed min-player strategy. The first iteration of this PI always initializes the max-player policy to be $\pi_{\max}^{(i+1,0)}$, if this is not this policy;
\item Step I of the algorithm takes $\Theta(\sqrt{T})$ policy evaluations to complete;
\item Step II of the iteration $i$ updates the min-player policy to $\pi_{\min}^{(i)}$;
\item The algorithm takes $\Theta(\sqrt{T})$ iterations to finish.
\end{enumerate}
In order to show that the algorithm always follow the above path, we verify the following key steps.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:si-improve1}
Suppose now the current status of the algorithm is at iteration $i\ge 0$ and step I.
If the current strategy is $(\pi_{\max}^{(i)}, \pi_{\max}^{(i, z)})$ for any $z\in [S']$, then the next strategy is $(\pi_{\max}^{(i)}, \pi_{\max}^{(i+1, 0)})$, provided appropriately chosen values for $\{r_i\}_{i\in[S']}\cup\{r_\delta,r_\delta', r_g\}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
To prove this lemma, we will compare the action values at each max-player state and show that the actions of $\pi_{\max}^{(i+1, 0)}$ will be picked.
Denote $\overline{v} = \overline{v}(\pi_{\max}^{(i)}, \pi_{\max}^{(i, z)})$
and $\boldsymbol{Q} = \boldsymbol{Q}^{[\pi_{\max}^{(i)}, \pi_{\max}^{(i, z)}]} \in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{S}\times\mathcal{A}^1}$ as the action value function.
We first consider the switching state $s_*$.
Recall that $s_*$ has $S'$ actions $a_1, a_2, \ldots, a_{S'}$.
For each $j\in [i]$, we have
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_*, a_{j}) = r_j + \gamma^{i+S_b + 1}\cdot(-r_g + \gamma \overline{v}) + \gamma \Gamma[i]\cdot r_{\delta}.
\]
For each $j'\in [i+1, S']$, we have
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_*, a_{j'}) = r_{j'} + \gamma^2 \overline{v}.
\]
Since we are choosing $r_1\ge r_2\ge \ldots r_{S'}$, action $a_{i+1}$ is more preferable to $a_{i+2}, a_{i+3}, \ldots, a_{S'}$.
It remains to compare $\boldsymbol{Q}(s_*, a_{i+1})$ with $\boldsymbol{Q}(s_*, a_{j})$ for $j\in [i]$. Recall that $\gamma =1-1/\beta = 1-O(1/T)$, and $\overline{v} = -\Theta(\beta/T\cdot \sqrt{T})$ (by Lemma~\ref{lemma:vbar}).
We thus have
\[
|\gamma^{i+S_b+1} (-r_g + \gamma \overline{v}) - (-r_g+\gamma^2 \overline{v})| = \Theta(1)
\]
which can be made arbitrarily small by controlling the ratio of $S_b/\sqrt{T}$.
Note that $\gamma \Gamma[i] \cdot r_{\delta} = O(1)$ and can be made arbitrarily small by controlling the ratio of $S_b/\sqrt{T}$ as well.
Therefore, for $j\in[i]$
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_*, a_{j}) \le r_j - r_g + \gamma^2 \overline{v} + c
\]
for some constant $c$ that can be made arbitrarily small.
Therefore, $a_{i+1}$ is preferable to $a_{j}$ as long as $r_{i+1}\ge r_{j} - r_g + c$, which can be guaranteed by choosing these values appropriately.
Next, we show that for the state $s_{M_j}$ with $j\in [z]$, action $U$ is preferable.
We can compute their action values as follows.
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_j}, U) = \gamma \overline{v} \quad\text{and}\quad
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_j}, R) = \gamma^{j+S_b'}\cdot[r_i + \gamma^{i+S_b+1}\cdot(-r_g + \gamma \overline{v}) + \gamma\Gamma[i]\cdot r_\delta] - \Gamma[j]\cdot r_{\delta}'.
\]
With a similar Taylor expansion argument as that for $s_*$, we have
\[
|\boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_j}, R) - (r_i - r_g +\gamma \overline{v})| = \Theta(1)
\]
which can be arbitrarily small by controlling the ratios, $S_b/\sqrt{T}$ and $S_b'/\sqrt{T}$.
Therefore, as long as $r_i-r_g+c\le 0$ for some small constant $c>0$, then
$Q(s_{M_j}, R)<Q(s_{M_j}, U)$ and thus action $U$ is preferable.
We now consider state $s_{M_{j'}}$ for $j'\in[z+1, S']$. We can compute their action values as follows.
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_{j'}}, U) = \gamma \overline{v} \quad\text{and}\quad
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_{j'}}, R) = -r_{\delta}' + \gamma^2 \overline{v}.
\]
Since $|\gamma^2\overline{v} -\gamma \overline{v}| = O(1/\sqrt{T})$, and $r_{\delta}'= \Theta(1/\sqrt{T})$, we can make sure that
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_{j'}}, U) > \boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_{j'}}, R)
\]
by choosing $r_{\delta}'$ appropriately.
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:si-improve2}
Suppose now the current status of the algorithm is at iteration $i\ge 0$ and step I.
If the current strategy is $(\pi_{\max}^{(i)}, \pi_{\max}^{(i+1, z)})$ for any $z\in [S'-1]$, then the next strategy is $(\pi_{\max}^{(i)}, \pi_{\max}^{(i+1, z+1)})$, provided appropriately chosen values for $\{r_i\}_{i\in[S']}\cup\{r_\delta,r_\delta', r_g\}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is in a similar structure as that of Lemma~\ref{lem:si-improve1}.
We will compare action values at different states of the max-player.
Denote $\overline{v} = \overline{v}(\pi_{\max}^{(i)}, \pi_{\max}^{(i+1, z)})$
and $\boldsymbol{Q} = \boldsymbol{Q}^{[\pi_{\max}^{(i)}, \pi_{\max}^{(i+1, z)}]} \in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{S}\times\mathcal{A}^1}$ as the action value function.
We first consider the state $s_*$.
For each $j\in [i]$, we have
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_*, a_{j}) = r_j + \gamma^{i+S_b + 1}\cdot(-r_g + \gamma \overline{v}) + \gamma \Gamma[i]\cdot r_{\delta}.
\]
For each $j'\in [i+1, S']$, we have
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_*, a_{j'}) = r_{j'} + \gamma^2 \overline{v}.
\]
Since we are choosing $r_1\ge r_2\ge \ldots r_{S'}$, action $a_{i+1}$ is more preferable to $a_{i+2}, a_{i+3}, \ldots, a_{S'}$.
It remains to compare $\boldsymbol{Q}(s_*, a_{i+1})$ with $\boldsymbol{Q}(s_*, a_{j})$ for $j\in [i]$. Recall that $\gamma =1-1/\beta = 1-O(1/T)$, and $\overline{v} = \Theta(\beta/T\cdot \sqrt{T})$ (by Lemma~\ref{lemma:vbar}).
We thus have
\[
|\gamma^{i+S_b+1} (-r_g + \gamma \overline{v}) - (-r_g+\gamma^2 \overline{v})| = \Theta(1)
\]
which can be made arbitrarily small by controlling the ratio of $S_b/\sqrt{T}$.
Note that $\gamma \Gamma[i] \cdot r_{\delta} = O(1)$ and can be made arbitrarily small by controlling the ratio of $S_b/\sqrt{T}$ as well.
Therefore, for $j\in[i]$
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_*, a_{j}) \le r_j - r_g + \gamma^2 \overline{v} + c
\]
for some constant $c$ that can be made arbitrarily small.
Therefore, $a_{i+1}$ is preferable to $a_{j}$ as long as $r_{i+1}\ge r_{j} - r_g + c$, which can be guaranteed by choosing these values appropriately.
Next, we show that for the state $s_{M_j}$ with $j\in [z+1]$, action $R$ is preferable.
We can compute their action values as follows.
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_j}, U) = \gamma \overline{v} \quad\text{and}\quad
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_j}, R) = \gamma^{j+S_b'}\cdot(r_i + \gamma^2 \overline{v}) - \Gamma[j]\cdot r_{\delta}'.
\]
With a similar Taylor expansion argument as that for $s_*$, we have
\[
|\boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_j}, R) - (r_i +\gamma \overline{v})| = \Theta(1)
\]
which can be arbitrarily small by controlling the ratio, $S_b'/\sqrt{T}$.
Therefore, as long as $r_i - c > 0$ for some small constant $c>0$, then
$Q(s_{M_j}, U)<Q(s_{M_j}, R)$ and thus action $R$ is preferable.
We now consider state $s_{M_{j'}}$ for $j'\in[z+2, S']$. We can compute their action values as follows.
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_{j'}}, U) = \gamma \overline{v} \quad\text{and}\quad
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_{j'}}, R) = -r_{\delta}' + \gamma^2 \overline{v}.
\]
Since $|\gamma^2\overline{v} -\gamma \overline{v}| = O(1/\sqrt{T})$, and $r_{\delta}'= \Theta(1/\sqrt{T})$, we can make sure that
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_{j'}}, U) > \boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_{j'}}, R)
\]
by choosing $r_{\delta}'$ appropriately.
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:si-improve3}
Suppose now the current status of the algorithm is at iteration $i\ge 0$ and step II.
If the current strategy is $(\pi_{\max}^{(i)}, \pi_{\max}^{(i+1, z)})$ for any $z\in [S']$, then the next strategy is $(\pi_{\max}^{(i+1)}, \pi_{\max}^{(i+1, z)})$, provided appropriately chosen values for $\{r_i\}_{i\in[S']}\cup\{r_\delta,r_\delta', r_g\}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
To prove this lemma, we will compare the action values for the min-player.
Denote again $\overline{v} = \overline{v}(\pi_{\max}^{(i)}, \pi_{\max}^{(i+1, z)})$
and $\boldsymbol{Q} = \boldsymbol{Q}^{[\pi_{\max}^{(i)}, \pi_{\max}^{(i+1, z)}]} \in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{S}\times\mathcal{A}^1}$ as the action value function.
For each $j\in[i+1]$, we have
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_{m_j}, U) = \gamma \overline{v} \quad \text{and}\quad
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_{m_j}, R) = \gamma^{i+S_b}\cdot(-r_g + \gamma \overline{v}) + \Gamma[i]\cdot r_{\delta}.
\]
By a similar Taylor expansion argument, we have
\[
Q(s_{m_j}, R) \le -r_g + \gamma \overline{v} + c
\]
for some constant $c> 0$ that can be made arbitrarily small.
Therefore, as long as $-r_g+c<0$, action $R$ is preferable (note that the min-player prefers action with smaller action value).
For each $j'\in[i+2, S']$, we have
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_{j'}}, U) = \gamma \overline{v} \quad\text{and}\quad
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_{j'}}, R) = r_{\delta} + \gamma^2 \overline{v}.
\]
Since $|\gamma^2\overline{v} -\gamma \overline{v}| = O(1/\sqrt{T})$, and $r_{\delta}= \Theta(1/\sqrt{T})$, we can make sure that
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_{j'}}, U) < \boldsymbol{Q}(s_{M_{j'}}, R)
\]
by choosing $r_{\delta}$ appropriately.
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\paragraph{Proof of Theorem \ref{lowerbound}}
\begin{proof
By Lemma~\ref{lem:si-improve1}, \ref{lem:si-improve2}, and \ref{lem:si-improve3}, we can verify that the algorithm
follows the following path,
\begin{align*}
(\pi_{\min}^{(0)}, \pi_{\max}^{(0)})&\rightarrow(\pi_{\min}^{(0)}, \pi_{\max}^{(1,0)})\rightarrow(\pi_{\min}^{(0)}, \pi_{\max}^{(1,1)})\rightarrow(\pi_{\min}^{(0)}, \pi_{\max}^{(1,2)})\ldots\rightarrow(\pi_{\min}^{(0)}, \pi_{\max}^{(1, S')})\\
\rightarrow(\pi_{\min}^{(1)}, \pi_{\max}^{(1, S')})&\rightarrow(\pi_{\min}^{(1)}, \pi_{\max}^{(2,0)})\rightarrow(\pi_{\min}^{(1)}, \pi_{\max}^{(2,1)})\rightarrow(\pi_{\min}^{(1)}, \pi_{\max}^{(2,2)})\ldots\rightarrow(\pi_{\min}^{(1)}, \pi_{\max}^{(2, S')})\\
&\ldots\\
\rightarrow(\pi_{\min}^{(S'-1)}, \pi_{\max}^{(S'-1, S')})&\rightarrow(\pi_{\min}^{(S'-1)}, \pi_{\max}^{(S',0)})\rightarrow(\pi_{\min}^{(S'-1)}, \pi_{\max}^{(S',1)})\rightarrow\ldots\rightarrow(\pi_{\min}^{(S'-1)}, \pi_{\max}^{(S', S')}).
\end{align*}
Each policy improvement step takes one policy evaluation.
By a straightforward counting, the total number of policy evaluations is $(S'-1)S' = \Theta(T)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
If Step I. of the SI does not compute an exact optimal max-player strategy but an approximate one, a similar lower bound still holds.
This is because in the above proof, the PI in step I. require $\Omega(\sqrt{T})$ steps to finish even for an approximate optimal max-player strategy.
\end{remark}
\section{Summary}
\bibliographystyle{apalike}
\subsection{Notations and Preliminaries}
\label{sec:prelim}
\paragraph{Notation:}
We use $\boldsymbol{1}$ to denote the all-ones vector whose dimension is adapted to the context.
We use the operators $|\cdot|, (\cdot)^2, \sqrt{\cdot}, \le, \ge$ as entrywise operators on vectors.
We identify the transition probability function ${\bf P}$ as a matrix in $\mathbb{R}^{(\mathcal{S}\times\mathcal{A}^1)\times \mathcal{S}}$ and each row ${\bf P}(\cdot~|~s,a)\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{S}}$ as a vector.
We denote $\boldsymbol{v}$ as a vector in $\mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{S}}$ and $\boldsymbol{Q}$ as a vector in $\mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{S}\times \mathcal{A}^1}$.
Therefore ${\bf P}\boldsymbol{v}$ is a vector in $\mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{S}\times \mathcal{A}^1}$.
We use $\sigma$ to denote strategy pairs and $\pi$ for the min-player or max-player strategy.
For any strategy $\sigma$, we define $\boldsymbol{Q}_{\sigma}\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{S}}$ as $\boldsymbol{Q}_{\sigma}(s) := \boldsymbol{Q}(s,\sigma(s))$ for $\forall s\in \mathcal{S}$.
We denote ${\bf P}^{\sigma}$ as a linear operator defined as
\[
\forall s\in \mathcal{S}:\quad
[{\bf P}^{\sigma} \boldsymbol{v}](s) = {\bf P}(\cdot~|~s,\sigma(s))^\top \boldsymbol{v}, \quad\text{and}\quad \forall s,a\in \mathcal{S}\times \mathcal{A}^1:
[{\bf P}^{\sigma} \boldsymbol{Q}](s,a) = {\bf P}(\cdot~|~s,a)^\top \boldsymbol{Q}_{\sigma}.
\]
\paragraph{Min-value and max-value:} For a min-player strategy $\pi_{\min}$, we define its \emph{value} as
\begin{align}
\label{value:pimin}
\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi_{\min}} := \max_{\pi_{\max} ~ : ~ \cS_{\max} \rightarrow \cA} \boldsymbol{v}^{(\pi_{\min}, \pi_{\max})},
\end{align}
We let $\sigma_{\max}(\pi_{\min})$ denote a maximizing argument of the above and call it an \emph{optimal counter strategy} of $\pi_{\min}$.
Thus a value of a min-player strategy gives his expected reward in the \emph{worst case}.
We say a min-player strategy $\pi_{\min}$ is \emph{$\epsilon$-optimal} if
$$\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi_{\min}} \le \min_{\pi_{\min}' ~ : ~ \cS_{\min} \rightarrow \cA}\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi_{\min}'} +\epsilon\cdot\boldsymbol{1},
\quad \text{entrywisely}.
$$
The value and $\epsilon$-optimality for the max player is defined similarly. We denote by $\sigma^*$ the optimal strategy and by $\boldsymbol{v}^*$ the value function of the optimal strategy.
\paragraph{$Q$-function:} For a strategy $\sigma$, we denote its \emph{$Q$-function}
(or \emph{action value}) as $\boldsymbol{Q}^{\sigma}\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{S}\times \mathcal{A}^1}$ by
$ \boldsymbol{Q}^\sigma := \boldsymbol{r} + \gamma {\bf P} \boldsymbol{v}^{\sigma}.$
For a vector $\boldsymbol{v} \in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{S}}$ we denote $\boldsymbol{Q}(\boldsymbol{v}):=\boldsymbol{r} + \gamma {\bf P} \boldsymbol{v}$.
Given a $\boldsymbol{Q} \in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{S}\times \mathcal{A}^1}$, we denote the greedy value of $\boldsymbol{Q}$ as
\[
V[\boldsymbol{Q}] (s):= \min_{a\in \mathcal{A}^1}~ \boldsymbol{Q}(s,a)\quad\text{if} \quad s\in \mathcal{S}_{\min} \quad\text{and}\quad V[\boldsymbol{Q}] (s):= \max_{a\in \mathcal{A}^1}\quad \boldsymbol{Q}(s,a)\quad\text{if}\quad s\in \mathcal{S}_{\max}.
\]
\paragraph{Bellman Operator:}
We denote the Bellman operator, $\mathcal{T}$, as follows: $\mathcal{T}[\boldsymbol{v}]\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{S}}$,
and
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{T}[\boldsymbol{v}](s) &:= V[\boldsymbol{r}+\gamma{\bf P} \boldsymbol{v}].
\end{align*}
We also denote the greedy strategy, $\sigma(\boldsymbol{v})$ or $\sigma(\boldsymbol{Q})$, as the maximization/minimization argument of the $\mathcal{T}$ operator. Moreover, for a given strategy $\sigma$, we denote $\mathcal{T}_{\sigma}[\boldsymbol{v}] = \boldsymbol{Q}(\boldsymbol{v})_{\sigma}$.
For a given min-player strategy $\pi_{\min}$, we define the \emph{half} Bellman operator $\mathcal{H}_{\pi_{\min}}$
\[
\mathcal{H}_{\pi_{\min}} [\boldsymbol{v}] = \boldsymbol{r}(s,\pi_{\min}(s)) +\gamma {\bf P}(\cdot~|~s,\pi_{\min}(s))^\top \boldsymbol{v} \quad\text{if} \quad s\in \mathcal{S}_{\min}; \qquad \mathcal{T}[\boldsymbol{v}](s)\quad\text{if}\quad s\in \mathcal{S}_{\max}.
\]
We define $\mathcal{H}_{\pi_{\max}}$ similarly.
Note that $\boldsymbol{v}^*$ is the unique fixed point of the Bellman operator, i.e., $\mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}^*]= \boldsymbol{v}^*$ (known as the Bellman equation \cite{bellman1957dynamic}).
Similarly, $\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi_{\min}}$ (resp. $\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi_{\max}}$) is the unique fixed point for $\mathcal{H}_{\pi_{\min}}$ (resp. $\mathcal{H}_{\pi_{\max}}$).
The (half) Bellman-operators satisfy the following properties (see. e.g. \cite{hansen2013strategy,puterman2014markov})
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{contraction}: $\|\mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}_1] - \mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}_2]\|_{\infty} \le \gamma \| \boldsymbol{v}_1 - \boldsymbol{v}_2\|_{\infty}$;
\item \emph{monotonicity}: $\boldsymbol{v}_1\le \boldsymbol{v}_2 \Rightarrow \mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}_1] \le \mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}_2]$.
\end{enumerate}
\paragraph{High Probability:} we say an algorithm has a property ``with high probability'' if for any $\delta$ by increasing the time and sample complexity by $O(\log(1/\delta))$ it has the property with probability $1 - \delta$.
\subsection{Previous Work}
\label{sec:prev_work}
Here we provide a more detailed survey of previous works related to stochastic games and MDPs.
Two-person stochastic games generalize
MDPs \cite{shapley1953stochastic}. When one of the players has only one action to choose from, the problem reduces to a MDP.
A related game is the stochastic game where both players choose their respective actions simultaneously at each state and the process transitions to the next state under the control of both players \cite{shapley1953stochastic}. The turn-based stochastic game can be reduced to the game with simultaneous moves \cite{prolat2015approximateDP}.
Computing an optimal strategy for a two-player turn-based zero-sum stochastic game is known to be in NP $\cap$ co-NP \cite{condon1992complexity}.
Later \cite{hansen2013strategy} showed that the strategy iteration, a generalization of Howard's policy iteration algorithm \cite{howard1960dynamic}, solves the discounted problem in strongly polynomial time when the discount factor is fixed. Their work uses ideas from \cite{ye2011simplex} which proved that the policy iteration algorithm solves the discounted MDP (DMDP) in strongly polynomial time when the discount factor is fixed. In general (e.g., if the discount factor is part of the input size), it is open if stochastic games can be solved in polynomial time \cite{littman1996algorithms}. This is in contrast to MDPs which can be solved in (weakly) polynomial time as they are a special case of linear programming.
The algorithms and complexity theory for solving two-player stochastic games is closely related to that of solving MDPs. Their is vast literature on solving MDPs which dates back to Bellman who developed value iteration in 1957 \cite{bellman1957dynamic}. The policy iteration was introduced shortly after by Howard \cite{howard1960dynamic}, and its complexity has been extensive studied in \cite{mansour1999complexity,ye2011simplex,scherrer2013improved}. Then \cite{d1963probabilistic} and \cite{de1960problemes} discovered that MDPs are special cases
of a linear program, which leads to the insight that the simplex method, when applied to solving DMDPs, is a
simple policy iteration method. Ye \cite{ye2011simplex} showed that policy iteration (which is a variant of the general simplex method for linear programming) and the simplex method are strongly polynomial for DMDP and terminate in $O(|\mathcal{S}|^2|\mathcal{A}^1| (1-\gamma)^{-1} \log( |\mathcal{S}| (1-\gamma)^{-1}))$ iterations.
\cite{hansen2013strategy} and \cite{scherrer2013improved} improved the iteration bound to $O(|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1| (1-\gamma)^{-1} \log(|\mathcal{S}|(1-\gamma)^{-1}))$
for Howard's policy iteration method.
The best known convergence result for policy and strategy iteration are given by \cite{ye2005new} and \cite{hansen2013strategy}. The best known iteration complexities for both problems are of the order $(1-\gamma)^{-1}$, which becomes unbounded as $\gamma\rightarrow 1$. It is worth mentioning that \cite{ye2005new} designed a combinatorial interior-point algorithm (CIPA) that solves the DMDP in strongly polynomial time.
Sample-based algorithms for learning value and policy functions for MDP have been studied in \cite{kearns1999finite, kakade2003sample, singh1994upper, azar2011speedy, azar2013minimax, sidford2018variance, sidford2018near, agarwal2019optimality} and many others.
Among these papers, \cite{azar2013minimax} obtains the first tight sample bound for finding an $\epsilon$-optimal value function and for finding $\epsilon$-optimal policies in a restricted $\epsilon$ regime and
\cite{sidford2018near} obtains the first tight sample bound for finding an $\epsilon$-optimal \emph{policy} for any $\epsilon$.
Both sample complexities are of the form $\widetilde{O}[|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|(1-\gamma)^{-3}]$.
Lower bounds have been shown in \cite{azar2011reinforcement, even2006action} and \cite{ azar2013minimax}.
\cite{azar2013minimax} give the first tight lower bound $\Omega[|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|(1-\gamma)^{-3}]$. For undiscounted average-reward MDP, a primal-dual based method was proposed in \cite{wang2017randomized} which achieves sample complexity $\widetilde{O}(|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1| t_{\mathrm{mix}}^2 c_{\max}^2/ c_{\min}^2)$, where $t_{\mathrm{mix}}$ is the worst-case mixing time and $c_{\max} / c_{\min}$ is the ergodicity ratio.
Sampling-based method for two-player stochastic game has been considered in \cite{wei2017online} in an online learning setting.
However, their algorithm leads to a sub-optimal sample-complexity when generalized to the generative model setting.
As for general stochastic games, the minimax Q-learning algorithm and the friend-and-foe Q-learning algorithm were introduced in \cite{littman1994markov} and \cite{littman2001friend}, respectively. The Nash Q-learning algorithm was proposed for zero-sum games in \cite{hu2003nash} and for general-sum games in \cite{littman2001value, hu1999multiagent}.
\section{Sample Complexity of Stochastic Games}
In this section, we provide and analyze our sampling-based algorithm for solving stochastic games. Recall that we have a \emph{generative model} for the game such that we can obtain
samples from state-action pairs.
Each sample is obtained in time $O(1)$. As such we care about the total number of samples used or the total amount of time consumed by the algorithm.
We will provide an efficient algorithm that takes input a generative model and obtains a good strategy for the underlying stochastic game.
We now describe the algorithm.
Since the min-player and max-player are symmetric, let us focus on the min-player strategy.
For the max player strategy, we can either consider the game $\mathcal{G}'=(\mathcal{S}_{\min}, \mathcal{S}_{\max}, {\bf P}, \boldsymbol{1}-\boldsymbol{r}, \gamma)$, in which the roles of the max and min players switched, or use the corresponding algorithm for the max-player defined in Section~\ref{sec:alg}, an algorithm that is a direct generalization from the min-player algorithm.
\begin{algorithm}[htb!]
\caption{
QVI-MDVSS:
\label{alg-halfErr}
algorithm for computing monotone decreasing value-strategy sequences.
}
{\small
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State
\textbf{Input:} A generative model for stochastic game, $\mathcal{M}=(\mathcal{S}, \mathcal{A}^1, \boldsymbol{r}, {\bf P}, \gamma)$;
\State
\textbf{Input:} Precision parameter $u\in[0,(1-\gamma)^{-1}]$,
and error probability $\delta \in (0, 1)$;
\State
\textbf{Input:}
Initial values $\boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)}, \sigma^{+(0)}$ that satisfies monotonicity:
{\small
\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:input-condition}
\boldsymbol{v}^*\le \boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)} \le \boldsymbol{v}^* +u\boldsymbol{1},\quad \boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)}\ge \mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)}],\quad\text{and} \quad \boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)}\ge \mathcal{T}_{\sigma^{+(0)}} [\boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)}];
\end{align}
\vspace{-4mm}
}
\State\textbf{Output:}
$\{\boldsymbol{v}^{+(i)}, \boldsymbol{Q}^{+(i)}, \sigma^{+(i)}, \boldsymbol{\xi}^{+(i)} \}_{i=0}^{R}$ which is an MDVSS with probability at least $1-\delta$;
\State
\State\textbf{INITIALIZATION:}
\State Let $c_1, c_2, c_3, c$ be some tunable absolute constants;
\State \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Initialize constants:}}
\State \qquad$\beta\gets (1-\gamma)^{-1}$, and $R\gets\lceil c_1\beta\ln[\beta u^{-1}]\rceil$;
\State \label{def:m1}\qquad$m_1 \gets{c_2\beta^3\cdot\min(1,u^{-2})\cdot{\log(8|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|\delta^{-1})} }{}$;
\State \qquad$m_2\gets {c_3\beta^{2}\log[2R|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|\delta^{-1}]}$;
\State\qquad $\alpha_1\gets L/m_1$ where $L = c\log(|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|\delta^{-1}(1-\gamma)^{-1}u^{-1})$;
\State
\textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Obtain an initial batch of samples:}}
\State For each $(s, a)\in \mathcal{S}\times\mathcal{A}^1$:
obtain independent samples $s_{s,a}^{(1)}, s_{s,a}^{(2)}, \ldots, s_{s,a}^{(m_1)}$ from ${\bf P}(\cdot | s,a)$;
\State
Initialize:
$\boldsymbol{w}^{+}=\widetilde{\boldsymbol{w}}^+ = \widehat{\boldsymbol{\sigma}}^+=\boldsymbol{Q}^{+(0)}=\boldsymbol{Q}^{+(1)} \gets \beta \cdot {\bf 1}_{\mathcal{S} \times \mathcal{A}^1}$ and $i\gets 0$;
\For{each $(s, a)\in \mathcal{S}\times\mathcal{A}^1$}
\State\label{def:start-init-compute} \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Compute empirical estimates of ${\bf P}_{s,a}^{\top}\boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)}$ and $\mathrm{var}({\boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)}})(s,a)$:}}
\State \label{alg1: compute w1+}
$\widetilde{\boldsymbol{w}}^{+}(s,a) \gets \frac{1}{m_1}
\sum_{j=1}^{m_1} \boldsymbol{v}^{+ (0)}(s_{s,a}^{(j)})$;
\State
\label{def:empricial-variance}
$\widehat{\boldsymbol{\sigma}}^{+}(s,a)\gets \frac{1}{m_1} \sum_{j=1}^{m_1}(\boldsymbol{v}^{+ (0)})^2(s_{s,a}^{(j)}) - (\widetilde{\boldsymbol{w}}^{+})^2(s,a)$ ;
\State \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Shift the empirical estimate to have one-sided error and guarantee monotonicity:}}
\State
$\boldsymbol{w}^+(s, a) \gets \widetilde{\boldsymbol{w}}^+(s,a) + \sqrt{\alpha_1\widehat{\boldsymbol{\sigma}}^+(s,a)} + \alpha_1^{3/4}\beta$
\State \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Compute coarse estimate of the $Q$-function and make sure its value is in $[0,\beta]$:}}
\State
$\boldsymbol{Q}^{+(0)}(s,a) \gets \min[\boldsymbol{r}(s,a) + \gamma \boldsymbol{w}^{+}(s,a), \beta]$\label{def:end-init-compute}
\EndFor
\State
\State\textbf{REPEAT:} \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\qquad\qquad\textbackslash \textbackslash successively improve}}
\For{$i=1$ to $R$}
\State \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Compute
the one-step dynamic programming:}}
\State\label{alg: pit} Let ${\boldsymbol{v}}^{+(i)} \gets \widetilde{\boldsymbol{v}}^{+(i)}\gets \mathcal{T} [ \boldsymbol{Q}^{+(i-1)} ]$, ${\sigma}^{+(i)}\gets\widetilde{\sigma}^{+(i)}\gets \sigma(\boldsymbol{Q}^{+(i-1)})$;
\State \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Compute strategy and value and maintain monotonicity:}}
\State \label{alg: v2+} For {each $s\in \mathcal{S}$} if ${\boldsymbol{v}}^{+(i)}(s)\ge \boldsymbol{v}^{+(i-1)}(s)$, then
$\boldsymbol{v}^{+(i)}(s)\gets \boldsymbol{v}^{+(i-1)}(s)$ and $\sigma^{+(i)}(s)\gets \sigma^{+(i-1)}(s)$;
\State\textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Obtaining a small batch of samples:}}
\State For each $(s, a)\in \mathcal{S}\times\mathcal{A}^1$:
draw independent samples $\widetilde{s}_{s,a}^{(1)}, \widetilde{s}_{s,a}^{(2)}, \ldots, \widetilde{s}_{s,a}^{(m_2)}$ from ${\bf P}(\cdot | {s,a})$;
\State \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Compute the expected value, $\boldsymbol{g}^{\pm(i)}$, the estimate of ${\bf P} \big[\boldsymbol{v}^{\pm(i)} - \boldsymbol{v}^{\pm (0)}\big]$ with one-sided error:}}
\State \label{alg1: compute g} Let $\widetilde{\boldsymbol{g}}^{+(i)}(s,a)\gets {\frac{1}{m_2}} \sum_{j=1}^{m_2} \big[\boldsymbol{v}^{+ (i)}(\widetilde{s}_{s,a}^{(j)}) - \boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)}(\widetilde{s}_{s,a}^{(j)}) \big]$;
\State Let ${\boldsymbol{g}}^{+(i)}(s,a)\gets\widetilde{\boldsymbol{g}}^{+(i)}(s,a)+ C(1-\gamma)u$, where $C>0$ is an absolute constant;
\State \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Estimate the approximation error:}}
\State $\boldsymbol{\xi}^{+ (i)}\gets 2\sqrt{\alpha_1 \boldsymbol{\sigma}_{\boldsymbol{v}^{+ (0)}}} +
2[\alpha_1^{3/4}\beta + C(1-\gamma)u]\cdot \boldsymbol{1}$
\State \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Improve $\boldsymbol{Q}^{+ (i)}$ and make sure its value is in $[0,\beta]$:}}
\State \label{alg: q-func} $\boldsymbol{Q}^{+ (i+1)}\gets \min\Big[\boldsymbol{r} + \gamma\cdot[\boldsymbol{w}^{+}+\boldsymbol{g}^{+ (i)}], \beta\Big]$;
\EndFor
\State \textbf{return}
$\{\boldsymbol{v}^{+(i)}, \boldsymbol{Q}^{+(i)}, \sigma^{+(i)}, \boldsymbol{\xi}^{+ (i)}\}_{i=0}^{R}$
\end{algorithmic}
}
\end{algorithm}
\paragraph{The Full Algorithm.}
For simplicity, let us denote $\beta = 1/(1-\gamma)$.
Our full algorithm will use the QVI-MDVSS algorithm (Algorithm~\ref{alg-halfErr}) as a subroutine.
As we will show shortly, this subroutine maintains a monotonic value strategy sequence with high probability.
Suppose the algorithm is
specified by an accuracy parameter $\epsilon\in(0,1]$.
We initialize a value vector $\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)} = \beta\boldsymbol{1}$, and an arbitrary strategy $\sigma^{(0)}=(\pi_{\min}^{(0)}, \pi_{\max}^{(0)})$.
Let $u^{(0)} = \beta$.
Then our initial value and strategy satisfy the requirement of the input specified by Algorithm~\ref{alg-halfErr}:
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{v}^*\le \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)} \le \boldsymbol{v}^* +u^{(0)}\boldsymbol{1},\quad \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}\ge \mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}],\quad\text{and} \quad \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}\ge \mathcal{T}_{\sigma^{(0)}} [\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}];
\end{align*}
Let $u^{(j)}\gets \beta / 2^j$ and $\delta\gets 1/\poly(\log(\beta/\epsilon))$.
We run Algorithm \ref{alg-halfErr} repeatedly:\\
\fbox{
\centering
\parbox{0.90\textwidth}{
\begin{align}
\label{algorithm-full}
(v^{(j+1)}, \sigma^{(j+1)})\gets\textrm{QVI-MDVSS}\gets (v^{(j)}, \sigma^{(j)}, u^{(j)}, \delta),
\end{align}
}}\\
where $\sigma^{(j)}=(\pi_{\min}^{(j)}, \pi_{\max}^{(j)})$ and we take the terminal value and strategy of the output sequence of Algorithm~\ref{alg-halfErr} as the input for the next iteration.
In total we run \eqref{algorithm-full} $R'=\Theta(\log(\beta/\epsilon))$ iterations.
In the end, we output $\pi^{(R')}_{\min}$ from $\sigma^{(R')}=(\pi_{\min}^{(R')}, \pi_{\max}^{(R')} )$ as our min-player strategy.
The formal guarantee of the algorithm is presented in the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}[Restatement of Theorem~\ref{mainthm}]
\label{mainthm2}
Given a stochastic game $\mathcal{G} =(\mathcal{S}_{\min}, \mathcal{S}_{\max}, {\bf P}, \boldsymbol{r}, \gamma)$ with a generative model, there exists (constructively) an algorithm that outputs, with probability at least $1-\delta$,
an $\epsilon$-optimal strategy $\sigma$ by querying
$Z=\widetilde{O}(|\mathcal{S}| |\mathcal{A}^1| (1-\gamma)^{-3} \epsilon^{-2})$
samples in time $O(Z)$ using space $O(|\mathcal{S}| |\mathcal{A}^1|)$ where $\epsilon\in(0,1)$ and $\widetilde{O}(\cdot)$ hides $\poly\log[ |\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|/(1-\gamma)/\epsilon/\delta]$ factors.
\end{theorem}
The formal proof of Theorem \ref{mainthm2} is given in the next section.
Here we give a sketch of the proof.
\paragraph{Proof Sketch of Theorem \ref{mainthm2}:}
We first show the high-level idea. Considering one iteration of \eqref{algorithm-full},
we claim that if the input value and strategy $\sigma^{(j)}, \boldsymbol{v}^{(j)}, u^{(j)}$ satisfies the input condition \eqref{eqn:input-condition}, then with probability at least $1-\delta$, the terminal value and strategy of the output sequence,
$\sigma^{(j+1)}, \boldsymbol{v}^{(j+1)}$, satisfies,
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:half-err}
\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi_{\min}^{j+1}}\le \boldsymbol{v}^{j+1}\le \boldsymbol{v}^* + u^{(j)} \boldsymbol{1}/2 =: \boldsymbol{v}^* + u^{(j+1)} \boldsymbol{1};
\end{align}
and $(\sigma^{(j+1)}, \boldsymbol{v}^{(j+1)}, u^{(j+1)})$ satisfies the the input condition \eqref{eqn:input-condition}.
Namely, with high probability, the error of the output is decreased by at least half and the output can be used as an input to the QVI-MDVSS algorithm again.
Suppose we run the subroutine of Algorithm~\ref{alg-halfErr} for $R'$ times, and conditioning on the event that all the instances of QVI-MDVSS succeed, the final error of $\pi_{\min}^{(R')}$ is then at most $u^{(R')} = 2^{-R'}\beta = \epsilon$, as desired.
By setting $\delta = \delta'/R'$ for some $\delta'>0$, we have that all QVI-MDVSS instances succeed with probability at least $1-\delta'$.
It remains to show that the algorithm QVI-MDVSS works as claimed.
\emph{High-level Structure of Algorithm~\ref{alg-halfErr}.}
To outline the proof,
we denote a \emph{monotone decreasing value-strategy sequence} (MDVSS) as $\{\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}, \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}, \sigma^{(i)}, \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}\}_{i=0}^{R}$, satisfying \eqref{eqn:informal-mdvss}, where $\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)},\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)} \in \mathbb{R}^\mathcal{S}, \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{S}\times \mathcal{A}^1}$ and $\sigma^{(i)} = (\pi_{\min}^{(i)}, \pi_{\max}^{(i)})\in \mathcal{A}^1^\mathcal{S}$.
A more formal treatment of the sequence is presented in Section~\ref{sec:monotone_sequence}.
We next introduce the high-level idea of Algorithm~\ref{alg-halfErr}.
The basic step of the algorithm is to do approximate value-iteration while preserving all monotonic properties required by an MDVSS, i.e.,
we would like to approximate
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}={\boldsymbol{Q}}[\boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)}] := \boldsymbol{r} + {{\bf P}} \boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)} \quad\text{and} \quad
{\mathcal{T}}[\boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)}] := V[{\boldsymbol{Q}}(\boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)})].
\]
We would like to approximate ${{\bf P}} \boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)}$ using samples,
but we do not want to use the same amount of samples per iteration (as it become costly if the number of iterations is large).
Instead, we compute only the \emph{first} iteration (i.e., estimate ${\bf P} \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}$) up to high accuracy with a large number of samples ($m_1$ samples, defined in Line~\ref{def:m1}).
These computations are presented in Line~\ref{def:start-init-compute}-\ref{def:end-init-compute}.
To maintain an upper bound of the of the estimation error, we also compute the empirical variances of the updates in Line~\ref{def:empricial-variance}.
We shift upwards our estimates by the estimation error upper bounds to make our estimators one-sided, which is crucial to maintain the MDVSS properties.
For the subsequent steps (Line~\ref{alg: pit} - \ref{alg: q-func}), we use $m_2$ samples per iteration ($m_2\ll m_1$) to
estimate ${\bf P}(\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)} - \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)})$.
The expectation is that $(\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)} - \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)})$ has a small $\ell_\infty$ norm, and hence ${\bf P}(\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)} - \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)})$ can be estimated up to high accuracy with only a small number of samples.
The estimator of ${\bf P}(\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)} - \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)})$ plus the estimator of ${\bf P} \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}$ in the initialization steps gives a high-accuracy estimator (Line~\ref{alg: q-func}) for the value iteration.
Since $m_2\ll m_1$, the total number of samples per state-action pair is dominated by $m_1$.
This idea is formally known as \emph{variance-reduction}, firstly proposed for solving MDP in \cite{sidford2018variance}.
Similarly, we shift our estimators to be one-sided.
We additionally maintain carefully-designed strategies in Line~\ref{alg: pit}-\ref{alg: v2+} to preserve monotonicity.
Hence the algorithm can be viewed as a value-strategy iteration algorithm.
\emph{Correctness of Algorithm~\ref{alg-halfErr}.}
We now sketch the proof of correctness for Algorithm~\ref{alg-halfErr}.
Firstly Proposition \eqref{prop:main0} shows that the if an MDVSS, e.g., $\{\boldsymbol{v}^{+(i)},\boldsymbol{Q}^{+(i)}, \sigma^{+(i)}, \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{+(i)}\}_{i=0}^R$,
satisfies $\|\boldsymbol{v}^{+(R)}- \boldsymbol{v}^*\|_{\infty} \le \epsilon$ for some $\epsilon>0$ then
their terminal strategies and values satisfy
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi_{\min}^{+(R)}}\le \boldsymbol{v}^{+(R)}\le \boldsymbol{v}^* + \epsilon \boldsymbol{1}.
\]
This indicates that as long as we can show $\epsilon \le u/2$, then the \emph{halving-error-property} \eqref{eqn:half-err} holds.
Proposition~\ref{mainprop0} shows the halving-error-property can be achieved by setting
\[
\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{+(i)}
\lesssim \sqrt{\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)})/m} + \text{ lower-order terms},
\]
where $\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)})$ is the variance-of-value vector of $\boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)}$ and $m \gtrsim \sqrt{\beta^3 u^{-2}}$.
This proof is based on constructing an auxiliary Markovian strategy for analyzing the error accumulation throughout the value-strategy iterations. The Markovian strategy is a time-dependent strategy used as a proxy for analyzing the entrywise error recursion (Lemmas \ref{mainprop0}-\ref{cor:error accur}).
Proposition~\ref{mainprop} shows, with high probability, Algorithm~\ref{alg-halfErr} produces value-strategy sequences
$\{\boldsymbol{v}^{+(i)}, \boldsymbol{Q}^{+(i)}, \sigma^{+(i)}, \boldsymbol{\xi}^{+(i)} \}_{i=0}^{R}$, which is indeed an MDVSS and $\boldsymbol{\xi}^{+(i)}$ satisfies Proposition~\ref{mainprop0}. The proof involves analyzing the probability of ``good events" on which monotonicity is preserved at every iteration by using confidence estimates computed during the iterations and concentration arguments. See Lemmas \ref{def:events}-\ref{lemma:all good events happend prob} for the full proof of Proposition \ref{mainprop}.
\emph{Putting Everything Together.} Finally by putting together the strategies, we conclude that the terminal strategy of the iteration~\eqref{algorithm-full} is always an approximately optimal min-player strategy to the game, with high probability.
For implementation, since our algorithm only computes the inner product based on samples, the total computation time is proportional to the number of samples.
Moreover, since we can update as samples are drawn and output the monotone sequences as they are generated, we do not need to store samples or the value-strategy sequences, thus the overall space is $O(|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|)$.
\qed
\section{Proof of Main Results}
The remainder of this section is devoted to proving Theorem~\ref{mainthm}. We prove this by formally providing a notion of \emph{monotone value-strategy sequences}.
With this, we show if an algorithm outputs some monotone value-strategy sequence, then the terminal strategy of the sequence is always an approximately optimal strategy to the game.
We then show that Algorithm~\ref{alg-halfErr}
produces {monotone value-strategy sequences} with high probability.
\subsection{Additional Notation}
First we provide additional notation critical to our proofs.
\paragraph{Markovian Strategies:}
We denote a Markovian strategy $\sigma^{\infty}$ as an infinitely long sequence of pre-defined strategies \[\sigma^{\infty}:= (\sigma_1, \sigma_2, \ldots),
\] where each $\sigma_i$ is a normal deterministic strategy.
We denote
\[
\sigma^{\infty}_{t} = (\sigma_t, \sigma_{t+1}, \ldots)
\]
as another Markovian strategy.
We denote $\sigma^{\infty}_{\min}$ and $\sigma^{\infty}_{\max}$ as the min-player strategy and the max-player strategy respectively.
When using the strategy, players uses $\sigma_t$ at time $t$.
The strategy is Markovian because it does not depend on the historical moves.
Note that a stationary strategy $\sigma$ is a special case of the Markovian strategy: $\sigma = (\sigma, \sigma, \sigma,\ldots )$.
The value of a Markovian strategy is defined as before, but the states are generated by playing the action $\sigma_t(s^t)$ at time $t$.
Since the strategy has a time dependence, we denote
\[
\boldsymbol{v}_t^{\sigma^{\infty}}:=\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma^{\infty}_{t}] \quad
\text{and}\quad
\boldsymbol{Q}^{\sigma^{\infty}}_t = \boldsymbol{r} + \gamma {\bf P} \boldsymbol{v}_{t+1}^{\sigma^{\infty}}.
\]
The (half) Bellman operators are defined similarly to that of stationary policies.
\subsection{Monotone Value-Strategy Sequence}
\label{sec:monotone_sequence}
In this section we formally define monotone strategy value sequences.
Such a sequence, although not explicitly stated in \cite{sidford2018variance, sidford2018near}, are crucial for these algorithms to obtain good policy while obtaining a good value for an MDP.
In the following sections, we denote
$m\ge 1$, $L\ge 1$ and $\epsilon\in[0, (1-\gamma)^{-1}]$ as parameters.
{Monotone value-strategy sequences} are formally defined as follows.
\begin{definition}[Monotone Decreasing Value-Strategy Sequence]
\label{def:mdvps}
A \emph{monotone decreasing value-strategy sequence} (MDVSS) is a sequence of $\{\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}, \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}, \sigma^{(i)}, \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}\}_{i=0}^{R}$ where $\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)},\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)} \in \mathbb{R}^\mathcal{S}, \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{S}\times \mathcal{A}^1}$ and $\sigma^{(i)} = (\pi_{\min}^{(i)}, \pi_{\max}^{(i)})\in \mathcal{A}^1^\mathcal{S}$ satisfy
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}\ge \boldsymbol{v}^{(1)} \ge \ldots \boldsymbol{v}^{(R)} \ge \boldsymbol{v}^*$;
\item $\forall i\in[0,R]$, $\mathcal{T}_{\sigma^{(i)}}[ \boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}] \le \boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}, \mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}]\le \boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}, \mathcal{H}_{\pi^{(i)}_{\min}}[ \boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}]\le \boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}$;
\item $\forall i\in[R]$, $\boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)} \le \boldsymbol{r} + \gamma {\bf P} \boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)} + \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}$;
\item $\forall i\in[R]$, $\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}\le V[ \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}]$.
\end{enumerate}
Note that $\boldsymbol{Q}^{(0)}, \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(0)}$ can be arbitrary.
\end{definition}
Here, we explain the intuition of the sequence.
The first property guarantees that the value-estimator $\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}$s always upper bound the optimal value.
The second property guarantees that
$\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi_{\min}}\le \boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}$.
Indeed
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi_{\min}} = \lim_{t\rightarrow \infty}
\mathcal{H}_{\pi_{\min}}^{t}[ \boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}] \le \boldsymbol{v}^{(i)},
\]
where $\mathcal{H}_{\pi_{\min}}^{t}$ denotes applying $\mathcal{H}_{\pi_{\min}}$ for $t$ times.
Therefore, as long as $\boldsymbol{v}^{(R)} - \boldsymbol{v}^* \le \epsilon\boldsymbol{1}$, we have
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^*\le \boldsymbol{v}^{\pi_{\min}} \le \boldsymbol{v}^* + \epsilon\boldsymbol{1}.
\]
The third and the fourth property guarantees $\boldsymbol{v}^{(R)}$ is good by requiring that $\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}$ and $\boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}$ satisfy the approximate value iteration with one-sided error. However the overall error $\boldsymbol{v}^{(R)} - \boldsymbol{v}^* $ is controlled by the per-step error term $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}$.
Similarly, we define \emph{monotone increasing value-strategy sequence}(MIVSS) analagously with every inequality reversed.
\begin{definition}[Monotone Increasing Value-Strategy Sequence]
\label{def:mivps}
A \emph{monotone increasing value-strategy sequence} (MIVSS) is a sequence of $\{\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}, \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}, \sigma^{(i)}, \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}\}_{i=0}^{R}$ where $\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}\in \mathbb{R}^\mathcal{S}, \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{S}\times \mathcal{A}^1}$ and $\sigma^{(i)}\in \mathcal{A}^1^\mathcal{S}$ that satisfies,
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}\le \boldsymbol{v}^{(1)} \le \ldots \boldsymbol{v}^{(R)} \le \boldsymbol{v}^*$;
\item $\forall i\in[0,R]$, $\mathcal{T}_{\sigma^{(i)}} [\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}] \ge \boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}, \mathcal{T} \boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}\ge [\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}], \mathcal{H}_{\pi_{\max}^{(i)}}[\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}]\ge \boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}$;
\item $\forall i\in[R]$, $\boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)} \ge \boldsymbol{r} + \gamma {\bf P} \boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)} - \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}$
\item $\forall i\in[R]$, $\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}\ge V [\boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}]$.
\end{enumerate}
Note that $\boldsymbol{Q}^{(0)}, \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(0)}$ can be arbitrary.
\end{definition}
\subsection{Monotone Value-Strategy Sequence Implies Good Strategy}
Next, we show that MDVSS or MIVSS implies a good terminal value/strategy.
First we show that if the terminal value $\boldsymbol{v}^{(R)}$ is close to the optimal value, then we are guaranteed to have good strategies as well.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:main0}
Suppose we have an MDVSS, $\{\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)},\boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}, \sigma^{(i)}, \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}\}_{i=0}^R$,
with $\|\boldsymbol{v}^{(R)}- \boldsymbol{v}^*\|_{\infty} \le \epsilon$ for some $\epsilon\ge 0$.
Then we have
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi_{\min}^{(R)}}\le \boldsymbol{v}^* + \epsilon \boldsymbol{1}.
\]
Similarly, suppose $\{\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)},\boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}, \sigma^{(i)}, \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}\}_{i=0}^R$ is an MIVSS, then
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi_{\max}^{(R)}}\ge \boldsymbol{v}^* - \epsilon \boldsymbol{1}.
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By the property of an MDVSS, we have\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi_{\min}^{(R)}} \le \boldsymbol{v}^{(R)}.
\]
Since $\boldsymbol{v}^{(R)} \le \boldsymbol{v}^* + \epsilon\boldsymbol{1}$, we prove the first inequality.
The second inequality follows similarly.
\end{proof}
Next we consider when it is the case we achieve a good terminal value. The following proposition shows that an MDVSS(MVISS) with an appropriate error parameters has a better terminal value than its initial value.
\begin{proposition}
\label{mainprop0}
Let $u\in(0,\beta), \beta = (1-\gamma)^{-1}$, $R=\Theta[\beta\log(\beta/u)]$.
Suppose
an MDVSS (or MIVSS) $\{\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)},\boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}, \sigma^{(i)}, \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}\}_{i=0}^R$
satisfies
\[
\|\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)} - \boldsymbol{v}^*\|_{\infty}\le u\quad\text{and}\quad
\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)} = \sqrt{L \cdot\mathrm{var}({\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}}) /m} + \beta\cdot (L/m)^{3/4}+ u/ (CR),
\]
for some large constant $C>1$ and $m\ge 1$.
Then we have
\[
\|\boldsymbol{v}^{(R)}- \boldsymbol{v}^*\|_{\infty} \le u /2
\quad\text{for}\quad
m = \widetilde{\Omega}\bigg(\frac{1}{\min(1, u^2)\cdot (1-\gamma)^3}\bigg)
~.
\]
\end{proposition}
Note that Proposition~\ref{mainprop0} shows that in an MDVSS/MIVSS, the distance to the optimal value of the terminal value reduces by at least half of its initial value.
Starting from some $\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}$ with distance at most $\beta$ to $\boldsymbol{v}^*$, by concatenating $O(\log(\beta/\epsilon))$ many MDVSS/MIVSS's, with the initial value of one sequence set as the terminal value of the last sequence, an $\epsilon$-optimal value can be obtained.
The remainder of this subsection devotes to proving the above proposition.
Since MIVSS and MDVSS are symmetric, in the following analysis, we focus on MDVSS and the analysis follows similarly for MIVSS.
\subsubsection{Auxiliary Markovian Strategy}
Due to the lack of monotonicity we do not know how to use the optimal strategy $\sigma^*$ to carefully account for the error accumulation of the MDVSS.
To resolve this issue, we instead use the following auxiliary Markovian strategy as such a proxy.
\begin{definition}[Auxiliary Strategy]
Given a MDVSS, $\{\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)},\boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}, \sigma^{(i)}, \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}\}_{i=0}^R$, we
denote the Markovian auxiliary strategy for the max-player as \[
\mpi{(i)}_{\aux\max}
= (\pi^{(i)}_{\aux\max}, \pi^{(i-1)}_{\aux\max}, \ldots, \pi^{(1)}_{\aux\max}, \pi^{*}_{\max}, \pi^{*}_{\max}, \pi^{*}_{\max} \ldots ),
\]
where $\pi^{(i)}_{\aux\max}(s) = \arg\max_{a}\boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}(s,a)$ for $s\in \mathcal{S}_{\max}$.
We denote the auxiliary strategy for the min-player as
\[
\mpi{(i)}_{\aux\min} = \sigma_{\min}[\pi^{\infty(i)}_{\aux\max}]
= (\pi^{(i)}_{\aux\min}, \pi^{(i-1)}_{\aux\min}, \ldots, \pi^{(1)}_{\aux\min}, \pi^{*}_{\min}, \pi^{*}_{\min}, \pi^{*}_{\min} \ldots ),
\]
which is the optimal counter Markovian policy of $\pi^{\infty(i)}_{\aux\max}$, i.e.,
\[
\forall s\in \mathcal{S}_{\min}:\quad \pi^{\infty(i)}_{\aux\min}(s)
= \arg \min_{a}\big[\boldsymbol{r}(s,a) + \gamma {\bf P}(\cdot | s, a)^\top \boldsymbol{v}[\pi^{\infty(i-1)}_{\aux}]\big].
\]
We also denote \[\sigma^{\infty(i)}_{\aux}
=\bigg[( \pi^{(i)}_{\aux\min}, \pi^{(i)}_{\aux\max}), ( \pi^{(i-1)}_{\aux\min},\pi^{(i-1)}_{\aux\max}), \ldots, ( \pi^{(1)}_{\aux\min},\pi^{(1)}_{\aux\max}), \sigma^{*}, \sigma^{*}, \sigma^{*} \ldots \bigg]
.
\]
Furthermore, we denote
$
\sigma^{(i)}_{\aux} = (\pi^{(i)}_{\aux\min}, \pi^{(i)}_{\aux\max})
$ for $i\ge 1$ and $\sigma^{(i)}_{\aux} = \sigma^*$ for $i\le 0$.
\end{definition}
For a Markovian strategy, we first show that the strategy has a value always smaller than the optimal value.
\begin{lemma}
For all $i\in [R]$, we have
\[
\boldsymbol{v}\big[\sigma^{\infty(i)}_{\aux}\big]\le \boldsymbol{v}^*.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Denote
\[
\widetilde{\sigma}^{\infty(i)}_{\aux} = \bigg[( \pi^*_{\min}, \pi^{(i)}_{\aux\max}), ( \pi^*_{\min},\pi^{(i-1)}_{\aux\max}), \ldots, ( \pi^*_{\min},\pi^{(1)}_{\aux\max}), \sigma^{*}, \sigma^{*}, \sigma^{*} \ldots \bigg].
\]
Denote $\sigma^{\infty(0)}_{\aux}= \widetilde{\sigma}^{\infty(0)}_{\aux} = (\sigma^*, \sigma^*, \ldots, )$.
We first show that for all $i\in [R]$,
$\boldsymbol{v}\big[\sigma^{\infty(i)}_{\aux}\big]\le \boldsymbol{v}\big[\widetilde{\sigma}^{\infty(i)}_{\aux}\big]$.
Indeed it holds trivially for $i=0$.
Suppose it holds for some $i\ge 0$.
Then, for each $s\in \mathcal{S}_{\min}$, we have,
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma^{\infty(i)}_{\aux}](s)
&= \min_{a}\big[\boldsymbol{r}(s,a) + \gamma {\bf P}(\cdot ~|~ s, a)^\top \boldsymbol{v}(\sigma^{\infty(i-1)}_{\aux})\big] \\
&\le \big[\boldsymbol{r}(s,\sigma^*(s)) + \gamma {\bf P}(\cdot ~|~ s, \sigma^*(s))^\top \boldsymbol{v}(\sigma^{\infty(i-1)}_{\aux})\big] \\
&\le \big[\boldsymbol{r}(s,\sigma^*(s)) + \gamma {\bf P}(\cdot ~|~ s, \sigma^*(s))^\top \boldsymbol{v}(\widetilde{\sigma}^{\infty(i-1)}_{\aux})\big] \qquad(\text{due to } \boldsymbol{v}\big[\sigma^{\infty(i-1)}_{\aux}\big]\le \boldsymbol{v}\big[\widetilde{\sigma}^{\infty(i-1)}_{\aux}\big])\\
& = \boldsymbol{v}[\widetilde{\sigma}^{\infty(i)}_{\aux}](s).
\end{align*}
For each $s\in \mathcal{S}_{\max}$, we have,
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma^{\infty(i)}_{\aux}](s)
&= \big[\boldsymbol{r}(s,\sigma^{(i)}_{\aux}(s)) + \gamma {\bf P}(\cdot | s, \sigma^{(i)}_{\aux}(s))^\top \boldsymbol{v}(\sigma^{\infty(i-1)}_{\aux})\big] \\
&\le\big[\boldsymbol{r}(s,\sigma^{(i)}_{\aux}(s)) + \gamma {\bf P}(\cdot | s, \sigma^{(i)}_{\aux}(s))^\top \boldsymbol{v}(
\widetilde{\sigma}^{\infty(i-1)}_{\aux})\big] \qquad(\text{due to } \boldsymbol{v}\big[\sigma^{\infty(i-1)}_{\aux}\big]\le \boldsymbol{v}\big[\widetilde{\sigma}^{\infty(i-1)}_{\aux}\big])\\
& = \boldsymbol{v}[\widetilde{\sigma}^{\infty(i)}_{\aux}](s).
\end{align*}
Now, since $(\pi^*_{\max}, \pi^*_{\max}, \ldots)$ is the optimal counter strategy of $(\pi^*_{\min}, \pi^*_{\min}, \ldots)$, we have
\[
\boldsymbol{v}[\widetilde{\sigma}^{\infty(i)}_{\aux}] \le \boldsymbol{v}^*
\]
holds similarly. This concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
Consider the error vector $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}$.
Recall that $ \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}_{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i)}}$ denotes a vector in $\mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{S}}$ whose $s$-th entry is given by $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}(s, \sigma_{\aux}^{(i)}(s))$.
The next lemma shows a recursive relation between a Markovian strategy and the corresponding MDVSS values.
\begin{lemma}
For all $i\in [R]$, we have
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)} - \boldsymbol{v}[{\sigma^{\infty(i)}_{\aux}}] \le \gamma {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i)}}\big(\boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)} - \boldsymbol{v}[{\sigma_{\aux}^{\infty(i-1)}}]\big) + \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}_{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i)}}
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Note that $\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}\ge \boldsymbol{v}^*\ge \boldsymbol{v}[{\sigma^{\infty(i)}_{\aux}}]$.
For each $s\in \mathcal{S}_{\min}$, we have
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}(s)
&\le \min_{a} \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}(s,a)
\le \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}(s,{\sigma^{(i)}_{\aux}}(s))\\
&\le \boldsymbol{r}(s,{\sigma^{(i)}_{\aux}}(s)) + \gamma {\bf P}(\cdot|s,{\sigma^{(i)}_{\aux}}(s))^{\top} \boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)} + \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}(s,{\sigma^{(i)}_{\aux}}(s)),
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{v}[{\sigma^{\infty(i)}_{\aux}}](s) = \boldsymbol{r}(s,{\sigma^{(i)}_{\aux}}(s)) + \gamma {\bf P}(\cdot|s,{\sigma^{(i)}_{\aux}}(s))^{\top} \boldsymbol{v}[{\sigma^{\infty(i-1)}_{\aux}}].
\end{align*}
Thus
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}(s) - \boldsymbol{v}[{\sigma^{\infty(i)}_{\aux}}](s)
\le \gamma {\bf P}(\cdot|s,{\sigma^{(i)}_{\aux}}(s))^{\top}\big(\boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)}- \boldsymbol{v}[{\sigma^{\infty(i-1)}_{\aux}}]\big) + \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}(s,{\sigma^{(i)}_{\aux}}(s)).
\]
Similarly, for each $s\in \mathcal{S}_{\max}$, we have,
$\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}(s)\le \max_{a}\boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}(s,a) := \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}(s,{\sigma^{(i)}_{\aux}}(s))$, thus
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}(s) - \boldsymbol{v}[{\sigma^{\infty(i)}_{\aux}}](s)
&\le
\boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}(s,{\sigma^{(i)}_{\aux}}(s)) - \boldsymbol{v}[{\sigma^{\infty(i)}_{\aux}}](s)\\
&\le \gamma {\bf P}(\cdot|s,{\sigma^{(i)}_{\aux}}(s))^{\top}\big(\boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)}- \boldsymbol{v}[{\sigma^{\infty(i-1)}_{\aux}}]\big) + \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}(s,{\sigma^{(i)}_{\aux}}(s))
\end{align*}
as desired.
\end{proof}
With an inductive application of the above lemma, we obtain
the following corollary, which states an upper bound between the difference of $\boldsymbol{v}^{(R)}$ and $\boldsymbol{v}[{\sigma^{\infty(R)}_{\aux}}]$.
It connects the upper bound with a recursive propagation of the error.
\begin{corollary}
\label{corr:expansion}
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{v}^{(R)} - \boldsymbol{v}[{\sigma^{\infty(R)}_{\aux}}]
\le \gamma^{R}& {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R)}}\cdot {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R-1)}} \cdot \ldots {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(1)}}\big(\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)} - \boldsymbol{v}^*\big)\\
& + \sum_{i=1}^{R}\gamma^{R-i}
{\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R)}} \cdot {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R-1)}} \cdot \ldots {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i+1)}} \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}_{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i)}}.
\end{align*}
\end{corollary}
By this corollary, we know that the major error accumulation term is the second term.
\subsubsection{Error Accumulation}
We now consider the error accumulation in the sequence.
As will show shortly, we relate $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}$ to the variance vector
$\sqrt{\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma_{\aux}^{\infty(i-1)}])}\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{S}\times\mathcal{A}^1}$, where
$\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v})[s,a]
:= \mathrm{var}_{s'\sim P(\cdot|s,a)}[\boldsymbol{v}(s')]$, $\forall (s,a), \boldsymbol{v}$.
Therefore, it suffices to consider the following bound.
\begin{lemma}
\begin{align*}
\sum_{i=1}^{R}&\gamma^{R-i}
{\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R)}} \cdot {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R-1)}} \cdot \ldots {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i+1)}}\sqrt{\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma_{\aux}^{\infty(i-1)}])_{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i)}}}\\
&\le \sqrt{R\sum_{i=1}^{R}\gamma^{2(R-i)}
{\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R)}} \cdot {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R-1)}} \cdot \ldots {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i+1)}}\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma_{\aux}^{\infty(i-1)}])_{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i)}}}
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Follows from Cauchy-Schwarz and that the ${\bf P}$ matrices are non-negative with each row summing to $1$.
\end{proof}
The following lemma establishes a Bellman-like equation for the variance vector of a Markovian strategy.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:variance}
For any Markovian strategy $\pi^{\infty} = (\pi^{(0)}, \pi^{(1)}, \ldots, )$,
we have, for all $s\in \mathcal{S}$
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:newvar}
\mathrm{var}\bigg[\sum_{t=0}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^t, \pi^{(t)}(s))\bigg|s^0 = s\bigg]
=
\bigg[\sum_{t=0}^{\infty}\gamma^{2(t+1)}
{\bf P}^{\pi^{(0)}}{\bf P}^{\pi^{(1)}}{\bf P}^{\pi^{(2)}}\ldots {\bf P}^{\pi^{(t-1)}} \mathrm{var}[\boldsymbol{v}(\pi^{\infty(t+1)})]_{\pi^{(t)}}\bigg](s)
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{var}\bigg[\sum_{t=0}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^t, \pi^{(t)}(s^t))\bigg|s^0 = s\bigg]
&= \mathbb{E}\bigg[\bigg(\sum_{t=0}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^t, \pi^{(t)}(s^t))\bigg)^2\bigg|s^0 = s\bigg]
- \mathbb{E}\bigg[\sum_{t=0}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^t, \pi^{(t)}(s^t))\bigg|s^0 = s\bigg]^2.
\end{align*}
For the second term, we have
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{E}\bigg[\sum_{t=0}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^t, \pi^{(t)}(s^t))\bigg|s^0 = s\bigg]^2
&= \boldsymbol{v}[\pi^{\infty(0)}]^2(s)=
\boldsymbol{r}(s, \pi^{(0)}(s))^2 \\
&\qquad\qquad+ \gamma^2 ({\bf P}^{\pi^{(0)}} \boldsymbol{v}[\pi^{\infty(1)}])^2(s) + 2\gamma \boldsymbol{r}(s, \pi^{(0)}(s))({\bf P}^{\pi^{(0)}} \boldsymbol{v}[\pi^{\infty(1)}])(s).
\end{align*}
For the first term, we have
\begin{align*}
\bigg(\sum_{t=0}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^t, \pi^{(t)}(s^t))\bigg)^2
=\boldsymbol{r}(s, \pi^{(0)}(s))^2
+ 2\boldsymbol{r}(s, \pi^{(0)}(s))\bigg(\sum_{t=1}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^t, \pi^{(t)}(s^t))\bigg)
+\bigg(\sum_{t=1}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^t, \pi^{(t)}(s^t))\bigg)^2
\end{align*}
Note that
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{E}&\bigg[\bigg(\sum_{t=1}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^t, \pi^{(t)}(s^t))\bigg)^2\bigg| s^0=s\bigg]\\
&=
\mathbb{E}\bigg[\bigg(\sum_{t=1}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^t, \pi^{(t)}(s^t))\bigg)^2\bigg| s^0=s\bigg]
-\gamma^2 \sum_{s'}{\bf P}^{\pi^{(0)}}(s'|s) \boldsymbol{v}^2[\pi^{\infty(1)}](s') + \gamma^2 \sum_{s'}{\bf P}^{\pi^{(0)}}(s'|s) \boldsymbol{v}^2[\pi^{\infty(1)}](s')\\
&= \gamma^2 \sum_{s'}{\bf P}^{\pi^{(0)}}(s'|s)
\mathrm{var}\bigg[\sum_{t=0}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^{t+1}, \pi^{(t+1)}(s))\bigg|s^1 = s'\bigg] + \gamma^2 \sum_{s'}{\bf P}^{\pi^{(0)}}(s'|s) \boldsymbol{v}^2[\pi^{\infty(1)}](s')
\end{align*}
Combining the above two equations, we have,
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{E}\bigg[\bigg(\sum_{t=0}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^t, \pi^{(t)}(s^t))\bigg)^2\bigg|s^0=s\bigg]
&= \boldsymbol{r}(s, \pi^{(0)}(s))^2 + 2\gamma \boldsymbol{r}(s, \pi^{(0)}(s)) \sum_{s'}{\bf P}^{\pi^{(0)}}(s'|s)\boldsymbol{v}[\pi^{\infty(1)}](s')
\\
&\quad+ \gamma^2 \sum_{s'}{\bf P}^{\pi^{(0)}}(s'|s)
\mathrm{var}\bigg[\sum_{t=0}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^{t+1}, \pi^{(t+1)}(s))\bigg|s^1 = s'\bigg]
\\
& \quad + \gamma^2 \sum_{s'}{\bf P}^{\pi^{(0)}}(s'|s) \boldsymbol{v}^2[\pi^{\infty(1)}](s')
\end{align*}
We thus obtain
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{var}&\bigg[\sum_{t=0}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^t, \pi^{(t)}(s^t))\bigg|s^0 = s\bigg]
= \gamma^2 \sum_{s'}{\bf P}^{\pi^{(0)}}(s'|s)
\mathrm{var}\bigg[\sum_{t=0}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^{t+1}, \pi^{(t+1)}(s))\bigg|s^1 = s'\bigg]\\
&\qquad+ \gamma^2 \sum_{s'}{\bf P}^{\pi^{(0)}}(s'|s) \boldsymbol{v}^2[\pi^{\infty(1)}](s')
- \gamma^2 ({\bf P}^{\pi^{(0)}} \boldsymbol{v}[\pi^{\infty(1)}])^2(s)\\
&= \gamma^2 \sum_{s'}{\bf P}^{\pi^{(0)}}(s'|s)
\mathrm{var}\bigg[\sum_{t=0}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^{t+1}, \pi^{(t+1)}(s))\bigg|s^1 = s'\bigg] + \gamma^2 \mathrm{var}({(\boldsymbol{v}[\pi^{\infty(1)}]) })_{\pi^{(0)}}
\end{align*}
Let LHS and RHS be the left hand side and right hand side of \eqref{eqn:newvar} respectively.
Then we have,
\begin{align*}
LHS &=
\gamma^2
\sum_{s'}{\bf P}^{\pi^{(0)}}(s'|s) \mathrm{var}\bigg[\sum_{t=0}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^{t+1}, \pi^{(t+1)}(s))\bigg|s^1 = s'\bigg]
+ \gamma^2 \mathrm{var}({(\boldsymbol{v}[\pi^{\infty(1)}]) })_{\pi^{(0)}}\\
&=\gamma^4
\sum_{s',s''}{\bf P}^{\pi^{(0)}}(s'|s){\bf P}^{\pi^{(1)}}(s''|s') \mathrm{var}\bigg[\sum_{t=0}^\infty \gamma^{t}\boldsymbol{r}(s^{t+2}, \pi^{(t+2)}(s))\bigg|s^2 = s''\bigg] + \gamma^4 {\bf P}^{\pi^{(0)}}\mathrm{var}({(\boldsymbol{v}[\pi^{\infty(2)}])})_{\pi^{(1)}} \\
& \qquad+\gamma^2 \mathrm{var}({(\boldsymbol{v}[\pi^{\infty(1)}])})_{\pi^{(0)}}
\end{align*}
Applying the above equality recursively for $\mathrm{var}({(\boldsymbol{v}[\pi^{\infty(i)}])})$ completes the proof.
\end{proof}
Based on the above two lemmas, we immediately obtain the following worst-case bound for the error accumulation.
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:error accur}
\begin{align*}
\sqrt{R\sum_{i=1}^{R}\gamma^{2(R-i)}
{\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R)}} \cdot {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R-1)}} \cdot \ldots {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i+1)}}\mathrm{var}({\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma_{\aux}^{\infty(i-1)}]})_{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i)}}}
&\le \sqrt{\frac{R}{\gamma^2(1-\gamma)^2}}.
\end{align*}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
We use that
\begin{align*}
\Big[\sum_{i=1}^{R}\gamma^{2(R-i)}
{\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R)}} \cdot {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R-1)}} \cdot &\ldots {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i+1)}}\mathrm{var}({\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma_{\aux}^{\infty(i-1)}]})_{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R-i)}}\Big](s)\\
&\le \frac{1}{\gamma^2}\cdot \mathrm{var}\bigg[\sum_{i=0}^\infty \gamma^{i}\boldsymbol{r}(s^{i}, \sigma_{\aux}^{(R-i)}(s))\bigg|s^0 = s\bigg].
\end{align*}
Since $\sum_{i=0}^\infty \gamma^{i}\boldsymbol{r}(s^i, \sigma_{\aux}^{(i)}(s))\le (1-\gamma)^{-1}$, we have
$\mathrm{var}({\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma_{\aux}^{\infty(i-1)}]})_{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R-i)}}\le (1-\gamma)^{-2}$ as desired.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{Putting Everything Together}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{mainprop0}]
By Corollary~\ref{corr:expansion}, we have,
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{v}^{(R)}- \boldsymbol{v}^*\le \boldsymbol{v}^{(R)}-\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma_{\aux}^{(R)}]
&\le
\gamma^{R}{\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R)}}\cdot {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R-1)}} \cdot \ldots {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(1)}}\big(\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)} - \boldsymbol{v}^*\big)\\
&\qquad+\sum_{i=1}^{R}\gamma^{R-i}
{\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R)}} \cdot {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R-1)}} \cdot \ldots {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i+1)}} \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}_{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i)}}\\
&\le
u/4 + \underset{\textcircled{1}}{\underline{\sum_{i=1}^{R}\gamma^{R-i}
{\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R)}} \cdot {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R-1)}} \cdot \ldots {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i+1)}} \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}_{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i)}}}},
\end{align*}
where the first inequality holds
for sufficiently large $R$.
Consider the second term.
Since
\[
\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)} = \sqrt{L \cdot\mathrm{var}({\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}}) /m} + \beta\cdot (L/m)^{3/4}+ u/ (CR).
\]
We bound
\[
\sum_{i=1}^{R}\gamma^{R-i}
{\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R)}} \cdot {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R-1)}} \cdot \ldots {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i+1)}} \cdot \beta\cdot (L/m)^{3/4}
\le R\beta\cdot (L/m)^{3/4}
\]
and
\[
\sum_{i=1}^{R}\gamma^{R-i}
{\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R)}} \cdot {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R-1)}} \cdot \ldots {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i+1)}} \cdot u/(CR)
\le Ru/(CR).
\]
We thus have,
\[
\textcircled{1}\le \sum_{i=1}^{R}\gamma^{R-i}
{\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R)}} \cdot {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R-1)}} \cdot \ldots {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i+1)}} \sqrt{L\cdot \mathrm{var}({\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}})_{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i)}} /m}
+ R\beta\cdot(L/m)^{3/4} + R\cdot u / (CR).
\]
Note that
\[
\sqrt{\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)})_{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i)}}}
\le \sqrt{\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i-1)}})_{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i)}}} +
\|\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma_{\aux}^{(i-1)}] - \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}\|_{\infty}.
\]
Now consider
\begin{align*}
\|\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma_{\aux}^{(i-1)}] - \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}\|_{\infty}
&\le \|\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)} - \boldsymbol{v}^{(R)}\|_{\infty}+\|\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma_{\aux}^{(i-1)}] - \boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)}\|_{\infty}.
\end{align*}
We bound $ \|\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)} - \boldsymbol{v}^{(R)}\|_{\infty}\le u$.
Applying Corollary~\ref{corr:expansion} again, we have
\begin{align*}
\|\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma_{\aux}^{(i-1)}] - \boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)}\|_{\infty}
&\le u/4 + \sum_{i=1}^{R}\gamma^{R-i}
{\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R)}} \cdot {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R-1)}} \cdot \ldots {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i+1)}} \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}_{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i)}}\\
& \le u/4 + \sum_{i=1}^{R}\gamma^{R-i}
{\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R)}} \cdot {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R-1)}} \cdot \ldots {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i+1)}} \sqrt{L\cdot \mathrm{var}({\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}})_{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i)}} /m}\\
&\qquad
+ R\beta\cdot(L/m)^{3/4} + R\cdot u / (CR)
\end{align*}
With a natural bound, $\mathrm{var}[\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}]\le \beta^2\cdot \boldsymbol{1}$, we have
\begin{align*}
\|\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma_{\aux}^{(i-1)}] - \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}\|_{\infty}\le u+
\|\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma_{\aux}^{(i-1)}] - \boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)}\|_{\infty}
&\le R\beta\sqrt{L/m} +R\beta(L/m)^{3/4}+u/C'
\end{align*}
for some constant $C'>0$.
Therefore,
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{v}^{(R)}- \boldsymbol{v}^* &\le
\sum_{i=1}^{R}\gamma^{R-i}
{\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R)}} \cdot {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(R-1)}} \cdot \ldots {\bf P}^{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i+1)}} \sqrt{\frac{L\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}[{\sigma_{\aux}^{(i-1)}}])_{ \pi_{\aux}^{(i)}}}m}\\ & \qquad
+ R\bigg(R\beta\sqrt{\frac{L}{m}} +R\beta\Big(\frac{L}{m}\Big)^{3/4} + \frac{u}{C'}\bigg)\cdot\sqrt{\frac{L}{m}} + \frac{u}{4}
+\frac{u}{C}+ R\beta\cdot\Big(\frac{L}{m}\Big)^{3/4}\\
&\le\sqrt{\frac{LR\beta^2}{\gamma^2m}} + R\bigg(R\beta\sqrt{\frac{L}{m}} +R\beta\Big(\frac{L}{m}\Big)^{3/4} + \frac{u}{C'}\bigg)\cdot\sqrt{\frac{L}{m}} + \frac{u}{4}
+\frac{u}{C}+ R\beta\cdot\Big(\frac{L}{m}\Big)^{3/4}\\
&\le u/2
\end{align*}
for large enough constants, $C$, and that in $m$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Algorithm that Computes a Monotone Sequence}
\label{sec:alg}
Here we show that
Algorithm~\ref{alg-halfErr} or Algorithm~\ref{alg-halfErr-inc}
computes an MDVSS or MIVSS respectively.
\begin{proposition}
\label{mainprop}
Let $u\in(0,\beta], \beta = (1-\gamma)^{-1}, \delta\in(0,1)$, and $R=\Theta[\beta\log(\beta/u)]$. Further, let $L = \Theta(\log[\delta^{-1}\beta R|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|])$, and $m=\Omega(\beta^3\cdot\max(u^{-2}, 1)\cdot{\log(|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|\delta^{-1})})$.
Then there exists an algorithm, on input a stochastic game with a generative model
with a sampling oracle, $\mathcal{G} =(\mathcal{S}:=\mathcal{S}_{\min}\cup \mathcal{S}_{\max}, {\bf P}, \boldsymbol{r}, \gamma)$, a value-strategy pair $(\pi^{(0)}, \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)})$ satisfying $\mathcal{T}_{\pi^{(0)}} [\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}] \le \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}, \mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}]\le \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}$ (or $\mathcal{T}_{\pi^{(0)}} [\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}] \ge \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}, \mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}]\ge \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}$), and $\|\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)} - \boldsymbol{v}^*\|_{\infty}\le u$ for some $u>0$, outputs, with probability at least $1-\delta$, an MDVSS (or MIVSS) $\{\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)},\boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}, \pi^{(i)}, \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}\}_{i=0}^R$
by querying
\[
Z = O\big[|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|\cdot (m + R\beta^{2}\log[R|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|\delta^{-1}])\big]
\]
samples, where
\[
\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)} = \sqrt{L \boldsymbol{\sigma}_{\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}} /m} + \beta\cdot (L/m)^{3/4}+ u/ (CR),
\]
for some large constant $C>1$ and $\boldsymbol{\sigma}_{\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}} := \mathrm{var}[\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}]$
is the variance vector for vector $\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}$.
The algorithms uses space $O(|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|)$ and halts in time $O(Z)$.
\end{proposition}
This section is devoted to proving Proposition~\ref{mainprop}.
The algorithm of obtaining MDVSS and MIVSS is provided in Algorithm~\ref{alg-halfErr} and \ref{alg-halfErr-inc}.
\paragraph{The Good Events}
Suppose we are given an arbitrary input vector $\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}, \boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)}\in[0,(1-\gamma)^{-1}]^{\mathcal{S}}$ with $\boldsymbol{v}^*-u\boldsymbol{1}\le\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}\le \boldsymbol{v}^* \le \boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)} \le \boldsymbol{v}^*+u\boldsymbol{1}$, $ \boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}\le \mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}]$, $\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}\le \mathcal{T}_{\pi^-} [\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}]$,
$ \mathcal{T}[\boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)}]\le \boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)}$ and $\mathcal{T}_{\pi^+} [\boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)}]\le \boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)}$.
Since the algorithm is randomized,
to begin our analysis, we define a sequence of events for the iterates.
We will show that these events happen with high probability via concentration inequalities.
\begin{definition}
\label{def:events}
Let $\widetilde{\boldsymbol{w}}^-$ and $\widetilde{\boldsymbol{w}}^+$ be the estimate defined in Line~\ref{alg1: compute w1+} (of Algorithm~\ref{alg-halfErr} or Algorithm~\ref{alg-halfErr-inc} respectively).
Denote $\alpha_1\gets L/m_1\le 1$.
Let $\mathcal{E}_0$ be the event that
\begin{align}
|\widetilde{\boldsymbol{w}}^{\pm}-{\bf P} \boldsymbol{v}^{\pm(0)}|\le \sqrt{\alpha_1 \boldsymbol{\sigma}_{\boldsymbol{v}^{\pm(0)}}} + \alpha_1^{3/4}\cdot\|\boldsymbol{v}^{\pm(0)}\|_{\infty}\cdot \boldsymbol{1}.
\end{align}
For each $i> 0$,
let $\widetilde{\boldsymbol{g}}^{\pm(i)}$ be given in Line~\ref{alg1: compute g}.
Let $\mathcal{E}_i$ be the event that
\begin{align}
|\widetilde{\boldsymbol{g}}^{\pm(i)} - {\bf P}[\boldsymbol{v}^{\pm(i)} - \boldsymbol{v}^{\pm (0)}] |\le C(1-\gamma)u\cdot \boldsymbol{1}.
\end{align}
for some sufficiently small constant $C>0$.
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:base event}
For some sufficiently large constant $c$ in $L$,
$\Pr[\mathcal{E}_0]\ge 1-O(\delta/R)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Note that $\|v^{\pm(0)}\|_{\infty}\le (1-\gamma)^{-1}$.
By a straightforward application of a Hoeffding bound and Bernstein inequality and a union bound over all $(s,a)$, we reach the desired inequality.
More details can be find in the proof of Lemma~5.1 in \cite{sidford2018near}.
\end{proof}
\paragraph{The Implications of the Good Events}
We now illustrate the consequences of these good events.
\begin{lemma}[Implications of $\mathcal{E}_0$]
\label{lemma:e0}
On $\mathcal{E}_0$, we have, for all $(s,a)\in \mathcal{S}\times\mathcal{A}^1$
\begin{align*}
0\le \boldsymbol{r}(s,a) +\gamma {\bf P}(\cdot|s,a)^\top \boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)} - \boldsymbol{Q}^{-(0)}(s,a) &\le 2\sqrt{\alpha_1 \boldsymbol{\sigma}_{\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}}} +
2\alpha_1^{3/4}\|\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}\|_{\infty}\quad\text{and}\quad\\
0\le \boldsymbol{Q}^{-(0)}(s,a) &\le \boldsymbol{Q}^*(s,a),
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
0\le \boldsymbol{Q}^{+(0)}(s,a) -r(s,a) -\gamma {\bf P}(\cdot|s,a)^\top \boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)} &\le 2\sqrt{\alpha_1 \boldsymbol{\sigma}_{\boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)}}} +
2\alpha_1^{3/4}\|\boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)}\|_{\infty}\quad\text{and}\quad\\
\boldsymbol{Q}^*(s,a)\le \boldsymbol{Q}^{+(0)}(s,a)&\le \beta,
\end{align*}
where $\alpha_1= L/m_1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We prove the first inequality and the second inequality follows similarly.
Condition on $\mathcal{E}_0$, we have
\[
|\boldsymbol{r}+ \gamma \widetilde{\boldsymbol{w}}^{-} - \boldsymbol{r}-\gamma {\bf P} \boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}|\le \sqrt{\alpha_1 \boldsymbol{\sigma}_{\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}}} +
\alpha_1^{3/4}\|\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}\|_{\infty}.
\]
Since
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}^{-(0)} = \max\Big[\boldsymbol{r}+ \gamma \widetilde{\boldsymbol{w}}^- - \sqrt{\alpha_1 \boldsymbol{\sigma}_{\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}}} -
\alpha_1^{3/4}\|\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}\|_{\infty}, {\bf0}\Big],
\]
we have
\[
0\le \boldsymbol{r} +\gamma {\bf P} \boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)} - \boldsymbol{Q}^{-(0)} \le 2\sqrt{\alpha_1 \boldsymbol{\sigma}_{\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}}} +
2\alpha_1^{3/4}\|\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}\|_{\infty}.
\]
Moreover, since $v^{(0)}\le v^*$, we have
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}^{-(0)}\le r(s,a) +\gamma {\bf P}(\cdot|s,a)^\top \boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)} \le \boldsymbol{Q}^{*},
\]
completing the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}[Implications of $\mathcal{E}_i$, (1)]
\label{lemma:e11}
Then for any $i> 0$,
conditioning on $\mathcal{E}_0, \mathcal{E}_1, \ldots, \mathcal{E}_{R}$, we have
$\{\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}, \boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i)}, \pi^{-(i)}, \boldsymbol{\xi}^{-(i)} \}_{i=0}^{R}$ is an MIVSS and
$\{\boldsymbol{v}^{+(i)}, \boldsymbol{Q}^{+(i)}, \pi^{+(i)}, \boldsymbol{\xi}^{+(i)} \}_{i=0}^{R}$ is an MDVSS
where
\[
\boldsymbol{\xi}^{\pm(i)} = 2\sqrt{\alpha_1 \boldsymbol{\sigma}_{\boldsymbol{v}^{\pm(0)}}} +
2[\alpha_1^{3/4}\beta + C(1-\gamma)u]\cdot \boldsymbol{1}
\]
for some sufficiently small $C>0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We prove the first part of the lemma, i.e., $\{\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}, \boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i)}, \pi^{-(i)}, \boldsymbol{\xi}^{-(i)} \}_{i=0}^{R}$ is an MIVSS. Then the second part follows similarly.
It is clear from the definition (Line~\ref{alg: v2-}) that
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}\le \boldsymbol{v}^{-(1)} \ldots \le \boldsymbol{v}^{-(R)}.
\]
To prove property 1 of MIVSS, we need additionally to show
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{-(R)}\le \boldsymbol{v}^*.
\]
This follows if property 2, i.e.,
\[
\forall i\in [0, R]:\quad \boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}\le \mathcal{T}_{\pi^{-(i)}} [\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}], \quad \boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}\le \mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}].
\]
Indeed,
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}\le \mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}] \le \mathcal{T}^2 [\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}] \ldots \le \mathcal{T}^{\infty} [\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}] = \boldsymbol{v}^*.
\]
We now prove property 2 by induction on $i$.
It immediately follows from the initial condition that
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}\le \mathcal{T}_{\pi^{-(0)}} [\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}], \quad \boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}\le \mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}].
\]
Suppose this property holds for all $0,1,\ldots, i-1$ for some $i>1$.
We now consider the case $i$.
Let $\widetilde{\boldsymbol{Q}}^{-(i)} = \boldsymbol{r} + \gamma {\bf P} \boldsymbol{v}^{-(i-1)}$.
Since $\|\widetilde{\boldsymbol{g}}^{-(i)} - {\bf P}(\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i-1)} - \boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)})\|_{\infty}\le C(1-\gamma)\epsilon$, we have
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:q-bound}
|\widetilde{\boldsymbol{Q}}^{-(i)} -\boldsymbol{r} - \gamma \boldsymbol{w}^{-(i-1)} - \gamma \boldsymbol{g}^{-(i-1)} | \le \boldsymbol{\xi}^{-(i)}/2.
\end{align}
Since
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i)}(s,a) &y= \max\Big[\boldsymbol{r}(s,a) + \gamma \boldsymbol{w}^{-(i-1)}(s,a) + \gamma \boldsymbol{g}^{-(i-1)}(s,a), 0\Big] \le \boldsymbol{r}(s,a) + \gamma {\bf P}(\cdot|s,a)^\top \boldsymbol{v}^{-(i-1)} \\
&= \widetilde{\boldsymbol{Q}}^{-(i)}(s,a)
\end{align*}
we have, for any $s\in \mathcal{S}$
\begin{align*}
\min_a \boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i)}(s,a)\le\min_a \widetilde{\boldsymbol{Q}}^{-(i)}(s,a)
\quad\text{and}\quad \max_a \boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i)}(s,a)\le\max_a \widetilde{\boldsymbol{Q}}^{-(i)}(s,a).
\end{align*}
For each $s\in \mathcal{S}$, denote
\[
\widetilde{\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i)}(s)= \boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i)}(s, \widetilde{\pi}^{-(i)}(s)),
\]
where $\widetilde{\pi}^{-(i)}$ is given in Line~\ref{alg: pit} (that achieves $\max_{a} \boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i)}(s,a)$ or $\min_{a} \boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i)}(s,a)$).
To show $\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}\le \mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}]$ and $v^{-(i)}\le \mathcal{T}_{\pi^{-(i)}} [\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}]$, we do a case analysis for a state in $\mathcal{S}$.
Firstly, we consider state $s\in \mathcal{S}_{\min}$.
For each state $s\in \mathcal{S}_{\min}$, note that $\widetilde{\pi}^{-(i)}(s) := \arg\min_a \boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i)}(s,a)$.
By Line~\ref{alg: v2-}, ${\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i)}(s)$ and $\pi^{-(i)}(s)$ have the following two possibilities,
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i-1)}(s) \le \widetilde{\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i)}(s)$ $\Rightarrow$ ${\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i)}(s) = \widetilde{\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i)}(s)$ and $\pi^{-(i)}(s) = \widetilde{\pi}^{-(i)}(s)$;
\item $\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i-1)}(s) > \widetilde{\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i)}(s)$ $\Rightarrow$ ${\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i)}(s) ={\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i-1)}(s)$ and
${\pi}^{-(i)}(s) ={\pi}^{-(i-1)}(s)$.
\end{enumerate}
Considering case 1.,
we have,
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}(s) &= \boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i-1)}(s,\pi^{-(i)}(s))\le \min_a \widetilde{\boldsymbol{Q}}^{-(i)}(s,a) = \mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i-1)}](s) \le
\mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}](s)
\quad\text{and} \\
\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}(s) &= \boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i-1)}(s,\pi^{-(i)}(s))\le \widetilde{\boldsymbol{Q}}^{-(i)}(s,\pi^{-(i)}(s))
= \mathcal{T}_{\pi^{-(i)}} [\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i-1)}](s)
\le \mathcal{T}_{\pi^{-(i)}}[ \boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}](s).
\end{align*}
Considering case 2., we have, by induction hypothesis ${\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i-1)}(s)\le \mathcal{T} [{\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i-1)}](s)$, ${\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i-1)}(s)\le \mathcal{T}_{{\pi}^{-(i-1)}}[{\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i-1)}](s)$.
Thus
\begin{align*}
{\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i)}(s) &\le \mathcal{T}[{\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i-1)}](s)\le \mathcal{T}[{\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i)}](s)~\text{,}\\
{\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i)}(s)&\le \mathcal{T}_{{\pi}^{(i-1)}}[{\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i-1)}](s)\le \mathcal{T}_{{\pi}^{-(i-1)}}[{\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i)}](s)
=\mathcal{T}_{{\pi}^{-(i)}}[{\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i)}](s).
\end{align*}
It follows similarly for the case of $s\in \mathcal{S}_{\max}$ (by just replacing the $\min$ by $\max$ in the above argument).
This completes the induction step and hence the property 2.
We now prove property 3 and 4.
By Equation~\ref{eqn:q-bound}, we immediately have,
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i)}\ge \boldsymbol{r} + \gamma {\bf P}(\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}) - \boldsymbol{\xi}^{-(i)}
\end{align*}
proving property 3.
Lastly, by Line~\ref{alg: v2-}, we have
\[
v^{-(i)}\ge \mathcal{T}[\boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i)}],
\]
completing the proof of property 4 and the lemma.
\end{proof}
\paragraph{The Probability of Good Events}
Note that the random samples in the successive improvement phase are independent with event $\mathcal{E}_0$. We then have the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:accurate_estimate}
Suppose the algorithm does not halt at iteration $i\ge 1$, then,
\[
\Pr[\mathcal{E}_{i}|\mathcal{E}_0, \mathcal{E}_1,\ldots, \mathcal{E}_{i-1}] \ge 1-O(\delta/R).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
On $\mathcal{E}_0, \mathcal{E}_1, \ldots, \mathcal{E}_{i-1}$,
we have $\boldsymbol{v}^{- (0)} \le \boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}\le \boldsymbol{v}^*\le \boldsymbol{v}^{+(i)}\le \boldsymbol{v}^{+(0)}$, thus $\|\boldsymbol{v}^{\pm (i)} - \boldsymbol{v}^{\pm (0)}\|\le u$.
Applying Hoeffding bound, Bernstein's inequality and a union bound over all $(s, a)$, we have that with probability at least $1-O(\delta/R)$,
$\|g^{(i)} - P[v^{(i)} - \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}]\|_{\infty}\le (1-\gamma)\epsilon/32$, completing the proof.
\end{proof}
Therefore, we have the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:all good events happend prob}
Let $R = \lceil c_1\beta\ln[\beta \epsilon^{-1}]\rceil$ be an integer for some constant $c_1$.
Then, with probability at least $1-O(\delta)$, $\mathcal{E}_0, \{\mathcal{E}_{i}\}_{i=1}^{R}$ all happen.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By a straightforward calculation, we have \\
$
\Pr[\cap_{i=0}^R\mathcal{E}_{i}] = \Pr[\mathcal{E}_{0}]\Pr[\mathcal{E}_1|\mathcal{E}_{0}]\Pr[\mathcal{E}_2|\mathcal{E}_{0}, \mathcal{E}_1] \ldots \Pr[\mathcal{E}_{R}|\mathcal{E}_{0}, \mathcal{E}_1, \ldots, \mathcal{E}_{R-1}]
\ge 1-O(\delta).
$
\end{proof}
\paragraph{Putting It Together}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{mainprop}]
Let $\mathcal{E} = \cap_{i=0}^R\mathcal{E}_{i}$,
we have shown, on $\mathcal{E}$, the outputs of Algorithm~\ref{alg-halfErr} and \ref{alg-halfErr-inc}, $\{\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}, \boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i)}, \pi^{-(i)}, \boldsymbol{\xi}^{-(i)} \}_{i=0}^{R}$ is an MIVSS and
$\{\boldsymbol{v}^{+(i)}, \boldsymbol{Q}^{+(i)}, \pi^{+(i)}, \boldsymbol{\xi}^{+(i)} \}_{i=0}^{R}$ is an MDVSS.
By the above lemmas, $\mathcal{E}$ happens with probability at least $1-\Theta(\delta)$.
This completes the proof of the proposition.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{mainthm}]
The theorem is proved by combining Proposition~\ref{prop:main0}, \ref{mainprop0}, and \ref{mainprop}.
\end{proof}
\begin{algorithm}[htb!]
\caption{
QVI-MIVSS:
\label{alg-halfErr-inc}
algorithm for computing monotone increasing value-strategy sequences.
}
{\small
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State
\textbf{Input:} A generative model for stochastic game $\mathcal{M}=(\mathcal{S}, \mathcal{A}^1, \boldsymbol{r}, {\bf P}, \gamma)$;
\State
\textbf{Input:} Precision parameter $u\in[0,(1-\gamma)^{-1}]$;
and error probability $\delta \in (0, 1)$
\State
\textbf{Input:}
Initial values $\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}, \pi^{-(0)}$ that satisfies monotonicity:
{\small
\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{align*}
&\boldsymbol{v}^*-u\boldsymbol{1}\le \boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)} \le \boldsymbol{v}^*, \quad \boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}\le \mathcal{T} \boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}, \quad\text{and}\quad \boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}\le \mathcal{T}_{\pi^{-(0)}} \boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)};
\end{align*}
\vspace{-4mm}
}
\State\textbf{Output:} $\{\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}, \boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i)}, \pi^{-(i)}, \boldsymbol{\xi}^{- (i)}\}_{i=0}^{R}$ which is an MIVSS with high probability.
\State
\State\textbf{INITIALIZATION:}
\State Let $c_1, c_2, c_3, c$ be some tunable absolute constants;
\State \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Initialize constants:}}
\State \qquad$\beta\gets (1-\gamma)^{-1}$, and $R\gets\lceil c_1\beta\ln[\beta u^{-1}]\rceil$;
\State \qquad$m_1 \gets{c_2\beta^3\cdot\min(1,u^{-2})\cdot{\log(8|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|\delta^{-1})} }{}$;
\State \qquad$m_2\gets {c_3\beta^{2}\log[2R|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|\delta^{-1}]}$;
\State\qquad $\alpha_1\gets L/m_1$ where $L = c\log(|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}^1|\delta^{-1}(1-\gamma)^{-1}\epsilon^{-1})$;
\State
\textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Obtain an initial batch of samples:}}r
\State For each $(s, a)\in \mathcal{S}\times\mathcal{A}^1$:
obtain independent samples $s_{s,a}^{(1)}, s_{s,a}^{(2)}, \ldots, s_{s,a}^{(m_1)}$ from ${\bf P}(\cdot | s,a)$;
\State
Initialize: $~\boldsymbol{w}^{-}=\widetilde{\boldsymbol{w}}^- = \widehat{\boldsymbol{\sigma}}^-=\boldsymbol{Q}^{-(0)}=\boldsymbol{Q}^{-(1)} \gets {\bf0}_{\mathcal{S} \times \mathcal{A}^1}$ and $i\gets 0$;
\For{each $(s, a)\in \mathcal{S}\times\mathcal{A}^1$}
\State \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Compute empirical estimates of ${\bf P}_{s,a}^{\top}\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}$ and $\mathrm{var}({\boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}})(s,a)$:}}
\State \label{alg1: compute w1-}
$\widetilde{\boldsymbol{w}}^{-}(s,a) \gets \frac{1}{m_1}
\sum_{j=1}^{m_1} \boldsymbol{v}^{- (0)}(s_{s,a}^{(j)})$;
\State $\widehat{\boldsymbol{\sigma}}^{-}(s,a)\gets \frac{1}{m_1} \sum_{j=1}^{m_1}(\boldsymbol{v}^{- (0)})^2(s_{s,a}^{(j)}) - (\widetilde{\boldsymbol{w}}^{-})^2(s,a)$ ;
\State \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Shift the empirical estimate to have one-sided error and guarantee monotonicity:}}
\State
$\boldsymbol{w}^-(s, a) \gets \widetilde{\boldsymbol{w}}^-(s,a) - \sqrt{\alpha_1\widehat{\boldsymbol{\sigma}}^-(s,a)} - \alpha_1^{3/4}\beta$;
\State \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Compute coarse estimate of the $Q$-function and make sure its value is in $[0,\beta]$:}}
\State
$\boldsymbol{Q}^{-(1)}(s,a) \gets \clip[\boldsymbol{r}(s,a) + \gamma \boldsymbol{w}^{-}(s,a), 0, \beta]$
\EndFor
\State
\State\textbf{REPEAT:} \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\qquad\qquad\textbackslash \textbackslash successively improve}}
\For{$i=1$ to $R$}
\State \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Compute
the one-step dynamic programming:}}
\State\label{alg: pit-} Let ${\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i)} \gets \widetilde{\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i)}\gets \mathcal{T} \boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i-1)}$, ${\pi}^{-(i)}\gets\widetilde{\pi}^{-(i)}\gets \pi(\boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i-1)})$;
\State \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Compute strategy and value and maintain monotonicity:}}
\State For {each $s\in \mathcal{S}$}:
\State\qquad \label{alg: v2-} if ${\boldsymbol{v}}^{-(i)}(s)\le \boldsymbol{v}^{-(i-1)}(s)$, then
$\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}(s)\gets \boldsymbol{v}^{-(i-1)}(s)$ and $\pi^{-(i)}(s)\gets \pi^{-(i-1)}(s)$;
\State\textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Obtaining a small batch of samples:}}
\State For each $(s, a)\in \mathcal{S}\times\mathcal{A}^1$:
draw independent samples $\widetilde{s}_{s,a}^{(1)}, \widetilde{s}_{s,a}^{(2)}, \ldots, \widetilde{s}_{s,a}^{(m_2)}$ from ${\bf P}(\cdot | {s,a})$;
\State \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Compute the expected value, $\boldsymbol{g}^{\pm(i)}$, the estimate of ${\bf P} \big[\boldsymbol{v}^{\pm(i)} - \boldsymbol{v}^{\pm (0)}\big]$ with one-sided error:}}
\State \label{alg1: compute g-} Let $\widetilde{\boldsymbol{g}}^{-(i)}(s,a)\gets {\frac{1}{m_2}} \sum_{j=1}^{m_2} \big[\boldsymbol{v}^{- (i)}(\widetilde{s}_{s,a}^{(j)}) - \boldsymbol{v}^{-(0)}(\widetilde{s}_{s,a}^{(j)}) \big]$;
\State Let ${\boldsymbol{g}}^{-(i)}(s,a)\gets\widetilde{\boldsymbol{g}}^{-(i)}(s,a)- C(1-\gamma)u$, where $C$ is sufficiently small;
\State \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Estimate the approximation error:}}
\State $\boldsymbol{\xi}^{- (i)}\gets 2\sqrt{\alpha_1 \boldsymbol{\sigma}_{\boldsymbol{v}^{- (0)}}} +
2[\alpha_1^{3/4}\beta + C(1-\gamma)u]\cdot \boldsymbol{1}$
\State \textcolor{OliveGreen}{\emph{\textbackslash \textbackslash Improve $\boldsymbol{Q}^{- (i)}$ make sure its value is in $[0,\beta]$:}}
\State \label{alg: q-func-} $\boldsymbol{Q}^{- (i+1)}\gets \clip\Big[\boldsymbol{r} + \gamma\cdot[\boldsymbol{w}^{-}+\boldsymbol{g}^{- (i)}],0, \beta\Big]$;
\EndFor
\State \textbf{return}
$\{\boldsymbol{v}^{-(i)}, \boldsymbol{Q}^{-(i)}, \pi^{-(i)}, \boldsymbol{\xi}^{- (i)}\}_{i=0}^{R}$
\end{algorithmic}
}
\end{algorithm}
\section{Technique Overview}
Since stochastic games are a generalization of MDPs, many techniques for solving MDPs can be immediately generalized to stochastic games.
However, as we have discussed,
some of the techniques used to achieve optimal sample complexities for solving MDPs in a generative model do not have a clear generalization to stochastic games.
Nevertheless, we show how to design an algorithm that carefully extends particular Q-learning based methods, i.e. methods that always maintain an estimator for the optimal value function (or $\boldsymbol{Q}^*$), to achieve our goals.
\paragraph{Q-Learning: }%
To motivate our approach we first briefly review previous Q-learning based methods and the core technique that achieves near-optimal sample complexity.
To motivate Q-learning, we first recall the value iteration algorithm solving an MDP. Given a full model for the MDP value iteration updates the iterates as follows
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}\gets \mathcal{T}[\boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)}]:= V[\boldsymbol{Q}(\boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)})]
\]
where $\boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}$ can be an arbitrary vector.
Since the Bellman operator is contractive and $\boldsymbol{v}^*$ is a fix point of $\mathcal{T}$, this method gives an $\epsilon$-optimal value in $O[(1-\gamma)^{-1}\log(\epsilon^{-1})]$ iterations.
In the learning setting, $\mathcal{T}$ cannot be exactly computed.
The Q-learning approach estimates $\mathcal{T}$ by its approximate version, i.e., to compute ${\bf P}(\cdot~|~s,a)^\top\boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)}$, we obtain samples from ${\bf P}(\cdot~|~s,a)$, and then compute the empirical average. Then we compute the approximate Q-value at the $i$-th iteration as
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}=\widehat{\boldsymbol{Q}}[\boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)}] := \boldsymbol{r} + \widehat{{\bf P}} \boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)} \quad\text{and} \quad
\widehat{\mathcal{T}}(\boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)}) := V[\widehat{\boldsymbol{Q}}(\boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)})],
\]
where
\[
\widehat{{\bf P}}(\cdot~|~s,a)^\top \boldsymbol{v} = \frac{1}{m}\sum_{s_i\sim P(\cdot|s,a),~ i\in [m]} \boldsymbol{v}(s_i)
\]
for some $m > 0$.
Then the estimation error per step is defined as
\[
\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)} = {\boldsymbol{Q}}[\boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)}] - \widehat{\boldsymbol{Q}}[\boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)}] .
\]
Since the exact value iteration takes at least $\Omega[(1-\gamma)^{-1}]$ iterations to converge,
the Q-learning (or approximated value iteration) takes at least $\Omega[(1-\gamma)^{-1}]$ iterations.
The total number of samples used over all the iterations is the sample complexity of the algorithm.
\paragraph{Variance Control and Monotonicity Techniques:}
To obtain the optimal sample complexity for one-player MDP,
one approach is to carefully bound each entry of $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}$.
By Bernstein inequality (\cite{azar2013minimax,sidford2018near, agarwal2019optimality}),
we have, with high probability,
\[
|\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}|\lesssim\sqrt{\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)})/m}
\le \sqrt{\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}^{*})/m} + \text{ lower-order terms}.
\]
where $\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}) = {\bf P} \boldsymbol{v} ^2 -({\bf P} \boldsymbol{v})^2$ is the \emph{variance-of-value} vector and ``$\lesssim $" means ``approximately less than."
Let $\pi^{(i)}$ be a policy maintained in the $i$-th iteration (e.g. the greedy policy of the current Q-value).
Due to the estimation error $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}$, the per step error bound reads,
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{Q}^* - \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}
\lesssim \gamma {\bf P}^{\pi^*}\boldsymbol{Q}^* - \gamma{\bf P}^{\pi^{(i-1)}} \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i-1)} + \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}.
\end{align*}
To derive the overall error accumulation,
\cite{sidford2018near} use the crucial \emph{monotonicity} property, i.e., since $\pi^{(i-1)}(s)=\arg\max_{a} \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i-1)}(s,a)$, we have
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:monotone}
\boldsymbol{Q}^{(i-1)}(s,\pi^*(s)) \le \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}(s,\pi^{(i-1)}(s)).
\end{align}
We thus have
\[
\boldsymbol{Q}^* - \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}
\lesssim \gamma{\bf P}^{\pi^*}\boldsymbol{Q}^* - \gamma{\bf P}^{\pi^*} \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i-1)} + \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}.
\]
By induction,
we have
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:induction-mdp}
\boldsymbol{Q}^* - \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)} \le (I-\gamma{\bf P}^{\pi^*})^{-1} \sqrt{\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}^{*})/m} + \text{lower-order terms}.
\end{align}
The leading-order error accumulation term $(I-\gamma{\bf P}^{\pi^*})^{-1} \sqrt{\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}^{*})/m}$
satisfies the so-called \emph{total variance} property, and can be upper bounded uniformly by
$\sqrt{(1-\gamma)^{-3}m^{-1}}$, resulting the correct dependence on $(1-\gamma)$.
Therefore the monotonicity property allows us to use $\pi^*$ as a \emph{proxy} policy, which carefully bounds the error accumulation.
For the additional subtlety of how to obtain an optimal policy, please refer to \cite{sidford2018near} for the variance reduction technique and the monotone-policy technique.
Similar observations regarding MDPs was used in \cite{agarwal2019optimality} as well.
This powerful technique, however, does not generalize to the game case due to the \emph{lack of monotonicity}.
Indeed, \eqref{eqn:monotone} does not hold for stochastic games due to the existence of both minimization and maximization operations in the Bellman operator. This is the critical issue which this paper seeks to overcome.
\paragraph{Finding Monotone Value-Strategy Sequences for Stochastic Games:}
Analogously to the MDP case, one approach is to bound error accumulation for stochastic games is to bound each entry of the error vector $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}$ carefully.
In fact, our method for solving stochastic games is very much like the MDP method used in \cite{sidford2018near}.
However, the analysis is much different in order to resolve the difficulty introduced by the lack of monotonicity.
Since a stochastic game has two players, we modify the variance reduced Q-value iteration (vQVI) method in \cite{sidford2018near} to obtain a min-player strategy and a max-player strategy respectively.
Since the two players are symmetric, let us focus on introducing and analyzing the algorithm for the min-player.
By a slight modification of the vQVI method, we can guarantee to obtain a sequence of strategies and values, $\{\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}, \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}, \sigma^{(i)}, \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}\}_{i=0}^{R}$, that satisfy, with high probability,
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:informal-mdvss}
\begin{aligned}
&\text{1.}\quad \boldsymbol{v}^{(0)}\ge \boldsymbol{v}^{(1)} \ge \ldots \boldsymbol{v}^{(R)} \ge \boldsymbol{v}^*;\\
&\text{2.}\quad \mathcal{T}_{\sigma^{(i)}}[ \boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}] \le \boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}, \mathcal{T} [\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}]\le \boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}, \mathcal{H}_{\pi_{\min}^{(i)}} [\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}] \le \boldsymbol{v}^{(i)};
\end{aligned}
\qquad
\begin{aligned}
&\text{3.}\quad \boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)} \le \boldsymbol{Q}[\boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)}] + \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)};\\
&\text{4.} \quad
\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}\le V[\boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}].
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
where $\sigma^{(i)}=(\pi_{\max}^{(i)},\pi_{\min}^{(i)})$.
The first property guarantees that the value sequences are monotonically decreasing, the second property guarantees $\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}$ is always an upper bound of the value $\boldsymbol{v}^{\pi_{\min}^{(i)}}$, and the third and fourth inequality guarantees that $\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}$ is well approximated by $V[\boldsymbol{Q}^{(i)}]$ and the estimation error satisfy
\[
|\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}|\lesssim\sqrt{\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)})/m},
\]
where $m$ is the total number of samples used per state-action pair.
Note that, as long as we can guarantee that $\boldsymbol{v}^{(R)} - \boldsymbol{v}^* \le \epsilon$, we can guarantee the min-strategy $\pi^{(R)}_{\min}$ is also good:
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{*}\le \boldsymbol{v}^{\pi^{(R)}_{\min}} \le \boldsymbol{v}^{(R)}.
\]
\paragraph{Controlling Error Accumulation using Auxiliary Markovian Strategy:}
Due to the lack of monotonicity \eqref{eqn:monotone}, we cannot use the optimal strategy $\sigma^*$ as a proxy strategy to carefully account for the error accumulation.
To resolve this issue, we construct a new proxy strategy $\sigma^{\infty}$. This strategy is a Markovian strategy, which is time-dependent but not history dependent, i.e., at time $t$, the strategy played is a deterministic map $\sigma^{\infty}_{t}:\mathcal{S}\rightarrow\mathcal{A}^1$.
The proxy strategy satisfies the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Underestimation.} its value, $\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma^{\infty}_{i}]$, (expected discounted cumulative reward starting from any time) is upper bounded by $\boldsymbol{v}^*$;
\item \textbf{Contraction.} $\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)}(s) - \boldsymbol{v}[\sigma^{\infty}_{i}](s)
\le \gamma {\bf P}(\cdot|s,\sigma^{\infty}_{i}(s))^{\top}\big(\boldsymbol{v}^{(i-1)}- \boldsymbol{v}[\sigma^{\infty}_{i-1}]\big) + \boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}(s,\sigma^{\infty}_{i}(s))$,
\end{enumerate}
Similarly, we can bound the error $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}(s,\sigma^{\infty}_{i}(s))$ by the variance-of-value of the proxy strategy
\[
\boldsymbol{\epsilon}^{(i)}(s,\sigma^{\infty}_{i}(s))
\le \sqrt{\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma^{\infty}_{i}])(s,\sigma^{\infty}_{i}(s))/m} + \text{ lower-order terms}.
\]
Based on the first property, we can upper bound
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{(i)} - \boldsymbol{v}^{*} \le \boldsymbol{v}^{(i)} - \boldsymbol{v}[\sigma^{\infty}_{i}].
\]
Based on the second property, and induction on $i$, we can now write a new form of error accumulation,
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{(R)} - \boldsymbol{v}^*\lesssim \sum_{i=1}^{R}\gamma^{R-i}
{\bf P}^{\sigma^{\infty}_{R}} \cdot {\bf P}^{\sigma^{\infty}_{R-1}} \cdot \ldots \cdot {\bf P}^{\sigma^{\infty}_{i+1}}\sqrt{\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma^{\infty}_{i-1}])_{\sigma^{\infty}_{i}}/m}+ \text{ lower-order terms},
\]
where $\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma^{\infty}_{i-1}])_{\sigma^{\infty}_{i}}(s) :=\mathrm{var}(\boldsymbol{v}[\sigma^{\infty}_{i}])(s,\sigma^{\infty}_{i}(s))$ for all $s\in \mathcal{S}$.
We derive
a new \emph{law of total variance} bound for the first term and ultimately prove an error accumulation upper bound:
\[
\boldsymbol{v}^{(R)} - \boldsymbol{v}^*\lesssim \sqrt{(1-\gamma)^{-3}m}+ \text{ lower-order terms},
\]
giving the optimal sample bound.
|
\chapter*{Acknowledgements}
\addcontentsline{toc}{chapter}{Acknowledgements}
I want to thank my Ph.D. advisor, Prof. Cauligi Raghavendra, who provided inordinate help with every step in the preparation and making of this dissertation. I want to thank our collaborators Dr. Sriram Rao from Facebook, Dr. Srikanth Kandula from Microsoft, and Dr. Ajitesh Srivastava from the Ming Hsieh Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Southern California. I would also like to thank Prof. Neal Young from the University of California, Riverside, for the helpful comments on Stack Exchange concerning the NP-Hardness proof of the Best Worst-case Routing presented in Appendix \ref{chapter_bwr_hardness}. I finally would like to thank Long Luo from the University of Electronic Science and Technology of China for helpful discussion and collaboration.
I would also like to thank the following researchers and engineers who provided helpful advice and support throughout the Ph.D. program as part of classes and internships. Prof. Minlan Yu now at Harvard; my internship team from Cisco that worked on Non-Volatile Memory for Distributed Storage especially David Oran, Josh Gahm, Atif Fahim, Praveen Kumar, Marton Sipos, and Spyridon Mastorakis; and my internship team at Google NetInfra working on Inter-Datacenter Traffic Engineering especially Jeffrey Liang, Kirill Mendelev, Brad Morrey, Gilad Avidov, and Warren Chen.
\tableofcontents
\listoffigures
\listoftables
\chapter*{Abstract}
\addcontentsline{toc}{chapter}{Abstract}
As applications become more distributed to improve user experience and offer higher availability, businesses rely on geographically dispersed datacenters that host such applications more than ever. Dedicated inter-datacenter networks have been built that provide high visibility into the network status and flexible control over traffic forwarding to offer quality communication across the instances of applications hosted on many datacenters. These networks are relatively small, with tens to hundreds of nodes and are managed by the same organization that operates the datacenters which make centralized traffic engineering feasible. Using coordinated data transmission from the services and routing over the inter-datacenter network, one can optimize the network performance according to a variety of utility functions that take into account data transfer deadlines, network capacity consumption, and transfer completion times. Such optimization is especially relevant for long-running data transfers that occur across datacenters due to the replication of configuration data, multimedia content, and machine learning models.
In this dissertation, we study techniques and algorithms for fast and efficient data transfers across geographically dispersed datacenters over the inter-datacenter networks. We discuss different forms and properties of inter-datacenter transfers and present a generalized optimization framework to maximize an operator selected utility function. Next, in the several chapters that follow, we study, in detail, the problems of admission control for transfers with deadlines and inter-datacenter multicast transfers. We present a variety of heuristic approaches while carefully considering their running time. For the admission control problem, our solutions offer significant speed up in the admission control process while offering almost identical performance in the total traffic admitted into the network. For the bulk multicasting problem, our techniques enable significant performance gain in receiver completion times with low computational complexity, which makes them highly applicable to inter-datacenter networks. In the end, we summarize our contributions and discuss possible future directions for researchers.
\mainmatter
\chapter{Introduction} \label{chapter_introduction}
Datacenters provide an infrastructure for many online services which include services managed by small companies and individuals who do not want to deal with complexities and difficulties of maintaining physical computers \cite{datacenter_survey_1, datacenter_survey_2}. Examples of these online services are on-demand video delivery, storage and file sharing, cloud computing, financial services, multimedia recommendation systems, online gaming, and interactive online tools that millions of users depend on \cite{services_1, services_2, services_3}. Besides, massively distributed services such as web search, social networks, and scientific analytics that require storage and processing of substantial scientific data take advantage of computing and storage resources of datacenters \cite{b4, social_inside, scientific_data_processing}.
Datacenter services may consist of a variety of applications with instances running on one or more datacenters. They may dynamically scale across a datacenter or across multiple datacenters according to end-user demands which enables cost-savings for service managers. Moreover, considering some degree of statistical multiplexing, better resource utilization can be achieved by allowing many services and applications to share datacenter infrastructure.
To reduce costs of building and maintaining datacenters, numerous businesses rely on infrastructure provided by large cloud infrastructure providers such as Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure, and Amazon Web Services \cite{google, azure, aws} with datacenters consisting of hundreds of thousands of servers. This enables the resources needed to run thousands of distributed applications that span hundreds of servers and scale out dynamically as needed to handle additional user load.
A datacenter is typically home to multiple server clusters with thousands of machines per cluster that are connected using high capacity networks. Figure \ref{fig:datacenter-design} shows the structure of a typical datacenter cluster network with many racks. A cluster is usually made up of up to hundreds of racks \cite{jupiter, vl2, server-per-rack-facebook}. A rack is essentially a group of machines which can communicate at high speed with minimum latency. All the machines in a rack are connected to a \textbf{Top of Rack (ToR)} switch which provides non-blocking connectivity among them. Rack size is typically limited by maximum number of ports that ToR switches provide and the ratio of downlink to uplink bandwidth. There is usually about tens of machines per rack \cite{jupiter, vl2, server-per-rack-facebook}. ToR switches are then connected via a large interconnection allowing machines to communicate across racks. An ideal network should act as a huge non-blocking switch to which all servers are directly connected allowing them to simultaneously communicate at maximum rate.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{datacenter-design.pdf}
\caption{A typical datacenter cluster}
\label{fig:datacenter-design}
\end{figure}
Datacenter network topology plays a significant role in determining the level of failure resiliency, ease of incremental expansion, communication bandwidth and latency. The aim is to build a robust network that provides low latency, typically up to hundreds of microseconds \cite{pitfall, dcqcn, hull}, and high bandwidth across servers. Many network designs have been proposed for datacenters \cite{fattree, vl2, hyperx, dcell, leaf-spine, xpander, fbtopology, jellyfish}. These networks often come with a large degree of path redundancy which allows for increased fault tolerance. Also, to reduce deployment costs, some topologies scale into large networks by connecting many inexpensive switches to achieve the desired aggregate capacity and number of machines \cite{clos, jupiter} and the majority of these topologies are symmetrical.
Many services may need to span over multiple racks to access required volume of storage and compute resources. This increases the overall volume of traffic across racks. A high-capacity datacenter network allows for flexible operation and placement of applications across clusters and improves overall resource utilization and on-demand scale out for applications \cite{jupiter, fattree, vl2, fbtopology}. This allows resources of any machine to be used by any application which is essential for hyper-scale cloud providers \cite{google, azure, aws}. However, designing networks that run at very high capacity is costly and unnecessary for smaller companies or enterprises. As a result, many datacenters may not offer full capacity across racks with the underlying assumption that services run mostly within a single rack. To maximize resource utilization across a datacenter, accommodate more services and allow for better scalability, large cloud providers usually build their networks at maximum capacity.
There is growing demand for datacenter network bandwidth. This increase is driven by faster storage devices, rising volume of user and application data, reduced cost of cloud services and ease of access to cloud services. Google reports 100\% increase in their datacenter networking demands every 12 to 15 months \cite{jupiter}. Cisco forecasts a 400\% increase in global datacenter IP traffic and $2.6\times$ growth in global datacenter workloads from 2015 to 2020 \cite{cisco-growth}. This growth in traffic has made network traffic management a necessity for datacenter operators to ensure that services can access the network capacity with minimal interference from other services.
\section{User Experience}
User experience is the cornerstone of online services which have become ubiquitous and are presented to users through a variety of platforms including websites and mobile applications \cite{online_services}. Several factors determine the quality of experience perceived by users while accessing such services the most important of which are latency and availability. It is crucial that users can always access the resources and the faster, the better. For example, a website's load time can affect whether the users will explore the website further. As another example, while watching a video clip on YouTube, users would like the video to start quickly and play smoothly without interruptions or degradation in quality \cite{online_playback_issues}.
To maximize users' quality of experience while interacting with a specific service, operators keep multiple instances of such services up and running at any time and place them closer to local users across regions, countries, and continents \cite{replication_helps_1, replication_helps_2}. This deployment minimizes users' latency while interacting with services and allows for a smooth and responsive experience. Moreover, if an instance is interrupted due to failures or disasters, users will have the option of switching to other running instances of the same service in another datacenter. Doing so will also require services to copy the data based on which they operate across the datacenters on which they run.
An example of such distributed applications is content distribution platforms like Netflix \cite{rep-netflix-locations}. These services copy multimedia content to many locations close to local users for low-latency and high-speed access. Figure \ref{fig:netflix_cache_locations} shows Netflix's cache locations where multimedia content is stored for regional user access \cite{netflix-replication}. Depending on how users are distributed, services can decide how to place copies of data. For example, multimedia content can be distributed to locations where many users are expected to access it. Besides, such copying can be done both proactively and reactively. In the former case, services copy the content to a location before it is accessed by users allowing all users to have fast access to content. In the latter case, services copy the content to a location when a user near that location accesses the content which might lead to first users experiencing less than ideal quality of experience. Although the proactive approach offers a better user experience, it can be more costly for operators.
\addtocounter{footnote}{-1}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{netflix_cache_locations.jpg}
\caption{Netflix cache locations as of 2016. Green dots are ISP locations and orange circles are Internet Exchange Points (IXPs) where different network providers connect their networks.\protect\footnotemark}
\label{fig:netflix_cache_locations}
\end{figure}
\footnotetext{This figure was downloaded from the following URL: \protect\url{https://media.netflix.com/en/company-blog/how-netflix-works-with-isps-around-the-globe-to-deliver-a-great-viewing-experience}}
Another example of distributed services is web search such as Google and Bing \cite{search_1, search_2}. These services crawl billions of web pages and generate significant volumes of search index updates which are distributed across many datacenters for low-latency access by local and regional users \cite{b4, bing}. Search index updates are generated at different frequencies according to how fresh the related results need to be which usually leads to smaller updates at high frequency and larger updates at a low frequency that are pushed from the datacenter that generates them to all other datacenters.
\section{Inter-Datacenter Networks}
There is benefit in providing services using multiple datacenters that are geographically distributed so that required services and data can be brought close to users for low-latency and high-speed access. Accordingly, Google Cloud, Amazon Web Services, and Microsoft Azure operate and maintain multiple geographically distributed datacenters. Google operates across $19$ regions as shown in Figure \ref{fig:datacenter_locations_google} with plans to expand to additional $4$ regions, Microsoft operates across $54$ geographical regions, Amazon runs more than two dozen availability zones each consisting of one or more discrete datacenters, and Facebook employs $7$ datacenters in North America and Europe.
\addtocounter{footnote}{-1}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{google_locations.jpg}
\caption{Google, a major cloud services provider, with $19$ functional regions and $4$ currently in progress as of $2019$.\protect\footnotemark}
\label{fig:datacenter_locations_google}
\end{figure}
\footnotetext{This figure was downloaded from the following URL: \protect\url{https://cloud.google.com/about/locations/}}
There is a significant volume of traffic exchanged between datacenters. This traffic is due to frequent copying of large quantities of data and content from one datacenter to one or more datacenters. For this purpose, high bandwidth networks connecting datacenters can be leased or purchased for fast and efficient data transfers \cite{level3, b4, swan-backbone, facebook-express-backbone}. These high-speed wide area networks with dedicated capacity are referred to as inter-datacenter (inter-DC) networks. The resources of these networks may be used by the services that run on the datacenters that they connect. Datacenter operators own the capacity of the inter-DC network and can manage it as needed to maximize the performance of services.
For example, Google B4, shown in Figure \ref{fig:google_wan}, is an inter-DC network that connects Google's datacenters globally.\footnote{This topology is from 2013 and has been well expanded since then.} It hosts the traffic for not only Google but also all the businesses that rely on Google Cloud including thousands of websites, mobile and desktop applications. Another dedicated inter-DC WAN is Microsoft Azure's global backbone \cite{swan, swan-backbone}, shown in Figure \ref{fig:azure_wan}. There are also a variety of third-party companies that offer tools and equipment for medium and small businesses to build their inter-DC networks with dedicated capacity for high performance.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{google_wan_2.jpg}
\caption{Google's inter-DC network also known as B4.\protect\footnotemark}
\label{fig:google_wan}
\end{figure}
\footnotetext{This figure was downloaded from \cite{google-dc-optical}.}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{Azure_Global_WAN.png}
\caption{Microsoft Azure's inter-DC network.\protect\footnotemark}
\label{fig:azure_wan}
\end{figure}
\footnotetext{This figure was downloaded from the following URL: \protect\url{https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/how-microsoft-builds-its-fast-and-reliable-global-network/}}
Given that inter-DC networks connect a limited number of locations, usually about tens to hundreds of datacenters, management of their capacity for efficient usage through coordinated resource scheduling is feasible and has been shown to improve utilization and reduce deployment costs \cite{b4, swan, tempus, dynamic_pricing}. Besides, inter-DC networks offer a high level of visibility into network status, and control over network behavior such as routing and forwarding of traffic. These features streamline capacity management which is also the central concept around which this dissertation is shaped.
\section{Inter-DC Transfers}
Datacenter services determine the traffic characteristics and the communication patterns among servers within a datacenter and between different datacenters. Many datacenters, especially cloud providers, run a variety of services that results in a spectrum of workloads. Some popular services include cache followers, file stores, key-value stores, data mining, search indexing, and web search. Some services generate lots of traffic among application instances of the service which is referred to as \textbf{internal traffic}. The reason this traffic is called internal is that they start and end between the instances of the same service without any direct interaction with the users. Examples of communication patterns that generate lots of internal traffic are scatter-gather (also known as partition-aggregate) \cite{nature,d2tcp, dctcp, detail} and batch computing tasks \cite{mapred, dryad}.
Inter-DC transfers occur as a result of geographically distributed services with instances running across various regions and datacenters generating lots of internal traffic across them. For example, multiple instances of services running on different datacenters may need to synchronize by sending periodic or on-demand updates. Besides, in the case of distributed data stores like key-value stores and relational databases, it may be necessary to offer consistency guarantees across multiple instances which requires the constant transmission of replicated data.
The volume of internal data transfers across datacenters is growing fast. For instance, Figure \ref{fig:traffic_growth} shows the growth of inter-DC bandwidth across Facebook's datacenters. As can be seen, the amount of internal traffic is a significant portion of the traffic carried by inter-DC network and is growing much faster than user traffic. To support this growing internal traffic, inter-DC network operators, such as Facebook, need to invest in expanding the network capacity which can be expensive. Therefore, efficient utilization of network bandwidth is critical to maximize the support for internal traffic. In this dissertation, we focus on developing efficient algorithms for optimizing internal inter-DC transfers. We consider the multiple research problems around inter-DC networks with a focus on performance, offer several solutions, and perform comprehensive evaluations.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{traffic_growth_in_express_backbone.jpg}
\caption{Traffic growth across Facebook's Express Backbone.\protect\footnotemark}
\label{fig:traffic_growth}
\end{figure}
\footnotetext{This figure was downloaded from the following URL: \protect\url{https://code.fb.com/networking-traffic/building-express-backbone-facebook-s-new-long-haul-network/}}
Inter-DC transfers can be classified according to their number of destinations and whether they have completion time requirements. We briefly discuss different types of inter-DC transfers in the following.
\subsection{Point to Point (P2P) Transfers}
Transfers could be generated as a result of data delivery from one datacenter to another datacenter which we refer to as point to point (P2P) transfers \cite{dtb, tempus, b4, amoeba, jetway, owan, social_inside}. Many backup services allow for one geographically distant copy of data in a different region for increased reliability in case of natural disasters or datacenter failures. For example, if a datacenter region on the east coast goes completely off the grid due to a storm, data copied to a datacenter on the west coast can be used to handle user queries. Also, data warehousing services require delivery of data from all datacenters to a datacenter warehouse \cite{fb_warehouse}.
\subsection{Point to Multipoint (P2MP) Transfers}
There are also transfers that deliver an object from one datacenter to multiple datacenters which we refer to as point to multipoint (P2MP) transfers. For example, content delivery networks (CDNs) may push significant video content to regional cache locations \cite{utube, netflix, jetway, ecoflow, social_inside}, cloud storage services may replicate data objects across multiple sites for increased reliability \cite{cassandra, azuresql}, and search engines push substantial updates to their geographically distributed search database on a regular basis \cite{b4}. Data transfers among datacenters for replication of objects from one datacenter to multiple datacenters is referred to as geo-replication \cite{mesa, mdcc, owan, google-dc-optical, mc_flexgrid, mc_icc_overlay, dtb, elastic_optical_networks, b4, yahoo, orchestrating, jetway} and can form a large portion of inter-DC traffic \cite{facebook-express-backbone}.
\subsection{Inter-DC Transfers with Deadlines}
Inter-DC transfers deliver content that may need to become available to applications before specific deadlines. Such deadlines may represent the importance of transfers \cite{tempus, amoeba}. For example, a transfer with a later deadline can be delayed in favor of another transfer with a close deadline. Deadlines are usually due to consumer requirements. For example, the results of some data processing may need to be ready by a specific time. It may also be an internally assigned metric for more efficient scheduling of network transfers. For example, if a data processing task requires two inputs to generate an output, and one of them becomes available sometime in the future, it will not help to deliver the other input data anytime earlier than that time. Assigning a deadline that is in the future, allows the network operators to deliver data that is needed sooner first.
\section{Overview of the Dissertation}
In this dissertation, we develop algorithms and techniques for efficient P2P and P2MP transfers among geographically dispersed datacenters. In Chapter \ref{chapter_background}, we first discuss how a modern inter-DC network manages traffic flow and formally present traffic management problems of interest, specifically online arrival of inter-DC traffic with its requirements. We then discuss performance metrics, such as mean and tail completion times, and finally, give a general optimization formulation for the types of problems we will consider in the rest of the dissertation.
For P2P traffic, path selection for traffic routing is a well-known problem with various existing solutions. However, using a centralized network architecture and given a dedicated inter-DC network, it is possible to develop routing algorithms that are adaptive to network conditions and therefore more efficient. In Chapter \ref{chapter_adaptive_routing}, we develop a new routing approach referred to as Best Worst-case Routing (BWR) which is capable of considerably reducing inter-DC transfer completion times regardless of the scheduling policy used for transmission of data across the network. We evaluate various heuristics that implement BWR and use them to quickly compute a new path for a newly arriving inter-DC transfer.
In Chapter \ref{chapter_admission_control}, we develop fast admission control algorithms for inter-DC transfers with deadlines. We focus on Point to Point (P2P) transfers to maximize the number of transfers completed before their deadlines. We present a new scheduling policy referred to as the As Late As Possible (ALAP) scheduling and combine it with a load-aware path selection mechanism to perform quick feasibility checks and decide on the admission of new inter-DC transfers. We also perform evaluations across different topologies and using varying network load and show that our approach is scalable and can speed up the admission control by more than two orders of magnitude compared to traditional techniques.
In Chapter \ref{chapter_p2mp_dccast}, we study efficient P2MP transfers where data transfer is needed from one source datacenter to multiple destination datacenters. Although this can be performed as multiple P2P transfers, there is opportunity to do significantly better as all the receiving ends are known apriori and the network traffic forwarding can be centrally controlled. We introduce the concept of load-aware forwarding trees and compute them as weighted Steiner trees.\footnote{A Steiner tree is a tree subgraph of the inter-DC network that connects the sender and all the receivers. The weight of a Steiner tree is the sum of weights of its edges. Selecting a minimum weight Steiner tree over a general graph is NP-Hard \cite{steiner_tree_problem} but fast heuristics exist that offer close to optimal solutions on average \cite{DSTAlgoEvaluation}.} We consider the objective of minimizing the completion time of the slowest transfer and the total bandwidth use of all transfers. We perform extensive evaluations using random and deterministic topologies and show that our tree selection approach can considerably reduce transfer completion times compared to tree selection using other weight assignment techniques. We show that our approach can reduce the completion times of slowest transfers by about $50\%$ compared to performing P2MP using multiple P2P transfers. We also consider deadlines for P2MP transfers and present an admission control solution to maximize the number of P2MP transfers completed before deadlines. Our approach uses load-aware forwarding trees combined with the ALAP scheduling policy to perform fast admission control for P2MP transfers with deadlines. We also perform extensive evaluations and show that compared to state-of-the-art inter-DC admission control solutions our approach admits up to $25\%$ more traffic into the network while saving at least $22\%$ network bandwidth.
For a P2MP transfer, it is in general not required that all receivers get a copy of the data at the same time. In Chapter \ref{chapter_p2mp_quickcast}, we focus on selectively speeding up some datacenters using receiver set partitioning, that is, grouping the receivers of P2MP transfers into multiple partitions and attaching each partition using an independent forwarding tree. That is because a single multicast tree can slow down all receivers to the slowest receiver, although it offers the highest bandwidth savings. We apply our P2MP load-aware tree selection approach per partition to distribute load across the network as well. We also explore different ways of finding the right number of partitions as well as the receivers that are grouped per partition. Using extensive evaluations, we show that our approach can speed up the P2MP receivers by up to $35\times$ when network links have highly varying capacities.
In Chapter \ref{chapter_iris}, we develop a framework to optimize for mixed completion time objectives for P2MP transfers over inter-DC networks. That is, we realize that in general, different applications that distribute copies of objects to many locations, may have different completion time objectives. For example, many applications require one copy of an object to be made quickly while the rest of the replicas can be made slowly. Knowing this requirement, we can select the receiver partitions accordingly to save bandwidth by grouping all the slower receivers into one partition and satisfy the speed requirements by attaching the fastest receiver using an independent path. We present a solution that uses application-specific objectives to optimize the partitioning and tree selection for P2MP transfers. Through simulations and emulations, we show that our approach reduces average receiver completion times by $2\times$ while meeting the requirements specified by applications on completion times.
In Chapter \ref{chapter_p2mp_parallel}, we aim to speed up P2MP transfers using parallel load-aware forwarding trees that are selected as weighted Steiner trees. We attach each partition of receivers using potentially multiple forwarding trees that in parallel deliver data to all its receivers hence increasing their throughput and reducing their completion times. We focus on the selection of edge-disjoint trees to eliminate direct bandwidth contention across the partitions of the same transfer. We perform comprehensive simulations and show that using up to two parallel edge-disjoint trees offers almost all the benefit over various topologies and that by using parallel trees we can speed up P2MP transfers by up to $40\%$.
Finally, in Chapter \ref{chapter_summary}, we provide a summary and set forth several future directions to expand on our work.
\clearpage
\chapter{Inter-DC Network Traffic Engineering} \label{chapter_background}
Inter-DC networks consist of high-capacity links that connect tens to hundreds of datacenters across cities, countries, and continents with dedicated bandwidth \cite{b4, swan, facebook-express-backbone, owan, amoeba, tempus, dynamic_pricing, google-dc-optical}. They can be modeled as a graph with datacenters as nodes and inter-DC links as edges where every edge is associated with the properties of the inter-DC link it represents such as capacity and bandwidth utilization. Given that datacenter operators also manage inter-DC networks, coordination among traffic generation from datacenters and routing of traffic within the inter-DC networks can be used to optimize network utilization and maximize overall utility \cite{tempus, amoeba, luo2018online, dynamic_pricing}.
The context we consider is data transfers that move bulk data across geographically dispersed datacenters over inter-DC networks. Bulk data transfers move the lion share of data across datacenters \cite{social_inside} which makes it highly practical and valuable to optimize their transmission over inter-DC networks. Besides, inter-DC networks are relatively small in terms of the number of edges and nodes which makes it feasible to formulate and solve optimization scenarios to maximize their performance \cite{b4, swan-backbone, facebook-express-backbone}. Finally, inter-DC networks are operated by the same organization that manages the datacenters they connect which makes it possible to control them in a logically centralized fashion as well as apply novel traffic scheduling and routing techniques that cannot be used over the internet.
We consider a centralized traffic management scheme where a logically centralized Traffic Engineering Server (TES) receives traffic requirements from the senders and decides how traffic should be transmitted from the senders and how it should be routed within the inter-DC network across the datacenters. It also communicates with the senders and the network elements to coordinate them. Several inter-DC networks have been built using this principle, and related work has shown that this form of management allows for substantial performance gains \cite{b4, tempus, amoeba, swan, owan, facebook-express-backbone}.
Central traffic allocation offers a variety of benefits: First, it allows for improved performance by minimizing congestion by proactively reserving bandwidth while collectively considering the interplay of many transfers initiated from different datacenters. Second, it offers a highly configurable platform that allows maximizing performance according to various utility functions. Such utility functions can be selected according to an organization's business model. The coordinated routing and scheduling of traffic for maximization of network utility can be formulated as an optimization problem with different constraints as we will show later in this chapter.
The traffic engineering problem we consider is the following. We are given an inter-DC network topology, including the connectivity and link capacities across datacenters, with end-points that generate network traffic located within the datacenters. Data transfers arrive at the network in an online manner at different datacenters, i.e., we assume no prior knowledge of when a future transfer will arrive and what properties it will have. End-points can control the rate at which they transmit traffic. Upon the arrival of a new transfer, the sender communicates with the TES the properties of this transfer and any potential requirements on its transmission. The problem is for TES to compute the best route(s) on which the traffic for this new transfer is forwarded as well as the rate at which the new transfer and all the other existing transfers should transmit their traffic.
The transmission rates need to be updated as new transfers arrive, existing transfers finish, links fail or their capacity changes, or transfers are terminated. To efficiently handle this highly dynamic situation, we assume a slotted timeline and periodically compute end-point transmission rates at the beginning of every timeslot. It is possible to schedule re-computation of rates upon highly critical events in addition to having them run periodically. In this dissertation, we only assume periodic execution of rate calculation for simplicity. Also, the transmission of any new transfer begins as soon as the rates are updated.
We assume that TES makes its optimization decisions given the knowledge of transfers that have already arrived. That is because we do not have deterministic information about transfers that may be created in the future. In general, it may be possible to predict future transfer arrivals and perform further optimizations accordingly, which is out of the scope of this dissertation.
\section{Central Inter-DC Traffic Management Architecture}
Central network traffic management has two major elements: rate-limiting at the senders and routing/forwarding in the network. Figure \ref{fig:PROBSETUP} shows the overall setup for this purpose adopted by several existing inter-DC networks \cite{swan, bwe}. In this setup, TES calculates transmission rates and routes for submitted transfers as they arrive at the network. Rates are then dispatched to agents that are located at datacenters which are proxies that keep track of local transfers, i.e., transfers initiated within the same datacenters, called site brokers. When TES calculates new routes, they are dispatched to the network by implementing proper forwarding rules on the network's switching elements. Figure \ref{fig:central_process} shows the steps taken by the TES in processing a new inter-DC transfer. The part of the switching elements that does this is referred to as the Forwarding Information Base (FIB).
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{PROBSETUP}
\caption{Central traffic management architecture.}
\label{fig:PROBSETUP}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{centralized_traffic_management.png}
\caption{Steps in processing of a new inter-DC transfer.}
\label{fig:central_process}
\end{figure}
When a sender wants to initiate a transfer, it first communicates with the site broker in the local datacenter which records the request and forwards it to TES. When TES responds with the transmission rates, site broker records that and forwards it to the sender. The sender then applies rate-limiting at the rate specified by TES. In some setups, the sender should also attach the proper forwarding label to its packets so that its packets are correctly forwarded (like a VLAN tag). Such labeling may also be applied transparently to the sender at a different network entity (hypervisor, border gateway, etc.). This function could also be implemented at the datacenter network edge based on end-point addresses and using real-time packet header modification predicates.
In order to flexibly allocate traffic with varying rates over time, we break the timeline into small timeslots similar to several current solutions \cite{b4, swan, tempus, amoeba, owan}. Figure \ref{fig:timeslots} shows how this is done for a single link $e$. For a network, capacity is allocated over the whole network per timeslot. We do not assume an exact length for these timeslots as there are trade-offs involved. Having smaller timeslots can lead to inaccurate rate-limiting\footnote{It takes a short amount of time for senders to converge to new rates \cite{carousel}.} and adds the overhead of having to calculate rates for a larger number of timeslots, while having larger timeslots results in a less flexible allocation because the transmission rate is considered constant over a timeslot. Finally, timeslot length depends on transfer sizes. In general, we could select a value based on minimum or average transfer size. Current solutions have used a timeslot duration of $5$ minutes which is long enough to reduce the overhead of rate-computations and short enough to allow the network to adapt to changes in traffic demand \cite{amoeba, owan}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{timeslots.png}
\caption{Rate-allocation per link per timeslot.}
\label{fig:timeslots}
\end{figure}
The purpose of the site broker is manifold by adding one level of indirection between senders and TES. First, it reduces the request-response overhead for TES by maintaining a persistent connection with the server and possibly aggregating many sender requests into a smaller number of messages before sending them off to the server. Second, it allows for the application of hierarchical bandwidth allocation by locally grouping many transfers and presenting them to TES as one.\footnote{This may reduce the accuracy of traffic engineering but makes it significantly scalable in case there is a considerable number of transfers \cite{bwe}.} Finally, site broker can update TES's response according to varying local network conditions, allow senders to switch to a backup TES in case TES goes offline, or even revert to distributed mode.
Centralized traffic management can be realized using Software Defined Networking (SDN) \cite{sdn}. SDN offers many highly configurable features among which is the ability to manage traffic forwarding state centrally and programmatically by installing, updating, or removing forwarding rules in real-time. With a global view of network status and server demands, it is possible to offer globally optimal solutions. WANs operated using SDN have been adopted by an increasing number of companies and organizations over the past few years examples of which include Google \cite{b4}, Microsoft \cite{swan}, and Facebook \cite{facebook-express-backbone}. Of course, there are challenges in such centralized and real-time management of network, for example, routing update inconsistencies or the latency from when forwarding rules are dispatched to when they take effect are two significant issues. Ongoing SDN related research has been addressing these and several other problems \cite{automan, sdn_rule_latency}. In this dissertation, we consider the usage of SDN for controlling dedicated inter-DC networks. We develop algorithms that can be used by TES to compute routes on a per transfer basis as they arrive.
\subsection{Functions of Centralized Traffic Management}
\noindent\textbf{Traffic Rate-limiting:} Figure \ref{fig:RATE} shows how rate-limiting can be applied at the servers before data is transmitted on the wire. The most straightforward approach is for service instances to communicate their demand with the local broker, which in turn makes contact with TES, and only hands off to the transport layer (i.e., socket) as much as specified by TES. This technique requires no changes to the end-points' protocol stack and hardware but requires modifications at the application layer. Another approach is to use the methods supported by the operating system for per-flow rate control. For example, the later versions of Linux allow users to use a socket option along with the Fair Queuing algorithm to specify a pacing rate. Next, it is possible to apply rate limiting in hardware using precise timers. This approach is much more accurate compared to software approaches but requires more sophisticated equipment. There are also hybrid approaches that use a combination of operating system support and hardware rate limiters to apply accurate per transfer rate limiting for a large number of transfers \cite{carousel}.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{RATELIMITING}
\caption{Several end-point rate-limiting techniques.}
\label{fig:RATE}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Traffic Routing:} Inter-DC networks are strong candidates for custom routing techniques. Effective routing should take into account the overall load scheduled on links to better use all available capacity while shifting traffic across a variety of paths. Besides, routing should consider the properties of new transfers while assigning routes to them. Conventional routing schemes are incapable of taking into account such parameters to optimize routing with regards to operator-specified utility functions.
\section{Performance Metrics}
A variety of metrics can be used for performance evaluation over inter-DC networks including transfer completion times, total network capacity consumption, and transfers completed before their deadlines. Depending on the services running over inter-DC networks, operators may choose to focus primarily on optimizing one metric or a utility function that generates an aggregate utility value according to all of these metrics. Table \ref{table_metrics} offers an overview of these metrics.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Definition of performance metrics.} \label{table_metrics}
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{tabular}{ |l|p{8cm}| }
\hline
\textbf{Metric} & \textbf{Description} \\ \hline
Tail completion times & Completion time of the slowest transfer over the evaluation period. In some cases, 99th or 95th percentile may be used instead. \\ \hline
Median completion times & The completion time of the transfer that is slower than 50\% of transfers and faster than the other 50\% over the evaluation period. \\ \hline
Mean completion times & Average of completion times of all transfers over the evaluation period. \\ \hline
Total bandwidth/capacity consumed & Sum of the volume of traffic that was sent on all network edges per edge over the evaluation period. \\ \hline
Ratio of deadline transfers completed & Fraction of transfers the network was able to finish before their deadlines in case a deadline was specified. The network may apply admission control to only accept transfers that it can complete by their deadlines. In this case, we take the fraction of admitted transfers. \\ \hline
Ratio of deadline traffic completed & Ratio of the total volume of transfers the network was able to finish before their deadlines, in case a deadline was specified, by the total volume of transfers. The network may apply admission control to only accept transfers that it can complete by their deadlines. In this case, we take the ratio of admitted traffic by total submitted traffic. \\ \hline
Running time (Network algorithms) & The time to process transfer information, and compute transmission rates and forwarding routes. \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
In general, some of these metrics may be at odds with others, and therefore it may not be possible to optimize all parameters at the same time. The relationship between these metrics also could depend on the operating point of the system. For example, under light traffic load, using more bandwidth usually allows us to reduce the completion times of transfers, while under heavy traffic load, using more bandwidth potentially leads to resource contention and increased completion times.
One can consider two scenarios of transfers with and without deadlines. In the former case, we consider the performance metrics that evaluate the volume of traffic and the total fraction of transfers completed before their deadlines. In the latter case, we pay attention to minimizing tail, median or mean completion times. When deadlines are not present, depending on the services running over the inter-DC networks, we may more strongly consider tail, median or mean completion times.\footnote{It is possible to consider other aggregate metrics as well given the circumstances.} For example, in computing tasks that take multiple inputs from different datacenters, the processing start time depends on when all the inputs become available which increases the importance of reducing tail completion times.
Various data transfer problems considered in this dissertation are all traffic engineering problems over inter-DC networks aiming at optimizing one or more of the metrics stated above. To find efficient solutions to such problems, we can formulate optimization problems using the network and transfer parameters, and consider appropriate performance metrics to optimize. We will develop a general optimization framework in the next section.
\section{General Inter-DC Optimization Formulation}
The inter-DC optimization problem can be formulated in a variety of ways by considering different objective functions and constraints. In each problem, bulk inter-DC transfers will be initiated from one sender to one or more receiving datacenters. In the following, we discuss different types of constraints and objectives that can be combined to form the ultimate framework.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Definition of Variables:} Table \ref{table_var_0} shows the list variables used in this section. Data could be transmitted over paths or multicast trees to receivers. Also, in general, data can be transmitted over multiple parallel paths or multicast trees towards the receivers. The notations we defined capture these properties.
\begin{table}[t!]
\begin{center}
\caption{Definition of variables.} \label{table_var_0}
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{tabular}{ |p{3cm}|p{10.5cm}| }
\hline
\textbf{Variable} & \textbf{Definition} \\
\hline
\hline
$t$ and $t_{now}$ & Some timeslot and current timeslot \\
\hline
$\omega$ & Width of a timeslot in seconds \\
\hline
$e$ & A directed edge \\
\hline
$C_e$ & Capacity of $e$ in bytes per second \\
\hline
$B_e$ & Current available bandwidth on edge $e$ \\
\hline
$G$ & A directed graph representing an inter-DC network \\
\hline
$\pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$ & Set$\langle\rangle$ of edges of directed graph $G$ \\
\hline
$\Psi$ & A directed subgraph over which traffic is forwarded to the receivers, could be a path or a multicast tree ($\pmb{\mathrm{E}}_{\Psi} \subset \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_{G}$) \\
\hline
$\pmb{\mathrm{R}}$ & Set of all requests (past, current, future) \\
\hline
$R_i$ & A transfer request where $R_i \in \pmb{\mathrm{R}},~i \in \pmb{\mathrm{I}}=\{1 \dots I\}$ \\
\hline
$S_{R_i}$ & Source datacenter of ${R_i}$ \\
\hline
$A_{R_i}$ & Arrival time of ${R_i}$ \\
\hline
$\tau_{R_i}$ & Completion time of ${R_i}$ \\
\hline
$t_{d_{R_i}}$ & Deadline of ${R_i}$ \\
\hline
$\Omega_{R_i}$ & Total network capacity consumed by ${R_i}$ for its completion \\
\hline
$\mathcal{V}_{R_i}$ & Original volume of ${R_i}$ in bytes \\
\hline
$\pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_i}$ & Set$\langle\rangle$ of destinations of $R_i$ \\
\hline
$\tau^{i}_{d}$ & Completion time of receiver $d \in \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_i}$ \\
\hline
$\pmb{\mathrm{\psi}}^{i}_{d}$ & Directed subgraphs attached to receiver $d \in \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_i}$ from $S_{R_i}$ \\
\hline
$f_{\Psi}^{i}(t)$ & Transmission rate of $R_{i}$ on subgraph $\Psi$ at timeslot $t$ \\
\hline
$\theta_{\Psi}^{e}$ & Whether edge $e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$ is on subgraph $\Psi$ (binary variable) \\
\hline
$U$ & A network utility function set by network operators \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Formal Definition of Completion Times:} We defined a receiver's completion time as the last timeslot with non-zero traffic arriving at that receiver for a specific transfer.
\begin{equation}
\tau^{i}_{d} \triangleq \{t \vert f_{\Psi}^{i}(t) > 0, \exists \Psi \in \pmb{\mathrm{\psi}}^{i}_{d}\}, \forall d \in \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_i}, \forall i \in \{1 \dots I\}
\end{equation}
For a transfer, the completion time is the time at which all receivers of that transfer complete.
\begin{equation}
\tau_{R_i} = \max_{d \in \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_i}} \tau^{i}_{d}, \forall i \in \{1 \dots I\}
\end{equation}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Optimization Objective:} A variety of metrics can be considered as part of the optimization objective including transfer completion times (i.e., median, average, tail), total network capacity use, and the number of deadlines missed (or alternatively, number of transfers that could not be admitted to meet their deadlines). In general, a utility function can be defined over these metrics which the optimization problem aims to maximize. This function should be representative of how much profit the business can obtain while using the network.
\begin{equation}
Max ( U((\{\tau_{R_i}\}, \sum_{i} \Omega_{R_i}, \rvert \{i \vert \tau_{R_i} > t_{d_{R_i}}\} \lvert))),~i \in \{1 \dots I\}
\end{equation}
Examples of objective functions include: Minimizing the mean (i.e., average) transfer completion times, i.e., $Min ( \sum_{i \in \{1 \dots I\}} \tau_{R_i})$, minimizing the total network capacity consumption, i.e., $Min ( \sum_{i \in \{1 \dots I\}} \Omega_{R_i})$, minimizing the number of deadline missing transfers, i.e., $Min ( \rvert \{i \in \{1 \dots I\} \vert \tau_{R_i} > t_{d_{R_i}}\} \lvert)$ or a combination of these. For example, we can minimize a weighted sum of completion times and total network capacity consumption, i.e., $Min ( \sum_{i \in \{1 \dots I\}} \tau_{R_i} + \alpha \sum_{i \in \{1 \dots I\}} \Omega_{R_i})$ where $0 < \alpha \ll 1$ is a coefficient used to prioritize minimizing completion times. In all of these cases, $U$ is defined as a negative multiply of these functions. In other words, the network operator profits if these parameters are minimized.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Demand Constraints:} The total data transmitted towards a receiver across all the paths or multicast trees connected to it then has to be equal to the total volume of the transfer.
\begin{equation}
\sum_{t} \sum_{\Psi \in \pmb{\mathrm{\psi}}^{i}_{d}} \omega f_{\Psi}^{i}(t) = \mathcal{V}_{R_i}, \forall i \in \{1 \dots I\} \label{demand_const}
\end{equation}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Capacity Constraints:} Total transmission rate of all paths and multicast trees sharing an edge must be at most equal to the link's available bandwidth $B_e \le C_e$.
\begin{equation}
\sum_{\substack{i, \Psi\\e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_{\Psi} \vert \Psi \in \{\cup_{d \in \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_i}} \pmb{\mathrm{\psi}}^{i}_{d}\}}} f_{\Psi}^{i}(t) \le B_e, \forall t, e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_{G}
\end{equation}
The available bandwidth on an edge is determined by the volume of traffic used up by short flows (e.g., user-facing, high priority traffic). There is usually a good estimate of how much such traffic is generated as the rate of growth for user traffic is far less than that of business-internal inter-DC transfers \cite{facebook-express-backbone}.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Routing Constraints:} To forward traffic from the source to each receiver per transfer, we can use one or more paths or trees. To make sure that each receiver is obtaining a full copy of the data, if any two receivers are connected using the same tree, any tree connected to one of them should also be connected to the other one. In other words, for some request $R_i$, receivers $\pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_i}$ can be separated into multiple groups $\pmb{\mathrm{D}}^{j}_{R_i}, j \le \lvert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_i} \rvert$ each connected using at least one path (i.e., $\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}^{j}_{R_i} \rvert = 1$) or tree (i.e., $\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}^{j}_{R_i} \rvert > 1$).
In general, it is possible to formulate the selection of such paths and trees as part of the optimization framework and create a joint routing and rate computation framework. This however leads to exponential number of constraints and addition of a large number of binary variables to the formulation which in general could take a long time to solve. Another approach would be to compute the paths and trees using some heuristic approach and plug them into the optimization framework which reduces the complexity of the problem allowing it to only focus on computation of the rates.
For the sake of completeness, we briefly discuss how a joint optimization can be formulated by adding constraints to the framework. This can be done by enumerating all possible paths (or trees) from the source to each group of receivers and considering fraction variables that determine how much of the traffic will end up on each path (tree). Also, since we do not know how to group receivers, we need to consider all possibilities and define binary variables that determine which grouping maximizes the utility of the network.
More formally, let us define binary variables $b_k$ as whether we have selected grouping $k \in \{1 \dots K\}$ where $K$ is the total number of ways to partition $\pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_i}$ into disjoint sets whose union is equal to $\pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_i}$. Also, let us define the groups in $k$\textsuperscript{th} partitioning as $\pmb{\mathrm{D}}^{j,k}_{R_i}, j \in \{1 \dots J\}$. We can write the following constraints:
\begin{align}
& \sum_{k \in \{1 \dots K\}} b_k = 1 \\
& \cup_{j \in \{1 \dots J\}} \pmb{\mathrm{D}}^{j,k}_{R_i} = \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_i}, \forall k \in \{1 \dots K\}
\end{align}
Let us define $\pmb{\mathrm{\Psi}}^{j,k}_{i}$ as the set of all paths (trees) that connect $S_{R_i}$ to $\pmb{\mathrm{D}}^{j,k}_{R_i}$ over the inter-DC graph $G$. For every receiver $d \in \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_i}$ we can then define the following constraint to find $\pmb{\mathrm{\psi}}^{i}_{d}$:
\begin{equation}
\pmb{\mathrm{\psi}}^{i}_{d} = \cup_{\substack{k \in \{1 \dots K\}~\vert~b_k = 1 \\ ~~j \in \{1 \dots J\}~\vert~ d \in \pmb{\mathrm{D}}^{j,k}_{R_i}}} \pmb{\mathrm{\Psi}}^{j,k}_{i}
\end{equation}
The demand constraint of Eq. \ref{demand_const} will then automatically take into account the distribution of traffic across all the paths (trees) that connect to any group of receivers.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Hard Deadline Constraint:} A transfer $R_i$ with a hard deadline must complete before its deadline. We can formulate this as an equality of demand over the timeslots prior to the transfer's deadline.
\begin{equation}
\sum_{t \le t_{d_{R_i}}} \sum_{\Psi \in \pmb{\mathrm{\psi}}^{i}_{d}} \omega f_{\Psi}^{i}(t) = \mathcal{V}_{R_i}, \forall d \in \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_i}
\end{equation}
The optimization problem with this constraint may become infeasible. That means the current parameters make it impossible to meet the given deadline. This process is referred to as admission control by performing feasibility checks. In general, fast heuristics exists that allow quick infeasibility checks, however, if a problem is not deemed infeasible by such heuristics, it does not guarantee feasibility.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Soft Deadlines:} A soft deadline can be formulated as part of the objective function. Although soft deadlines are not the focus of this dissertation, we provide a short overview of how they can be modeled here. In general, we can use a penalty function that determines the benefit obtained from completing the transfer. In case the transfer is finished way too late, its value could be zero (or even negative as it wastes bandwidth). Here, we define two different penalty functions as shown in Figure \ref{fig:penalty}. These functions are specified according to how the system should handle a deadline miss. A step function, for example, determines that we highly value meeting the deadline, but as soon as a deadline is missed, it does not matter how late we complete the transfer. We define a variable $\gamma_{t}$ that determines how much traffic is delivered per timeslot for a transfer to a specific receiver.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{penalty_functions.pdf}
\caption{Some penalty functions}
\label{fig:penalty}
\end{figure}
\begin{equation}
\gamma^{i}_{t} \triangleq \sum_{\Psi \in \pmb{\mathrm{\psi}}^{i}_{d}} \omega f_{\Psi}^{i}(t), \forall t, i \in \{1 \dots I\}
\end{equation}
Using this new variable, we can define a system-wide penalty function that can be combined with the objective function in the optimization formulation.
\begin{equation}
\pmb{\mathrm{P}} \triangleq \sum_{i} \sum_{t} \gamma^{i}_{t} P(t)
\end{equation}
And the new objective function can be formulated as follows.
\begin{equation}
Max(U-\pmb{\mathrm{P}})
\end{equation}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Other Constraints:} There are many basic constraints such as the valid range of values for variables. In this case, we have the following two basic constraints.
\begin{align}
& \theta_{\Psi}^{e} \in \{0, 1\}, \forall \Psi, e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_{G} \\
& 0 \le f_{\Psi}^{i}(t) \le \min_{e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_{G} ~\vert~ \theta_{\Psi}^{e} = 1} B_e, \forall \Psi
\end{align}
Depending on transfer arrival rate and patterns, this optimization model can become more complex with many variables.\footnote{That is, due to the presence of binary or integer variables and non-linear constraints and objectives.} Solving this optimization framework may be computationally expensive and slow given that it needs to be solved as new transfers arrive. In case transfers have hard deadlines, it may be necessary only to admit new transfers when their deadlines can be met, which essentially requires performing feasibility checks before finding an optimal solution. To address the issue of complexity, throughout this dissertation, we present, implement, and evaluate heuristics that help find quick solutions to different versions of this optimization framework.
\clearpage
\chapter{Adaptive Routing of Transfers over Inter-Datacenter Networks} \label{chapter_adaptive_routing}
Inter-DC networks carry traffic flows with highly variable sizes and different priority classes: long throughput-oriented flows and short latency-sensitive flows. While latency-sensitive flows are almost always scheduled on shortest paths to minimize end-to-end latency, long flows can be assigned to paths according to usage to maximize average network throughput. Long flows contribute huge volumes of traffic over inter-DC WAN. The Flow Completion Time (FCT) is a vital network performance metric that affects the running time of distributed applications and users' quality of experience. Adaptive flow routing can improve efficiency and performance of networks by assigning paths to new long flows according to network status and flow properties. We focus on single path routing while aiming at minimizing completion times and bandwidth usage of internal flows.
In this chapter, we first discuss a popular adaptive approach widely used for traffic engineering that is based on current bandwidth utilization of links. We propose an alternative that reduces bandwidth usage by up to at least $50\%$ and flow completion times by up to at least $40\%$ across various scheduling policies and flow size distributions. Next, we propose a routing approach that uses the remaining sizes and paths of all ongoing flows to minimize the worst-case completion time of incoming flows assuming no knowledge of future flow arrivals. Our approach can be formulated as an NP-Hard graph optimization problem. We propose {\sf{BWRH}}, a heuristic to quickly generate an approximate solution. We evaluate {\sf{BWRH}}~against several real WAN topologies and two different traffic patterns. We see that {\sf{BWRH}}~provides solutions with an average optimality gap of less than $0.25\%$. Furthermore, we show that compared to other popular routing heuristics, {\sf{BWRH}}~reduces the mean and tail FCT by up to $3.5\times$ and $2\times$, respectively. We then present and evaluate an even faster heuristic called {\sf{BWRHF}}~which is based on Dijkstra's shortest path algorithm. We perform extensive evaluations to compare {\sf{BWRH}}~and {\sf{BWRHF}}~to show that they offer relatively similar performance over multiple topologies, scheduling policies, and flow size distributions despite {\sf{BWRHF}}~being considerably faster and more straightforward.
\section{Background and Related Work}
Although adaptive path selection can be formulated as an online optimization problem, such problems cannot be solved optimally due to no knowledge about future flow arrivals. Alternatively, heuristic schemes can be used by considering a cost (distance) metric and selecting the minimum cost (shortest) path. A variety of metrics have been used for path selection over WAN including static metrics such as hop count and interface bandwidth, and dynamic metrics such as end-to-end latency which is a function of propagation and queuing latency, and current link bandwidth utilization \cite{tvlakshman, routing-metric}. Especially, bandwidth utilization has been extensively used by prior work over inter-DC networks \cite{ospf-is_is, texcp, tempus}.
Our understanding is that while these metrics are effective for routing of short flows, they are insufficient for improving the completion times of long flows as we will demonstrate. Over inter-DC WAN where end-points are managed by the organization that also controls the routing \cite{b4, swan-backbone, facebook-express-backbone}, one can use routing techniques that differentiate long flows from short flows and use flow properties obtained from applications, including flow size information, to reduce the completion times of long flows.
\subsection{A Novel Metric for Adaptive Routing over WAN}
We argue that while assigning paths to new flows, instead of focusing on current bandwidth utilization, \textit{one should consider utilization temporally and into the future,} i.e., by counting total outstanding bytes to be sent per link according to paths assigned to flows and total outstanding bytes per flow. We refer to this total number of remaining bytes per link as its \textit{load} and use it as the cost metric. Compared to utilization, load offers more information about future usage of a link's bandwidth which can help us perform more effective load balancing. Every time a flow is assigned to a path, load variables associated with all edges of that path increase by its demand. Also, a link's load variable decreases continuously as flows on that link make progress.
In addition, we evaluate two heuristics of selecting the path with minimum value of maximum link cost and minimum value of sum of link costs which we refer to as \texttt{MINMAX()} and \texttt{MINSUM()}, respectively. Although the former is frequently used in the literature \cite{ospf-is_is, texcp, tempus}, we find that the latter offers considerably better performance for the majority of traffic patterns and scheduling policies.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{infocom18_poster_fig.pdf}
\caption{Performance of various cost metrics for path selection over Cogent WAN \cite{cogent}, with uniform capacity of $1$ and $\lambda = 1.0$ ($\mathcal{F}$, $\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{M}$ represent the FCFS, SRPT and MMF scheduling policies, respectively), simulation was repeated many times and average was computed. The minimum was computed per column and per metric across all schemes in the column. MFCT and TFCT represent the mean and tail flow completion times, respectively.} \label{fig:cogent}
\end{figure*}
\section{Evaluation of Different Cost Metrics}
We considered a large WAN called Cogent \cite{cogent} with $197$ nodes and $243$ links, four flow demand distributions of light-tailed (Exponential distribution), heavy-tailed (Pareto distribution), Cache-Follower \cite{social_inside} and Hadoop \cite{social_inside} (the last two happen across Facebook datacenters), and a uniform capacity of $1.0$ for all links. A Poisson distribution with rate $\lambda$ was used for flow arrivals. For all flow demand distributions, we assumed an average of $20$ units and a maximum of $500$ units. For heavy-tailed, we used a minimum demand of $2$ units. We considered scheduling policies of First Come First Serve (FCFS), Shortest Remaining Processing Time (SRPT) and Fair Sharing using Max-Min Fairness (MMF). We considered three different cost metrics of ``utilization", ``load", and ``load+demand" per link where demand represents the new flow's size in bytes. To measure a path's cost, we considered two cost functions of \textit{maximum} which assigns any path the cost of its highest cost link (used by \texttt{MINMAX()} heuristic), and \textit{sum} which computes a path's cost by summing up costs of its links (used by \texttt{MINSUM()} heuristic). Combining these path cost functions with the three link cost metrics mentioned above, we obtain six different path selection schemes that select the path with minimum cost for a newly arriving flow. We also considered \texttt{MinHop} which selects a path with minimum hops per flow to compute lower bound of bandwidth usage. For minimum cost path selection, we used Dijkstra's algorithm in JGraphT library. We measured Mean and Tail Flow Completion Times (MFCT/TFCT) and total bandwidth as shown in Figure \ref{fig:cogent}.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Flow Completion Times (FCT):} \texttt{MINSUM(load)} and \texttt{MINSUM(load+demand)} perform almost identically in completion times. The rest of schemes offer highly varying performance dictated by scheduling policy or traffic pattern. Schemes based on utilization are at least $40\%$ above the minimum for the majority of scenarios. Also, \texttt{MINMAX(load)} and \texttt{MINMAX(load+demand)} are more than $50\%$ above the minimum in mean completion times for multiple scenarios. Overall, it can be seen that schemes based on ``load" as link cost offer much better tail completion times (less than $10\%$ away from minimum for majority of cases). Also, \texttt{MINSUM(load+demand)} offers the best mean completion times considering all scenarios.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Total Bandwidth Usage:} \texttt{MINSUM(load+demand)} offers the minimum extra bandwidth usage compared to \texttt{MinHop} which is below $20\%$ at all times. Schemes based on \texttt{MINMAX()} consume at least $40\%$ extra bandwidth. \texttt{MINSUM(load)} and \texttt{MINSUM(utilization)} use at least $10\%$ more bandwidth at all times compared to \texttt{MINSUM(load+demand)} and at least $20\%$ more bandwidth for the majority of scenarios.
\section{Discussion and Analysis}
We see that \texttt{MINSUM(load+demand)} stays within $20\%$ of minimum for all completion times and within $10\%$ of minimum in the majority of cases. It offers the minimum bandwidth usage across all adaptive approaches (\texttt{MinHop} is static). With this cost metric, larger flows are most likely assigned shorter paths which allows for higher bandwidth savings (due to presence of ``demand" as part of link cost) while shorter flows are assigned to paths with smaller total load which reduces completion times via load balancing. We believe \texttt{MINSUM(load+demand)} performs better than techniques based on \texttt{MINMAX()} since it considers total number of bytes that will eventually be scheduled on a path taking into account all edges and not just the highest loaded/utilized link. Our experiments have shown that \texttt{MINSUM(load+demand)} is also an effective metric for selection of multicast forwarding trees that reduce completion times via load balancing \cite{dccast, quickcast}. It is also interesting to note that \texttt{MINMAX(utilization)}, which is frequently used in traffic engineering research, is far from the best solution for the majority of evaluated scenarios. Centralized frameworks, such as SDN \cite{sdn}, are good candidates for realization of this scheme since they offer access to global view of network status and flow demands
\section{Best Worst-case Routing (BWR)}
Given the results of the experiments we performed above, it is obvious that current routing heuristics can be far from the optimal over different evaluation scenarios and for various performance metrics. Therefore, we revisit the well-known flow routing problem over inter-DC networks. As mentioned earlier, we focus on long flows which carry tremendous volumes of data over inter-DC networks \cite{b4, tempus}. They are usually generated as a result of replicating large objects such as search index files, virtual machine migration, and multimedia content. For instance, over Facebook's Express Backbone, about $80\%$ of flows for cache applications take at least 10 seconds to complete \cite{social_inside}. Besides, the volume of inter-DC traffic for replication of content and data, which generates many long flows, has been growing at a fast pace \cite{facebook-express-backbone}.
In general, flows are generated by different applications at unknown times to move data across the datacenters. Therefore, we assume that flows can arrive at the inter-DC network at any time and no knowledge of future flow arrivals. Every flow is specified with a source, a destination, an arrival time, and its total volume of data. The Flow Completion Time (FCT) of a flow is the time from its arrival until its completion.
We focus on minimizing the completion times of long flows which is a critical performance metric as it can significantly affect the overall application performance or considerably improve users' quality of experience. For example, in cloud applications such as Hadoop, moving data faster across datacenters can reduce the overall data processing time. As another example, moving popular multimedia content quickly to a regional datacenter via replication allows improved user experience for many local users. To attain this goal, routing and scheduling need to be considered together which can lead to a complex discrete optimization problem. Here, we only address the routing problem, that is, choosing a fixed path for an incoming flow given the network topology and the currently ongoing flows while making no assumptions on the traffic scheduling policy. We focus on single path routing which mitigates the undesirable effects of packet reordering.
Assuming no knowledge of future flow arrivals and no constraints on the network traffic scheduling policy, we propose to minimize the worst-case completion time of every incoming flow given the network topology, the currently ongoing flows' paths, and their remaining number of data units. For any given scheduling policy, we route the flows to minimize the worst-case flow completion time. We refer to this routing approach as the Best Worst-case Routing (BWR).
\subsection{System Model} \label{model}
We consider a general network topology with bidirectional links and equal capacity of one for all edges and assume an online scenario where flows arrive at unknown times in the future and are assigned a fixed path as they arrive. Each flow is divided into many equal size pieces (e.g., IP datagrams) which we refer to as data units. We also assume knowledge of the flow size (i.e., number of a flow's data units) for the new flow and the remaining flow size for all ongoing flows. Given an index $i$, every flow $F_i$ is defined with a source $s_i$, a destination $t_i$, an arrival time $\alpha_i$, and a total volume of data $\mathcal{V}_i$. In addition, each flow is associated with a path $P_i$, a finish time $\beta_i$ which is the time of delivery of its last data unit, and a completion time $c_i = \beta_i - \alpha_i$. Finally, at any moment, the total number of remaining data units of $F_i$ is $\mathcal{V}^r_i \le \mathcal{V}_i$.
Similar to multiple existing inter-DC networks \cite{b4, facebook-express-backbone, swan-backbone}, we assume the availability of logically centralized control over the network routing. A controller can maintain information on the currently ongoing long flows with their remaining data units and perform routing decisions for an incoming long flow upon arrival.
We employ a slotted timeline model where at each timeslot a single data unit can traverse any path in the network. In other words, we assume a zero propagation and queuing latency which we justify by focusing only on long flows. Given this model, if multiple flows have a shared edge, only one of them can transmit during a timeslot. We say two data units are competing if they belong to flows that share a common edge. Depending on the scheduling policy that is used, these data units may be sent in different orders but never at the same time. Also, if two flows with pending data units use non-overlapping paths, they can transmit their data units at the same time if no other flow with a common edge with either one of these flows is transmitting at the same timeslot.
\subsection{Definition of Best Worst-case Routing}
We aim to reduce long flows' completion times with no assumption on the scheduling policy for transmission of data units. To achieve this goal, we propose the following routing technique referred to as Best Worst-case Routing (BWR):
\vspace{0.5em}
\textbf{Problem 1.} \textit{Given a network topology $G(V,E)$ and the set of ongoing flows $\pmb{\mathrm{F}}=\{F_i, 1 \le i \le N\}$, we want to assign a path $P_{N+1}$ to the new flow $F_{N+1}$ so that the worst-case completion time of $F_{N+1}$, i.e., $\max(c_{N+1})$ is minimized.}
\vspace{0.5em}
Assuming no knowledge of future flows and given the described network model, since only a single data unit can get through any edge per timeslot, the worst-case completion time of a flow happens when the data units of all the flows that share at least one edge with the new flow's path go sequentially and before the last data unit of the new flow is transmitted. Therefore, Problem 1 can be reduced to the following graph optimization problem which aims to minimize the number of competing data units with $F_{N+1}$.
\vspace{0.5em}
\textbf{Problem 2.} \textit{Given a network topology $G(V,E)$ where every edge $e \in E$ is associated with a set of flows $\pmb{\mathcal{\mathrm{F}}}_e$ (that is, $e \in P_{i}, \forall F_i \in \pmb{\mathcal{\mathrm{F}}}_e$), the set of ongoing flows $\pmb{\mathrm{F}}=\{F_i, 1 \le i \le N\}$, and an incoming flow $F_{N+1}$, we want to find a minimum weight path $P_{N+1}$ where the weight of any path $P$ from $s_{N+1}$ to $t_{N+1}$ is computed as follows:}
\begin{equation}
W_{P} = \sum_{\{1 \le i \le N ~\vert~ F_i~\in~\{\cup_{e \in P}~\pmb{\mathcal{\mathrm{F}}}_e\}\}} \mathcal{V}^r_i \label{eq1}
\end{equation}
\vspace{0.5em}
\textbf{Proposition 1.} \textit{Assuming no knowledge of future flow arrivals, $P_{N+1}$ selected by solving Problem 2 minimizes the worst-case completion time of $F_{N+1}$ regardless of the scheduling policy used for transmission of data units.}
\vspace{0.5em}
\textbf{\textit{Proof.}} $P_{N+1}$ is chosen to minimize the maximum number of data units ahead of $F_{N+1}$ given the knowledge of ongoing flows' remaining data units which minimizes the worst-case $\beta_{N+1}$, that is, the maximum number of timeslots the last data unit of $F_{N+1}$ has to wait before it can be sent. Since $\alpha_{N+1}$ is fixed, this minimizes $\max(c_{N+1})$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{example.jpg}
\caption{Example of routing a new flow $F_4$} \label{fig:example}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.5em}
\textbf{Example:} Consider the scenario shown in Figure \ref{fig:example}. A new flow $F_4$ with 3 data units has arrived and has two options of sharing an edge with $F_1$ that has 4 remaining data units (path 1) or sharing edges with $\{F_2, F_3\}$ which have a total of 6 remaining data units (path 2). Our approach tries to minimize the worst-case completion time of $F_4$ given ongoing flows. If path 1 is chosen, the worst case completion time of $F_4$ will be 7 while with path 2 it will be 9 and therefore, the logically centralized network controller will select path 1 for $F_4$. The worst-case completion times are not affected by the scheduling policy and are independent of it. Also, the fact that $F_2$ has three common edges with path 2 and $F_3$ has two common edges with path 2 does not affect the worst-case completion time of $F_4$ on path 2.
\subsection{BWR Heuristic ({\sf{BWRH}})}
The path weight assignment used in Problem 2 is not edge-decomposable. Finding a minimum weight path for $F_{N+1}$ is NP-Hard and requires examining all paths from $s_{N+1}$ to $t_{N+1}$.\footnote{Please see Appendix \ref{chapter_bwr_hardness} for proof.} We propose a fast heuristic here, called {\sf{BWRH}}, that finds an approximate solution to Problem 2. Algorithm \ref{bwrh} shows our proposed approach to finding a path $P_{N+1}$ for $F_{N+1}$. At every iteration, the algorithm finds the minimum weight path from $s_{N+1}$ to $t_{N+1}$ with at most $K$ hops by computing the weight of every such path according to Eq. \ref{eq1}. The algorithm starts by searching all the minimum hop paths from $s_{N+1}$ to $t_{N+1}$ and finding the weight of the minimum weight path among such paths. It then increases the number of maximum hops allowed (i.e., $K$) by one, extending the search space to more paths. This process continues until the weight of the minimum weight path with at most $K$ hops is the same as $K-1$, i.e., there is no gain while increasing the number of hops.
The termination condition used in {\sf{BWRH}}~may prevent us from searching long paths. Therefore, if the optimal path is considerably longer than the minimum hop path, it is possible that the algorithm terminates before it reaches the optimal path. Let us call the optimal path $P_o$ and the path selected with our heuristic $P_h$. The optimality gap, defined as $\frac{W_{P_h} - W_{P_{o}}}{W_{P_{o}}}$, is highly dependant on the number of remaining data units of ongoing flows. We find that the worst-case optimality gap can be generally unbounded. However, it is highly unlikely, in general, for the optimal path to be long as having more edges increases the likelihood of sharing edges with more ongoing flows which increases the weight of the path. We will later confirm this intuition through empirical evaluations and show that {\sf{BWRH}}~provides solutions with an average optimality gap of less than a quarter of percent.
\SetAlgoVlined
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{{\sf{BWRH}}} \label{bwrh}
\SetKw{KwBy}{by}
\SetKwProg{FindPath}{FindPath}{}{}
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwIn{$F_{N+1}$, $G(V,E)$, $P_i,\mathcal{V}^r_i,1 \le i \le N$}
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwOut{$P_{N+1}$}
\nonl\hrulefill
\vspace{0.4em}
$K \gets$ $\#$hops on the minimum hop path from $s_{N+1}$ to $t_{N+1}$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
$W_{min}^K \gets$ Weight of the minimum weight path from $s_{N+1}$ to $t_{N+1}$ with at most $K$ hops by examining all such paths\;
\vspace{0.4em}
\Repeat{$W_{min}^{K} \ge W_{min}^{K-1}$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
$K \gets K+1$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
Compute $W_{min}^K$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
}
\vspace{0.4em}
$P_{N+1} \gets$ The minimum weight path from $s_{N+1}$ to $t_{N+1}$ with at most $K-1$ hops (if multiple minimum weight paths exist, choose the one with minimum hops)\;
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Application to Real Network Scenarios}
We discuss how {\sf{BWRH}}~can be used to find a path for an incoming flow on a real network assuming a uniform link capacity. We can use the same topology as the actual topology as input to {\sf{BWRH}}. Since we focus on long flows for which the transmission time is significantly larger than both propagation and queuing latency along existing paths, it is reasonable to ignore their effect in routing (hence the assumption that these values are zero in \S \ref{model}). Next, assuming that all data units are of the same size, we can use the total number of remaining bytes per ongoing flow in place of the number of remaining data units as it does not affect the selected path. In practice, some data units may be smaller than the underlying network's MTU, which for the long flows with many data units, has minimal effect on the selected path. Once {\sf{BWRH}}~selects a path, the network's forwarding state is updated accordingly to route the new flow's traffic, for example, using SDN \cite{b4, tempus}.
In general, network traffic is a mix of short and long flows. Since our dissertation targets the long flows, routing of short flows will not be affected and could be done considering the propagation and queuing latency. Incoming long flows can be routed according to the knowledge of current long flows while ignoring the effect of short flows.
\subsection{Evaluations} \label{bwrh_eval}
We considered two flow size distributions of light-tailed (Exponential) and heavy-tailed (Pareto) and considered Poisson flow arrivals with the rate of $\lambda$. We also assumed an average flow size of $\mu$ data units with a maximum of 500 data units along with a minimum size of 2 data units for the heavy-tailed distribution. We considered the scheduling policies of First Come First Serve (FCFS), Shortest Remaining Processing Time (SRPT) and Fair Sharing based on max-min fairness \cite{max-min-fairness}.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Topologies:} We used GScale \cite{b4} with 12 nodes and 19 edges, AGIS \cite{agis} with 25 nodes and 30 edges, ANS \cite{ans} with 18 nodes and 25 edges, AT\&T North America \cite{att} with 25 nodes and 56 edges, and Cogent \cite{cogent} with 197 nodes and 243 edges. We assumed bidirectional edges with a uniform capacity of 1 data unit per time unit for all of these topologies.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Schemes:} We considered three schemes besides {\sf{BWRH}}. The \textit{Shortest Path (Min-Hop)} approach simply selects a fixed shortest hop path from the source to destination per flow. The \textit{Min-Max Utilization} approach selects a path that has the minimum value of maximum utilization across all paths going from the source to the destination. This approach has been extensively used in the traffic engineering literature \cite{tvlakshman, tempus}. The \textit{Shortest Path (Random-Uniform)} selects a path randomly with equal probability across all existing paths which are at most one hop longer than the shortest hop path.
\begin{figure}[b]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{exp0_emb.jpg}
\caption{{\sf{BWRH}}'s optimality gap for $\lambda = 10$ and $\mu = 50$ computed for 1000 flow arrivals.} \label{fig:exp0}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\subfigure[AT\&T Topology \cite{att}]
{
\includegraphics[width=0.83\textwidth]{exp2_bwrh_att_emb.pdf}
}
\\
\subfigure[Cogent Topology \cite{cogent}]
{
\includegraphics[width=0.83\textwidth]{exp2_bwrh_cogent_emb.pdf}
}
\\
\subfigure[GScale Topology \cite{b4}]
{
\includegraphics[width=0.83\textwidth]{exp2_bwrh_gscale_emb.pdf}
}
\\
\subfigure[ANS Topology \cite{ans}]
{
\includegraphics[width=0.83\textwidth]{exp2_bwrh_ans_emb.pdf}
}
\caption{Online routing techniques by flow scheduling policy assuming $\lambda=1$, $\mu=50$, and various topologies over 500 time units. All simulations were repeated $20$ times and the average results have been reported along with standard deviations.} \label{fig:exp2}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{{\sf{BWRH}}'s Optimality Gap:} In Figure \ref{fig:exp0} we compute the optimality gap of solutions found by {\sf{BWRH}}~over three different topologies and under two traffic patterns. The optimal solution was computed by taking into account all existing paths and finding the minimum weight path on topologies of GScale, AGIS, and ANS. We also implemented a custom branch and bound approach which would require less computation time with a small number of ongoing flows (i.e., $< 20$ in our setting) and an intractable amount of time for a large number of ongoing flows (i.e., $> 30$ in our setting). According to the results, the average gap is less than $0.25\%$ over all experiments. We could not perform this experiment on larger topologies as computing the optimal solution would take an intractable amount of time.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Effect of Scheduling Policies:} In Figure \ref{fig:exp2}, we fixed the flow arrival rate to 1 and mean flow size to 50 and tried various scheduling policies under the four topologies of AT\&T North America, Cogent, GScale, and ANS. All simulations were repeated 20 times and the standard deviation for each instance has been reported. The minimum value normalizes each group of bars. We see that {\sf{BWRH}}~is consistently better than other schemes regardless of the scheduling policy used. We can also see that compared to each other, the performance of other schemes varies considerably with the scheduling policy applied. To quantify, {\sf{BWRH}}~provides up to $3.5\times$ and $2\times$ better mean and tail completion times than the other schemes across all scenarios on average, respectively.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Running Time:} We implemented Algorithm \ref{bwrh} in Java using the JGraphT library. To exhaustively find all paths with at most $K$ hops, we used the class \texttt{AllDirectedPaths} in JGraphT. We performed simulations while varying $\lambda$ from 1 to 10 and $\mu$ from 5 to 50 over 1000 flow arrivals per experiment which covers both lightly and heavily loaded regimes. We also experimented with all the four topologies pointed to earlier, both traffic patterns of light-tailed and heavy-tailed, and all three scheduling policies of FCFS, SRPT, and Fair Sharing. The maximum running time of Algorithm \ref{bwrh} was $222.24$ milliseconds, and the average of maximum running time across all experiments was $27$ milliseconds. This latency can be considered negligible given the time needed to complete long flows once they are routed.
\clearpage
\section{A Faster BWR Heuristic ({\sf{BWRHF}})}
In the previous section, we showed that even for large topologies, {\sf{BWRH}}~is a fast heuristic. Even so, the tail latency associated with finding a path can be hundreds of milliseconds. To be able to apply BWR to shorter flows, we propose a heuristic called {\sf{BWRHF}}~that runs much faster than {\sf{BWRH}}~with the caveat that its solutions are on average farther from the optimal.
{\sf{BWRHF}}~is based on Dijkstra's algorithm and works by simply assigning weights to edges of the inter-DC graph and selecting a minimum weight path. Despite its simplicity, empirical evaluations show its significant and consistent gains. Algorithm \ref{bwrh2} shows our proposed approach to finding a path $P_{N+1}$ for $F_{N+1}$. The coefficient $\epsilon$ allows us to select the shortest hop path in case there are multiple paths with the same weight.
\SetAlgoVlined
\begin{algorithm}[ht]
\caption{{\sf{BWRHF}}} \label{bwrh2}
\SetKw{KwBy}{by}
\SetKwProg{FindPath}{FindPath}{}{}
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwIn{$F_{N+1}$, $G(V,E)$, $P_i,\mathcal{V}^r_i,1 \le i \le N$, and $0 < \epsilon \ll 1$}
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwOut{$P_{N+1}$}
\nonl\hrulefill
\vspace{0.4em}
Assign edge weights, $W_e = (\sum_{F_i \in \pmb{\mathcal{\mathrm{F}}}_e} \mathcal{V}^r_i) + \epsilon$, $\forall e \in E$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
$P_{N+1} \gets$ Find a minimum weight (shortest) path from the source to the destination of $F_{N+1}$\;
\end{algorithm}
We will find the worst-case optimality gap for {\sf{BWRHF}}~based on the number of data units of flows already in the system. Without loss of generality, let us assume that flows $F_i,1 \le i \le N$ have been sorted by their remaining data units from the smallest ($F_1$) to the largest ($F_N$). Let us call the optimal path $P_o$ and the path selected with our heuristic $P_h$.
\vspace{0.5em}
\textbf{Theorem 1.} \textit{$\frac{W_{P_h}}{W_{P_{o}}} \le \frac{\sum_{1 \le i \le N} \mathcal{V}^r_i}{\mathcal{V}^r_1}$.}
\vspace{0.5em}
\textit{\textbf{Proof.}} In case there exists a path with weight of zero from $s_{N+1}$ to $t_{N+1}$, Algorithm \ref{bwrh2} and the optimal solution will both choose a path with weight of zero. In case the weight of the optimal path is greater than zero, the quality of paths selected by Algorithm \ref{bwrh2} is highly correlated with the existing flows, their remaining data units and paths, and the network topology. We construct a simple example, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:worstcase_dijkstra}, that obtains the worst-case optimality gap. There are two possible paths, $P_1$ and $P_2$, for $F_{N+1}$. Let us choose the number of intermediate nodes $M$ on $P_2$ so that $M > \frac{\sum_{1 \le i \le N} \mathcal{V}^r_i}{\mathcal{V}^r_1}$. Apparently, from $S$ to $T$, the optimal solution for Problem 2 is $P_2$ with a total weight of $\mathcal{V}^r_1$. However, Algorithm \ref{bwrh2} will choose $P_1$ with a total weight of $\sum_{1 \le i \le N} \mathcal{V}^r_i$. This represents the worst-case as the weight of optimal path is the minimum and the weight of the chosen path is the maximum.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{worst_case_path_bwr_dijkstra.pdf}
\caption{Worst-case routing scenario} \label{fig:worstcase_dijkstra}
\end{figure}
The worst-case optimality gap is highly dependant on the remaining flow data units and can potentially be large. However, the worst-case scenario is highly unique. We will show, through experiments, that Algorithm \ref{bwrh2} offers close to optimal solutions under different traffic patterns and network loads.
\subsection{Evaluations} \label{bwrhf_eval}
We performed extensive simulations to compare the two schemes of {\sf{BWRH}}, {\sf{BWRHF}} and an exact implementation of BWR using exhaustive search by finding and evaluating all existing paths between the source and destination of every incoming flow. We used the same simulation parameters and topologies discusses in \S \ref{bwrh_eval}. We compared the earlier schemes with respect to network load and scheduling policies.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{{\sf{BWRHF}}'s Performance by Network Load:} In Figures \ref{fig:exp_bwrhf_1} and \ref{fig:exp_bwrhf_2}, we explore the effect of load on the mean and tail completion times of various schemes considering the fair sharing policy. We consider multiple topologies with a different number of nodes and multiple degrees of connectivity. We see that regardless of incoming load (i.e., for different values of $\lambda$), all schemes offer close performance values. The performance gap is affected by both topology and load. We see a negligible difference in performance under both GScale and AT\&T topologies. For the topologies of Cogent, AGIS, and ANS, we observe that performance differs by up to 35\% across the schemes in a couple of cases. We also understand that although more straightforward, {\sf{BWRHF}}~offers better completion times in almost all instances. Knowing that BWR itself is a greedy online approach, this can be explained by noticing that making sub-optimal decisions for new flows as they arrive (i.e., the case for {\sf{BWRHF}}), can help future flows perform better in many cases. Since we evaluate the performance by looking at system-wide metrics (i.e., mean and tail flow completion times), it is reasonable to make sub-optimal decisions for routing of a new flow upon its arrival if that potentially helps the future flows, which we are unaware of, perform better and hence give us a better system-wide performance. For example, while the exact BWR implementation might choose a long path with minimum outstanding data units for a new flow, doing so might consume considerable network capacity due to many edges. Selecting a shorter path with marginally more data units can save more network bandwidth over extended periods and allow future flows to complete faster. Besides, it should be noted that the approach we took in Eq \ref{eq1} for computing the worst-case completion time of a new flow may overshoot, that is, the worst-case may be larger than necessary. This could happen as edge-disjoint flows that intersect with a path for the new flow may be able to transmit their data units in parallel. Computing tighter bounds on the worst-case, however, requires taking into account the dependencies of current flows and so can be computationally intensive in general.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{{\sf{BWRHF}}'s Performance by Scheduling Policy:} In Figures \ref{fig:exp_bwrhf_3} and \ref{fig:exp_bwrhf_4}, we explore the effect of scheduling policies of SRPT and FCFS on the mean and tail completion times of various schemes.\footnote{The effect of the fair sharing policy was already discussed in Figures \ref{fig:exp_bwrhf_1} and \ref{fig:exp_bwrhf_2}.} Again, we observe that the straightforward heuristic of {\sf{BWRHF}}~performs well compared to {\sf{BWRH}}~and the exact BWR implementation. We also see that under the heavy-tailed distribution of flow sizes, the effect of scheduling policies is more obvious. We see little difference in the performance of different schemes over all the topologies given different scheduling policies. In most cases, we see that {\sf{BWRHF}}~performs little better (i.e., up to 10\%) than {\sf{BWRH}}. For a few scenarios, {\sf{BWRHF}}~performs little worse (i.e., up to 15\%). The same two arguments discussed in the effect of network load above also applies to why this may be the case. In Figures \ref{fig:exp_bwrhf_5}, \ref{fig:exp_bwrhf_6} and \ref{fig:exp_bwrhf_7}, we compare {\sf{BWRH}}~and {\sf{BWRHF}}~with two other schemes of path selection that we earlier used in \S \ref{bwrh_eval}. We observe that for multiple scheduling policies, flow size distributions, and topologies, the two heuristics of {\sf{BWRH}}~and {\sf{BWRHF}}~perform almost equally well and better than the other schemes, i.e., up to $2.6\times$ and $2.1\times$ better in mean and tail completion times, respectively.
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\subfigure[Light-tailed Traffic]
{
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp_bwrhf_1_light_emb.pdf}
}
\\
\subfigure[Heavy-tailed Traffic]
{
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp_bwrhf_1_heavy_emb.pdf}
}
\caption{Comparison of mean and tail flow completion times for the three implementations of BWR for the three topologies of GScale \cite{b4}, AGIS \cite{agis} and ANS \cite{ans}. Exhaustive search finds all possible paths between the end-points and then finds a minimum weight path. We considered $\mu = 50$ data units and performed the simulation over 500 time units. All simulations were repeated 20 times and the average results have been reported. We applied the Fair Sharing policy based on max min fairness which is most widely used.} \label{fig:exp_bwrhf_1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\subfigure[Light-tailed Traffic]
{
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp_bwrhf_2_light_emb.pdf}
}
\\
\subfigure[Heavy-tailed Traffic]
{
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp_bwrhf_2_heavy_emb.pdf}
}
\caption{Comparison of mean and tail flow completion times for the three implementations of BWR over two large topologies of AT\&T \cite{att} and Cogent \cite{cogent}. We excluded exhaustive search as it would take intractable amount of time for the topologies considered here. We considered $\mu = 50$ data units and performed the simulation over 500 time units. All simulations were repeated 20 times and the average results have been reported. We also applied the Fair Sharing scheduling policy based on max min fairness which is most widely used.} \label{fig:exp_bwrhf_2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\subfigure[Light-tailed Traffic]
{
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp_bwrhf_4_light_emb.pdf}
}
\\
\subfigure[Heavy-tailed Traffic]
{
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp_bwrhf_4_heavy_emb.pdf}
}
\caption{Comparison of mean and tail flow completion times for the three implementations of BWR for the three topologies of GScale \cite{b4}, AGIS \cite{agis} and ANS \cite{ans}. Exhaustive search finds all possible paths between the end-points and then finds a minimum weight path. We considered $\lambda = 1$ and $\mu = 50$ data units and performed the simulation over 500 time units. All simulations were repeated 20 times and the average results are reported.} \label{fig:exp_bwrhf_3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\subfigure[Light-tailed Traffic]
{
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp_bwrhf_3_light_emb.pdf}
}
\\
\subfigure[Heavy-tailed Traffic]
{
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp_bwrhf_3_heavy_emb.pdf}
}
\caption{Comparison of mean and tail flow completion times for the three implementations of BWR over two large topologies of AT\&T \cite{att} and Cogent \cite{cogent}. We excluded exhaustive search as it would take intractable amount of time for the topologies considered here. We considered $\lambda = 1$ and $\mu = 50$ data units and performed the simulation over 500 time units. All simulations were repeated 20 times and the average results have been reported.} \label{fig:exp_bwrhf_4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\subfigure[AT\&T Topology \cite{att}]
{
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp_2_extended_att_emb.pdf}
}
\\
\subfigure[Cogent Topology \cite{cogent}]
{
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp_2_extended_cogent_emb.pdf}
}
\caption{Online routing techniques by flow scheduling policy assuming $\lambda=1$, $\mu=50$, and AT\&T and Cogent topologies over 500 time units. All simulations were repeated $20$ times and the average results have been reported along with standard deviations.} \label{fig:exp_bwrhf_5}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
~~~~~~~\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{exp_2_extended_legend.pdf}
\\
\subfigure[GScale Topology \cite{b4}]
{
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp_2_extended_gscale_emb.pdf}
}
\\
\subfigure[ANS Topology \cite{ans}]
{
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp_2_extended_ans_emb.pdf}
}
\caption{Online routing techniques by flow scheduling policy assuming $\lambda=1$, $\mu=50$, and GScale and ANS topologies over 500 time units. All simulations were repeated $20$ times and the average results have been reported along with standard deviations.} \label{fig:exp_bwrhf_6}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
~~~~~~~\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{exp_2_extended_legend.pdf}
\\
\subfigure[AGIS Topology \cite{agis}]
{
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp_2_extended_agis_emb.pdf}
}
\caption{Online routing techniques by flow scheduling policy assuming $\lambda=1$, $\mu=50$, and AGIS topology over 500 time units. All simulations were repeated $20$ times and the average results have been reported along with standard deviations.} \label{fig:exp_bwrhf_7}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{{\sf{BWRHF}}'s Optimality Gap:} In Figure \ref{fig:exp0_fast}, we compute the optimality gap of solutions found by {\sf{BWRHF}}~over three different topologies and under two traffic patterns. The optimal solution was computed by taking into account all existing paths and finding the minimum weight path on topologies of GScale, AGIS, and ANS. We also implemented a custom branch and bound approach which would require less computation time with a small number of ongoing flows (i.e., $< 20$ in our setting) and an intractable amount of time for a large number of ongoing flows (i.e., $> 30$ in our setting). According to the results, while the optimality gap may be large occasionally (i.e., $>50\%$ for $<2\%$ of the incoming flows, not shown), the average gap is less than $5\%$ over all experiments. We could not perform this experiment on larger topologies as computing the optimal solution would take an intractable amount of time.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{exp0_emb_bwr_dijkstra.pdf}
\caption{{\sf{BWRHF}}'s optimality gap for $\lambda = 10$ and $\mu = 50$ computed for 1000 flow arrivals.} \label{fig:exp0_fast}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Running Time:} {\sf{BWRHF}}~aims to find one minimum weight path using Dijkstra's algorithm which is on average much less computationally intensive compared to {\sf{BWRH}}. We implemented Algorithm \ref{bwrh2} in Java using the JGraphT library. We performed simulations while varying $\lambda$ from 1 to 10 and $\mu$ from 5 to 50 over 1000 flow arrivals per experiment which covers both lightly and heavily loaded regimes. We also experimented with all the four topologies pointed to earlier, both traffic patterns of light-tailed and heavy-tailed, and all three scheduling policies of FCFS, SRPT, and Fair Sharing. The maximum running time of Algorithm \ref{bwrh} was $17.88$ milliseconds, and the average of maximum running time across all experiments was $1.38$ milliseconds. This latency is about $10\times$ less than what was observed from {\sf{BWRH}}~under identical circumstances.
\section{Conclusions}
In this chapter, we explored a variety of routing heuristics and showed that the current routing techniques are insufficient for reducing the completion times of inter-DC transfers, even compared to several simple routing heuristics that we discovered. We then presented a new technique for routing based on flow size information, called the Best Worst-case Routing (BWR), to reduce flow completion times. Accordingly, the online routing problem turns into finding a minimum weight path on the topology from the source to the destination where the weight is computed by summing up the number of remaining data units of all the flows that have a common edge with the path. Since this is a hard problem, we developed two fast heuristics with small average optimality gaps. We also discussed how information from a real network scenario could be used as input to our network model to find a path on an actual inter-DC network for an incoming flow.
\clearpage
\chapter{Fast Deadline-based Admission Control for Inter-DC Transfers} \label{chapter_admission_control}
We consider the problem of admission control for point to point inter-DC transfers with deadlines. As the total capacity of inter-DC networks is limited, the purpose of admission control is to only accept new transfers when we can complete them prior to their deadlines while meeting the deadlines of all other transfers already in the system. To achieve this, traffic scheduling is needed for future timeslots because by focusing only on current timeslot we cannot guarantee that admitted transfers will finish before their deadlines \cite{tempus}. Besides, any algorithm used to perform such inter-DC admission control is desired to maximize the transfer admission rate and make efficient use of existing network resources. Speed in processing new transfer requests is another requirement. That is because for large scale applications that have millions of users, large number of transfers may have to be processed and allocated every minute. In this chapter, we propose and discuss a new scheduling policy called As Late As Possible (ALAP) scheduling and combine it with a novel routing policy to perform fast and effective admission control.
\section{Background and Related Work}
There is considerable work on maximizing the number of deadline meeting flows for traffic inside datacenters. These approaches, however, do not perform admission control which leads to wasted bandwidth. In \cite{d2tcp, pdq}, authors propose deadline aware transport protocols which increase the number of transfers that complete prior to their assigned deadlines by adjusting the transmission rate of such transfers based on their deadlines. Also, multiple previous studies have focused on improving the efficiency and performance of inter-DC communications through proper scheduling of transfers. In \cite{tempus}, authors propose TEMPUS which improves fairness by maximizing the minimum portion of transfers delivered to destination before the transfer deadlines. TEMPUS cannot guarantee that admitted transfers are completed prior to their deadlines.
In \cite{amoeba}, authors propose Deadline-based Network Abstraction (DNA) which allows tenants to specify deadlines for transfers, and a system called Amoeba which performs admission control for new inter-DC transfers. When a request is submitted, Amoeba formulates an optimization scenario, performs feasibility checks, and decides whether the new request can be satisfied using available resources. If a transfer cannot be completed prior to its deadline, Amoeba tries to reschedule a subset of previously admitted requests to push traffic further away out of the new request's timeline. The admission process is performed on a first-come-first-served (FCFS) basis and requests are not preempted, that is, the system does not drop a previously admitted request as this can lead to thrashing.
\section{Fast Admission Control on A Network Path}
We discuss a new scheduling approach that allows fast admission control over a single network path. We will extend this idea to general networks in the next section.
\subsection{System Model}
In this section, we consider a simple topology where multiple transfers are scheduled over the same path. We will use the same notation as that in Table \ref{table_var_0}. Assume we are allocating traffic for a timeline starting at $t_{now}$ representing current time and ending at $t_{end}$ which corresponds to the latest deadline for all submitted requests. New requests may be submitted to the scheduler at any time. Every request $R_i$ is identified with two parameters $\mathcal{V}_{R_i}$ and $t_{d_{R_i}}$ representing request size and deadline, respectively. Since all requests are scheduled over the same path, they all have the same source and destination. Requests are instantly allocated upon arrival over timeslots for which $t > t_{now}$. We consider a TES that receivers the inter-DC transfer requests and decides whether they can be admitted. If yes, the TES has to also compute a transmission schedule which determines the rate at which the source node should send packets associated with every transfer per timeslot.
\subsection{Currently Used Approach}
To perform admission control, one can formulate and solve a linear program (LP) involving all current transfers and the new transfer with demand and capacity constraints populated based on link capacities (for the links on the path) and request volumes. We can then attempt to solve this LP. If this LP is feasible, then the transfer can be admitted. This LP has to be solved every time a new request is submitted and can result in changing the allocation of already scheduled requests. The problem with this approach is its high complexity (solving possibly large LPs over and over is computationally inefficient) as the frequency of arrivals increases.
\subsection{As Late As Possible (ALAP) Scheduling}
We propose As Late As Possible Scheduling (ALAP) \cite{rcd}, which is a fast traffic allocation technique that minimizes the time required to perform the admission process. It avoids rescheduling already admitted requests to quickly decide whether a new request can be admitted. It also achieves high utilization and can efficiently use network resources. We present the rules based on which ALAP operates:
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Rule 1:} Similar to previous schemes \cite{amoeba}, preemption is not supported. Preempting a request that is partly transmitted is wasteful. Also, it may result in thrashing if requests are consecutively preempted in favor of future requests.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Rule 2:} To be fast, ALAP does not change the allocation of already allocated traffic unless there is leftover bandwidth in current timeslot ($t_{now}$). In which case, it fetches traffic from the earliest timeslot that is not empty and sends it. This is done until either we fully utilize the current timeslot or there is no more traffic to send.
When a new transfer $R_{new}$ is submitted, ALAP creates a small LP, only involving the new request, to schedule it. The number of variables in this LP is $(t_{d_{R_{new}}} - t_{now})$. Assume the amount of bandwidth allocated to new transfer at time $t$ is $f^{new}_{P}(t)$ and $C - B(t)$ is the residual capacity on the path at timeslot $t$ assuming a path capacity of $C = \min_{e \in P}(C_e)$ and available bandwidth of $B(t) = \min_{e \in P}(B_e(t)), \forall t$ where $P$ is the path on which we perform admission control. We use the LP of equation \ref{eq:eq2} with the objective function of equation \ref{eq:eq1} to do the allocation. If the following LP does not yield a feasible solution, we reject the request.
\begin{align}
& U(R_{new}) \triangleq \sum_{t=t_{now}+1}^{t_{d_{R_{new}}}} t~f^{new}_{P}(t) \label{eq:eq1} \\
& \max (U(R_{new})) \\
& \sum_{t = t_{now}+1}^{t_{d_{R_{new}}}} f^{new}_{P}(t) = \mathcal{V}_{R_{new}} \\
& 0 \le f^{new}_{P}(t) \le C - B(t), ~~~ t_{now} < t \le t_{d_{R_{new}}} \label{eq:eq2}
\end{align}
\vspace{0.5em}
Now consider a scenario where transfers $R_1, R_2, ~... ~ R_K$ arrive at the network in order to be allocated on path $P$. We show that upon arrival of $R_k, ~ 1 \le k \le K$, ALAP allocation for previously admitted requests is so that we cannot increase the chance of admission for $R_k$ by rearranging the allocation of already allocated requests (previous $k - 1$ requests). Recall that the deadline of $R_k$ is shown as $t_{d_{R_k}}$ and at any time $t$, the latest deadline of all admitted requests is $t_{end}$.
\vspace{0.5em}
\textbf{Theorem 1.} If we draw a vertical line at time $t_{d_{R_k}} \le t_{end}$ in our traffic allocation, it is not possible to increase the free space behind the line by moving traffic from left side of the line ($t \le t_{d_{R_k}}$) to the right side ($t_{end} \ge t > t_{d_{R_k}}$).
\vspace{0.5em}
\textbf{\textit{Proof.}} Let us assume we have the allocation shown in Figure \ref{fig:theorem1} for the first $k-1$ requests on path $P$. To schedule all requests, we used the utility function of equation \ref{eq:eq1} which assigns a higher cost to future timeslots. Let us assume that we can move some traffic volume from left side to the right side. If so, this volume belongs to at least one of the admitted requests and that means we are able to increase the utility for that request further. This is not possible because the LP in equation \ref{eq:eq2} gives the maximum utility. That means if we were to move traffic from left side of the line to the right side it would either result in violation of link capacity constraints or violation of deadline constraints.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{proof1_fixed.pdf}
\caption{A traffic allocation used in proof of Theorem 1.}
\label{fig:theorem1}
\end{figure*}
Now let's assume a new transfer arrives. If it can be allocated using the residual link capacity on all the links of path $P$, then we can admit it. If not, based on Theorem 1, there is no way we can shift already allocated traffic so that we can accommodate the new transfer. Since every new transfer is scheduled closest possible to its deadline, we refer to this policy as As Late As Possible (ALAP) scheduling since traffic cannot be pushed further closer to the deadline.
Figure \ref{ALAP} provides an example of the ALAP allocation technique. As can be seen, when the first transfer is received, the timeline is empty and therefore it is allocated adjacent to its deadline. The second transfer is allocated as close as possible to its deadline. The implication of this type of scheduling is that requests do not use resources until it is absolutely necessary. This means resources will be available to other requests that may currently need them. When the third transfer arrives, resources are free and it just grabs as much bandwidth as needed. If we had allocated the first two requests closer to current time we may have had to either reject the third transfer or move the first two transfers ahead freeing resources for the third transfer (which would have required rescheduling).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ALAP_horizontal.pdf}
\caption{An example of ALAP allocation.}
\label{ALAP}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Simulation Results}
We compare the performance and speed of ALAP with Amoeba \cite{amoeba}. Other schemes, such as \cite{swan, tempus}, are deadline-agnostic and have an effective link utilization of less than $50\%$ \cite{amoeba}. Amoeba, on the other hand, only accepts requests when it can guarantee that the deadline can be fully met.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Setup:} We consider a topology with multiple equal capacity links with a capacity of $1$ attached in a line and traffic is transmitted from one end to the other. We assume that high priority traffic (e.g., user generated, real-time, etc.) takes a fixed amount of bandwidth and allocate the leftover among inter-DC transfer requests. Simulation is performed for $576$ timeslots each lasting $5$ minutes which is equal to $2$ days. We performed the simulations three times and calculated the average.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Metrics:} Fraction of inter-DC transfer requests that were rejected, average link utilization, and average allocation time, in timeslots, per request are the three metrics measured and presented.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Workload:} We generate inter-DC transfers according to a Poisson distribution of rate $1 \le \lambda \le 8$ request(s) per timeslot. The difference between the arrival time of requests and their deadlines follows an exponential distribution with an average of $12$ timeslots. In addition, the demand of each request also follows an exponential distribution with an average of $0.286$ (a maximum of $1$ unit of traffic can be sent in each timeslot on every link).
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{results_1_embedded.pdf}
\caption{Comparison between Amoeba and ALAP scheduling.}
\label{fig:results_1}
\end{figure*}
\vspace{0.5em}
Figure \ref{fig:results_1} shows the aforementioned simulation metrics for both Amoeba and ALAP. As can be seen, both algorithms result in similar rejection rate (and so admission rate) and utilization. However, ALAP achieves the same performance metrics with much less complexity. ALAP is up to $15\times$ faster than Amoeba. Also, the complexity of ALAP grows slowly as the frequency of arrivals increases, i.e., up to $1.6\times$ while arrivals increase by a factor of $8$.
With regards to the trend for time complexity as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:results_1}, when the request arrival rate is small, most of the capacity is left unused. Therefore, Amoeba does not have to move already allocated requests to push in a new one. As the arrival rate increases, we see a higher utilization. Starting the arrival rate of $4$, utilization grows close to $1$ and we can see a huge jump in the time complexity of Amoeba (by a factor of $3.7\times$). That is because Amoeba has to move around multiple already allocated requests to push in the new request.
For an arrival rate of $8$ requests per timeslot, we see that both algorithms drop almost half of the requests. This can happen as a result of capacity loss in the network. For example, when a datacenter is connected using only two links and one of them fails for a few timeslots. While Amoeba can get really slow, ALAP scheduling is able to handle such situations almost as fast as when there is low link utilization.
\section{Application of ALAP over General Network Topologies} \label{section_dcroute}
We empirically showed that ALAP can speed up the allocation process by allowing new transfers to be scheduled only considering the residual bandwidth on the edges of a path $P$ which results in creation of much smaller LPs. In this section, we consider the routing problem in addition to the ALAP scheduling policy for admission control over a general network. We focus on single path routing and develop a solution called DCRoute \cite{dcroute}.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Minimizing Packet Reordering:} Avoiding packet reordering allows data to be instantly delivered to applications upon arrival of packets. In addition, inter-DC networks have characteristics similar to WAN networks (including asymmetric link delays and large delays for links that connect distant locations) for which multiplexing packets over different paths has been shown to considerably degrade TCP performance \cite{wan-reordering}. Putting out of order packets and segments back in order can be expensive in terms of memory and CPU usage, especially when transmitting at high rates.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Admission Control over General Networks:} In contrast to routing over a single path, for a network, each request is routed on multiple links and there are many ways to schedule requests ALAP. If some links are used by multiple requests routed on different edges, how traffic is allocated on common links can affect multiple other links which will affect the requests that use those links later on. We propose a routing heuristic that allows us to select a least loaded path for a new request over which we attempt to allocate a new request. We will show that using the ALAP scheduling policy, we can greatly speed up the allocation process while sacrificing negligible performance.
\subsection{System Model}
At any given moment, we have two parameters $t_{now}$ and $t_{end}$ which represent current timeslot and the latest deadline among all current transfers, respectively. A request arriving sometime in timeslot $t$ can be allocated starting timeslot $t+1$ since the schedule and transmission rate for current timeslot is already decided and broadcast into all senders. Also, at any moment $t$, $t_{now}$ is the timeslot that includes $t$ (current timeslot), and $t_{now}+1$ is the next available timeslot for allocation (next timeslot). A request is considered \textbf{active} if it is admitted into the system and its deadline has not passed yet. Some active requests may take many timeslots to complete transmission. The total unsatisfied demand of an active request is called the residual demand of that request. We will use the same notation as that in Table \ref{table_var_0}. We will define some additional variables in this section as shown in Table \ref{table_var_1}.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Variables used in this chapter in addition to those in Table \ref{table_var_0}} \label{table_var_1}
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{tabular}{ |p{2cm}|p{13cm}| }
\hline
\textbf{Variable} & \textbf{Definition} \\
\hline
\hline
$L_e(t)$ & Total load currently scheduled on edge $e$ prior to and including timeslot $t$ \\
\hline
$L_e$ & Total load currently scheduled on edge $e$ (same as $L_e(t_{now})$) \\
\hline
$\mathcal{V}^{r}_{R_{i}}$ & Current residual demand of request $R_i$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Definition of Edge Load $L_e$ and $L_e(t)$:} We define a new metric called edge load which determines the total remaining volume of traffic per edge for all the transfers that share that edge. This metric provides a measure of how busy a link is expected to be on average over future timeslots. $L_e(t)$ is the total volume of traffic scheduled on an edge prior to and including timeslot $t$. $L_e$ can then be written as $L_e(t_{end})$. For a new request with a deadline of $t_{d_{R_i}}$, it would only make sense for us to consider all the traffic scheduled on edges prior to $t_{d_{R_i}}$, i.e., $L_e(t_{d_{R_i}}), \forall e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_{G}$ is the metric we will use to select a path.
\vspace{0.5em}
Upon arrival of a transfer request, a central controller decides whether it is possible to allocate it considering some criteria that includes the total available bandwidth over future timeslots. If there is not enough room to allocate a request, the request is rejected and can be resubmitted to the system later with a new deadline.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Allocation Problem:} Given active requests $R_1$ through $R_n$ with residual demands $\mathcal{V}^{r}_{R_1}$ to $\mathcal{V}^{r}_{R_n}$ ($0 < \mathcal{V}^{r}_{R_i}, ~ 1 \le i \le n$), is it possible to allocate a new request $R_{n+1}$? If yes, we want to find a valid path over the inter-DC network and a transmission schedule that respects capacity and deadline constraints.
\vspace{0.5em}
There are many ways to formulate this as an optimization problem. We can solve this allocation problem by forming a linear program (LP) considering capacity constraints of the network edges as well as demand constraints of requests while considering a subset of available paths between the source and the destination of new request. We can also formulate an edge-based optimization problem that automatically considers all possible paths. These formulations, however, do not consider the single path routing constraint we have to minimize packet reordering. Adding the single path constraint will turn this into a Mixed Integer Linear Program (MILP) which are in general NP-Hard. If the constructed LP (or MILP) is feasible, the solution will give us a possible allocation. Although this approach maybe straightforward, considering the number of active requests, number of links in network graph, and how far we are planning ahead into the future due to deadlines ($t_{end}$), the resulting LP (or MILP) could be large and may take a long time to solve.
One of the ways to speed up this process is to limit the number of possible paths between every pair of nodes \cite{tempus}, for example, by using only the K-Shortest Paths \cite{amoeba}. Another method to speedup is to limit the number of considered active requests based on some criterion \cite{amoeba} such as having a common edge with the new request on their paths (if we know what path or potential paths we will assign to the new request). It is also possible to use custom iterative methods to solve the resulting LP models faster based on the solutions of previous LP models in a way similar to the water filling process \cite{tempus}.
\subsection{Network-wide ALAP Scheduling}
We do not create an LP model by employing a fast routing heuristic that allows us to select a path according to the total load scheduled on network edges and by trying to allocate new requests only knowing the residual bandwidth on the edges for different timeslots. DCRoute relies on the following three rules.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Rule 1:} A path $P_{i}$ is selected for every request $R_{i}$ upon their arrival based on the total outstanding load on the edges of the candidate paths.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Rule 2:} $R_{i}$ is initially allocated according to the ALAP policy on $P_{i}$.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Rule 3:} If the upcoming timeslot is underutilized, network utilization is maximized by pulling traffic from the closest timeslots into the future.
\vspace{0.5em}
Pulling traffic from closest timeslot into the future to maximize utilization allows the ALAP property of allocation to hold true afterwards. That is, all residual demands will still be allocated as close to their deadlines as possible. Over a network, however, requests with different paths could have common edges which could create complex dependencies that would prevent us from pulling traffic from earliest timeslots with non-zero allocation. This means, to maximize utilization, we may have to pull traffic from later timeslots which might render the ultimate allocation non-ALAP. To fix this, we add a procedure that runs afterwards, scans the timeline, and pushes the allocation forward as much as possible to make it ALAP.
Figure \ref{ex} shows an example of this process. There are three different requests all of which having the same deadline. It is not possible to pull back the green request as the link $E1$ is already occupied. Therefore, we have to pull the orange request (PullBack phase). Afterward, the allocation is not ALAP anymore, so we push the green request toward its deadline (PushForward phase). The final assignment is ALAP, and the utilization of upcoming timeslot is maximum.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{DCRoute_ex.pdf}
\caption{An example of improving utilization (i.e., PullBack phase) while keeping the final allocation ALAP (i.e., PushForward phase).}
\label{ex}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Load-based Dynamic Routing} \label{load_balancing_routing}
The next part is assigning paths to new transfers as they arrive. A transfer from any source to any destination can be generally routed over many paths. To avoid packet reordering, we limit the number of paths per transfer to $1$. In general, one can assign static paths to every new request given the source and the destination just like the K-Shortest Paths approach. However, as we will demonstrate, it is better to assign paths to new requests according to their sizes. To understand why this is important, we created the example of Figure \ref{fig:ROUTING}. By assigning shorter paths to larger transfers, the total capacity usage decreases across the network leaving more room for future requests on average. Such savings can pile up as time goes by with arrival of many transfers. This is especially important if transfer sizes are skewed which is what this study from Facebook confirms \cite{social_inside}.
Next, we would like routing to assign different transfers to different paths as much as possible to balance load across the network. If all transfers are assigned to the shortest path, it will be overloaded and slowed down while there is leftover capacity over some longer paths. As a result, we need a path selection technique that takes into account both load balancing and path assignment according to volumes. A well-established technique is to assign available paths some cost that is calculated as a function of transfer size and path properties and select the path with minimum cost. We propose a straight-forward cost assignment scheme that meets the stated criteria and is quick to compute.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Routing Cost:} Given a new transfer $R_{new}$ and a set of available paths $\mathrm{\textbf{P}}$ where for every path $P \in \mathrm{\textbf{P}}$ path cost $C_P(t)$ is defined as total outstanding load prior to $t$ which is calculated by summing up the total load scheduled on $P$ prior to $t$ if $R_{new}$ were to be put on $P$ considering the new transfer's size $\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}$.
\vspace{0.5em}
Let us assume a graph $G(V,E)$ connecting datacenters with bidirectional links with equal capacity for simplicity. We have variables $L_e(t)$ that represent the total sum of traffic volume scheduled over edge $e$ from time $t_{now}+1$ to $t$ (total load that is scheduled but not sent prior to time $t$). The value of $L_e(t)$ depends on transfer arrivals. As new transfers arrive this value increases on some edges and as we send traffic over time, this value decreases. With this notation, the cost assigned to path $P$ with $\lvert P \rvert$ edges given transfer $R_{new}$ with deadline $t_{d_{R_new}}$ and volume $\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}$ will be:
\begin{equation}
C_P(t) = \sum_{e \in P} L_e(t) + \mathcal{V}_{R_{new}} ~\lvert P \rvert = \sum_{e \in P}(L_e(t) + \mathcal{V}_{R_{new}})
\end{equation}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Routing Objective:} We want to select path $P$ that with minimum value of $C_P(t_{d_{R_{new}}})$ for all valid paths given $R_{new}$. This means selecting the path over which routing $R_{new}$ results in minimum total load (considering $R_{new}$ itself) prior to and including $t_{d_{R_{new}}}$.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Implications:} Since this cost assignment is edge decomposable (i.e., cost of a path is sum of costs of its edges), a path with minimum cost can be simply selected using Dijkstra's shortest path algorithm. For small transfers where $\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}$ is much smaller than $L_e(t_{d_{R_{new}}})$, the total already scheduled load on edges is dominant and as a result the assignment selects paths with minimum total load prior to the new transfer's deadline. If $\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}$ is considerably larger than $L_e(t_{d_{R_{new}}})$ for candidate paths, the cost function leans toward selecting shorter paths to minimize network capacity usage. This is essentially effective for heavy-tailed transfer size distributions. That is, the few enormous transfers will be scheduled on shortest paths while the rest of transfers are distributed across longer paths for load balancing.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{ROUTING.pdf}
\caption{An example of assigning paths to transfers and their total network capacity use assuming that no two transfers should be assigned the same paths for load balancing.}
\label{fig:ROUTING}
\end{figure}
\subsection{DCRoute Algorithm}
Every time a new request is submitted to the system, $t_{end}$ is updated to the latest deadline. We define the \textbf{active window} as the range of timeslots over all edges from time $t_{now}+1$ to $t_{end}$ which are the timeslots DCRoute operates on. DCRoute is made up of four procedures explained in the following.
\SetAlgoVlined
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\small
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwIn{$R_{new}({\cal V}_{R_{new}},S_{R_{new}},D_{R_{new}},t_{d_{R_{new}}})$, $G(V, E)$, $W$, $L_{e}(t)$ and $B_e(t)$, $\forall e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G, t > t_{now}$}
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwOut{Whether $R_{new}$ should be admitted, and a minimum cost path $P$}
\nonl\hrulefill
\vspace{0.4em}
To every edge $e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$, assign cost $L_e(t_{d_{R_{new}}}) + \mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
Find path $P$ by running Dijkstra's algorithm for shortest (minimum cost) path\;
\vspace{0.4em}
$t^{\prime}$ ~$\gets$~ $t_{d_{R_{new}}}$ and $\mathcal{V}^{\prime}$ ~$\gets$~ $\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}$ \;
\vspace{0.4em}
\While{$\mathcal{V}^{\prime} > 0$ \textnormal{\textbf{and}} $t^{\prime} > t_{now}$} {
\vspace{0.4em}
$B_P(t^{\prime})$ ~$\gets$~ $\min_{e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_P}(B_e(t^{\prime}))$ \;
\vspace{0.4em}
Schedule $R_{new}$ on $P$ with rate $\min(B_P(t^{\prime}),\frac{\mathcal{V}^{\prime}}{\omega})$ at timeslot $t^{\prime}$ \;
\vspace{0.4em}
$t^{\prime}$ ~$\gets$~ $t^{\prime}+1$ and $\mathcal{V}^{\prime}$ ~$\gets$~ $(\mathcal{V}^{\prime}-\min(B_P(t^{\prime}),\frac{\mathcal{V}^{\prime}}{\omega}) \times \omega)$ \;
}
\vspace{0.4em}
\Return{\textnormal{$P$ if $\mathcal{V}^{\prime} = 0$, otherwise, reject $R_{new}$}}\;
\caption{Allocate($R_{new}$)} \label{algo_1}
\end{algorithm}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\texttt{Allocate($R_{new}$):} Algorithm \ref{algo_1} is executed upon arrival of a new request $R_{new}$ and performs path selection, admission control and bandwidth allocation. To do so, it assigns a cost of $L_e(t_{d_{R_{new}}}) + \mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}$ to every edge $e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$ of the graph and then runs Dijkstra's algorithm to select the path $P$ with minimum cost. It then tries to schedule transfer $R_{new}$ on $P$ according to the ALAP policy starting from timeslot $t_{d_{R_{new}}}$ backward until $R_{new}$ is completely satisfied. It rejects the request, if there is not enough capacity on $P$ from $t_{now}$ to $t_{d_{R_{new}}}$.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\texttt{PullBack():} This procedure sweeps the timeslots starting $t_{now}+2$ to $t_{end}$ and pulls back traffic to the next timeslot to be scheduled, i.e., $t_{now}+1$. The objective is to maximize network resource utilization. When pulling back traffic, all edges on a transfer's path have to be checked for available capacity and updated together and atomically as we pull traffic back.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\texttt{PushForward():} After pulling some traffic back, it may be possible for some other traffic to be pushed ahead even further to make the allocation ALAP. This procedure scans all future timeslots starting $t_{now}+2$ and makes sure that all demands are allocated ALAP. If not, it moves as much traffic as possible to the future timeslots until all residual demands are ALAP. Note that there may be many ALAP schedules due to spacial and temporal dependencies across transfers. This procedure finds one of such schedules by scanning through time and edges in a fixed order.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\texttt{Walk():} This procedure is executed when the allocation for next timeslot is final. It broadcasts to all datacenters the allocation that is finalized for the next timeslot and adjusts requests' remaining demands accordingly by deducting what is scheduled to be sent from the total demand.
\subsection{Simulation Results}
In this section, we perform simulations to evaluate the performance of DCRoute. We generate synthetic traffic requests with Poisson arrival and input the traffic to both DCRoute and a few other techniques that can be used for deadline-aware traffic allocation. Two metrics are being measured and compared: \textbf{allocation time} and \textbf{fraction of rejected traffic} both of which are desired to be small.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Simulation Parameters:} We used the same traffic distributions as described in \cite{amoeba}. Requests arrive with Poisson distribution of rate $\lambda$. Also, total demand of each request $R$ is distributed exponentially with mean $\frac{1}{8}$ proportional to the maximum transmission volume possible prior to $t_{d_R}$. In addition, the deadline of requests is exponentially distributed for which we assumed a mean of $10$ timeslots. We performed the simulations over $500$ timeslots. We considered a uniform link capacity of $1$ for all edges.
\vspace{0.5em}
We compare DCRoute with the following allocation schemes for all of which we used the same objective function as \cite{amoeba}:
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Global LP:} This technique is the most general and flexible way of allocation which routes traffic over all possible edges. All active requests are considered for all timeslots on all edges creating a potentially large linear program. The solution here gives us a lower bound on traffic rejection rate.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{K-Shortest Paths:} Same as Global LP, however, only the K-Shortest Paths between each pair of nodes are considered in routing. The traffic is allocated using a linear program over such paths. We simulated four cases of $K \in \{1, 3, 5, 7\}$. It is obvious that as $K$ increases, the overall rejection rate will decrease as we have higher flexibility for choosing paths and multiplexing traffic.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Pseudo-Integer Programming (PIP):} In terms of traffic rejection rate, comparing DCRoute with the previous two techniques is not fair as they allow multiplexing packets on multiple paths. The aim of this technique is to find a lower bound on traffic rejection rate when all packets of each request are sent over a single path. To do so, the general way is to create an integer program involving a list of possible paths (maybe all paths) for the new request and fixed paths for requests already allocated. The resulting model would be a non-linear integer program which cannot be solved using standard optimization libraries available. We instead created a number of linear programs each assigning one of the possible K-Shortest Paths for the newly arriving request. We then compare the objective values manually and choose the best possible path. In our implementation, we chose $K = 20$. This $K$ seems to be more than necessary as we saw negligible improvement in traffic rejection rate even when increasing $K$ from $5$ to $7$. Using PIP, the path over which a request is transferred is decided upon admission and does not change afterwards. We implemented two versions of this scheme:
\begin{itemize}
\item Pure Minimum Cost (PMC): We choose the path that results in smallest objective value.
\item Shortest Path, Minimum Cost (SPMC): Amongst all shortest paths that result in a feasible solution and have the least number of hops, we choose the one with smallest objective value.
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Experiment 1: Google's GScale Network}
GScale network \cite{b4} comprised of $12$ nodes and $19$ links connects Google datacenters worldwide. We used the same topology to evaluate DCRoute as well as other allocation schemes. Figure \ref{115} shows the rejection rate of different techniques for different arrival rates from low load ($\lambda=1$) to high load ($\lambda=15$). We have included the schemes that potentially multiplex traffic over multiple paths just to provide a lower bound. Comparing with PMC and SPMC schemes over all arrival rates, DCRoute performs $< 2\%$ worse than the one with minimum rejection rate. Also, compared to all schemes, DCRoute rejects at most $4\%$ more traffic. Figure \ref{115} shows the relative time to process a request using different schemes. This time is calculated dividing the total time to allocate and adjust all requests over all timeslots by the total number of requests. DCRoute is about $3$ orders of magnitude faster than either PMC or SPMC. It should be noted that the rate at which time complexity grows drops as we move toward higher arrival rates since there is less capacity available for new requests and many arriving requests get rejected by failing simple capacity constraint checks.
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{115.pdf}
\caption{Total \% of rejected traffic and relative request processing time for GScale network with 12 nodes and 19 links.}
\label{115}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{520.pdf}
\caption{Total \% of rejected traffic and relative request processing time for networks with different sizes.}
\label{520}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Experiment 2: Network with Variable Size}
We simulated different methods against four networks from $5$ to $20$ nodes: $(N, M)$ $\in$ $\{(5, 7), (10, 17),$ $(15, 27), (20, 37)\}$. In our topology, each node was connected to $3$ or $4$ other nodes at most $2$ hops away. The arrival rate was kept constant at $\lambda=6.0$ for all cases. Figure \ref{520} shows the rejection rate of different schemes for different network sizes. As network size increases, since $\lambda$ is kept constant, the total capacity of network increases compared to the total demand of requests. As a result, for a scheme that multiplexes request traffic over different paths, we expect to see a decrease in rejection rate. For the K-Shortest Paths case with $K \in \{1,3\}$, we see an increase in rejection rate which we think is because these schemes cannot multiplex packets that much. Increasing the network size for these cases can cause more requests to have common links as the network is sparsely connected and create more bottlenecks resulting in a higher rejection rate.
PMC has a high rejection rate for small networks since choosing the minimum cost path might result in selecting longer (more hops) paths that create larger number of bottlenecks due to collision with other requests. Increasing network size, there are more paths to choose from and that results in less bottlenecks and therefore less rejection rate. In contrast, SPMC enforces the selection of paths with smaller number of hops resulting in lower rejection rates for small networks (due to request paths colliding less) and more rejections as network grows due to less diversity of chosen paths.
Compared to these two approaches, DCRoute balances the choice between smaller and longer paths. The assigned path has the least sum of load on the entire path and the least bottleneck load among all such paths. Paths with heavily loaded links and unnecessarily larger number of hops are avoided. As a result, rejection rate compared to $\min($PMC, SPMC$)$ is relatively small ($<3\%$) for all network sizes. Also, as Figure \ref{520} shows, similar to previous simulation, DCRoute is almost three orders of magnitude faster than PIP schemes and more than $200\times$ faster than all considered schemes.
\section{Admission Control with Multipath ALAP Scheduling}
In some scenarios we may be inclined to pay the reordering cost in order to increase the throughput, especially since inter-DC capacity is costly. In case packet reordering is not an issue, we can use multipath routing to increase network throughput and maximize the chances of admission for new transfers with deadlines. According to the ALAP policy, we will need to schedule traffic as close as possible to the deadlines over the multiple paths. That can be done by starting from the deadline on both paths and allocating as much as possible, then moving one timeslot back and allocating as much as possible on both paths, and so on. This has been shown in Figure \ref{fig:mp_dcroute_basics}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{mp_dcroute_basics.png}
\caption{An example of multipath ALAP scheduling: traffic is allocated on edge-disjoint paths from the deadline backward in parallel.}
\label{fig:mp_dcroute_basics}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Multipath Routing}
There are a variety of ways to select multiple paths for new transfers. We focus on application of parallel edge-disjoint paths to increase throughput. The benefit of using edge-disjoint paths is that the traffic for the same transfer will not have to compete with itself over common edges. We explain how multiple paths are selected and name our technique MP-DCRoute.
We want to select paths in a similar way to the approach presented in \ref{load_balancing_routing} which allowed for quick selection of paths while it balanced the load across network edges. To select more than one path with such properties, after finding the first path, we mark all of its edges as deleted and then search for the next path. This way, we are sure to obtain the same good load balancing properties while guaranteeing that the paths are edge-disjoint. We can keep searching for new paths until there are no more paths remain, or we can terminate the search as soon as we find a given number of paths. We combined these two conditions to allow for up to $K$ load balancing paths per transfer where $K$ is a configuration parameter.
The parameter $K$ needs to be selected carefully as using too many parallel paths per transfer can waste bandwidth and exhaust network capacity. That is because as we select more paths, the paths tend to grow longer, or use edges that are heavily loaded. This means that, under light load, using more paths can improve throughput while under heavy load, doing such can quickly saturate the network and lead to rejection of transfers. In general, $K$ can be selected adaptively according to the network's overall load factor. That is, the operators can monitor incoming traffic load and update $K$ accordingly for the new transfers.
\subsection{Simulation Results}
In this section, we perform simulations to evaluate the performance of MP-DCRoute. We generate synthetic traffic requests with Poisson arrival and input the traffic to both MP-DCRoute and DCRoute presented in the previous section. Three metrics are being measured and compared: \textbf{allocation time}, \textbf{fraction of rejected requests} and \textbf{fraction of rejected traffic} all of which are desired to be small.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Simulation Parameters:} We used the same traffic distributions as described in \cite{amoeba}. Requests arrive with Poisson distribution of rate $\lambda$. Also, total demand of each request $R_{new}$ is distributed exponentially with mean $\frac{1}{2}$ proportional to the maximum transmission volume possible prior to $t_{d_{R_{new}}}$. In addition, the deadline of requests is exponentially distributed for which we assumed a mean of $1$ timeslot. We performed the simulations over $1000$ timeslots. We considered a uniform link capacity of $1$ for all edges.
\vspace{0.5em}
We compare the following allocation schemes which are basically single and multipath ALAP scheduling techniques:
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{DCRoute (1 path):} The technique proposed in \S \ref{section_dcroute}. It uses a single path that is selected adaptively according to network load to balance load and minimize packet reordering.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{MP-DCRoute (up to $K$ paths):} We use the technique proposed in this section to select up to $K$ edge-disjoint adaptively selected paths that balance load across the network.
\vspace{0.5em}
We compare DCRoute and MP-DCRoute over three different topologies as shown in Figures \ref{fig:mp_dcroute_gscale}, \ref{fig:mp_dcroute_ans} and \ref{fig:mp_dcroute_cogent}. In terms of the total traffic admitted and the total number of requests admitted, we see that MP-DCRoute does considerably better, i.e., up to $12\%$ more traffic and up to $5\%$ more transfers are admitted to the inter-DC network. We also see that the gain of using multiple paths reduces as we increase the network load by increasing the arrival rate of transfers. Also, we see that all the benefit of using multiple paths is received with $2$ paths and increasing the number of paths to $3$ has virtually no benefit.\footnote{In most cases, using 3 paths instead of 2 hurts the performance.}
We then evaluate the running time of different techniques which is the total computation time to handle all $1000$ timeslots. We see that MP-DCRoute can be between up to $2\times$ to $3\times$ slower than DCRoute which is due to the time needed to find additional paths and schedule traffic over multiple paths per transfer. However, since the total time to process a single request is small,\footnote{In the order of milliseconds.} this should not cause any practical impediments.
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{mp_dcroute_gscale_embedded.pdf}
\caption{Multipath ALAP scheduling over GScale \cite{b4} topology.} \label{fig:mp_dcroute_gscale}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{mp_dcroute_ans_embedded.pdf}
\caption{Multipath ALAP scheduling over ANS \cite{ans} topology.} \label{fig:mp_dcroute_ans}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{mp_dcroute_cogent_embedded.pdf}
\caption{Multipath ALAP scheduling over Cogent \cite{cogent} topology.} \label{fig:mp_dcroute_cogent}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{Conclusions}
In this chapter, we discussed the problem of admission control for inter-DC transfers with deadlines which is an essential problem given that inter-DC networks have limited capacity. Sending traffic without paying attention to deadlines could waste bandwidth as the value of completed transfers past their deadlines may be significantly less. We discussed why current approaches based on linear programming or mixed integer linear programming are not effective in general as they could take a long time to solve and require considerable computing resources. We presented a new scheduling technique called As Late As Possible (ALAP) policy that allows the scheduler to quickly decide whether a new transfer can be admitted on a given path. We then developed an adaptive routing approach that balances load across the network and saves network capacity by routing larger transfers over shorter paths. Finally, we realized that, although using a single path per transfer can minimize packet reordering, which is a desired property, it can also limit the obtainable throughput. We then applied an edge-disjoint multipath routing technique that improves the traffic admitted to the network. We performed extensive simulations to confirm the effectiveness of our approaches showing that our methods can reduce the time needed to perform admission control and compute a valid schedule by orders of magnitude at little or no cost to the total traffic admitted to the inter-DC network.
\clearpage
\chapter{Efficient Point to Multipoint Transfers over Inter-DC Networks} \label{chapter_p2mp_dccast}
As discussed in Chapter \ref{chapter_introduction}, a large volume of inter-DC traffic is due to replication of data and content from one datacenter to multiple other datacenters. We refer to such transfers as Point to Multipoint (P2MP) which have a known sender and set of receivers upon arrival. Also, in general, we do not have knowledge of arrival times for these transfers and have to manage them as they arrive at the network, i.e., in an online fashion.
We consider efficient routing and scheduling of P2MP data transfers, with the objective of minimizing transfer completion times and total network capacity consumption. Using centralized scheduling and load-aware multicast tree selection, we can significantly improve the performance. Our approach is different from traditional multicasting in that we select multicast trees atomically given the source and all the destinations whereas traditional multicasting builds multicast trees incrementally as destinations join. With a global view of network topology and edge load status, it is possible to find near optimal weighted Steiner trees that connect any given source datacenter to its destination datacenters per P2MP transfer. We define appropriate edge weights and select minimum weight Steiner trees which lead to efficient bandwidth utilization of all network edges. To our knowledge, the research set forth, at the time of publication,\footnote{This chapter was originally published in \cite{dccast}.} was the first to explore and study efficient P2MP transfers over inter-DC networks.
\section{Background and Related Work}
A variety of datacenter services replicate content and data from one location to many locations. Table \ref{table_0} provides a brief list of how many replicas are made for some applications. Also, Figure \ref{fig:p2mp_app} offers a list of applications that perform P2MP transfers and gives a short description of why such replication is done.
\begin{table}[t!]
\begin{center}
\caption{Various services that perform data replication.} \label{table_0}
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{tabular}{ |p{4cm}|p{11cm}| }
\hline
\textbf{Service} & \textbf{Replicas} \\
\hline
\hline
Facebook & Across availability regions \cite{rep-facebook}, $\ge 4$ \cite{rep-facebook-2}, for various object types including large machine learning configs \cite{fb-holistic} \\
\hline
CloudBasic SQL Server & Up to $4$ secondary databases with active Geo-Replication (asynchronous) \cite{rep-cloudbasic} \\
\hline
Azure SQL Database & Up to $4$ secondary databases with active Geo-Replication (asynchronous) \cite{rep-azure} \\
\hline
Oracle Directory Server & Up to the number of datacenters owned by an enterprise for regional load balancing of directory servers \cite{rep-oracle-1, rep-oracle-2}\\
\hline
AWS Route $53$ GLB & Across multiple regions and availability zones for global load balancing \cite{route-53} \\
\hline
Youtube & Function of popularity, content potentially pushed to many locations (could be across $\ge33$ datacenters \cite{rep-youtube}) \\
\hline
Netflix & Across $2$ to $4$ availability regions \cite{rep-netflix-regions}, and up to $233$ cache locations distributed globally \cite{rep-netflix-locations} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{p2mp_app.png}
\caption{Applications that generate transfers potentially with multiple destinations.}
\label{fig:p2mp_app}
\end{figure}
One solution is to perform P2MP transfers as multiple independent P2P transfers that are scheduled separately \cite{mbdt_initial, ssnf, netstitcher, postcard, dtb, grease, geo_backup_selection, amoeba, tempus, ecoflow, orchestrating, dcroute}. There may however be more efficient ways, in terms of total bandwidth usage and transfer completion times, to perform P2MP transfers by sending at most one copy of the message across any link given that the source datacenter and destination datacenters are known apriori. In Figure \ref{fig:p2mp_0}, an object $X$ is to be transferred from datacenter $S$ to two $D$ datacenters considering a link throughput of $R$. In order to send $X$ to destinations, one could initiate individual transfers, but that wastes bandwidth and increases delivery time since the link attached to $S$ turns into a bottleneck.
We present an elegant solution using minimum weight Steiner Trees \cite{steiner_tree_problem} (a.k.a., Forwarding Trees, or Multicast Trees) for P2MP transfers that achieves reduced bandwidth usage and tail completion times for receivers. We briefly go over some of the related work in this space and survey their objectives and methods.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{new__p2mp.pdf}
\caption{Inter-DC multicasting can reduce total bandwidth consumption as well as completion times of transfers.}
\label{fig:p2mp_0}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Internet Multicasting:}
A large body of general multicasting approaches have been proposed where receivers can join multicast groups anytime to receive required data and multicast trees are incrementally built and pruned as nodes join or leave a multicast session such as IP multicasting \cite{ip_multicast}, TCP-SMO \cite{tcp-smo} and NORM \cite{norm}. These solutions focus on building and maintaining multicast trees, and do not consider link capacity and other ongoing multicast flows while building the trees.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Multicast Traffic Engineering:}
An interesting work \cite{online_multicast_bw_guarantees} considers the online arrival of multicast requests with a specified bandwidth requirement. The authors provide an elegant solution to find a minimum weight Steiner tree for an arriving request with all edges having the requested available bandwidth. This work assumes a fixed transmission rate per multicast tree, dynamic multicast receivers, and unknown termination time for multicast sessions whereas we consider variable transmission rates over timeslots, fixed multicast receivers, and deem a multicast tree completed when all its receivers download a specific volume of data. MTRSA \cite{sdn_multicast} considers a similar problem to \cite{online_multicast_bw_guarantees} but in an offline scenario where all multicast requests are known beforehand while taking into account the number of available forwarding rules per switch. MPMC \cite{MPMC_2013, MPMC_2016} maximizes the throughput for a single multicast transfer by using multiple parallel multicast trees and coding techniques. None of these works aims to minimize the completion times of receivers while considering the total bandwidth consumption.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Datacenter Multicasting:}
A variety of solutions have been proposed for minimizing congestion across the intra-datacenter network by selecting multicast trees according to link utilization. Datacast \cite{datacast} sends data over edge-disjoint Steiner trees found by pruning spanning trees over various topologies of FatTree, BCube, and Torus. AvRA \cite{avalanche} focuses on tree and FatTree topologies and builds minimum edge Steiner trees that connect the sender to all receivers as they join. MCTCP \cite{mctcp} reactively schedules flows according to link utilization. These works do not aim at minimizing the completion times of receivers and ignore the total bandwidth consumption.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Overlay Multicasting:}
With overlay networks, end-hosts can form a multicast forwarding tree in the application layer. RDCM \cite{rdcm} populates backup overlay networks as nodes join and transmits lost packets in a peer-to-peer fashion over them. NICE \cite{nice} creates hierarchical clusters of multicast peers and aims to minimize control traffic overhead. AMMO \cite{AMMO} allows applications to specify performance constraints for selection of multi-metric overlay trees. DC2 \cite{dc2} is a hierarchy-aware group communication technique to minimize cross-hierarchy communication. SplitStream \cite{split-stream} builds forests of multicast trees to distribute load across many machines. BDS \cite{overlay_hkust} generates an application-level multicast overlay network, creates chunks of data, and transmits them in parallel over bottleneck-disjoint overlay paths to the receivers. Due to limited knowledge of underlying physical network topology and condition (e.g., utilization, congestion or even failures), and limited or no control over how the underlying network routes traffic, overlay routing has limited capability in managing the total bandwidth usage and distribution of traffic to minimize completion times of receivers. In case such control and information are provided, for example by using a cross-layer approach, overlay multicasting can be used to realize solutions such as those presented in this dissertation.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Reliable Multicasting:}
Various techniques have been proposed to make multicasting reliable including the use of coding and receiver (negative or positive) acknowledgments. Experiments have shown that using positive ACKs does not lead to ACK implosion for medium scale (sub-thousand) receiver groups \cite{tcp-smo}. TCP-XM \cite{tcp-xm} allows reliable delivery by using a combination of IP multicast and unicast for data delivery and re-transmissions. MCTCP \cite{mctcp} applies standard TCP mechanisms for reliability. Another approach is for receivers to send NAKs upon expiration of some inactivity timer \cite{norm}. NAK suppression has been proposed to address implosion which can be applied by routers \cite{arm}. Forward Error Correction (FEC) has been used to reduce re-transmissions \cite{norm} and improve the completion times \cite{avalanche_code} examples of which include Raptor Codes \cite{raptor} and Tornado Codes \cite{tornado}. These techniques can be applied complementary to the algorithms and techniques presented in this dissertation.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Multicast Congestion Control:}
Existing approaches track the slowest receiver. PGMCC \cite{pgmcc}, MCTCP \cite{mctcp} and TCP-SMO \cite{tcp-smo} use window-based TCP like congestion control to compete fairly with other flows. NORM \cite{norm} uses an equation-based rate control scheme. With rate allocation and end-host based rate limiting applied over inter-DC networks, need for distributed congestion control becomes minimal; however, such techniques can still be used as a backup in case there is a need to fall back to distributed inter-DC traffic control.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Other Related Work:}
CastFlow \cite{castflow} precalculates multicast spanning trees which can then be used at request arrival time for fast rule installation. ODPA \cite{odpa} presents algorithms for dynamic adjustment of multicast spanning trees according to specific metrics. BIER \cite{bier} has been recently proposed to improve the scalability and allow frequent dynamic manipulation of multicast forwarding state in the network and can be applied complementary to our solutions in this dissertation. Peer-to-peer approaches \cite{promise, bittorrent, slurpie} aim to maximize throughput per receiver without considering physical network topology, link capacity, or total network bandwidth consumption. Store-and-Forward (SnF) approaches \cite{netstitcher, mbdt, dtb, mbdt_initial} focus on minimizing transit bandwidth costs which does not apply to dedicated inter-DC networks. However, SnF can still be used to improve overall network utilization in the presence of diurnal link utilization patterns, transient bottleneck links, or for application layer multicasting. BDS \cite{bds} uses many parallel overlay paths from a multicast source to its destinations storing and forwarding data from one destination to the next. Application of SnF for bulk multicast transfers considering the physical topology is complementary to our work in this dissertation. Recent research \cite{ddccast,multicast_deadline,AGE,dartree} also consider bulk multicast transfers with deadlines with the objective of maximizing the number of transfers completed before the deadlines.
\section{Adaptive Forwarding Tree Selection for P2MP Transfers} \label{dccast}
We present an efficient scheme for P2MP transfers called DCCast \cite{dccast} which aims to optimize tail transfer completion times as well as total network capacity consumption. It selects forwarding trees according to a weight assignment that tries to balance load across the network.
\subsection{System Model} \label{dccast_sys_model}
To allow for flexible bandwidth allocation, we consider a slotted timeline \cite{tempus, amoeba, dcroute} where the transmission rate of senders is constant during each timeslot, but can vary from one timeslot to next. This can be achieved via rate-limiting at end-hosts \cite{swan, bwe}. A central scheduler is assumed that receives transfer requests from end-points, calculates their temporal schedule, and informs the end-points of rate-allocations when a timeslot begins. We focus on scheduling large transfers that take more than a few timeslots to finish and therefore, the time to submit a transfer request, calculate the routes, and install forwarding rules is considered negligible in comparison. We assume equal capacity for all links in an online scenario where requests may arrive anytime. A more advanced solution that considers non-uniform link capacity is discussed in the next chapter. We will use the same notation as that in Table \ref{table_var_0} with some additional variables in this section as shown in Table \ref{table_var_dccast}.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Variables used in this chapter in addition to those in Table \ref{table_var_0}} \label{table_var_dccast}
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{tabular}{ |p{2cm}|p{13cm}| }
\hline
\textbf{Variable} & \textbf{Definition} \\
\hline
\hline
$L_e$ & Total load currently scheduled on edge $e$ (same as $L_e(t_{now})$) \\
\hline
$T_{R_{i}}$ & The forwarding tree (i.e., multicast tree) selected for request $R_i$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Definition of Edge Load $L_e$:} We define a new metric called edge load which provides a measure of how busy a link is expected to be on average over future timeslots. $L_e, \forall e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_{G}$ is the total volume of traffic scheduled on an edge $e$ which is computed by summing up the number of remaining bytes for all the transfers that share $e$ at $t_{now}$.
\subsection{Selection of Forwarding Trees}
Our proposed approach is, for each P2MP transfer, to jointly route traffic from source to all destinations over a forwarding tree to save bandwidth. Using a single forwarding tree for every transfer also minimizes packet reordering which is known to waste CPU and memory resources at the receiving ends especially at high rates \cite{juggler, mptcphard}.
To perform a P2MP transfer $R_{new}$ with volume $\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}$, the source $S_{R_{new}}$ transmits traffic over a Steiner Tree that spans across $\pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}}$. At any timeslot, traffic for any transfer flows with the same rate over all links of a forwarding tree to reach all the destinations at the same time. The problem of scheduling a P2MP transfer then translates to finding a forwarding tree and a transmission schedule over such a tree for every arriving transfer in an online manner. A relevant problem is the minimum weight Steiner tree \cite{steiner_tree_problem} that can help minimize total bandwidth usage with proper weight assignment. Although it is a hard problem, heuristic algorithms exist that often provide near optimal solutions \cite{robins2005tighter, Watel2014}.
\subsection{Scheduling Policy}
When forwarding trees are found, we schedule traffic over them according to First Come First Serve (FCFS) policy using all available residual bandwidth on links to minimize the completion times. This allows us to provide guarantees to users on when their transfers will complete upon their arrival. We do not use a preemptive scheme, such as Shortest Remaining Processing Time (SRPT), due to practical concerns: larger transfers might get postponed over and over which might lead to the starvation problem and it is not possible to make promises on exactly when a transfer would complete. Optimal scheduling discipline to minimize tail times rests on transfer size distribution \cite{caltech-tail}.
\subsection{DCCast Algorithms}
DCCast is made up of two algorithms as follows.\footnote{An implementation of DCCast is available on Github: \url{https://github.com/noormoha/DCCast}}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\texttt{Update()}: This procedure is executed upon beginning of every timeslot. It simply dispatches the transmission schedule, that is the rate for each transfer, to all senders to adjust their rates via rate-limiting and adjusts $L_{e}~(e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E_G}})$ by deducting the total traffic that was sent over $e$ during current timeslot.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\texttt{Allocate($R_{new}$)}: This procedure is run upon arrival of every request which finds a forwarding tree and schedules $R_{new}$ to finish as early as possible. Pseudo-code of this function has been shown in Algorithm \ref{algo_1}. Statically calculating forwarding trees can lead to creation of hot-spots, even if there exists one highly loaded edge that is shared by multiple trees. As a result, DCCast dynamically chooses a forwarding tree that reduces the tail transfer completion times while saving considerable bandwidth.
It is possible that larger trees provide higher available bandwidth by using longer paths through least loaded edges, but using which would consume more overall bandwidth since they send same traffic over more edges. To model this behavior, we use a weight assignment that allows balancing these two possibly conflicting objectives. The weights represent traffic load allocated on links. Selecting links with lower weights will improve load balancing that would be better for future requests. The trade off is in avoiding heavier links at the expense of getting larger trees for a more even distribution of load.
The forwarding tree $T_{R_{new}}$ selected by Algorithm \ref{algop2mp_1} will have a total weight of:
\begin{equation}
\sum_{e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_{T_{R_{new}}}}(L_e + \mathcal{V}_{R_{new}})
\end{equation}
This weight is essentially the total load over $T_{R_{new}}$ if request $R_{new}$ were to be allocated on it. Selecting trees with minimal total weight will most likely avoid highly loaded edges and larger trees. To find an approximate minimum weight Steiner Tree, we used GreedyFLAC \cite{Watel2014, DSTAlgoEvaluation}, which is quite fast and in practice provides results not far from the optimal.
\SetAlgoVlined
\begin{algorithm}[t!]
\small
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwIn{$R(\mathrm{V}_{R_{new}},S_{R_{new}},\pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}})$, $G(\pmb{\mathrm{V}}_G, \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G)$, $\omega$, $L_{e}$ and $B_e(t)$ for $e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$ and $t > t_{now}$}
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwOut{Forwarding tree (minimum weight Steiner Tree) $T_{R_{new}}$ and transmission schedule (traffic allocation) for $R_{new}$ for $t > t_{now}$}
\nonl\hrulefill
\vspace{0.4em}
To every edge $e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$, assign weight $(L_{e} + \mathrm{V}_{R_{new}})$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
Find the minimum weight Steiner tree $T_{R_{new}}$ that connects $S_{R_{new}} \cup \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}}$. We used GreedyFLAC \cite{Watel2014, DSTAlgoEvaluation}\;
\vspace{0.4em}
$t^{\prime}$ ~$\gets$~ $t_{now}+1$ and $\mathcal{V}^{\prime}$ ~$\gets$~ $\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}$ \;
\vspace{0.4em}
\While{$\mathcal{V}^{\prime} > 0$} {
\vspace{0.4em}
$B_{T_{R_{new}}}(t^{\prime})$ ~$\gets$~ $\min_{e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_{T_{R_{new}}}}(B_e(t^{\prime}))$ \;
\vspace{0.4em}
Schedule $R_{new}$ on $T_{R_{new}}$ with rate $\min(B_{T_{R_{new}}}(t^{\prime}),
\frac{\mathcal{V}^{\prime}}{\omega})$ at timeslot $t^{\prime}$ \;
\vspace{0.4em}
$t^{\prime}$ ~$\gets$~ $t^{\prime}+1$ and $\mathcal{V}^{\prime}$ ~$\gets$~ $\mathcal{V}^{\prime}-\min(B_{T_{R_{new}}}(t^{\prime}),
\frac{\mathcal{V}^{\prime}}{\omega}) \times \omega$ \;
}
\vspace{0.4em}
\Return{\textnormal{$T_{R_{new}}$ and the transmission schedule of $R_{new}$}}\;
\caption{Allocate($R_{new}$)} \label{algop2mp_1}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Evaluation} \label{eval}
We evaluated DCCast using synthetic traffic. We assumed a total capacity of $1.0$ for each timeslot over every link. The arrival of requests followed a Poisson distribution with rate $\lambda_{P2MP} = 1$. Demand of every request was calculated using an exponential distribution with mean $20$ added to a constant value of $10$ (fixing the minimum demand to $10$). All simulations were performed over as many timeslots as needed to finish all requests with arrival time of last request set to be $500$ or less. Presented results are normalized by minimum values in each chart.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Schemes used for comparison.} \label{table_1}
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{tabular}{ |l|p{11.5cm}| }
\hline
\textbf{Scheme} & \textbf{Method} \\
\hline
\hline
MINMAX & Selects forwarding trees to minimize maximum load on any link. Schedules traffic using FCFS policy \S \ref{dccast}. \\
\hline
RANDOM & Selects random forwarding trees. Schedules traffic using FCFS policy \S \ref{dccast}. \\
\hline
BATCHING & Batches (enqueues) new requests arriving in time windows of $T$. At the end of batching windows, jointly schedules all new requests according to Shortest Job First (SJF) policy and picks their forwarding trees using weight assignment of Algorithm \ref{algo_1}. \\
\hline
SRPT & Upon arrival of a new request, jointly reschedules all existing requests and the new request according to SRPT policy \S \ref{dccast} and picks new forwarding trees for all requests using weight assignment of Algorithm \ref{algo_1}. \\
\hline
P2P-SRPT-LP & Views each P2MP request as multiple independent point-to-point (P2P) requests. Uses a Linear Programming (LP) model along with SRPT policy \S \ref{dccast} to (re)schedule each request over $K$-Shortest Paths between its source and destination upon arrival of new requests. \\
\hline
P2P-FCFS-LP & Similar to above while using FCFS policy \S \ref{dccast}. \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
We measure three different metrics: \textbf{total bandwidth used} as well as \textbf{mean and tail transfer completion times}. The total bandwidth used is the sum of all traffic over all timeslots and all links, i.e., the total network capacity consumed during simulation running time. The completion time of a transfer is defined as its arrival time to the time its last bit is delivered to the destination(s). We performed simulations using Google's GScale topology \cite{b4}, with $12$ nodes and $19$ edges, on a single machine (Intel Core i7-6700T and 24 GBs of RAM). All simulations were coded in Java and used Gurobi Optimizer \cite{gurobi} to solve linear programs for P2P schemes. We increased the destinations (copies) for each object from $1$ to $6$ picking recipients according to uniform distribution. Table \ref{table_1} shows list of considered schemes. In this table, the first $4$ approaches are P2MP schemes and last $2$ are P2P schemes that operate by breaking each P2MP transfer into multiple P2P transfers.
We evaluated various forwarding tree selection criteria over both GScale topology and a larger random topology with $50$ nodes and $150$ edges as shown in Figures \ref{fig:p2mp_all_1} and \ref{fig:p2mp_all_1_2}, respectively. In case of GScale, DCCast performs slightly better than RANDOM and MINMAX in completion times while using equal overall bandwidth (not in figure). In case of larger random topologies, DCCast's dominance is more obvious regarding completion times while using same or less bandwidth (not in figure).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{dccast_minmax_random}
\caption{Tree Selection (GScale Topo)}
\label{fig:p2mp_all_1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{matrix_123_self_random_minmax_3}
\caption{Tree Selection (Random topology, $\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{V}}_G \lvert=50$)}
\label{fig:p2mp_all_1_2}
\end{figure}
We also experimented various scheduling disciplines over forwarding trees as shown in Figure \ref{fig:p2mp_all_2}. The SRPT discipline performs considerably better with respect to mean completion times; it however may lead to starvation of larger transfers if smaller ones keep arriving. It has to compute and install new forwarding trees and recalculate the whole schedule, for all requests currently in the system with residual demands, upon arrival of every new request. This could impose significant rule installation overhead which is considered negligible in our evaluations. It might also lead to lots of packet loss and reordering. Batching improves performance marginally compared to DCCast and could be an alternate road to take. Generally, a smaller batch size results in a smaller initial scheduling latency while a larger batch size makes it possible to employ collective knowledge of many requests in a batch for optimized scheduling. Batching might be more effective for systems with bursty request arrival patterns. All schemes performed almost similarly regarding tail completion times and total bandwidth usage (not in figure).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{dccast_srpt_batch_3_cropped}
\caption{Various scheduling policies and the effect of batching.}
\label{fig:p2mp_all_2}
\end{figure}
In Figure \ref{fig:p2mp_all_3}, we compare DCCast with a Point-To-Point scheme (P2P-SRPT-LP) using SRPT scheduling policy which uses various number of shortest paths (i.e., $K$ shortest paths) and delivers each copy independently. The total bandwidth usage is close for all schemes when there is only one destination per request. Both bandwidth usage and tail completion times of DCCast are up to $50\%$ less than that of P2P-SRPT-LP as the number of destinations per transfer increases. Although DCCast follows the FCFS policy, its mean completion time is close to that of P2P-SRPT-LP and surpasses it for $6$ copies due to bandwidth savings which leave more headroom for new transfers. In a different experiment, we compared DCCast with P2P-FCFS-LP and obtained somewhat similar results. DCCast again saved up to $50\%$ bandwidth and reduced tail completion times by up to almost $50\%$ while increasing the number of destinations per transfer.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{p2p_cropped}
\caption{DCCast vs Point-To-Point (P2P-SRPT-LP).}
\label{fig:p2mp_all_3}
\end{figure}
Finally, we studied the effect of load and network size on DCCast comparing it with a P2P scheme that is based on $3$-Shortest Paths. Figure \ref{fig:perf_by_size} shows that when network grows in size, there is minor change in performance of P2MP routing. The total bandwidth usage increase obviously since paths become longer. However, the growth in bandwidth usage of P2P scheme considered is a little more than that of DCCast. Figure \ref{fig:perf_by_load} shows the effect of input load on performance of same schemes. As can be seen, all performance metrics grow much slower for DCCast compared to P2P shortest paths (lower values are better).
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{perf_by_size.pdf}
\caption{Performance of $3$-Shortest Paths (P2P) vs DCCast as network grows.}
\label{fig:perf_by_size}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{perf_by_load.pdf}
\caption{Performance of $3$-Shortest Paths (P2P) vs DCCast as incoming network load increases.}
\label{fig:perf_by_load}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\noindent\textbf{Computational Overhead:} We used a large network with $50$ nodes and $300$ edges and considered P2MP transfers with $5$ destinations per transfer. Transfers were generated according to Poisson distribution with arrival times ranging from $0$ to $1000$ timeslots and the simulation ran until all transfers were completed. Mean processing time of a single \textit{timeslot} increased from $1.2ms$ to $50ms$ per timeslot while increasing $\lambda_{P2MP}$ from $1$ to $10$. Mean processing time of a single \textit{transfer} (which accounts for finding a tree and scheduling the transfer) was $1.2ms$ and $5ms$ per transfer for $\lambda_{P2MP}$ equal to $1$ and $10$, respectively. This is negligible compared to timeslot lengths of minutes in prior work \cite{amoeba}. We also looked at the computational overhead of DCCast as network size grows shown in Figure \ref{fig:comp_network_size}. As can be seen, the growth is sub-linear.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{comp_network_size.pdf}
\caption{Computational overhead of DCCast as network size grows.}
\label{fig:comp_network_size}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\section{Fast Admission Control for Point to Multipoint Transfers with Deadlines}
Existing techniques to performing inter-DC transfers are either unable to guarantee the deadlines for inter-DC multicast transfers or can only do so by treating multicast transfers as separate P2P transfers. We present Deadline-aware DCCast (DDCCast), a quick yet effective deadline aware point to multipoint technique based on the ALAP traffic allocation policy. DDCCast performs careful admission control using temporal planning, rate-allocation, and rate-limiting to avoid congestion while sending traffic over forwarding trees that are adaptively selected to reduce network capacity consumption and maximize the number of admitted transfers. We perform experiments confirming DDCCast's potential to reduce total bandwidth usage by up to $45\%$ while admitting up to $25\%$ more traffic into the network compared to alternatives that guarantee deadlines.
\subsection{System Model}
We use the same notations expressed earlier in Table \ref{table_var_0} and Table \ref{table_var_dccast}. Similarly, to provide flexible bandwidth allocation, we consider a slotted timeline \cite{tempus, amoeba, dcroute} where the transmission rate of senders is constant during each slot, but can be updated from one slot to the next. This can be achieved using rate-limiting techniques at the end-points \cite{swan, bwe}.
A central scheduler is assumed that receives transfer requests from end-points, performs admission control to determine feasibility, calculates an initial temporal schedule, and informs the end-points of next timeslot's rate-allocation when the timeslot begins. The allocation for future slots can change as new requests are submitted, however, only the scheduler knows about schedules beyond the current timeslot and it can update such schedules as new requests are submitted. We focus on scheduling large transfers that can take minutes or more to complete \cite{tempus} and therefore, the time to submit a transfer request, calculate the routes, and install forwarding rules is considered negligible in comparison. We also assume equal link capacity for all links to simplify the problem. We consider an online scenario where requests may arrive at any time and go through an admission control process; if admitted, they are scheduled to be completed prior to their deadlines. To prevent thrashing, similar to previous works \cite{amoeba, dcroute}, we also assume that once a request is admitted, it cannot be evicted.
A transfer request $R_{i}$ is considered \textbf{active} if it has been admitted but not completed. At any moment, there may be $K \ge 0$ different active requests with various deadlines. We define \textbf{active window} as the range of time from $t_{now}+1$ (next timeslot) to $t_{end}$, the timeslot of the latest deadline, defined as $\max(t_{d_{R_{i_1}}},\dots,t_{d_{R_{i_K}}})$. At the end of each timeslot, all requests can be updated to reflect their remaining (residual) demands by deducting volume sent during a timeslot from their total demand at the beginning of a timeslot. To perform a P2MP transfer $R$, the source $S_R$ transmits traffic over a Steiner Tree \cite{steiner_tree_problem} that spans across all destinations $\pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_1}$ to $\pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_n}$ which we refer to as the P2MP request's forwarding tree. The transmission rate over a forwarding tree at every timeslot is the minimum of available bandwidth over all edges of the tree at that timeslot.
\subsection{Point to Multipoint Transfers with Deadlines}
We focus on the case when a P2MP transfer is only valuable if all of its destinations receive the associated object prior to the specified deadline, i.e., all receivers have the same deadline. As a result, a transfer should only be accepted if this requirement can be guaranteed given no failures or unexpected loss of capacity across the network.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{P2MP Deadline Problem:} Determine feasibility of allocating transfer $R_{K+1}$ using any forwarding tree over the inter-DC network $G$, given $K$ existing requests $R_1$ to $R_K$ with residual demands $\mathcal{V}^{r}_{R_1}$ to $\mathcal{V}^{r}_{R_K}$ each with their own forwarding trees. If feasible, the transfer is admitted and the algorithm should determine the forwarding tree that minimizes overall bandwidth consumption. The objective is to maximize the total traffic admitted into the network.
\vspace{0.5em}
The most general approach to solving the \textit{P2MP Deadline Problem} is to form a Mixed Integer Linear Program (MILP) that considers capacity of links over various timeslots along with transfer deadlines and reschedules all active requests along with the new request. The solution would be a new schedule for every active transfer (over the same trees) and a new tree with a rate allocation schedule for the new request. Solving MILPs can be computationally intensive and may take a long time. This is especially problematic if MILPs have to be solved upon arrival of requests for admission control where admission control latency can lead to creation of backlogs. We discuss our fast heuristic next.
\subsection{Deadline-aware DCCast (DDCCast)}
The architecture of DDCCast (Deadline-Aware DCCast \cite{dccast, dccastgit}) is shown in Figure \ref{fig:ddccast}. There are two main procedures of \texttt{Update()} and \texttt{Allocate($R_{new}$)}. The former simply reads the rate-allocations from the database and dispatches them to all end-points at the beginning of every timeslot. The latter performs admission control, forwarding tree selection and rate-allocation according to the ALAP policy. The rates are then updated in a database. Also, at the beginning of every timeslot, if there is unused capacity, the \texttt{Update()} procedure moves back some of the future allocations, starting with the closest allocation to the current timeslot that can be moved back, to maximize utilization. Afterwards, to keep the allocation ALAP, it may sweep the timeline and further push any allocations that can be pushed forward closest to their deadlines. This technique is similar to the one used by DCRoute in Chapter \ref{chapter_admission_control} with the minor difference that it is applied over the edges of multicast trees. We discuss the main parts of DDCCast in the following.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{ddccast_arc.pdf}
\caption{DDCCast (Deadline-Aware DCCast \ref{dccast}) architecture.}
\label{fig:ddccast}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Forwarding Tree Selection}
For every new transfer, this procedure selects a forwarding tree that connects the sender to all receivers over the inter-DC network. This is done by assigning weights to edges of the inter-DC network and selecting a minimum weight Steiner Tree \cite{steiner_tree_problem}. Weight of a forwarding tree is sum of the weights of its edges. For every transfer $R_{new}$ with volume $\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}$, we assign edge $e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$ of the inter-DC network a weight of $(\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}} + L_{e}(t_{d_{R_{new}}}))$ where $L_{e}(t)$ is the total load on edge $e$ up to and including timeslot $t$. Running a minimum weight Steiner Tree heuristic gives us a forwarding tree $T_{R_{new}}$. This process is performed only once for every request upon their arrival.
We explain the motivation behind our approach to tree selection. Ideally for routing, we seek a tree with minimum number of edges that connects the source datacenter to all destination datacenters (i.e., a minimum edge Steiner Tree), but such tree may not have enough capacity available on all edges to complete $R_{new}$ prior to $t_{d_{R_{new}}}$. Therefore, a different Steiner tree, which can be larger but offers more available bandwidth may be chosen. It is possible that larger trees provide higher available capacity by using longer paths through least loaded edges, but they consume more bandwidth since they send $\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}$ over a larger number of edges. To model this behavior, we use a weight assignment that allows balancing two possibly conflicting objectives, i.e., finding the forwarding tree with highest available capacity by potentially taking longer paths (to balance load across the network), while minimizing the total network capacity used by minimizing the number of edges used. Our evaluations presented earlier in \ref{dccast} show that this cost assignment performs more effectively compared to minimizing the maximum utilization on the network which is a well-known policy that is frequently used for traffic engineering over wide area networks.
\subsubsection{Admission Control}
After finding a P2MP forwarding tree, we need to first verify if the new transfer can be accommodated over the tree. We perform admission control by calculating the available bandwidth over the tree (i.e., $\forall e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_{T_{R_{new}}}$) for all timeslots of $t_{now}+1$ to $t_{d_{R_{new}}}$. We then sum the available bandwidth across these timeslots and admit the request if the total is not less than $\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}$.
This admission control approach does not guarantee that a rejected request could not have been accommodated on $G$. It is possible that a request is rejected although it could have been accepted if a different forwarding tree had been chosen. In general, finding the tree with maximum available bandwidth prior to a deadline is a hard problem given that the maximum available rate over a tree is the minimum of what is available over its edges per timeslot. In addition, even if this problem could be optimally solved in polynomial time, it is unclear whether it would lead to an improved solution since this is an online resource packing problem with multiple capacity and demand constraints.
\subsubsection{Traffic Allocation and Adjustment}
Once admitted, the traffic allocation process places every new request according to ALAP policy which guarantees meeting deadlines while postponing the use of bandwidth until necessary. Adjustments are done in \texttt{Update()} procedure upon beginning of timeslots. To maximize utilization and use the network efficiently, we adjust the schedules when there is unused capacity. Upon the beginning of every timeslot, we pull traffic from closest timeslots in the future over each forwarding tree and send it in current timeslot, if there is available capacity across all edges of such a P2MP forwarding tree. For a network, it may not be possible to schedule traffic ALAP on all edges since allocations may need to span over multiple edges all of which may not have available bandwidth. Therefore, after maximizing the utilization of the upcoming timeslot (i.e., $t_{now}+1$), we sweep the timeline starting $t_{now}+2$ and push allocations forward as much as possible until no schedule can be pushed further toward its deadline.
\subsection{Evaluation}
We evaluated DDCCast using synthetic traffic generated in accordance with several related works \cite{amoeba, dcroute}. The arrival of requests followed a Poisson distribution with rate $\lambda$. The deadline $t_{d_{R_{new}}}$ of every request $R_{new}$ was generated using an exponential distribution with a mean value of $10$ timeslots. Demand of $R_{new}$ was then calculated using another exponential distribution with a mean of $\frac{t_{d_{R_{new}}}-t_{now}}{8}$. All simulations were performed over $500$ timeslots and each scenario was repeated $10$ times and the average measurements have been reported. We assumed a total capacity of $1.0$ for every timeslot over every link.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Setup:} We performed our simulations over Google's GScale topology \cite{b4} with $12$ datacenters and $19$ bidirectional edges. We assumed a machine attached to each datacenter generating traffic destined to other (multiple) datacenters. The simulations were performed on a single machine equipped with an Intel Core i7-6700T CPU and 24GBs of RAM. All simulations were coded in Java, and to solve linear programs for Amoeba, we used Gurobi \cite{gurobi}.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Performance Metrics:} We measured two metrics of \textbf{total bandwidth used} and \textbf{total traffic volume admitted}. Both parameters were calculated over the whole network and all timeslots. The first parameter is the sum of all traffic over all timeslots and all links. The second parameter determines what volume of offered load from all end-points was admitted into the network.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Schemes:} Following schemes were considered: DDCCast, DCRoute,\footnote{DCRoute was presented earlier in Chapter \ref{chapter_admission_control}.} and Amoeba \cite{amoeba} all of which aim to guarantee the deadlines, maximize total utilization, and perform admission control. DCRoute and Amoeba do not have the notion of point to multipoint forwarding trees. As a result, to perform the following simulations, each P2MP transfer with multiple destinations in DDCCast is broken into several independent P2P transfers from the source to each destination and then plugged into DCRoute and Amoeba. We only compare DDCCast with these two works since other works either do not support deadlines \cite{bwe, swan} or focus on different objectives.
\subsubsection{Effect of Number of Destinations}
Figure \ref{fig:p2mp_copies} shows the results of this experiment. We increased the number of destinations for each transfer from $1$ to $5$ and picked random destinations for each transfer. The total volume of traffic used by Amoeba \cite{amoeba} is up to $1.8\times$ the volume used by DDCCast. Even in case of one destination Amoeba uses $1.2\times$ the bandwidth of DCCast and DCRoute. This occurs because Amoeba routes traffic across the $K$ static shortest paths, and as $K$ increases, some of these paths may not be as short as the shortest path. Therefore, even for a small incoming network load, a portion of traffic may traverse longer paths and increase total bandwidth usage. DDCCast saves bandwidth by using P2MP forwarding trees. DDCCast admits $25\%$ more traffic compared to Amoeba when sending objects to $5$ destinations while using $45\%$ less overall network capacity.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{copies_em}
\caption{Capacity consumption and total admitted traffic by $\vert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R} \vert$ (given $\lambda = 2$)}
\label{fig:p2mp_copies}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Effect of Transfer Arrival Rate (i.e., Incoming Load)}
We investigate the effect of $\lambda$ while sending an object to three destinations. Results of this experiment have been shown in Figure \ref{fig:p2mp_lambda}. Volume of admitted traffic is about $10\%$ higher for DDCCast compared with other two schemes over all arrival rates. Also, similar to the previous experiment, DDCCast's total bandwidth usage is between $37\%$ to $45\%$ less than Amoeba \cite{amoeba} and $28\%$ less than DCRoute \cite{dcroute}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{lambda_em}
\caption{Capacity consumption and total admitted traffic by $\lambda$ (given $\vert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_i} \vert = 3, \forall i$)}
\label{fig:p2mp_lambda}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
In this chapter, we studied efficient inter-DC P2MP transfers which are multicast transfers with known source and set of receivers upon submission to the inter-DC network. We investigated an adaptive approach to selection of forwarding trees (i.e., multicast trees) which reduced total capacity consumption while balancing load across the network. It is possible to set up such trees using commodity hardware that support multicast forwarding, or SDN frameworks such as OpenFlow \cite{openflow} along with application of Group Tables \cite{openflow-1.3.1}.\footnote{See Appendix \ref{chapter_sdn_gt_all} for a discussion of switch support for group tables.} Such trees can be configured upon arrival of transfers and torn down upon their completion. Our evaluations show that by adaptively selecting forwarding trees according to edge load and transfer size, we can reduce the total network capacity consumption while either reducing completion times, or admitting more traffic given guaranteed deadlines.
\clearpage
\chapter{Speeding up P2MP Transfers using Receiver Set Partitioning} \label{chapter_p2mp_quickcast}
In the previous chapter, we discussed using atomically selected forwarding trees (i.e., multicast trees) to copy an object from one datacenter to multiple datacenters over an inter-DC network. This allowed us to save network capacity while reducing the time needed to cast objects to many locations. Although one can perform inter-DC P2MP transfers using a single multicast forwarding tree, that might lead to poor performance as the slowest receiver on each tree dictates the completion time for all receivers. In this chapter, we discuss using multiple trees per transfer, each connected to a subset of receivers, which alleviates this concern. The choice of multicast trees also determines the total bandwidth usage.
We approach this problem by breaking it into three sub-problems of partitioning, tree selection, and rate allocation. We present an algorithm, called QuickCast, which is computationally fast and allows us to significantly speed up multiple receivers per multicast transfer with control over extra bandwidth consumption. We evaluate QuickCast against a variety of synthetic and real traffic patterns as well as real WAN topologies. Compared to performing bulk multicast transfers as separate unicast transfers, QuickCast achieves up to $3.64\times$ reduction in mean completion times while at the same time using $0.71\times$ the bandwidth. Also, QuickCast allows the top $50\%$ of receivers to complete between $3\times$ to $35\times$ faster on average compared with when a single forwarding multicast tree is used for data delivery.
\section{Background and Related Work}
In general, it is not required that the receivers of a P2MP transfer complete data reception at the same time. For many applications, speeding up several receivers per P2MP transfer can translate to improved end-user quality of experience and increased availability. For example, faster replication of video content to regional datacenters enhances average user's experience in social media applications or making a newly trained model available at regional datacenters allows speedier access to new application features for millions of users. Several recent works focus on improving the performance of unicast transfers over dedicated inter-DC networks \cite{b4, swan, tempus, amoeba, owan}. However, performing bulk multicast transfers as many separate unicast transfers can lead to excessive bandwidth usage and will increase receiver completion times.
Although there exists extensive work on multicasting, it is not possible to apply those solutions to our problem as existing research has focused on different goals and considers different constraints. For example, earlier research in multicasting aims at dynamically building and pruning multicast trees as receivers join or leave \cite{ip_multicast}, building multicast overlays that reduce control traffic overhead and improve scalability \cite{nice}, or choosing multicast trees that satisfy a fixed available bandwidth across all edges as requested by applications \cite{online_multicast_bw_guarantees, sdn_multicast}, minimize congestion within datacenters \cite{avalanche, datacast}, reduce data recovery costs assuming some recovery nodes \cite{raera}, or maximize the throughput of a single multicast flow \cite{MPMC_2013, MPMC_2016}. To our knowledge, none of the related research efforts aimed at minimizing the mean completion times of receivers for concurrent bulk multicast transfers while considering the overall bandwidth usage, which is the focus of this chapter.
In this chapter, we break the bulk multicast transfer routing, and scheduling problem with the objective of minimizing mean completion times of receivers into three sub-problems of the receiver set partitioning, multicast forwarding tree selection per receiver partition, and rate allocation per forwarding tree. We briefly describe each problem as follows.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Receiver Set Partitioning:} As different receivers can have different completion times, a natural way to improve completion times is to partition receivers into multiple sets with each receiver set having a separate tree. This reduces the effect of slow receivers on faster ones. We employ a partitioning technique that groups receivers of every bulk multicast transfer into multiple partitions according to their mutual distance (in hops) on the inter-DC graph. With this approach, the partitioning of receivers into any $N > 1$ partitions consumes minimal additional bandwidth on average. We also offer a configuration parameter called the partitioning factor that is used to decide on the right number of partitions that create a balance between receiver completion times improvements and the total bandwidth consumption.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Forwarding Tree Selection:} To avoid heavily loaded routes, multicast trees should be chosen dynamically per partition according to the receivers in that partition and the distribution of traffic load across network edges. We utilize a computationally efficient approach for forwarding tree selection that connects a sender to a partition of its receivers by assigning weights to edges of the inter-DC graph, and using a minimum weight Steiner tree heuristic. We define a weight assignment according to the traffic load scheduled on edges and their capacity and empirically show that this weight assignment offers improved receiver completion times at minimal bandwidth consumption.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Rate Allocation:} Given the receiver partitions and their forwarding trees, formulating the rate allocation for minimizing mean completion times of receivers leads to a hard problem. We consider the popular scheduling policies of fair sharing, Shortest Remaining Processing Time (SRPT), and First Come First Serve (FCFS). We reason why fair sharing is preferred compared to policies that strictly prioritize transfers (i.e., SRPT, FCFS, etc.) for network throughput maximization when focusing on bulk multicast transfers especially ones with many receivers per transfer. We empirically show that using max-min fairness \cite{max-min-fairness}, which is a form of fair sharing, we can considerably improve the average network throughput which in turn reduces receiver completion times.
\subsubsection{Motivating Example}
Figure \ref{fig:motivating_example} shows an example of delivering a large object \textbf{X} from source $S$ to destinations $\{t_1,t_2,t_3,t_4\}$ which has a volume of 100 units. We have two types of links with capacities of 1 and 10 units of traffic per time unit. We can use a single multicast tree to connect the sender to all receivers which will allow us to transmit at the bottleneck rate of 1 to all receivers. However, one can group receivers into two partitions of $P1$ and $P2$ and attach each partition with a separate multicast tree. Then we can select transmission rates so that we minimize the mean completion times. In this case, assigning a rate of 1 to the tree attached to $P1$ and a rate of 9 to the tree attached to $P2$ will attain this goal while respecting link capacity over all links (the link attached to $S$ is the bottleneck). As another possibility, we could have assigned a rate of 10 to the tree attached to $P2$, allowing $\{t_3,t_4\}$ to finish in 10 units of time, while suspending the tree attached to $P1$ until time 11. As a result, the tree attached to $P1$ would have started at 11 allowing $\{t_1,t_2\}$ to finish at 110. In this dissertation, we aim to improve the speed of several receivers per bulk multicast transfer without hurting the completion times of the slow receivers. In computing the completion times, we ignore the propagation and queuing latencies as the focus of this dissertation is on delivering bulk objects for which the transmission time dominates the propagation or queuing latency along the trees.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{tcc_motiv_exmp.pdf}
\caption{Using multiple smaller multicast trees we can improve the completion times of several receivers while marginally increasing total network capacity consumption.}
\label{fig:motivating_example}
\end{figure}
\section{System Model}
We consider a scenario where bulk multicast transfers arrive at the inter-DC network in an online fashion. We will use the same notations as that of Table \ref{table_var_0}. We will also use some additional definitions as described in Table \ref{table_var_quickcast}. In general, synchronization is not required across receivers of a bulk multicast transfer and therefore, receivers are allowed to complete at different times as long as they all receive the multicast object completely. Incoming requests are processed as they come by a traffic engineering server that manages the forwarding state of the whole network in a logically centralized manner for installation and eviction of multicast trees. Upon arrival of a request, this server decides on the number of partitions and receivers that are grouped per partition and a multicast tree per partition.
Periodically, the TES computes the transmission rates for all multicast trees at the beginning of every timeslot and dispatches them to senders for rate limiting. This allows for a congestion free network since the rates are computed according to link capacity constraints and other ongoing transfers. To minimize control plane overhead, partitions and forwarding trees are fixed once they are established for an incoming transfer. In this context, the bulk multicast transfer routing and scheduling problem can be formally stated as follows.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Definition of variables used in this chapter besides those defined in Table \ref{table_var_0}.} \label{table_var_quickcast}
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{tabular}{ |p{2cm}|p{11.5cm}| }
\hline
\textbf{Variable} & \textbf{Definition} \\
\hline
\hline
$U_e$ & Edge $e$'s bandwidth utilization, $0 \le U_e \le 1$ \\
\hline
$T$ & A directed Steiner tree connected to a partition of receivers \\
\hline
$P$ & A partition of receivers of a request $R$ \\
\hline
$\pmb{\mathrm{P}}_R$ & Set$\langle\rangle$ of partitions of request $R$, $\vert \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_R \vert \le \vert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_R \vert$ \\
\hline
$T_P$ & The forwarding tree (i.e., multicast tree) of partition $P$ \\
\hline
$r_{T_P}(t)$ & The transmission rate over $T_P$ of partition $P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}$ at timeslot $t$ \\
\hline
$\mathcal{V}_{P}^r$ & Residual volume of some partition $P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}$ \\
\hline
$L_e$ & Edge $e$'s total traffic load at time $t_{now}$, i.e., total outstanding bytes scaled by $e$'s inverse capacity \\
\hline
$p_f \ge 1$ & Configuration parameter; determines a partitioning cost threshold \\
\hline
$N_{max}$ & Configuration parameter; maximum number of partitions allowed per transfer \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Partitioning Problem:} Given an inter-DC network $G(\pmb{\mathrm{V}}_G,\pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G)$ with the edge capacity $C_e, \forall e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$ and the set of all partitions $\{P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_R ~\vert~ \forall R \in \pmb{\mathrm{R}}, \mathcal{V}^{r}_{P} > 0\}$, for a newly arriving bulk multicast transfer $R_{new}$, the traffic engineering server needs to compute a set of receiver partitions $\pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{R}$ each with one or more receivers, and select a forwarding tree $T_P, \forall P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{R}$.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Rate-allocation Problem:} Per timeslot $t$, the traffic engineering server needs to compute the rates $r_{T_P}(t), ~\{P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_R ~\vert~ \forall R \in \pmb{\mathrm{R}}, \mathcal{V}^{r}_{P} > 0\}$. The objective is to minimize the average time for a receiver to complete data reception while keeping the total bandwidth consumption below a certain threshold compared to the minimum possible, i.e., a minimum edge Steiner tree per transfer.
\vspace{0.5em}
Both the number of ways to partition receivers into subsets and the number of candidate forwarding trees per subset grow exponentially with the problem size. It is, in general, not clear how partitioning and selection of forwarding trees correlate with both receiver completion times and total bandwidth usage. Even the simple objective of minimizing the total bandwidth usage is a hard problem. Also, assuming known forwarding trees, selecting transmission rates per timeslot per tree for minimization of mean receiver completion times is a hard problem. Finally, this is an online problem with unknown future arrivals which adds to the complexity.
\section{Optimizing Receiver Completion Times with Minimum Bandwidth Usage}
As stated earlier, we need to address the three sub-problems of receiver set partitioning, tree selection, and rate allocation. Since the partitioning sub-problem uses the tree selection sub-problem, we first discuss tree selection in the following. As the last problem, we will address rate allocation. Since the total bandwidth usage is a function of transfer properties, i.e., number of receivers, transfer volume, and the location of sender and receivers, and the network topology, it is highly sophisticated to design a solution that guarantees a limit on the total bandwidth usage. Instead, we aim to reduce the receiver completion times while minimally increasing bandwidth usage.
\subsection{Forwarding Tree Selection}
The tree selection problem states that given a network topology with link capacity knowledge, how to choose a Steiner tree that connects a sender to all of its receivers. The objective is to minimize the completion times of receivers\footnote{All receivers on a tree complete at the same time.} while minimally increasing the total bandwidth usage. Since the total bandwidth usage is directly proportional to the number of edges on selected trees, we would want to keep trees as small as possible. Reduction in completion times can be achieved by avoiding edges that have a large outstanding traffic load. For this purpose, we use an approach similar to the one used in Chapter \ref{chapter_p2mp_dccast} which worked by assigning proper weights to the edges of the inter-DC graph and choosing a minimum weight Steiner tree. The weight assignment we use next also takes into account the variable link capacities over the topology.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Weight Assignment:} We use the metric of link load $L_{e}, \forall e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$ that is defined in Table \ref{table_var_quickcast} and can be computed as $L_e = \frac{1}{C_e} \sum_{P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{R_{new}}, \forall R ~\vert~ e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_{T_P}} \mathcal{V}_{P}^r$. Note that this is different from what we used in Chapter \ref{chapter_p2mp_dccast} in that we divide the total outstanding volume of traffic allocated on a link by its capacity.
\vspace{0.5em}
We can compute a link's load since we know the remaining volume of current transfers and the edges that they use. A link's load is a measure of how busy it is expected to be in the next few timeslots. It increases as new transfers are scheduled on a link, and diminishes as traffic flows through it. To select a forwarding tree from a source to a set of receivers, we use an edge weight of $L_{e} + \frac{\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}}{C_{e}}$ and select a minimum weight Steiner tree. The selected tree will most likely exclude any links that are expected to be highly busy. Addition of the second element in the weight (new request's volume divided by capacity) helps select smaller trees in case there is not much load on most edges.
Algorithm \ref{algo_dccast} applies the weight assignment approach mentioned above to select a forwarding tree that balances the traffic load across available trees and finds a minimum weight Steiner tree using the GreedyFLAC heuristic \cite{Watel2014}. In \S \ref{evaluations}, we explore a variety of weights for forwarding tree selection as shown in Table \ref{table_cost} and see that this weight assignment provides consistently close to minimum values for the three performance metrics of mean and tail receiver completion times as well as total bandwidth usage.
\SetAlgoVlined
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{Forwarding Tree Selection Algorithm} \label{algo_dccast}
{\small
\SetKw{KwBy}{by}
\SetKwProg{ComputeTree}{ComputeTree}{}{}
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwIn{Request $R_{new}$, partition $P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{R_{new}}$, $G(\pmb{\mathrm{V}}_G,\pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G)$, and $L_{e}, \forall e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$ }
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwOut{A forwarding tree (set of edges)}
\nonl\hrulefill
\vspace{0.4em}
\ComputeTree{$\mathrm{(}P,R_{new}\mathrm{)}$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
Assign a weight of $(L_{e} + \frac{\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}}{C_e})$ to every edge $e$, $\forall e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
Find a minimum weight Steiner tree $T_P$ which connects the nodes $\{S_{R_{new}} \cup P$\}\;
\vspace{0.4em}
$L_e \gets L_e + \frac{\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}}{C_e},~\forall e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_{T_P}$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
\Return{$T_P$}\;
}
}
\end{algorithm}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Worst-case Complexity:} Algorithm \ref{algo_dccast} computes one minimum weight Steiner tree. For a request $R_{new}$, the worst-case complexity of Algorithm \ref{algo_dccast} is $O(\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{V}}_G \rvert^3 \lvert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}} \rvert^2+\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G \rvert)$ given the complexity of GreedyFLAC \cite{Watel2014}.
\subsection{Receiver Set Partitioning} \label{partitioning}
The maximum transmission rate on a tree is that of the link with minimum capacity. To improve bandwidth utilization of inter-DC backbone, we can replace a large forwarding tree with multiple smaller trees each connecting the source to a subset of receivers. By partitioning, we isolate some receivers from the bottlenecks allowing them to receive data at a higher rate. We aim to find a set of partitions each with at least one receiver that allows for reducing the average receiver completion times while minimally increasing the bandwidth usage. Bottlenecks may appear either due to competing transfers or differences in link capacity. In the former case, some edges may be shared by multiple trees which lead to lower available bandwidth per tree. Such conditions may arise more frequently under heavy load. In the latter case, differences in link capacity can increase completion times especially in large networks and with many receivers per transfer.
Receiver set partitioning to minimize the impact of bottlenecks and reduce completion times is a sophisticated open problem. It is best if partitions are selected in a way that no additional bottlenecks are created. Also, increasing the number of partitions may in general increase bandwidth consumption (multiple smaller trees may have more edges in total compared to one large tree). Therefore, we need to come up with the right number of partitions and receivers that are grouped per partition. We propose a partitioning approach, called the hierarchical partitioning, that is computationally efficient and uses a partitioning factor to decide on the number of partitions and receivers that are grouped in those partitions.
\subsubsection{Number of Partitions} Transfers may have a highly varying number of receivers. Generally, the number of partitions should be computed based on the number of receivers, where they are located in the network, and the network topology. Also, using more partitions can lead to the creation of unnecessary bottlenecks due to shared links. We compute the number of partitions per transfer according to the total traffic load on network edges and considering a threshold that limits the cost of additional bandwidth consumption.
\subsubsection{Limitations of Partitioning} Partitioning, in general, cannot improve tail completion times of transfers as tail is usually driven by physical resource constraints, i.e., low capacity links or links with high contention.
\subsubsection{Hierarchical Partitioning}
We group receivers into partitions according to their mutual distance which is defined as the number of hops on the shortest hop path that connects any two receivers. Hierarchical clustering \cite{clustering_methods} approaches such as agglomerative clustering can be used to compute the groups by initially assuming that every receiver has its partition and then by merging the two closest partitions at each step which generates a hierarchy of partitioning solutions. Each layer of the hierarchy then gives us one possible solution with a given number of partitions.
With this approach, the partitioning of receivers into any $N > 1$ partitions consumes minimal additional bandwidth on average compared to any other partitioning with $N$ partitions. That is because assigning a receiver to any other partition will likely increase the total number of edges needed to connect the source to all receivers; otherwise, that receiver would not have been grouped with the other receivers in its current partition in the first place. There is, however, no guarantee since hierarchical clustering works based on a greedy heuristic.
After building a partitioning hierarchy, the algorithm selects the layer with the maximum number of partitions whose total sum of tree weights stays below a threshold that can be configured as a system parameter. Choosing the maximum partitions allows us to minimize the effect of slow receivers given the threshold, which is a multiple of the weight of a single tree that would connect the sender to all receivers and can be looked at as a bandwidth budget. We call the multiplication coefficient the partitioning factor $p_f$. Algorithm \ref{algo_quick} shows this process in detail. The partitioning factor $p_f$ plays a vital role in the operation of QuickCast as it determines the extra cost we are willing to pay in bandwidth for improved completion times. In general, a $p_f$ greater than one but close to it should allow partitioning to separate very slow receivers from several other nodes. A $p_f$ that is considerably larger than one may generate too many partitions and potentially create many shared links which reduce throughput and additional edges that increase bandwidth usage. If $p_f$ is less than one, a single partition will be used.
\SetAlgoVlined
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{Compute Partitions and Trees} \label{algo_quick}
{\small
\SetKw{KwBy}{by}
\SetKwProg{ComputePartitionsAndTrees}{ComputePartitionsAndTrees}{}{}
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwIn{Request $R_{new}$, $G(\pmb{\mathrm{V}}_G,\pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G)$, and $L_{e}, \forall e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$}
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwOut{Pairs of (partition, forwarding tree)}
\nonl\hrulefill
\vspace{0.4em}
\ComputePartitionsAndTrees{$\mathrm{(}R_{new},N_{max}\mathrm{)}$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
Assign a weight of $(L_{e} + \frac{\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}}{C_e})$ to $e$, $\forall e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
Find the minimum weight Steiner tree $T_{R_{new}}$ which connects the nodes $\{S_{R_{new}} \cup \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}}\}$ and its total weight $W_{T_{R_{new}}}$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
\ForEach{$\{\alpha,\beta\}, \alpha \in \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}},\beta \in \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}},~\alpha \neq \beta$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
$\mathrm{DIST}_{\alpha,\beta} \gets$ number of edges on the minimum hop path from $\alpha$ to $\beta$\;
}
\vspace{0.4em}
Compute the agglomerative clustering hierarchy for $\pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}}$ using average linkage and distance $\mathrm{DIST}_{i,j}$ which will have $l$ clusters at layer $1 \le l \le \lvert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}} \rvert$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
\For{$l = \min(N_{max}, \lvert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}} \rvert)$ \KwTo $2$ \KwBy $-1$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
$\pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{l} \gets$ set of clusters at layer $l$ of agglomerative hierarchy, each cluster forms a partition\;
\vspace{0.4em}
\ForEach{$P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{l}$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
Find the minimum weight Steiner tree $T_{P}$ which connects the nodes $\{S_{R_{new}} \cup P\}$\;
}
\vspace{0.4em}
\If{$\sum_{P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{l}} W_{T_{P}} \le p_f \times W_{T_{R_{new}}}$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
\ForEach{$P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{l}$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
$T_{P} \gets$ \textbf{ComputeTree}~($P$,$R_{new}$)\;
}
\vspace{0.4em}
\Return{$(P,~T_{P}),~\forall P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{l}$}\;
}
}
\vspace{0.4em}
$L_e \gets L_e + \frac{\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}}{C_e},~\forall e \in T_{R_{new}}$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
\Return{$(\pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}},~T_{R_{new}})$}\;
}
}
\end{algorithm}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Worst-case Complexity:} Algorithm \ref{algo_quick} performs multiple calls to the GreedyFLAC \cite{Watel2014}. It uses the hierarchical clustering with average linkage which has a worst-case complexity of $O(\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}} \rvert^3)$. To compute the pairwise distances of receivers, we use breadth first search with has a complexity of $O(\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{V}}_G \rvert+\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G \rvert)$. Worst-case complexity of Algorithm \ref{algo_quick} is $O((\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{V}}_G \rvert^3+\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G \rvert) \lvert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}} \rvert^2+\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}} \rvert^3)$.
\subsection{Rate Allocation} \label{rate-allocation}
To compute the transmission rates per tree per timeslot, one can formulate an optimization problem with the capacity and demand constraints, and consider minimizing the mean receiver completion times as the objective. This is, however, a hard problem and can be modeled using mixed-integer programming by assuming a binary variable per timeslot per tree that shows whether that tree has completed by that timeslot. One can come up with approximation algorithms to this problem which is considered part of the future work.
We consider the three popular scheduling policies of FCFS, SRPT, and fair sharing according to max-min fairness \cite{max-min-fairness} which have been extensively used for network scheduling. These policies can be applied independently of partitioning and forwarding tree selection techniques. Each one of these three policies has its unique features. FCFS and SRPT both prioritize transfers; the former according to arrival times and the latter according to transfer volumes and so obtain a meager fairness score \cite{fairness_theory}. SRPT has been extensively used for minimizing flow completion times within datacenters \cite{pfabric, pias, epn}. Strictly prioritizing transfers over forwarding trees (as done by SRPT and FCFS), however, can lead to low overall link utilization and increased completion times, especially when trees are large. This might happen due to bandwidth contention on shared edges which can prevent some transfers from making progress. Fair sharing allows all transfers to make progress which mitigates such contention enabling concurrent multicast transfers to all make progress. In \S \ref{eval-rate-alloc}, we empirically compare the performance of these scheduling policies and show that fair sharing based on max-min fairness can significantly outperform both FCFS and SRPT in average network throughput especially with a larger number of receivers per tree. As a result, we will use QuickCast along with the fair sharing policy based on max-min fairness.
The TES periodically computes the transmission rates per multicast tree every timeslot to maximize utilization and cope with inaccurate inter-DC link capacity measurements, imprecise rate limiting, and dropped packets due to corruption. To account for inaccurate rate limiting, dropped packets and link capacity estimation errors, which all can lead to a difference between the actual volume of data delivered and the number of bytes transmitted, we propose that senders keep track of actual data delivered to their receivers per forwarding tree. At the end of every timeslot, every sender reports to the traffic engineering server how much data it was able to deliver allowing it to compute rates accordingly for the timeslot that follows. Newly arriving transfers will be assigned rates starting the next timeslot.
\section{Evaluation} \label{evaluations}
We considered various topologies and transfer size distributions as shown in Tables \ref{table_topology} and \ref{table_traffic}. Also, for Algorithm \ref{algo_quick}, unless otherwise stated, we used $p_f = 1.1$ which limits the overall bandwidth usage while offering significant gains. In the following sections, we first evaluated a variety of weight assignments for multicast tree selection considering receiver completion times and bandwidth usage. We showed that the weight proposed in Algorithm \ref{algo_dccast} offers close to minimum completion times with minimal extra bandwidth consumption. Next, we evaluated the proposed partitioning technique and considered two cases of $N_{max}=2$,\footnote{Two partitions is the minimum needed to separate several receivers from the slowest receiver per P2MP transfer.} and $N_{max}=\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}} \rvert$.
We measured the performance of QuickCast while varying the number of receivers and showed that it offers consistent gains. We also measured the speedup observed by different receivers ranked by their speed per multicast transfer, and the effect of partitioning factor $p_f$ on the gains in completion times as well as bandwidth usage. In addition, we evaluated the effect of different scheduling policies on average network throughput and showed that with increasing number of multicast receivers, fair sharing offers higher throughput compared to both FCFS and SRPT. Finally, we showed that QuickCast is computationally fast by measuring its running time and that the maximum number of group table forwarding entries it uses across all switches is only a fraction of what is usually available in a physical switch across the several considered scenarios.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Network Topologies:} Table \ref{table_topology} shows the list of topologies we considered. These topologies provide capacity information for all links which range from 45 Mbps to 10 Gbps. We normalized all link capacities dividing them by the maximum link capacity. We also assumed all bidirectional links with equal capacity in either direction.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Various topologies used in evaluation.} \label{table_topology}
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{tabular}{ |p{3cm}|p{10.5cm}| }
\hline
\textbf{Name} & \textbf{Description} \\
\hline
\hline
ANS \cite{ans} & A backbone and transit network that spans across the United States with $18$ nodes and $25$ links. All links have equal capacity of 45 Mbps. \\
\hline
GEANT \cite{geant} & A backbone and transit network that spans across the Europe with $34$ nodes and $52$ links. Link capacity ranges from 45 Mbps to 10 Gbps. \\
\hline
UNINETT \cite{uninett} & A large-sized backbone that spans across Norway with $69$ nodes and $98$ links. Most links have a capacity of 1, 2.5 or 10 Gbps. \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Traffic Patterns:}
Table \ref{table_traffic} shows the considered distributions for transfer volumes. Transfer arrival followed a Poisson distribution with rate $\lambda$. We considered no units for time or bandwidth. For all simulations, we assumed a timeslot length of $\delta = 1.0$. For Pareto distribution, we considered a minimum transfer volume equal to that of $2$ full timeslots and limited maximum transfer volume to that of $2000$ full timeslots. Unless otherwise stated, we considered an average demand equal to volume of $20$ full timeslots per transfer for all traffic distributions (we fixed the mean values of all distributions to the same value). Per simulation instance, we assumed equal number of transfers per sender and for every transfer, we selected the receivers from all existing nodes according to the uniform distribution (with equal probability from all nodes).
\vspace{0.2em}
\noindent\textbf{Assumptions:} We focused on computing gains and assumed accurate knowledge of inter-DC link capacity, and precise rate control at the end-points which together lead to a congestion free network. We also assumed no dropped packets due to corruption or errors, and no link failures.
\vspace{0.2em}
\noindent\textbf{Simulation Setup:} We developed a simulator in Java (JDK 8). We performed all simulations on one machine (Core i7-6700 and 24 GB of RAM). We used the Java implementation of GreedyFLAC \cite{DSTAlgoEvaluation} for minimum weight Steiner trees.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Transfer size distributions (parameters in \S \ref{evaluations}).} \label{table_traffic}
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{tabular}{ |p{5cm}|p{8.5cm}| }
\hline
\textbf{Name} & \textbf{Description} \\
\hline
\hline
Light-tailed & Based on Exponential distribution. \\
\hline
Heavy-tailed & Based on Pareto distribution. \\
\hline
Cache-Follower (Facebook) & Generated by cache applications over Facebook inter-DC WAN \cite{social_inside}. \\
\hline
Hadoop (Facebook) & Generated by geo-distributed analytics over Facebook inter-DC WAN \cite{social_inside}. \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Weight Assignment Techniques for Tree Selection}
We empirically evaluate and analyze several weights for selection of forwarding trees. Table \ref{table_cost} lists the weight assignment approaches considered for tree selection (please see Table \ref{table_var_quickcast} for definition of variables). We considered three edge weight metrics of utilization (i.e., the fraction of a link's bandwidth currently in use), load (i.e., the total volume of traffic that an edge will carry starting current time), and load plus the volume of the newly arriving transfer request.
We also considered the weight of a tree to be either the weight of its edge with maximum weight or the sum of weights of its edges. An exponential weight is used to approximate selection of trees with minimum highest weight, similar to the approach used in \cite{tempus}. The benefit of the weight \#6 over \#5 is that in case there is no load or minimal load on some edges, selecting the minimum weight tree will lead to minimum edge trees that reduce bandwidth usage. Also, with this approach, we tend to avoid large trees for large transfers which helps further reduce bandwidth usage.
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{center}
\caption{Various weights for tree selection for incoming request $R_{new}$.} \label{table_cost}
\vspace{0.5em}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{ |p{0.5cm}|p{5cm}|p{8cm}| }
\hline
\textbf{\#} & Weight of edge $e, \forall e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$ & \textbf{Properties of Selected Trees} \\
\hline
\hline
1 & $1.0$ & A fixed minimum edge Steiner tree \\
\hline
2 & $\exp(U_e)$ & Minimum highest utilization over edges \\
\hline
3 & $\exp(L_e)$ & Minimum highest load over edges \\
\hline
4 & $U_e$ & Minimum sum of utilization over edges \\
\hline
5 & $L_e$ & Minimum sum of load over edges \\
\hline
6 & $L_e+\frac{\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}}{C_e}$ & Minimum final sum of load over edges \\[0.5mm]
\hline
7 & $1.0+\frac{\exp(U_e)} {\sum_{e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G} \exp(U_e)}$ & Minimum edges, min-max utilization \\[1mm]
\hline
8 & $1.0+\frac{\exp(L_e)} {\sum_{e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G} \exp(L_e)}$ & Minimum edges, min-max load \\[1mm]
\hline
9 & $1.0+\frac{U_e} {\sum_{e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G} U_e}$ & Minimum edges, min-sum of utilization \\[1mm]
\hline
10 & $1.0+\frac{L_e} {\sum_{e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G} L_e}$ & Minimum edges, min-sum of load \\[1mm]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\cline{2-13}
\multicolumn{1}{l|}{} & \multicolumn{12}{c|}{Mean Receiver Completion Times} \\ \cline{2-13}
\multicolumn{1}{l|}{} & \multicolumn{6}{c|}{ANS} & \multicolumn{6}{c|}{GEANT} \\ \cline{2-13}
\multicolumn{1}{l|}{} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Light-tailed} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Heavy-tailed} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Light-tailed} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Heavy-tailed} \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}\#} & $\mathcal{F}$ & $\mathcal{S}$ & $\mathcal{M}$ & $\mathcal{F}$ & $\mathcal{S}$ & $\mathcal{M}$ & $\mathcal{F}$ & $\mathcal{S}$ & $\mathcal{M}$ & $\mathcal{F}$ & $\mathcal{S}$ & $\mathcal{M}$ \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}1} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F56B00}50- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}2} & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}3} & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F56B00}50- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}4} & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}5} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}\textbf{6}} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}7} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}8} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F56B00}50- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}9} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}10} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ & \cellcolor[HTML]{F56B00}50- \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}\vspace{0.2em}
\\
\vspace{0.5em}
\resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\cline{2-13}
\multicolumn{1}{l|}{} & \multicolumn{12}{c|}{Tail Receiver Completion Times} \\ \cline{2-13}
\multicolumn{1}{l|}{} & \multicolumn{6}{c|}{ANS} & \multicolumn{6}{c|}{GEANT} \\ \cline{2-13}
\multicolumn{1}{l|}{} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Light-tailed} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Heavy-tailed} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Light-tailed} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Heavy-tailed} \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}\#} & $\mathcal{F}$ & $\mathcal{S}$ & $\mathcal{M}$ & $\mathcal{F}$ & $\mathcal{S}$ & $\mathcal{M}$ & $\mathcal{F}$ & $\mathcal{S}$ & $\mathcal{M}$ & $\mathcal{F}$ & $\mathcal{S}$ & $\mathcal{M}$ \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}1} & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F56B00}50- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F56B00}50- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ & \cellcolor[HTML]{F56B00}50- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}2} & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}3} & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}4} & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}5} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}\textbf{6}} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}7} & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F56B00}50- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}8} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F56B00}50- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F56B00}50- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ & \cellcolor[HTML]{F56B00}50- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}9} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}10} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ & \cellcolor[HTML]{F56B00}50- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FE0000}50+ & \cellcolor[HTML]{F56B00}50- \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}\vspace{0.2em}
\\
\vspace{0.5em}
\resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\cline{2-13}
\multicolumn{1}{l|}{} & \multicolumn{12}{c|}{Total Bandwidth Used} \\ \cline{2-13}
\multicolumn{1}{l|}{} & \multicolumn{6}{c|}{ANS} & \multicolumn{6}{c|}{GEANT} \\ \cline{2-13}
\multicolumn{1}{l|}{} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Light-tailed} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Heavy-tailed} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Light-tailed} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Heavy-tailed} \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}\#} & $\mathcal{F}$ & $\mathcal{S}$ & $\mathcal{M}$ & $\mathcal{F}$ & $\mathcal{S}$ & $\mathcal{M}$ & $\mathcal{F}$ & $\mathcal{S}$ & $\mathcal{M}$ & $\mathcal{F}$ & $\mathcal{S}$ & $\mathcal{M}$ \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}1} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}2} & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F56B00}50- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8A102}40- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}3} & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}4} & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- & \cellcolor[HTML]{FFCC67}30- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}5} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}\textbf{6}} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{F8FF00}20- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}7} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}8} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}9} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\cellcolor[HTML]{EFEFEF}10} & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- & \cellcolor[HTML]{34FF34}10- \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}%
\vspace{0.4em}
\resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|
>{\columncolor[HTML]{34FF34}}l |l|l|
>{\columncolor[HTML]{F8FF00}}l |l|l|
>{\columncolor[HTML]{FFCC67}}l |}
\cline{1-2} \cline{4-5} \cline{7-8}
$< 10\%$ from min & 10- & & $< 20\%$ from min & 20- & & $< 30\%$ from min & 30- \\ \cline{1-2} \cline{4-5} \cline{7-8}
\end{tabular}
}%
\vspace{0.1em}
\resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|
>{\columncolor[HTML]{F8A102}}l |l|l|
>{\columncolor[HTML]{F56B00}}l |l|l|
>{\columncolor[HTML]{FE0000}}l |}
\cline{1-2} \cline{4-5} \cline{7-8}
$< 40\%$ from min & 40- & & $< 50\%$ from min & 50- & & $\ge 50\%$ from min & 50+ \\ \cline{1-2} \cline{4-5} \cline{7-8}
\end{tabular}
}%
\vspace{0.2em}
\caption{Evaluation of various weights for tree selection ($\mathcal{F}$, $\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{M}$ refer to scheduling policies FCFS, SRPT and Fair Sharing, respectively).} \label{fig:weights.assignment}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:weights.assignment} shows our simulation results of receiver completion times for bulk multicast transfers with $10$ receivers for a fixed arrival rate of $\lambda=1$. We considered both light-tailed and heavy-tailed transfer volume distributions. Techniques \#1, \#7, \#8, \#9 and \#10 all used minimal edge Steiner trees, and so offer minimum bandwidth usage. However, this comes at the cost of increasing completion times especially when edges have a non-homogeneous capacity.
Techniques \#2 and \#4 use utilization as criteria for load balancing. Minimizing maximum link utilization has long been a popular objective for traffic engineering over WAN. As can be seen, they have the highest bandwidth usage compared to other techniques (up to $40\%$ above the minimum) for almost all scenarios while their completion times are at least $20\%$ worse than the minimum for several scenarios.
Techniques \#3, \#5, and \#6 operate based on link load (i.e., total outstanding volume of traffic per edge) among which technique \#3 (minimizing maximum load) has the highest variation between best and worst case performance (up to $40\%$ worse than the minimum in mean completion times).
Techniques \#5 and \#6 (minimizing the sum of load including and excluding the new multicast request) on the other hand offer consistently good performance that is up to $13\%$ above the minimum (for all performance metrics) across all scheduling policies, topologies, and traffic patterns. These techniques offer lower completion times for the GEANT topology with non-uniform link capacity. Technique \#6 also provides slightly better bandwidth usage and better completion times compared to \#5 for the majority of scenarios (not shown). Our proposals rely on technique \#6 for selection of load-aware forwarding trees, as shown in Algorithm \ref{algo_dccast}.
\subsection{Receiver Set Partitioning}
Receiver set partitioning allows separation of faster receivers from the slowest (or slower ones). This is essential to improve network utilization and speed up transfers when there are competing transfers or physical bottlenecks. For example, both GEANT and UNINETT have edges that vary by at least a factor of $10\times$ in capacity. We evaluate QuickCast over a variety of scenarios.
\subsubsection{Effect of Number of Receivers}
We provide an overall comparison of several schemes (QuickCast, Single Load-Aware Steiner Tree, and DCCast \cite{dccast}) along with two basic solutions of using a minimum edge Steiner tree and unicast minimum hop path routing as shown in Figure \ref{fig:overall}. We also considered both light and heavy load regimes. We used real inter-DC traffic patterns reported by Facebook for two applications of Cache-Follower and Hadoop \cite{social_inside}. Also, all schemes use the fair sharing rate allocation based on max-min fairness except DCCast which uses the FCFS policy.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure[$\lambda = 1$ (heavy load)]
{
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{overall_new_1_emb_new.pdf}
}
\\
\subfigure[$\lambda = 0.001$ (light load)]
{
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{overall_new_001_emb_new.pdf}
}
\caption{Various schemes for bulk multicast transfers. All schemes use max-min fair rates except for DCCast which uses FCFS and are performed on GEANT topology. Plots are normalized by minimum (lower is better). We used Cache-Follower and Hadoop traffic patterns in Table \ref{table_traffic}.}
\label{fig:overall}
\end{figure}
The minimum edge Steiner tree leads to the minimum bandwidth consumption. The unicast minimum hop path routing approach separates all receivers per bulk multicast transfer. It, however, uses a significantly larger volume of traffic and also does not offer the best mean completion times for the following reasons. First, it exhausts network capacity quickly which increases tail completion times by a significant factor (not shown here). Second, it can lead to many additional shared links that increase contention across flows and reduce throughput per receiver. The significant increase in completion times of higher percentiles increases the average completion times of the unicast approach.
With $N_{max}=\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}} \rvert$, we see that QuickCast offers the best mean and median completion times, i.e., up to $2.84\times$ less compared to QuickCast with $N_{max}=2$, up to $3.64\times$ less compared to unicast minimum hop routing, and up to $3.33\times$ less than single load-aware Steiner tree. To achieve this gain, QuickCast with $N_{max}=\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}} \rvert$ uses at most $1.49\times$ more bandwidth compared to using minimum edge Steiner trees which is still $1.4\times$ less than bandwidth usage of unicast minimum hop routing. We also see that while increasing the number of receivers, QuickCast with $N_{max}=\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}} \rvert$ offers consistently small median completion times by separating fast and slow receivers since the number of partitions are not limited. Overall, we see a higher gain under light load as there is more capacity available to utilize. We also recognize that QuickCast with either $N_{max}=2$ or $N_{max}=\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}} \rvert$ performs almost always better than unicast minimum hop routing in mean completion times.
\subsubsection{Speedup by Receiver Rank}
Figure \ref{fig:speedup_1} shows how QuickCast can speed up multiple receivers per transfer by separating them from the slower receivers. The gains are normalized by when a single partition is used per bulk multicast transfer. In case the number of partitions is limited to two similar to \cite{quickcast}, the highest gain is usually obtained by the first two to three receivers while allowing more partitions, we can get considerably higher gain for a significant fraction of receivers. Also, by not limiting the partitions to two, we see higher gains for all receiver ranks that is above $2\times$ for multiple receiver ranks. This comes at the cost of higher bandwidth consumption which we saw earlier in the previous experiment.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{gain_8_emb_new.pdf}
\caption{Mean receiver completion time speedup (larger is better) of receivers compared to single load-aware Steiner tree (Algorithm \ref{algo_dccast}) by their rank (receivers sorted by their speed from fastest to slowest per transfer), receivers selected according to uniform distribution from all nodes, we considered $\lambda = 1$.}
\label{fig:speedup_1}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Partitioning Factor}
The performance of QuickCast as a function of the partitioning factor (i.e., $p_f$) has been shown in Figure \ref{fig:pf} where gains are normalized by single load-aware Steiner tree which uses a single partition per bulk multicast transfer. We computed per receiver mean and 95\textsuperscript{th} percentile completion times as well as bandwidth usage.
As can be seen, bandwidth consumption increases with partitioning factor as more requests' receivers are partitioned into two or more groups. The gains in completion times keep increasing if $N_{max}$ is not limited as we increase $p_f$. That, however, can ultimately lead to unicast delivery to all receivers (i.e., every receiver as a separate partition) and excessive bandwidth usage. We see a diminishing return type of curve as $p_f$ is increased with the highest returns coming when we increase $p_f$ from 1 to 1.1 (marked with a green dashed lined). That is because using too many partitions can saturate network capacity while not improving the separation of fast and slow nodes considerably.
At $p_f=1.1$, we see up to 10\% additional bandwidth usage compared to single load-aware Steiner tree while mean completion times improve by between 40\% to 50\%. According to other experiments not shown here, with large $p_f$, it is possible even to see reductions in gain that come from excessive bandwidth consumption and increased contention over capacity. Note that this experiment was performed considering four receivers per bulk multicast transfer. Using more receivers can lead to more bandwidth usage with the same $p_f$, an increased slope at values of $p_f$ close to 1, and faster saturation of network capacity as we increase $p_f$. Therefore, using smaller $p_f$ is preferred with more receivers per transfer.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{pf_emb_new.pdf}
\caption{Performance of QuickCast as a function of partitioning factor $p_f$. We assumed 4 receivers and an arrival rate of $\lambda = 1$.}
\label{fig:pf}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{thr_emb_new.pdf}
\caption{Average throughput of bulk multicast transfers obtained by running different scheduling policies. We started 100 transfers at the time zero, senders and receivers were selected according to the uniform distribution. Each group of bars is normalized by the minimum in that group.}
\label{fig:thr}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Effect of Rate Allocation Policies} \label{eval-rate-alloc}
As explained earlier in \S \ref{rate-allocation}, when scheduling traffic over large forwarding trees, fair sharing can sometimes offer significantly higher throughput and hence better completion times. We performed an experiment over the ANS topology and with both light-tailed and heavy-tailed traffic distributions. ANS topology has uniform link capacity across all edges which helps us rule out the effect of capacity variations on throughput obtained via different scheduling policies. We also considered an increasing number of receivers from 4 to 8 and 16. Figure \ref{fig:thr} shows the results. We see that fair sharing offers a higher average throughput across all ongoing transfers compared to FCFS and SRPT and that with more receivers, the benefit of using fair sharing increases to up to $1.5\times$ with 16 receivers per transfer.
\subsection{Running Time}
To ensure scalability of proposed algorithms, we measured the running time of our algorithms over various topologies (with different sizes) and with varying rates of arrival. We assumed two arrival rates of $\lambda=0.001$ and $\lambda=1$ which account for light and heavy load regimes. We also considered eight receivers per transfer and all the three topologies of ANS, GEANT, and UNINETT. We saw that the running time of Algorithm \ref{algo_dccast}, and \ref{algo_quick} remained below one millisecond and 20 milliseconds, respectively, across all of these scenarios. These numbers are less than the propagation latency between the majority of senders and receivers over considered topologies (a simple TCP handshake would take at least twice the propagation latency). More efficient realization of these algorithms can further reduce their running time (e.g., implementation in C/C++ instead of Java).
\subsection{Forwarding Plane Resource Usage}
QuickCast can be realized using software-defined networking and OpenFlow compatible switches. To forward packets to multiple outgoing ports on switches where trees branch out to numerous edges, we can use group tables which have been supported by OpenFlow since early versions. Besides, an increasing number of physical switch makers have added support for group tables. To allow forwarding to multiple outgoing ports, the group table entries should be of type ``ALL", i.e., \texttt{OFPGT\_ALL} in the OpenFlow specifications. Group tables are highly scarce (compared to TCAM entries) and so should be used with care. Some new switches support 512 or 1024 entries per switch. Another critical parameter is the maximum number of action buckets per entry which primarily determines the maximum possible branching degree for trees. Across the switches we looked at, we found that the minimum supported value was 8 action buckets which should be enough for WAN topologies as most of such do not have any nodes with this connectivity degree.
In general, reasoning about the number of group table entries needed to realize different schemes is hard since it depends on how the trees are formed which is highly intertwined with edge weights that depend on the distribution of load. For example, consider a complete binary tree with 8 receivers as leaves and the sender at the root. This will require 6 group table entries to transmit to all receivers with two action buckets per each intermediate node on the tree (branching at the sender does not need a group table entry). If instead, we used an intermediate node to connect to all receivers with a branching degree of 8, we would only need one group table entry with eight action buckets.
We measured the number of group table entries needed to realize QuickCast. We computed the average of the maximum, and maximum of the maximum number of entries used per switch during the simulation for the topologies of ANS, GEANT, and UNINETT, with arrival rates of $\lambda=0.001$ and $\lambda=1$, considering both light-tailed and heavy-tailed traffic patterns and assuming that each bulk multicast transfer had eight receivers. The experiment was terminated when 200 transfers arrived. Looking at the maximum helps us see whether there are enough entries at all times to handle all concurrent transfers. Interestingly, we saw that by using multiple trees per transfer, both the average and maximum of the maximum number of group table entries used were less than when a single tree was used per transfer. One reason is that using a single tree slows down faster receivers which may lead to more concurrent receivers that increase the number of group entries. Also, by partitioning receivers, we make subsequent trees smaller and allow them to branch out closer to their receivers which balances the use of group table entries usage across the switches reducing the maximum. Finally, by using more partitions, the maximum number of times a tree needs to branch to reach all of its receivers decreases. Across all the scenarios considered above, the maximum of maximum group table entries at any timeslot was 123, and the average of the maximum was at most 68 for QuickCast. Furthermore, by setting $N_{max}=\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}} \rvert$ which allows for more partitions, the maximum of maximum group table entries decreased by up to 17\% across all scenarios.
\section{Conclusions}
Many P2MP transfers do not require that all receivers finish reception at the same time. Moreover, attaching all receivers of a P2MP transfer to the sender using a single forwarding trees limits the speed of all receivers to that of the slowest one. We introduced the bulk multicast routing and scheduling problem to minimize mean completion times of receivers and split it into three sub-problems of receiver set partitioning, tree selection, and rate allocation. We then presented QuickCast which applies three heuristic techniques to offer approximate solutions to these three hard sub-problems. We performed extensive evaluations to validate the effectiveness of QuickCast. In general, the gains are a function of network connectivity, link capacities, and transfer properties. Considering multiple network topologies and transfer size distributions, we found that QuickCast offers significant speedups for multiple receivers per P2MP transfer while negligibly increasing the total bandwidth consumption. Interestingly, we also found that the number of forwarding rules at network switches needed to realize QuickCast can be considerably less than when a single forwarding tree is used per P2MP transfer which makes it more practical.
\clearpage
\chapter{Mixed Completion Time Objectives for P2MP Transfers over Inter-DC Networks} \label{chapter_iris}
Bulk transfers from one to multiple datacenters can have many different completion time objectives ranging from quickly replicating some $k$ copies to minimizing the time by which the last destination receives a full replica. We design an SDN-style wide-area traffic scheduler that optimizes different completion time objectives for various requests. The scheduler builds, for each bulk transfer, one or more multicast forwarding trees which preferentially use lightly loaded network links. Multiple multicast trees are used per bulk transfer to insulate destinations that have higher available bandwidth and can hence finish quickly from congested destinations.
When receivers of a bulk multicast transfer have very different network bandwidth available on paths from the sender, the slowest receiver dictates the completion time for all receivers. As discussed in Chapter \ref{chapter_p2mp_quickcast}, using multiple multicast trees to separate the faster receivers which will improve the average receiver's completion time. However, each additional tree consumes more network bandwidth and at the extremum, this idea devolves to one tree per receiver. We aim to answer the following questions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item What is the right number of trees per transfer?
\item Which receivers should be grouped in each tree?
\end{enumerate}
We analyze a relaxed version of this partitioning problem where each partition is a subset of receivers attached to the sender with a separate forwarding tree. We first propose a partitioning technique that reduces the average receiver completion times of receivers by isolating slow and fast receivers. We study this approach in the relaxed setting of having a congestion-free network core, i.e., links in/out of the datacenters are the capacity bottlenecks, and considering max-min fair rate allocation from the underlying network. We then develop a partitioning technique for real-world inter-datacenter networks, without relaxations, and inspired by the findings from studying the relaxed scenario. The partitioning technique operates by building a hierarchy of valid partitioning solutions and selecting the one that offers the best average receiver completion times. Our evaluation of this partitioning technique on real-world topologies, including ones with bottlenecks in the network core, show that the technique yields completion times that are close to a lower bound and hence nearly optimal.
Moreover, we incorporate binary objective vectors which allow applications to indicate transfer-specific objectives for receivers' completion times. Using the application-provided objective vectors, we can optimize for mixed completion time objectives based on the trade-off between total network capacity consumption and the receivers' average completion times.
We present the {{\sf Iris}} heuristic, which computes a partitioning of receivers for every transfer given a binary objective vector. {{\sf Iris}} aims to minimize the completion time of receivers whose rank is indicated by applications/users with a one in the objective vector while saving as much bandwidth as possible by grouping receivers whose ranks are indicated with consecutive zeros in the objective vector.
{{\sf Iris}} operates in a logically centralized manner, receives bulk multicast transfer requests from end-points, and computes receiver partitions along with their multicast forwarding trees. We create forwarding trees using group tables~\cite{openflow-1.1.0}. {{\sf Iris}} uses a RESTful API to communicate with the end-points allowing them to specify their transfer properties and requirements (i.e., objective vectors) using which it computes and installs the required rules in the forwarding plane. We believe our techniques are easily applicable in today's inter-DC networks~\cite{b4, swan-backbone, facebook-express-backbone}.
We perform extensive simulations and Mininet emulations with {{\sf Iris}} using synthetic and real-world Facebook inter-DC traffic patterns over large WAN topologies. Simulation results show that {{\sf Iris}} speeds up transfers to a small number of receivers~(e.g., $\geq 8$ receivers) by $\ge 2\times$ on the average completion time while the bandwidth used is $\leq 1.13\times$ compared to state-of-the-art. Transfers with more receivers receive larger benefits. For transfers to at least $16$ receivers, $75\%$ of the receivers complete at least $5\times$ faster and the fastest receiver completes $2.5\times$ faster compared to state-of-the-art. Compared to performing multicast as multiple unicast transfers with shortest path routing, {{\sf Iris}} reduces mean completion times by about $2\times$ while using $0.66\times$ of the bandwidth. Finally, Mininet emulations show that {{\sf Iris}} reduces the maximum group table entries needed by up to $3\times$.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Motivating Examples:}
Back-end geo-distributed applications running on datacenters can have different requirements on how their objects are replicated to other datacenters. Hence, inter-DC traffic is usually a mix of transfers with various completion time objectives. For example, while reproducing $n$ copies of an object to $n$ different datacenters/locations, one application may want to transfer $k$ copies quickly to any among $n$ given receivers, and another application may want to minimize the time when the last copy finishes. In the former case, grouping the slower $n-k$ receivers into one partition consumes less bandwidth and this spare bandwidth could be used to speed up the other transfers. In the latter case, by grouping all receivers except the slowest receiver together (i.e., into one tree), we can isolate them from the slowest receiver with minimal bandwidth consumption. Minimizing the completion times of all receivers is another possible objective. Our technique takes as input a binary objective vector whose $i$\textsuperscript{th} element expresses interest in the completion time of the $i$\textsuperscript{th} fastest receiver; it aims to minimize the completion times of receivers whose rank is set to one in this objective vector. It is easy to see that following values of the objective vector achieve the goals discussed so far; when $k=1$, $n=3$, $\{1, 0, 0\}$, $\{0, 0, 1\}$ and $\{1, 1, 1\}$ aim to minimize the completion time of the fastest $k$ out of $n$ receivers, the slowest receiver, and all receivers, respectively.
\section{System Model} \label{system_model_iris}
Similar to previous chapters, a TES runs our algorithms in a logically centralized manner to decide how traffic is forwarded in-network. P2MP transfers are processed in an online fashion as they arrive with the main objective of optimizing completion times. Also, forwarding entries, which are installed for every transfer upon arrival, are fixed until the transfers' completion may only be updated in case of failures.
We consider max-min fair \cite{max-min-fairness} rate allocation across multicast forwarding trees. Traffic is transmitted with the same rate from the source to all the receivers attached to a forwarding tree. To reach max-min fair rates, such rates can either be computed centrally over specific time periods, i.e., timeslots, and then be used for end-point traffic shaping or end-points can gradually converge to such rates in a distributed fashion in a way similar to TCP \cite{mctcp} (fairness is considered across trees). In our evaluations, we will consider the former approach for increased network utilization. Using a fair sharing policy addresses the starvation problem (such as in SRPT policy) and prevents larger transfers from blocking edges (such as in FCFS policy).
We use the notion of \textbf{objective vectors} to allow applications to define transfer-specific requirements which in general can improve overall system performance and reduce bandwidth consumption. An objective vector for a transfer is a vector of zeros and ones which is the same size as the number of receivers of that transfer. From left to right, the binary digit $i$ in this vector is associated with the $i\textsuperscript{th}$ fastest receiver. A one in the objective vector indicates that we are specifically interested in the completion time of the receiver associated with that rank in the vector. By assigning zeros and ones to different receiver ranks, it is possible to respect different applications' preferences or requirements while allowing the system to optimize bandwidth consumption further. The application/user, however, needs not be aware of the mapping between the downlink speeds (rank in the objective vector) and the receivers themselves.
Table \ref{table_omega} offers several examples. For instance, an objective vector of $\{0,0,0,1,0,0,0,0\}$ indicates the application's interest in the fourth fastest receiver. To respect the application's objective, we initially isolate the fourth receiver and do not group it with any other receiver. The first three fastest receivers can be grouped into a partition to save bandwidth. The same goes for the four slowest receivers. However, we do not group all receivers indicated with zeros into one partition initially (i.e., the top three receivers and the bottom four) to avoid slowing some of them down unnecessarily (in this case, the top three receivers). This forms the basis for the partitioning technique proposed in \S \ref{partitioning} that operates by building a hierarchy with multiple layers, where each layer is a valid partitioning solution, and selects the layer that gives the smallest average receiver completion times.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Behavior of several objective vectors.} \label{table_omega}
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{tabular}{ |p{4.5cm}|p{9cm}| }
\hline
\textbf{Objective Vector ($\omega$)} & \textbf{Outcome (given $n$ receivers)} \\
\hline
\hline
\raisebox{-0.6\totalheight}{\includegraphics[height=3em]{omega_1.pdf}} & Interested in completion times of all individual receivers \\
\hline
\raisebox{-0.9\totalheight}{\includegraphics[height=3em]{omega_2.pdf}} & Interested in completion times of the top $k$ receivers (groups the bottom $n-k$ receivers to save bandwidth) \\
\hline
\raisebox{-0.9\totalheight}{\includegraphics[height=3em]{omega_3.pdf}} & Interested in the completion time of the $k$\textsuperscript{th} receiver (groups the top $k-1$ receivers into a fast partition, and the bottom $n-k$ receivers into a slow one to save bandwidth) \\
\hline
\raisebox{-0.9\totalheight}{\includegraphics[height=3em]{omega_4.pdf}} & Not interested in the completion time of any specific receiver (all receivers form a single partition) \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Problem Statement:}
Given an inter-DC topology with known available bandwidth per link, the traffic engineering server is responsible for \textit{partitioning receivers} and \textit{selecting a forwarding tree per partition} for every incoming bulk multicast transfer. A bulk multicast transfer is specified by its source, set of receivers and volume of data to be delivered. The primary objective is minimizing average receiver completion times. In case an objective vector is specified, we want to minimize average completion times of receivers whose ranks are indicated with a $1$ in the vector as well as receivers indicated with consecutive $0$'s in the vector together as groups (receivers noted with consecutive $0$'s use the same forwarding tree and will have the same completion times). Minimizing bandwidth consumption, which is directly proportional to the size of selected forwarding trees, is considered a secondary objective.
\subsection{Online Greedy Optimization Model} \label{greedy_online}
The online bulk multicast partitioning and forwarding tree selection problem can be formulated using Eq. \ref{opt}-\ref{const_cap} added the constraint that our rate allocation is max-min fair across forwarding trees for any selection of the partitions and the trees. We will use the notation defined in Table \ref{table_var_0} as well as those in Table \ref{table_var_iris}.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Definition of variables used in this chapter besides those defined in Table \ref{table_var_0}.} \label{table_var_iris}
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{tabular}{ |p{1.5cm}|p{12cm}| }
\hline
\textbf{Variable} & \textbf{Definition} \\
\hline
\hline
$T$ & A directed Steiner tree \\
\hline
$r_T(t)$ & The transmission rate over tree $T$ at timeslot $t$ \\
\hline
$P$ & A receiver partition of some request \\
\hline
$\pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{R}$ & Set$\langle\rangle$ of partitions of some request $R$ \\
\hline
$T_{P}$ & The forwarding tree of partition $P$ \\
\hline
$\mathcal{V}^{r}_{P}$ & Current residual volume of partition $P$ of request $R$ \\
\hline
$\kappa_P$ & Estimated minimum completion time of partition $P$ \\
\hline
$L_e$ & Edge $e$'s total load (see \S \ref{forwardingtree}) \\
\hline
$\pi_R$ & Objective vector assigned to request $R$ \\
\hline
$\pi_R^{\star}$ & Weighted completion time vector computed from $\pi_R$ by replacing the last zero in a pack of consecutive zeros with the number of consecutive zeros in that pack (e.g., $\pi_R=\{0,0,0,1,0,0\} \rightarrow \pi_R^{\star}=\{0,0,3,1,0,2\}$) \\
\hline
$\tau_{R}$ & Vector of completion times of receivers of request $R$ sorted from fastest to slowest \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The set $\pmb{\mathrm{R}}$ includes both the new transfer $R_{new}$ and all the ones already in the system for which we already have the partitions and forwarding trees. The optimization objective of Eq. \ref{opt} is to minimize the weighted sum of completion times of receivers of all requests $R \in \pmb{\mathrm{R}}$ according to their objective vectors, and the total bandwidth consumption of $R_{new}$ by partitioning its receivers and selecting their forwarding trees (indicated by the term $\sum_{P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{R_{new}}} \mathcal{V}_{P} \lvert T_{P} \rvert$). Operators can choose the non-negative coefficient $\epsilon$ according to the overall system objective to give a higher weight to minimizing the weighted completion time of receivers than reducing bandwidth consumption. Eq. \ref{const_dem} shows the demand constraints which state that the total sum of transmission rates over every tree for future timeslots is equal to the remaining volume of data per partition (each partition uses one tree). Eq. \ref{const_cap} presents the capacity constraints which state that the total sum of transmission rates per timeslot for all trees that share a common edge has to not go beyond its available bandwidth.
\begin{align}
\min~~~&\sum_{R \in \pmb{\mathrm{R}}} \Big( \tau_{R} \cdot \pi_R^{\star} \Big) + \epsilon \sum_{P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{R_{new}}} \mathcal{V}_{P} \lvert T_{P} \rvert \label{opt}\\
\textrm{Subject to}~~~&\sum_{t} r_{T_P}(t) = \mathcal{V}^{r}_{P} & \forall P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{R}, R \in \pmb{\mathrm{R}} \label{const_dem} \\
&\sum_{\{P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{R}, R \in \pmb{\mathrm{R}} ~\vert~ e \in T_P\}} r_{T_P}(t) \le B_e(t) \qquad & \forall t, e \label{const_cap}
\end{align}
This online discrete optimization problem is highly complex as it is unclear how receivers should be partitioned into multiple subsets to reduce completion times and there is an exponential number of possibilities. Selection of forwarding trees to minimize completion times is also a hard problem. In \S \ref{Iris}, we will present a heuristic that aims to approximate a solution to this optimization problem inspired by the findings in \S \ref{partitioning_model}.
\section{Partitioning of Receivers on a Relaxed Topology} \label{partitioning_model}
Due to the high complexity of the partitioning problem as a result of physical topology, we first study a relaxed topology where every datacenter is attached with a single uplink/downlink to a network with infinite core capacity (and so the network core cannot become a bottleneck). As shown in Figure \ref{fig:problem_formulation}, the sender has a maximum uplink rate of $r_s$ and transmits to a set of $n$ receivers with different maximum downlink rates of $r_i, \forall i \in \{1,\dots,n\}$. In \S \ref{forwardingtree}, we discuss a load-balancing forwarding tree selection approach that aims to distribute load across the network to minimize the effect of bottlenecks within the network core. Also, inspired by the findings in this section, we will develop an effective partitioning heuristic in \S \ref{partitioning}. Without loss of generality, let us also assume that the receivers in Figure \ref{fig:problem_formulation} are sorted by their downlink rates in descending order. The sender can initiate multicast flows to any partition (i.e., a subset of receivers) given that every receiver appears in exactly one partition. All receivers in a partition will have the same multicast rate that is the rate of the slowest receiver in the partition. To compute rates at the uplink, we consider the max-min fair rate allocation policy (see \S \ref{system_model_iris}). In this context, we would like to compute the number of partitions as well as the receivers that should be grouped per partition to minimize mean completion times.
\begin{figure}[b]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{aggregated_topo.pdf}
\caption{A relaxed topology with infinite core capacity, and uplink and downlink capacities of $r_s$ and $r_1 \ge \dots \ge r_n$.}
\label{fig:problem_formulation}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.5em}
\textbf{Theorem 1.} Given receivers sorted by their downlink rates, partitioning that groups consecutive receivers is pareto-optimal with regards to minimizing completion times.
\vspace{0.5em}
\textbf{\textit{Proof.}} We use proof by contradiction. Let us assume a partitioning where non-consecutive receivers are grouped together, that is, there exist two partitions $P_1$ and $P_2$ where part of partition $P_1$ falls in between receivers of $P_2$ or the other way around. Let us call the slowest receivers of $P_1$ and $P_2$ as $j_1$ and $j_2$, respectively. Across $j_1$ and $j_2$, let us pick the fastest and call it $f(j_1,j_2)$. If $f(j_1,j_2) = j_1$ (i.e., in the non-decreasing order of downlink speed from left to right, $P_2$ appears before $P_1$ as in $P_2\{\dots\}~P_1\{\dots,j_1\}~P_2\{\dots,j_2\}~\dots$), then by swapping the fastest receiver in $P_2$ and $j_1$, we can improve the rate of $P_1$ while keeping the rate of $P_2$ the same. If $f(j_1,j_2) = j_2$, then by swapping the fastest receiver in $P_1$ and $j_2$, we can improve the rate of $P_2$ while keeping the rate of $P_1$ the same. This can be done in both cases without changing the number of partitions, or number of receivers per partition across all partitions. Since the new partitioning has a higher or equal achievable rate for one of the partitions, the total average completion times will be less than or equal to that of original partitioning, which means the original partitioning could not have been optimal.
\subsection{Our Partitioning Approach}
Based on Theorem 1, the number of possible partitioning scenarios that can be considered for minimum average completion times is the number of compositions of integer $n$, that is, $2^{n-1}$ ways which can be a large space to search. To reduce complexity, we isolate slow receivers from the rest of receivers to minimize their effect. In other words, given an integer $1 \le M \le n$, we group the first $n - M + 1$ fastest receivers into one partition and the rest of the receivers as separate $1$-receiver partitions ($M - 1$ in total). Since we do not know the value of integer $M$, we will try all possible values, that is, $n$ in total which will help us find the right threshold for the separation of fast and slow receivers. In particular, we compute the total average downlink rate of all receivers for the given transfer for every value of $M$ and select the $M$ that maximizes the average rate.\footnote{Or alternatively minimizes the average completion times of receivers.} As shown in Figure \ref{fig:problem_formulation}, the uplink at the sender has a rate of $r_s$ which will be divided across all the multicast flows that deliver data to the receivers. Isolating a slow receiver only takes a small fraction of the sender's uplink which is why this technique is effective as we will later see in evaluations. An example of this approach and how it compares with the optimal solution is shown in Figure \ref{fig:partitioning_example_1} where our solution selects $M=3$ partitions isolating the two slow receivers.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{partitioning_1.pdf}
\caption{Various partitioning solutions for a scenario with four receivers. Numbers show the downlink and uplink speeds of nodes and curly brackets indicate the partitions where all nodes in a partition receive data at the same rate. The objective is to maximize the average rate of receivers given the max-min fairness policy.}
\label{fig:partitioning_example_1}
\end{figure}
A main determining factor in the effectiveness of this approach is how $r_s$ compares with $\sum_{1 \le i \le n} r_i$. If $r_s$ is larger, then simply using $n$ partitions will offer the maximum total rate to the receivers. The opposite is when $r_s \ll \sum_{1 \le i \le n} r_i$ in which case using a single partition offers the highest total rate. In other cases, given the partitioning approach mentioned above, the worst-case scenario happens when there are many slow receivers and only a handful of fast receivers. An example has been shown in Figure \ref{fig:partitioning_example_2}. In the scenario on the left, our approach groups all the receivers into one partition where they all receive data at the rate of one. That is because by isolating slow receivers we can either get a rate of one or less than one if we isolate more than nine slow receivers, which means using one partition is enough. The optimal case, however, groups all the slow receivers into one partition. In general, scenarios like this rarely happen as the number of slow receivers over inter-datacenter networks is usually small, i.e., most datacenters are connected using high capacity links with large available bandwidth. In general, since we consider all values of $M$ from $1$ to $n$ partitions, the solution obtained from our partitioning approach cannot be worse than the two baseline approaches of using a single multicast tree for all receivers and unicasting to all receivers using separate paths.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{partitioning_2.pdf}
\caption{A worst-case scenario for the proposed partitioning scenario. Numbers within the nodes show the downlink and uplink speeds of nodes and curly brackets indicate the partitions where all nodes in a partition receive data at the same rate. The objective is to maximize the average rate of receivers given the max-min fairness policy.}
\label{fig:partitioning_example_2}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Incorporating Objective Vectors}
We allow users to supply an objective vector along with their multicast transfers to better optimize the network performance, that is, total network capacity consumption and receiver completion times. We incorporate the objective vectors by grouping receivers with consecutive ranks that are indicated with zeros in the objective vector and treating them as one partition in the whole process. That is because the users have indicated no interest in the completion times of those receivers, so we might as well reduce the network capacity usage by grouping them from the beginning. Figure \ref{fig:wancast_clustering_example} shows an example of building possible solutions by isolating slow receivers and incorporating the user-supplied objective vector, which we refer to as the partitioning hierarchy. Please note that this hierarchy moves in the reverse direction, that is, instead of isolating slow receivers, it merges fast receivers from bottom to the top.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{wancast_clustering_example.pdf}
\caption{Example of a partitioning hierarchy for a transfer with 10 receivers (the topology not shown).}
\label{fig:wancast_clustering_example}
\end{figure}
Each layer in this hierarchy, labeled as $\bm{\mathrm{P}}_{i}, 1 \le i \le 5$, represents a valid partitioning solution.\footnote{The associated network topology is not shown.} We see that receivers indicated with consecutive zeros in $\omega_{R}$ are merged into one big partition at the base layer or $\bm{\mathrm{P}}_{5}$. Also, we see that as we move up, the two fastest partitions at each layer are merged, which reduces total bandwidth consumption. For each layer, we compute the average completion time of receivers and then select the layer that offers the least value, in this case, $\bm{\mathrm{P}}_{3}$ was chosen.
\section{Iris} \label{Iris}
We apply the partitioning technique discussed in the previous chapter to real-world inter-datacenter networks. We develop a heuristic for partitioning receivers on real-world topologies without relaxations of \S \ref{partitioning_model}. We will generate multiple valid partitioning solutions in the form of a hierarchy where layers of the hierarchy present feasible partitioning solutions and each layer is formed by merging the two fastest partitions of the layer below.\footnote{In general, it is not possible to offer optimality guarantees due to the highly varying factors of network topology, transfer arrivals, and the distribution of transfer volumes. However, our extensive simulations in \S \ref{evaluations} show that our approach can offer significant improvement on other approaches over various topologies and traffic patterns. Also, as a result of building a hierarchy of partitioning options and selecting the best one, our solution will be at least as good as either using a single multicast tree or using unicasting to all receivers.}
We present {{\sf Iris}}, a heuristic that runs on the traffic engineering server to manage bulk multicast transfers.\footnote{Unicast transfers are a special case with a single receiver.} When a bulk multicast transfer arrives at an end-point, it will communicate the request to the traffic engineering server which will then invoke {{\sf Iris}}. It uses the knowledge of physical layer topology, available bandwidth on edges after deducting the share of high priority user traffic and other running transfers to compute partitions and forwarding trees. The traffic engineering server pulls end-points' actual progress periodically to determine their exact remaining volume across transfers to compute the total outstanding load per edge for all edges. {{\sf Iris}} consists of four modules as shown in Figure \ref{fig:iris_pipeline} which we discuss in the following subsections. {{\sf Iris}} aims to find an approximate solution to the optimization problem of Eq. \ref{opt} assuming $\epsilon \ll 1$ to prioritize minimizing completion times over minimizing bandwidth consumption. We will empirically evaluate {{\sf Iris}} by comparing it to recent work and a lower bound in \S \ref{evaluations}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{flow_diagram.pdf}
\caption{Pipeline of {{\sf Iris}}.}
\label{fig:iris_pipeline}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Choosing Forwarding Trees} \label{forwardingtree}
Load aware forwarding trees are selected given the link capacity information on the topology and according to other ongoing bulk multicast transfers across the network to reduce the completion times by mitigating the effect of bottlenecks. Tree selection should also aim to keep bandwidth consumption low by minimizing the number of edges per tree where an edge could refer to any of the links on the physical topology. To select a forwarding tree, a general approach that can capture a wide range of selection policies is to assign weights to edges of the inter-DC graph $G$ and select a minimum weight Steiner tree \cite{steiner_tree_problem}. Per edge $e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$, we assume a virtual queue that increases by volume of every transfer scheduled on that edge and decreases as traffic flows through it. Since edges differ in capacity, completing the same virtual queue size may need significantly different times for different links. We define a metric called load as $L_e = \frac{1}{B_e} \sum_{\{P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{R}, \forall R \in \pmb{\mathrm{R}} ~\vert~ e \in T_{P}\}} \mathcal{V}^{r}_{P}$. This equation sums up the remaining volumes of all trees that use a specific edge (total virtual queue size) and divides that by the average available bandwidth on that edge to compute the minimum possible time it takes for all ongoing transfers on that edge to complete. To keep completion times low, we need to avoid edges for which this value is large.
With this metric available, to select a forwarding tree given a sender and several receivers, we will first assign an edge weight of $L_e + \frac{\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}}{B_e}$ to all edges $e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$ and then select a minimum weight Steiner tree as shown in Algorithm \ref{tree_algorithm}. With this edge weight, compared to edge utilization which has been extensively used in literature for traffic engineering, we achieve a more stable measure of how busy a link is expected to be in the near future on average. We considered the second term in edge weight to reduce total bandwidth use when there are multiple trees with the same weight. It also leads to the selection of smaller trees for larger transfers which decreases the total bandwidth consumption of {{\sf Iris}} further in the long run.
\SetAlgoVlined
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{Compute A Forwarding Tree} \label{tree_algorithm}
\SetKw{KwBy}{by}
\small
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwIn{Steiner tree terminal nodes $\pmb{\mathrm{\Gamma}} \subset \{S_{R_{new}} \cup \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}}\}$, request $R_{new}$}
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwOut{A Steiner tree}
\nonl\hrulefill
\SetKwProg{CompForwardingTree}{CompForwardingTree}{}{}
\vspace{0.4em}
\CompForwardingTree{$\mathrm{(}\pmb{\mathrm{\Gamma}},R_{new}\mathrm{)}$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
To every edge $e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$, assign a weight of $(L_{e} + \frac{\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}}{B_e})$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
\Return{A minimum weight Steiner tree that connects the nodes in set $\pmb{\mathrm{\Gamma}}$ (we used a hueristic \cite{DSTAlgoEvaluation})}\;
}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Estimating Minimum Completion Times} \label{ct_estimation}
The purpose of this procedure is to estimate the minimum completion time of different partitions of a given transfer considering available bandwidth over the edges and applying max-min fair rate allocation when there are shared links across forwarding trees. Algorithms \ref{rank_algorithm} and \ref{wancast_algorithm} then use the minimum completion time per partition to rank the receivers (i.e., faster receivers have an earlier completion time) and then decide which partitions to merge. Computing the minimum completion times is done by assuming that the new transfer request has access to all the available bandwidth and compared to computing the exact completion times is much faster. Besides, calculating the exact completion times is not particularly more effective due to the continuously changing state of the system as new transfer requests arrive. Since available bandwidth over future timeslots is not precisely known, we can use estimate values similar to other work \cite{netstitcher, tempus, amoeba}. Algorithm \ref{ct_calc_algorithm} shows how the minimum completion times are computed.
\SetAlgoVlined
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{Computing Minimum Completion Times} \label{ct_calc_algorithm}
\SetKw{KwBy}{by}
\small
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwIn{Request $R_{new}$, a set of partitions $\pmb{\mathrm{P}}$ where $P \subset \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}}, \forall P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}$}
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwOut{The minimum completion time of every partition in $\pmb{\mathrm{P}}$}
\nonl\hrulefill
\SetKwProg{MinimumCompletionTimes}{MinimumCompletionTimes}{}{}
\vspace{0.4em}
\MinimumCompletionTimes{$\mathrm{(}\pmb{\mathrm{P}},R_{new}\mathrm{)}$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
$\pmb{\mathrm{f}} \gets \emptyset$, $t \gets t_{now}+1$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
$\gamma_P \gets \mathcal{V}_R,~\forall P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
$T_P \gets$ \texttt{CompForwardingTree(}$P,R_{new}$\texttt{)}, $\forall P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
\While{$\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{f}} \rvert < \lvert \mathrm{\pmb{\mathrm{P}}} \rvert$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
Compute $r_{T_P}(t),\forall P \in \{\pmb{\mathrm{P}} - \pmb{\mathrm{f}}\}$, max-min fair rate \cite{max-min-fairness} allocated to tree $T_P$ at timeslot $t$ given available bandwidth of $B_e(t)$ on every edge $e \in \pmb{\mathrm{E}}_G$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
$\gamma_P \gets \gamma_P - \omega ~r_{T_P}(t),~\forall P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
\ForEach{$P \in \{\pmb{\mathrm{P}} - \pmb{\mathrm{f}}\}$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
\If{$\gamma_P = 0$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
$\kappa_P \gets t$, $\pmb{\mathrm{f}} \gets \{\pmb{\mathrm{f}} \cup P\}$\;
}
}
\vspace{0.4em}
$t \gets t+1$\;
}
\vspace{0.4em}
\Return{$\kappa_P,\forall P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}$}
}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Assigning Ranks to Receivers} \label{receiver_rank_assignment}
Algorithm \ref{rank_algorithm} assigns ranks to individual receivers according to their minimum completion times taking into account available bandwidth over edges as well as edges' load in the path selection process. This ranking is used along with the provided objective vector later to partition receivers.
\SetAlgoVlined
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{Assign Receiver Ranks} \label{rank_algorithm}
\SetKw{KwBy}{by}
\small
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwIn{Request $R_{new}$}
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwOut{$\psi_r$, i.e., the rank of receiver $r \in \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}}$}
\nonl\hrulefill
\SetKwProg{AssignReceiverRanks}{AssignReceiverRanks}{}{}
\vspace{0.4em}
\AssignReceiverRanks{$\mathrm{(}R_{new}\mathrm{)}$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
{\color{gray}/* Every receiver is treated as a separate partition */}
\vspace{0.4em}
$\{\kappa_r,~\forall r \in \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}}\} \gets $ \texttt{MinimumCompletionTimes(}$\pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}}, R_{new}$\texttt{)}\;
\vspace{0.4em}
$\psi_r \gets$ Position of receiver $r$ in the list of all receivers sorted by their estimated minimum completion times (fastest receiver is assigned a rank of $1$), $\forall r \in \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}}$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
\Return{$\psi_r,\forall r \in \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}}$}\;
}
\end{algorithm}
\SetAlgoVlined
\begin{algorithm}[p]
\caption{Compute Receiver Partitions and Trees ({{\sf Iris}})} \label{wancast_algorithm}
\SetKw{KwBy}{by}
\small
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwIn{Request $R_{new}$, binary objective vector $\pi_{R_{new}}$}
\vspace{0.4em}
\KwOut{Partitions of request $R_{new}$ and their forwarding trees}
\nonl\hrulefill
\SetKwProg{CompPartitionsAndTrees}{CompPartitionsAndTrees}{}{}
\vspace{0.4em}
\CompPartitionsAndTrees{$\mathrm{(}R_{new},\pi_{R_{new}}\mathrm{)}$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
{\color{gray}/* Initial partitioning using the objective vector $\pi_{R_{new}}$ */}
\vspace{0.4em}
$\{\psi_r, \forall r \in \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}}\} \gets$ \texttt{AssignReceiverRanks(}$R_{new}$\texttt{)}\;
\vspace{0.4em}
$\pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}}^{s} \gets$ Receivers $r$ sorted by $\psi_r, \forall r \in \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}}$ ascending\;
\vspace{0.4em}
$\pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{base} \gets \{$Any receiver $r \in \pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}}$ for which $\pi_{R_{new}}<\psi_r>$ is $1$ as a separate partition$\} \cup \{$Group receivers that appear consecutively on $\pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}}^{s}$ for which $\pi_{R_{new}}<\psi_r>$ is $0$, each group forms a separate partition$\}$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
{\color{gray}/* Building the partitioning hierarchy for $\pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{base}$ */}
\vspace{0.4em}
$\pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{base} \rvert} \gets$ $\pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{base}$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
\For{$l = \lvert \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{base} \rvert$ \KwTo $l = 1$ \KwBy $-1$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
$\{\kappa_P,~\forall P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_l\} \gets $ \texttt{MinimumCompletionTimes(}$\mathrm{\pmb{\mathrm{P}}_l,R_{new}}$\texttt{)}\;
\vspace{0.4em}
$\kappa_l \gets \sum_{P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_l} (\lvert P \rvert~\kappa_P)$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
Assuming receivers are sorted from left to right by increasing order of rank, merge the two partitions on the left, $P$ and $Q$, to form $PQ$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
$\pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{l-1} \gets \{PQ\} \cup \{\pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{l}-\{P,Q\}\}$\;
}
\vspace{0.4em}
Find $l_{min}$ for which $\kappa_{l_{min}} \le \min_{1 \le l \le \lvert \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{base} \rvert} \kappa_l$, if multiple layers have the same $\kappa_l$, choose the layer with minimum total weight over all of its forwarding trees, i.e., select $l_{min}$ to optimize $\min(\sum_{P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{l_{min}}} (\sum_{e \in T_P} (L_e + \frac{\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}}{B_e})))$\;
\vspace{0.4em}
\ForEach{$P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{l_{min}}$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
$T_{P} \gets$ \texttt{CompForwardingTree(}$P,R_{new}$\texttt{)}\;
\vspace{0.4em}
\ForEach{$e \in T_{P}$}{
\vspace{0.4em}
$L_e \gets L_e + \frac{\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}}{B_e}$, $W_e \gets W_e + \frac{\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}}{B_e}$\;
}
}
\vspace{0.4em}
\Return{$(P,~T_P),~\forall P \in \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{l_{min}}$}\;
}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{The {{\sf Iris}} Algorithm} \label{partitioning_iris}
The {{\sf Iris}} algorithm computes receiver partitions using hierarchical partitioning and assigns each partition a multicast forwarding tree. The partitioning problem is solved per transfer and determines the number of partitions and the receivers that are grouped per partition. {{\sf Iris}} uses a partitioning technique inspired by the findings of \S \ref{partitioning_model} that is computationally fast, significantly improves receiver completion times, and operates only relying on network topology and available bandwidth per edge (i.e., after deducting the quota for higher priority user traffic). Algorithm \ref{wancast_algorithm} illustrates how {{\sf Iris}} partitions receivers with an objective vector. Given that each node in a real-world topology may have multiple interfaces, we cannot directly compute the right number of partitions using Theorem 2. As a result, we build a partitioning hierarchy with numerous layers and examine the various number of partitions from bottom to the top of the hierarchy while looking at the average of minimum completion times. By building a hierarchy, we consider the discrete nature of forwarding tree selection on the physical network topology. The process consists of two steps as follows.
We first use the receiver ranks from Algorithm \ref{rank_algorithm} and the objective vector to create the base of partitioning hierarchy, $\pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{base}$. We first sort the receivers by their ranks from fastest to slowest and then group them according to the weights in the objective vector. For any receiver whose rank in the objective vector has a value of $1$, we consider a separate partition (single node partition) which allows the receiver to complete as fast as possible by not attaching it to any other receiver. Next, we group receivers with consecutive ranks that are assigned a value of $0$ in the objective vector into partitions with potentially more than one receiver, which allows us to save as much bandwidth as possible since the user has not indicated interest in their completion times.
Now that we have a set of base partitions $\pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{base}$, a heuristic creates a hierarchy of partitioning solutions with $\lvert \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{base} \rvert$ layers where every layer $1 \le l \le \lvert \pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{base} \rvert$ is made up of a set of partitions $\pmb{\mathrm{P}}_{l}$. Each layer is created by merging two partitions from the layer below going from the bottom to the top of hierarchy. At the bottom of the hierarchy, we have the base partitions. Also, at any layer, any partition $P$ is attached to the sender using a separate forwarding tree $T_{P}$. We first compute the average of minimum completion times of all receivers at the bottom of the hierarchy. We continue by merging the two partitions that hold receivers with highest ranks. When merging two partitions, the faster partition is slowed down to the speed of slower partition. A new forwarding tree is computed for the resulting partition using the forwarding tree selection heuristic of Algorithm \ref{tree_algorithm} to all receivers in that partition, and the average of minimum completion times for all receivers are recomputed. This process continues until we reach a single partition that holds all receivers. In the end, we select the layer at which the average of minimum completion times across all receivers is minimum, which gives us the number of partitions, the receivers that are grouped per partition, and their associated forwarding trees. If there are multiple layers with the minimum average completion times, the one with minimum total forwarding tree weight across its forwarding trees is chosen which on average leads to better load distribution.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Various topologies and traffic patterns used in evaluation. One unit of traffic is equal to what can be transmitted at the rate of the fastest link over a given topology per timeslot.} \label{table_evaluations}
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{tabular}{p{2cm}|p{2.5cm}|p{8.5cm}|}
\cline{2-3}
& \textbf{Name} & \textbf{Description} \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{\multirow{2}{*}{Topology}} & GEANT & Backbone and transit network across Europe with 34 nodes and 52 links. Link capacity from 45 Mbps to 10 Gbps. \\ \cline{2-3}
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{} & UNINETT & Backbone network across Norway with 69 nodes and 98 links. Most links have a capacity of 1, 2.5 or 10 Gbps. \\ \hline \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{\multirow{4}{*}{Traffic Pattern}} & Light-tailed & Based on Exponential distribution with a mean of $20$ units per transfer. \\ \cline{2-3}
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{} & Heavy-tailed & Based on Pareto distribution with the minimum of $2$ units, the mean of $20$ units, and the maximum capped at $2000$ units per transfer. \\ \cline{2-3}
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{} & Hadoop & Generated by geo-distributed data analytics over Facebook's inter-DC WAN (distribution mean of $20$ units per transfer). \\ \cline{2-3}
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{} & Cache-follower & Generated by geo-distributed cache applications over Facebook's inter-DC WAN (distribution mean of $20$ units per transfer). \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Evaluation} \label{evaluations_iris}
We considered various topologies and transfer size distributions as shown in Table \ref{table_evaluations}. We selected two research topologies with given capacity information on edges from the Internet Topology Zoo \cite{zoo}. We could not use other commercial topologies as the exact connectivity and link capacity information were not publicly disclosed. We also considered multiple transfer volume distributions including synthetic (light-tailed and heavy-tailed) and real-world Facebook inter-DC traffic patterns (Hadoop and Cache-follower) \cite{social_inside}. Transfer arrival pattern was according to Poisson distribution with a rate of $\lambda$ per timeslot. For simplicity, we assumed an equal number of receivers for all bulk multicast transfers per experiment. We performed simulations and Mininet emulations to evaluate {{\sf Iris}}. We compare {{\sf Iris}} with multiple baseline techniques and QuickCast, presented in Chapter \ref{chapter_p2mp_quickcast}, which also focuses on partitioning receivers into groups for improved completion times.
\subsection{Computing a Lower Bound} \label{aggregate_topo}
We develop a technique to compute a lower bound on receiver completion times by creating an aggregate topology from the actual topology. As shown in Figure \ref{fig:aggregate_topology}, to create the aggregate topology, we combine all downlinks and uplinks with rates $r_i^{[node]}$ for all interfaces $i$ per node to a single uplink and downlink with their rates set to the sum of rates of physical links. Also, the aggregate topology connects all nodes in a star topology using their uplinks and downlinks and so assumes no bottlenecks within the network. Since this topology is a relaxed version of the physical topology, any solution that is valid for the physical topology is valid on this topology as well. Therefore, the solution to the aggregate topology is a lower bound that can be computed efficiently but may be inapplicable to the actual physical topology. We will use this approach in \S \ref{min_avg_comp} for evaluation of {{\sf Iris}}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{aggr_topo.pdf}
\caption{The physical topology, and the aggregate topology to compute a lower bound on receiver completion times. The aggregate topology is not part of how {\sf Iris}~operates and is only used for evaluation in this section.}
\label{fig:aggregate_topology}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Simulations}
In simulations, we focus on computing gains and therefore assume no dropped packets and accurate max-min fair rates. We normalized link capacities by maximum link rate per topology and fixed the timeslot length to $\omega = 1.0$.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Accounting for the Effect of User Traffic:} We account for the effect of higher priority user traffic in the simulations. The amount of available bandwidth per edge per timeslot, i.e., $B_e(t)$, is computed by deducting the rate of user traffic from the link capacity $C_e$. Recent work has shown that this rate can be safely estimated \cite{tempus, netstitcher}. For evaluations, we assume that user traffic can take up to $30\%$ of a link's capacity with a minimum of $5\%$ and that its rate follows a periodic pattern going from low to high and to low again. Per link, we consider a random period in the range of $10$ to $100$ timeslots that is generated and assigned per experiment instance.
\subsubsection{Minimizing Average Completion Times} \label{min_avg_comp}
This is when the objective vector is made of all ones. The partitioning hierarchy then begins with all receivers forming their $1$-receiver partitions. This is a highly general objective and can be considered as the default approach when the application/user does not specify an objective vector. We discuss multiple simulation experiments.
In Figure \ref{fig:overall_iris}, we measure the completion times (mean and tail) as well as bandwidth consumption by the number of receivers (tail is 99.9\textsuperscript{th} percentile). We consider two baseline cases: unicast shortest path and static single tree (i.e., minimum edge Steiner tree) routing. The shortest path routing is the unicast scenario that uses minimum bandwidth possible. The minimum edge Steiner tree routing uses minimum bandwidth possible while connecting all receivers with a single tree. The first observation is that using unicast, although leads to highest separation of fast and slow receivers, does not lead to the fastest completion as it can lead to many shared bottlenecks and that is why we see long tail times. {{\sf Iris}} offers the minimum completion times (mean and tail) across all scenarios. Also, its completion times grow much slower compared to others as the number of receivers (and so overall network load) increases. This is while {{\sf Iris}} uses only up to $35\%$ additional bandwidth compared to the static single tree (unicast shortest path routing uses up to $2.25\times$). Compared to QuickCast, {{\sf Iris}} offers up to $26\%$ lower tail times and up to $2.72\times$ better mean times while using up to $13\%$ extra bandwidth.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{overall_iris_emb_vert.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of various techniques by number of multicast receivers. Plots are normalized by the minimum data point (mean and tail charts are normalized by the same minimum), $\lambda = 1$, and lower values are better.}
\label{fig:overall_iris}
\end{figure}
In Figure \ref{fig:speedup_1_iris}, we show the completion times speedup of receivers by their rank. As seen, gains depend on the topology, traffic pattern, and receiver's rank. The dashed line is the baseline, i.e., no-partitioning case. Compared to QuickCast \cite{quickcast}, the fastest node always completes faster and up to $2.25\times$ faster with {{\sf Iris}}. Also, the majority of receivers complete significantly faster. In case of four receivers, the top $75\%$ receivers complete between $2\times$ to $4\times$ faster than baseline and with sixteen receivers, the top $75\%$ receivers complete at least $8\times$ faster than baseline. This is when QuickCast's gain drops quickly to one after the top $25\%$ of receivers.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{gain_13_emb_vert.pdf}
\caption{Mean completion time speedup (larger is better) of receivers normalized by no partitioning (load aware single tree) case given their rank from fastest to slowest, every node initiates equal number of transfers, receivers were selected according to uniform distribution from all nodes, and we considered $\lambda$ of 1.}
\label{fig:speedup_1_iris}
\end{figure}
In Figure \ref{fig:speedup_2}, we measure the CDF of completion times for all receivers. As seen, tail completion times are two to three orders of magnitude longer than median completion times which is due to variable link capacity and transfer volumes. We evaluate the completion times of QuickCast and {{\sf Iris}} and compare them with a lower bound which considers the aggregate topology (see \S \ref{aggregate_topo}) and applies Theorem 2 directly. It is likely that no feasible solution exists that achieves this lower bound. Under low arrival rate (light load), we see that {{\sf Iris}} tracks the lower bound nicely with a marginal difference. Under high arrival rate (heavy load), {{\sf Iris}} stays close to the lower bound for lower and higher percentiles while not far from it for others.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{cdf_aggr_iris_emb_vert.pdf}
\caption{CDF of receiver completion times. Every transfer has 8 receivers selected uniformly across all nodes. ``Lower Bound'' is computed by finding the aggregate topology and applying Theorem 2.}
\label{fig:speedup_2}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Other Objective Vectors}
We discuss four different objective vectors of $A$, $B$, $C$ and $D$ as shown in Figure \ref{fig:vectors}. This figure shows the mean speedup of receivers given their ranks, and the bandwidth consumption associated with each vector. In $A$, we aim to finish one copy quickly while not being concerned with completion times of other receivers. We see a gain of between $9\times$ to $18\times$ across the two topologies considered for the first receiver. We also see that this approach uses much less extra bandwidth compared to when we have a vector with more ones (e.g., case $B$). In $B$, we aim to speed up the first four receivers (we care about each one) while in $C$, we want to speed up the fourth receiver not directly concerning ourselves with the top three receivers. As can be seen, $B$ offers increasing speedups for the top three receivers while $C$'s speedup is flatter. Also, $C$ uses less bandwidth compared to $B$ by grouping the top three receivers into one partition at the base of the hierarchy. Finally, $D$'s vector specifies that the application/user only cares about the completion time of the last receiver which means that receiver will be put in a separate partition at the base of the hierarchy while other receivers will be grouped into one partition. Since the slowest receiver is usually limited by its downlink speed, this cannot improve its completion time. However, with minimum extra bandwidth, this speeds up all receivers except the slowest by as much as possible. Except for the slowest, all receivers observe a speedup of between $3\times$ to $6\times$ while using $8\%$ to $16\%$ less bandwidth compared to $B$. A tradeoff is observed, that is, $D$ offers lower speedup but consistent gain for more receivers with less bandwidth use compared to $B$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{obj_vectors_new_emb_vert_printed.pdf}
\caption{Gain by rank for different receivers per transfer averaged over all transfers for four different objective vectors. We set $\lambda = 0.1$ and there are $8$ receivers.}
\label{fig:vectors}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Mininet Emulations}
We used Mininet to build and test a prototype of {{\sf Iris}} and compare it with QuickCast and set up the testbed on CloudLab \cite{cloudlab}. We used OpenvSwitch (OVS) 2.9 in the OpenFlow 1.3 compatibility mode along with the Floodlight controller 1.2 connecting them to a control network. We assumed fixed available bandwidth over edges according to GEANT topology \cite{geant} while scaling downlinks' capacity so that the maximum is 500 Mbps. We did this to reduce the CPU overhead of traffic shaping over TCLink Mininet modules. Our traffic engineering program communicated with end-points through a RESTful API. We used NORM \cite{norm_navy} for multicast session management along with its rate-control module. To increase efficiency, we computed max-min fair rates centrally at the traffic engineering program and let the end-points shape their traffic using NORM's rate control module. The experiment was performed using twelve trace files generated according to Facebook traffic patterns (concerning transfer volume) \cite{social_inside}, and each trace file had 200 requests in total with an arrival rate of one request per timeslot based on Poisson distribution. We also considered timeslots of one second, a minimum transfer volume of 5 MBs and limited the maximum transfer volume to 500 MBs (which also match the distribution of YouTube video sizes \cite{you_tube}). We considered three schemes of {{\sf Iris}}, QuickCast and a single tree approach (no partitioning). The total emulation time was about 24 hours. Figure \ref{fig:mininet} shows our emulation results. To allow comparison between the tail (95\textsuperscript{th} percentile) and mean values, we have normalized both plots by the same minimum in each row. Also, the group table usage plots are not normalized and show the actual average and actual maximum across all switches. The reason why data points jump up and down is the randomness of generated traces that comes from transfers (volume, source, receivers, arrival pattern, etc).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.64\textwidth]{mininet_emb_vert.pdf}
\caption{Mininet Emulation Results}
\label{fig:mininet}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Completion Times and Bandwidth:} {{\sf Iris}} can improve on QuickCast by speeding up mean receiver completion times by up to $2.5\times$. It also offers up to $4\times$ better mean completion times compared to using a single forwarding tree per transfer. We also see that compared to using one multicast tree, {{\sf Iris}} consumes at most $25\%$ extra bandwidth.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Forwarding Plane:} We see that {{\sf Iris}} uses up to about $4\times$ less group table entries at the switches where the maximum number of entries were exhausted which allows more parallel transfers across the same network. {{\sf Iris}} achieves this by allowing a larger number of partitions per transfer whenever it does not hurt the completion times. By allowing more partitions, each tree will branch less times on average reducing the number of group table entries.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Running Time:} Across all experiments, the computation time needed to run {{\sf Iris}} to calculate partitions and forwarding trees stayed below 5 ms per request.
\subsection{Practical Concerns}
New challenges, such as increased communication latency across network elements and failures, may arise while deploying {{\sf Iris}} on a real-world geographically distributed network. Communication latency may not affect the performance considerably as we focus on long-running internal transfers that are notably more resilient to latency overhead of scheduling and routing compared to interactive user traffic. Failures may affect physical links or the TES. Loss of a physical link can be addressed by rerouting the affected transfers reactively either by the network controller or by using the SDN fast failover mechanisms. End-points may be equipped with distributed congestion control, such as the one presented in \cite{mctcp}, which they can fall back to in case the centralized traffic engineering fails.
\section{Conclusions}
In this chapter, we presented the problem of grouping receivers into multiple partitions per P2MP transfer to minimize the effect of receiver downlink speed discrepancy on completion times of receivers. We analyzed a relaxed version of this problem and came up with a partitioning that minimizes mean completion times given max-min fair rates. We also set forth the idea of applications/users expressing their requirements in the form of binary objective vectors which allows us to optimize resource consumption and performance further. We then described {{\sf Iris}}, a system that computes partitions and forwarding trees for incoming bulk multicast transfers as they arrive given objective vectors. We showed that {{\sf Iris}} could significantly reduce mean completion times with a small increase in bandwidth consumption and can fulfill the requirements expressed using objective vectors while saving bandwidth whenever possible. It is worth noting that performance of any partitioning and forwarding tree selection algorithm rests profoundly on the network topology and transfer properties.
\clearpage
\chapter{Speeding up P2MP Transfers using Parallel Steiner Trees} \label{chapter_p2mp_parallel}
In Chapters \ref{chapter_p2mp_dccast} to \ref{chapter_iris}, we discussed different ways of managing Point to Multipoint (P2MP) inter-DC transfers via using dynamically selected forwarding trees to balance load across the network and reduce network capacity consumption. In all past efforts, we attached each receiver to the sender using a single forwarding tree.\footnote{In case of partitioning, every receiver belonged to exactly one partition and so was connected to the sender using a single forwarding tree.} In general, however, it may be possible to increase receivers' download speeds by using multiple parallel trees that connect the sender to all receivers\footnote{In case of partitioning, all receivers in every partition are attached using one forwarding tree to the sender as in Chapters \ref{chapter_p2mp_quickcast} and \ref{chapter_iris}.} which is what we will explore in this chapter. We will show that by using two forwarding trees per receiver, we can reduce the completion times of receivers by up to $40\%$ while only increasing the total network capacity usage by up to $10\%$. We also find that using up to more than two parallel trees offers a negligible benefit or even hurts the performance due to excessive bandwidth usage and creation of unnecessary bottlenecks.
\section{Motivating Example}
By using parallel trees, we can substantially increase the multicast forwarding throughput possibly at little extra network capacity cost. Figure \ref{fig:parallel_tree_example} shows how adding more trees can improve the overall receiver throughput. Assuming equal link capacity of $1$ for all edges, the single tree case on the left offers a total rate of $1$. Adding one more tree in an edge-disjoint manner will double the rate. If we consider an equal division of traffic across the two trees, the total network bandwidth usage is not increase compared to the single tree case. Now find the network on the right. We see three trees that will give us a total rate of $3$. However, the last tree has four edges. Assuming equal division of traffic across all three trees, we see that this will increase the total bandwidth usage by $1.11\times$. Also, we see that adding more trees will not help us improve completion times due to the creation of bottlenecks (since trees will not be edge-disjoint anymore).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{motivating_example_parallel_trees.pdf}
\caption{Using parallel forwarding trees we can increase the overall network throughput to all receivers. We may have to pay some extra bandwidth cost as we add more trees.}
\label{fig:parallel_tree_example}
\end{figure}
\section{System Model}
We adopt the same system model as presented in \S \ref{dccast_sys_model}. Namely, we consider a slotted timeline, and a centralized traffic engineering mechanism that determines what trees will be used by an arriving transfer. The central controller also computes the rates at which senders transmit traffic on each tree. We also focus on bulk and internal data transfers that are not in the critical path of user experience and so are resilient to some degree of latency. We assume heterogeneous link capacities as presented by real WAN topologies. We will use the same notation as that in Tables \ref{table_var_0} and \ref{table_var_dccast}.
\section{Application of Parallel Forwarding Trees}
We discuss how to dynamically select parallel edge-disjoint forwarding trees according to network load across different edges and then discuss various rate-allocation (i.e., traffic scheduling) policies.
\subsection{Adaptive Edge-disjoint Parallel Forwarding Tree Selection}
Although using a single forwarding tree for every transfer minimizes packet reordering and total network capacity consumption, it can considerably limit the overall achievable network throughput for P2MP transfers. Under light load, this will lead to inefficient use of network capacity artificially increasing the completion times of P2MP transfers. We discuss our approach to selection of multiple forwarding trees.
To perform a P2MP transfer $R_{new}$ with volume $\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}$, the source $S_{R_{new}}$ transmits traffic over edge-disjoint Steiner trees that span across $\pmb{\mathrm{D}}_{R_{new}}$. In this chapter, we do not discuss receiver set partitioning as that subject can be applied orthogonal to the parallel tree selection approach by treating each partition as a separate P2MP request. At any timeslot, traffic for any transfer flows with the same rate over all links of a forwarding tree to reach all the destinations at the same time. The problem of scheduling a P2MP transfer then translates to finding multiple forwarding trees and a transmission schedule over every tree for every arriving transfer in an online manner. A relevant problem is the minimum weight Steiner tree \cite{steiner_tree_problem} that can help minimize total bandwidth usage with proper weight assignment. Although it is a hard problem, heuristic algorithms exist that often provide near optimal solutions \cite{robins2005tighter, Watel2014}.
To select multiple Steiner trees, we use the metric load $L_e$ that is defined for every edge $e$ as the total remaining volume of traffic for all the trees that include that edge. We first assign every edge a weight of $W_e = \frac{L_e + \mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}}{C_e}$ which is the minimum time it would take for all the transfers that share that edge to complete (if $R_{new}$ were to be placed on that edge). The algorithm starts by first selecting a minimum weight Steiner tree using a heuristic algorithm. We then mark all of the edges of this tree as deleted and run the minimum weight Steiner tree selection algorithm again. This process is repeated until either no more trees can be found (i.e., some receivers are disconnected) or we reach a maximum of $K$ trees set by the operators as a configuration parameter.
This approach offers several benefits. Since trees are selected dynamically as load changes on edges, they tend to avoid highly busy links. Also, as trees assigned to a transfer are edge-disjoint, this approach avoids creating additional bottlenecks that cause competition across trees of the same transfer. Finally, by limiting the maximum number of trees, operators can choose between speeding up the transfers (using more trees) or minimizing total bandwidth consumption (using fewer trees) by changing the value of $K$. This value could be chosen as a function of network load, i.e., under heavier load operators can reduce $K$ and increase it as load decreases.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Updating $L_e$:} While using multiple forwarding trees, after selection of such trees, the load on their edges needs to be increased according to $\mathcal{V}_{R_{new}}$. Since we do not know, originally, how much of the traffic will be sent over each tree, it is unclear how to increase the load on the edges of different trees. This is because according to the scheduling policy used to send traffic and the future transfers that arrive, the volume of traffic sent over different trees per transfer can change. For example, if a transfer has two trees and one of them has to compete with a future transfer, the volume of traffic sent over the other tree will automatically increase as a result as soon as the future transfer arrives. To address this, we use a heuristic technique as follows. We assume that at any time, the remaining volume of a transfer is equally divided across all its trees. If one tree sends a lot of traffic, that reduction in load will be equally divided and deducted from all of the trees for that transfer. Although the exact load on every edge will potentially not be accurate, this approach offers an efficient approximation of load which helps us to quickly select future forwarding trees.
\subsection{Scheduling Policies}
Similar to previous chapters, we consider well-known scheduling policies of First Come First Serve (FCFS), Shortest Remaining Processing Time (SRPT), and fair sharing based on Max-Min Fairness (MMF). These scheduling policies have different properties. Fair sharing is the most widely used policy as it allows many users to fairly access the network bandwidth over network bottlenecks. SRPT allows more internal data transfers to be completed in any given period of time. FCFS can also be used to offer more accurate guarantees to applications on when their transfers will complete.
\section{Evaluation} \label{evaluations_parallel}
We considered various topologies and transfer size distributions. In the following, we perform experiments to measure the effectiveness of using parallel forwarding trees on multiple toplogies and using multiple transfer size distributions.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Network Topologies:}
We use the same topologies discussed in Chapter \ref{chapter_p2mp_quickcast}. These topologies provide capacity information for all links which range from 45 Mbps to 10 Gbps. We normalized all link capacities dividing them by the maximum link capacity. We also assumed all bidirectional links with equal capacity in either direction.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Traffic Patterns:}
We use the same transfer size distributions discussed in Chapter \ref{chapter_p2mp_quickcast}. Transfer arrival followed a Poisson distribution with rate $\lambda$. We considered no units for time or bandwidth. For all simulations, we assumed a timeslot length of $\omega = 1.0$. For Pareto distribution, we considered a minimum transfer volume equal to that of $2$ full timeslots and limited maximum transfer volume to that of $2000$ full timeslots. Unless otherwise stated, we considered an average demand equal to volume of $20$ full timeslots per transfer for all traffic distributions (we fixed the mean values of all distributions to the same value). Per simulation instance, we assumed equal number of transfers per sender and for every transfer, we selected the receivers from all existing nodes according to the uniform distribution (with equal probability from all nodes).
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Assumptions:} We focused on computing gains and assumed accurate knowledge of inter-DC link capacity, and precise rate control at the end-points which together lead to a congestion free network. We also assumed no dropped packets due to corruption or errors, and no link failures.
\vspace{0.5em}
\noindent\textbf{Simulation Setup:} We developed a simulator in Java (JDK 8). We performed all simulations on one machine (Core i7-6700 and 24 GB of RAM). We used the Java implementation of GreedyFLAC \cite{DSTAlgoEvaluation} for minimum weight Steiner trees.
\subsection{Effect of Number of Parallel Trees}
Figure \ref{fig:exp_1_parallel_trees} shows the effect of maximum number of trees per transfer (i.e., $K$). We see that almost all the gain is obtained with $2$ parallel trees and increasing it further does not improve the completion times. Adding more trees, however, increases the total network bandwidth usage. We see that while the network bandwidth consumption increases by about $7\%$ in the settings of this experiment, the mean completion times improve by up to $17\%$ and the median completion times improve by up to $30\%$. The gain in mean completion times is less than that of median as a result of the tail completion times which are usually much higher than median since the transfer size distribution is skewed. Also, it is worth noting that having parallel trees cannot improve tail completion times as the tail is restricted by physical constraints such as low capacity links.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp1_multitree_embedded.pdf}
\caption{The effect of number of parallel trees on total bandwidth consumption and transfer completion times (TCTs). Other experiment parameters are $\lambda = 0.01$, max-min fair rate computation, and GEANT \cite{geant} topology.}
\label{fig:exp_1_parallel_trees}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Effect of Number of Copies}
In Figure \ref{fig:exp_2_parallel_trees} we explore the effect of number of receivers per transfer. With more receivers, we will have larger trees which make it harder in general to find edge-disjoint parallel trees. As a result, we see that the gain in mean and median completion times drops with more receivers. One way to increase the effect of parallel trees in scenarios with many receivers per transfer is to reduce the receivers per tree by partitioning receivers using some technique, for example those discussed in Chapters \ref{chapter_p2mp_quickcast} and \ref{chapter_iris}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp2_multitree_embedded.pdf}
\caption{The effect of number of receivers on total bandwidth consumption ratio (i.e., $\frac{\textnormal{Bandwidth of }K=2}{\textnormal{Bandwidth of }K=1}$) and transfer completion times (TCTs) gain (i.e., $\frac{\textnormal{completion time of }K=1}{\textnormal{completion time of }K=2}$). Other experiment parameters are $\lambda = 0.01$, max-min fair rate computation, and GEANT \cite{geant} topology.}
\label{fig:exp_2_parallel_trees}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Effect of Transfer Size Distribution}
Figure \ref{fig:exp_3_parallel_trees} shows the effect of different transfer size distributions which include both synthetic and real distributions. Since trees are selected dynamically, we see that the total bandwidth consumption also changes with the traffic pattern. We also see that the gain in mean and median completion times depend highly on the traffic distribution ranging from $5\%$ to $30\%$. Interestingly, we also see that the gain in mean completion times has an inverse relationship with that of median completion times. We believe this behavior is a result of how distributions affect the tail completion times. For example, with the synthetic light-tailed and heavy-tailed distributions, the tail grows larger with $K=2$, while for the real traffic patterns of Cache-follower and Hadoop we see a decrease in tail completion times (not shown in the figure). The common result is that regardless of the traffic patterns, we always obtain considerable gains in either mean or median completion times with up to $10\%$ increase in bandwidth usage.
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp3_multitree_embedded.pdf}
\caption{The effect of transfer size distribution on total bandwidth consumption ratio (i.e., $\frac{\textnormal{Bandwidth of }K=2}{\textnormal{Bandwidth of }K=1}$) and transfer completion times (TCTs) gain (i.e., $\frac{\textnormal{completion time of }K=1}{\textnormal{completion time of }K=2}$). Other experiment parameters are $\lambda = 0.01$, $4$ receivers per transfer, max-min fair rate computation, and GEANT \cite{geant} topology.}
\label{fig:exp_3_parallel_trees}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Effect of Topology}
We explore the effect of different topologies as shown in Figure \ref{fig:exp_4_parallel_trees}. We see that GScale offers significantly higher gains in completion times compared to the other two topologies. That is because we assumed a uniform capacity of $1$ across the edges of GScale while GEANT and UNINETT have many low capacity edges which negatively affect the gains. We also see a higher bandwidth usage over GScale that is up to $18\%$ which is due to the ability of the routing algorithm to use parallel trees for more transfers. GScale is a smaller topology and is better connected compared to UNINETT and GEANT which is why we can build more parallel trees on average.
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp4_multitree_embedded.pdf}
\caption{The effect of topology on total bandwidth consumption ratio (i.e., $\frac{\textnormal{Bandwidth of }K=2}{\textnormal{Bandwidth of }K=1}$) and transfer completion times (TCTs) gain (i.e., $\frac{\textnormal{completion time of }K=1}{\textnormal{completion time of }K=2}$). Other experiment parameters are $\lambda = 0.01$, $4$ receivers per transfer, and max-min fair rate computation.}
\label{fig:exp_4_parallel_trees}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Effect of Scheduling Policies}
Figure \ref{fig:exp_5_parallel_trees} shows the effect of scheduling policies on the flow completion times gain and the total bandwidth use. We see that using parallel trees offers the most gain when applying the SRPT policy. This is because small transfers obtain much higher throughput as soon as they arrive since the policy preempts any other larger transfers. Fair sharing and FCFS both offer considerable gains in median completion times with fair sharing offering a higher average gain that is due to better tail completion times. In other words, with FCFS, few large transfers can fully block some links and slow down all other transfers whose trees use those edges. Overall, we see that using parallel trees marginally increases bandwidth use while considerably improving completion times regardless of the scheduling policy.
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp5_multitree_embedded.pdf}
\caption{The effect of traffic scheduling policy on total bandwidth consumption ratio (i.e., $\frac{\textnormal{Bandwidth of }K=2}{\textnormal{Bandwidth of }K=1}$) and transfer completion times (TCTs) gain (i.e., $\frac{\textnormal{completion time of }K=1}{\textnormal{completion time of }K=2}$). Other experiment parameters are $\lambda = 0.01$, $4$ receivers per transfer, and GEANT \cite{geant} topology.}
\label{fig:exp_5_parallel_trees}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Effect of Network Load}
In Figure \ref{fig:exp_6_parallel_trees} we evaluate the effect of network load. Overall, it appears that with lower network load, we observer higher gains in completion times and slightly higher bandwidth consumption. Under light load, most network edges are not loaded and so using parallel trees allows us to increase throughput for ongoing transfers with minimal interference. As load increases, we expect higher contention across competing transfers for access to network capacity which reduces the gains of having parallel trees.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{exp6_multitree_embedded.pdf}
\caption{The effect of transfer arrival rate (i.e., network load) on total bandwidth consumption ratio (i.e., $\frac{\textnormal{Bandwidth of }K=2}{\textnormal{Bandwidth of }K=1}$) and transfer completion times (TCTs) gain (i.e., $\frac{\textnormal{completion time of }K=1}{\textnormal{completion time of }K=2}$). Other experiment parameters are $4$ receivers per transfer, max-min fair rate computation, and GEANT \cite{geant} topology.}
\label{fig:exp_6_parallel_trees}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\section{Conclusions}
In this chapter, we evaluated the benefits of parallel forwarding trees for inter-DC P2MP transfers. The approach is to use edge-disjoint forwarding trees to reduce the interference across the trees of one transfer while maximizing throughput. We used a load-adaptive approach for selection for forwarding trees that selects up to $K$ such trees that balance load across the network. We also discussed a weight assignment technique for updating load weights over the edges of trees for efficient computation of weights. According to our evaluations with different traffic patterns, topologies, network load, number of parallel trees, and scheduling policies, we find that using up to two parallel trees per transfer can considerably improve the completion times of transfers while slightly increasing the total network bandwidth use. We also find that for better-connected networks with fewer bottlenecks, using parallel trees offer higher gains in completion times.
\clearpage
\chapter{Summary and Future Directions} \label{chapter_summary}
As organizations continue to build more datacenters around the globe, communication across these datacenters becomes more and more important for highly distributed applications with globally distributed users. Increasingly, companies use private dedicated high speed networks to connect datacenters to offer high quality infrastructure for distributed applications. For such costly networks to be profitable, it is necessary to maximize performance and efficiency.
In this dissertation, we made the case for coordinated control of routing over inter-DC networks and traffic transmission at the end-points. Since inter-DC networks are relatively small with tens to hundreds of nodes, such coordination is possible and is currently used by multiple organizations. A traffic engineering sever that is logically centralized receives traffic demands from end-points as well as network status updates from the network. Combined with the topology information, the traffic engineering server can then compute the routes over which traffic is forwarded over inter-DC networks and the rate at which traffic is transmitted from end-points.
We focused on multiple research domains concerned with traffic engineering over inter-DC networks. First, we noticed that a large portion of inter-DC traffic is formed by large inter-DC flows which we refer to as transfers. We realized that current adaptive routing techniques based on link utilization or static topology information are insufficient for minimizing the completion times of such transfers. We then developed Best Worst-case Routing (BWR), which is a routing heuristic that aims to route new transfers to minimize their worst-case completion times. We showed that this technique can improve completion times regardless of the scheduling policy used for transmission of traffic.
We then discussed the deadline requirement of many inter-DC transfers and studied admission control for large transfers. Admission control helps prevent over committing existing resources and makes sure that admitted transfers meet the deadlines they aimed for. Our major contribution has been to make such admission control as fast as possible to handle large number of transfers as they arrive. The admission control considers both routing of traffic and transmission control. We considered both cases of single path routing and multipath routing and showed that using up to two parallel paths offers considerable gains in admitted traffic. For fast admission control, we applied a new traffic allocation strategy that pushes traffic for every transfer as close as possible to their deadlines which we call the As Late As Possible (ALAP) scheduling policy. With this allocation strategy, we can quickly determine if a new transfer can meet its deadline and compute a feasible allocation without formulating complex optimization problems.
Next, we considered the problem of delivering objects from one location to multiple locations while paying attention to performance metrics such as completion times and deadlines. This problem has the one-to-many transmission property in common with the traditional multicasting problem, but has the added property that all the receivers of a transfer are known at the arrival time which allows us to select a multicast tree unon its arrival. We called such transfers Point to Multipoint (P2MP) transfers. We used Steiner trees to minimize bandwidth usage while selecting them in a way that distributes load by shifting traffic across various trees to exercise all available capacity. This approach allowed us to reduce tail completion times while handling more traffic. We also discussed the same problem given deadlines for P2MP transfers and showed that using the same adaptive tree selection technique combined with the ALAP scheduling policy, we can admit more traffic to the network and guarantee deadlines as well.
We then explored ways of further reducing the completion times of some receivers for P2MP transfers given that not all the receivers have to receive complete data at the same time. We observed that a single slow receiver, can slow down all receivers attached to the sender on a tree and proposed to break receivers into multiple partitions. Each partition is then connected to the sender using a separate tree. By grouping receivers according to their download speeds or by according to their proximity we can then improve their overall reception rate. We presented algorithms for performing such partitioning and showed that it is effective. We also showed that the effectiveness of these techniques is a function of network topology and link capacity distribution as well as distribution of transfer volumes.
Finally, we aimed to further improve the completion times of a P2MP transfer by using parallel forwarding trees. We explored the application of edge-disjoint forwarding trees that are selected adaptively according to network load. We realized that parallel trees can considerably improve completion times while minimally increase bandwidth consumption. We also found that selecting more than two parallel trees does not offer any benefits in most cases but increases bandwidth consumption.
\section{Future Directions}
We propose a few research directions for interested researchers to explore. We categorize these ideas according to the part of dissertation they target.
\subsection{Adaptive Routing over Inter-DC Networks} \label{adaptive_routing}
We presented BWR as an effective routing technique that improves transfer completion times regardless of the scheduling policy used for traffic. The method we developed to compute the worst-case completion times of transfers per path can be further improved. Our current implementation is merely summing up the remaining volumes of all the flows that intersect a path can be in general not tight enough and is too conservative for worst-case. For example, consider a path with two hops as shown in Figure \ref{fig:future_work_example}. On the first hop, we intersect $F_1$ with $4$ remaining packets, and on the second hop, we intersect $F_2$ with $5$ remaining data units. The current method will simply use $4 + 5$ as the worst-case start time on the path, but if the whole topology has only these two links, $F_1$ and $F_2$ can transmit in parallel, which means the worst-case will be $\max(F_1, F_2)$ that is $5$. Knowing this, an algorithm should prefer this path over another with a worst-case of $8$ (not shown in the figure). Computing the exact worst-case may be possible by using a dependency graph which can be computationally expensive. Furthermore, since optimizing one arriving flow does not necessarily provide benefits to future arrivals, we did not explore finding the exact worst-case. Also, extending to multipath BWR routing, and the effect of inaccurate flow size information on routing performance can be other directions to explore.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{future_work_example.pdf}
\caption{Example scenario used in \S \ref{adaptive_routing}}
\label{fig:future_work_example}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Deadline-aware Point to Multipoint Transfers}
The approach we presented in this dissertation for deadline-based admission control requires that all destinations can be reached before the deadline for that transfer. This, however, may be too restrictive for many applications: we might prefer to maximize the number of receivers that complete before specified deadlines per transfer while considering a minimum number of replicas that need be made before a given deadline. This objective is more practical in the sense that minimum replicas represent some degree of reliability (which means we guarantee a required reliability degree) while allowing more transfers to be admitted which increases network utilization and efficiency.
\subsection{Receiver Completion Times of Point to Multipoint Transfers}
Due to varying load on edges as a result of time zone differences, the total bandwidth per tree may not be significant as trees span across many regions. To address this issue, store-and-forward can be used along with parallel trees to utilize the capacity of wide area networks further. With store-and-forward, one can build large scale overlay networks across datacenters and use intermediate nodes as large temporary buffers that store data in case the incoming rate is higher than the outgoing rate per transfer. As time passes bandwidth increases on outgoing edges of such nodes, the temporary buffer used will drain to next hop overlay nodes. An overlay node can consist of multiple servers in every datacenter with enough capacity to store data over highly loaded hours and consume later. With this approach, overlay nodes will use simple point to point connections but on a per-hop basis to build a multicast overlay network \cite{mc_icc_overlay}.
\subsection{Large-scale Implementation and Evaluation of Algorithms for Fast and Efficient Point to Multipoint Transfers}
In this dissertation, we developed various algorithms for fast and efficient P2MP transfers and evaluated them through simulations. Large-scale evaluation of our techniques and algorithms over real inter-DC networks and using practical inter-DC applications is another direction for future research. For example, forwarding trees can be realized using SDN Group Tables \cite{openflow-1.1.0}, Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) \cite{bier}, and via standard multicast tables at the inter-DC switches. These approaches offer various trade-offs concerning the latency of installing a forwarding tree, the number of forwarding trees that can be set up at any given time, and the maximum rate at which traffic can be forwarded over forwarding trees. Comparison and analysis of how various ways of implementing forwarding trees can affect the efficiency and speed of inter-DC transfers is an exciting and valuable topic for future research.
\clearpage
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{S:1}
Parkinson's disease (PD) is a chronic neurodegenerative disease caused by the nigrostriatal pathway degeneration and leads to dopamine's insufficiency in the striatum \cite{obeso10}. The characterization of the disease based on the motor symptoms are tremor, rigidity, and bradykinesia. Moreover, the non-motor symptoms which are depression, apathy, and sleep disorder, are frequently recognized. These symptoms degrade the quality of life of the people who suffer from this disease \cite{chaudhuri09}. Early and accurate diagnosis is crucial for effective treatment. The use of I123-Ioflupane SPECT or sometimes known as DaTSCAN or [123I]FP-CIT images, has become reliable as one of the PD diagnosis standards \cite{djang12}. The I123-Ioflupane has a high binding affinity for presynaptic dopamine transporters (DAT) inside the striatum. Healthy subjects are characterized by intense and symmetric uptake of the I123-Ioflupane in the caudate nucleus and putamen in both hemispheres. The striatal transaxial images should appear as the symmetric comma- or crescent-shaped. On the other hand, PD subjects are indicated by the unilateral or bilateral decrease in the uptake of the I123-Ioflupane. The striatal transaxial image often shrinks to a circular or oval shape on one or both sides. In clinical practice, diagnosis using SPECT images is usually evaluated visually and sometimes includes assistance from the semi-quantification method, which relies on computer software to acquire quantification of SPECT images \cite{badiavas11}.
The study of automated computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) of PD currently focuses on the supervised machine learning algorithm, which receives multi-dimensional input features. The machine learning methods for SPECT images classification between healthy and PD subjects from several studies show very high accuracy, generally above 90\% \cite{taylor17}. Conventional supervised machine learning for the CAD faces the difficulty of processing the images in their original form. Hand-engineering is needed in selecting the region of interest that leads to appropriate features in which the classifier can detect the patterns. Deep convolutional neural network (DCNN), which does not rely heavily on hand-engineering, has recently become a mainstream method for solving image classification problems \cite{lecun15, goodfellow16}.
The DCNN composing the convolutional and pooling layers is inspired by the receptive fields in the visual cortex \cite{hubel62}. The resemblance of the DCNN and the primate visual stimuli processing has also been evaluated using the last convolutional layer's features from the DCNN, and the inferior temporal cortex neural responses \cite{cadieu14}. In addition, the progress in hardware, software, and algorithm parallelization, which reduces the training time to process a massive collection of multi-dimensional data, allows DCNN to become a high-performance tool in medical image recognition \cite{litjens17, duncan20}. Further investigation shows that DCNN still gives high classification accuracy even without the need for spatial normalization procedure \cite{martinez18}. However, it is still unclear which regions in the images are being detected by the model and whether the DCNN understands the pattern in the same way as the expert's visual interpretation. Unlike the conventional machine learning models in which each input feature is hand-designed and the models are decomposable into interpretable components, the complexity of the DCNN seems to diminish its interpretability. Also, the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Recital 71, which gives citizens a ``right to explanation'' will make the ``black box'' approaches hardly suitable in clinical diagnosis \cite{ras18}.
Several DCNN model interpretation methods have been developed to visualize or interpret the DCNN so that the attention map can be generated to understand the essential pixels of the input image. These methods were used to interpret the model's decision and increase the credibility of the DCNN diagnosis results in several types of medical image \cite{martinez18, esteva17, lee19}. However, due to the variety of model interpretation methods, there is no evidence of which methods can provide the most reliable interpretation results for medical image applications.
{\RED This tutorial aims to demonstrate the procedure for selecting the most suitable interpretation method for SPECT image PD recognition model. The contributions of this tutorial are as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item We provide an overview on the recent PD recognition model, and provide a step-by-step approach to implement four DCNN models.
\item We incorporate six well-known interpretation methods to four DCNN models, display each method's visual interpretation result, and demonstrate the methods for evaluating the interpretation performance. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first attempt to explore the interpretation methods that is suitable for using with SPECT image PD recognition model.
\item We propose a method to utilize the interpreted feedback to aid in model selection.
\end{enumerate}
}
The code for all four DCNN models with six interpretation methods was uploaded and can be download publicly\footnote{https://github.com/IoBT-VISTEC/PPMI\_DL, We will publish all source codes and data sources immediately after getting an acceptance letter from SJ}. Furthermore, the introduced deep neural network interpretation methods can contribute to the future of data processing in an AI Era (interpretable-AI) as one of the core modules in sensors-related studies. For example, Grezmak \textit{et al.} had reported the interpretable CNN for a machine fault diagnosis \cite{machine_lrp}, Alharthi \textit{et al.} had reported an interpretable time series model for gait-induced ground reaction force (GRF) in Parkinson’s disease (PD) recognition \cite{gait_lrp}, and Lee \textit{et al.} had utilized interpretable AI in glucose management for diabetes patient \cite{9115809}. All of the examples demonstrate the usefulness of the model interpretation methods as feedback in constructing well-suited deep learning architectures.
\section{PD Recognition Methods and an Example Scenario}
\label{S:2}
\subsection{Traditional Classification Method}
The most commonly used features for the traditional classification method are the striatal binding ratios (SBR) from both left and right caudate and putamen, which relate to the ratio of the target region and the reference region. These features were classified with the probabilistic neural network, decision tree \cite{palumbo10}, and support vector machine (SVM) \cite{palumbo14, prashanth14}. Other new methods have been developed to find the features from region of interest (ROI), including shape analysis and surface fitting \cite{prashanth17}, mean ellipsoid uptake and dysmorphic index \cite{augimeri16}, Haralick texture features \cite{martinez13}, principal component analysis (PCA) \cite{towey11}, independent component analysis (ICA) \cite{martinez14}, partial least squares decomposition \cite{segovia12}, empirical mode decomposition with PCA or ICA \cite{rojas13} or circularity features obtained from DAT \cite{shiiba20}. These new types of features seem to give the best accuracy with the SVM classifier. Furthermore, the image voxels within the ROI are also used directly as the input features with SVM \cite{illan12, oliveira15}, logistic lasso \cite{tagare17}, and single-layer neural network \cite{zhang17} classifiers.
In this tutorial, we utilize the most commonly used SBR feature with an SVM classifier as an example of the traditional classification method. The SBR \cite{sbr13} can be calculated by first applying the standard Gaussian 3D 6.0 mm filter to the final preprocessed images. These images were then normalized to standard Montreal Neurologic Institute (MNI) space so that all scans are in the same anatomical alignment, followed by identifying the transaxial slice with the highest striatal uptake. Then, the 8 hottest striatal slices around it were averaged to generate a single slice image. Regions of interest (ROI) were then selected for left and right caudate, and left and right putamen. The occipital cortex was selected as the reference region. Count densities for each region were extracted, and SBR is calculated as
\begin{equation}
\textrm{SBR of target region} = \frac{\textrm{Target region count density}}{\textrm{Reference region count density}}-1.
\end{equation}
The SBR of each subject can be obtained from the PPMI database alongside the SPECT images. It was proved that applying SBR to SVM gives very high accuracy \cite{prashanth14}; therefore, we will use this classification method as a baseline for comparing and evaluating with the deep learning approach.
\begin{table*}
\caption{\RED Summarize of traditional classification method (upper) and deep learning (lower) for Parkinson's disease SPECT image classification.}
\centering
\resizebox{0.99\textwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{ l c l l l l }
Reference & Number of subjects & Feature & Classifier & Dataset & Accuracy \\
& PD:Control & & & & \\
\hline
Palumbo et al. 2010 \cite{palumbo10} & 127 : 89 & Striatal binding ratios & PNN, CT & Private dataset & PNN: $96.6 \%$, CT: 93.5 \% \\
Towey et al. 2011 \cite{towey11} & 79 : 37 & PCA decomposition of striatal region & Naive-Bayes & Private dataset & 94.8\% \\
Oliveira et al. 2015 \cite{oliveira2015computer} & 445 : 209 & Voxel-base-feature & SVM & PPMI & 97.86\% \\
Oliveira et al. 2018 \cite{oliveira2018extraction} & 443 : 209 & SBR, CBP, PBP, SBP, PCR, LSR, VSR & SVM, kNN, LR & PPMI & SVM: 97.90\%, kNN: 97.20\%, LR: 96.90\% \\
\hline
\\
Reference & Number of subjects & Feature & Classifier & Dataset & Accuracy \\
& PD:Control & & & & \\
\hline
Martinez et al. 2017 \cite{martinez2017} & 158 : 111 & None & DCNN & PPMI & 95.50\% \\
Choi et al. 2017 \cite{choi17} & 431 : 193 (PPMI) & None & PDNet & PPMI & 96.00\% \\
& 72 : 10 (SNUH) & None & PDNet & SNUH (Private dataset) & 98.8\% \\
Wenzel et al. 2019 \cite{wenzel2019automatic} & 438 : 207 & None & DCNN & PPMI & 97.20\% \\
Ortiz et al. 2019 \cite{ortiz2019parkinson} & 158 : 111 & Isosurface & LeNet, AlexNet & PPMI & LeNet: 95.10\%, AlexNet: 95.10\% \\
Mohammed et al. 2021 \cite{mohammed2021easy} & 1359 : 1364 & None & DCNN & PPMI & 99.34\% \\
& (1023 of control images were augmented images) & & & & \\
\hline
\multicolumn{6}{l}{SBR: Striatal binding ratios, CBP: Caudate binding potential, PBP: Putamen binding potential, SBP: Striatal binding potential, PCR: Putamen-to-caudate ratio, LSR: Length of the striatal region,
}\\
\multicolumn{6}{l}{
VSR: Volume of the striatal region, kNN: k-Nearest neighbor, LR: Logistic regression, PNN: Probablistic neural network, CT: Classification tree }\\
\end{tabular}}
\label{tbl-ref01}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{fig-model}
\caption{Structure of PD-Net and Deep PD Net used as examples in this tutorial with the details of the size and number of convolution and max-pooling filters. The PD Net has been modified in the last convolution layer so that the image from the database can be used directly without the need for zero-padding.}
\label{fig:DCNN}
\end{figure}
\subsection{CNN Architectures for PD recognition}
There are several DCNN based models for PD recognition using SPECT images. From 2017, Martinez-Murcia \textit{et al.} proposed utilization of DCNN on SPECT image to diagnose PD \cite{martinez2017}. They trained their model with 301 SPECT images (158 PD, 111 normal control (NC), and 32 scans without evidence for dopaminergic deficit (SWEDD)) from the PPMI database, and their network achieved up to 95.5\% accuracy (96.2\% sensitivity). Choi \textit{et al.} proposed a deep DCNN model ``PD Net'' which was trained with the whole volume of SPECT images to discriminated the PD subjects from NC subjects \cite{choi17}. The model was trained with 624 subjects (431 PD and 193 NC) from the PPMI database, resulting in 96.0\% accuracy (94.2\% sensitivity) comparable to the evaluation from the experts.
Later in 2018, Wenzel \textit{et al.} proposed a large DCNN model with 2,872,642 parameters trained by 645 subjects from PPMI (438 PD and 207 NC). Despite the fact that this model yield 97.7\% accuracy (96.6\% sensitivity), slightly better than PD Net, the model is large and resource-consuming. Recently in 2021, Mohammed \textit{et al.} proposed the present state-of-the-art model with minimal architecture \cite{mohammed2021easy}. Their model consisted of three convolutional layers with a filter size of $(3\times3)$ and two dense layers. Their model's input image was normalized to enhance the ROI and provide a distinguishing feature to the model. A 10-fold cross-validation was used to evaluate the performance of the model. This state-of-the-art model was trained by 2723 SPECT images from the PPMI database (1359 PD and 1364 NC) and can provide 99.3\% accuracy (99.0\% sensitivity).
\subsection{Model implementation: Example Scenario}
{\RED
For a demonstration, we incorporate four different DCNN architectures based on PD Net \cite{choi17} for comparing in both classification and interpretation performance. As a tutorial, we choose these four DCNN architectures so that the classification performance is not significantly different and difficult to evaluate. Later in the tutorial, we will show another benefit of model interpretation: to interpret feedback as an evaluation metric.
For further study and development, we suggest utilizing the state-of-the-art model \cite{mohammed2021easy}.
\subsubsection{Models description}
The first model in this tutorial is the PD Net illustrated on the left-hand side of \autoref{fig:DCNN}. In the original PD Net, zero-padding was applied to make the image's size equal in all dimensions. However, this tutorial does not include zero-padding so that the images are all in their original form. Thus, a slight modification of the filter size is made in our PD Net model. PD Net model is composed of three 3D convolution layers connected with a single fully connected layer. Each 3D convolution layer has a different setup of filter size and stride, but all 3D convolution layers have Rectified Linear Unit (ReLU) activation layer and a max-pooling layer with $(3\times3\times3)$ pool size and stride of 2 attached. The first 3D convolution layer has 16 filters with a size of $(7\times7\times7)$ and a stride of 4. After the first pooling, images are fed to the second 3D convolution layer, which has 64 filters with a size of $(5\times5\times5)$ and a stride of 1. Finally, a 3D convolution layer with 256 filters of size $(2\times3\times2)$ and a stride of 1 is attached. This layer produces 256 features, which then fully-connect to 2 output nodes to discriminate the extracted features.
The second model is a modified PD Net architecture by increasing the network depth as shown on the right-hand side of \autoref{fig:DCNN}. We refer this model as ``Deep PD Net''. In this model, the filter size of both the 3D convolution and max-pooling layers was designed so that the last layer before the fully-connect layer gives 256 features, the same as PD Net.
The third and fourth models are PD Net and Deep PD Net with batch normalization. The batch normalization layer was added to follow each ReLU layer. Batch normalization was proposed to accelerate DCNN's training and was first applied with the image classification task \cite{ioffe15}. It can achieve the same accuracy with a much lower learning rate; thus, it reduces the number of epochs for training.
\subsubsection{SPECT image dataset}
The public SPECT image dataset commonly used in PD recognition studies \cite{Klyuzhin29,ortiz19,wenzel2019automatic,mohammed2021easy,choi17} are from Parkinson’s Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) database \cite{ppmi12}. PPMI is a study from the collaboration of research centers designed to identify PD progression biomarkers and to provide essential tools to improve PD therapeutics. All SPECT scan data acquired from every center undergo the same preprocessing procedure before they are publicly shared via the database \cite{sbr13}. SPECT raw projection data was imported to a HERMES\footnote{Hermes Medical, Stockholm, Sweden} system for iterative reconstruction using the HOSEM software. Iterative reconstruction was done without applying any filter. The HOSEM reconstructed files were then transferred to PMOD\footnote{PMOD Technologies, Zurich, Switzerland} for further processing. Attenuation correction ellipses were drawn on the images and a Chang 0 attenuation correction was applied. The final 3D-volume SPECT image with the voxel size of $2\times 2\times 2 \;\mathrm{mm^3}$ and the dimension of $91\times 109\times 91$ can be directly downloaded from the publicly shared PPMI database.
}
\subsubsection{Data selection and pre-processing}
{\RED A total of 607 subjects with clinical characteristics summarized in \autoref{tbl-para} were selected for training the models in this tutorial. Since PPMI is the longitudinal study of the PD subject, only the earliest SPECT image was selected for each subject and we selected one SPECT image per subject. The selected data has more PD class than NC class, since the PPMI database provide more data from PD class than NC class. This make the data imbalance, which in some work, the data augmentation on NC class is utilized to balance the data \cite{mohammed2021easy}. In this tutorial, we will not cover on the data augmentation method. After obtaining SPECT images from PPMI, the min-max normalization in the range $[0,1]$ is applied.}
\subsubsection{Training and testing process}
{\RED All the DCNN models were implemented with Keras \cite{chollet15}, an open-source deep learning library written in Python and running on top of Tensorflow \cite{abadi17}. The models were trained for 30 epochs using Stochastic Gradient Descent. The momentum parameter was set to 0.9. The learning rate was initially $1 \times 10^{-4}$ and logarithmically decreased to have $1 \times 10^{-6}$ at the final epoch. Additionally, weight parameters in the model were initiated with a Glorot initialization \cite{glorot10}. The loss function also is weighted for class imbalance during the training. These training parameters are the same with \cite{choi17} and every model uses the same parameters for a fair comparison.}
The data were divided into training, validation, and testing set with a ratio of 80:10:10. During the training, the model uses the validation set to tune the model to reach the best classification performance. The experiment is carried out using 10-fold cross-validation. The best model that the validation set provides in each fold is used to calculate both classification and interpretation performance by applying it to the testing set.
\begin{table}
\caption{Clinical details of all subjects used in this tutorial.}
\centering
\resizebox{0.45\textwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{ l l l }
& Parkinson's disease & Normal Control \\
& (n=448) & (n=159) \rule[-0.9ex]{0pt}{0pt}\\
\hline
Age & 61.6 $\pm$ 9.8 & 60.5 $\pm$ 11.3 \rule{0pt}{2.6ex}\\
Sex (M/F) & 288/160 & 112/47 \\
MDS-UPDRS part III & 21.3 $\pm$ 9.5 & \\
Hoehn and Yahr stage & 1.6 $\pm$ 0.5 & \rule[-0.9ex]{0pt}{0pt}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\label{tbl-para}
\end{table}
The classification performance of each model is reported using the 10-fold cross-validation. In addition to the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity are used as metrics to compare each model. They are defined as
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{Sensitivity = \frac{ True\; positive}{Total\; positive}},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{Specificity = \frac{\mathrm True\; negative}{Total\; negative}}.
\end{equation}
Results that were acquired using SBR as the input feature along with the SVM classifier were used as the benchmark to compare with the deep learning method, which uses whole volume SPECT image as the input feature with DCNN as the classifier. Four types of DCNN architecture were designed based on the PD Net \cite{choi17} and all of them are described in the previous section. The mean $\pm$ STD of accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity calculated from 10-fold of a testing set, are shown in \autoref{tbl-acc}. The accuracy varies from 95\% to 96\% with the deep learning approaches, giving a slightly higher accuracy than the SVM model. Deep PD Net with batch normalization has the highest accuracy with 96.87\%. The sensitivity of each model was not significantly different. However, we can see the improvement of the specificity from 93\% to 97\% of the Deep PD Net model.
McNemar's test \cite{dietterich98} was used to compare between SVM and DCNN models, and the $p$-value from this test can not reveal any statistical difference in the classification performance. Thus, we further investigate the ROC curve as shown in \autoref{fig:roc_curve}. It reveals a trend of a higher AUC value of DCNN than that of SVM. The Deep PD Net with batch normalization has the highest AUC value, which is 0.987.
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Classification performance of SVM, PD Net and Deep PD Net.}
\resizebox{0.8\textwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{ l l l l l l l}
Method & Input Feature & Accuracy & Sensitivity & Specificity & \\
\hline
SVM & SBR Ratio & 95.55 $\pm$ 2.48 & 96.90 $\pm$ 2.61 & 92.29 $\pm$ 7.73 & \\
PD Net & SPECT & 95.39 $\pm$ 2.88 & 95.97 $\pm$ 3.30 & 93.75 $\pm$ 6.23 & \\
PD Net + Batch Norm & SPECT & 96.54 $\pm$ 2.63 & 96.88 $\pm$ 3.20 & 95.66 $\pm$ 6.09 & \\
Deep PD Net & SPECT & 96.71 $\pm$ 2.32 & 97.10 $\pm$ 2.35 & 95.42 $\pm$ 4.40 & \\
Deep PD Net + Batch Norm & SPECT & 96.87 $\pm$ 2.13 & 96.42 $\pm$ 3.01 & 97.89 $\pm$ 3.61 & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\label{tbl-acc}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{fig-roc_curve}
\caption{ROC curve for each model.}
\label{fig:roc_curve}
\end{figure}
\section{Model Interpretation Methods}
\label{S:3}
\subsection{Interpretation Methods Overview}
Despite the fact that DCNN models can provide highly accurate classification results, due to DCNN's black-box nature, it is difficult to directly explain the importance of the input features that lead to high classification performance. Model interpretation methods have been used to reveal the feature importance and assess the trust of the model prediction results. Hence, the primary purpose of the interpretation method is to calculate the ``contribution score'' \cite{shrikumar17} of the input features. Vastly used model interpretation methods for DCNN can be categorized into two major groups. The first one is the gradient-based method, which focuses on using backpropagation to calculate the gradient that can be implied back to be the input score of the target class's input features. The other group is the additive attribution methods, which alternatively construct a simpler model to explain the complex model. Well-known current methods belonging to these two major groups are discussed below.
\subsubsection{Gradient based method}
The core concept of deep learning is to calculate the gradient of the loss function with respect to all the model's weights and biases. These gradients can be used to compute the relation between the input feature and the output prediction class. We categorize the interpretation methods that directly use these gradients from the original model as the gradient-based method.
\textbf{Direct backpropagation (Saliency map):} Backpropagation is a method to compute gradients of the loss function for all weights in the network. These gradients can also be backpropagated to the input data layer, which contributes the most to the assigned class. This is done by computing the gradient of the output category with respect to a sample input image \cite{simonyan13}. If we define input features as $x$ and score for predicting class $c$ as $S^c$, the map of the contribution score is calculated as
\begin{equation}
L^c_\mathrm{Saliency\;map} = \frac{\partial S^c}{\partial x}
\end{equation}
\textbf{Guided backpropagation:} For the direct backpropagation, the gradient of the loss function with respect to the parameter of layer $l+1$ is used to calculate the gradient of the loss function with respect to the parameter of layer $l$. In guided backpropagation, the same calculation with the direct backpropagation is used, but if the gradient of layer $l+1$ is negative, the gradient of layer $l$ is set to zero \cite{springenberg14}. In other words, this method includes the guidance signal to the deeper layer during the backpropagation resulted in the remarkable improvement of the contribution score map.
\textbf{Grad-CAM:} Global average pooling (GAP) is the sum of all the values in a feature map at the last convolution layer. It was proposed to replace the fully-connected layers of the DCNN. GAP reduces the total model parameters and results in preventing the overfitting from the fully-connected layers in some cases. For a 2D input image, the GAP of the $k^\mathrm{th}$ feature map $A^k$ can be calculated from the sum of the 2D elements $i,j$ or can be written as
\begin{equation}
G^k = \sum\limits_{i} \sum\limits_{j} A^k_{ij}.
\end{equation}
The score of predict class $c$ then becomes
\begin{equation}
S^c = \sum\limits_{k } \sum\limits_{i} \sum\limits_{j} w^c_k A^k_{ij},
\end{equation}
where $w^c_k$ is the weight of $A^k_{ij}$ to predict class $c$. By examining this equation, class activation map (CAM) can be defined as
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{CAM} =\sum\limits_{k } w^c_k A^k_{ij},
\end{equation}
which shows the 2D map of the score that predict class $c$. CAM represents the input feature's contribution score by resizing this 2D map to the original input image. It also has a remarkable ability for object localization of the predict class \cite{zhou16}. However, the structure of GAP tends to reduce the model classification performance. The Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping (Grad-CAM), which is a generalized form of CAM, was proposed to handle the issue \cite{selvaraju17}. Grad-CAM directly calculates the gradient using the backpropagation from each neuron of the last convolution layer feature map, which can be written as $\partial S^c / \partial A^k_{ij}$. Then, these gradients are summed within the $k^\mathrm{th}$ feature map to generate the weight of each map and predict class $c$, which can be written as;
\begin{equation}
\alpha _k^c = \sum\limits_i {\sum\limits_j {\frac{{\partial {S^c}}}{{\partial A_{ij}^k}}} }
\end{equation}
Then Grad-CAM of class $c$ can be generated from
\begin{equation}
L_{{\mathrm{Grad - CAM}}}^c = \mathrm{ReLU} \left( {\sum\limits_k {\alpha _k^c{A^k}} } \right).
\end{equation}
ReLU function is used to remove the negative contribution scores because Grad-CAM wants to consider only the input features that increase the prediction score of class $c$. Due to the direct use of the gradient from the backpropagation, Grad-CAM can be applied to interpret any type of DCNN (e.g., DCNN with recurrent neural networks) without any modifications to the DCNN model.
\textbf{Guided Grad-CAM:} The use of the last convolution layer of the Grad-CAM can provide a more accurate location of the relevant image regions. However, this last layer does not maintain enough resolution to provide a fine-grained importance feature. Although the guided backpropagation method provides the contribution scores of every individual pixel of the input image, it lacks the localization capability. In order to get the best outcome, it is possible to fuse guided backpropagation with Grad-CAM to create Guided Grad-CAM that has both high-resolution and high capability to locate the related image area.
\subsubsection{Additive feature attribution method}
When the model becomes more complex, the original model can hardly be used to explain its results. The best way to explain the model is to generate a simpler explanation model from the original model's approximation.
By giving $f(x)$ to be the original model, $x$ to be the original input, $g(x')$ to be the explanation model, and $x'$ to be the simplified input, the equation used to explain the original model can be written as $g(x') = f(x)$. The simplified input must be able to map to the original input through a mapping function $x=h_x(x')$. The simplest way to represent the explanation model is to let the simplified input be the binary vector, representing the presence or absence of the input features. For the image classification task, these input features can be pixels or super-pixels. This method of generating the explanation model is defined as the additive feature attribution method \cite{lundberg17, lundberg16}, in which the explanation model $g$ is written as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:additiveFeature}
g(x') = {\phi _0} + \sum\limits_{i = 1}^M {{\phi _i}{{x'}_i}},
\end{equation}
where $x' \in \lbrace 0,1\rbrace ^M$, $M$ is the number of simplified input features, and $\phi_i \in \mathbb{R}$. This method approximates the output $f(x)$ by using $\phi_i$ which is the ``attribution'' or ``contribution score'' from each input feature. Two well-known interpretation methods which are based on the concept of \autoref{eq:additiveFeature} are discussed below.
\textbf{DeepLIFT:} Deep Learning Important FeaTures (DeepLIFT) is an interpretation method that avoids discontinuity of the gradient-based approach in approximating the feature contribution to the output \cite{shrikumar17}. By giving reference to the input and output, the contribution scores can be calculated from the difference using this reference. If $x_i$ and $f(x)$ are input feature and model output, $x_{i0}$ and $f(x_0)$ are reference input feature and reference model output, then $\Delta y = f(x)-f(x_0)$ and $\Delta x_i = x_i - x_{i0}$ are defined as the difference between the reference and model output and input feature. DeepLift assigns the attribution of $\Delta x_i$ as $C_{\Delta x_i \Delta y}$ and uses the summation of these attributions to give the value of $\Delta y$, which can be written as;
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sum-to-delta}
\sum\limits_{i = 1}^M C_{\Delta x_i \Delta y} = \Delta y.
\end{equation}
By comparing this with \autoref{eq:additiveFeature} with $f(x_0) = \phi_0$ and $C_{\Delta x_i \Delta y} = \phi_i$, DeepLIFT can be categorized as the additive feature attribution method. DeepLIFT uses rules, that are based on the structure of deep learning network, to assign the attribution from each input feature. Thus, DeepLIFT is ``model-specific'' in the approximation of the contribution score. DeepLIFT also shown to be the modify form with better performance compare to another model-specific method called ``layer-wise relevance propagation'' \cite{bach15}.
\textbf{SHAP:} SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) was designed to simplify any complex model, not restricted to any model structure \cite{lundberg17}. For SHAP, Shapley values are used for the contribution score, and they are the only set of values that satisfy the properties of the additive feature attribution or \autoref{eq:additiveFeature}. SHAP proposes a way to approximate the Shapley value by minimizing the objective function that satisfies all the properties of \autoref{eq:additiveFeature}. This objective function does not constrain any model parameters and only use the result from the model output. Thus, SHAP becomes ``model-agnostic'' in the approximation of the contribution score.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{fig-heatmap}
\caption{An example of slice averaging SPECT image (left figure) and the attention map (right table) from Deep PD Net model for (a) NC and (b) PD. The red line is the segmented line generated from the mean threshold reported in Ref. \citenum{prashanth17}. The first row of the right table shows the original map. The second and the third row shows the binary map generated from the top 10\% of contribution score and the top 1\% contribution score.}
\label{fig:heatmap}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Interpretation performance Comparison: Example Scenario}
Since there are various model interpretation methods available, it is not possible to decisively express which method is the best for SPECT image classification without actual comparison. Therefore, we demonstrate the interpretation performance of the six well-known interpretation methods mentioned above in this tutorial.
To evaluate the interpretation performance, we generated a ground truth image by segmenting the striatal nuclei. This ground truth image is compared with the attention map from the interpretation methods. The segmented striatal nuclei are created based on a previous study \cite{prashanth17}. The slices from 35th to 48th of the SPECT image, which cover the striatal nuclei, are selected. Then, each slice is normalized to the range from 0 to 1, and a slice averaging image is constructed. This slice averaging image is again normalized to [0,1]. After that, a threshold that determines the segmented area is selected. The mean $\pm$ SD of the thresholds for NC and PD subjects, which the experts selected, were reported in \cite{prashanth17} as 0.63 $\pm$ 0.04 and 0.69 $\pm$ 0.05, respectively. In this tutorial, we select the mean threshold values and use them to find the segmented striatal nuclei of the slice averaging image. The results of the slice averaging SPECT images from NC and PD can be seen in \autoref{fig:heatmap}. The area that is enclosed by the red irregular ellipse represents the segmented area. The segmented area is now used as the ground truth to evaluate the interpretation performance.
The slice averaging the attention map from the interpretation method was also generated similar to the slice averaging the SPECT images. Examples of grayscale attention maps from the Deep PD Net model are shown in the first row of \autoref{fig:heatmap} (a) and (b) for a NC and a PD subject, respectively. White regions located near or inside the segmented region show the most contributed area in the class prediction.
\begin{table*}
\caption{The results of the mean Dice coefficient using the binary image of the attention map for the top 10\% of contribution scores (upper) and the top 1\% of contribution scores (lower). The bold number refers to the highest Dice coefficient among all the methods.}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{ l l l l l l l l }
Model & Saliency Map & Guided Backprop & Grad-CAM & Guided Grad-CAM & DeepLIFT & SHAP &\\
\hline
PD Net & 17.09 $\pm$ 4.91 & \bf 23.78 $\pm$ 6.02 & 3.27 $\pm$ 8.11 & 22.15 $\pm$ 7.36 & 16.92 $\pm$ 6.75 & 16.62 $\pm$ 6.77 & \\
PD Net + Batch Norm & 12.51 $\pm$ 4.99 & \bf 23.90 $\pm$ 6.76 & 4.49 $\pm$ 7.89 & 20.73 $\pm$ 8.53 & 14.98 $\pm$ 6.04 & 15.50 $\pm$ 6.85 & \\
Deep PD Net & 17.29 $\pm$ 5.00 & \bf 29.72 $\pm$ 8.95 & 3.66 $\pm$ 7.77 & 25.70 $\pm$ 10.15 & 18.11 $\pm$ 6.59 & 15.72 $\pm$ 9.60 & \\
Deep PD Net + Batch Norm & 15.22 $\pm$ 4.36 & \bf 29.38 $\pm$ 9.00 & 2.96 $\pm$ 6.49 & 21.11 $\pm$ 12.16 & 16.99 $\pm$ 5.23 & 16.35 $\pm$ 9.39 & \\
\hline
\\
\\
Model & Saliency Map & Guided Backprop & Grad-CAM & Guided Grad-CAM & DeepLIFT & SHAP &\\
\hline
PD Net & 38.38 $\pm$ 10.73 & \bf 53.08 $\pm$ 10.42 & 1.45 $\pm$ 5.96 & 49.32 $\pm$ 16.69 & 32.53 $\pm$ 11.53 & 26.73 $\pm$ 11.20 & \\
PD Net + Batch Norm & 22.20 $\pm$ 9.38 & \bf 54.85 $\pm$ 10.12 & 1.85 $\pm$ 6.59 & 47.91 $\pm$ 19.62 & 26.73 $\pm$ 10.27 & 22.63 $\pm$ 11.19 & \\
Deep PD Net & 45.32 $\pm$ 10.02 & \bf 66.07 $\pm$ 12.62 & 1.45 $\pm$ 5.99 & 58.87 $\pm$ 23.86 & 36.96 $\pm$ 11.00 & 25.81 $\pm$ 15.54 & \\
Deep PD Net + Batch Norm & 38.37 $\pm$ 10.22 & \bf 65.56 $\pm$ 12.32 & 0.96 $\pm$ 5.11 & 49.00 $\pm$ 28.71 & 38.71 $\pm$ 10.28 & 28.15 $\pm$ 15.82 & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\label{tbl-overlay}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Evaluation Methods for Interpretable Models}
The pixels that are used to evaluate the interpretation performance need to be selected with another threshold. \cite{shrikumar17} proposed the threshold of which using only 20\% of top values sorted from descending order. In this study, this thresholding technique was used with altering percentages of 10\% and 1\%. Then two binary images can be generated from an attention map. These binary images for different interpretation methods are shown in the second and third row of \autoref{fig:heatmap} (a) and (b), respectively. These figures demonstrate the overlap region between each interpretation method and the segmented area significantly. By considering the figure of the top 10\% pixels as seen in the second row, we can observe that the majority of the pixels are located inside the brain area. On the other hand, the results from using the top 1\% as seen in the third row show that the majority of pixels gather inside the segmented red line area.
Dice coefficient $D$ is widely used to compare a predicted segmented image $P$ with the ground truth segmented image $G$. It is defined as twice the size of the intersect area between $P$ and $G$ over the sum of the area $P$ and $G$, and can be written as
\begin{equation}
D = \frac{{2\left| {P \cap G} \right|}}{{\left| P \right| + \left| G \right|}}.
\end{equation}
The coefficient exists in the range of $[0,1]$ where $D=1$ indicates identical segmentation. The mean $\pm$ SD of the Dice coefficient is calculated from the test set of all 10-fold. The results are shown in \autoref{tbl-overlay}. The bold value indicates the best result in a given threshold. The upper and lower tables show the results from the top 10\% and top 1\%, respectively. The uses of the top 10\% and 1\% show that guided backpropagation has the highest Dice coefficient, which directly relates to the interpretation performance in providing the information of the location of striatal nuclei. The Dice coefficient's boxplots in \autoref{fig:dice_box_plot} also confirm that guided backpropagation performance dominates other methods.
Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare the guided backpropagation with the other methods. It revealed significant differences ($p < 0.01$) for the Dice coefficient between guided backpropagation and all other methods. This test was then used to compare the Dice coefficient of guided backpropagation between Deep PD Net and PD Net. We also found the significant difference ($p < 0.01$) of this model. However, the difference between Deep PD Net and Deep PD Net with batch normalization was not significant.
Mean absolute error is used as another measure to evaluate each method's performance as demonstrated in \autoref{fig:abs_error}. The guided backpropagation shows that the error approaches zero inside the striatal nuclei, which can be interpreted as the Deep PD Net directly focuses on the region and gives more credibility to the prediction results.
We generate a mean segmented image from the binary map of top 1\% pixels and overlay on top of the ground truth segmented image as shown in \autoref{fig:mean}. By examining \autoref{fig:mean}(a), saliency map and DeepLIFT can identify the tail of symmetric comma shape in the control group. On the other hand, from \autoref{fig:mean}(b), SHAP can correctly identify the uptake depletion location of the PD group.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig-dice_box_plot}
\caption{Boxplots of Dice coefficient in different interpretation methods from the top 1\% of contribution score for (a) PD Net (b) PD Net + Batch Norm (c) Deep PD Net and (d) Deep PD Net + Batch Norm. Median is the line that locates inside the box, and black dots represent outliers outside 1.5 times the interquartile range of the upper and lower quartile.}
\label{fig:dice_box_plot}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{fig-abs_error}
\caption{The mean segmented image (left) and mean absolute error plot (right table) for (a) NC group and (b) PD group. The mean absolute error was calculated using the binary image from the top 1\% contribution pixels to compare with the binary image from the segmented image.}
\label{fig:abs_error}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{fig-mean}
\caption{The mean segmented image (left) and mean segmented heatmap (right table) for (a) NC group and (b) PD group. The mean segmented heatmap was generated using the mean of binary images from the top 1\% contribution pixels.}
\label{fig:mean}
\end{figure*}
\section{Discussion on Example Scenario}
\label{S:4}
In \autoref{S:2}, we demonstrate the comparison of classification performance between 4 types of DCNN architecture based on the PD Net. DCNN may cause the overfitting of the data \cite{rawat17}. However, Deep PD Net, which attaches more convolution and max-pooling layers to increase the network depth, yields better performance than PD Net without overfitting. The addition of batch normalization to the model shows a minor improvement of the model accuracy, which might be due to the small value of the learning rate set in this study. Also, the input data may not be complex enough compared to the results of the original batch normalization study \cite{ioffe15}. From the clinical details shown in \autoref{tbl-para}, the number of PD subjects is 3 times higher than the number of NC subjects. Due to this extreme class imbalance, we can observe only the increase in the specificity but not the sensitivity.
For the comparison of interpretation performance, the Dice coefficient in \autoref{tbl-overlay} and mean absolute error in \autoref{fig:abs_error} show that guided backpropagation outperforms other methods. Guided backpropagation was first designed to improve the saliency map's quality in feature visualization of the deep learning model \cite{springenberg14}. In this tutorial, it has the best ability to show fine-grained importance. It also gives much less error in the mean absolute error plot compared to other methods. On the other hand, Grad-CAM was the only method that barely focuses on the crucial region. Although Grad-CAM was supposed to perform well in the class-discriminative and localize relevant image regions \cite{selvaraju17}, it barely focuses on fine-grained importance. Another issue of Grad-CAM is that it heavily relies on the resolution of the last feature map. Since PD Net was designed with the last feature map of size $(1\times 1\times 1)$, we need to select the feature map from the upper convolution layer with size $(6 \times 8 \times 6)$ which may reduce the interpretation performance.
When we plot the mean segmented image from the binary map of the top 1\% pixels, saliency map, DeepLIFT, and SHAP also able to discriminate the difference between classes. Since SHAP is the model-agnostic method, it does not rely on DCNN weights; thus, the result becomes different from the saliency map and DeepLIFT. Even though these three methods' performance is hard to evaluate, SHAP can generate a better quality heatmap at the uptake depletion location, which outperforms other methods in discriminating the difference between PD and NC subjects. This should be consistent with \cite{lundberg17}, which revealed that SHAP gives the best performance among all other methods of showing the class difference between hand-written images of numbers 8 and 3. In conclusion, both guided backpropagation and SHAP are suitable interpretation methods for the architectures in this tutorial. Nevertheless, in other medical image applications, the other interpretation methods might overcome both methods.
Another interesting aspect of the model interpretation is to use the interpreted feedback as an evaluation metric to choose the best model. For example, from \autoref{tbl-acc} and \autoref{fig:roc_curve}, PD Net with batch normalization shows better specificity and AUC value comparing to Deep PD Net, while Deep PD Net shows better accuracy and sensitivity. The performance of the two models is not significantly different and is difficult to evaluate. To this end, the feedback from the interpretation method can provide a decisive answer to the evaluation. From \autoref{tbl-overlay}, when utilizing the guided backpropagation method, Deep PD Net has the highest interpretation performance, which is significantly higher than that of PD Net with batch normalization. This result suggests that Deep PD Net is the best suit for PD recognition among the tutorial's DCNN architecture.
We suggest a flow chart for applying the interpreted feedback to assist in model evaluation in \autoref{fig:flow_chart}. In this tutorial, if we follow the flow chart, the Deep PD Net model should be suggested to be used for PPMI data. This flow chart and the concept of model interpretation methods can be utilized not only in medical image application but also in other DCNN application where the credibility of DCNN need to be verified as well, for example, DCNN applications in biomedical \cite{esteva17, lee19} or bioinformatics \cite{le17}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.40\textwidth]{fig-flow_chart}
\caption{The flow chart for the interpretation method application for assisting in model evaluation.}
\label{fig:flow_chart}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
\label{S:5}
The purpose of this tutorial is to demonstrate the procedure for selecting the most reliable interpretation method for SPECT image PD recognition model. To this end, we introduce the traditional and DCNN approach for PD diagnosis and give an example scenario with four DCNN models. Then, we introduce six well-known interpretation methods and exhibit these six methods' interpretation performance on those four DCNN models mentioned above. We propose evaluation methods for measuring the interpretation performance using the Dice coefficient and mean segmented binary image overlay on top of ground truth segmented image. {\RED The evaluation demonstrates that the guided backpropagation and SHAP interpretation methods are both suitable for PD recognition methods in different aspects. Guided backpropagation shows the highest Dice coefficient and lowest mean square error, while SHAP provides the best quality heatmap at the uptake depletion location.} Finally, we discuss about utilizing interpreted feedback for deciding the most suitable model for the intended task. The interpretation and evaluation methods displayed in this tutorial can be applied for other tasks aside from PD recognition, and contribute to sensor data processing in an AI Era.
\section{Introduction}
\label{S:1}
Parkinson's disease (PD) is a chronic neurodegenerative disease caused by the nigrostriatal pathway degeneration and leads to dopamine's insufficiency in the striatum \cite{obeso10}. The characterization of the disease based on the motor symptoms are tremor, rigidity, and bradykinesia. Moreover, the non-motor symptoms which are depression, apathy, and sleep disorder, are frequently recognized. These symptoms degrade the quality of life of the people who suffer from this disease \cite{chaudhuri09}. Early and accurate diagnosis is crucial for effective treatment. The use of I123-Ioflupane SPECT or sometimes known as DaTSCAN or [123I]FP-CIT images, has become reliable as one of the PD diagnosis standards \cite{djang12}. The I123-Ioflupane has a high binding affinity for presynaptic dopamine transporters (DAT) inside the striatum. Healthy subjects are characterized by intense and symmetric uptake of the I123-Ioflupane in the caudate nucleus and putamen in both hemispheres. The striatal transaxial images should appear as the symmetric comma- or crescent-shaped. On the other hand, PD subjects are indicated by the unilateral or bilateral decrease in the uptake of the I123-Ioflupane. The striatal transaxial image often shrinks to a circular or oval shape on one or both sides. In clinical practice, diagnosis using SPECT images is usually evaluated visually and sometimes includes assistance from the semi-quantification method, which relies on computer software to acquire quantification of SPECT images \cite{badiavas11}.
The study of automated computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) of PD currently focuses on the supervised machine learning algorithm, which receives multi-dimensional input features. The machine learning methods for SPECT images classification between healthy and PD subjects from several studies show very high accuracy, generally above 90\% \cite{taylor17}. Conventional supervised machine learning for the CAD faces the difficulty of processing the images in their original form. Hand-engineering is needed in selecting the region of interest that leads to appropriate features in which the classifier can detect the patterns. Deep convolutional neural network (DCNN), which does not rely heavily on hand-engineering, has recently become a mainstream method for solving image classification problems \cite{lecun15, goodfellow16}.
The DCNN composing the convolutional and pooling layers is inspired by the receptive fields in the visual cortex \cite{hubel62}. The resemblance of the DCNN and the primate visual stimuli processing has also been evaluated using the last convolutional layer's features from the DCNN, and the inferior temporal cortex neural responses \cite{cadieu14}. In addition, the progress in hardware, software, and algorithm parallelization, which reduces the training time to process a massive collection of multi-dimensional data, allows DCNN to become a high-performance tool in medical image recognition \cite{litjens17, duncan20}. Further investigation shows that DCNN still gives high classification accuracy even without the need for spatial normalization procedure \cite{martinez18}. However, it is still unclear which regions in the images are being detected by the model and whether the DCNN understands the pattern in the same way as the expert's visual interpretation. Unlike the conventional machine learning models in which each input feature is hand-designed and the models are decomposable into interpretable components, the complexity of the DCNN seems to diminish its interpretability. Also, the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Recital 71, which gives citizens a ``right to explanation'' will make the ``black box'' approaches hardly suitable in clinical diagnosis \cite{ras18}.
Several DCNN model interpretation methods have been developed to visualize or interpret the DCNN so that the attention map can be generated to understand the essential pixels of the input image. These methods were used to interpret the model's decision and increase the credibility of the DCNN diagnosis results in several types of medical image \cite{martinez18, esteva17, lee19}. However, due to the variety of model interpretation methods, there is no evidence of which methods can provide the most reliable interpretation results for medical image applications.
{\RED This tutorial aims to demonstrate the procedure for selecting the most suitable interpretation method for SPECT image PD recognition model. The contributions of this tutorial are as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item We provide an overview on the recent PD recognition model, and provide a step-by-step approach to implement four DCNN models.
\item We incorporate six well-known interpretation methods to four DCNN models, display each method's visual interpretation result, and demonstrate the methods for evaluating the interpretation performance. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first attempt to explore the interpretation methods that is suitable for using with SPECT image PD recognition model.
\item We propose a method to utilize the interpreted feedback to aid in model selection.
\end{enumerate}
}
The code for all four DCNN models with six interpretation methods was uploaded and can be download publicly\footnote{https://github.com/IoBT-VISTEC/PPMI\_DL, We will publish all source codes and data sources immediately after getting an acceptance letter from SJ}. Furthermore, the introduced deep neural network interpretation methods can contribute to the future of data processing in an AI Era (interpretable-AI) as one of the core modules in sensors-related studies. For example, Grezmak \textit{et al.} had reported the interpretable CNN for a machine fault diagnosis \cite{machine_lrp}, Alharthi \textit{et al.} had reported an interpretable time series model for gait-induced ground reaction force (GRF) in Parkinson’s disease (PD) recognition \cite{gait_lrp}, and Lee \textit{et al.} had utilized interpretable AI in glucose management for diabetes patient \cite{9115809}. All of the examples demonstrate the usefulness of the model interpretation methods as feedback in constructing well-suited deep learning architectures.
\section{PD Recognition Methods and an Example Scenario}
\label{S:2}
\subsection{Traditional Classification Method}
The most commonly used features for the traditional classification method are the striatal binding ratios (SBR) from both left and right caudate and putamen, which relate to the ratio of the target region and the reference region. These features were classified with the probabilistic neural network, decision tree \cite{palumbo10}, and support vector machine (SVM) \cite{palumbo14, prashanth14}. Other new methods have been developed to find the features from region of interest (ROI), including shape analysis and surface fitting \cite{prashanth17}, mean ellipsoid uptake and dysmorphic index \cite{augimeri16}, Haralick texture features \cite{martinez13}, principal component analysis (PCA) \cite{towey11}, independent component analysis (ICA) \cite{martinez14}, partial least squares decomposition \cite{segovia12}, empirical mode decomposition with PCA or ICA \cite{rojas13} or circularity features obtained from DAT \cite{shiiba20}. These new types of features seem to give the best accuracy with the SVM classifier. Furthermore, the image voxels within the ROI are also used directly as the input features with SVM \cite{illan12, oliveira15}, logistic lasso \cite{tagare17}, and single-layer neural network \cite{zhang17} classifiers.
In this tutorial, we utilize the most commonly used SBR feature with an SVM classifier as an example of the traditional classification method. The SBR \cite{sbr13} can be calculated by first applying the standard Gaussian 3D 6.0 mm filter to the final preprocessed images. These images were then normalized to standard Montreal Neurologic Institute (MNI) space so that all scans are in the same anatomical alignment, followed by identifying the transaxial slice with the highest striatal uptake. Then, the 8 hottest striatal slices around it were averaged to generate a single slice image. Regions of interest (ROI) were then selected for left and right caudate, and left and right putamen. The occipital cortex was selected as the reference region. Count densities for each region were extracted, and SBR is calculated as
\begin{equation}
\textrm{SBR of target region} = \frac{\textrm{Target region count density}}{\textrm{Reference region count density}}-1.
\end{equation}
The SBR of each subject can be obtained from the PPMI database alongside the SPECT images. It was proved that applying SBR to SVM gives very high accuracy \cite{prashanth14}; therefore, we will use this classification method as a baseline for comparing and evaluating with the deep learning approach.
\begin{table*}
\caption{\RED Summarize of traditional classification method (upper) and deep learning (lower) for Parkinson's disease SPECT image classification.}
\centering
\resizebox{0.99\textwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{ l c l l l l }
Reference & Number of subjects & Feature & Classifier & Dataset & Accuracy \\
& PD:Control & & & & \\
\hline
Palumbo et al. 2010 \cite{palumbo10} & 127 : 89 & Striatal binding ratios & PNN, CT & Private dataset & PNN: $96.6 \%$, CT: 93.5 \% \\
Towey et al. 2011 \cite{towey11} & 79 : 37 & PCA decomposition of striatal region & Naive-Bayes & Private dataset & 94.8\% \\
Oliveira et al. 2015 \cite{oliveira2015computer} & 445 : 209 & Voxel-base-feature & SVM & PPMI & 97.86\% \\
Oliveira et al. 2018 \cite{oliveira2018extraction} & 443 : 209 & SBR, CBP, PBP, SBP, PCR, LSR, VSR & SVM, kNN, LR & PPMI & SVM: 97.90\%, kNN: 97.20\%, LR: 96.90\% \\
\hline
\\
Reference & Number of subjects & Feature & Classifier & Dataset & Accuracy \\
& PD:Control & & & & \\
\hline
Martinez et al. 2017 \cite{martinez2017} & 158 : 111 & None & DCNN & PPMI & 95.50\% \\
Choi et al. 2017 \cite{choi17} & 431 : 193 (PPMI) & None & PDNet & PPMI & 96.00\% \\
& 72 : 10 (SNUH) & None & PDNet & SNUH (Private dataset) & 98.8\% \\
Wenzel et al. 2019 \cite{wenzel2019automatic} & 438 : 207 & None & DCNN & PPMI & 97.20\% \\
Ortiz et al. 2019 \cite{ortiz2019parkinson} & 158 : 111 & Isosurface & LeNet, AlexNet & PPMI & LeNet: 95.10\%, AlexNet: 95.10\% \\
Mohammed et al. 2021 \cite{mohammed2021easy} & 1359 : 1364 & None & DCNN & PPMI & 99.34\% \\
& (1023 of control images were augmented images) & & & & \\
\hline
\multicolumn{6}{l}{SBR: Striatal binding ratios, CBP: Caudate binding potential, PBP: Putamen binding potential, SBP: Striatal binding potential, PCR: Putamen-to-caudate ratio, LSR: Length of the striatal region,
}\\
\multicolumn{6}{l}{
VSR: Volume of the striatal region, kNN: k-Nearest neighbor, LR: Logistic regression, PNN: Probablistic neural network, CT: Classification tree }\\
\end{tabular}}
\label{tbl-ref01}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{fig-model}
\caption{Structure of PD-Net and Deep PD Net used as examples in this tutorial with the details of the size and number of convolution and max-pooling filters. The PD Net has been modified in the last convolution layer so that the image from the database can be used directly without the need for zero-padding.}
\label{fig:DCNN}
\end{figure}
\subsection{CNN Architectures for PD recognition}
There are several DCNN based models for PD recognition using SPECT images. From 2017, Martinez-Murcia \textit{et al.} proposed utilization of DCNN on SPECT image to diagnose PD \cite{martinez2017}. They trained their model with 301 SPECT images (158 PD, 111 normal control (NC), and 32 scans without evidence for dopaminergic deficit (SWEDD)) from the PPMI database, and their network achieved up to 95.5\% accuracy (96.2\% sensitivity). Choi \textit{et al.} proposed a deep DCNN model ``PD Net'' which was trained with the whole volume of SPECT images to discriminated the PD subjects from NC subjects \cite{choi17}. The model was trained with 624 subjects (431 PD and 193 NC) from the PPMI database, resulting in 96.0\% accuracy (94.2\% sensitivity) comparable to the evaluation from the experts.
Later in 2018, Wenzel \textit{et al.} proposed a large DCNN model with 2,872,642 parameters trained by 645 subjects from PPMI (438 PD and 207 NC). Despite the fact that this model yield 97.7\% accuracy (96.6\% sensitivity), slightly better than PD Net, the model is large and resource-consuming. Recently in 2021, Mohammed \textit{et al.} proposed the present state-of-the-art model with minimal architecture \cite{mohammed2021easy}. Their model consisted of three convolutional layers with a filter size of $(3\times3)$ and two dense layers. Their model's input image was normalized to enhance the ROI and provide a distinguishing feature to the model. A 10-fold cross-validation was used to evaluate the performance of the model. This state-of-the-art model was trained by 2723 SPECT images from the PPMI database (1359 PD and 1364 NC) and can provide 99.3\% accuracy (99.0\% sensitivity).
\subsection{Model implementation: Example Scenario}
{\RED
For a demonstration, we incorporate four different DCNN architectures based on PD Net \cite{choi17} for comparing in both classification and interpretation performance. As a tutorial, we choose these four DCNN architectures so that the classification performance is not significantly different and difficult to evaluate. Later in the tutorial, we will show another benefit of model interpretation: to interpret feedback as an evaluation metric.
For further study and development, we suggest utilizing the state-of-the-art model \cite{mohammed2021easy}.
\subsubsection{Models description}
The first model in this tutorial is the PD Net illustrated on the left-hand side of \autoref{fig:DCNN}. In the original PD Net, zero-padding was applied to make the image's size equal in all dimensions. However, this tutorial does not include zero-padding so that the images are all in their original form. Thus, a slight modification of the filter size is made in our PD Net model. PD Net model is composed of three 3D convolution layers connected with a single fully connected layer. Each 3D convolution layer has a different setup of filter size and stride, but all 3D convolution layers have Rectified Linear Unit (ReLU) activation layer and a max-pooling layer with $(3\times3\times3)$ pool size and stride of 2 attached. The first 3D convolution layer has 16 filters with a size of $(7\times7\times7)$ and a stride of 4. After the first pooling, images are fed to the second 3D convolution layer, which has 64 filters with a size of $(5\times5\times5)$ and a stride of 1. Finally, a 3D convolution layer with 256 filters of size $(2\times3\times2)$ and a stride of 1 is attached. This layer produces 256 features, which then fully-connect to 2 output nodes to discriminate the extracted features.
The second model is a modified PD Net architecture by increasing the network depth as shown on the right-hand side of \autoref{fig:DCNN}. We refer this model as ``Deep PD Net''. In this model, the filter size of both the 3D convolution and max-pooling layers was designed so that the last layer before the fully-connect layer gives 256 features, the same as PD Net.
The third and fourth models are PD Net and Deep PD Net with batch normalization. The batch normalization layer was added to follow each ReLU layer. Batch normalization was proposed to accelerate DCNN's training and was first applied with the image classification task \cite{ioffe15}. It can achieve the same accuracy with a much lower learning rate; thus, it reduces the number of epochs for training.
\subsubsection{SPECT image dataset}
The public SPECT image dataset commonly used in PD recognition studies \cite{Klyuzhin29,ortiz19,wenzel2019automatic,mohammed2021easy,choi17} are from Parkinson’s Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) database \cite{ppmi12}. PPMI is a study from the collaboration of research centers designed to identify PD progression biomarkers and to provide essential tools to improve PD therapeutics. All SPECT scan data acquired from every center undergo the same preprocessing procedure before they are publicly shared via the database \cite{sbr13}. SPECT raw projection data was imported to a HERMES\footnote{Hermes Medical, Stockholm, Sweden} system for iterative reconstruction using the HOSEM software. Iterative reconstruction was done without applying any filter. The HOSEM reconstructed files were then transferred to PMOD\footnote{PMOD Technologies, Zurich, Switzerland} for further processing. Attenuation correction ellipses were drawn on the images and a Chang 0 attenuation correction was applied. The final 3D-volume SPECT image with the voxel size of $2\times 2\times 2 \;\mathrm{mm^3}$ and the dimension of $91\times 109\times 91$ can be directly downloaded from the publicly shared PPMI database.
}
\subsubsection{Data selection and pre-processing}
{\RED A total of 607 subjects with clinical characteristics summarized in \autoref{tbl-para} were selected for training the models in this tutorial. Since PPMI is the longitudinal study of the PD subject, only the earliest SPECT image was selected for each subject and we selected one SPECT image per subject. The selected data has more PD class than NC class, since the PPMI database provide more data from PD class than NC class. This make the data imbalance, which in some work, the data augmentation on NC class is utilized to balance the data \cite{mohammed2021easy}. In this tutorial, we will not cover on the data augmentation method. After obtaining SPECT images from PPMI, the min-max normalization in the range $[0,1]$ is applied.}
\subsubsection{Training and testing process}
{\RED All the DCNN models were implemented with Keras \cite{chollet15}, an open-source deep learning library written in Python and running on top of Tensorflow \cite{abadi17}. The models were trained for 30 epochs using Stochastic Gradient Descent. The momentum parameter was set to 0.9. The learning rate was initially $1 \times 10^{-4}$ and logarithmically decreased to have $1 \times 10^{-6}$ at the final epoch. Additionally, weight parameters in the model were initiated with a Glorot initialization \cite{glorot10}. The loss function also is weighted for class imbalance during the training. These training parameters are the same with \cite{choi17} and every model uses the same parameters for a fair comparison.}
The data were divided into training, validation, and testing set with a ratio of 80:10:10. During the training, the model uses the validation set to tune the model to reach the best classification performance. The experiment is carried out using 10-fold cross-validation. The best model that the validation set provides in each fold is used to calculate both classification and interpretation performance by applying it to the testing set.
\begin{table}
\caption{Clinical details of all subjects used in this tutorial.}
\centering
\resizebox{0.45\textwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{ l l l }
& Parkinson's disease & Normal Control \\
& (n=448) & (n=159) \rule[-0.9ex]{0pt}{0pt}\\
\hline
Age & 61.6 $\pm$ 9.8 & 60.5 $\pm$ 11.3 \rule{0pt}{2.6ex}\\
Sex (M/F) & 288/160 & 112/47 \\
MDS-UPDRS part III & 21.3 $\pm$ 9.5 & \\
Hoehn and Yahr stage & 1.6 $\pm$ 0.5 & \rule[-0.9ex]{0pt}{0pt}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\label{tbl-para}
\end{table}
The classification performance of each model is reported using the 10-fold cross-validation. In addition to the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity are used as metrics to compare each model. They are defined as
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{Sensitivity = \frac{ True\; positive}{Total\; positive}},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{Specificity = \frac{\mathrm True\; negative}{Total\; negative}}.
\end{equation}
Results that were acquired using SBR as the input feature along with the SVM classifier were used as the benchmark to compare with the deep learning method, which uses whole volume SPECT image as the input feature with DCNN as the classifier. Four types of DCNN architecture were designed based on the PD Net \cite{choi17} and all of them are described in the previous section. The mean $\pm$ STD of accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity calculated from 10-fold of a testing set, are shown in \autoref{tbl-acc}. The accuracy varies from 95\% to 96\% with the deep learning approaches, giving a slightly higher accuracy than the SVM model. Deep PD Net with batch normalization has the highest accuracy with 96.87\%. The sensitivity of each model was not significantly different. However, we can see the improvement of the specificity from 93\% to 97\% of the Deep PD Net model.
McNemar's test \cite{dietterich98} was used to compare between SVM and DCNN models, and the $p$-value from this test can not reveal any statistical difference in the classification performance. Thus, we further investigate the ROC curve as shown in \autoref{fig:roc_curve}. It reveals a trend of a higher AUC value of DCNN than that of SVM. The Deep PD Net with batch normalization has the highest AUC value, which is 0.987.
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Classification performance of SVM, PD Net and Deep PD Net.}
\resizebox{0.8\textwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{ l l l l l l l}
Method & Input Feature & Accuracy & Sensitivity & Specificity & \\
\hline
SVM & SBR Ratio & 95.55 $\pm$ 2.48 & 96.90 $\pm$ 2.61 & 92.29 $\pm$ 7.73 & \\
PD Net & SPECT & 95.39 $\pm$ 2.88 & 95.97 $\pm$ 3.30 & 93.75 $\pm$ 6.23 & \\
PD Net + Batch Norm & SPECT & 96.54 $\pm$ 2.63 & 96.88 $\pm$ 3.20 & 95.66 $\pm$ 6.09 & \\
Deep PD Net & SPECT & 96.71 $\pm$ 2.32 & 97.10 $\pm$ 2.35 & 95.42 $\pm$ 4.40 & \\
Deep PD Net + Batch Norm & SPECT & 96.87 $\pm$ 2.13 & 96.42 $\pm$ 3.01 & 97.89 $\pm$ 3.61 & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\label{tbl-acc}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{fig-roc_curve}
\caption{ROC curve for each model.}
\label{fig:roc_curve}
\end{figure}
\section{Model Interpretation Methods}
\label{S:3}
\subsection{Interpretation Methods Overview}
Despite the fact that DCNN models can provide highly accurate classification results, due to DCNN's black-box nature, it is difficult to directly explain the importance of the input features that lead to high classification performance. Model interpretation methods have been used to reveal the feature importance and assess the trust of the model prediction results. Hence, the primary purpose of the interpretation method is to calculate the ``contribution score'' \cite{shrikumar17} of the input features. Vastly used model interpretation methods for DCNN can be categorized into two major groups. The first one is the gradient-based method, which focuses on using backpropagation to calculate the gradient that can be implied back to be the input score of the target class's input features. The other group is the additive attribution methods, which alternatively construct a simpler model to explain the complex model. Well-known current methods belonging to these two major groups are discussed below.
\subsubsection{Gradient based method}
The core concept of deep learning is to calculate the gradient of the loss function with respect to all the model's weights and biases. These gradients can be used to compute the relation between the input feature and the output prediction class. We categorize the interpretation methods that directly use these gradients from the original model as the gradient-based method.
\textbf{Direct backpropagation (Saliency map):} Backpropagation is a method to compute gradients of the loss function for all weights in the network. These gradients can also be backpropagated to the input data layer, which contributes the most to the assigned class. This is done by computing the gradient of the output category with respect to a sample input image \cite{simonyan13}. If we define input features as $x$ and score for predicting class $c$ as $S^c$, the map of the contribution score is calculated as
\begin{equation}
L^c_\mathrm{Saliency\;map} = \frac{\partial S^c}{\partial x}
\end{equation}
\textbf{Guided backpropagation:} For the direct backpropagation, the gradient of the loss function with respect to the parameter of layer $l+1$ is used to calculate the gradient of the loss function with respect to the parameter of layer $l$. In guided backpropagation, the same calculation with the direct backpropagation is used, but if the gradient of layer $l+1$ is negative, the gradient of layer $l$ is set to zero \cite{springenberg14}. In other words, this method includes the guidance signal to the deeper layer during the backpropagation resulted in the remarkable improvement of the contribution score map.
\textbf{Grad-CAM:} Global average pooling (GAP) is the sum of all the values in a feature map at the last convolution layer. It was proposed to replace the fully-connected layers of the DCNN. GAP reduces the total model parameters and results in preventing the overfitting from the fully-connected layers in some cases. For a 2D input image, the GAP of the $k^\mathrm{th}$ feature map $A^k$ can be calculated from the sum of the 2D elements $i,j$ or can be written as
\begin{equation}
G^k = \sum\limits_{i} \sum\limits_{j} A^k_{ij}.
\end{equation}
The score of predict class $c$ then becomes
\begin{equation}
S^c = \sum\limits_{k } \sum\limits_{i} \sum\limits_{j} w^c_k A^k_{ij},
\end{equation}
where $w^c_k$ is the weight of $A^k_{ij}$ to predict class $c$. By examining this equation, class activation map (CAM) can be defined as
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{CAM} =\sum\limits_{k } w^c_k A^k_{ij},
\end{equation}
which shows the 2D map of the score that predict class $c$. CAM represents the input feature's contribution score by resizing this 2D map to the original input image. It also has a remarkable ability for object localization of the predict class \cite{zhou16}. However, the structure of GAP tends to reduce the model classification performance. The Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping (Grad-CAM), which is a generalized form of CAM, was proposed to handle the issue \cite{selvaraju17}. Grad-CAM directly calculates the gradient using the backpropagation from each neuron of the last convolution layer feature map, which can be written as $\partial S^c / \partial A^k_{ij}$. Then, these gradients are summed within the $k^\mathrm{th}$ feature map to generate the weight of each map and predict class $c$, which can be written as;
\begin{equation}
\alpha _k^c = \sum\limits_i {\sum\limits_j {\frac{{\partial {S^c}}}{{\partial A_{ij}^k}}} }
\end{equation}
Then Grad-CAM of class $c$ can be generated from
\begin{equation}
L_{{\mathrm{Grad - CAM}}}^c = \mathrm{ReLU} \left( {\sum\limits_k {\alpha _k^c{A^k}} } \right).
\end{equation}
ReLU function is used to remove the negative contribution scores because Grad-CAM wants to consider only the input features that increase the prediction score of class $c$. Due to the direct use of the gradient from the backpropagation, Grad-CAM can be applied to interpret any type of DCNN (e.g., DCNN with recurrent neural networks) without any modifications to the DCNN model.
\textbf{Guided Grad-CAM:} The use of the last convolution layer of the Grad-CAM can provide a more accurate location of the relevant image regions. However, this last layer does not maintain enough resolution to provide a fine-grained importance feature. Although the guided backpropagation method provides the contribution scores of every individual pixel of the input image, it lacks the localization capability. In order to get the best outcome, it is possible to fuse guided backpropagation with Grad-CAM to create Guided Grad-CAM that has both high-resolution and high capability to locate the related image area.
\subsubsection{Additive feature attribution method}
When the model becomes more complex, the original model can hardly be used to explain its results. The best way to explain the model is to generate a simpler explanation model from the original model's approximation.
By giving $f(x)$ to be the original model, $x$ to be the original input, $g(x')$ to be the explanation model, and $x'$ to be the simplified input, the equation used to explain the original model can be written as $g(x') = f(x)$. The simplified input must be able to map to the original input through a mapping function $x=h_x(x')$. The simplest way to represent the explanation model is to let the simplified input be the binary vector, representing the presence or absence of the input features. For the image classification task, these input features can be pixels or super-pixels. This method of generating the explanation model is defined as the additive feature attribution method \cite{lundberg17, lundberg16}, in which the explanation model $g$ is written as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:additiveFeature}
g(x') = {\phi _0} + \sum\limits_{i = 1}^M {{\phi _i}{{x'}_i}},
\end{equation}
where $x' \in \lbrace 0,1\rbrace ^M$, $M$ is the number of simplified input features, and $\phi_i \in \mathbb{R}$. This method approximates the output $f(x)$ by using $\phi_i$ which is the ``attribution'' or ``contribution score'' from each input feature. Two well-known interpretation methods which are based on the concept of \autoref{eq:additiveFeature} are discussed below.
\textbf{DeepLIFT:} Deep Learning Important FeaTures (DeepLIFT) is an interpretation method that avoids discontinuity of the gradient-based approach in approximating the feature contribution to the output \cite{shrikumar17}. By giving reference to the input and output, the contribution scores can be calculated from the difference using this reference. If $x_i$ and $f(x)$ are input feature and model output, $x_{i0}$ and $f(x_0)$ are reference input feature and reference model output, then $\Delta y = f(x)-f(x_0)$ and $\Delta x_i = x_i - x_{i0}$ are defined as the difference between the reference and model output and input feature. DeepLift assigns the attribution of $\Delta x_i$ as $C_{\Delta x_i \Delta y}$ and uses the summation of these attributions to give the value of $\Delta y$, which can be written as;
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sum-to-delta}
\sum\limits_{i = 1}^M C_{\Delta x_i \Delta y} = \Delta y.
\end{equation}
By comparing this with \autoref{eq:additiveFeature} with $f(x_0) = \phi_0$ and $C_{\Delta x_i \Delta y} = \phi_i$, DeepLIFT can be categorized as the additive feature attribution method. DeepLIFT uses rules, that are based on the structure of deep learning network, to assign the attribution from each input feature. Thus, DeepLIFT is ``model-specific'' in the approximation of the contribution score. DeepLIFT also shown to be the modify form with better performance compare to another model-specific method called ``layer-wise relevance propagation'' \cite{bach15}.
\textbf{SHAP:} SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) was designed to simplify any complex model, not restricted to any model structure \cite{lundberg17}. For SHAP, Shapley values are used for the contribution score, and they are the only set of values that satisfy the properties of the additive feature attribution or \autoref{eq:additiveFeature}. SHAP proposes a way to approximate the Shapley value by minimizing the objective function that satisfies all the properties of \autoref{eq:additiveFeature}. This objective function does not constrain any model parameters and only use the result from the model output. Thus, SHAP becomes ``model-agnostic'' in the approximation of the contribution score.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{fig-heatmap}
\caption{An example of slice averaging SPECT image (left figure) and the attention map (right table) from Deep PD Net model for (a) NC and (b) PD. The red line is the segmented line generated from the mean threshold reported in Ref. \citenum{prashanth17}. The first row of the right table shows the original map. The second and the third row shows the binary map generated from the top 10\% of contribution score and the top 1\% contribution score.}
\label{fig:heatmap}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Interpretation performance Comparison: Example Scenario}
Since there are various model interpretation methods available, it is not possible to decisively express which method is the best for SPECT image classification without actual comparison. Therefore, we demonstrate the interpretation performance of the six well-known interpretation methods mentioned above in this tutorial.
To evaluate the interpretation performance, we generated a ground truth image by segmenting the striatal nuclei. This ground truth image is compared with the attention map from the interpretation methods. The segmented striatal nuclei are created based on a previous study \cite{prashanth17}. The slices from 35th to 48th of the SPECT image, which cover the striatal nuclei, are selected. Then, each slice is normalized to the range from 0 to 1, and a slice averaging image is constructed. This slice averaging image is again normalized to [0,1]. After that, a threshold that determines the segmented area is selected. The mean $\pm$ SD of the thresholds for NC and PD subjects, which the experts selected, were reported in \cite{prashanth17} as 0.63 $\pm$ 0.04 and 0.69 $\pm$ 0.05, respectively. In this tutorial, we select the mean threshold values and use them to find the segmented striatal nuclei of the slice averaging image. The results of the slice averaging SPECT images from NC and PD can be seen in \autoref{fig:heatmap}. The area that is enclosed by the red irregular ellipse represents the segmented area. The segmented area is now used as the ground truth to evaluate the interpretation performance.
The slice averaging the attention map from the interpretation method was also generated similar to the slice averaging the SPECT images. Examples of grayscale attention maps from the Deep PD Net model are shown in the first row of \autoref{fig:heatmap} (a) and (b) for a NC and a PD subject, respectively. White regions located near or inside the segmented region show the most contributed area in the class prediction.
\begin{table*}
\caption{The results of the mean Dice coefficient using the binary image of the attention map for the top 10\% of contribution scores (upper) and the top 1\% of contribution scores (lower). The bold number refers to the highest Dice coefficient among all the methods.}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{ l l l l l l l l }
Model & Saliency Map & Guided Backprop & Grad-CAM & Guided Grad-CAM & DeepLIFT & SHAP &\\
\hline
PD Net & 17.09 $\pm$ 4.91 & \bf 23.78 $\pm$ 6.02 & 3.27 $\pm$ 8.11 & 22.15 $\pm$ 7.36 & 16.92 $\pm$ 6.75 & 16.62 $\pm$ 6.77 & \\
PD Net + Batch Norm & 12.51 $\pm$ 4.99 & \bf 23.90 $\pm$ 6.76 & 4.49 $\pm$ 7.89 & 20.73 $\pm$ 8.53 & 14.98 $\pm$ 6.04 & 15.50 $\pm$ 6.85 & \\
Deep PD Net & 17.29 $\pm$ 5.00 & \bf 29.72 $\pm$ 8.95 & 3.66 $\pm$ 7.77 & 25.70 $\pm$ 10.15 & 18.11 $\pm$ 6.59 & 15.72 $\pm$ 9.60 & \\
Deep PD Net + Batch Norm & 15.22 $\pm$ 4.36 & \bf 29.38 $\pm$ 9.00 & 2.96 $\pm$ 6.49 & 21.11 $\pm$ 12.16 & 16.99 $\pm$ 5.23 & 16.35 $\pm$ 9.39 & \\
\hline
\\
\\
Model & Saliency Map & Guided Backprop & Grad-CAM & Guided Grad-CAM & DeepLIFT & SHAP &\\
\hline
PD Net & 38.38 $\pm$ 10.73 & \bf 53.08 $\pm$ 10.42 & 1.45 $\pm$ 5.96 & 49.32 $\pm$ 16.69 & 32.53 $\pm$ 11.53 & 26.73 $\pm$ 11.20 & \\
PD Net + Batch Norm & 22.20 $\pm$ 9.38 & \bf 54.85 $\pm$ 10.12 & 1.85 $\pm$ 6.59 & 47.91 $\pm$ 19.62 & 26.73 $\pm$ 10.27 & 22.63 $\pm$ 11.19 & \\
Deep PD Net & 45.32 $\pm$ 10.02 & \bf 66.07 $\pm$ 12.62 & 1.45 $\pm$ 5.99 & 58.87 $\pm$ 23.86 & 36.96 $\pm$ 11.00 & 25.81 $\pm$ 15.54 & \\
Deep PD Net + Batch Norm & 38.37 $\pm$ 10.22 & \bf 65.56 $\pm$ 12.32 & 0.96 $\pm$ 5.11 & 49.00 $\pm$ 28.71 & 38.71 $\pm$ 10.28 & 28.15 $\pm$ 15.82 & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\label{tbl-overlay}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Evaluation Methods for Interpretable Models}
The pixels that are used to evaluate the interpretation performance need to be selected with another threshold. \cite{shrikumar17} proposed the threshold of which using only 20\% of top values sorted from descending order. In this study, this thresholding technique was used with altering percentages of 10\% and 1\%. Then two binary images can be generated from an attention map. These binary images for different interpretation methods are shown in the second and third row of \autoref{fig:heatmap} (a) and (b), respectively. These figures demonstrate the overlap region between each interpretation method and the segmented area significantly. By considering the figure of the top 10\% pixels as seen in the second row, we can observe that the majority of the pixels are located inside the brain area. On the other hand, the results from using the top 1\% as seen in the third row show that the majority of pixels gather inside the segmented red line area.
Dice coefficient $D$ is widely used to compare a predicted segmented image $P$ with the ground truth segmented image $G$. It is defined as twice the size of the intersect area between $P$ and $G$ over the sum of the area $P$ and $G$, and can be written as
\begin{equation}
D = \frac{{2\left| {P \cap G} \right|}}{{\left| P \right| + \left| G \right|}}.
\end{equation}
The coefficient exists in the range of $[0,1]$ where $D=1$ indicates identical segmentation. The mean $\pm$ SD of the Dice coefficient is calculated from the test set of all 10-fold. The results are shown in \autoref{tbl-overlay}. The bold value indicates the best result in a given threshold. The upper and lower tables show the results from the top 10\% and top 1\%, respectively. The uses of the top 10\% and 1\% show that guided backpropagation has the highest Dice coefficient, which directly relates to the interpretation performance in providing the information of the location of striatal nuclei. The Dice coefficient's boxplots in \autoref{fig:dice_box_plot} also confirm that guided backpropagation performance dominates other methods.
Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare the guided backpropagation with the other methods. It revealed significant differences ($p < 0.01$) for the Dice coefficient between guided backpropagation and all other methods. This test was then used to compare the Dice coefficient of guided backpropagation between Deep PD Net and PD Net. We also found the significant difference ($p < 0.01$) of this model. However, the difference between Deep PD Net and Deep PD Net with batch normalization was not significant.
Mean absolute error is used as another measure to evaluate each method's performance as demonstrated in \autoref{fig:abs_error}. The guided backpropagation shows that the error approaches zero inside the striatal nuclei, which can be interpreted as the Deep PD Net directly focuses on the region and gives more credibility to the prediction results.
We generate a mean segmented image from the binary map of top 1\% pixels and overlay on top of the ground truth segmented image as shown in \autoref{fig:mean}. By examining \autoref{fig:mean}(a), saliency map and DeepLIFT can identify the tail of symmetric comma shape in the control group. On the other hand, from \autoref{fig:mean}(b), SHAP can correctly identify the uptake depletion location of the PD group.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig-dice_box_plot}
\caption{Boxplots of Dice coefficient in different interpretation methods from the top 1\% of contribution score for (a) PD Net (b) PD Net + Batch Norm (c) Deep PD Net and (d) Deep PD Net + Batch Norm. Median is the line that locates inside the box, and black dots represent outliers outside 1.5 times the interquartile range of the upper and lower quartile.}
\label{fig:dice_box_plot}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{fig-abs_error}
\caption{The mean segmented image (left) and mean absolute error plot (right table) for (a) NC group and (b) PD group. The mean absolute error was calculated using the binary image from the top 1\% contribution pixels to compare with the binary image from the segmented image.}
\label{fig:abs_error}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{fig-mean}
\caption{The mean segmented image (left) and mean segmented heatmap (right table) for (a) NC group and (b) PD group. The mean segmented heatmap was generated using the mean of binary images from the top 1\% contribution pixels.}
\label{fig:mean}
\end{figure*}
\section{Discussion on Example Scenario}
\label{S:4}
In \autoref{S:2}, we demonstrate the comparison of classification performance between 4 types of DCNN architecture based on the PD Net. DCNN may cause the overfitting of the data \cite{rawat17}. However, Deep PD Net, which attaches more convolution and max-pooling layers to increase the network depth, yields better performance than PD Net without overfitting. The addition of batch normalization to the model shows a minor improvement of the model accuracy, which might be due to the small value of the learning rate set in this study. Also, the input data may not be complex enough compared to the results of the original batch normalization study \cite{ioffe15}. From the clinical details shown in \autoref{tbl-para}, the number of PD subjects is 3 times higher than the number of NC subjects. Due to this extreme class imbalance, we can observe only the increase in the specificity but not the sensitivity.
For the comparison of interpretation performance, the Dice coefficient in \autoref{tbl-overlay} and mean absolute error in \autoref{fig:abs_error} show that guided backpropagation outperforms other methods. Guided backpropagation was first designed to improve the saliency map's quality in feature visualization of the deep learning model \cite{springenberg14}. In this tutorial, it has the best ability to show fine-grained importance. It also gives much less error in the mean absolute error plot compared to other methods. On the other hand, Grad-CAM was the only method that barely focuses on the crucial region. Although Grad-CAM was supposed to perform well in the class-discriminative and localize relevant image regions \cite{selvaraju17}, it barely focuses on fine-grained importance. Another issue of Grad-CAM is that it heavily relies on the resolution of the last feature map. Since PD Net was designed with the last feature map of size $(1\times 1\times 1)$, we need to select the feature map from the upper convolution layer with size $(6 \times 8 \times 6)$ which may reduce the interpretation performance.
When we plot the mean segmented image from the binary map of the top 1\% pixels, saliency map, DeepLIFT, and SHAP also able to discriminate the difference between classes. Since SHAP is the model-agnostic method, it does not rely on DCNN weights; thus, the result becomes different from the saliency map and DeepLIFT. Even though these three methods' performance is hard to evaluate, SHAP can generate a better quality heatmap at the uptake depletion location, which outperforms other methods in discriminating the difference between PD and NC subjects. This should be consistent with \cite{lundberg17}, which revealed that SHAP gives the best performance among all other methods of showing the class difference between hand-written images of numbers 8 and 3. In conclusion, both guided backpropagation and SHAP are suitable interpretation methods for the architectures in this tutorial. Nevertheless, in other medical image applications, the other interpretation methods might overcome both methods.
Another interesting aspect of the model interpretation is to use the interpreted feedback as an evaluation metric to choose the best model. For example, from \autoref{tbl-acc} and \autoref{fig:roc_curve}, PD Net with batch normalization shows better specificity and AUC value comparing to Deep PD Net, while Deep PD Net shows better accuracy and sensitivity. The performance of the two models is not significantly different and is difficult to evaluate. To this end, the feedback from the interpretation method can provide a decisive answer to the evaluation. From \autoref{tbl-overlay}, when utilizing the guided backpropagation method, Deep PD Net has the highest interpretation performance, which is significantly higher than that of PD Net with batch normalization. This result suggests that Deep PD Net is the best suit for PD recognition among the tutorial's DCNN architecture.
We suggest a flow chart for applying the interpreted feedback to assist in model evaluation in \autoref{fig:flow_chart}. In this tutorial, if we follow the flow chart, the Deep PD Net model should be suggested to be used for PPMI data. This flow chart and the concept of model interpretation methods can be utilized not only in medical image application but also in other DCNN application where the credibility of DCNN need to be verified as well, for example, DCNN applications in biomedical \cite{esteva17, lee19} or bioinformatics \cite{le17}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.40\textwidth]{fig-flow_chart}
\caption{The flow chart for the interpretation method application for assisting in model evaluation.}
\label{fig:flow_chart}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
\label{S:5}
The purpose of this tutorial is to demonstrate the procedure for selecting the most reliable interpretation method for SPECT image PD recognition model. To this end, we introduce the traditional and DCNN approach for PD diagnosis and give an example scenario with four DCNN models. Then, we introduce six well-known interpretation methods and exhibit these six methods' interpretation performance on those four DCNN models mentioned above. We propose evaluation methods for measuring the interpretation performance using the Dice coefficient and mean segmented binary image overlay on top of ground truth segmented image. {\RED The evaluation demonstrates that the guided backpropagation and SHAP interpretation methods are both suitable for PD recognition methods in different aspects. Guided backpropagation shows the highest Dice coefficient and lowest mean square error, while SHAP provides the best quality heatmap at the uptake depletion location.} Finally, we discuss about utilizing interpreted feedback for deciding the most suitable model for the intended task. The interpretation and evaluation methods displayed in this tutorial can be applied for other tasks aside from PD recognition, and contribute to sensor data processing in an AI Era.
|
\section{Introduction}
\ifdefinedtrue
Fourier-transform
\else
\IEEEPARstart{F}{ourier-transform}
\fi
infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) measurements provide a sensitive, non-destructive way of understanding the material's chemical composition. Like most structural spectroscopic techniques, it characterizes the chemical composition of the material by the absorbance/reflectance of light in a range of frequencies \cite{rein2014analysis,bassan2011light,ctucureanu2016ftir,duvall2010detection}. Specifically, FTIR spectrometer shines a beam of infrared light that contains a range of spectral components on the sample, and measures the intensity of the absorbed light at every frequency. As each chemical bond in the material only absorbs the infrared radiation at its characteristic frequency, the absorbance intensity of each light component indicates the richness of corresponding chemical bond in the examined sample \cite{ctucureanu2016ftir,afseth2012extended,bassan2011light}. The measurement signal obtained from FTIR spectrometer is called the FTIR spectrum. It takes the form of a high dimensional vector, denoting the intensity of infrared absorption at a sequence of frequencies.
The Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) composite grabs increasing attention in the aerospace industry for its lightweight, excellent strength and other properties. However, safety concerns on its bonding quality are essential due to low surface free energy \cite{han2014evaluation}.
To improve bonding quality, surface modification methods have been well-developed to improve CFRP surface energy, including thermal treatment, wet chemical or electrochemical oxidation, plasma treatment, gas-phase oxidation, coating treatment, and so on \cite{sharma2014carbon,tiwari2014surface,kakhki2014review}.
Among these surface modification methods, plasma exposure is one of the most popular ones with its special advantage
\cite{waters2017effect,de2008surface,kwon2005surface,mukhopadhyay2002plasma,liston1993plasma}. It is a non-destructive method allowing greater control over the number of unwanted reaction pathways \cite{sharma2014carbon
}.
Previous research indicated that plasma exposure can increase the wettability of the material by modifying the chemical composition and the physical structures of its surface layer \cite{de2008surface,kwon2005surface,liston1993plasma,tiwari2014surface}, which in turn improves the bonding quality between CFRP panels in aerospace applications.
However, it remains unclear how the plasma height, the distance between the plasma nozzle and the sample, affects the chemical components of CFRP indicated by FTIR measurements.
Motivated by the problem of quantifying the effect of plasma exposure on the CFRP material when plasma height varies, this study aims at tackling a more general problem of understanding the surface treatment effect of various strength on FTIR signals. Specifically, consider the experiment detailed in Fig.~\ref{fig1}, where we collect the pre-exposure FTIR measurements and post-exposure FTIR signal on a number of CFRP coupons, where the strength of treatment, described by the plasma height, is set to prescribed values from 8mm to 22mm. From the data, we seek to understand how the plasma height affects the FTIR measurements taken on a sample surface before and after the plasma exposure at different heights, which will shed some light on how the chemical composition of CFRP is changed by the plasma treatment.
Modeling the treatment effect from FTIR signals involves two major challenges. First, FTIR spectra are subject to many uncertainty sources, including light scattering, optical path length variations, and temperature variation \cite{afseth2012extended,bassan2011light,cornel2008quantitative}.
Besides, the measurement uncertainties of FTIR spectra have been widely recognized. In industrial applications, the FTIR signals are usually observed visually by experienced engineers and technicians \cite{rein2014analysis,vsedvenkova2008thermal,THowie2017Thermal} and such approaches can be both time-consuming and sometimes inaccurate.
These uncertainties result in the offset shift and the multiplicative error, and the latter also influences the magnitude of the noise on the FTIR measurements.
To decrease the level of uncertainty in FTIR measurements, the preprocessing of the FTIR signals is studied in a series of literature. For example, Cornel et al. \cite{cornel2008quantitative} reviewed multiple preprocessing procedures for analyzing the FTIR signals. However, most of them are ad-hoc methods that do not fully characterize the sources of uncertainty and involved error patterns in the FTIR spectra. Among them, the only exception is the multiplicative scatter correction (MSC) method, which characterized the multiplicative error and offset shift of the FTIR spectra. However, the MSC model fails to consider the magnitude-dependent noise based on the FTIR spectra.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{1a_new.png}
\newline
\caption{The experimental setup. The CFRP coupons were processed by plasma, and the plasma height is set at $h_1,...,h_n.$ The FTIR measurements were taken before and after the plasma exposure to capture the change of chemical components on the CFRP surface.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
The second challenge is that surface treatment usually has a nonlinear effect on the FTIR signal. For example, the effect of the plasma exposure is nonlinear in general \cite{mukhopadhyay2002plasma}, as when the plasma height is small the effect of adjusting plasma height for one unit is very significant, whereas when the plasma height is large, changing the plasma height for one unit will barely affect the FTIR signal. Due to the nonlinearity, the univariate effect on the high-dimensional measurements cannot be characterized through existing methods such as the functional linear models \cite{ramsay2005applied}.
To tackle these challenges and achieve our objective, we developed a statistical framework in this study that (i) characterizes the underlying uncertainty of the FTIR spectra, and (ii) describes the nonlinear effect on the post-treatment FTIR spectra. Based on the proposed model, a two-step procedure is developed. In each step, an optimization problem is formulated to estimate the template FTIR signal that is representative for all measurement spectra and to represent the effect of plasma exposure respectively. To validate our methodology, we conducted experiments and collected FTIR spectra measurements from samples before and after the plasma exposure. These measurements are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig2}.
The contribution of our work is twofold. In terms of statistical analysis, we proposed a preprocessing algorithm to derive a template spectrum from FTIR spectra obtained from repetitive measurements and a general strategy to quantify the nonlinear treatment effect on the spectrum measurements. The methodology is applicable to a large variety of studies that involves understanding the treatment effects on spectral measurements subject to similar multiplicative and offset uncertainty. In terms of manufacturing engineering, we gained an understanding of the effect of plasma exposure on the CFRP material for the first time, and identified several chemical bonds that are affected by plasma exposure.
The remaining part of the article is organized as follows. In Section II, we look into the data characteristics and present the statistical analysis procedure in detail. In Section III, we verify the performance of the proposed two-step algorithm on synthetic data. In section IV, we demonstrate the analytical result on experimental real data. Finally, we conclude this article in Section V.
\section{Uncertainty Analysis and Proposed Framework}
In this section, we first analyze the sources and patterns of the variations of signal data collected from the FTIR metrology, and then propose a statistical model that describes the uncertainty of these signals. Based on the statistical model, we formulate two optimization problems to obtain the template signal and capture the effect of the surface treatment.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{2a_new.png}
\newline
\subfigure (a) Pre-exposure FTIR signals obtained before plasma exposure
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{2b_new.png}
\newline
\subfigure (b) Post-exposure FTIR signals obtained after plasma exposure at various heights
\caption{Raw FTIR signals collected from CFRP coupons in the experiments shown in Fig.~\ref{fig1}.
}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Uncertainties in FTIR Metrology and Spectra Modeling}
Recall that the measurements of the FTIR spectrum are subject to offset shift, multiplicative error, and other noises. Among these uncertainties, the offset shift and multiplicative error are dominant. As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig2} (a), signals obtained from the pre-treatment surfaces are similar in shapes, as if generated by vertically stretching and moving a template signal randomly. We refer to the variation of the vertical scale as “multiplicative error”, and the variation of the vertical location as the “offset shift”. According to the literature \cite{afseth2012extended,bassan2011light,cornel2008quantitative}, the offset shift is mainly caused by light scattering and the multiplicative error is mainly caused by optical path length variations related to the hand-held nature of the device. We can also see that the variance of the noise is dependent on the shape of the signal since the noise is more significant at the peaks of the signal, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:1bnew}. This phenomenon is common in light-based spectroscopy. For example, Yue et.al \cite{yue2017generalized} summarized multiple error sources in greater detail for Ramen spectra, a similar metrology in material science.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{1b_mew.png}
\caption{The sample variance of the FTIR signal (the orange curve) is closely related to the sample mean of the FTIR signal (the blue curve) obtained from the experiment in Fig.~\ref{fig1}.}
\label{fig:1bnew}
\end{figure}
From this observation, we assume that all pre-treatment signals come from a common template signal denoted by $\mathbf{x}_{0} \in \mathbb{R}^{p}$. Then, the $i$-th pre-treatment signal $\mathbf{x}_{0, i}=\left(x_{0, i}^{(1)}, \ldots, x_{0, i}^{(p)}\right)^{\top} \in \mathbb{R}^{p}$ is modeled as
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{x}_{0,i}=
a_{0,i} \left(\mathbf{x}_{0}+ \boldsymbol{\varepsilon}_{0, i}\right)+b_{0, i} \mathbf{1},~ i=1, \ldots, n
\label{eq:pretreat}
\end{equation}
Here $a_{0, i} \in \mathbb{R}$ is the factor for the multiplicative error, $b_{0, i} \in \mathbb{R}$ is the offset, and $\boldsymbol{\varepsilon}_{0, i} \in \mathbb{R}^p$ is the noise vector, whose elements are independent and follow $\varepsilon_{0, i}^{(j)} \sim N\left(0, \sigma^{2}\right),~i=1, \dots, n ;~ j=1, \dots, p$. The vector $\mathbf{1}=(1, \ldots, 1)^{\top} \in \mathbb{R}^{p}$. Note that in the formulation (\ref{eq:pretreat}), the parameters
are not identifiable without constraints, since the tuple $(a_{0,i},~ \mathbf{x}_{0},~ b_{0,i})$ and $(ka_{0,i},~ (\mathbf{x}_{0}-\mu\mathbf{1})/k,~ b_{0,i}+a_{0,i}\mu)$ correspond to the same probability model for $\mathbf{x}_{0,i}$ for any $k$ and $\mu$.
To make the model identifiable, we apply two additional constraints on $\mathbf{x}_{0}$:
\begin{equation}
\left\|\mathbf{x}_{0}\right\|^{2}=\mathbf{x}_{0}^{\top} \mathbf{x}_{0}=1, \quad \mathbf{x}_{0}^{\top} \mathbf{1}=0
\label{eq:cstr1}
\end{equation}
In this formulation, we assume that the measurement taken every time are independent with each other.
This is because the area that the FTIR equipment samples on is very small, and thus the hand-held FTIR equipment cannot obtain pre-treatment or post-treatment measurements at exactly the same location on the sample. Also, note that the random error $\boldsymbol{\varepsilon}_{0,i}$ is firstly added to the template $\mathbf{x}_{0}$, and then affected by the multiplicative error $a_{0,i}$. Therefore, the standard deviation of the noise on the signal is proportional to the multiplicative error, and thus every variable of the observed pre-treatment signal follows a normal distribution with different variance $x_{0, i}^{(j)} \sim N\left(a_{0, i} x_{0}^{(j)}+b_{0, i}, a_{0, i}^{2} \sigma^{2}\right)$. This observation corroborates with the property of the FTIR signal as discussed earlier.
The proposed model is different from the model in Yue et al. \cite{yue2017generalized}, which proposed $x_{0,i}^{(j)} \sim N\left(x_{0}^{(j)}, a x_{0}^{(j)}+b\right)$, because the multiplicative error and outfit error are not considered in Yue's model.
As will be seen later, estimating $\mathbf{x}_0$ in our model is different from simply denoising the raw signals analytically. Also, our representation of the signals is different from the MSC approach \cite{afseth2012extended,cornel2008quantitative}, which implicitly assumes that all signals have the same magnitudes of errors in calculating the sample mean as the template signal.
The FTIR measurements obtained after the treatment procedure, such as plasma exposure in our motivating example, are also subject to offset shift and multiplicative error. Moreover, the treatment
effect leads to the shape change from the template signal. The \textit{pattern} of the signal change caused by the treatment effect is assumed
to be the same across all signals, and are irrelevant of the strength of the treatment, whereas the \textit{magnitude} of the change relates to the strength of the treatment. In the motivating example, the change of the FTIR signal is of greater magnitude when the plasma nozzle is closer to the CFRP coupon. From the above reasoning, the post-treatment template is modeled as $\mathbf{x}_{0}+\delta_{i} \mathbf{g}$, where $\mathbf{g} \in \mathbb{R}^{p}$
represents the pattern of modification: the change of the template caused by plasma exposure. The value $\delta_{i}$ represents the magnitude of
modification on the $i$-th spectrum, and $\boldsymbol{\delta}=\left(\delta_{1}, \ldots, \delta_{n}\right)$ is referred to as the vector of effects. Therefore, we assume the following model for the post-treatment error:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{x}_{1, i}=a_{1, i}
\left(\mathbf{x}_{0}+\delta_{i} \mathbf{g}+\boldsymbol{\varepsilon}_{1, i}\right)+b_{1, i} \mathbf{1},~ i=1, \ldots, n
\label{eq:posttreat}
\end{equation}
Like the pre-treatment model \eqref{eq:pretreat}, $a_{1, i}$ and $b_{1, i}$ represent the multiplicative error and the offset shift respectively, and they are not of interest in our inference. Note that here $a_{1, i}$ and $ b_{1, i}$ are also independent with the $a_{0, i}$ and $b_{0, i}$ in the pre-treatment signals. The error $\boldsymbol{\varepsilon}_{1, i}$ is the noise vector following the same distribution as $\boldsymbol{\varepsilon}_{0, i}$, and is independent with $\boldsymbol{\varepsilon}_{0, i}$. Similar to the pre-treatment model \eqref{eq:pretreat}, the parameters in the post-treatment model \eqref{eq:posttreat} are not identifiable, and therefore, the additional constraint $\| \mathbf{g}\|^2= 1$ is imposed. Also, we encourage $\mathbf{g}$ to be close to 0 at most elements, since the surface treatment usually triggers chemical reactions among specific chemical compositions rather than for all the chemical compositions on the material surface.
Note that we provide a very flexible model for $\boldsymbol\delta$, the magnitude vector.
In the above pre-treatment and post-treatment models, the effect of the exterior treatment on the surface and the uncertainty involved with the FTIR measurement are fully characterized. In the following subsections, we develop a two-step procedure, to estimate the template signal $\mathbf{x}_{0}$, the pattern of the signal change $\mathbf{g}$ and the magnitude of modification $\delta$. In the first step, we use the pre-treatment signals to estimate the template signal $\mathbf{x_0}$, and in the second step, we regard the template signal estimated in Step 1 as known and fixed and use post-treatment signal to estimate the
pattern of modification $\mathbf{g}$ and the vector of effect $\boldsymbol{\delta}$. The detailed procedure are introduced in the following subsections.
\subsection{Step 1: Estimate the Template Spectra $\mathbf{x}_{0}$}
In Step 1, our objective is to estimate the template signal $\mathbf{x}_{0}$ in model \eqref{eq:pretreat} from the pre-treatment FTIR measurements $\mathbf{x}_{0,1}, \mathbf{x}_{0,2}, \ldots, \mathbf{x}_{0, n},$ In Cornel \cite{cornel2008quantitative}, some ad-hoc methods have been provided to estimate the template signal, such as through standardizing and averaging the measurements signals. However, these methods have no guarantee to eliminate the error to the greatest extent.
In this study, we propose to use the maximmum likelihood estimation (MLE) principle to develop a computational efficient algorithm to estimate $\mathbf{a}_{0},~ \mathbf{b}_{0}$, and $\mathbf{x}_{0}$.
Based on the pre-treatment model (1), it is clear that $\mathbf{x}_{0, i} \sim N\left(a_{0, i} \mathbf{x}_{0}+b_{0, i} \mathbf{1},~ a_{0, i}^{2} \sigma^{2}\mathbf{I}\right)$ , where $\sigma^2 = \mathrm{var}(\varepsilon_{0, i}^{(j)})$.
Thus, the log-likelihood function is
\begin{multline}
\ell\left(\boldsymbol{a}_{0}, \boldsymbol{b}_{0}, \mathbf{x}_{0} ; \mathbf{x}_{0, \mathrm{i}}\right)=
-\frac{n}{2} \ln \left(2 \pi \sigma^{2}\right) \\
-\sum_{i=1}^n\frac{\lVert\mathbf{x}_{0, i}-a_{0, i} \mathbf{x}_{0}-b_{0 i,} \mathbf{1}\rVert^2}{2 a_{0, i}^{2} \sigma^{2}}
-\sum_{i=1}^{n} \ln \left|a_{0, i}\right|
\label{MLE}
\end{multline}
Note that we need to optimize the log-likelihood function subject to the constraints in \eqref{eq:cstr1}. It is computationally challenging to find the solution for this constrained optimization jointly over the parameter space ($\mathbf{a}_0,~ \mathbf{b}_0,~ \sigma^2,~\mathbf{x}_0$) of the dimension $2n+1+(p-1) = 2n+p$.
To circumvent this difficulty and focus on the parameters $\mathbf{x}_0$, we propose to investigate the main term related to $\mathbf{x}_0$ in the \eqref{MLE} and minimize the objective function:
\[ \sum_{i=1}^{n}\lVert\mathbf{x}_{0, i}-a_{0, i} \mathbf{x}_{0}-b_{0,i} \mathbf{1}\rVert^{2} /a_{0, i}^{2} \]
Re-parameterize $c_{0, i}=a_{0, i}^{-1}$ and $d_{0, i}=-a_{0, i}^{-1} b_{0, i}$ and apply the constraints in the model (1), the following optimization problem needs to be solved
\begin{align}
\min _{\mathbf{x}_{0}, \mathbf{c}_{0}, \mathbf{d}_{0}} \sum_{i=1}^{n} & \left\|c_{0, i}\mathbf{x}_{0, i}+d_{0, i} \mathbf{1}-\mathbf{x}_{0}\right\|^{2} \notag \\
\text {subject to} & \quad \mathbf{x}_{0}^{\top} 1=0,~\left\|\mathbf{x}_{0}\right\|^{2}=1 \label{eq:step1}
\end{align}
where $\mathbf{c}_{0}=\left(c_{0,1}, \ldots, c_{0, n}\right)^{\top}$ and $\mathbf{d}_{0}=\left(d_{0,1}, \ldots, d_{0, n}\right)^{\top}$, and
$\|\cdot\|$ represents the Euclidian norm. The parameters $a_{0, i},~ b_{0, i}$ can be computed by $c_{0, i}^{-1}$ and $-c_{0, i}^{-1} d_{0, i},$ respectively.
Given $\mathbf{x}_{0}$, the optimal value of $c_{0, i},~ d_{0, i}$ can be calculated from solving least square problems:
\[\left[ \begin{array}{c}{\hat{c}_{0, i}\left(\mathbf{x}_{0}\right)} \\ {\hat{d}_{0, i}\left(\mathbf{x}_{0}\right)}\end{array}\right]=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}{\mathbf{x}_{0, i}^{\top} \mathbf{x}_{0, i}} & {\mathbf{x}_{0, i}^{\top} \mathbf{1}} \\ {\mathbf{1}^{\top} \mathbf{x}_{0, i}} & {p}\end{array}\right]^{-1} \left[ \begin{array}{c}{\mathbf{x}_{0, i}^{\top} \mathbf{x}_{0}} \\ {\mathbf{1}^{\top} \mathbf{x}_{0}}\end{array}\right]\]
Plug them in \eqref{eq:pretreat} and denote $\mathbf{H}_{i}=\mathbf{x}_{0, i} \mathbf{x}_{0, i}^{\top}\left(\mathbf{x}_{0, i}^{\top} \mathbf{x}_{0, i}\right)^{-1}\left[\mathbf{I}-\frac{\mathbf{11^{\top}}}{p}\right]$, the objective of (3) is transformed to
\[f\left(\mathbf{x}_{0}, \mathbf{c}_{0}\left(\mathbf{x}_{0}\right), \mathbf{d}_{0}\left(\mathbf{x}_{0}\right)\right)=\sum_{i=1}^{n}\left\|\mathbf{H}_{i} \mathbf{x}_{0}-\mathbf{x}_{0}\right\|^{2}\]
Then, it can be further written as $f\left(\mathbf{x}_{0}, \mathbf{c}_{0}\left(\mathbf{x}_{0}\right), \mathbf{d}_{0}\left(\mathbf{x}_{0}\right)\right)=\mathbf{x}_{0}^{\top} \mathbf{M} \mathbf{x}_{0}$, where $\mathbf{M}=\sum_{i=1}^{n} \mathbf{V}_{i}^{\top} \mathbf{V}_{i}$, and $\mathbf{V}_{i}=\mathbf{H}_{i}-\mathbf{I}$, and thus the problem \eqref{eq:step1} is transformed to
\begin{align}
\min _{\mathbf{x}_{0}, \mathbf{c}_{0}, \mathbf{d}_{0}} & \mathbf{x}_{0}^{\top} \mathbf{M} \mathbf{x}_{0} \notag \\
\text {subject to} \quad & \mathbf{x}_{0}^{\top} \mathbf{1}=0 \text ,~\left\|\mathbf{x}_{0}\right\|^2 =1 \label{eq:eigenprob}
\end{align}
The objective function becomes a quadratic function of $\mathbf{x}_{0}$, and thus the problem is essentially an eigen problem with linear constraint. It can be shown \cite{golub1973some} that the solution $ \hat{\mathbf{x}}_{0} $ to this problem is $\mathbf{P v}$, where $\mathbf{P}=\mathbf{I}-\mathbf{1 1}^{\top}$ and $ \mathbf{v}$ is the eigen vector of $ \mathbf{P M P}$ corresponding to the smallest eigen value.
\subsection{Step 2: Estimate $\boldsymbol{\delta}$ and $\mathbf{g}$ from the Post-treatment Spectra }
In Step 1, the estimation of the template signal $\mathbf{x}_{0}$ was obtained from the last step based on pre-treatment signals. In Step 2, this template is regarded as known and our objective is to estimate $\mathbf{g} \in \mathbb{R}^{p}$ and $\boldsymbol{\delta}=\left(\delta_{1}, \ldots, \delta_{n}\right)^{\top}$ from the post-treatment signals. Like problem \eqref{eq:step1}, we can find the solution of $\boldsymbol{\delta},~ \mathbf{g}$ from the following least square problem (\ref{eq:step2}):
\begin{align}
\min_{\boldsymbol{\delta}, \boldsymbol{g}_{1},\mathbf{c}_{1}, \mathbf{d}_{1}} \sum_{i=1}^{n}&\left\|c_{1, i} \mathbf{x}_{1, i}+d_{1, i} \mathbf{1}-\left(\mathbf{x}_{0}+\delta_{\mathrm{i}} \mathbf{g}\right)\right\|_{2}^{2} \notag \\
\text{subject to} & \quad \|\mathbf{g}\|^2=1 \label{eq:step2}
\end{align}
However, similar to the problem in Step 1, the parameters $c_{1,i}$, $d_{1,i}$, and $\delta_i$ are not identifiable without further constraints.
To solve the identifiability issue, the pattern of modification $\mathbf{g}$ can be any function obtained from the linear combination of $\mathbf{\tilde{g}, 1}$ and $\mathbf{x}_{0}$, where $\mathbf{\tilde{g}}$ is the component of $\mathbf{g}$ in the null space of $\mathbf{1}$ and $\mathbf{x}_{0}$. In what follows, we first find the vector $\tilde{\mathbf{g}}$ by solving problem \eqref{eq:step2} in addition to two constraints
on $\mathbf{g}: \mathbf{g}^{\top} \mathbf{x}_{0}=0$ and $\mathbf{g}^{\top} \mathbf{1}=0,$ which leads to problem \eqref{eq:step2constr}:
\begin{align}
\min _{\boldsymbol{\delta}, \mathbf{\tilde{g}},\mathbf{c}_{1}, \mathbf{d}_{1}} \sum_{i=1}^{n}&\left\|c_{1, \mathrm{i}} \mathbf{x}_{1, i} +d_{1, i} \mathbf{1}-\left(\mathbf{x}_{0}+\delta_{i} \tilde{\mathbf{g}}\right)\right\|_{2}^{2} \notag \\
\text{subject to} & \quad \tilde{\mathbf{g}}^{\top} \mathbf{x}_{0}=\mathbf{0},~ \tilde{\mathbf{g}}^{\top} \mathbf{1}=\mathbf{0} \label{eq:step2constr}
\end{align}
After that, we discuss how to find the pattern of modification $\mathbf{g}=\epsilon_{1} \mathbf{x}_{0}+\epsilon_{2} \mathbf{1}+\sqrt{1-\epsilon_{1}^{2}-\epsilon_{2}^{2}} \tilde{\mathbf{g}}$ with the best interpretability.
\subsection{Solution Procedure for Problem \eqref{eq:step2constr}}
For the simplicity of notations, we drop the subscript $“1”$ in
$c_{1, i}$ and $d_{1, i}$ and $\mathbf{x}_{1, i},$ and drop the tilde from $\tilde{\mathbf{g}}$.
Then, the objective function in \eqref{eq:step2constr} is denoted by
\begin{align}
F(\boldsymbol{\delta}, \mathbf{g}, & \mathbf{c}, \mathbf{d}) = \sum_{i=1}^{n} \sum_{j=1}^{p}\left(c_{i} x_{i j}+d_{i}-x_{0, j}-\delta_{i} g_{j}\right)^{2} \notag \\
=& \left\|\left(\mathbf{c} \mathbf{1}^{\top}\right) \odot \mathbf{X}+\mathbf{d} \mathbf{1}^{\top}-\mathbf{1} \mathbf{x}_{0}^{\top} -\boldsymbol{\delta} \mathbf{g}^{\top}\right\|_{F}^{2} \label{eq:step2F}
\end{align}
where $\mathbf{c}=\left(c_{1}, c_{2}, \ldots, c_{ n}\right)^{\top}, \mathbf{d}=\left(d_{1}, d_{2}, \ldots, d_{n}\right)^{\top}$, and $\mathbf{X}=\left[\mathbf{x}_{1}, \ldots, \mathbf{x}_{ n}\right]^{\top}$. The operator $\odot$ is the
elementwise product of two matrix. We solve the problem \eqref{eq:step2F} with the following block-wise coordinate descent method:
\begin{algorithm}[htb]
\caption{ Block-wise Coordinate Descent Algorithm}
\label{alg.Framwork}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State Initialization: $\boldsymbol{\delta}\gets \mathbf{0}$ and arbitrary $\mathbf{g}$
\Loop
\State Given $\boldsymbol{\delta}$ and $\mathbf{g}$, update $\mathbf{c}$ and $\mathbf{d}$:
$\left[\mathbf{c}, \mathbf{d}\right]\gets\arg \min _{\mathbf{c}, \mathbf{d}} F\left(\boldsymbol{\delta}, \mathbf{g}, \mathbf{c}, \mathbf{d}\right)$;
\State Given $\mathbf{c}$ and $\mathbf{d}$, update $\boldsymbol{\delta}$ and $\mathbf{g}$:
$\left[\boldsymbol{\delta}, \mathbf{g}\right]\gets\arg \min _{\boldsymbol{\delta}, \mathbf{g}} F\left(\boldsymbol{\delta}, \mathbf{g}, \mathbf{c}, \mathbf{d}\right)$
subject to $\mathbf{g}^{\top} \mathbf{1}=0;~ \mathbf{g}^{\top} \mathbf{x}_{0}=0$ and $\|\mathbf{g}\|^2=1$;
\EndLoop
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
In this algorithm, the optimization problem in line 3 can be solved by multiple least-square problems to obtain $\left(c_{ i}, d_{ i}\right)^{\top}$, which can be seen from (8). The closed form solution to line 3 is
\[\left[ \begin{array}{c}{c_{i}} \\ {d_{i}}\end{array}\right]=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}{\mathbf{x}_{i}^{\top} \mathbf{x}_{i}} & {\mathbf{x}_{i}^{\top} \mathbf{1}} \\ {\mathbf{1}^{\top} \mathbf{x}_{i}} & {p}\end{array}\right]^{-1} \left[ \begin{array}{c}{\mathbf{x}_{i}^{\top}\left(\mathbf{x}_{0}+\delta_{i} \mathbf{g}\right)} \\ {\mathbf{1}^{\top}\left(\mathbf{x}_{0}+\delta_{i} \mathbf{g}\right)}\end{array}\right]\]
Denote $\mathbf{M}=\left(\mathbf{c} \mathbf{1}^{\top}\right) \odot \mathbf{X}+\boldsymbol{d} \mathbf{1}^{\top}-\mathbf{1} \mathbf{x}_{0}^{\top}$. Line 4 is equivalent with solving the problem \eqref{eq:step2svd}:
\begin{align}
\left[\boldsymbol{\delta}, \mathbf{g}\right]=\operatorname{arg min}_{\boldsymbol{\delta}, \mathbf{g}}\left\|\mathbf{M}-\boldsymbol{\delta} \mathbf{g}^{\top}\right\|_{F}^{2} \notag \\
\text{subject to} ~ \mathbf{g}^{\top} \mathbf{1}=0,~ \mathbf{g}^{\top} \mathbf{x}_{0}=0 ,~ \left\|\mathbf{g}\right\|^2=1 \label{eq:step2svd}
\end{align}
Note that under the constraint that $\mathbf{g}^{\top} \mathbf{1}=0$ and
$\mathbf{g}^{\top} \mathbf{x}_{0}=0,$ the objective of \eqref{eq:step2svd} can be decomposed to
\begin{align}
&{\left\|\mathbf{M}-\boldsymbol{\delta} \mathbf{g}^{\top}\right\|_{F}^{2}} \notag \\
=&\left\|\mathbf{M}-\widetilde{\mathbf{M}}+\widetilde{\mathbf{M}}-\boldsymbol{\delta} \mathbf{g}^{\top}\right\|_{F}^{2} \notag \\
=&\left\|\widetilde{\mathbf{M}}\right\|_{F}^{2}+\left\|\mathbf{M}-\widetilde{\mathbf{M}}-\boldsymbol{\delta} \mathbf{g}^{\top}\right\|_{F}^{2} \notag
\end{align}
where $\widetilde{\mathbf{M}}=\mathbf{H} \mathbf{M}, \mathbf{H}=\widetilde{\mathbf{X}}_{0}\left(\widetilde{\mathbf{X}}_{0}^{\top} \widetilde{\mathbf{X}}_{0}\right)^{-1} \widetilde{\mathbf{X}}_{0}^{\top},$ and $\widetilde{\mathbf{X}}_{0}=\left[ {\mathbf{1}},~ {\mathbf{x}_{0}}\right]$.
Geometrically, $\widetilde{\mathbf{M}}$ is obtained by projecting every column of $\mathbf{M}$ onto the space spanned by $\mathbf{1}$ and $\mathbf{x}_{0}$. Then, the minimizer of problem \eqref{eq:step2svd} can be obtained from solving the reduced rank problem:
\[\left[\boldsymbol{\delta}, \mathbf{g}\right]=\operatorname{arg min}_{\boldsymbol{\delta}, \mathbf{g}}\left\|\mathbf{M}-\widetilde{\mathbf{M}}-\boldsymbol{\delta} \mathbf{g}^{\top}\right\|_{F}^{2}\]
Let the singular value decomposition of $\mathbf{M}-\widetilde{\mathbf{M}}$ be
$\mathbf{M}-\widetilde{\mathbf{M}}=\sum_{k} \lambda_{k} \mathbf{u}_{k} \mathbf{v}_{k}^{\top},$ with $\lambda_{1} \geq \lambda_{2} \geq \cdots$. The solution $\mathbf{g}$ is the first right singular vector $\mathbf{v}_{1},$ and $\boldsymbol{\delta}$ is $\lambda_{1} \mathbf{u}_{1}$. See,
for example, Theorem 2.4.8 of Golub et al. \cite{golub2012matrix}.
\subsection{Find the Most Interpretable Pattern of Modification $\mathbf{g}$}
After the pattern of modification $\tilde{\mathbf{g}}$ is obtained, the pattern of modification can be any function obtained from the linear combination of $\tilde{\mathbf{g}}, \mathbf{1}$ and $\mathbf{x}_{0}$. As our objective is to understand the change of chemical components, it is desirable that $\mathbf{g}$ be close to zero in most elements. For this reason, we aim to find $\theta \in[0,2 \pi]$ and $\phi \in [0, \pi]$ to minimize
$G(\theta, \phi)=\|\mathbf{g}(\theta, \phi)\|_{1}$, where $\mathbf{g}(\theta, \phi)=\tilde{\mathbf{g}} \cos \phi+\frac{\mathbf{1}}{\sqrt{p}} \cos \theta \sin \phi+\mathbf{x}_{0} \sin \theta \sin \phi,$ Because $\tilde{\mathbf{g}},~ \frac{\mathbf{1}}{\sqrt{p}}$ and $\mathbf{x}_{0}$ are orthogonal with each other and all with
Euclidian norm $1,~\|\mathbf{g}(\theta, \phi)\|_{2}=1$ for all $\theta$ and $\phi$. After solving
\[\left(\theta^{*}, \phi^{*}\right)=\operatorname{arg~min}_{\theta, \phi} G(\theta, \phi),\]
the pattern of modification is obtained as
\[ \mathbf{g}\left(\theta^{*}, \phi^{*}\right)=\tilde{\mathbf{g}} \cos \phi^{*}+\frac{\mathbf{1}}{\sqrt{p}} \cos \theta^{*} \sin \phi^{*}+\mathbf{x}_{0} \sin \theta^{*} \sin \phi^{*}.\]
As discussed earlier, the pattern of modification will help us understand the change of chemicals: it provides a map of the treatment effect on all frequency bands, giving comprehensive information on how the chemical bonds change as a result of the surface treatment.
\section{Simulation studies}
In this section, we implement the two-step algorithm proposed in the last section on synthetic data with the uncertainties described in Section II to validate the effectiveness of the proposed method. In our simulation, the template signal $\mathbf{x}_{0}$ is obtained by averaging and standardizing some pre-treatment signals obtained from the experiment.
We first generate 33 pre-treatment signals based on the template signal, subject to the random offset, multiplicative error and independent noise.
To generate the post-exposure signals, we select true value for the vector of effect as $\boldsymbol{\delta}=[8~5~3~2~2~2~2~2~2]^{\top}$, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig5}. The simulated pattern of modification $\mathbf{g}$ is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig6}. For each $\delta_i$ for $i=1,\ldots,9$, we generated three post-treatment signals, by adding $\delta _i\mathbf{g}$ onto the baseline signals that are also subject to random offset, multiplicative error and independent noise. As a result, we obtain 27 post-exposure signals as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig3}.
Here, the number of pre-treatment and post-treatment signals are set in consistency with the sample size in our experiments, as detailed in the next section. The analysis of the real data will be illustrated in the next section as well.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{5_new.png}
\newline
\caption{Simulated $\boldsymbol{\delta}$ function.}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{6_new.png}
\newline
\caption{Simulated $\mathbf{g}$ function.}
\label{fig6}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{3a_new.png}
\newline
\subfigure (a) Simulated pre-treatment signals (black curves) and the true template signal $\mathbf{x}_0$ (red curve)
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{3b_new.png}
\newline
\subfigure (b)Simulated post-treatment signals with the same kind of uncertainties
\caption{Simulated FTIR signals.}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
In Step 1, we estimate the template signal $\mathbf{x}_{0}$ with the aligned pre-treatment FTIR signals by solving problem \eqref{eq:step1}, and the result is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig4} (a). The black curves are the aligned pre-treatment signals $\hat{c}_{0, i} \mathbf{x}_{0, i}+\hat{d}_{0, i} \mathbf{1}$ and the red curve is the template signal $\mathbf{x}_{0}$. Compared with the raw data seen in Fig.~\ref{fig3}, the pre-treatment signals are well aligned. Fig.~\ref{fig4} (b) shows the comparison of the true template signal (red curve) and the reconstructed template signal (blue circles) estimated by the proposed algorithm. The two curves almost coincide, which implies that the template signal is extracted accurately and thus we verify the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm on FTIR spectra pre-treatment.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{4a_new.png}
\newline
\subfigure (a) Corrected simulated pre-treatment FTIR signals and the template signal (red curve).
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{4b_new.png}
\newline
\subfigure (b) Comparison of normalized true template signal (red curve) and reconstructed template signal (blue circles) estimated by the proposed algorithm
\caption{ Estimation results of proposed Step 1 on the simulated data in Fig~\ref{fig3} (a).}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{7_new.png}
\caption{The reconstructed $\hat{\boldsymbol{\delta}}$ function. }
\label{fig7}
\end{figure}
Then, we regard the pre-treatment template FTIR signal $\mathbf{x}_0$ as known and implement the proposed coordinate descent method on the simulated post-treatment signals to estimate the vector of effect $\boldsymbol{\delta}$ and the pattern of modification $\mathbf{g}$. After solving the problem (\ref{eq:step2constr}), we obtain the estimation of the vector of effect $\boldsymbol{\hat \delta}$ and component of the pattern of modification $\tilde{\mathbf{g}}$, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig7} and Fig.~\ref{fig8}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{8_new.png}
\newline
\caption{The signal $\tilde{\mathbf{g}}$ solved from \eqref{eq:step2constr}}
\label{fig8}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig7}, the estimated vector of effect $\widehat{\boldsymbol{\delta}}$ is plotted against the treatment magnitude. From this figure, it can be seen that the shape of $\widehat{\boldsymbol{\delta}}$ is very similar to that of the true value $\boldsymbol{\delta}$ illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig5}. It verifies that the accuracy of estimating the vector of effect.
Note that the vector of effect $\boldsymbol{\delta}$ is significantly different from the ground truth in Fig.~\ref{fig5}, which is primarily due to the constraints added when solving the optimization problem. It doesn't matter since what is of interest is the trend of the $\boldsymbol{\delta}$ rather than the magnitude.
The variation in $\widehat{\boldsymbol{\delta}}$ is primarily caused by the estimation error of $\mathbf{a}_{1}, \mathbf{b}_{1}$, and the random error $\boldsymbol{\varepsilon}_1$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{9_new.png}
\newline
\caption{The heatmap of function $G(\theta, \phi),$ when $\theta \in[0,2 \pi], \phi \in[0, \pi]$ }
\label{fig9}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{10_new.png}
\newline
\caption{The reconstructed $\hat{\mathbf{g}}$ function. }
\label{fig10}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig8} illustrates the shape of the signal $\tilde{\mathbf{g}}$. To find the pattern of modification $\mathbf{g}$ with the best interpretability, we need to find $\theta^{*},~\phi^{*}$ that minimize the value of $G(\theta, \phi)$. To understand the landscape of $G(\theta, \phi)$, we plot its values for all values $\theta\in[0,2\pi]$ and $\phi\in[0,\pi]$, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig9}. From this figure, we can see that $G(\theta, \phi)$ is highly non-convex, and it has multiple local minima. Among these local minima, we select the one with $\phi\approx 0$ or $\phi\approx \pi$, as we desire the function $\mathbf{g}$ be mainly determined by $\tilde{\mathbf{g}}$, and thus $\cos(\phi)$ be close to 1. We pick the local optima $\theta^{*}=1.8972$,~ $\phi^{*}=0.8741$, and the resulted vector of $\widehat{\boldsymbol{g}}$ is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig10}. From this result, the estimated $\widehat{\boldsymbol{g}}$ function in Fig.~\ref{fig10} is consistent with the ground truth of $\mathbf{g}$ in Fig.~\ref{fig6}. Our simulation study verifies the accuracy of the estimation of $\boldsymbol{g}$ as well.
Note that the magnitude of the absorbance is significantly different from the ground truth in Fig.~\ref{fig6}. Similar to the reconstructed $\boldsymbol{\delta}$ function, such difference is believed to be caused by the constraints in solving the optimization problem. The shape of $\mathbf{\hat g}$ is close to $\mathbf{g}$ thereof
\section{Case Study: Investigation of Real FTIR Spectra }
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{11_new.png}
\caption{ Corrected pre-treatment FTIR signals (black curves) and the template signal (red curve).}
\label{fig11}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{12_new.png}
\caption{ The plot of the effect of plasma exposure $\boldsymbol{\delta}$ versus the corresponding plasma height. }
\label{fig12}
\end{figure}
The study is motivated by the engineering problem of understanding the effect of plasma exposure on the CFRP panels when the plasma height varies. In this section, we further demonstrate how to use the method proposed in Section 2 to quantify the effect of plasma exposure, and discuss how the result benefit manufacturing engineering. We begin with introducing the setting of the experiment that collects the pre-exposure and post-exposure FTIR signals when the plasma height varies. Then we demonstrate our analysis procedure in detail, and discuss our findings.
\subsection{Experimental Setup and Data Collection}
The CFRP sheet is the base material used in the experiment shown in Fig.~\ref{fig1}. In this experiment, we prepared
eleven $ 1" \times 1"$ CFRP panels fabricated with HexPlyR M20 curing epoxy matrix from the same batch.
First, we measured the FTIR signal three times on each coupon before plasma treatment to obtain $n = 33$ pre-exposure FTIR spectra. In our experiment, the FTIR equipment used is 4300 Handheld FTIR from Agilent Company. On a small area on the sample, it captures the absorbance intensity of infrared light whose wavenumber (determined by frequency) is between 650 cm$^{-1}$ and 4000 cm$^{-1}$.
Within this range, each FTIR spectrum is represented by a signal containing $p=1798$ equidistant data points.
To understand the effect of plasma treatment when the plasma height varies, these eleven sample coupons are processed with atmospheric press plasma with prescribed plasma heights $h = 22$mm, 20mm, ..., 2mm.
Again we take three FTIR measurements on each coupon, with the same procedure as the pre-exposure measurement.
We noted that the six post-exposure FTIR signals from the two coupons that underwent the plasma exposure with 2mm and 4mm plasma heights (denoted as black curves in Figure~\ref{fig2} (b)) are significantly different from the signals obtained from the other coupons, and investigated from the sample that the surfaces are carbonized due to the excessive heat caused by the plasma exposure. Therefore, these six FTIR measurements are eliminated, and the post-exposure spectra contain 27 FTIR signals.
\subsection{Implementation of the Proposed Method on Real Data}
Similar to the procedure of simulation on synthetic data, we implement the proposed methodology on real FTIR data collected from the experiment described in the last part. In Step 1, we estimate the template signal $\mathbf{x}_{0}$ with the aligned pre-exposure FTIR signals by solving problem \eqref{eq:step1}, and the result is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig11}. The black curves are all aligned pre-exposure signals $\hat{c}_{0, i} \mathbf{x}_{0, i}+\hat{d}_{0, i} \mathbf{1}$, and the red curve is the template signal $\mathbf{x}_0$. Compared with the raw data seen in Fig.~\ref{fig2}, the pre-exposure signals are well aligned, and the template signal $\mathbf{x}_0$ is the representation of these curves.
Then, we implement the proposed coordinate descent method on the post-exposure signals to quantify the effect of plasma surface treatment. Similar to the process in the last section, we obtain the vector of effect $\boldsymbol{\delta}$ and the signal $\tilde{\mathbf{g}}$ by solving the problem \eqref{eq:step2constr}, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig12} and Fig.~\ref{fig13}. The vector of effect $\boldsymbol{\delta}$ is plotted against the plasma height in Fig.~\ref{fig12}. From this figure, we can see that the effect of the plasma treatment is positive when the plasma height is small, and gradually decreases as the plasma height increases, and generally becomes constant after the plasma height gets greater than 10mm.
From the trend, we can see that a smaller plasma height tends to cause a more significant chemical change. This result confirms our previous experiment that the wettability of the CFRP material is higher when smaller plasma height is used, as long as the CFRP surface is not burnt (which is also mentioned in \cite{BTG2013CA}).
The result in Fig.~\ref{fig12} can provide valuable guideline to plasma parameter selection during CFRP surface preprocessing in aircraft maintenance. Although we know from the physical understanding that there is an upper bound of plasma height, under which the plasma treatment is effective, the shape of the vector $\boldsymbol{\delta}$ tells us that 10 mm is approximately the threshold, as larger plasma height will change the FTIR curve very little. In other words, the analysis gives us a relatively quantitative and persuasive understanding of the surface treatment effect on the FTIR measurements.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{13_new.png}
\caption{ The signal $\tilde{\mathbf{g}}$, as solved from the problem \eqref{eq:step2constr} }
\label{fig13}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{14_new.png}
\caption{The heatmap of function $G(\theta, \phi),$ when $\theta \in[0,2 \pi], \phi \in[0, \pi]$ }
\label{fig14}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5 in]{15_new.png}
\caption{The pattern of modification $\mathbf{g}$. }
\label{fig15}
\end{figure}
Then we find the pattern of modification ${\mathbf{g}}$ that minimize the value of $G(\theta, \phi)$ based on $\tilde{\mathbf{g}}$ illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig13}. The value of $G(\theta, \phi)$ is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig14}. We pick the local optima $\theta^{*}=0.0009,~ \phi^{*}=0.5053$, and the resulted vector of $\mathbf{g}$ is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig15}.
Recall that the pattern of modification $\mathbf{g}$ illustrates the effect of plasma exposure on all frequency bands.
The change of FTIR gives
comprehensive information on how the chemical bonds are changed as a result of the plasma exposure \cite{mukhopadhyay2002plasma,ctucureanu2016ftir,bassan2011light}. From Fig.~\ref{fig15}, we can see that in the wavenumber region of $2000-3000cm^{-1}$, $3200-4000cm^{-1}$, especially $2700-3000cm^{-1}$, the pattern of modification $\mathbf{g}$ has several significant positive values. It implies that the corresponding chemical bonds, including O = C = O, N = C = O, N = N = N, N = C = N, N = C = S, C -- H, O -- H, and N -- H, are created by plasma exposure, according to the IR absorption table \cite{IRsearch}. The pattern of modification $\mathbf{g}$ in the rest frequency regions tends to be around zero, which means that plasma does not change the chemical bonds whose characteristic wavenumbers are in those regions. Our result agrees with existing researches on the effects of plasma exposure on materials. For example, it is suggested in \cite{sharma2014carbon} that the plasma grafting to CF surface increased the proportion of oxygen atoms, and that the plasma modified carbon fiber shows a significant increase in oxygen and nitrogen concentration \cite{han2014evaluation}.
\section{Conclusion and Discussion}
In this article, we proposed a general framework to quantify the effects of certain treatment on the FTIR spectra subjecting to multiple uncertainties. With this framework, two types of uncertainties in the FTIR signals, offset shift and multiplicative error, were carefully addressed. In the two-step procedure, we first formulated a novel optimization problem to estimate the representative pre-treatment spectrum, and then formulated another optimization problem to obtain a pattern of modification $\mathbf{g}$ that reveals how the treatment affects the shape of the FTIR spectrum, as well as a vector $\boldsymbol{\delta}$ that describes the degree of change caused by different treatment magnitudes.
This methodology is illustrated by a motivating example of quantifying the plasma treatment effect on the CFRP though FTIR measurements. In the case study, we understand the effective range of the plasma height from the vector of effects $\mathbf{\delta}$, and identified the affected chemical bounds from the pattern of modification $\mathbf{g}$.
In future research, we can go one step further to map $\mathbf{g}$ to the change of constituents of the chemical compounds with the help of the FTIR spectra librarys \cite{IRsearch}.
The knowledge on the modification of chemical components can shed some light on how the surface improvement technology change the chemical component of the material, which further indicate which chemicals shall be added or avoided to improve the surface quality before composite joining and repairing in aircraft manufacturing and maintenance.
Our technique is suitable and promising to analyze the data obtained from a wide range of spectral measurements, including ultraviolet-visible spectroscopy (UV-Vis), X-ray diffraction (XRD), Raman spectroscopy etc, when the background noise leads to uncertain offset and the uncertain signal level results in the multiplicative error. Typically, these uncertainties are of greater magnitude in real manufacturing environments than the lab conditions, due to the inexperienced operators and the uncontrolled surroundings.
Therefore, the analytic framework proposed in this article also helps to broaden the scope of portable spectrometers, such as the hand-held FTIR devices.
Also, the method in this article is applicable to quantify the effect a large class of surface treatment apart from the plasma treatment.
The pattern of modification $\mathbf{g}$ reveals the general effect pattern of certain surface treatment method in a relatively large range of the treatment magnitude, which provides a better understanding of intrinsic reasons behind the treatment.
Recall that the surface treatment methods have been well-developed, including thermal treatment, wet chemical or electrochemical oxidation, plasma treatment, gas-phase oxidation, coating treatment, and so on.
Applying and extending this method to solve more problems in the manufacturing industry is a direction for our further research.
Finally, the methodology of this study can also be extended. For example, this study assumes that there is a single pattern of modification $\mathbf{g}$, which is the same under all levels of treatment effect. New methodologies can be developed in future research, based on the assumptions that the pattern of modification is different for distinct levels of surface treatment.
\bibliographystyle{ieeetr}
|
\section{Introduction}\vspace{-3mm}
Image denoising is an important research topic in computer vision, aiming at
recovering the underlying clean image from an observed noisy one. The noise contained in a real noisy image is
generally accumulated from multiple different sources, e.g., capturing instruments, data transmission media,
image quantization, etc.~\cite{tsin2001statistical}. Such complicated
generation process makes it fairly difficult to access the noise information accurately and
recover the underlying clean image from the noisy one. This constitutes the main aim of blind image denoising.
There are two main categories of image denoising methods. Most classical methods belong to the first category, mainly focusing on constructing a rational maximum a posteriori (MAP) model, involving
the fidelity (loss) and regularization terms, from a Bayesian perspective~\cite{bishop2006pattern}.
An understanding for data generation mechanism is required for designing a rational MAP objective, especially
better image priors like sparsity~\cite{aharon2006k},
low-rankness~\cite{gu2014weighted,zhu2016noise,Xu_2018_ECCV}, and non-local
similarity~\cite{buades2005non,maggioni2013nonlocal}.
These methods are superior mainly in their interpretability naturally led by the Bayesian framework.
They, however, still exist critical limitations due to their assumptions on both
image prior and noise (generally i.i.d. Gaussian), possibly deviating from real
spatially variant (i.e.,non-i.i.d.) noise,
and their relatively low implementation speed
since the algorithm needs to be re-implemented for any
new coming image. Recently, deep learning approaches represent a new trend along this research line.
The main idea is to firstly collect large amount of noisy-clean image pairs
and then train a deep neural network denoiser
on these training data in an end-to-end learning manner. This approach is
especially superior in its effective accumulation of knowledge from large datasets and
fast denoising speed for test images.
They, however, are easy to overfit
to the training data with certain noisy types, and still could not be generalized well on test
images with unknown but complicated noises.
Thus, blind image denoising especially for real images is still a challenging task, since the real noise
distribution is difficult to be pre-known (for model-driven MAP approaches)
and hard to be comprehensively simulated by training data (for data-driven deep learning approaches).
Against this issue, this paper proposes a new variational inference method, aiming at directly inferring both
the underlying clean image and the noise distribution from an observed noisy image in a unique Bayesian framework.
Specifically, an approximate posterior is presented by taking the intrinsic clean image and noise variances as
latent variables conditioned on the input noisy image. This posterior provides explicit parametric forms for all
its involved hyper-parameters, and thus can be efficiently implemented for blind image denoising with automatic
noise estimation for test noisy images.
In summary, this paper mainly makes following contributions: 1) The proposed method is capable of simultaneously
implementing both noise estimation and blind image denoising tasks in a unique Bayesian framework.
The noise distribution is modeled as a general non-i.i.d. configurations with spatial relevance across the image,
which evidently better complies with the heterogeneous real noise beyond the conventional i.i.d. noise assumption.
2) Succeeded from the fine generalization capability of the generative model, the proposed method is verified to
be able to effectively estimate and remove complicated non-i.i.d. noises in test images even though such noise types
have never appeared in training data, as clearly shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:butterfly_case2}. 3) The proposed method is
a generative approach outputted a complete distribution revealing how the noisy image is generated. This not only
makes the result with more comprehensive interpretability beyond traditional methods purely aiming at obtaining
a clean image, but also naturally leads to a learnable likelihood (fidelity) term according to the data-self. 4) The
most commonly utilized deep learning paradigm, i.e., taking MSE as loss function and training on large noisy-clean
image pairs, can be understood as a degenerated form of the proposed generative approach. Their overfitting issue
can then be easily explained under this variational inference perspective: these methods intrinsically put dominant
emphasis on fitting the priors of the latent clean image, while almost neglects the effect of noise variations. This
makes them incline to overfit noise bias on training data and sensitive to the distinct noises in test noisy images.
The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 introduces related work. Sections 3 presents the
proposed full Bayesion model,
the deep variational inference algorithm, the network architecture and some discussions. Section 4
demonstrates experimental results and the paper is finally concluded.
\vspace{-3mm}\section{Related Work}\vspace{-3mm}
We present a brief review for the two main categories of image denoising methods, i.e., model-driven MAP based methods
and data-driven deep learning based methods.
\textbf{Model-driven MAP based Methods:} Most classical image denoising methods belong to this category, through
designing a MAP model with a fidelity/loss term and a regularization one delivering the pre-known
image prior. Along this line, total variation denoising~\cite{rudin1992nonlinear},
anisotropic diffusion~\cite{perona1990scale} and wavelet coring~\cite{simoncelli1996noise} use the statistical
regularities of images to remove the image noise. Later, the nonlocal similarity prior, meaning many small patches
in a non-local image area possess similar configurations, was widely used in image denoising.
Typical ones include CBM3D~\cite{4271520} and non-local means~\cite{buades2005non}. Some dictionary learning
methods~\cite{gu2014weighted,dong2013nonlocal,Xu_2018_ECCV} and Field-of-Experts (FoE)~\cite{roth2009fields},
also revealing certain prior knowledge of image patches, had also been attempted for the task. Several other
approaches focusing on the fidelity term, which are mainly determined by the noise assumption on data. E.g.,
Mulitscale~\cite{lebrun2015multiscale} assumed the noise of each patch and its similar patches in the same
image to be correlated Gaussian distribution, and LR-MoG~\cite{zhu2016noise}, DP-GMM~\cite{yue2018hyperspectral}
and DDPT~\cite{zhu2017blind} fitted the image noise by using Mixture of Gaussian (MoG) as an approximator for noises.
\textbf{Data-driven Deep Learning based Methods:} Instead of pre-setting image prior, deep learning methods
directly learn a denoiser (formed as a deep neural network) from noisy to clean ones on a large collection
of noisy-clean image pairs. Jain and Seung~\cite{jain2009natural} firstly adopted a five layer convolution neural
network (CNN) for the task. Then some auto-encoder based methods~\cite{xie2012image,agostinelli2013adaptive} were
applied. Meantime, Burger et al.~\cite{burger2012image} achieved the comparable performance with
BM3D using plain multi-layer perceptron (MLP). Zhang et al.~\cite{zhang2017beyond} further proposed the denoising
convolution network (DnCNN) and achieved state-of-the-art performance on Gaussian denoising tasks.
Mao et al.~\cite{mao2016image} proposed a deep fully convolution encoding-decoding network with symmetric
skip connection. Tai et al.~\cite{tai2017memnet} preposed a very deep persistent memory network (MemNet) to
explicitly mine persistent memory through an adaptive learning process. Recently, NLRN~\cite{liu2018non}, N3Net~\cite{plotz2018neural}
and UDNet~\cite{lefkimmiatis2018universal} all embedded the non-local property of image into DNN to
facilitate the denoising task. In order to boost the flexibility against
spatial variant noise, FFDNet~\cite{zhang2018ffdnet} was proposed by pre-evaluating the noise level and inputting it to
the network together with the noisy image. Guo et al.~\cite{guo2018toward} and
Brooks et al.~\cite{brooks2018unprocessing} both attempted to simulate the generation process of the images in camera.
\vspace{-2mm}\section{Variational Denoising Network for Blind Noise Modeling}\vspace{-2mm}
Given training set $D=\{\bm{y}_j,\bm{x}_j\}_{j=1}^n$, where $\bm{y}_j,\bm{x}_j$ denote the $j^{th}$ training
pair of noisy and the expected clean images, $n$ represents the number of training images,
our aim is to construct a variational parametric
approximation to the posterior of the latent variables, including the latent clean image and the noise variances,
conditioned on the noisy image. Note that for the noisy image $\bm{y}$, its training pair $\bm{x}$ is
generally a simulated ``clean'' one obtained as the average of many noisy ones taken under similar camera
conditions~\cite{anaya2014renoir,Abdelhamed_2018_CVPR}, and thus is always not the exact latent clean image $\bm{z}$.
This explicit parametric posterior can then be used to directly infer the clean image and noise
distribution from any test noisy image. To this aim, we first need to formulate a rational full Bayesian
model of the problem based on the knowledge delivered by the training image pairs.
\vspace{-2mm}\subsection{Constructing Full Bayesian Model Based on Training Data}\vspace{-2mm}
Denote $\bm{y}=[y_1,\cdots,y_d]^T$ and $\bm{x}=[x_1,\cdots,x_d]^T$ as any training pair in $D$,
where $d$ (width*height) is the size of a training image\footnote{We use $j~(=1,\cdots,n)$ and
$i~(=1,\cdots,d)$ to express the indexes of training data and data dimension, respectively, throughout
the entire paper.}. We can then construct the following model to express the generation process
of the noisy image $\bm{y}$:
\begin{equation}
y_i \sim \mathcal{N}(y_i|z_i, \sigma_i^2),~ i=1,2,\cdots,d,
\label{Eq:generate_noisy_im}
\end{equation}
where $\bm{z} \in \mathbb{R}^d$ is the latent clean image underlying $\bm{y}$, $\mathcal{N}(\cdot | \mu, \sigma^2)$ denotes
the Gaussian distribution with mean $\mu$ and variance $\sigma^2$.
Instead of assuming i.i.d. distribution for the noise as
conventional~\cite{mairal2008sparse,dong2013nonlocal,gu2014weighted,Xu_2018_ECCV}, which largely deviates the
spatial variant and signal-depend characteristics of the real noise~\cite{zhang2018ffdnet,brooks2018unprocessing},
we models the noise as a non-i.i.d. and pixel-wise Gaussian distribution in Eq.~\eqref{Eq:generate_noisy_im}.
The simulated ``clean'' image $\bm{x}$ evidently provides a strong prior to the latent variable $\bm{z}$. Accordingly
we impose the following conjugate Gaussian prior on $\bm{z}$:
\begin{equation}
z_i \sim \mathcal{N}(z_i|x_i, \varepsilon_0^2), ~i=1,2,\cdots,d,
\label{Eq:prior-z}
\end{equation}
where $\varepsilon_0$ is a hyper-parameter and can be easily set as a small value.
Besides, for $\bm{\sigma}^2=\{\sigma^2_1, \sigma_2^2, \cdots, \sigma_d^2\}$, we also introduce a rational
conjugate prior as follows:
\begin{equation}
\sigma_i^2 \sim \text{IG}\left(\sigma_i^2|\frac{p^2}{2}-1, \frac{p^2\xi_i}{2}\right), ~ i=1,2,\cdots, d,
\label{Eq:prior-sigma}
\end{equation}
where $\text{IG}(\cdot|\alpha, \beta)$ is the inverse Gamma distribution with parameter $\alpha$ and $\beta$,
$\bm{\xi}=\mathcal{G}\left( (\hat{\bm{y}}-\hat{\bm{x}})^2;p \right)$ represents the filtering output of the
variance map $(\hat{\bm{y}}-\hat{\bm{x}})^2$ by a Gaussian filter with $p \times p$ window,
and $\hat{\bm{y}}$, $\hat{\bm{x}} \in \mathbb{R}^{h\times w}$ are the matrix (image) forms of $\bm{y}$,
$\bm{x} \in \mathbb{R}^d$, respectively. Note that the mode of above
IG distribution is $\xi_i$~\cite{bishop2006pattern,yong2017robust}, which is a approximate evaluation of $\sigma_i^2$ in $p \times p$ window.
Combining Eqs.~\eqref{Eq:generate_noisy_im}-\eqref{Eq:prior-sigma}, a full Bayesian model for the problem can be obtained.
The goal then turns to
infer the posterior of latent variables $\bm{z}$ and
$\bm{\sigma}^2$ from noisy image $\bm{y}$, i.e., $p(\bm{z}, \bm{\sigma}^2|\bm{y})$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{net_loss}
\vspace{-3mm}
\caption{\small{The architecture of the proposed deep variational inference network.
The red solid lines denote the forward process, and the blue dotted lines mark the gradient
flow direction in the BP algorithm.}}
\label{fig:net-loss}\vspace{-4mm}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-2mm}\subsection{Variational Form of Posterior}\vspace{-2mm}
We first construct a variational distribution $q(\bm{z}, \bm{\sigma}^2|\bm{y})$ to approximate the
posterior $p(\bm{z}, \bm{\sigma}^2|\bm{y})$ led by Eqs.~\eqref{Eq:generate_noisy_im}-\eqref{Eq:prior-sigma}. Similar to
the commonly used mean-field variation inference techniques, we assume
conditional independence between variables $\bm{z}$ and $\bm{\sigma}^2$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
q(\bm{z}, \bm{\sigma}^2|\bm{y})=q(\bm{z}|\bm{y})q(\bm{\sigma}^2|\bm{y}).
\label{Eq:posterior-factor-asumption}
\end{equation}
Based on the conjugate priors in Eqs. \eqref{Eq:prior-z} and \eqref{Eq:prior-sigma}, it is natural to
formulate variational posterior forms of $\bm{z}$ and $\bm{\sigma}^2$ as follows:
\begin{align}
q(\bm{z}|\bm{y}) = \prod_i^d \mathcal{N}(z_i|\mu_i(\bm{y};W_{D}), m_i^2(\bm{y};W_{D})), \
q(\bm{\sigma}^2|\bm{y}) = \prod_i^d \text{IG}(\sigma_i^2|\alpha_i(\bm{y};W_{S}), \beta_i(\bm{y};W_{S})),
\label{Eq:distribution_z_sigma}
\end{align}
where $\mu_i(\bm{y};W_{D})$ and $m_i^2(\bm{y};W_{D})$ are designed as the prediction functions for getting
posterior parameters of latent variable $\bm{z}$ directly from $\bm{y}$. The function is represented as a network,
called denoising network or \textit{D-Net}, with parameters $W_{D}$. Similarly, $\alpha_i(\bm{y};W_{S})$ and
$\beta_i(\bm{y};W_{S})$ denote the prediction functions for evaluating posterior parameters of
$\bm{\sigma}^2$ from $\bm{y}$, where $W_{S}$ represents the parameters of the network, called Sigma network or \textit{S-Net}.
The aforementioned is illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:net-loss}. Our aim is then to optimize
these network parameters $W_{D}$ and $W_{S}$ so as to get the explicit functions for predicting clean image
$\bm{z}$ as well as noise knowledge $\bm{\sigma}^2$ from any test noisy image $\bm{y}$. A rational objective
function with respect to $W_{D}$ and $W_{S}$ is thus necessary
to train both the networks.
Note that the network parameters $W_{D}$ and $W_{S}$ are shared by posteriors calculated on all training data, and
thus if we train them on the entire training set, the method is expected to induce the general statistical inference
insight from noisy image to its underlying clean image and noise level.
\vspace{-2mm}\subsection{Variational Lower Bound of Marginal Data Likelihood}\vspace{-2mm}
For notation convenience, we simply write $\mu_i(\bm{y};W_{D})$, $m_i^2(\bm{y};W_{D})$,
$\alpha_i(\bm{y};W_{S})$, $\beta_i(\bm{y};W_{S})$ as $\mu_i$, $m_i^2$, $\alpha_i$, $\beta_i$ in
the following calculations. For any noisy image $\bm{y}$ and its simulated ``clean'' image $\bm{x}$ in the
training set, we can decompose its marginal likelihood as the following form~\cite{blei2006variational}:
\begin{equation}
\log p(\bm{y}) = \mathcal{L}(\bm{z},\bm{\sigma}^2;\bm{y})
+ D_{KL}\left(q(\bm{z},\bm{\sigma}^2|\bm{y})||p(\bm{z},\bm{\sigma}^2|\bm{y}) \right),
\label{Eq:lower_decomposition}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}(\bm{z},\bm{\sigma}^2;\bm{y}) = E_{q(\bm{z},\bm{\sigma}^2|\bm{y})}
\left[\log p(\bm{y}|\bm{z},\bm{\sigma}^2)p(\bm{z})p(\bm{\sigma}^2)-\log q(\bm{z},\bm{\sigma}^2|\bm{y}) \right],
\label{Eq:lower_bound}
\end{equation}
Here $E_{p(x)}[f(x)]$ represents the exception of $f(x)$ w.r.t. stochastic variable $x$ with probability density
function $p(x)$. The second term of Eq.~\eqref{Eq:lower_decomposition} is a KL divergence between the variational
approximate posterior $q(\bm{z},\bm{\sigma}^2|\bm{y})$ and the true posterior $p(\bm{z},\bm{\sigma}^2|\bm{y})$ with
non-negative value. Thus the first term $\bm{\mathcal{L}}(\bm{z},\bm{\sigma}^2;\bm{y})$ constitutes a
\textit{variational lower bound} on the logarithm of marginal likelihood $p(\bm{y})$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\log p(\bm{y}) \ge \mathcal{L} (\bm{z},\bm{\sigma}^2;\bm{y}).
\label{Eq:nonequal_bound}
\end{equation}
According to Eqs.~\eqref{Eq:posterior-factor-asumption}, \eqref{Eq:distribution_z_sigma} and \eqref{Eq:lower_bound}, the
lower bound can then be rewritten as:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}(\bm{z},\bm{\sigma}^2;\bm{y})=E_{q(\bm{z},\bm{\sigma}^2|\bm{y})}
\left[ \log p(\bm{y}|\bm{z},\bm{\sigma}^2) \right]
- D_{KL}\left(q(\bm{z}|\bm{y}) || p(\bm{z}) \right)
- D_{KL} \left(q(\bm{\sigma}^2|\bm{y}) || p(\bm{\sigma^2}) \right).
\label{Eq:lower_bound_factor}
\end{equation}
It's pleased that all the three terms in Eq~\eqref{Eq:lower_bound_factor} can be integrated
analytically as follows:
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{equation}
E_{q(\bm{z},\bm{\sigma}^2|\bm{y})}\left[ \log p(\bm{y}|\bm{z},\bm{\sigma}^2) \right]
= \sum_{i=1}^d \Big\{-\frac{1}{2}\log 2\pi - \frac{1}{2}(\log \beta_i - \psi(\alpha_i))
-\frac{\alpha_i}{2\beta_i}\left[ (y_i-\mu_i)^2 + m_i^2\right]\Big\},
\label{Eq:lower_bound_likeli}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
D_{KL}\left(q(\bm{z}|\bm{y}) || p(\bm{z}) \right) = \sum_{i=1}^d \Big\{
\frac{(\mu_i-x_i)^2}{2\varepsilon_0^2}
+ \frac{1}{2}\left[\frac{m_i^2}{\varepsilon_0^2}-\log \frac{m_i^2}{\varepsilon_0^2} -1 \right]
\Big\},
\label{Eq:lower_bound_group_kl1}
\end{equation}
\begin{align}
D_{KL} \left(q(\bm{\sigma}^2|\bm{y}) || p(\bm{\sigma^2}) \right) &= \sum_{i=1}^d \bigg\{
\left(\alpha_i-\frac{p^2}{2}+1\right)\psi(\alpha_i)
+ \left[ \log \Gamma \left(\frac{p^2}{2}-1\right) - \log \Gamma (\alpha_i)\right] \notag \\
&\mathrel{\phantom{=}} \hspace{1.5cm}+\left(\frac{p^2}{2}-1\right)\left(\log \beta_i - \log \frac{p^2\xi_i}{2}\right)
+\alpha_i \left(\frac{p^2\xi_i}{2\beta_i}-1\right)\bigg\},
\label{Eq:lower_bound_group_kl2}
\end{align}
\end{footnotesize}
where $\psi(\cdot)$ denotes the digamma function. Calculation details are listed in supplementary material.
We can then easily get the expected objective function (i.e., a negtive lower bound of the marginal likelihood on
entire training set) for optimizing the network parameters of \textit{D-Net} and \textit{S-Net} as follows:
\begin{equation}
\min_{W_D,W_S} -\sum_{j=1}^n \mathcal{L}(\bm{z}_j,\bm{\sigma}_j^2;\bm{y}_j). \label{Eq:Objective}
\end{equation}
\vspace{-4mm}\subsection{Network Learning} \label{sec:inference}\vspace{-2mm}
As aforementioned, we use \textit{D-Net} and \textit{S-Net} together to infer
the variational parameters $\bm{\mu}$, $\bm{m}^2$ and $\bm{\alpha}$, $\bm{\beta}$ from the input
noisy image $\bm{y}$, respectively, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:net-loss}. It is critical to consider how to
calculate derivatives of this objective with respect to $W_D,W_S$ involved in $\bm{\mu}$, $\bm{m}^2$,
$\bm{\alpha}$ and $\bm{\beta}$ to facilitate an easy use of stochastic gradient varitional inference. Fortunately,
different from other related variational inference techniques
like VAE \cite{kingma2013auto}, all three terms of Eqs.~\eqref{Eq:lower_bound_likeli}-\eqref{Eq:lower_bound_group_kl2}
in the lower bound Eq.~\eqref{Eq:lower_bound_factor} are differentiable and their derivatives can be calculated
analytically without the need of any reparameterization trick, largely reducing the difficulty of network
training.
At the training stage of our method, the network parameters can be easily updated with backpropagation (BP)
algorithm~\cite{goodfellow2016deep} through Eq.~\eqref{Eq:Objective}. The function of each term in this objective can
be intuitively explained: the first term represents the likelihood of the observed noisy images in training set,
and the last two terms control the discrepancy between the variational posterior and the corresponding prior.
During the BP training process, the gradient information from the likelihood term of Eq.~\eqref{Eq:lower_bound_likeli}
is used for updating both the parameters of \textit{D-Net} and \textit{S-Net} simultaneously, implying that the
inference for the latent clean image $\bm{z}$ and $\bm{\sigma}^2$ is guided to be learned from each other.
At the test stage, for any test noisy image, through feeding it into \textit{D-Net}, the final denoising
result can be directly obtained by $\bm{\mu}$. Additionally, through inputting the noisy image to the \textit{S-Net},
the noise distribution knowledge (i.e., $\bm{\sigma}^2$) is easily inferred. Specifically, the noise variance in
each pixel can be directly obtained by using the mode of the inferred inverse Gamma
distribution: $\sigma_i^2=\frac{\beta_i}{(\alpha_i+1)}$.
\vspace{-2mm}\subsection{Network Architecture}\vspace{-2mm}
The D-Net in Fig.~\ref{fig:net-loss} takes the noisy image $\bm{y}$ as input to infer the variational
parameters $\bm{\mu}$ and $\bm{m}^2$ in $q(\bm{z}|\bm{y})$ of Eq.~\eqref{Eq:distribution_z_sigma},
and performs the denoising task in the proposed variational inference algorithm. In order to capture
multi-scale information of the image, we use a U-Net~\cite{ronneberger2015u} with depth 4 as the D-Net,
which contains 4 encoder blocks ([\textit{Conv}+\textit{ReLU}]$\times$2+\textit{Average pooling}), 3 decoder
blocks (\textit{Transpose Conv}+[\textit{Conv}+\textit{ReLU}]$\times$2) and symmetric skip connection under
each scale. For parameter $\bm{\mu}$, the residual learning strategy is adopted as in~\cite{zhang2017beyond}, i.e.,
$\bm{\mu}=\bm{y}+f(\bm{y};W_D)$, where $f( \cdot ;W_D)$ denotes the \textit{D-Net} with parameters $W_D$.
As for the \textit{S-Net}, which takes the noisy image $\bm{y}$ as input and outputs the predicted variational
parameters $\bm{\alpha}$ and $\bm{\beta}$ in $q(\bm{\sigma}^2|\bm{y})$ of Eq~\eqref{Eq:distribution_z_sigma},
we use the DnCNN~\cite{zhang2017beyond} architecture with five layers, and the feature channels of each layer
is set as 64. It should be noted that our proposed method is a general framework, most of the commonly used network
architectures~\cite{zhang2018ffdnet,Ploetz2018,lefkimmiatis2018universal,zhang2018residual} in image restoration can
also be easily substituted.
\vspace{-2mm}\subsection{Some Discussions}\label{sec:discussion}\vspace{-2mm}
It can be seen that the proposed method succeeds advantages of both model-driven MAP and data-driven deep learning methods.
On one hand, our method is a generative approach and possesses fine interpretability to the data generation mechanism;
and on the other hand it conducts an explicit prediction function, facilitating efficient image denoising as well as
noise estimation directly through an input noisy image. Furthermore, beyond current methods, our method can finely
evaluate and remove non-i.i.d. noises embedded in images, and has a good generalization capability to images with
complicated noises, as evaluated in our experiments. This complies with the main requirement of the blind image
denoising task.
If we set the hyper-parameter $\varepsilon_0^2$ in Eq.\eqref{Eq:prior-z} as an extremely small value close to $0$, it is
easy to see that the objective of the proposed method is dominated by the second term of Eq.~\eqref{Eq:lower_bound_likeli},
which makes the objective degenerate as the MSE loss generally used in traditional deep learning
methods (i.e., minimizing $\sum_{j=1}^n||\bm{\mu}(\bm{y}_j;W_{D})-\bm{x}_j||^2$. This provides a new understanding to
explain why they incline to overfit noise bias in training data. The posterior inference process puts dominant
emphasis on fitting priors imposed on the latent clean image, while almost neglects the effect of noise variations. This
naturally leads to its sensitiveness to unseen complicated noises contained in test images.
Very recently, both CBDNet~\cite{guo2018toward} and FFDNet~\cite{zhang2018ffdnet} are presented for the
denoising task by feeding the noisy image integrated with the pre-estimated noise level into the deep network to
make it better generalize to distinct noise types in training stage. Albeit more or less improving
the generalization capability of network, such strategy is still too heuristic and is not easy to interpret
how the input noise level intrinsically influence the final denoising result. Comparatively, our method is
constructed in a sound Bayesian manner to estimate clean image and noise distribution together from the input
noisy image, and its generalization can be easily explained from the perspective of generative model.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering\vspace{-3mm}
\includegraphics[scale=0.54]{sigmaMap}\vspace{-3mm}
\caption{\small{(a) The spatially variant map $\bm{M}$ for noise generation in training data. (b1)-(d1):
Three different $\bm{M}$s on testing data in Cases 1-3.
(b2)-(d2): Correspondingly predicted $\bm{M}$s by our method on the testing data.}}
\vspace{-2mm}
\label{fig:sigma_train_test}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{\small{The PSNR(dB) results of all competing methods on the three groups of test datasets. The best and second
best results are highlighted in bold and Italic, respectively.}}\tiny \vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{@{}C{1.0cm}@{}|@{}C{1.2cm}@{}|@{}C{1.1cm}@{}@{}C{1.1cm}@{}@{}C{1.1cm}@{}
@{}C{1.0cm}@{}@{}C{1.0cm}@{}@{}C{1.5cm}@{}@{}C{1.3cm}@{}@{}C{1.3cm}@{}@{}C{1.1cm}@{}@{}C{1.2cm}@{}}
\Xhline{0.8pt}
\multirow{2}*{Cases}&\multirow{2}*{Datasets} & \multicolumn{8}{c}{Methods} \\
\Xcline{3-12}{0.4pt}
& & \tiny{CBM3D} &\tiny{WNNM} &\tiny{NCSR} &\tiny{MLP} &\tiny{DnCNN-B} &\tiny{MemNet} &\tiny{FFDNet}
&\tiny{$\text{FFDNet}_v$} &\tiny{UDNet} &\tiny{VDN} \\
\Xhline{0.4pt}
\multirow{3}*{Case 1} & Set5
& 27.76 &26.53 &26.62 &27.26 &29.85 & 30.10 &\textit{30.16} &30.15 &28.13 &\textbf{30.39} \\
\Xcline{2-12}{0.4pt}
& LIVE1 & 26.58 &25.27 &24.96 &25.71 &28.81 & 28.96 &\textit{28.99} &28.96 &27.19 &\textbf{29.22} \\
\Xcline{2-12}{0.4pt}
& BSD68 & 26.51 &25.13 &24.96 &25.58 &28.73 & 28.74 &\textit{28.78} &28.77 &27.13 &\textbf{29.02} \\
\Xhline{0.4pt}
\multirow{3}*{Case 2} & Set5
& 26.34 &24.61 &25.76 &25.73 &29.04 & 29.55 &\textit{29.60} &29.56 &26.01 &\textbf{29.80} \\
\Xcline{2-12}{0.4pt}
& LIVE1 & 25.18 &23.52 &24.08 &24.31 &28.18 & 28.56 &\textit{28.58} &28.56 &25.25 &\textbf{28.82} \\
\Xcline{2-12}{0.4pt}
& BSD68 & 25.28 &23.52 &24.27 &24.30 &28.15 & 28.36 &\textit{28.43} &28.42 &25.13 &\textbf{28.67} \\
\Xhline{0.4pt}
\multirow{3}*{Case 3} & Set5
& 27.88 &26.07 &26.84 &26.88 &29.13 & 29.51 &\textit{29.54} &29.49 &27.54 &\textbf{29.74} \\
\Xcline{2-12}{0.4pt}
& LIVE1 & 26.50 &24.67 &24.96 &25.26 &28.17 & 28.37 &\textit{28.39} &28.38 &26.48 &\textbf{28.65} \\
\Xcline{2-12}{0.4pt}
& BSD68 & 26.44 &24.60 &24.95 &25.10 &28.11 & 28.20 &\textit{28.22} &28.20 &26.44 &\textbf{28.46} \\
\Xhline{0.8pt}
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:psnr_noniid}
\vspace{-2mm}
\end{table}
\vspace{-2mm}\section{Experimental Results}\vspace{-2mm}
We evaluate the performance of our method on synthetic and real datasets in this section. All experiments
are evaluated in the sRGB space. We briefly denote our method as VDN in the following. The training and
testing codes of our VDN is available at \url{https://github.com/zsyOAOA/VDNet}.
\vspace{-2mm}\subsection{Experimental Setting}\vspace{-2mm}
\textbf{Network training and parameter setting:} The weights of \textit{D-Net} and \textit{S-Net} in our variational
algorithm were initialized according to~\cite{he2015delving}. In each epoch, we randomly crop $N=64\times 5000$ patches
with size $128\times 128$ from the images for training. The Adam algorithm~\cite{Kingma2015} is adopted to
optimize the network parameters through minimizing the proposed negative lower bound objective. The initial learning
rate is set as $2e\text{-}4$ and linearly decayed in half every 10 epochs until to $1e\text{-}6$.
The window size $p$ in Eq.~\eqref{Eq:prior-sigma} is set as 7. The hyper-parameter $\varepsilon_0^2$ is set as
$5e\text{-}5$ and $1e\text{-}6$ in the following synthetic and real-world image denoising experiments, respectively.
\textbf{Comparison methods:} Several state-of-the-art denoising methods are adopted for performance comparison,
including CBM3D~\cite{4271520}, WNNM~\cite{gu2014weighted}, NCSR~\cite{dong2012nonlocally}, MLP~\cite{burger2012image},
DnCNN-B~\cite{zhang2017beyond}, MemNet~\cite{tai2017memnet}, FFDNet~\cite{zhang2018ffdnet}, UDNet~\cite{lefkimmiatis2018universal}
and CBDNet~\cite{guo2018toward}. Note that CBDNet is mainly designed for blind denoising task, and thus we only
compared CBDNet on the real noise removal experiments.
\vspace{-2mm}\subsection{Experiments on Synthetic Non-I.I.D. Gaussian Noise Cases}\vspace{-2mm}
Similar to~\cite{zhang2018ffdnet}, we collected a set of source images to train the network,
including 432 images from BSD~\cite{amfm_pami2011}, 400 images from the validation set of ImageNet~\cite{DengCHI14} and
4744 images from the Waterloo Exploration Database~\cite{ma2017waterloo}. Three commonly used datasets
in image restoration (Set5, LIVE1 and BSD68 in~\cite{kim2016accurate}) were adopted as test datasets to
evaluate the performance of different methods.
In order to evaluate the effectiveness and robustness of VDN under the non-i.i.d. noise configuration,
we simulated the non-i.i.d. Gaussian noise as following,
\begin{equation}
\bm{n} = \bm{n}^1 \odot \bm{M}, ~ ~n^1_{ij} \sim \mathcal{N}(0,1),
\label{eq:noise-generation}
\end{equation}
where $\bm{M}$ is a spatially variant map with the same size as the source image.
We totally generated four kinds of $\bm{M}$s as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:sigma_train_test}.
The first (Fig.~\ref{fig:sigma_train_test} (a)) is used for generating noisy images of training data
and the others (Fig.~\ref{fig:sigma_train_test} (b)-(d)) generating three groups of testing data (denotes as
Cases 1-3). Under this noise generation manner, the noises in training data and testing data are
with evident difference, suitable to verify the robustness and generalization capability of competing
methods.
\textbf{Comparson with the State-of-the-art:}
Table~\ref{tab:psnr_noniid} lists the average PSNR results of all competing methods on three groups of testing data.
From Table~\ref{tab:psnr_noniid}, it can be easily observed that: 1) The VDN outperforms
other competing methods in all cases, indicating that VDN is able to handle such
complicated non-i.i.d. noise; 2) VDN surpasses FFDNet about 0.25dB averagely even though
FFDNet depends on the true noise level information instead of automatically inferring noise
distribution as our method;
3) the discriminative methods MLP, DnCNN-B and UDNet seem to evidently overfit on training noise bias;
4) the classical model-driven method CBM3D performs more stably than WNNM and NCSR, possibly due to the latter's
improper i.i.d. Gaussian
noise assumption. Fig.~\ref{fig:butterfly_case2} shows the denoising results of different competing methods on
one typical image in testing set of Case 2, and more denoising results can be found in the supplementary material.
Note that we only display the top four best results from all due to page limitation. It can be seen
that the denoised images by CBM3D and DnCNN-B still contain obvious noise, and FFDNet over-smoothes the image and
loses some edge information, while our proposed VDN removes most of the noise and preserves more details.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.46]{butterfly_case2_part}
\vspace{-3mm}
\caption{\small{Image denoising results of a typical test image in Case 2. (a) Noisy image, (b) Groundtruth,
(c) CBM3D (24.63dB), (d) DnCNN-B (27.83dB), (e) FFDNet (28.06dB), (f) VDN (28.32dB).}}
\label{fig:butterfly_case2}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{\small{The PSNR(dB) results of all competing methods on AWGN noise cases of three
test datasets.}}\tiny\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{@{}C{1.1cm}@{}|@{}C{1.1cm}@{}|@{}C{1.1cm}@{}@{}C{1.1cm}@{}@{}C{1.1cm}@{}
@{}C{1.0cm}@{}@{}C{1.0cm}@{}@{}C{1.5cm}@{}@{}C{1.3cm}@{}@{}C{1.3cm}@{}@{}C{1.2cm}@{}@{}C{1.2cm}@{}}
\Xhline{0.8pt}
\multirow{2}*{Sigma}&\multirow{2}*{Datasets} & \multicolumn{8}{c}{Methods} \\
\Xcline{3-12}{0.4pt}
& & CBM3D &WNNM &NCSR &MLP &DnCNN-B &MemNet &FFDNet &$\text{FFDNet}_e$ &UDNet &VDN \\
\Xhline{0.4pt}
\multirow{3}*{$\sigma=15$} & Set5
&33.42 &32.92 &32.57 &- &34.04 &34.18 &34.30 &\textit{34.31} &34.19 &\textbf{34.34} \\
\Xcline{2-12}{0.4pt}
& LIVE1 &32.85 &31.70 &31.46 &- & 33.72 &33.84 &\textbf{33.96} &\textbf{33.96} &33.74 &33.94 \\
\Xcline{2-12}{0.4pt}
& BSD68 &32.67 &31.27 &30.84 &- &\textit{33.87} &33.76 &33.85 &33.68 &33.76 &\textbf{33.90} \\
\Xhline{0.4pt}
\multirow{3}*{$\sigma=25$} & Set5
&30.92 &30.61 &30.33 &30.55 &31.88 &31.98 &\textit{32.10} &32.09 &31.82 &\textbf{32.24} \\
\Xcline{2-12}{0.4pt}
& LIVE1 &30.05 &29.15 &29.05 &29.16 &31.23 &31.26 &\textit{31.37} &\textit{31.37} &31.09 &\textbf{31.50} \\
\Xcline{2-12}{0.4pt}
& BSD68 &29.83 &28.62 &28.35 &28.93 &\textit{31.22} &31.17 &31.21 &31.20 &31.02 &\textbf{31.35} \\
\Xhline{0.4pt}
\multirow{3}*{$\sigma=50$} & Set5
&28.16 &27.58 &27.20 &27.59 &28.95 &29.10 &\textit{29.25} &\textit{29.25} &28.87 &\textbf{29.47} \\
\Xcline{2-12}{0.4pt}
& LIVE1 &26.98 &26.07 &26.06 &26.12 &27.95 &27.99 &\textit{28.10} &\textit{28.10} &27.82 &\textbf{28.36} \\
\Xcline{2-12}{0.4pt}
& BSD68 &26.81 &25.86 &25.75 &26.01 &27.91 &27.91 &\textit{27.95} &\textit{27.95} &27.76 &\textbf{28.19} \\
\Xhline{0.8pt}
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:psnr_iidgauss}
\end{table}
Even though our VDN is designed based on the non-i.i.d. noise assumption and trained on the non-i.i.d. noise data,
it also performs well on additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) removal task.
Table~\ref{tab:psnr_iidgauss} lists the average PSNR results under three noise levels ($\sigma = 15, 25, 50$) of AWGN.
It is easy to see that our method obtains the best or at least comparable performance with the state-of-the-art
method FFDNet.
Combining Table~\ref{tab:psnr_noniid} and Table~\ref{tab:psnr_iidgauss}, it
should be rational to say that our VDN is robust and able to handle a wide range of noise types, due to its better
noise modeling manner.
\textbf{Noise Variance Prediction:} The \textit{S-Net} plays the role of noise modeling and is
able to infer the noise distribution from the noisy image. To verify the fitting capability of \textit{S-Net}, we
provided the $\bm{M}$ predicted by \textit{S-Net} as the input of FFDNet, and the denoising results are listed
in Table~\ref{tab:psnr_noniid} (denoted as $\text{FFDNet}_v$).
It is obvious that FFDNet under the real noise level and $\text{FFDNet}_v$ almost have the same performance,
indicating that the \textit{S-Net} effectively captures proper noise information.
The predicted noise variance Maps on three groups of testing data are shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:sigma_train_test}~(b2-d2) for easy observation.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering\vspace{-3mm}
\includegraphics[scale=0.48]{SIDD_validataion}
\vspace{-2mm}
\caption{\small{Denoising results on one typical image in the validation set of SIDD. (a) Noisy image,
(b) Simulated ``clean'' image, (c) WNNM(21.80dB), (d) DnCNN (34.48dB), (e) CBDNet (34.84dB),
(d) VDN (35.50dB).}}
\label{fig:SIDD_validation}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{The comparison results of different methods on SIDD benchmark and validation dataset.}
\centering\vspace{-2mm}
\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{@{}C{1.5cm}@{}|@{}C{1.4cm}@{}@{}C{1.4cm}@{}@{}C{1.1cm}@{}@{}C{1.7cm}@{}@{}C{1.4cm}@{}@{}C{1.1cm}@{}|@{}C{1.7cm}@{}@{}C{1.5cm}@{}@{}C{1.1cm}@{}}
\Xhline{0.8pt}
Datasets & \multicolumn{6}{c|}{SIDD Benchmark} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{SIDD Validation} \\
\Xhline{0.4pt}
Methods & CBM3D & WNNM & MLP & DnCNN-B & CBDNet & VDN & DnCNN-B & CBDNet & VDN \\
\Xhline{0.4pt}
PSNR & 25.65 & 25.78 & 24.71 & 23.66 & 33.28 & \textbf{39.23} & 38.41 &38.68 &\textbf{39.28} \\
\Xhline{0.4pt}
SSIM & 0.685 & 0.809 & 0.641 & 0.583 & 0.868 & \textbf{0.971} &\textbf{0.909} &0.901 &\textbf{0.909} \\
\Xhline{0.8pt}
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:PSNR-SSIM-SIDD}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[!t]
\centering\vspace{-1mm}
\caption{\small{The comparison results of all competing methods on DND benchmark dataset.}}\vspace{-2mm}
\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{@{}C{1.5cm}@{}|@{}C{1.6cm}@{}@{}C{1.5cm}@{}@{}C{1.5cm}@{}@{}C{1.3cm}@{}@{}C{1.5cm}@{}@{}C{1.5cm}@{}
@{}C{1.6cm}@{}@{}C{1.8cm}@{}}
\Xhline{0.8pt}
Methods & CBM3D & WNNM & NCSR & MLP & DnCNN-B & FFDNet & CBDNet & VDN \\
\Xhline{0.4pt}
PSNR &34.51 & 34.67 & 34.05 & 34.23 & 37.90 & 37.61 &38.06 & \textbf{39.38} \\
\Xhline{0.4pt}
SSIM &0.8507 & 0.8646 & 0.8351 & 0.8331 &0.9430 & 0.9415 &0.9421 & \textbf{0.9518} \\
\Xhline{0.8pt}
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:PSNR-DND}
\vspace{-3mm}
\end{table}
\vspace{-4mm}\subsection{Experiments on Real-World Noise}\vspace{-2mm}
In this part, we evaluate the performance of VDN on real blind denoising task, including two banchmark
datasets: DND~\cite{plotz2017benchmarking} and SIDD~\cite{Abdelhamed_2018_CVPR}. DND consists of 50
high-resolution images with realistic noise from 50 scenes taken by 4 consumer cameras.
However, it does not provide any other additional noisy and clean image pairs to train the network.
SIDD~\cite{Abdelhamed_2018_CVPR} is another real-world denoising benchmark, containing $30,000$ real noisy images captured
by 5 cameras under 10 scenes. For each noisy image, it estimates one simulated ``clean'' image through
some statistical methods~\cite{Abdelhamed_2018_CVPR}.
About 80$\%$ ($\sim 24,000$ pairs) of this dataset are provided for training purpose, and the rest as held for benchmark.
And 320 image pairs selected from them are packaged together as a medium version of SIDD, called SIDD Medium
Dataset\footnote{\label{foot:SIDD}https://www.eecs.yorku.ca/~kamel/sidd/index.php},
for fast training of a denoiser.
We employed this medium vesion dataset to train a real-world image denoiser, and test the performance on the two benchmarks.
Table~\ref{tab:PSNR-SSIM-SIDD} lists PSNR results of different methods on
SIDD benchmark\footnote{We employed the function 'compare\_ssim' in scikit-image library to calculate
the SSIM value, which is a little difference with the SIDD official results}.
Note that we only list the results of the competing methods that are available
on the official benchmark website\footref{foot:SIDD}.
It is evident that VDN outperforms other methods.
However, note that neither DnCNN-B nor CBDNet performs well, possibly because they were trained
on the other datasets, whose noise type is different from SIDD. For fair comparison, we retrained DnCNN-B and CBDNet
based on the SIDD dataset. The performance on the SIDD validation
set is also listed in Table~\ref{tab:PSNR-SSIM-SIDD}. Under same training conditions, VDN still outperforms DnCNN-B 0.87 PSNR
and CBDNet 0.60dB PSNR, indicating the effectiveness and significance of our non-i.i.d. noise modeling manner.
For easy visualization, on one typical denoising example, results of the best four competing methods are displayed
in Fig.~\ref{fig:SIDD_validation}
Table~\ref{tab:PSNR-DND} lists the performance of all competing methods
on the DND benchmark\footnote{https://noise.visinf.tu-darmstadt.de/}.
From the table, it is easy to be seen that our proposed VDN surpasses all the competing methods.
It is worth noting that CBDNet has the same optimized network with us, containing a \textit{S-Net} designed
for estimating the noise distribution and a \textit{D-Net} for denoising. The superiority of VDN compared
with CBDNet mainly benefits from the deep variational inference optimization.
For easy visualization, on one typical denoising example, results of the best four competing methods are displayed
in Fig.~\ref{fig:SIDD_validation}. Obviously, WNNM is ubable to remove the complex real noise, maybe because
the low-rankness prior is insufficient to describe all the image information and the IID Gaussian noise
assumption is in conflict with the real noise. With the powerful feature extraction ability of CNN, DnCNN and
CBDNet obtain much better denoising results than WNNM, but still with a little noise.
However, the denoising result of
our proposed VDN has almost no noise and is very close to the groundtruth.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:sigmamap_benchmark}, we displayed the noise variance map predicted by \textit{S-Net} on the two real
benchmarks. The variance maps had been enlarged several times for easy visualization. It is easy to see that the
predicted noise variance map relates to the image content,
which is consistent with the well-known signal-depend
property of real noise to some extent.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering\vspace{-1mm}
\includegraphics[scale=0.51]{sigmaMap_benchmark}
\vspace{-2mm}
\caption{\small{The noise variance map predicted by our proposed VDN on SIDD and DND benchmarks. (a1-a3): The noisy image, real noise
($|\bm{y}-\bm{x}|$) and noise variance map of one typical image of SIDD validation dataset. (b1-b2): The noisy image and predicted
noise variance map of one typical image of DND dataset.}}
\label{fig:sigmamap_benchmark}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[t]
\parbox[b]{.55\textwidth}{
\raggedright
\caption{\scriptsize Performance of VDN under different $\varepsilon^2_0$ values on SIDD validation
dataset ($p=7$).} \label{tab:eps_comparison}
\scriptsize \vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{C{0.75cm}|C{0.65cm}C{0.65cm}C{0.65cm}C{0.65cm}C{0.65cm}C{0.75cm}}
\Xhline{0.8pt}
$\varepsilon_0^2$ &1e-4 &1e-5 &1e-6 &1e-7 &1e-8 &MSE \\
\Xhline{0.4pt}
PSNR &38.89 &39.20 &\textbf{39.28} &39.05 &39.03 &39.01 \\
\Xhline{0.4pt}
SSIM &0.9046 &0.9079 &\textbf{0.9086} &0.9064 &0.9063 &0.9061 \\
\Xhline{0.8pt}
\end{tabular}} \hspace{0.2cm}
\parbox[b]{.43\textwidth}{
\raggedleft
\caption{\scriptsize Performance of VDN under different $p$ values on SIDD validation
dataset ($\varepsilon_0^2=1e\text{-}6$).} \label{tab:hyper_p}
\scriptsize \vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{C{0.7cm}|C{0.55cm}C{0.55cm}C{0.55cm}C{0.55cm}C{0.55cm}}
\Xhline{0.8pt}
$p$ &5 &7 &11 &15 &19 \\
\Xhline{0.4pt}
PSNR &39.26 &\textbf{39.28} &39.26 &39.24 &39.24 \\
\Xhline{0.4pt}
SSIM &\textbf{0.9089} &0.9086 &0.9086 &0.9079 &0.9079 \\
\Xhline{0.8pt}
\end{tabular}}
\vspace{-3mm}
\end{table}
\vspace{-1mm}\subsection{Hyper-parameters Analysis}\vspace{-1mm}
The hyper-parameter $\varepsilon_0$ in Eq.~\eqref{Eq:prior-z} determines how much does the desired latent clean
image $\bm{z}$ depend on the simulated groundtruth $\bm{x}$. As discussed in Section~\ref{sec:discussion}, the
negative variational lower bound degenerates into MSE loss when $\varepsilon_0$ is setted as an extremely small
value close to 0. The performance of VDN under different $\varepsilon_0$ values on the SIDD validation dataset
is listed in Table~\ref{tab:eps_comparison}. For explicit comparison, we also directly trained the \textit{D-Net}
under MSE loss as baseline. From Table~\ref{tab:eps_comparison}, we can see that: 1) when $\varepsilon_0$ is too
large, the proposed VDN obtains relatively worse results since the prior constraint on $\bm{z}$ by simulated
groundtruth $\bm{x}$ becomes weak; 2) with $\varepsilon_0$ decreasing, the performance of VDN tends to be similar
with MSE loss as analysised in theory; 3) the results of VDN surpasses MSE loss about 0.3 dB PSNR
when $\varepsilon_0^2=1e\text{-}6$, which verifies the importantance of noise modeling in our method. Therefore,
we suggest that the $\varepsilon_0^2$ is set as $1e\text{-}5$ or $1e\text{-}6$ in the real-world denoising task.
In Eq.~\eqref{Eq:prior-sigma}, we introduced a conjugate inverse gamma distribution as prior for $\bm{\sigma}^2$.
The mode of this inverse gamma distribution $\xi_i$ provides a rational approximate evaluation for $\sigma_i^2$,
which is a local estimation in a $p \times p$ window centered at the $i^{th}$ pixel. We compared the performance
of VDN under different $p$ values on the SIDD validation dataset in Table~\ref{tab:hyper_p}. Empirically, VDN
performs consistently well for the hyper-parameter $p$.
\vspace{-2mm}\section{Conclusion}\vspace{-2mm}
We have proposed a new variational inference algorithm, namely varitional denoising network (VDN),
for blind image denoising. The main idea is to learn an approximate posterior to the true posterior
with the latent variables (including clean image and noise variances) conditioned on the input noisy image.
Using this variational posterior expression, both tasks of blind image denoising and noise estimation can
be naturally attained in a unique Bayesian framework. The proposed VDN is a generative method, which can easily
estimate the noise distribution from the input data. Comprehensive experiments have demonstrated the superiority
of VDN to previous works on blind image denoising. Our method can also facilitate the study of other low-level
vision tasks, such as super-resolution and deblurring. Specifically, the fidelity term in these tasks can be
more faithfully set under the estimated non-i.i.d. noise distribution by VDN, instead of the traditional
i.i.d. Gaussian noise assumption.
\vspace{1mm}
\noindent\textbf{Acknowledgements}:This research was supported by National Key R\&D Program of China (2018YFB1004300), the China NSFC project
under contract 61661166011, 11690011, 61603292, 61721002 and U1811461, and Kong Kong RGC General Research Fund
(PolyU 152216/18E).
|
\section{introduction}\label{sec:intro}
Soon after the telescope was discovered, it was realized that atmospheric turbulence poses a major hindrance to the performance of the ground-based telescopes. The effects of atmospheric turbulence on astronomical observations was investigated by \cite{fri65,Fried66} by relating the statistics of wave distortion to optical resolution. The extensive research on the effect of atmospheric studies shows that the imaging through turbulence is limited by atmospheric seeing $\lambda/r_0$, irrespective of optical system resolution $\lambda/D$, where $r_0$ is Fried parameter and $D$ is the aperture diameter.
The turbulence induced wave-front distortions are often spread over different spatial scales. The study by \cite{noll76} expressed these distortions using Zernike polynomials representing varying degree of aberrations. These polynomials are widely used to evaluate optical system performance. The same was used by \cite{noll76} to estimate the effect of atmospheric turbulence on wave-front. From these investigations, it became clear that the effect of wave-front distortions scale with the size of the system aperture. Larger the telescope, stronger the deleterious effect of the higher-order distortions. The image motion, being the lowest order aberration, is primarily caused by the global tilt in the wave-front -sometime also called the angle of arrival fluctuations. The contribution of the lowest order distortions is about 87\% of the wave-front phase variance (\citealt{fri65, dainty98}). By eliminating the image motion using a real-time tip-tilt system, the image resolution can be significantly improved -at least for small aperture diameters.
The optical wave-front correction with adaptive optics (AO) system was first used by the US Navy for defence purpose (\citealt{greenwood77}). Its enormous potential was recognized in the field of medical and astronomical use. One of the early realizations of astronomical AO systems, the \emph{COME-ON} prototype system, was on Observatoire de Haute-Provence (\citealt{rousset90}). Modern telescopes equipped with AO are highly productive and serving the astronomical community better.
The design and development of an AO system should consider the atmospheric characteristics of the telescopic site. Apart from telescope size, the Fried parameter(\citealt{fri66}), isoplanatic angle (\citealt{hubbard79}) and coherence time (\citealt{davis96,kel07}) are the key parameters that can guide the design of AO system. The Fried parameter determines the minimum spatial sampling of the wave-front for sensing and correction. The coherence time helps to determine the optimal loop frequency for close loop AO operation. For high-speed operation, the target star should have enough photons to adequately sample the wave-front -both temporally and spatially. This limits the operation of natural guide star AO systems to a small number of target stars that are relatively brighter (\citealt{wizinowich2000}). Therefore, to increase the overall sky coverage and improve the effective AO correction over large angular range, a single or multiple artificial laser guide stars are often deployed (\citealt{max97}).
The knowledge of isoplanatic angle is essential in natural guide star systems. In the case of fainter science target, the AO system uses the nearby bright target as a guide star, preferably within an isoplanatic angle. The proximity of the science target to the guide star defines the active correction of the wave-front. Typically, this parameter will range from 2$^{\prime\prime}$-6$^{\prime\prime}$(\citealt{eaton85,sarazin02}).
Conventionally, AO systems initially correct the slope (global tilt with large amplitude) of the wave-front before they correct high-order distortions (high spatial frequency terms with smaller amplitudes). In the former case, a rapidly moving 2-axis steering mirror is used for correcting the wave-front slope variations. Such a system is conceptually simple to develop and cost effective. The layout of a natural guide star tip-tilt correction system is shown in Figure \ref{fig:AOLayout}. This system has a tip-tilt stage with a mirror mounted on it. In response to changing conditions, the tip-tilt controller constantly steers the actuators to keep stellar beam locked to a fixed reference position in the image plane. A number of tip-tilt systems have been developed in the past (\citealt{racine89, glindemann1997charm}). A tip-tilt system at Calar Alto 3.5~m telescope, e.g., has shown image motion reduction from $\sim$ $\pm$0.4$^{\prime\prime}$ to $\sim$ 0.03$^{\prime\prime}$ with 30-100~Hz loop frequency (\citealt{glindemann1997charm}). This alone could yield a significant improvement in image resolution. A proper exposure time of a tip-tilt sensor is crucial to optimize the performance of the instrument (\citealt{mar87}). For example, \cite{glindemann97} has shown that to track/correct an image motion with 5-10 Hz bandwidth, a loop frequency of 50 -100 Hz is required. \cite{close94} have developed a Cassegrain secondary tip-tilt AO. They have reported three-fold image motion reduction at 72~Hz loop frequency. Furthermore, \cite{golimowski92} have used image motion compensation system for high resolution stellar coronography. The instrument is reported to have achieved a resolution gain by a factor of 2.2. It enabled the observations of a two magnitudes fainter objects than what was achieved without the image stabilization.
The Indian Institute of Astrophysics has initiated a long-term project to develop AO systems for its observatory telescopes. We plan to achieve this in three phases: first, estimating the turbulence parameters at the telescope site, second, the development of tip-tilt image motion compensation system and third, the design and development of higher order AO system. Atmospheric turbulence parameters, namely, the Fried parameter, isokinetic angle and coherence time have been measured in the initial phase (\citealt{VSReddy2019}). In this paper we discuss the design and development of a tip-tilt system for 1.3~m telescope at Vainu Bappu Observatory at Kavalur. From here on the paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{sec:develop} we present the details of opto-mechanical design of the instrument followed by the development of control software and tip-tilt calibration methodology. Laboratory tests and characterization of the instrument are discussed in Section \ref{sec:labtest}. The on-sky performance of the instrument is described in Section \ref{sec:onsky}. Finally, in Section \ref{sec:discuss}, we summarized our results.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=9.5cm]{ms2019-0208fig1.eps}
\caption{ \label{fig:AOLayout} Conceptual layout of a natural guide star tip-tilt correction system. The telescope primary mirror collects the light from a target field. The light beam is directed to tip-tilt instrument. The light is divided between the sensing arm and the imaging arm of the instrument. The image motion is corrected in common path where the tip-tilt stage is placed. The corrected wave-front can be directed to imaging camera or a science instrument.}
\end{figure}
\section{Opto-mechanical design}\label{sec:develop}
The tip-tilt system was designed for 1.3 m telescope, Vainu Bappu Observatory located at $78^\circ 50^\prime E$ and $12^\circ 34^\prime N$. The telescope was commissioned in the year 2014. It is a Ritchey-Chretien model telescope with primary and secondary being hyperbolic mirrors. During the routine observations telescope resolution is seeing-limited. A tip-tilt instrument followed by a higher order AO system is envisioned to transform the seeing-limited resolution of the telescope to near diffraction limited case.
\subsection{Opto-mechanical design}
An optical system of the instrument was designed in ZEMAX ray tracing software. Several design parameters, such as effective focal length, overall weight and dimensions of the instrument were considered. The pixel scale at telescope Cassegrain focus is 0.26$^{\prime\prime}$/pixel (pixel size = 13 $\mu$m ) while the diffraction limited resolution is 0.106$^{\prime\prime}$ at 630 nm wavelength. In the optical design of the instrument, the pixel scale was reduced to half of the diffraction limited resolution. This improved the sensitivity of the telescope to measure the image motion. The instrument weighs $\approx$ 28~kg and has dimensions $120\times60\times30$ cm$^{3}$. It was installed on the West port of the telescope as shown in the top panel of Figure~2. A solid model designed in $\it AutoCAD$ is shown in bottom panel of Figure~2. Some key specifications of the telescope and the tip-tilt instrument are listed in Table~\ref{tab:Telescope}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=11.5cm]{ms2019-0208fig2.eps}
\caption{ \label{fig:instrumentMech} The tip-tilt instrument mounted on the West port of Cassegrain focus of 1.3 m JCB telescope at VBO (top). A CAD model showing the mechanical layout and system components (bottom).}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\bc
\centering
\caption{Key specifications of tip-tilt instrument. Telescope and instrument layout is shown in Figure \ref{fig:AOLayout}. F/$_{\#}$: F-ratio, PS: Pixel Scale.}
\label{tab:Telescope}
\begin{tabular}{lccr}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Property & Value \\
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Wavelength range& 480-700 nm\\
wave-front sense plane FOV2 & 40$^{\prime\prime}$\\
Image plane FOV1 & 1$^{\prime}$\\
Telescope focus F/$_{\#}$, PS & 8, 0.26$^{\prime\prime}$\\
Sensor camera F/$_{\#}$, PS & 15.7, 0.06$^{\prime\prime}$\\
Imaging camera F/$_{\#}$, PS & 22.4, 0.08$^{\prime\prime}$\\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline
\end{tabular}
\ec
\end{table}
\subsection{Sub-components of the instrument}
A brief description of essential sub-components of tip-tilt instrument is as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\bullet$] \textbf{Tip-tilt stage}: We used a fast steering tip-tilt stage from \textit{Physik Instrumente}\footnote{https://www.physikinstrumente.com/} (Model: S-330). It is a Piezo-based actuator system with two orthogonal axis. Each of the axis has two actuators that work on the opposite polarity of an applied voltage. These axis are able to deflect the light beam with 0.5 $\mu$rad resolution over a 10~mrad tilt angle. The tip-tilt stage has a one-inch diameter platform to mount a mirror that steers the light beam projected on to it. The stage is driven by \textit{Physik Instrumente} E-517 control system that has proportional, integral and differential (PID) internal voltage controller to provide a position accuracy of 0.5 $\mu$rad in a close-loop operation.
\item[$\bullet$] \textbf{Sensing camera}: The performance of the tip-tilt instrument depends on its ability to sense the image motion and apply the necessary correction. The sensing camera should be able to operate at high frame rate to record the random drift in the stellar image. We used \textit{Andor Neo-sCMOS} 2560$\times$2160 pixel, high-speed camera\footnote{https://andor.oxinst.com}. For exposure time of 1 ms and frame size of $128\times128$ pixels, we could able to achieve frame rate of $\sim$\ 300 using control software developed on LabView platform. With 6.5 $\mu$m pixel size and the magnification achieved by the relay optics, the sensing camera is able to sample the sky with 0.06$^{\prime\prime}$/pixel.
\item[$\bullet$] \textbf{Imaging camera}: We used \textit{Princeton Instruments} ProEm eXcelon ($1024\times1024$, pixel size = $13 \mu$m) EMCCD\footnote{https://www.princetoninstruments.com/} for tilt corrected observations. The CCD is used in continuous exposure mode with simultaneous read out of the data. This is a frame transfer operation. In this mode, the data in active area is vertically shifted to a masked area. This operation takes few microseconds (0.8 $\mu$sec) and enables the active area to be available for next exposure. The full frame of the CCD cover $\approx 1^{\prime} \times 1^{\prime}$ on-sky field of view (FoV) with plate scale of $0.08^{\prime\prime}$/pixel.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Estimation of image motion}
The sensing camera is operated in high-speed mode ($\sim$\ 300 fps) to acquire short exposure images. These images were used to estimate the image motion using a centroid tracking method (\citealt{close94,golimowski92}). The noise in the images affects the accuracy of centroid tracking. The images were bias subtracted. Although the magnitude of the dark current itself is negligible, there is considerable bias counts ($\sim$100 counts at 30 K), which contributes error to the centroid estimation. Thus this `dark' subtraction (which includes bias) found to be was essential. The master dark is obtained by taking the median of the dark frames before each experiment.
The centroid estimation should be faster to minimize the time delay between the sensing of the motion and the correction. For this experiment, we have chosen an intensity thresholding centroid technique. In this method, a threshold slightly above the pixel noise level is applied to the image. The method minimizes the noise by assigning zero counts to pixels below the threshold. The resultant image centroid is measured using the weighted average of the intensities as shown in the Equation \ref{eq:eq1}.
To measure the improvement in tilt corrected image motion, the root mean square (rms) of the residual centroid motion is estimated using Equation \ref{eq:eq2}:
\begin{center}
\begin{eqnarray}
X_c &=& \frac{\sum x_i I_i }{ \sum I_i}, Y_c = \frac{\sum y_i I_i }{ \sum I_i}, \label {eq:eq1} \\
\sigma_x &=& \sqrt[]{\frac{\sum ({X_c-\bar {X_c}})^2 }{n}}, \sigma_y = \sqrt[]{\frac{\sum ({Y_c-\bar {Y_c}})^2 }{n}} \label{eq:eq2}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{center}
where $X_c$, $Y_c$ are the estimated centroid of the image, $I_{i,j}$ are pixel intensities, $x_{i,j}$, $y_{i,j}$ are pixel coordinates, $\bar {X_c}$, $\bar {Y_c}$ are mean centroids and $\sigma_x$, $\sigma_y$ are associated standard deviations.
\subsection{Power spectral density}
The power spectral density (PSD) is the measure of energy distributed over a frequency range when the measurements are made within a finite time window (\citealt{welch67}). In this paper, the PSD of the centroids of tilt uncorrected and corrected images was measured. The comparison between the PSD help in determining the correction bandwidth of the tip-tilt instrument. The correction bandwidth is defined as the least frequency at which the ratio of the PSD of the uncorrected and corrected data sets falls to unity, i.e., 0~dB.
\begin{equation}
\widehat{x}(f)=\frac{1}{2\pi\sqrt{T}}\int_{0}^{T} e^{-2{\pi}ift}x(t)dt
\label {eq:eq3}\\
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
S(f)=|\widehat{x}(f)|^2
\label {eq:eq4}\\
\end{equation}
The power spectral density $S(f)$ over limited time interval $[0,T]$ of centroid data $x(t)$ is defined in Equation \ref{eq:eq3},\ref{eq:eq4}. Where, $\widehat{x}(f)$ is the Fourier transform of centroid data with temporal frequency $f$.
\subsection{Control Software}
A control software with graphical user interface (GUI) is developed using National Instrument's LabVIEW platform\footnote{http://www.ni.com/} to operate the instrument. The software enables the interoperability between the sensing camera and the tip-tilt stage. The program flow of the control software is shown in the Figure \ref{Fig:flowChart}. As shown in the flowchart, during the initialization step, the connectivity of the tip-tilt stage and the camera is checked. Subsequently, the exposure time, the number of frames to obtain are set, following which the tip-tilt actuators are initialized. The program has one master loop and one slave loop where the former independently acquires the image frames, and the later processes them in sequence to estimate the centroid. The independence of the master loop from its slave improves the loop frequency of the system. The tip-tilt stage corrects for each of the centroid shifts in real time to compensate for the image motion. There is a time delay of $\approx$~0.8 ms, after acquiring the image and the tip-tilt mirror reaching its commanded position. The software has option to save the image and centroid data. For optimal performance of the instrument in closed loop, a PID controller was implemented in software.
\begin{equation}
\Delta c(t)=K_{p}e(t)+K_{d}\frac{de(t)}{dt}+K_{i}\int_{0}^{t^{\prime}} e(t^{\prime})dt
\label {eq:eq4_1}\\
\end{equation}
In the above equation, $K_{p}$, $K_{d}$ and $K_{i}$ are proportional, derivative and integral gains and $e(t)$ is the difference of two consecutive centroid shifts, $\Delta c(t)$ is the centroid shift estimated using the PID control. The controller gains are calculated using trial and error method by monitoring the residual image centroid motion. The estimated values for $K_{p}$, $K_{d}^{\prime}$ and $K_{i}^{\prime}$ are 4E-1, 2.5E-1, 2.3E-3 respectively. Here, $K_{d}^{\prime}$ and $K_{i}^{\prime}$ are $K_{d}*T$ and $K_{i}/T$, where $T$ is time interval between two consecutive centroids. The $\Delta c(t)$ is multiplied by voltage required to cause a pixel shift.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[
>=latex',
auto
]
\node [intg] (kp) {Initialize the system (Start the camera, tip-tilt controller and set all the essential system parameters)};
\node [intg] (ki2) [node distance=2.3 cm ,below of = kp] {Camera: Obtain image frame};
\node [intg] (ki3) [node distance=1.8 cm ,below of = ki2] {Process Image (Dark subtraction)};
\node [intg] (ki4) [node distance=1.8 cm,below of=ki3] {Find image centroid (Gravity centroid on intensity threshold)};
\node [decision] (ki5) [node distance=2.5 cm,below of=ki4] {Closed/Open loop?};
\node [intg] (ki6) [node distance=2.5 cm,below of=ki5] {Correct for tilts};
\node [intg] (ki7) [node distance=1.5 cm,below of=ki6] {Tilt corrected (index the image and centroid data)};
\node [decision] (ki8) [node distance=2.0 cm,below of=ki7] {Stop?};
\node [intg] (ki9) [node distance=2.2 cm,below of=ki8] {Stop acquisition, correction and save data (images and centroid)};
\node [intg] (ki10) [node distance=1.5 cm,below of=ki9] {End};
\draw[->] (kp) -- (ki2);
\draw[->] (ki2) -- (ki3);
\draw[->] ($(ki2.south)+(-0.0,-0.3)$) -- ($(ki2.west)+(-1.5,-0.8)$) |- node [near start] {Master loop} (ki2);
\draw[->] (ki3) -- (ki4);
\draw[->] (ki4) -- (ki5);
\draw[->] (ki5.west) -- ($(ki5.west)+(-2.5,0.0)$) |- node [near start] {Open loop} (ki3);
\draw[->] (ki5.south) -- node [near start] {Closed loop} (ki6);
\draw[->] (ki5) -- (ki6);
\draw[->] (ki6) -- (ki7);
\draw[->] (ki7) -- (ki8);
\draw[->] (ki8.west) -- ($(ki8.west)+(-4.5,0.0)$) |- node [near start] {No, Slave loop} (ki3);
\draw[->] (ki8.south) -- node [near start] {Yes} (ki9);
\draw[->] (ki8) -- (ki9);
\draw[->] (ki9) -- (ki10);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Flow chart of control software. \label{Fig:flowChart}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Instrument calibration}
The calibration is required to accurately map the image wandering on the CCD to the input control voltage that drives the piezo actuators to compensate the image movement across the detector plane. This mapping is unique for each instrument as the linear beam-throw by steering mirror depends on the specific layout of the optical components.
The axis of the stage have been centred around its maximum dynamic range i.e. at five mrad. The layout of laboratory setup is shown in the Figure \ref{fig:Labsetup}. A point source is generated by spatially filtering the laser beam as shown in the figure. The spatial filter consists of a microscope objective and a Pinhole of 10 $\mu$m. For performance analysis, the centroid motion of the point source image on sensing camera has been observed.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=4.5cm]{ms2019-0208fig4.eps}
\caption{ \label{fig:Labsetup} Experiment layout for the tip-tilt calibration in the lab. The tip-tilt stage TT1 was used to induce the image motion while TT2 was used to correct it. The CCD camera was used for recording the movement of the laser spot.}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Axis alignment}
Ideally, the movement of two actuator axis should be perfectly aligned with the pixel rows (horizontal) and columns (vertical) of the CCD. Initially, the axis of the tip-tilt stage were coarsely aligned by observing the spot traces in the live camera images. After making the fine adjustments, a residual deviation in alignment was measured by taking multiple images of the source on CCD while the beam was progressively steered (horizontally or vertically) in a sequence of voltage steps applied to individual actuators, one at a time. Furthermore, to minimize the alignment error, a rotation matrix (\citealt{russell71}) as shown in Equation \ref{eq:matrix} was generated from the obtained data. To compensate the small offset in the alignment the shift in the image motion is multiplied with this matrix before applying the corrections in real-time.
\begin{equation}
\begin{bmatrix}
x^{\prime}\\
y^{\prime}\\
\end{bmatrix}
=
\begin{bmatrix}
a&b\\
c&d\\
\end{bmatrix}
*
\begin{bmatrix}
x\\
y\\
\end{bmatrix}
\label {eq:matrix}\\
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
X^{\prime}=AX
\label {eq:rotation}\\
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
V=KX^{\prime}
\label {eq:voltage}\\
\end{equation}
Equation \ref{eq:rotation} is the relation between the rotation matrix $A$ and the centroid shifts. In the Equation \ref{eq:matrix}, $x$ and $y$ are image centroid shift, $x^{\prime}$ and $y^{\prime}$ are centroid shift after rotation along H-axis and V-axis. In our experiment, the measured elements of the rotation matrix ($A$) were: $a=1.003$,$b=0.0013$, $c=0.0015$ and $d=0.9996$. These are typical values for a closely aligned system. In Equation \ref{eq:voltage}, $V$ is voltage applied to tip-tilt stage and $K$ is the voltage per unit shift in the centroid.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=9.5cm]{ms2019-0208fig5.eps}
\caption{ \label{fig:AxisCalibration} Calibration curves for two-axis tip-tilt stage. The horizontal (H-axis), vertical (V-axis) have been moved with equal step size of 1~V (top). In both cases, the rms deviation from the linear fit is $\sim$ 0.3~$\mu$m (bottom).}
\end{figure}
The response of each actuator is tested independently by tilting it over a range of 3~mrad to 8~mrad with an input voltage step size of 1V. The image centroids for each input step voltage is recorded. The mean centroid shift is estimated by measuring the average difference between two consecutive centroids over the earlier mentioned tilt range. Figure \ref{fig:AxisCalibration} (top panel) shows the image centroid shift on the camera as a function of input voltage. The error in actuator movement is defined as the difference between two consecutive centroids with respect to the mean centroid shift. It is plotted in the Figure \ref{fig:AxisCalibration} (bottom panel). The estimated \emph{rms} error in the actuator movement is less than 0.3 $\mu$m. Results of tip-tilt stage calibration are summarized in Table~\ref{tab:ttcalib}.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Tip-tilt stage axis calibration}
\label{tab:ttcalib}
\begin{tabular}{lccr}
\hline
Parameter & Value\\
\hline
Number of samples & 51\\
Exposure time per sample & 3 ms\\
Tip-Tilt range & 3-8 mrad \\
Voltage range & 24-78 V\\
Voltage step size & $\sim$ 1V\\
Linear image shift (total) & $\sim$650 $\mu$m\\
Mean centroid shift & $\sim$ 12 $\mu$m\\
rms error in movement & $\sim$ 0.3$\mu$m\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Laboratory testing of the instrument}\label{sec:labtest}
Initially, a prototype of the instrument was set up in the laboratory. Centroid data of short exposure images of the star was obtained a priory from the telescope. This data was then used as input to one of the steering mirrors to simulate the image motion in the lab studies. For characterization of the instrument, the residual image centroid motion and the PSD of tilt uncorrected and corrected images were analysed.
The layout of the laboratory setup is shown in Figure \ref{fig:Labsetup}. In this study we used two tip-tilt stages -one to induce the image motion (Piezosystems jena\footnote{$https://www.piezosystem.com/$}, Model Number: PSH x/2); and the other to correct it. The former has the frequency response up to 3~kHz, 0.02 $\mu$rad resolution and $\pm$4 mrad dynamic range.
The centroid data (in pixels) need to be converted to the voltages which will be applied to the tip-tilt stage 1 (TT1). For this purpose, the per-pixel voltage (0.21 V for H-axis and 0.23 V for V-axis) is estimated for the TT1 system from the calibration curves. The voltages were applied to TT1 to induce the image motion at the frequency of 33 Hz. This is to maintain at least 10 times correction bandwidth (\citealt{har98}) of the system. The induced image motion is tracked using the centroid estimations.
The image motion data was recorded both with and without the tip-tilt correction. The Figure \ref{fig:LabCentroid} shows the image centroid motion in the laboratory. The \emph{rms} of corrected image motion is reduced by a factor of $\sim$ 12.8 in horizontal axis and $\sim$ 9.8 in vertical axis, compared to the uncorrected.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=7.5cm]{ms2019-0208fig6.eps}
\caption{ \label{fig:LabCentroid} Image centroid motion in arcsec ($^{\prime\prime}$) along horizontal (top panel) and vertical (bottom panel) axis of the camera. The plot has three sets of data i.e. the induced image motion, the uncorrected image motion and the corrected residual image motion. The induced and the sensed image motion has $\sim$ $96\%$ correlation. The image shift is converted to arc-seconds by multiplying the image shift with pixel scale similar to the telescope (0.06$^{\prime\prime}$).}
\end{figure}
The closed loop correction bandwidth of the system was estimated from the power spectral densities of the image motions for both tilt uncorrected and corrected cases. The observed correction bandwidth (0~dB)is $\sim 25 Hz$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=7.5cm]{ms2019-0208fig7.eps}
\caption{ \label{fig:LabPSD} The power spectral density of centroid data in laboratory. The vertical line signifies the merging of the two plots. This is the 0~dB closed loop correction bandwidth (red line) of the system.}
\end{figure}
\section{On-sky testing of the instrument}\label{sec:onsky}
After successful alignment and calibration, the instrument was mounted on the telescope (see Figure \ref{fig:instrumentMech}). Initial tests were done in March 2018. The on-sky performance of the tip-tilt system is described in terms of the residual \emph{rms} image motion, correction bandwidth, full width half maximum and peak intensity of the image. We are presenting these results after satisfactory performance has been achieved since January 2019.
\subsection{Observations}
The objects of $m_v$ brighter than six have been chosen. These objects were close to the zenith with hour angle of less than one hour. Preferably, targets with more than one object in the field have been chosen. This enables the instrument to sense the bright star with high-speed and apply the correction to the entire field. List of the targets used is given in the Table \ref{tab:Targets}. These targets were observed on different days from March 2019 to May 2019.
For high speed performance, a region of interest (ROI) has been chosen around the target image on sensing camera. This enhanced the frame rate and thus increased the overall loop frequency. The exposure times are chosen from 3 ms to 20 ms. The longer exposure time allows us to observe the relatively fainter targets. This enables us to vary a loop frequency from $\sim$ 290 fps to 47 fps.
Each data set was recorded over 150 seconds. Under poor atmospheric conditions, the binning operation was carried out in the program to enhance the signal to noise ratio. This might have reduced the accuracy in centroid estimation, but overall, it improved the correction performance.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=5.0cm]{ms2019-0208fig8_1.eps}
\includegraphics[height=5.0cm]{ms2019-0208fig8_2.eps}\\
\caption{ \label{fig:ShortExp} Illustration object: HIP57632. The short exposure time (3 ms) image on sensing camera (left). Relatively long exposure time (200 ms) image on the imaging camera. The frame size is $\sim$ $10^{\prime\prime}\times10^{\prime\prime}$.}
\end{figure}
The tilt corrected images were acquired on imaging camera. This camera was given relatively longer exposure time($\sim$200 ms). Because of a set of objects with different magnitude, we chose a fixed exposure time to avoid pixel saturation in case of a brighter object. In Figure \ref{fig:ShortExp}, the short exposure image of sensing camera and the imaging camera were shown.
A total of 1000 images of each target field were acquired on the imaging camera. Every target was observed for tilt uncorrected and corrected images. These images were processed using a Python script. The image frames have been dark subtracted and flat fielded prior to the analysis. The co-added images, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:LongExp}, will give the equivalently long exposure images. Finally, these images were divided by number of obtained frames. This will average the intensity of each frame and minimize the effect of intensity fluctuations on the estimation of the performance.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=13.5cm]{ms2019-0208fig9.eps}
\caption{ \label{fig:LongExp} Illustration: Object HIP57632. The tilt uncorrected (top-left) and the tilt corrected (top-right) co-added images. The psf of the image along the horizontal axis is shown in the bottom panel.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Image centroid, PSD and psf comparison}
The instrument was characterized by measuring the residual image motion. Figure \ref{fig:CentroidMotion} shows the tilt-corrected and uncorrected image centroids recorded consecutively by sensing camera.
The rms value was reduced to $\sim$0.08$^{\prime\prime}$ from $\sim$1.26$^{\prime\prime}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=7.5cm]{ms2019-0208fig10.eps}
\caption{ \label{fig:CentroidMotion} Image centroid motion of HIP57632. The rms image motion has been reduced by a factor of $\sim$ 14 in horizontal axis and $\sim$ 8.9 in vertical axis.}
\end{figure}
The image motion power spectral density is shown in Figure \ref{fig:TelescopePSD}. The correction bandwidth of the system is found to be $\sim$26 Hz, depicted with a vertical line in the figure. The temporal frequencies beyond this limit are uncorrected.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=7.5cm]{ms2019-0208fig11.eps}
\caption{ \label{fig:TelescopePSD} The power spectral density of the image motion for star HIP57632. Vertical dotted line demarcates the close-loop bandwidth of the system.}
\end{figure}
On imaging camera, the psf is expected to be sharper with tip-tilt instrument in operation. The Figure \ref{fig:LongExp} shows the psf of HIP57632. The full width at half maximum (FWHM) of the psf has improved from 2.4$^{\prime\prime}$ to 1.03$^{\prime\prime}$. The improvement in FWHM was calculated as shown in Equation \ref{eq:psf}. This is a $\sim$ 57\% improvement.
\begin{equation}
Improvement(\%)=\frac{FWHM_{uc}-FWHM_{cr}}{FWHM_{uc}}\times100
\label {eq:psf}\\
\end{equation}
Here, $FWHM_{uc}$ is for uncorrected image and $FHWM_{cr}$ is for corrected image.
In the above case, the peak intensity of tilt corrected psf has increased by factor of $\sim$ 2.8. This improves the sensitivity of the instrument towards the observation of a fainter object. The sensitivity was estimated by using the Equation \ref{eq:eq6}. This is equation relates the magnitude difference of a star with peak intensity of the tilt uncorrected and corrected images. It is observed that the sensitivity is improved by a factor of 1.1 in magnitude.
\begin{equation}
\Delta m_{v}=-2.512*log_{10}\Big[\frac{I_{c}}{I_{uc}}\Big]
\label {eq:eq6}\\
\end{equation}
Where, ${I_{c}}/{I_{uc}}$ is the ratio of peak intensities of tilt corrected and uncorrected images, $\Delta m_{v}$ is the improvement in apparent magnitude. Here, we considered, ${I_{c}}/{I_{uc}}$ as ${4.3}/{1.49}$.
\subsection{Effect of loop frequency}
The optimal frame rate is essential for the effective tilt correction of the images in a close-loop operation. This is in confirmation with the fact that the wave-front distortions are caused by the spatial and the temporal disturbances in the atmosphere. The spatial distortions are corrected by compensating for the shift in the image centroid. But the dynamic nature of the atmosphere induces high frequency image motion. To overcome this effect, the time delay between the instant of estimation of the shifts and the instant of the correction applied to the corrector should be kept minimum.
To study the effect of loop frequency on the peak intensity of the tilt-corrected images, we observed HIP57632 with different frame rates. The frame rate was changed by changing the exposure time of the sensing camera from three to 20 ms, yielding loop frequencies of 290 to 47 Hz.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=8.5cm]{ms2019-0208fig12.eps}
\caption{ \label{fig:psfcomp} Comparison of tip-tilt corrected psf of HIP57632 for different loop frequencies. The peak intensity is showing logistic growth with loop frequency.}
\end{figure}
In Figure \ref{fig:psfcomp}, cross section of the psfs with different loop frequency are plotted. The peak intensity of the psf was increased with increase in loop frequency and the result is plotted in Figure \ref{fig:psflf}. In this figure, the peak factor was defined as the ratio of peak intensity of the tilt corrected to that of uncorrected image.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=8.5cm]{ms2019-0208fig13.eps}
\caption{ \label{fig:psflf} Increment in peak factor with loop frequency.}
\end{figure}
We have modeled the effect of loop frequency on peak factor with a function of the form shown in Equation \ref {eq:eq5}.
\begin{equation}
I_{pf}(f)=K_1+K_2*(1-e^{-f_0/f})
\label {eq:eq5}\\
\end{equation}
In the above equation, $f$ is loop frequency, $I_{pf}$ is peak factor and the estimated constants are $K_{1}$, $K_{2}$ and $f_0$ estimated to be $\approx$ 3.2, -2.2 and 52 Hz, respectively. The units of $K_2$ and $K_1$ are similar to $I_{max}$. Arguably, the estimated values of the constants depend on the target intensity and the atmospheric seeing conditions.
In Figure \ref{fig:psdlf}, the power spectral densities for different loop frequencies are shown. We can see that that the correction bandwidth increased to $\sim$ 26 Hz at 290 Hz from $\sim$ 4.8 Hz at 47 Hz loop frequency. On an average, the correction bandwidth is $\sim$ 1/10 of the loop frequency which is in agreement with other studies reported in literature (\citealt{har98}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=9.5cm]{ms2019-0208fig14.eps}
\caption{ \label{fig:psdlf} The PSD (arcsec$^2$Hz$^{-1}$) with respect to correction bandwidth for object HIP57632. The orange and the blue lines are PSD of tilt uncorrected and corrected centroid data. The loop frequency is 168 Hz (left) and 96 Hz (right) for top row, 64 Hz (left) and 47 Hz (right) for bottom row and their correction bandwidths (red line) are in the plot.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Gain in angular resolution}
The tilt corrected images show improvement in angular resolution. The gain in angular resolution is a function of relative sizes of the telescope aperture (D) and the atmospheric coherence diameter $r_{0}$. This relation can be theoretically estimated using the formalism given by \cite{roddier1981v} and is shown in Figure \ref{fig:angain}. The gain is defined as the ratio of equivalent width (\citealt{roddier1981v}) of tilt uncorrected image and corrected images. The observed values of the gain for a set of six targets as listed in Table \ref{tab:Targets} are over plotted on the theoretical curve. $r_0$ is estimated from the equivalent width of the uncorrected images (to get the $D/r_0$ for the observed data). The observed gain has shown a deviation up to 24\% from the theoretical gain.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=7.5cm]{ms2019-0208fig15.eps}
\caption{ \label{fig:angain} Comparison of gain in angular resolution between the theoretical and the observed data. On vertical axis, EW$_{uc}$ and EW$_{c}$ are equivalent widths of tilt uncorrected and corrected image.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Performance of the instrument on faint targets}
We observed a set of seven objects as listed in Table \ref{tab:Targets} (objects 7-13) to validate the increase in sensitivity of the instrument due to image stabilization. Usually, a bright star near faint star is used for sensing the image motions and the same correction is applied to the entire field. If the faint star is close enough, the corrections are similar and thus the sensitivity of the instrument on the faint star increases.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=7.5cm]{ms2019-0208fig16.eps}
\caption{ \label{fig:PSFHIP50583} Surface plot of HIP50583, containing average tilt uncorrected and corrected image. The frame size is $\sim$ $32^{\prime\prime}\times32^{\prime\prime}$.}
\end{figure}
In Figure \ref{fig:PSFHIP50583} the tilt uncorrected and corrected image of HIP50583 is shown. The object has brightness of 2.37 in magnitude with a relatively fainter object with magnitude of 3.47, at an angular separation of 4.63$^{\prime\prime}$. The correction increased the peak intensity by a factor of $\sim$ 2.5 times in brighter object $\sim$ 2.1 times in fainter object. The angular resolution (FWHM) of these objects improved by 52\% and 46\% respectively. Similar to this, several other objects were observed and these results are shown in Figure \ref{fig:twostars} and Table \ref{tab:Targets}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=8.5cm]{ms2019-0208fig17_1.eps}
\includegraphics[height=8.5cm]{ms2019-0208fig17_2.eps}\\
\caption{ \label{fig:twostars} Examples: Tilt uncorrected and corrected images of various targets.}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{List of observed stars with varying angular separation. In the table, $m_v$ is apparent magnitude, $\Delta m_v$ is magnitude different between two objects and 'Sep' is angular separation between the objects in arc-sec. Peak factor is the ratio of tilt corrected and uncorrected image and improvement in resolution ($R$) is similar to Equation \ref{eq:psf}. LF is approximate loop frequency}
\label{tab:Targets}
\begin{tabular}{lcccccccccr}
\hline
Sl.No.&Target&RA&Dec&$m_v$& $\Delta m_v$& Sep(${\prime\prime}$)& LF (fps)& Peak factor& R(\%) \\
\hline
1&HIP57632,$\--$ &11 49 03.5&+14 34 19.4&2.13& $\--$& $\--$&290&2.8,$\--$&57,$\--$ \\
2&HIP54879,$\--$&11 14 14.4& +15 25 46.4&3.35& $\--$& $\--$&290&2.1,$\--$&45,$\--$ \\
3&HIP37279,$\--$&07 39 18.1&+05 13 29.9&0.37& $\--$& $\--$&290&1.8,$\--$&44,$\--$ \\
4&HIP65474,$\--$&13 25 11.5&-11 09 40.7&0.97& $\--$& $\--$&290&1.4,$\--$&32,$\--$ \\
5&HIP67927,$\--$&13 54 41.0&+18 23 51.7&2.68&$\--$& $\--$&290&1.5,$\--$&38,$\--$ \\
6&HIP69673,$\--$&14 15 39.6&+19 10 56.6&-0.05&$\--$& $\--$&290&2.4,$\--$&50,$\--$ \\
7&HIP50583, gam02 Leo&10 19 58 &19 50 29.3&2.37&1.1&4.63&290& 2.5, 2.1&52, 46\\
8&HIP61941, gam Vir B& 12 41 39.6& -01 26 57.7&2.74&0.75&1.52&290&2.4, 2.3&51, 49\\
9&HR4677, HD 106976&12 18 08&-03 57 05.01&5.99&0.7&20.33&64&1.5, 1.3&36, 32\\
10&HR6752, 70 Oph B&18 05 27 & 02 30 0.0&4.03 &2.04&4.91 &98&1.9, 1.7&41,36 \\
11&HR5789, del Ser B&15 34 48.1& 10 32 15.9 &3.79 &1.4 &4.1&98&1.7, 1.5 &32, 33\\
12&HR5984, bet02 Sco&16 05 26.2 & -19 48 19.6& 2.5&2.3&13.64&98&1.8, 1.6&42, 36\\
13&HR5505, eps Boo B& 14 44 59.2 &+27 04 27.2&2.39&2.4&2.58&98&1.8, 1.5&43, 31\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Summary and conclusion}\label{sec:discuss}
A tip-tilt instrument has been developed for the 1.3 m JCB telescope to overcome the image degradation caused by angle of arrival fluctuations. In laboratory, a simulated image motion corresponding the actual data acquired from the telescope was used to characterize the instrument. The on-sky performance of the instrument was analyzed by observing several stars of varying brightness and angular separation. The real-time correction has shown a characteristic improvement in the image quality that is consistent with previously reported studies in the literature. This study has led to the following findings and conclusions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item In laboratory, the rms image motion was reduced by $\sim$12 times and the correction bandwidth was estimated to be a $\sim$ 25 Hz for a loop frequency of 290 Hz.
\item On telescope, the rms image motion was reduced by $\sim$14 times and the correction bandwidth was estimated to be about 0.1 times the loop frequency, where the loop frequency was varied from 47 Hz to 290 Hz (five distinct frequencies in this range).
\item The FWHM of the image reduced from 2.4$^{\prime\prime}$ to 1.03$^{\prime\prime}$. This corresponds to 57\% improvement in the image resolution.
\item The sensitivity of the instrument was found to increased by a factor of 1.1 magnitude (corresponding to the increase in the dynamic range, peak intensity ratio of 2.8).
\item In the case of targets with two close-by stars in the field, the FWHM of the individual psf decreased and the peak brightness increased depending on the magnitudes. For example, in the case of HIP50583 with separation of 4.63$^{\prime\prime}$ and magnitude difference of 1.1, the FWHM of the bright star increased by 52\% and that of the faint star increased by 46\%. The peak brightness of the bright star increased by a factor of $\sim$ 2.5 and that of the faint star increased by a factor of $\sim$ 2.1.
\end{enumerate}
To further improve the image quality to near diffraction limited resolution of the telescope, the work on a higher order AO system is under progress.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We would like to thank Prof. B Raghavendra Prasad for allowing us to use the lab facilities at CREST. We also gratefully acknowledge the help received from Mr Suresh Venkata Narra during the initial testing and Mr Hari Mohan Varsey for preparing with the mechanical design of the instrument. We thank Mr Anbazhagan, the engineer-in-charge, VBO Kavalur, for providing logistics and technical support during the on-sky testing. We also thank the observing staff at VBO, namely, V. Moorthy, G. Selva Kumar, S Venkatesh, Rahul and Naveen for their valuable support during this work.
\bibliographystyle{raa}
|
\section{Introduction}
The Mermin-Wagner theorem implies that two-dimensional (2D) materials cannot exhibit a spontaneously broken symmetry at finite temperatures.\cite{Studio2005} This means that long range magnetic order in 2D can only exist by virtue of magnetic anisotropy. More precisely, the continuous symmetry must be broken by the presence of an easy axis (typically out-of-plane in 2D materials), which breaks the spin rotational symmetry whereas an easy plane (typically the atomic plane of a 2D material) will yield a residual $O(2)$ symmetry that still prohibits (long range) magnetic order at finite temperatures.
In 2017, a monolayer of CrI$_3$ was shown to exhibit ferromagnetic order below 45 K\cite{Huang2017a} and CrI$_3$ thus comprises the first realization of magnetic order in 2D. The search for magnetism in this particular material was inspired by the presence of a strong out-of-plane easy axis (as required by the Mermin-Wagner theorem) in bulk CrI$_3$, which is a van der Waals bonded layered material. Since then, a few other materials have joined the family of 2D magnets. In particular, ferromagnetic order has been observed in Fe$_3$GeTe$_2$ below 130 K,\cite{Fei2018} evidence for room temperature ferromagnetism has been reported in MnSe$_2$\cite{doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.8b00683} and VSe$_2$,\cite{Bonilla2018, Liu2018d} and FePS$_3$ has been shown to exhibit antiferromagnetic order below 118 K.\cite{Lee2016} In all cases, the magnetic order is driven by magnetic anisotropy that originates from spin-orbit interactions and is expected to be large for materials containing heavy elements. For example, CrI$_3$ and Fe$_3$GeTe$_2$ exhibit strong magnetic anisotropy due to the presence of I and Te atoms respectively. On the other hand, MnSe$_2$ and VSe$_2$ are the only 2D materials to date that exhibit magnetic order at room temperature despite the lack of elements heavier than Se. This highlights that magnetic order in 2D materials is determined by a subtle interplay between magnetic anisotropy and exchange interactions and both effects may contribute to sizable critical temperatures. Moreover, Fe$_3$GeTe$_2$, MnSe$_2$ and VSe$_2$ are itinerant ferromagnets and the microsocopic mechanism leading to magnetic order may be somewhat different than the cases of CrI$_3$ and NiPS$_3$, which are insulators. Providing estimates of critical temperatures in 2D materials from a given material composition thus remains a highly challenging problem.
It is not possible to calculate thermodynamic properties (such as critical temperatures) directly from first principles methods using present day techniques and one has to rely on certain approximate schemes to obtain quantitative predictions from theory. For insulators, the Heisenberg model provides an accurate account of the interactions between the localized spins that govern the properties of magnetic materials. The parameters entering the Heisenberg model can be calculated from Density Functional Theory (DFT), which thus constitutes an efficient framework for obtaining “first principles Heisenberg models”. Solving the Heisenberg model is, however, a non-trivial task. In particular, the importance of correlations in 2D implies that standard Weiss mean field theory\cite{Yosida1996} cannot yield faithful predictions and any approximation has to explicitly incorporate correlation. One approach is to calculate the non-interacting spin-wave spectrum (magnons), and then apply a temperature dependent renormalization scheme that take magnon interactions into account.\cite{Yosida1996, Gong2017b, Lado2017, Torelli2019} The magnetization can then be calculated from the (renormalized) spin-wave spectrum as a function of temperature and the critical temperature is obtained as the point of vanishing magnetization. A somewhat orthogonal approach is to neglect quantum effects completely and perform Monte Carlo (MC) simulations of the classical Heisenberg model.\cite{Torelli2019, Akturk2017, Yasuda2005, Kim2019} In contrast to renormalized spin-wave theory, the MC approach includes all correlations in the model, but does not take into account the quantum nature of spins. It has recently been shown that the renormalized spin-wave theory yields qualitatively wrong results in systems with large magnetic anisotropy and MC simulations appear to be the most appropriate choice for extracting critical temperatures from Heisenberg models in 2D. In particular, MC simulations based on a first principles Heisenberg model recently predicted Curie temperatures of 50 K and 24 K for CrI$_3$ and CrBr$_3$ respectively, which is in good agreement with the experimental values of 45 K and 27 K.\cite{Torelli2019c}
CrI$_3$, CrBr$_3$, FePS$_3$, and Fe$_3$GeTe$_2$ are reported to exhibit magnetic order of the Ising type meaning that the monolayers have strong out-of-plane easy-axes and first principles calculations indicate that the same is true for MnSe$_2$.\cite{Torelli2019c} In contrast, anomalous Hall conductivities and hysteresis loops have clearly shown that VSe$_2$ exhibits an easy-plane, which appears to be at odds with the Mermin-Wagner theorem and the magnetic properties of VSe$_2$ is currently debated. In particular, angle-resolved photoemission experiments\cite{Duvjir2018} as well as first principles calculations\cite{Wong2019} have shown that VSe$_2$ exhibits a paramagnetic charge density wave (CDW) at elevated temperatures,\cite{Duvjir2018, Wong2019} and the long range magnetic order reported in Ref. \onlinecite{Bonilla2018} has not yet been reproduced experimentally. In addition, Cr$_2$Ge$_2$Te$_6$20 and NiPS$_3$\cite{Kim2019} have been shown to exhibit easy-plane ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic order respectively in bilayer structures, but both materials lack long range magnetic order in the monolayer limit as expected from the Mermin-Wagner theorem. The magnetic properties of VSe$_2$ are thus strongly complicated by the proximity of the ferromagnetic ground state with a paramagnetic charge density wave and the current understanding of the magnetic properties must be regarded as unresolved. However, from a fundamental point of view it seems hard to reconcile 2D magnetic order with clear experimental signatures of easy plane magnetization.
There is, however, a loophole for the Mermin-Wagner theorem that allow some amount of magnetization in easy-plane 2D magnets. If one considers the limit of infinite easy-plane anisotropy the spins effectively become confined to the atomic plane and the physics is captured by the so-called $XY$ model. The thermodynamic properties are then governed by Kosterlitz-Thouless (KT) physics and the spins exhibit algebraic correlations at all temperature below the KT phase transition. If that is the case there will be no characteristic length scale for correlations and any macroscopic sample will exhibit a finite magnetization due to finite size effects.\cite{Bramwell1994}
In this prospective, we will show how to calculate critical temperatures for 2D magnetic insulators using first principles Heisenberg models and classical Monte Carlo simulations. We then discuss the case of easy-plane magnetism and review the basic results from Kosterlitz-Thouless theory, which allow finite magnetization in macroscopic samples.
\section{The anisotropic Heisenberg model}
The Heisenberg model can be derived as an approximation to the many-body electronic Hamiltonian in a localized basis where only the spin degrees of are retained. In that framework the interactions between localized spins are referred to as direct exchange and arise as a consequence of Coulomb interactions and Pauli exclusion.\cite{Yosida1996} A rather different type of magnetic interactions may be derived by assuming strongly localized spins and include hybridization by second order perturbation theory. This will typically be mediated by non-magnetic ligand atoms and is referred to as superexchange.\cite{Anderson1950, Anderson1959} Remarkably, the superexchange interaction between localized spins has precisely the same form as the direct exchange interaction and can be included in the Heisenberg model by a simple redefinition of the interactions parameters.
A rather general form of the Heisenberg model, which includes magnetic anisotropy can be written as
\begin{align}\label{eq:H}
H=-\frac{1}{2}\sum_{ij\alpha\beta}S_i^\alpha \mathcal{J}_{ij}^{\alpha\beta}S_i^\beta-\sum_{i\alpha} A_i^\alpha (S_i^\alpha)^2,
\end{align}
where $S_i^\alpha$ is the $\alpha$ component of the spin operator for the magnetic atom at site i and $\mathcal{J}_{ij}^{\alpha\beta}$ is a 3x3 interaction matrix that couple spin states at sites $i$ and $j$. The second sum contains single-ion anisotropy constants that determine the energy cost of a global spin rotation. In general the off-diagonal elements of $J_{ij}^{\alpha\beta}$ lead to Kitaev interactions\cite{Xu2018, Banerjee2016} and Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interactions\cite{Heide2009, Koretsune2018, Liu2018} that may give rise to highly intriguing physical properties. However, the off-diagonal components are typically an order of magnitude smaller than the isotropic part\cite{Xu2018} and have marginal influence on the ordering temperatures. In the following we will thus stick to a simplified version where the off-diagonal components of $\mathcal{J}_{ij}^{\alpha\beta}$ is neglected and we assume in-plane isotropy such that $J_{ij}^{xx}=J_{ij}^{yy}$ and $A_i^x=A_i^y$. The Heisenberg model can then be written as
\begin{align}\label{eq:H_iso}
H=&-\frac{\widetilde J_{ij}}{2}\sum_{ij}\mathbf{S}_i\cdot\mathbf{S}_j-\frac{\widetilde J_{ij}^z}{2}\sum_{ij}\Big(2S_i^z S_j^z-S_i^x S_j^x-S_i^y S_j^y\Big)\notag\\
&-\sum_{i\alpha} A_i^\alpha (S_i^\alpha)^2,
\end{align}
where $A_i=A_i^z-A_i^x$, $\widetilde J_ij^z=(\mathcal{J}_{ij}^{zz}-\mathcal{J}_{ij}^{xx})/3$, and $\widetilde{J}_{ij}=Tr[\mathcal{J}_{ij}^{\alpha\beta}]/3$ is the isotropic part of the exchange tensor. Eq. \eqref{eq:H_iso} is then equivalent to Eq. \eqref{eq:H} except for a constant term given by $\sum_iA_i^xS_i(S_i+1)$, where $S_i$ is the maximum eigenvalue of $S_i^z$. In Eq. \eqref{eq:H_iso} we have explicitly split the exchange tensor into an isotropic and a traceless part. However, it is often more convenient to rewrite it in the form
\begin{align}\label{eq:H_convenient}
H=-\frac{1}{2}\sum_{ij}J_ij\mathbf{S}_i\cdot\mathbf{S}_j-\frac{1}{2}\sum_{ij}\lambda_{ij}S_i^zS_j^z--\sum_iA_i(S_i)^2,
\end{align}
with $J_{ij}=\widetilde J_{ij}-\widetilde J_{ij}^z$ and $\lambda=3\widetilde J_{ij}^z$ This is the version of the Heisenberg Hamiltonian that will be used in the following. We note that different conventions for the parameters are used in the literature and it is always crucial to specify a convention when referring to a set of parameters.
\section{Heisenberg parameters from first principles}
Before delving into an analysis of Eq. \eqref{eq:H_convenient}, we will briefly show how to obtain the Heisenberg parameters $J_{ij}$, $\lambda_{ij}$, and $A_i$ from first principles simulations. It is in principle, possible to calculate the exchange coupling constants from microscopic expressions involving either an exchange integral in the case of direct exchange or from a combination of hopping matrix elements and on-site Coulomb interactions in the case of superexchange.\cite{Besbes2019, Wang2019} This approach is, however, problematic for several reasons: 1) A quantitative calculation has to be carried out in a localized basis set (for example Wannier functions\cite{Marzari2012}) and the results will inevitably depend on a specific choice of basis. 2) The exchange mechanism is often a combination of exchange and superexchange and there is no way of a priori determining how to balance the contributions in a quantitative treatment of the parameters. 3) Methods based on density functional theory (DFT) can only yield accurate total energies (if a good xc-functional is used), but “Kohn-Sham parameters” such as band energies, hopping parameters or exchange integrals do not comprise genuine physical properties.
A much better approach is based on an energy mapping analysis, where DFT total energies corresponding to different spin symmetries\cite{Grling1993, Grling2000} are mapped to the model (3) and used to extract the parameters.\cite{Xiang2013, Jacobsson2017, Kdderitzsch2002, Pajda2001, Olsen2017, Bose2010} This requires no knowledge of the underlying exchange mechanism and the accuracy is only limited by quality of the applied exchange-correlation functional. In particular, if we restrict ourselves to a single type of magnetic atom and nearest neighbor interactions only, a classical treatment of the Heisenberg model leads to\cite{Torelli2019}
\begin{align}
J=&\frac{E_{AFM}^\parallel-E_{FM}^\parallel}{N_{AFM}S^2},\label{eq:J}\\
\lambda=&\frac{E_{FM}^\parallel-E_{FM}^\perp-E_{AFM}^\parallel+E_{AFM}^\perp}{N_{AFM}S^2},\label{eq:lambda}\\
A=&\frac{(E_{FM}^\parallel-E_{FM}^\perp)\delta_--(E_{AFM}^\parallel-E_{AFM}^\perp)\delta_+}{2S^2},\label{eq:A}
\end{align}
where $E_{FM}$ and $E_{AFM}$ are the energies of the ferromagnetic and an antiferromagnetic configuration respectively. The superscripts denotes whether the magnetization is in-plane ($\parallel$) or out-of-plane ($\perp$) and $\delta_\pm=1\pm N_{FM}/N_{AFM}$ where $N_{FM}$ and $N_{AFM}$ is the number of nearest neighbors with aligned and anti-aligned spins respectively in the anti-ferromagnetic configuration. In the case of a bipartite lattice of magnetic atoms there is a fully anti-ferromagnetic configuration with with $N_{FM}=0$ and $\delta_\pm=1$. However, for-non-bipartite lattices (a triangular lattice for example) there is no natural choice of the anti-ferromagnetic state and one has to choose a frustrated configuration with $N_{FM}\neq0$. Typically, the Heisenberg parameters are on the order of meV or less and it is crucial to use the same basis sets for all configurations in order to obtain well converged results. This approach is easily generalized to yield additional Heisenberg parameters such as next-nearest and third-nearest neighbor interactions, but for insulators these are typically much smaller than the nearest neighbor interactions, which usually govern the critical temperatures. In general, however, one has to check whether it is sufficient to restrict the analysis to nearest neighbor interactions.
If the ground state is antiferromagnetic it may not be obvious, which value to use for $S$ in the energy mapping analysis. However, a ferromagnetic configuration without spin-orbit coupling is bound to yield a half integer for any insulator and that defines the value of S to be used in the Heisenberg model. We note that DFT codes often provide an estimate of local magnetic moments based on an integrated spin-density in some vicinity of the atomic nuclei, but this comprises a rather arbitrary measure and should not be used for quantitative analysis. Moreover, spin-orbit effects may yield a non-integer value of the magnetic moments (in unit of Bohr magnetons per cell) in a ferromagnetic configuration, which is at odds with the Heisenberg model that assumes a half-integer spin in the ferromagnetic ground state. This is due to inter-band spin mixing, which is not captured by the Heisenberg model and such effects cannot be captured by a model like Eq. \eqref{eq:H_convenient}. While it would be highly interesting to extend the Heisenberg model to include multiple band effects this is a rather small effect that is unlikely to affect the prediction of critical temperatures. For example, in CrI$_3$ the inclusion of spin-orbit coupling leads to an LDA magnetic moment per Cr ion of 3.01 Bohr magnetons, which is very close to the nominal value of 3.0. Finally, the inclusion of spin-orbit coupling that is needed to obtain the four DFT energies $E_{FM/AFM}^{\perp/\parallel}$ introduces certain subtleties in the calculations. In the case of CrI$_3$ the ground state is ferromagnetic with a strong out-of-plane easy axis and from this state $E_{FM}^\perp$ is obtained. However, the ferromagnetic state with in-plane magnetization comprises a saddle point in spin-configuration space and any unconstrained calculation will converge towards the state with out-of-plane magnetization. To resolve this one can either perform a constrained DFT calculation or include spin-orbit corrections non-selfconsistently.
It should be emphasized that the energy mapping analysis leading to Eqs. \eqref{eq:J}-\eqref{eq:A} was based on the classical Heisenberg model. For a ferromagnetic system with easy-axis anisotropy the ground state energy coincides with the classical energy. But for an anti-ferromagnetic system, the classical ground state energy only provides an upper estimate of the true ground state energy. For example, for a square lattice with nearest neighbor interactions and no anisotropy the ground state energy per site is approximately $2JS^2(1+0.158/S)$\cite{Yosida1996} whereas the classical energy is simply $2JS^2$ ($J$ is negative). If one assumes that DFT provides the correct ground state energy, the classical energy mapping analysis will lead to an overestimation of the exchange coupling constant. This problem also pertains to ferromagnetic systems since the antiferromagnetic state that enters the analysis is presumably correctly described in DFT and therefore does not correspond to the classical energy assumed in Eqs. \eqref{eq:J}-\eqref{eq:A}. In principle it is straightforward to include quantum corrections in the analysis for any isotropic Heisenberg model, but the situation becomes somewhat more complicated when anisotropy is introduced. For example, a ferromagnetic Heisenberg model with out of plane easy axis has a lowest and a highest eigenstate respectively that must correspond to $E_{FM}^\perp$ and $E_{AFM}^\parallel$ obtained from DFT. But the energies $E_{FM}^\parallel$ and $E_{AFM}^\perp$ cannot be mapped onto any eigenstate of the Heisenberg model and it is not obvious, how to proceed with the quantum mechanical energy mapping in this case.
\begin{table}[t!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& LDA & LDA+U & PBE & PBE+U & PBEsol \\
\hline
$\quad J\quad$ & 1.28 (1.28) & 2.97 & 2.09 & 3.81 & 2.14 \\
\hline
$A$ & 0.22 (0.19) & 0.024 & 0.16 & -0.009 & 0.17 \\
\hline
$\lambda$ & 0.16 (0.17) & 0.25 & 0.13 & 0.27 & 0.15 \\
\hline
$\Delta$ & 1.18 (1.16) & 1.17 & 0.92 & 1.18 & 1.00\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Exchange and anisotropy constants of a monolayer CrI$_3$ calculated with a few different functionals. All values are in meV. Spin-orbit coupling was included non-selfconsistently except for the values in brackets, which were obtained with selfconsistent spin-orbit coupling. LDA+U and PBE+U was performed with U=3.5 eV}
\label{tab}
\end{table}
The accuracy of commonly applied exchange-correlation functionals for exchange and anisotropy constant has not yet been completely clarified, but there has been a few studies on the performance of hybrids\cite{Kdderitzsch2002} and LDA+U/PBE+U for three-dimensional bulk systems.\cite{Olsen2017} It was found that for the anti-ferromagnets NiO and MnO, LDA+U and PBE+U were able to provide good agreement with experimental values for nearest and next nearest neighbor interactions if the “right” value of U was chosen. In Tab. 1, we compare the Heisenberg parameters for CrI$_3$ calculated with LDA, LDA+U, PBE, PBE+U and PBEsol, we have used a value of U=3.5 eV for LDA+U and PBE+U. All calculations were performed with the electronic structure code GPAW, which is based on plane waves and the projector-augmented wave method.\cite{Enkovaara2010a, Olsen2016a, Larsen2017} All structures were relaxed with the given functional. It is observed that the predicted exchange constants may differ by more than a factor of three depending on the applied functional. In addition the anisotropy constant is strongly dependent on the whether or not an on-site Coulomb repulsion U is introduced. However, the spin-wave gap $\Delta=A(2S-1)+\lambda N_{nn}S$ (to be introduced below), which largely determines the spin-orbit mediated magnetic properties is not very sensitive to the functional. This signifies that the spin-orbit effects are rather insensitive to the xc-functional. Including an onsite U term in the calculation merely transfers the single-ion anisotropy energy into the anisotropic exchange energy. However, the large span in exchange constants indicates that first principles predictions of magnetic properties such as critical temperatures may be off by a factor of three and there is a strong need for a systematic study of the accuracy of exchange-correlation functionals for exchange constants.
\section{Easy-axis order}
Once a first principles Heisenberg Hamiltonian has been obtained through the energy mapping analysis we are left with the pertinent problem of solving it. In three-dimensional magnets a rough estimate of the critical temperature can be obtained from Weiss mean field theory. In 2D, however, this approach is bound to fail since there is no reference to the dimensionality of the problem and finite critical temperatures will be predicted even in the absence of anisotropy. In 2D the effect of anisotropy must be included on equal footing with the exchange interactions. In the presence of an easy-axis (here chosen as the z-direction) a rigorous quantum mechanical analysis can be carried out by introducing the Holstein-Primakoff transformation, which replaces the spin operators in Eq. \eqref{eq:H_convenient} by bosonic operators that create or annihilate spin wave excitations (magnons). For a single type of magnetic atom the transformation is
\begin{align}
S_i^-=&\sqrt{2S}a_i^\dag \sqrt{1-\frac{(a_i^\dag a_i)}{2S}},\\
S_i^+=&\sqrt{2S}\sqrt{1-\frac{(a_i^\dag a_i)}{2S}}a_i ,\\
S_i^z=&S-a_i^\dag a_i,
\end{align}
with $S_i^\pm=S_i^x\pm iS_i^y$. The bosonic commutation relations for $a_i$ and $a_i^\dag$ imply that the commutation relations for the spin operators are fulfilled. In order to proceed, the square roots must be Taylor expanded and one obtains
\begin{align}\label{eq:H_exp}
H=E_0+H_2+H_4+H_6+\ldots,
\end{align}
where $E_0$ is zeroth order in raising and annihilation operators, $H_2$ is second order, $H_4$ is fourth order and so forth. In Eq. \eqref{eq:H_exp} we assume each term to be normal ordered such that all annihilation operators are to the right. This implies that $E_0$ is simply the ground state energy, $H_2$ determines the spectrum of single magnon excitations, $H_4$ gives rise to two-magnon interactions, and $H_6$ gives rise to three-magnon interactions. It should be noted that the anisotropy parameters only enter $E_0$, $H_2$, and $H_4$ and a truncation at fourth order thus includes anisotropy exactly.
If one is interested in the properties at low temperatures it may be assumed that two-magnon excitations are rare and the spectrum can be obtained from $H_2$, which can be solved directly by a Fourier transform. The spectrum then becomes\cite{Torelli2019}
\begin{align}\label{eq:eps}
\varepsilon_n(\mathbf{q})=\varepsilon_n^0(\mathbf{q})+A(2S-1)+\lambda SN_nn,
\end{align}
where $n$ denotes a band index (the range is equal to the number of magnetic atoms in the unit cell) and $\varepsilon_n^0(\mathbf{q})$ is the spectrum without anisotropy, which satisfies $\varepsilon_{n_0}^0(\mathbf{0})=0$ for the lowest band $n_0$. The term $\Delta_0\equiv A(2S-1)+\lambda SN_{nn}$ is therefore the spin-wave gap and magnetic order in 2D relies on $\Delta_0\neq0$. It should be noted that for $S=1/2$ the single-ion anisotropy term cannot open a gap and anisotropic exchange is required for magnetic order.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Fig1.png}
\caption{Renormalized spin-wave spectrum of CrI$_3$ calculated at different temperatures.}
\label{fig:sw}
\end{figure}
At finite temperatures the spin-wave approximation breaks down due to the presence of thermally excited magnons. The magnon interactions may be included through a mean field approximation of the fourth order term, which leads to a temperature dependent (renormalized) spin-wave spectrum.\cite{Yosida1996, Tyablikov2013, Gong2017b} In particular, the gap is effectively decreased by temperature effects and for a single site in the unit cell it may be written as\cite{Torelli2019}
\begin{align}\label{eq:delta}
\Delta=\Delta_0-4A\langle n\rangle-\lambda N_{nn}\langle n\rangle,
\end{align}
where $\langle n\rangle$ is the Bose distribution of magnons averaged over the Brillouin zone. Since the Bose distribution depends on temperature as well as the magnon spectrum one has to calculate the gap and spectrum self-consistently. In Fig. \ref{fig:sw}, we show the renormalized spectrum of CrI$_3$ calculated at different temperature using the parameters of PBE+U from Tab. \ref{tab} It is clear that the gap decreases as the temperature is increased. The Bose distribution of magnons will diverge at the point where the gap vanishes and this signals a phase transition in the present approximations. In Fig. \ref{fig:delta}, we show the spin-wave gap as a function of temperature and it is seen to vanish at $T_c= 35$ K. This appears to be in good agreement with the experimental value of 45 K. However, the agreement might be fortuitous and certainly depends on our choice of PBE+U values for the Heisenberg parameters.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Fig2.png}
\caption{Temperature dependent gap of CrI$_3$ calculated from renormalized spin-wave theory Eq. \eqref{eq:delta}. The gap closes at $T=35$ K,
which signals a phase transition with loss of magnetic order.}
\label{fig:delta}
\end{figure}
It is far from clear that the mean field approach is a good approximation close to the critical temperature where a high density of magnons is expected. In fact, it is not even obvious that multiple-magnon interactions (terms beyond fourth order in the Hamiltonian) can safely be neglected. On the other hand, quantum effects tend to be quenched by thermal fluctuations at elevated temperatures and for the sole purpose of evaluating critical temperatures a purely classical approach might be expected to work well. The average energy and magnetization of the classical Hamiltonian \eqref{eq:H_convenient} can be obtained straightforwardly from Monte Carlo simulations and in Fig. \ref{fig:mc} we show an example of such calculations; again using the Heisenberg parameters obtained with PBE+U. The magnetization decreases monotonously with increasing temperature and drops abruptly to zero at $T = 50$ K. Similarly, the heat capacity has a sharp peak at $T = 50$ K, which thus signals a phase transition where magnetic order is lost. The critical temperatures resulting from such calculations can be tabulated for different lattices and values of anisotropy parameters. In Fig. \ref{fig:T} we display such a compilation for honeycomb, square and triangular lattices in case of $\lambda=0$. In the limit of $A\rightarrow\infty$ the in-plane spin components are quenched and the critical temperature approaches that of the corresponding Ising model with coupling parameter $J$. This is an exact condition, which is naturally obtained in a classical treatment, but breaks down in renormalized spin-wave theory.\cite{Torelli2019}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Fig3.png}
\caption{Magnetization per Cr atom ($M_z$ in unit of Bohr magnetons) and heat capacity ($dE/dT$) of a monolayer CrI$_3$ obtained from
Monte Carlo simulations. Both quantities show a clear phase transition at a $T=50$ K where the magnetic order is lost.}
\label{fig:mc}
\end{figure}
As it turn out all the MC calculations can be fitted to the function\cite{Torelli2019}
\begin{align}\label{eq:T_c}
T_c = S^2T_c^{Ising}\tanh^{1/4}\bigg[\frac{6}{N_{nn}}\log\Big(1+\gamma\frac{\Delta_0}{J(2S-1)}\Big)\bigg],
\end{align}
where $\gamma=0.033$, $N_{nn}$ is the number of nearest neighbors, and $T_c^{Ising}$ is the critical temperature of the corresponding Ising model, which is given by 1.52, 2.27 and 3.64 in units of $J/k_B$ for the honeycomb, square and triangular lattices respectively. This expression is useful for high throughput computational screening of ferromagnetic compounds, since it only requires three Heisenberg parameters that are easily obtained from DFT as explained above. Such an approach has recently been applied to the Computational 2D Materials Database (C2DB)\cite{Pandey2018} where 3712 2D materials was screened for magnetic properties and yielded a prediction of 17 novel stable 2D ferromagnetic materials.\cite{Torelli2019c} It should also be straightforward to conduct a screening study on experimental databases like the Inorganic Crystal Structure Database (ICSD)\cite{Allmann2007} and the Crystallography Open Database (COD)\cite{Graulis2011} by applying a measure that identifies exfoliable materials from three-dimensional parent compounds.\cite{Mounet2018, Larsen2019}
\section{Easy-plane order}
The above analysis assumes an easy-axis that coincides with the out-of-plane direction. If the ground state has a component of magnetization in the plane of the material and in-plane isotropy is assumed, the rotational freedom prohibits long range magnetic order due to the Mermin-Wagner theorem. Mathematically, the above analysis would then result in a negative spin-wave gap that implies the instability of a state with out-of-plane magnetization. For high throughput calculations the sign of the spin-wave gap can thus be used as a descriptor that determines if long-range order is possible at finite temperatures.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Fig4.png}
\caption{Critical temperature as a function of single-ion anisotropy calculated from Monte Carlo simulations of Honeycomb, square, and hexagonal (triangular) lattices. The solid lines are fitted functions given by Eq \eqref{eq:T_c}. Figure from Ref. \onlinecite{Torelli2019} ©IOP Publishing. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved.}
\label{fig:T}
\end{figure}
Although long range order is forbidden for easy-plane magnets in 2D, finite size effects may give rise to a macroscopic magnetization if the anisotropy is large. For example, in the limit of $A\rightarrow-\infty$ the $S^z$ components of the spins become quenched and the model \eqref{eq:H_convenient} effectively reduces to the $XY$ model given by
\begin{align}\label{eq:XY}
H_{XY}=-\frac{1}{2}\sum_{ij}J_{ij} (S_i^x S_j^x+S_i^y S_j^y).
\end{align}
Kosterlitz and Thouless have shown that this model exhibits critical behavior for all temperatures below a certain temperature $T_{KT}$, meaning that spin correlations decay with a power law dependence on distance. This implies that long range order may be observed in any macroscopic sample although the order strictly speaking vanishes for an infinite system. Assuming small spin deflections such that $\mathbf{S}_i\cdot\mathbf{S}_j=S^2\cos(\theta)\approx S^2 (1-\theta ^2/2)$ in Eq. \eqref{eq:XY}, yields the harmonic $XY$ model ($HXY$) and a classical analysis then shows that the magnetization of a finite sample is given by\cite{Jos1977}
\begin{align}\label{eq:M}
M=\bigg(\frac{1}{2N}\bigg)^{k_B T/8\pi J},
\end{align}
where $N$ is the number of sites in the system. However, the analysis neglects the possibility of spin vortices that effectively renormalize the magnetization. The energy of a single vortex diverges, but bound vortex/anti-vortex pairs have a finite energy and constitute fundamental excitations of the system at low energies. At the Kosterlitz-Thouless transition temperature, the vortex/anti-vortex pairs unbind and the system becomes disordered. In Fig. \ref{fig:M}, we show the magnetization \eqref{eq:M} as a function of temperature for different values of $N$. We also indicate $T_{KT}^{HXY}=1.351 J/k_B$ above which the magnetic order is destroyed by unbound vortex/anti-vortex pairs. As shown by Bramwell and Holdsworth, the KT temperature is largely unaltered by finite size effects although strictly speaking it only marks a true phase transition in the infinite system.\cite{Bramwell1994} This implies that the magnetization is lost above the KT temperature and we may take the critical temperature for ordering as $T_c\approx T_{KT}^{HXY}$. Only the magnitude of the magnetization below $T_{KT}^{HXY}$ will depend on the size of a sample and will vanish in the limit of an infinite system. The decay of magnetization with system size is, however, very slow. For example, a sample with an area of 1 $\mu$m$^2$ and a distance between magnetic atoms of 3 Å, the magnetization is reduced by 60 {\%} at the KT transition compare to the value at $T=0$. For a 1 mm$^2$ sample the reduction will be 80 {\%} and a macroscopic magnetization will thus be prominent at any temperature below
$T_{KT}^{HXY}$. The phase transition in the $XY$ model (without the harmonic approximation) is a bit lower ($T_{KT}=0.898J/k_B$), but the conclusion remains the same.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Fig5.png}
\caption{The magnetization in units of $S$ as a function of temperature in the $HXY$ model. The dashed vertical line indicates the KT transition above which the spins become disordered due to unbound vortex/anti-vortex pairs.}
\label{fig:M}
\end{figure}
In real materials the condition of $A\rightarrow-\infty$ will of course not be satisfied, but part of the Kosterlitz-Thouless behavior may be expected in easy-plane 2D magnets with finite anisotropy. Macroscopic samples of 2D materials with an easy-plane may thus show magnetic order due to finite size effects even if the Mermin-Wagner theorem prohibits long-range magnetic order. In particular the easy-plane 2D magnets, Cr$_2$Ge$_22$Te$_6$\cite{Gong2017b}, NiPS$_3$\cite{Kim2019} and VSe$_2$\cite{Bonilla2018} could exhibit magnetism of the Kosterlitz-Thouless type described above. Only VSe$_2$ have been reported to show macroscopic magnetization at finite temperatures though and those measurements have subsequently been questioned.\cite{Wong2019} Nevertheless, the subtle correlations and intricate magnetic frustration reported for VSe$_2$ could indicate that this material exhibits rich magnetic phenomena and the presence of spin vortices could hinder the direct measurements of magnetization and perhaps make it strongly dependent on the precise conditions under which the measurements are carried out. In the case of Cr$_2$Ge$_2$Te$_6$ the KT transitions is expected at $\sim J/k_B$ which is roughly 75 K,\cite{Gong2017b, Xu2018} but the persistence of in-plane magnetic order is hindered by the exceedingly small anisotropy in this material.
\section{Outlook}
In this prospective article we have shown how to obtain accurate predictions for critical temperatures of 2D ferromagnetic insulators using DFT combined with either renormalized spin-wave theory or classical Monte Carlo simulations. Both methods agree well with experiments for the cases of and CrI$_3$ and CrBr$_3$, but the renormalized spin-wave method is expected to break down in highly anisotropic systems. We also presented a universal, but simple analytical expression for the critical temperature that were fitted to MC simulations and only depends on the Heisenberg parameters as well the number of nearest neighbors in a given material. Thus, the critical temperature of any 2D ferromagnetic insulator can be estimated from just four DFT calculations.
A major caveat of this method is the fact that insulating magnetic materials often exhibit strongly correlated physics and the calculated Heisenberg parameters can be rather sensitive to the chosen DFT functional. As such DFT must be regarded as inaccurate for the prediction of Heisenberg parameters in these systems. At least there is a need for more systematic assessment of the performance of various functionals for the prediction of magnetic properties. Another – perhaps more fundamental – deficiency of the method is the energy mapping analysis, which is based on the classical Heisenberg model. The classical Monte Carlo simulations of Curie temperatures are justified because the thermal fluctuations quench the quantum fluctuations in the vicinity of the critical temperature, but the parameters are calculated from the ground state at zero K, and should be mapped to the quantum mechanical Heisenberg model. Without anisotropy it is straightforward to obtain the quantum corrected value of the nearest neighbor exchange coupling constants. It is however challenging to generalize that analysis to the case where anisotropy is included, but we hope that the challenge will be taken up in near future such that a universal and rigorous energy mapping scheme can be defined.
In the present prospective, we have focused on the calculation of transition temperatures for ferromagnetic order in 2D materials. A natural next step is then to extend the analysis to anti-ferromagnetic order in 2D, which has been observed in FePS$_3$\cite{Lee2016, Wang2016} and NiPS$_3$.\cite{Kim2019, Wildes2015} The calculation of Heisenberg parameters and Monte Carlo simulations would proceed exactly as in the ferromagnetic case and for any bipartite lattice (for example square or honeycomb) the spin-wave analysis can be carried out by means of a Bogoliubov transformation.\cite{Yosida1996} However, for non-bipartite lattices (for example triangular) anti-ferromagnetic exchange coupling constants will give rise to geometric frustration and the magnetic phase diagram may become extremely rich with several competing phases for a given set of Heisenberg parameters.\cite{Chernyshev2009, Maksimov2019} Even in the absence of anisotropy the classical ground state is non-collinear and the mechanism by which anisotropy opens a gap is much more complicated than in the ferromagnetic case. A thorough analysis of the effect of anisotropic exchange on the magnetic properties of triangular lattices has recently been carried out,\cite{Maksimov2019} but an analysis of the effect of single-ion anisotropy in non-bipartite lattices with anti-ferromagnetic exchange coupling still seems to be lacking.
The most important remaining question is how to deal with itinerant magnets in 2D. Most of the reported high-temperature 2D magnets like FePS$_3$,\cite{Lee2016, Wang2016} VSe$_2$\cite{Bonilla2018} and Fe$_3$GeTe$_2$\cite{Fei2018} are indeed metallic, but it is not at all clear if the Heisenberg model \eqref{eq:H_convenient} can provide even a qualitatively correct description in those cases. Naively, one may expect that the Heisenberg model could provide a decent approach if the exchange coupling constants can be converged with respect to distance. However, there are several issues with such an approach; it is – for example – not clear what value to use for the spin $S$. Alternatively, one may try to apply Stoner theory of magnetism,\cite{Yosida1996} which comprises a more natural starting point for itinerant magnets, but there is no simple way to obtain critical temperatures in that case and the theory requires inclusion of a parametric Hubbard U, that measures on-site Coulomb repulsion between electrons. The prediction of thermodynamic properties for itinerant magnets thus poses the biggest and most important theoretical challenge in the field at the moment.
2D materials comprise an extremely versatile class of compounds. There are endless possibilities of optimizing particular properties by bottom up design of van der Waals heterostructures composed of 2D materials. In the case of magnetic 2D materials, van der Waals heterostructures have already been shown to yield new magnetic properties. For example, multilayers of CrI$_3$ exhibit anti-ferromagnetic interlayer coupling and the coercive field for interlayer alignment range from 0.65 T to 1.84 T depending on the number of layers.\cite{Huang2017a, Sivadas2018, Jiang2019} This implies that the magnetic properties of multilayer structures of CrI$_3$ can be tuned simply by varying the number of layers. The anti-ferromagnetic structure of multilayers also implies that multilayers can act as spin valves with an interlayer conductance that may change by several orders of magnitude depending on the inter-layer magnetic state.\cite{Cardoso2018, Song2018, Wang2018, Song2019} An additional convenient feature of 2D materials is the ease at which they can be electrostatically gated and for 2D magnets the magnetic properties may change dramatically under the influence of a gate voltage.\cite{Huang2018, Jiang2018, Morell2018} Finally, bilayers of CrI$_3$ have symmetry-allowed nearest neighbor Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interactions that could give rise to Skyrmions\cite{Liu2018, Liu2018e} or perhaps topological magnons.\cite{Mook2014, Pershoguba2018} For other materials, such as Cr$_2$Ge$_2$Te$_6$ and NiPS$_3$, the bulk intra-layer magnetic order (ferromagnetic and anti-ferromagnetic respectively) is preserved down to a bilayer, but vanishes in the monolayer limit. This is due to the easy-plane nature of the anisotropy, by which the long-range order is lacking for a monolayer, whereas even the bilayer structure bypasses the Mermin-Wagner theorem by weak interlayer magnetic interactions. It remains to be seen, however, if a remnant of Kosterlitz-Thouless physics can be observed in monolayers of such materials.
|
\section{Introduction}
A consequence of Einstein's general theory of relativity are gravitational waves, perturbations to spacetime that travel away from their source at the speed of light.
A stochastic gravitational-wave background (SGWB) signal is formed from the superposition of many events or processes that are too weak and too numerous to be resolved individually, and which combine to produce a SGWB~\cite{Christensen_2019}.
Cosmological sources, such as inflation, pre-Big Bang models, or cosmic strings, could create a SGWB.
Astrophysical sources can also create a SGWB; this background could be produced over the history of the Universe from compact binary coalescences, supernovae, and neutron stars.
In fact, the recent observations by Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo of gravitational waves in observing runs O1 and O2 from 10 binary black hole mergers~\cite{PhysRevLett.116.061102,PhysRevLett.116.241103,PhysRevX.6.041015,LIGOScientific:2018mvr} and a binary neutron star merger~\cite{PhysRevLett.119.161101} implies that a SGWB will be created from these events happening throughout the history of the universe and it may be detectable by Advanced LIGO~\cite{0264-9381-32-7-074001} and Advanced Virgo~\cite{0264-9381-32-2-024001} in the coming years~\cite{PhysRevLett.116.131102,PhysRevLett.120.091101,LIGOScientific:2019vic}.
As Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo conduct their observations a major goal will be to measure the SGWB.
The spectrum of a SGWB is usually described
by the dimensionless quantity $\Omega_{gw}( f )$ which is the
gravitational-wave energy density per unit logarithmic frequency,
divided by the critical energy density $\rho_{c}$ ($\rho_{c}=3 c^2 H^2_0 /8 \pi G$, where $H_0$ is the present value of the Hubble constant) to close the
universe,
\begin{equation}
\Omega_{gw}( f ) = \frac{f}{\rho_c} \frac{d \rho_{gw}}{d f} ~.
\end{equation}
Many theoretical models of the SGWB in the observation band of LIGO and Virgo are characterized by a
power-law spectrum which assumes that the fractional energy density in gravitational waves has the form
\begin{equation}
\Omega_{gw}( f ) = \Omega_{\alpha} \left(\frac{f}{f_{ref}}\right)^{\alpha} ~,
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ is the spectral index and $f_{ref}$ is a reference
frequency.
Cosmologically produced SGWBs are typically approximated by a power law in the LIGO-Virgo frequency band, $\alpha = 0$, while $\alpha = 3$ is characteristic of some astrophysical models (and also a flat strain power spectral density spectrum).
A SGWB from binary black holes in Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo's most sensitive frequency band ($10$ Hz - $100$ Hz) would have $\alpha = 2/3$.
The method by which LIGO and Virgo have attempted to measure the SGWB is, in principle, not difficult; optimally filtered correlations from the output strain data from two detectors are calculated~\cite{Christensen:1992,stoch_allenromano}.
This method was used on initial LIGO~\cite{LIGO} and initial Virgo~\cite{Virgo} data to set limits on the energy density of the SGWB~\cite{S5stoch,S5H1H2,S6stoch}.
No signal was detected, but the results constrain the energy density of the SGWB to be $\Omega_0 < 5.6 \times 10^{-6}$ at 95\% confidence~\cite{S6stoch} in the 41.5--169.25 Hz band.
The advanced detectors will ultimately have about 10-times better strain sensitivity than the initial detectors; the low frequency limit of the sensitive band is also extended from 40 Hz down to 10 Hz. As will be described below, this has improved the upper limits on the energy density of the SGWB by a factor of about 100.
Furthermore, the number of detectors operating in a worldwide network will increase, eventually including sites at LIGO-Hanford, LIGO-Livingston, Virgo, GEO-HF (at high frequencies)~\cite{0264-9381-31-22-224002}, KAGRA (Japan)~\cite{PhysRevD.88.043007}, and LIGO-India~\cite{doi:10.1142/S0218271813410101}.
The significant strain sensitivity improvements and wider bandwidth will enable real breakthroughs in the searches for the SGWB, with a potential sensitivity approaching $\Omega_0 \sim 10^{-9}$.
The detection of a cosmologically produced SGWB would be a landmark discovery of enormous importance to the larger physics and astronomy community. The detection of an astrophysically produced SGWB would also be of great interest; the loudest contributions to such an SGWB would likely be stellar mass binary black hole systems and binary neutron star systems, due to their large apparent abundances~\cite{PhysRevLett.116.131102,PhysRevLett.120.091101,LIGOScientific:2019vic}.
Gravitational-wave signals that are too weak to be detected individually combine to form a SGWB.
The SGWB that LIGO and Virgo hope to observe could be created from two classes of sources.
A cosmologically produced SGWB would be created in the earliest moments of the Universe. There are a host of cosmological processes that could contribute to the SGWB, such as the amplification of vacuum fluctuations following inflation~\cite{kolbturner}, phase transitions in the early universe~\cite{starobinksii,bar-kana}, cosmic strings~\cite{kibble,damour,olmez1,olmez2}, and pre-Big Bang models~\cite{buonanno,mandic}.
An astrophysically produced SGWB would arise from the ensemble of what would be considered to be standard astrophysical events~\cite{2011RAA....11..369R}.
In total the astrophysical background would be the result of a broad spectrum of events, including core collapses to neutron stars or black holes~\cite{2005PhRvD..72h4001B,2006PhRvD..73j4024S,2009MNRAS.398..293M,2010MNRAS.409L.132Z,PhysRevLett.116.131102}, rotating neutron stars~\cite{2001A&A...376..381R,2012PhRvD..86j4007R} including magnetars~\cite{2006A&A...447....1R,2011MNRAS.410.2123H,2011MNRAS.411.2549M,2013PhRvD..87d2002W}, phase transitions \cite{sigl,2009GReGr..41.1389D} or initial instabilities in young neutron stars~\cite{1999MNRAS.303..258F,2011ApJ...729...59Z,2004MNRAS.351.1237H,2011ApJ...729...59Z}, compact binary mergers~\cite{farmer,2011ApJ...739...86Z,2011PhRvD..84h4004R,2011PhRvD..84l4037M,2012PhRvD..85j4024W,2013MNRAS.431..882Z} and compact objects around super-massive black holes~\cite{barack,sigl2}. As LIGO and Virgo observe in the advanced detector era, the cosmologically produced SGWB and the astrophysically produced SGWB are both exciting targets for observation.
\section{Results from Advanced LIGO Observing Runs O1 and O2}\label{sec:O1_results}
Advanced LIGO's first observing run O1 went from September 2015 to January 2016, while its second observing run O2 went from November 2016 to August 2017. Advanced Virgo participated in O2 for the month of August 2017. Together LIGO and Virgo detected gravitational waves from 10 binary black hole mergers and a binary neutron star merger~\cite{LIGOScientific:2018mvr}. The data from the two Advanced LIGO detectors, LIGO Hanford and LIGO Livingston, were used for the search for a SGWB. Data quality cuts removed problematic times and frequencies from the analysis. In total for O1, 30 days of coincident data were analyzed, while for O2 the data amounted to 99 days. No SGWB was detected.
\subsection{Combined O1 and O2 Isotropic Results}
Assuming that the frequency dependence of the energy density of the SGWB is flat, namely $\alpha = 0$, the constraint on the energy density is $\Omega(f) < 6.0 \times 10^{-8}$ with 95\% confidence within the 20 Hz - 86 Hz frequency band~\cite{LIGOScientific:2019vic}. This is a factor of 2.8 better than the upper limit set by using just the O1 data~\cite{PhysRevLett.118.121101}. For a spectral index of $\alpha = 2/3$ the constraint on the energy density is $\Omega(f) < 4.8 \times 10^{-8}$,
while for $\alpha = 3$ it is $\Omega(f) < 7.9 \times 10^{-9}$
~\cite{LIGOScientific:2019vic} (both with with 95\% confidence, and a reference frequency of $f_{ref} = 25$ Hz when $\alpha \neq 0$). A prior that is flat in $\Omega_{gw}$ has been used.
The O1 and O1 + O2 results have been used to limit cosmic string parameters~\cite{Abbott:2017mem,LIGOScientific:2019vic}, similar to what was done with initial LIGO and initial Virgo~\cite{S5stoch,S5strings}.
The dramatic improvement in the upper limit on the SGWB energy density was important, but not the most important SGWB outcome of observing runs O1 and O2. The observation of the gravitational waves from stellar mass binary black hole mergers~\cite{PhysRevLett.116.061102,PhysRevLett.116.241103,PhysRevX.6.041015,LIGOScientific:2018mvr} and a binary neutron star merger~\cite{PhysRevLett.119.161101} implies that these events are far more numerous in the universe than originally expected. In fact, it is likely that the SGWB produced from these type of events will be at the level of $\Omega_{gw} \sim 10^{-9}$ in the observing band of Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo~\cite{PhysRevLett.116.131102,PhysRevLett.118.121101,PhysRevLett.120.091101,LIGOScientific:2019vic}.
Figure~\ref{fig:BBH_background} displays the prediction of the astrophysical SGWB from binary black holes and binary neutron stars, along with the statistical Poisson uncertainties derived from the local binary merger rate.
Also included is the estimate of the contribution from the addition neutron star - black hole binaries.
The same binary formation and evolution scenario is used to compute the SGWB from from neutron star - black hole binaries as in~\cite{PhysRevLett.120.091101}, but an update was made for the mass distributions and rates so as to be consistent with the most recent results given in~\cite{LIGOScientific:2018mvr,LIGOScientific:2018jsj}. For the neutron star - black hole binaries, the same evolution with redshift was used as for the binary neutron stars.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5.5in]{OGW_CBC.pdf}
\caption{The Advanced LIGO SGWB sensitivity curves for O1 \protect \cite{PhysRevLett.118.121101}, combined O1+O2 \protect \cite{LIGOScientific:2019vic}, and design sensitivity \protect \cite{PhysRevD.88.124032,Barsotti_2018}. The purple line is the median total SGWB, combining binary black holes (BBH) and binary neutron stars (BNS); this uses the model presented in \protect \cite{PhysRevLett.120.091101} with updated mass distributions and rates from \protect \cite{LIGOScientific:2018mvr,LIGOScientific:2018jsj}; the gray box is the Poisson error region. The dotted gray line is the sum of the upper limit for the combined BBH and BNS backgrounds with the upper limit on the neutron star - black hole binary (NSBH) background.}
\label{fig:BBH_background}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Anisotropic O1 and O2 Results}
Within the LIGO-Virgo observational band it is expected that the SGWB will be essentially isotropic, with the level of assumed anisotropies being many orders of magnitude below the predicted sensitivities~\cite{LIGOScientific:2019gaw}. However, LIGO and Virgo have decided to look for a SGWB that would be anisotropic. Such an anisotropic background could provide even more information about the early universe, or the astrophysical environment in our region of the universe. Using the recent O1 and O2 data there have been three different types of searches for an anisotropic background~\cite{PhysRevLett.118.121102,LIGOScientific:2019gaw}. To look for extended sources, LIGO and Virgo use what is known as the spherical harmonic decomposition~\cite{S5direct}. In order to search for point sources, a broadband radiometer analysis is used~\cite{0264-9381-23-8-S23,S4radiom}. Finally, LIGO and Virgo employed a narrow-band radiometer search to look for gravitational waves in the direction of interesting objects in the sky, such as the galactic center, Scorpius X-1 and SN 1987A.
An anisotropic SGWB was not observed with the Advanced LIGO O1 and O2 data, but important upper limits were set~\cite{PhysRevLett.118.121102,LIGOScientific:2019gaw}.
For broadband point sources, the gravitational wave energy flux per unit frequency was constrained to be
$F_{\alpha,\Theta} < (0.05 - 25)\times 10^{-8}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ Hz$^{-1} (f/25$ Hz)$^{\alpha-1}$
depending on the sky location
$\Theta$
and the spectral power index $\alpha$.
For extended sources, the upper limits on the fractional gravitational wave energy density required to close the Universe are
$\Omega(f,\Theta) < (0.19 - 2.89)\times 10^{-8}$ sr$^{-1} (f/25 $ Hz$)^{\alpha}$,
again depending on
$\Theta$
and $\alpha$.
The directed searches for narrow-band gravitational waves from Scorpius X-1, Supernova 1987~A, and the Galactic Center had median frequency-dependent limits on strain amplitude of
$h_0 < (4.2,\, 3.6,$ and $ 4.7)\times10^{-25}$
respectively, for the most sensitive detector frequencies
130 - 175 Hz. See \cite{LIGOScientific:2019gaw} for further details.
\subsection{Tests of General Relativity with the Stochastic Gravitational-Wave Background}
LIGO and Virgo have used the recent observation of gravitational waves from binary black hole and binary neutron star coalescences to test general relativity~\cite{PhysRevLett.116.221101,PhysRevX.6.041015,LIGOScientific:2019fpa,Abbott:2018lct}. The LIGO-Virgo SGWB search has also be extended in order to test general relativity~\cite{Callister:2017ocg}. There is not necessarily a reason to expect extra polarizations of gravitational waves, nor extra polarizations in the SGWB (the consequences would be huge even if the chances are, a priori, not large); however, LIGO and Virgo have the ability to search for these modes, and will do so. With general relativity there are only two possible polarizations for gravitational waves, namely the two tensor modes. Alternative theories of gravity can also generate gravitational waves with scalar or vector polarizations~\cite{Will2014}.
Since there are six possible polarization modes, Advanced LIGO (with only two detectors, that are essentially co-aligned with respect to each other) cannot identify the polarization of short duration gravitational wave signals~\cite{PhysRevX.6.041015,Romano2017,Will2014}, such as those that have been recently observed~\cite{PhysRevLett.116.061102,PhysRevLett.116.241103,PhysRevX.6.041015}.
A minimum of six detectors would be necessary to resolve the polarization content (scalar, vector and tensor) of
a short duration gravitational wave~\cite{Will2014}.
A search for long duration gravitational waves, such as those from rotating neutron stars or the SGWB by the two Advanced LIGO detectors,
can directly measure the polarizations of the gravitational waves~\cite{Romano2017,0264-9381-32-24-243001,Isi:2017equ,Callister:2017ocg}.
A detection of a SGWB by Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo would allow for a
verification of general relativity that is not possible with short duration gravitational wave searches.
The LIGO-Virgo search for a SGWB has been expanded to a search for 6 polarizations: two tensor modes, two vector modes, and two scalar modes~\cite{Callister:2017ocg}, and applied to the Advanced LIGO Observing Run O1 and O2 data~\cite{PhysRevLett.120.201102,LIGOScientific:2019vic}.
The addition of Advanced Virgo to the network does not improve detection prospects (because of its longer distance displacement from the LIGO detectors), however it will improve the ability to estimate
the parameters of a SGWB of mixed polarizations. The eventual inclusion of KAGRA~\cite{PhysRevD.88.043007} and LIGO-India~\cite{doi:10.1142/S0218271813410101} will further expand the ability to resolve different polarizations of the SGWB, and further test general relativity. Bayesian parameter estimation techniques have been developed in order to search for tensor, vector and scalar polarizations in the LIGO-Virgo data~\cite{Callister:2017ocg}.
When calculating the SGWB for tensor, vector and scalar polarizations one uses the notation $\Omega^A_{\rm gw}(f)$ in analogy with the standard general relativity search. However, in a general modification of gravity, the quantities $\Omega^T_\mathrm{gw}(f)$, $\Omega^V_\mathrm{gw}(f)$, and $\Omega^S_\mathrm{gw}(f)$ are more correctly associated to measurements of the two-point correlation statistics of different components of the SGWB as opposed to energy densities~\cite{Isi:2018miq}. There was no evidence found for a SGWB of tensor, vector or scalar polarizations in the O1 and O2 data, and upper limits were set~\cite{PhysRevLett.120.201102,LIGOScientific:2019vic}. These upper limits depend on the assumptions made for the what combination of the three polarizations are presumed to be present in the data. For example, when assuming that the tensor, vector or scalar polarizations could all be present in the data, then the upper limits are presented in Table~\ref{tab:nongrUL} assuming a prior that is flat in $\Omega_{gw}$, and another prior that is flat in log$\Omega_{gw}$.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{10pt}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{l|c c}
\hline
\hline
Polarization &
Uniform prior &
Log-uniform prior \\
\hline
Tensor $\Omega^T_\mathrm{gw}(f)$ & $8.2 \times 10^{-8}$ & $3.2 \times 10^{-8}$ \nonumber \\
Vector $\Omega^V_\mathrm{gw}(f)$ & $1.2 \times 10^{-7}$ & $2.9 \times 10^{-7}$ \nonumber \\
Scalar $\Omega^S_\mathrm{gw}(f)$ & $4.2 \times 10^{-7}$ & $6.1 \times 10^{-7}$ \nonumber \\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Upper limits for the SGWB assumed to be made up of simultaneous contributions of tensor, vector and scalar polarizations: $\Omega^T_\mathrm{gw}(f)$, $\Omega^V_\mathrm{gw}(f)$, and $\Omega^S_\mathrm{gw}(f)$. Results are presented using a prior that is log uniform, and another that is uniform on the amplitude $\Omega_{\rm ref}$ for each polarization. The O1 and O2 data are used. See~ \protect \cite{LIGOScientific:2019vic} for more details.}
\label{tab:nongrUL}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{Correlated magnetic noise in global networks of gravitational-wave detectors}
A search for the SGWB uses a cross-correlation between the data from two detectors. Inherent in such an analysis is the assumption that the noise in one detector is statistically independent from the noise in the other detector. Correlated noise would introduce an inherent bias in the analysis. It is for this reason that the data from two separated detectors is used. At one time initial LIGO had two co-located detectors at the LIGO Hanford site. An attempt was made to measure the SGWB with these two detectors, but correlated noise at low frequencies contaminated the measurement, and a clean analysis could only be made above 460 Hz~\cite{S5H1H2}.
The LIGO, Virgo and KAGRA detector sites are thousands of kilometers from one another, and the simple assumption is that the noise in the detectors at these sites is independent from one another. However, this assumption has been demonstrated to be false for magnetic noise. The Earth's surface and the ionosphere act like mirrors and form a spherical cavity for extremely low frequency electromagnetic waves. The Schumann resonances are a result of this spherical cavity, and resonances are observed at 8, 14, 20, 26, ... Hz~\cite{Sentman}. Most of these frequencies fall in the important SGWB detection band (10 Hz to 100 Hz) for Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo. The resonances are driven by the 100 or so lightning strikes per second around the world.
The resonances result in magnetic fields of order 0.5 - 1.0 pT Hz$^{1/2}$ on the Earth's surface~\cite{Sentman}.
In the time domain, 10 pT bursts appear
above a 1 pT background at a rate of $\approx$ 0.5 Hz ~\cite{FULLEKRUG1995479}.
This magnetic field noise correlation has been observed between magnetometers at the LIGO, Virgo and KAGRA sites~\cite{Schumann,PhysRevD.97.102007}. Magnetic fields can couple into the gravitational wave detectors and create noise in the detectors' output strain channel. It has been determined that the correlated magnetic field noise did not affect the SGWB upper limits measured by initial LIGO and Virgo. For the observing runs O1 and O2 it has been demonstrated that the upper limits on the SGWB were not contaminated by correlated magnetic noise~\cite{LIGOScientific:2019vic}. However, it is possible that correlated magnetic noise could contaminate the future results of Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo~\cite{wiener}. If that is the case, then methods must be taken to try and monitor the magnetic fields and subtract their effects. This could be done, for example, via Wiener filtering~\cite{wiener,0264-9381-33-22-224003,PhysRevD.97.102007}. Low noise magnetometers are now installed at the LIGO and Virgo sites in order to monitor this correlated magnetic noise, and to be used if Wiener filtering is necessary for the SGWB searches. In addition to long term magnetic noise correlations, short duration magnetic transients, produced from lightning strikes around the world, are seen to be coincidently visible at the detector sites and could affect the search for short duration gravitational wave events~\cite{0264-9381-34-7-074002}.
\section{Future Observing Runs for LIGO and Virgo}
Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo have completed two observing runs, and the results of the search for a SGWB have been published~\cite{PhysRevLett.118.121101,PhysRevLett.118.121102,LIGOScientific:2019vic,LIGOScientific:2019gaw}. At the time of this writing Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo are in the middle of the third observing run O3. Over the next few years further observing runs will happen as Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo approach their target sensitivities~\cite{Aasi:2013wya}. At their target sensitivities LIGO and Virgo should be able to constrain the energy density of the SGWB to approximately $\Omega_{gw} \sim 2 \times 10^{-9}$ with two years of coincident data (in the 10 Hz to 100 Hz band). At this point LIGO and Virgo could possibly observe a binary black hole and binary neutron star produced SGWB~\cite{PhysRevLett.118.121101,PhysRevLett.116.131102,PhysRevLett.120.091101,LIGOScientific:2019vic}. Various cosmological models~\cite{starobinksii,bar-kana,buonanno,mandic}, or cosmic strings~\cite{kibble,damour,olmez1,olmez2} might produce a detectable SGWB at this level as well.
Similar sensitivity advances will also be made with the directional searches as Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo reach their target sensitivities. In fact, the addition of Advanced Virgo to the network, with its long distance displacement from the LIGO sites, will make a further important contribution to the directional searches and their ability to map the sky~\cite{PhysRevLett.118.121102}. This will also be true for the addition of KAGRA~\cite{PhysRevD.88.043007} and LIGO-India~\cite{doi:10.1142/S0218271813410101} to the global network. One can expect to see many important results pertaining to the search for a SGWB from LIGO, Virgo and KAGRA in the coming years.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
Thanks to Tania Regimbau for comments on the manuscript.
NLC is funded by NSF grants PHY-1505373 and PHY-1806990.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the United States
National Science Foundation (NSF) for the construction and operation of the
LIGO Laboratory and Advanced LIGO as well as the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC) of the
United Kingdom, the Max-Planck-Society (MPS), and the State of
Niedersachsen/Germany for support of the construction of Advanced LIGO
and construction and operation of the GEO600 detector.
Additional support for Advanced LIGO was provided by the Australian Research Council.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the Italian Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN),
the French Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) and
the Foundation for Fundamental Research on Matter supported by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research,
for the construction and operation of the Virgo detector
and the creation and support of the EGO consortium.
The authors also gratefully acknowledge research support from these agencies as well as by
the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research of India,
the Department of Science and Technology, India,
the Science \& Engineering Research Board (SERB), India,
the Ministry of Human Resource Development, India,
the Spanish Agencia Estatal de Investigaci\'on,
the Vicepresid\`encia i Conselleria d'Innovaci\'o, Recerca i Turisme and the Conselleria d'Educaci\'o i Universitat del Govern de les Illes Balears,
the Conselleria d'Educaci\'o, Investigaci\'o, Cultura i Esport de la Generalitat Valenciana,
the National Science Centre of Poland,
the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF),
the Russian Foundation for Basic Research,
the Russian Science Foundation,
the European Commission,
the European Regional Development Funds (ERDF),
the Royal Society,
the Scottish Funding Council,
the Scottish Universities Physics Alliance,
the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund (OTKA),
the Lyon Institute of Origins (LIO),
the Paris \^{I}le-de-France Region,
the National Research, Development and Innovation Office Hungary (NKFIH),
the National Research Foundation of Korea,
Industry Canada and the Province of Ontario through the Ministry of Economic Development and Innovation,
the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council Canada,
the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research,
the Brazilian Ministry of Science, Technology, Innovations, and Communications,
the International Center for Theoretical Physics South American Institute for Fundamental Research (ICTP-SAIFR),
the Research Grants Council of Hong Kong,
the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC),
the Leverhulme Trust,
the Research Corporation,
the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), Taiwan
and
the Kavli Foundation.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the NSF, STFC, MPS, INFN, CNRS and the
State of Niedersachsen/Germany for provision of computational resources.%
This article has been assigned the document number LIGO-P1900145.
\section*{References}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
Text in scene images usually contains a large amount of semantic information, thus text recognition plays an important role in the field of computer vision. With the advent of deep learning, methods for recognition have made great progresses\cite{crnn,mjsynth1,mjsynth2,synth}. These techniques achieve great performances on regular text images, but they are not expert in treating irregular text images owing to the fixed geometric structures of the layers in the modules. Unfortunately, irregular text is also very common in the wild, as illustrated in Figure \ref{examples}. Therefore, some predecessors\cite{liu2016star,cheng2017focusing,sun2018textnet} utilized rectification networks or attention mechanism to mitigate this issue. Yao \textsl{et al.}\cite{yao2014unified} presented to use a dictionary to do error correction on the recognition results to handle multi-oriented text images. Luo \textsl{et al.}\cite{moran} added a multi-object rectification network before the recognition network. Shi \textsl{et al.}\cite{shi2016robust} put forward a spatial transformer network\cite{stn} to automatically rectify the word images. Gupta \textsl{et al.}\cite{synth} proposed a method to regard the whole word as a class that will ignore the arrangement of the characters. Lyu \textsl{et al.}\cite{lyu2018mask} propose an end-to-end learning procedure to handle text instances of irregular shapes. These methods are highly effective and greatly alleviated the problem of irregular text recognition, yet most of them tend to rectify the images from different perspectives. That may lead to more manual designs like requirements of preprocesses and increment of network complexity.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{center}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.7in]{example1.png}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.7in]{example2.png}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.7in]{example3.png}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.7in]{example4.png}}
\end{center}
\caption{The examples of images with regular and irregular text from public benchmarks. (a) Regular text. (b) Curved Text. (c) Tilted text. (d) Other kinds of irregular text.}
\label{examples}
\end{figure}
In most recognition networks, standard convolutional layers that possess receptive fields with a fixed rectangular shape are utilized. These layers have a certain effect, but they may not best suit the text area as there are redundant background noises, as shown in Figure \ref{examples}. For a better performance, especially on irregular text images, we propose a focus-enhanced text recognition method in which the operation of rectifying images is needless in this paper. Imagine that we are reading text in the real world, if the words are arranged irregularly, usually we will not turn our head to fit the arrangements of them or try to rectify their shapes in our minds. Generally we simply make our focus move along with the text line and change our visual field in the minds. Hence we intend to give the network a capability to focus on the text area and extract the feature precisely. Recently, deformable convolutional layers which are able to learn additional offsets on each sample location of the convolutional kernels from the images are proposed by Dai \textsl{et al.}\cite{deconv}, which inspires us to make the layers change their structures. In our work, deformable layers that are able to adjust the receptive field to cover the region of interest better have been applied in order to enhance the focus of text recognition networks. We integrate our components with CRNN\cite{crnn}, which is widely utilized as a baseline model. To assess our method and confirm the effectiveness, we carry out some ablation experiments and comparisons with other methods on several public benchmarks. The results demonstrate that our proposed method can achieve a competitive performance both on regular and irregular text benchmarks. All the training and testing codes will be open source soon.
\section{Methodology}
\label{method}
\subsection{Baseline}
In this section, first we review the architecture of CRNN(Convolution Recurrent Neural Networks) \cite{crnn}. To the best of our knowledge, it is the first attempt to integrate CNN(Convolution Neural Networks) and RNN(Recurrent Neural Networks) for scene text recognition. Benefited from RNN who is able to achieve sequence labeling without segmentation, the model realizes end-to-end recognition. The network mainly composes of three modules: convolution, recurrent and transcription. Based on the VGG architectures\cite{vgg}, the convolutional layers consist of convolution and max pooling, and it is responsible for extracting the features of the text into frames. In the recurrent layers, BiLSTM(Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory) networks\cite{lstm} which utilize a forget gate to avoid the vanishing gradient problem are utilized, and the layers predict the content of each frame. The transcription layer decodes the per-frame predictions into a label sequence.
\subsection{Deformable Modules}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=4in]{deformable.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Indication of $3\times3$ deformable convolution kernel. The blue points indicate the sample locations of a standard convolution kernel. The arrows shows the offsets, and the green points indicate the sampling locations of deformable convolution. }
\label{deformable_illustrate}
\end{figure}
Although CRNN\cite{crnn} has reached great performances on regular text images, the models still cannot achieve a satisfactory performance when facing irregular text images on account of the background noises and the training data most of which are regular. Enlightened by Dai \textsl{et al.}\cite{deconv}, who present a network in which the convolutional layers can learn to add offsets on each sample location, we consider that it is necessary for the network to change the focus to treat irregular text. Hence we intend to integrate these deformable layers into our baseline model to enhance its focus. The 2D convolution of each location $p_0$ in the image can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
\bm{y}(\bm{p}_0)=\sum_{\bm{p}_n\in R}^{}\bm{w}(\bm{p}_n)\bm{x}(\bm{p}_0+\bm{p}_n)
\end{equation}
where $x$ represents the input feature map, $w$ represents the weight of sampled values and $R$ defines the receptive field size and dilation. In the defromable convolution, $R$ is augmented with offsets$\{\Delta \bm{p}_n|n=1,...,N\}$
\begin{equation}
\bm{y}(\bm{p}_0)=\sum_{\bm{p}_n\in R}^{}\bm{w}(\bm{p}_n)\bm{x}(\bm{p}_0+\bm{p}_n+\Delta \bm{p}_n)
\end{equation}
The offsets on sampling locations can be learned automatically during the training stage. The process of the deformable convolution is indicated in Figure \ref{deformable_illustrate}. It is obvious that the shapes of the receptive fields of the deformable convolution can better focus on the text area, which enables the ability to treat irregular text of our network. However, the replacement is not arbitrary. The shallow layers usually extract some basic information such as the edges, shapes and textures, thus the deformable convolution may be ineffective. And because there should be some space in the image for the receptive fields to drift, the effectiveness could be not obvious as deep layers have a too small size. In summary, we finally replace the convolutional layers in the middle of the network with deformable ones, which will be introduced in details in section \ref{location_impact}. The visualization of the layers in our network is shown in Figure \ref{deformable_visualize}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{center}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.45\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.2in]{conv1_1.png}
\label{standard_visualize1}
\end{minipage}
}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.45\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.2in]{deconv1_1.png}
\label{deformable_visualize1}
\end{minipage}
}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.45\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.2in]{conv1_2.png}
\label{standard_visualize2}
\end{minipage}
}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.45\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.2in]{deconv1_2.png}
\label{deformable_visualize2}
\end{minipage}
}
\end{center}
\caption{Indication of fixed receptive fields in standard convolution(a)(c) and adaptive receptive fields in deformable convolution(b)(d). In each image triplet, the left shows the sampling locations of two levels of $3\times3$ filters on the preceding feature map, the middle shows the sampling locations of a $3\times3$ filter and the right shows two activation units. Two sets of locations are highlighted according to the activation units.}
\label{deformable_visualize}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Network Architecture}
The architecture of oue modified network is depicted in Figure \ref{architectures}. Owing that the network becomes more complicated, in order to avoid the problem of vanishing gradient, some residual blocks have been utilized. Each of the residual blocks consists of two $3\times3$ convolutions with a \textsl{skip connection}. And for better engineer implementation, the adaptive max pooling layers are applied in our network. These layers are able to get the kernel size automatically according to the required size of the output feature map with
\begin{equation}
k=in-(out-1)\times floor(\frac{in}{out})
\end{equation}
where $in$ means the input kernel size and $out$ means the output kernel size.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\begin{flushleft}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.58\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.9in]{network1.png}
\label{pipline_of_crnn}
\end{minipage}%
}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.9in]{network2.png}
\label{convolutional_layers_archeticture}
\end{minipage}
}
\end{flushleft}
\centering
\caption{The pipeline of our method(a), the architecture of the convolutional layers in the network and the components of the residual blocks(b). In the figure, "Conv" means a standard convolutional layer with the kernel size and output channel number, "MaxPool" means an adaptive max pooling layer with the output size, "DConv" means a deformable convolutional layer with the kernel size and output channel number and "BatchNorm" means batch normalization operation with the input channel number.}
\label{architectures}
\end{figure}The pipeline of our network is shown in Figure \ref{pipline_of_crnn} and the architecture of the convolutional layers is depicted in Figure \ref{convolutional_layers_archeticture}. All the activation functions are ReLU and we do not modify the recurrent layers and the transcription layer of the baseline model.
\section{Experiments}
\label{experiment}
In the following part, we will describe the implementation details of our method. We use the standard evaluation protocols and run a number of ablations to analyze the effectiveness of the proposed components on public benchmarks.
\subsection{Datasets}
\subsubsection{Training Data}
\label{training_data}
\noindent\textbf{MJSynth Dataset}\cite{mjsynth1, mjsynth2} includes about 9-million gray synthesized images. The fonts of the text are collected from Google Fonts and the backgrounds are collected from ICDAR 2003\cite{icdar03} and SVT\cite{SVT} datasets. Text samples are obtained through font, border and shadow rendering. Then after coloring and distortion, the samples will be blended into natural images with some noises.
\noindent\textbf{SynthText in the Wild Dataset}\cite{synth} includes about 7-million colored synthesized images. The dictionary is collected from SVT dataset\cite{SVT} and the background images are from Google Image Search. To synthesize text images, a text example will be rendered and then blended into a contiguous region of a scene image according to the semantic information.
\subsubsection{Testing Data}
To confirm the effectiveness of our method, five benchmarks have been utilized in the experiments. Each of them will be introduced below.
\noindent\textbf{TotalText(Total)}\cite{totaltext} dataset consists of 1255 training images and 300 testing images with more than 3 different text orientations: horizontal, multi-oriented, and curved. There are totally about 2,000 word images.
\noindent\textbf{ICDAR 2013(IC13)}\cite{icdar13} dataset consists of 229 training and 233 testing images which contains about 1,000 words. The images were captured by user explicitly detecting the focus of the camera on the text content of interest, so most of the text is regular arranged horizontally.
\noindent\textbf{ICDAR 2015(IC15)}\cite{icdar15} dataset consists of 1000 training and 500 testing images with about 4,000 words. The images were collected without taking any specific prior attention, thus the word images may be blurred and not arranged horizontally.
\noindent\textbf{Street View Text(SVT)}\cite{SVT} dataset consists of 353 images in which about 600 words were labeled as testing data. The images were collected from Google Street View and many of them are severely corrupted by noise and blur, or have very low resolutions.
\noindent\textbf{IIIT 5K-Words(IIIT5K)}\cite{IIIT5K} dataset contains 3,000 cropped word test images. The dataset is harvested from Google image search.
In these datasets, Total\cite{totaltext} and IC15\cite{icdar15} are commonly used to test the ability to recognize irregular text images, and the others are mainly to test recognition of regular ones.
\subsection{Implementation Details}
The network is trained only with the synthetic text images mentioned in section \ref{training_data}, and no real data is involved. All of the input images are resized to $200\times64$. The loss function is Connectionist Temporal Classification (CTC) loss proposed by Graves \textsl{et al.}\cite{ctc}. The optimizer of the network is SGD, the batch size is set to 64 and the learning rate is 0.00005. The network is trained for 8 epochs which costs 3 days. The proposed method is implemented by PyTorch\cite{pytorch}. All experiments are carried out on a standard PC with Intel i7-8700 CPU and a single Nvidia TITAN Xp GPU.
\subsection{Ablation Experiments}
\subsubsection{The Impacts of Proposed Components}
We evaluate the effectiveness of our proposed components, including to utilize deformable convolutional layers, to use residual blocks and to resize the images to a larger size. Our model needs input images with size $200\times64$, and we also test the model with $100\times32$ which is applied in our baseline model. The comparisons are shown in Table \ref{ablation_components} and some of the recognition results are shown in Figure \ref{result}. The models are all trained with case insensitive mode and tested without lexicon.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccc}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
DConv & ResBlock & Larger Size & Total & IC13 & IC15 & SVT & IIIT5K \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
& & & 64.8 & 86.2 & 65.3 & 78.4 & 85.2 \\
\ding{52} & & & 68.6 & 88.7 & 70.8 & 78.3 & 90.4 \\
&\ding{52} & & 68.2 & 88.9 & 69.5 & 78.7 & 91.4 \\
& &\ding{52} & 65.2 & 87.4 & 65.6 & 78.1 & 87.4 \\
\ding{52} &\ding{52} & & 68.7 & 89.0 & 69.9 & 78.9 & 90.9 \\
\ding{52} &\ding{52} &\ding{52} & \textbf{70.3} &\textbf{89.7} &\textbf{72.2} & \textbf{79.4} & \textbf{92.2} \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Ablation Experiment Results. In the table, "DConv" means to utilize the deformable convolution layers, "ResBlock" means to add residual blocks into the network and "Larger Size" means to utilize $200\times 64$ as the size of input images.}
\label{ablation_components}
\end{table}
From Table \ref{ablation_components}, we can observe that the adaptations of our model achieves a progress on the accuracy compared with the baseline model. And apparently, the deformable layers are chiefly effective on irregular images, but the effect is not significant when recognizing regular text. The residual blocks are mainly effective on regular images. And to utilize $200\times64$ as the input size dose not bring about significant improvements on our baseline networks. However, as some space for offsets is required, the larger input size is highly effective on our modified network. Finally, with all of the components, the model will reach the best performance.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\begin{center}
\begin{minipage}[t]{1\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4.5in]{results.png}
\end{minipage}
\end{center}
\centering
\caption{The recognition results of our baseline model(up) and our method(down). The red characters are those recognized incorrectly.}
\label{result}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{The Impacts of Location of Deformable Layers}
\label{location_impact}
To demonstrate that it is best to utilize the deformbale convolutional layers as the fourth and fifth layers, ablation experiments with deformable layers at different positions have been involved. The results are shown in Table \ref{ablation_location}.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cccccc}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Location & Total & IC13 & IC15 & SVT & IIIT5K \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
\{3\} & 65.1 & 89.2 & 67.2 & 77.6 & 88.9 \\
\{4\} & 66.4 & 88.1 & 67.2 & 77.7 & 89.8 \\
\{5\} & 67.7 & 89.3 & 68.6 & 77.6 & 90.6 \\
\{3,4\} & 66.1 & 88.5 & 66.8 & 78.0 & 89.4 \\
\{4,5\} & \textbf{70.3}& \textbf{89.7}&\textbf{72.2}& \textbf{79.4 }& \textbf{92.2} \\
\{3,5\} & 64.4 & 88.3 & 64.4 & 74.6 & 89.1 \\
\{3,4,5\} & 63.8 & 87.3 & 64.6 & 75.0 & 88.1 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Ablation Experiment Results. "Location" represents which convolutional layers are replaced with deformable ones. For instance, "\{3,5\}" means to replace the third and fifth layers.}
\label{ablation_location}
\end{table}
In this table, it can be observed that when deeper layers are replaced with deformable ones, the network will achieve better performances. And to utilize two deformable layers is better than to use one, but when three layers are replaced, there is degeneration on accuracy. We consider that it is because too many deformable layers cause an over-fitting problem. According to the results, finally we choose to apply deformable layers in the fourth and fifth convolution.
\subsection{Comparative Evaluation}
\begin{table}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cccccc}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Methods & Total & IC13 & IC15 & SVT & IIIT5K \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Shi \textsl{et al.}\cite{crnn} & - & 86.7 & - & 80.8 & 78.2 \\
Luo \textsl{et al.}\cite{moran} & - & 92.4 & 68.8 &\textbf{88.3}& 91.2 \\
Liu \textsl{et al.}\cite{liu2016star} & - & 89.1 & - & 83.6 & 83.3 \\
Lyu \textsl{et al.}\cite{lyu2018mask} & 52.9 & 86.5 & 62.4 & - & - \\
Sun \textsl{et al.}\cite{sun2018textnet} & 54.0 & 83.0 & 60.5 & - & - \\
Shi \text{et al.}\cite{rare} & - & 88.6 & - & 81.9 & 81.9 \\
Lee \textsl{et al.}\cite{r2am} & - & 90.0 & - & 80.7 & 78.4 \\
Cheng \textsl{et al.}\cite{aon} & - & - & 68.2 & 82.8 & 87.0 \\
Liu \textsl{et al.}\cite{liu2018char} & - & 90.8 & 60.0 & 84.4 & 83.6 \\
Liu \textsl{et al.}\cite{liu2018synthetically}& - &\textbf{94.0}& - & 87.1 & 89.4 \\
Bissacco \textsl{et al.}\cite{bi2013photoocr} & - & 87.6 & - & 78.0 & - \\
Wang \textsl{et al.}\cite{wang2017gated} & - & - & - & 81.5 & 80.8 \\
Jaderberg \textsl{et al.}\cite{jad2014deep} & - & 81.8 & - & 71.7 & - \\
Jaderberg \textsl{et al.}\cite{mjsynth2} & - & 90.8 & - & 80.7 & - \\
Tan \textsl{et al.}\cite{tan2014using} & - & - & - & 80.1 & 81.7 \\
Baseline & 64.8 & 86.2 & 65.3 & 78.4 & 85.2 \\
Ours &\textbf{70.3}& 89.7 &\textbf{72.2}& 79.4 &\textbf{92.2}\\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Experiment Results. In the table, "Baseline" represents the model which is trained by our training dataset using our baseline model without any modification. "-" represents that the authors did not test their model on the dataset and no result provided.}
\label{comparisons}
\end{table}
We make a few comparisons with other methods including \cite{crnn,moran,liu2016star,cheng2017focusing,lyu2018mask,sun2018textnet,rare,r2am,aon,liu2018char,liu2018synthetically,bi2013photoocr,wang2017gated,jad2014deep,mjsynth2,tan2014using}. All the results are reached without lexicon, which are shown in Table \ref{comparisons}. It is obvious that our method is effective while dealing with irregular text like those from TotalText \cite{totaltext} and ICDAR 2015 \cite{icdar15}. Though there are no significant improvements when treating regular text from ICDAR 2013 \cite{icdar13} and IIIT5K \cite{IIIT5K}, our proposed model still reaches a satisfactory performance. On SVT \cite{SVT}, our model do not achieve a high score, and we assert that is because many of the images are severely corrupted by noise and blur, or have very low resolutions. That is different from the images in the training dataset, which confuses the deformable layers. The deformable layers are not able to locate the text area learned from the training images, as our goal is to deal with irregular text but not blurred text.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{conclusions}
For dealing with irregular text images, modules for rectifying is usually easier to think of. But that is different from the way we read irregular text which should be to change and enhance our focus. In this work, we propose a method to recognize both regular and irregular text images through utilizing deformable convolutional layers to enable the ability of the network to change and enhance its focus. The model has reached a satisfactory performance, and no component for rectifying the images is applied. In the future, as more complicated recognition networks are available and attention mechanism can be involved, our goal is to design a system that is able to deal with images in which the text is in any orientation without preprocesses.
\bibliographystyle{elsarticle-num}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{1}
Strong bars are clearly seen in the optical morphologies of ~30\% of disc galaxies \citep{Knapen2000,Marinova2007,Nair2010}, with 60\% displaying bars or bar-like features in the near infrared. Bars exert strong torques on the gas and stars in their host galaxy and are one of the major drivers of secular evolution \citep{LyndenBell1979,Combes2008,Cheung2013,Sellwood2014}. They can have a strong influence on the redistribution of gas thus impacting star formation activity and the overall stellar populations and structure in the centre of galaxies.\par
The torques which bars induce drive gas towards the leading edges of the bar. This gas becomes compressed, loses angular momentum and energy, and falls towards the centre of the galaxy \citep{Athanassoula1992,Heller1994,Knapen1995,Sheth2005}, which explains the higher central gas concentrations observed in barred galaxies compared to unbarred spirals \citep{Sakamoto1999,Sheth2005}.\par
By redistributing the gas, bars can influence the star formation of their galaxies; however, the details of these effects are still unclear. While many numerical \citep{Shlosman1989,Berentzen1998,Combes2001,Kim2011,Kim2012,Seo2013,Shin2017} and observational \citep{Heckman1980,Hawarden1986,Devereux1987,Hummel1990,Laurikainen2004,Jogee2005,Regan2006,Ellison2011,Wang2012,Lin2017} studies have found that bars are associated with an increase in central star formation rates (SFR), others find that there is no association between bars and an increase in star formation \citep{Pompea1990,Martinet1997,Chapelon1999,Cheung2013,Willett2015}.\par
Similarly, \cite{Vera2016} find there is an increase in the metallicity in the centre of barred galaxies compared to non-barred galaxies, while others find no changes in metallicities \citep{Henry1999,Considere2000,Cacho2014}.\par
The disagreement between the effects of bars on the SFRs and metallicities of their hosts could be related to morphology \citep{Ho1997,Oh2012} where early-type barred galaxies show enhanced SFRs, while late-types show no difference between the SFRs seen in barred and unbarred spirals. This might also be explained through the different lengths and strengths of bars \citep{Martin1995,Martinet1997,Kim2017}. Indeed, numerical studies find that bar strength and 3D structure can impact the efficiency of gas inflow and hence the SFR and metallicity of the host \citep{Athanassoula2003,Buta2005,Nair2010,Hoyle2011,fragkoudi2016}.\par
Given the influence that bars can have over the properties of their host, determining their age becomes an important step in understanding the evolution of their galaxies. What actually matters is not only when bars form but also if they are long lived features.\par
While some numerical studies in idealized galaxies find that bars can be destroyed by central mass concentrations, gravity torques and supermassive black holes \citep{Bournaud2002,Bournaud2005,Hozumi2005,Hozumi2012}, in cosmological simulations most of the bars are long lived features \citep{KK2012,Fiacconi2015}. Observationally, barred galaxies show central gas concentrations which are not seen in unbarred galaxies \citep{Sakamoto1999}, with some bars containing old nuclear disks \citep{Gadotti2015} which would be difficult to explain if bars were short-lived features.\par
If bars are long lived then determining the age of the bar can help uncover when galactic disks begin to settle \citep{Gadotti2001}. However, when talking about bar ages we must use some caution since the age of the stellar population within the bar is not necessarily related with the bar formation epoch \citep{Wozniak2007}. Observationally, there have been several methods proposed to provide bar ages. \cite{Perez2009} and \cite{Perez2011} used optical spectroscopy to analyse the properties of the stellar populations in bars, finding a wide range of bar ages. \cite{Gadotti2005} used the vertical velocity dispersion of the bar and found that older bars are vertically thick when compared to recently formed bars. By comparing gas mass with accretion rate \cite{Elmegreen2009} determined a lower limit on the age of the bar in their study. \cite{Kim2014} determined that as bars evolve their light profiles move from exponential and disk-like to flat. From this, they associate the flattening of the profile with bar age (i.e. older bars have flatter profiles while younger bars have more exponential, disk-like profiles). \cite{Gadotti2015} used the age of stars in the nuclear ring to define a lower limit of the epoch of bar formation. \cite{Carles2016} proposed that it might be possible to determine when the bar forms from changes in the star formation histories of the central regions of barred galaxies. \par
\cite{James2016,James2018} used a feature first noticed by \cite{James2009}, which they named the `star formation desert' (SFD), to determine the ages of the bars. They define the SFD as a region lying within the inner ring, either side of the bar in the area the bar sweeps out that shows little to no H$\alpha$ emission. These regions also display a deficit in surface stellar density \citep{Gadotti2003,Gadotti2008,Kim2016}. \cite{James2016,James2018} assumed a truncated star formation model and found that SFD regions can be very old. If the truncation of star formation is caused by the bar, this feature can be used to determine the epoch of bar formation. This leads to some interesting questions:
\begin{itemize}
\item Is the SFD region observable in simulations? Can the mechanism behind this cessation of star formation be determined?
\item Is it a result of gas being dynamically heated against star formation, or is the gas being removed by the formation of the bar? If the gas is removed then where does it go?
\item Can the properties of the SFD be used as a method for determining the formation epoch of the bar?
\item Are the SFD stars only born before the formation of the bar and, if they are not, where do the later-forming stars come from?
\item Is the cessation of star formation in the SFDs related to a global downturn in star formation?
\end{itemize}\par
In the following paper we attempt to answer these questions by presenting a numerical analysis of a sample of simulated galaxies selected from \cite{Martig2012}. The structure of the paper is as follows: Section \ref{section:simulation} contains a description of the simulation techniques used to produce our sample, a description of the sample itself and the method used to obtain the properties of the bars. Section \ref{section:results} contains our results and analysis of stars within the SFD region in comparison with the bar and global galaxy properties. Section \ref{section:discussion} contains our discussion of the main results in terms of determining the epoch of bar formation and the analysis of the stars within the SFD region. Our main conclusions are presented in Section \ref{section:conclusion} along with our plans for future analysis of this region.\par
\begin{figure*}
\begin{tabular}{lcr}
\includegraphics[trim={.5cm .5cm .5cm 1.5cm},clip,width=3.1cm]{/37_sd_output338.pdf}&
\includegraphics[trim={.5cm .5cm .5cm 1.5cm},clip,width=3.1cm]{/37_age_map.pdf}&
\includegraphics[trim={.5cm .5cm .5cm 1.5cm},clip,width=3.1cm]{/37_ysd_1_output338.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[trim={.5cm .5cm .5cm 1.5cm},clip,width=3.1cm]{/45_sd_output338.pdf}&
\includegraphics[trim={.5cm .5cm .5cm 1.5cm},clip,width=3.1cm]{/45_age_map.pdf}&
\includegraphics[trim={.5cm .5cm .5cm 1.5cm},clip,width=3.1cm]{/45_ysd_1_output338.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[trim={.5cm .5cm .5cm 1.5cm},clip,width=3.1cm]{/82_sd_output338.pdf}&
\includegraphics[trim={.5cm .5cm .5cm 1.5cm},clip,width=3.1cm]{/82_age_map.pdf}&
\includegraphics[trim={.5cm .5cm .5cm 1.5cm},clip,width=3.1cm]{/82_ysd_1_output338.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[trim={.5cm .5cm .5cm 1.5cm},clip,width=3.1cm]{/92_sd_output338.pdf}&
\includegraphics[trim={.5cm .5cm .5cm 1.5cm},clip,width=3.1cm]{/92_age_map.pdf}&
\includegraphics[trim={.5cm .5cm .5cm 1.5cm},clip,width=3.1cm]{/92_ysd_1_output338.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[trim={.5cm .5cm .5cm 1.5cm},clip,width=3.1cm]{/106_sd_output338.pdf}&
\includegraphics[trim={.5cm .5cm .5cm 1.5cm},clip,width=3.1cm]{/106_age_map.pdf}&
\includegraphics[trim={.5cm .5cm .5cm 1.5cm},clip,width=3.1cm]{/106_ysd_1_output338.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[trim={.5cm .5cm .5cm 0cm},clip,width=3.4cm]{/128_sd_output338.pdf}&
\includegraphics[trim={0cm 0cm 1cm 0cm},clip,width=3.3cm]{/128_age_map.pdf}&
\includegraphics[trim={.5cm .5cm .5cm 0cm},clip,width=3.4cm]{/128_ysd_1_output338.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Each plot represents a 40$\times$40$\times$40\,kpc box with the galaxy centred within the box. Left: Face-on surface stellar density maps with the total halo mass decreasing down the column. Middle: Average age maps displaying strong signals for the SFD desert feature. Right: Surface stellar density maps for the young stars, <10 Myrs, also displaying the SFD feature with SF mainly located within the bar region and along the spiral arms of the galaxies.}
\label{Figure:AGE}
\end{figure*}
\section{Simulations}\label{section:simulation}
In this paper we analyse 6 simulated barred spiral galaxies with a range of star formation histories and bar formation epochs selected from the 33 galaxies presented in \cite{Martig2012}. In this section we give a brief overview of the simulation technique: the motivations behind our sample, the algorithm used to determine the strengths, lengths and formation epoch of bars, and the properties of the galaxies in our sample.\par
\subsection{Simulation Technique}
The simulation technique requires two parts. The first involves a dark matter-only cosmological simulation with the adaptive mesh refinement code \textsc{ramses} \citep{teyssier2002}. From this simulation, the merger and accretion histories for halos within isolated environments at z=0, with masses between $\mathrm{{2.7} \times {10^{11}}}$ and $\mathrm{{2} \times {10^{12}} M_{\odot}}$, are extracted.\par
The target halos are then re-simulated at higher resolution. The re-simulations begin at z=5 with a seed galaxy containing stars, gas and dark matter. As shown in Appendix A.5 of \cite{Martig2009} the initial conditions do not affect the subsequent evolution of the simulated galaxy due to the very small mass of the initial seed galaxy. This galaxy's evolution is followed down to z=0 with mergers, as well as dark matter and gas accretion prescribed by the cosmological simulation; we refer the reader to \cite{Martig2012} for details on the properties of the incoming galaxies. The re-simulation has a spatial resolution of 150 pc, mass resolution of $\mathrm{{1.5}\times{{10}^4} M_{\odot}}$ for gas particles, of $\mathrm{{7.5}\times{{10}^4} M_{\odot}}$ for star particles (or $\mathrm{{1.5}\times{{10}^4} M_{\odot}}$ for star particles formed during the simulation from the gas) and $\mathrm{{3}\times{{10}^5} M_{\odot}}$ for dark matter particles in a box of 800 kpc using the particle mesh-code described in \cite{Bournaud2002,Bournaud2003}. Gas dynamics are modelled using a sticky particle algorithm.\par
Star formation is modeled using a Kennicutt-Schmidt relation \citep{1998kennicutt} with a 1.5 exponent and a star formation threshold of $\mathrm{0.03M_{\odot}pc^{-3}}$. Kinetic feedback from supernovae is included such that 20 percent of supernova energy is redistributed to the gas particles, and stellar mass loss is also taken into account \citep{Martig2012}.\par
\begin{center}
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabu} to 0.45\textwidth { | X[c] | X[c] | X[c] | X[c] | X[c] | }
\hline
\textbf{Halo} & \textbf{ $\mathrm{M_*}$ [$\mathrm{10^{10}M_{\odot}}$]} &\textbf{$\mathrm{L_{bar}}$ [kpc]} &\textbf{$\mathrm{S_{bar}}$} & \textbf{$\mathrm{T_{bar}}$ [Gyr]} \\
\hline
37 & $\mathrm{12.0}$ & 6.0 & 0.70 & 8.5\\
45 & $\mathrm{10.2}$ & 6.6 & 0.76& 6.8\\
82 & $\mathrm{3.81}$ & 4.4 & 0.38 & 2.0\\
92 & $\mathrm{4.38}$ & 5.6 & 0.71 & 6.8\\
106 & $\mathrm{4.29}$ & 3.1 & 0.45 & 6.6\\
128 & $\mathrm{2.69}$ & 3.3 & 0.74 & 4.7\\
\hline
\end{tabu}
\caption{Properties of the model galaxies taken from z=0. For each halo we provide the halo index number, the stellar mass ($\mathrm{M_*}$) calculated by summing star particles to the R${}_{25}$ limit, the bar length ($\mathrm{L_{bar}}$), and the bar strength ($\mathrm{S_{bar}}$). The final column gives the bar formation epoch of the galaxy in lookback time.}
\end{table}
\end{center}
\subsection{Sample Selection}
From the sample of 33 simulated galaxies described in \cite{Martig2012} we select 6 that display a wide range of star formation histories, masses, and bar lengths, strengths, and formation epochs. By selecting this limited sample we can do a more detailed analysis but still explore the diversity of the larger sample.\par
Column 1 of Figure 1 shows the surface stellar density maps of the galaxies face-on at z=0, ranked in order of largest halo mass (top) to lowest (bottom). The main properties are highlighted in Table 1.\par
All of the galaxies begin with a merger-intense phase which contributes to the build up of a hot stellar component for ages greater than 9 Gyr. After this the disk builds with features such as spiral arms, and, more pivotal to the focus of this paper, the bars and star formation desert regions. Halo 106 differs from this scenario by having three epochs of bar formation with the first two being destroyed by mergers. For this case we list properties relevant to the final bar, for which the bar formation epoch is given in the final column of Table 1.\par
\subsection{Bar detection}
The sample chosen has a range of bar formation epochs as listed in Table 1. Bars can be identified visually but, for a more systematic study, we identify bars through an automatic detection method. Using this method also allows for the computation of bar strengths and lengths, as explained in more detail in \cite{KK2012}. This method of bar detection is founded on the azimuthal spectral analysis of surface density profiles of face-on galaxies. \par
Bars are identified in this method with even-mode phase signatures, m=2 being the most prominent, within the `bar detection region'. The `bar detection region' we define as starting between 900 and 1500 pc. We do not begin detecting bars within 900 pc because small variations in $\mathrm{\Phi_2}$ are produced by off-centering (a result of the resolution limits) and central asymmetries cause the mis-identification of barred or non-barred systems. Once a $\mathrm{\Phi_2}$ phase is detected it must be constant for at least 1500 pc for the galaxy to be classified as barred. After a bar has been found its length (determined by the extent of the constant phase $\mathrm{\Phi_{2}}$) and strength are measured. To calculate strength we use the definition proposed by \cite{AJAL1998}:\par
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{c@{\qquad}}
\mathrm{S \equiv r^{-1}_{bar} \int^{r_{bar}}_{0} \frac{A_2}{A_0} dr}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\noindent where the radial limit of the bar is defined by $\mathrm{r_{bar}}$ and A${}_{2}$ and A${}_{0}$ represent the Fourier amplitudes for the 0${}^{\mathrm{th}}$ and 2${}^{\mathrm{nd}}$ modes.\par
Bars observable to high redshift have a strength $\mathrm{S\geqslant 0.2}$ \citep{Sheth2008}. At this strength, bars can still be confused with flattened early-type galaxies. To reduce this effect we identify true bars by using the constraint that the strengths of the m=2 mode must be greater than, or equivalent to, 0.3 in two orthogonal edge-on projections. \par
\subsection{Defining the SFD}\label{method:sfd_definition}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{SFD_region.pdf}\\
\caption{The two `C'-shaped regions we define as the SFD.}
\label{figure:SFD_region}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{Figure:AGE}, column 2 shows the mean age maps for our sample of simulated galaxies. The blue colour highlights younger stellar populations while the red shows older populations. In all of the galaxies in the sample there is a region either side of the bar, within the region the bar sweeps out, displaying consistently older populations. This coincides with the SFD region seen observationally in \cite{James2015}. The size of the SFD is closely associated with bar length and it never extends further than the radius of the bar. The SFD region is bordered by the inner ring which contains a younger population. In all the cases the bar appears to be a younger feature than the SFD but, in these simulated galaxies, older than the ring and disk.\par
We define the SFD as the region encompassed in a ring excluding the bar and the bulge. We fit the shape of the ring as an ellipse using the bar-length as the major axis and take the width of the bar as 1 kpc. Additionally, we remove stars which are associated with the bulge from the SFD by removing an inner ellipse shaped region and then removing the bar itself. This results in two `C'-shaped regions shown in Figure \ref{figure:SFD_region}.\par
Finally we remove `interloper' stars. These are stars which are only passing through the SFD region at the point of selection. To remove them from the SFD sample we define a z-axis (perpendicular to the plane of the galaxy) limit of 2 kpc either side of the central plane on a snapshot 0.075 Gyr from the selection snapshot and compare the stellar IDs to those in the selection snapshot, only keeping the stars which appear in both snapshots.\par
\section{Results}\label{section:results}
\subsection{Age Maps}
To determine whether the SFD region in the simulated galaxy sample is a result of a lack of star formation we refer to the young star maps shown in Figure \ref{Figure:AGE}, column 3. Here we present the surface stellar density of stars less than 10 Myr old, at z=0. High concentrations of young stars are seen within the bar, the spiral arms, and along the inner ring. Some of the rings are populated fully with young stars, while others exhibit broken profiles. For those that do show broken inner rings, the stars are more concentrated at the regions connecting to the ends of the bar. Very few, if any, young stars are seen in the SFD regions. When making side-by-side comparisons between the age and young star maps it is clear that they both highlight the SFD region, the age maps through the older mean age populations and the young star maps through a lack of young stars.\par
However, the figures presented in this section only show the mean age population and do not tell us about the distribution in ages within the SFD region in comparison to the bar and global populations. To understand how the age distributions differ between regions we need to investigate how the age distributions change with respect to lookback time. \par
\subsection{Star Formation Histories} \label{sec:SFH}
From the mean stellar age maps in Figure \ref{Figure:AGE} centre column there is a clear difference between the mean ages of stellar populations within the SFDs, bars, and inner rings of the galaxies.\par
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lr}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{SFH/galaxy_37_SFH_final_plots.pdf}&
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{SFH/galaxy_45_SFH_final_plots.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{SFH/galaxy_82_SFH_final_plots.pdf}&
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{SFH/galaxy_92_SFH_final_plots.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{SFH/galaxy_106_SFH_final_plots.pdf}&
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{SFH/galaxy_128_SFH_final_plots.pdf}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{For each of the simulated galaxies in our sample we present the age distributions taken from the SFD region, the bar, and the total galaxy at z=0. In each plot we display the age distribution normalised to the surface area of the corresponding regions, the age distribution normalised to an area of 1, and the residual (the bar minus the SFD age distribution). Marked on each plot by the vertical dashed line is the time of bar formation. This line coincides with the downturn in the age distribution of the SFD and, in most cases (see section \ref{sec:SFH}), the change of the residual from negative to positive.}
\label{Figure:SFH}
\end{figure*}
In Figure \ref{Figure:SFH} we plot the age distribution of stars found in the bar and SFD regions, together with the age distribution of all stars found within a 20$\times$20 kpc $\mathrm{{}^{2}}$ box with a height of 4 kpc. The top section of each plot shows the bar, SFD, and global age distributions normalised by area. The onset of the bar is marked with a black dashed line. The bar always shows a $\sim$10 times higher surface density in the age distribution when compared to the SFD and global galaxy, reflecting the higher mass surface density in the bar. The shape of the age distributions for the bar and global galaxy are actually very similar, and the formation of the bar does not seem to have any impact on star formation globally in the galaxy. By contrast, the age distribution of the SFD shows a relative lack of young stars after the formation of the bar.\par
For galaxies 37, 45, 92, 106, and 128 the drop in the age distribution of the SFD coincides with the onset of the bar. However, in galaxy 82, the drop happens long before the formation of the bar (see section 4.2.1 for more details).\par
To better compare the shapes of the different age distributions, we normalize them to 1 and plot them in the middle panels of each plot. In all cases the global and bar age distributions follow similar shapes, while the SFD gradually drops relative to that of the bar after bar formation. We highlight this effect by showing the difference between the age distributions of the bar and SFD in the bottom panels. For the majority of cases this difference moves from negative to positive after bar formation (corresponding to a change to a lower value for the SFD after bar formation). As the galaxy continues to evolve the residual difference between the bar and SFD tends to increase which we associate with a suppression in the star formation of the SFD region.\par
Again, galaxy 82 remains an outlier. The transfer of the residual from negative to positive occurs $\sim$5 Gyr before the onset of the bar. While this is not associated with the formation of the bar, there is a ring-like feature which does form during this period.\par
In all galaxies the age distribution of the stars in the SFD does not show a sudden drop at the time of bar formation, contrary to what could have been expected from the mean age maps which show a striking contrast between the mean ages of the SFD and the bar regions. For almost all of the galaxies we see a more gradual decrease in the age distribution of the SFD. If this is a true representation of the star formation histories in observed galaxies, this will make using the SFDs to time the formation of the bar harder than expected. However, there is information in the shape of the difference between the SFD and bar age distributions. Once the bar has formed, for almost all the galaxies, we see a change from negative to positive in the difference between the SFD and the bar. This difference is subtle but, it does imply that there is a suppression of star formation within the SFD after the formation of the bar.\par
\begin{figure*}
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\includegraphics[trim={0.25cm 0 2.8cm 0},clip,width=0.29\textwidth]{/gas/output079.pdf}&\includegraphics[trim={0.25cm 0 2.8cm 0},clip,width=0.29\textwidth]{/gas/output109.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[trim={0.25cm 0 2.8cm 0},clip,width=0.29\textwidth]{/gas/output124.pdf}&\includegraphics[trim={0.25cm 0 0 0},clip,width=0.365\textwidth]{/gas/output334.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Here we show the evacuation of gas from the SFD regions. Initially, the gas is diffuse before spiral arms begin to appear. When the bar forms, the central gas concentration elongates along the major axis of the bar, and the spiral arms strengthen. Once the bar is established the gas is removed from the SFD region progressively over 1-2 Gyr. Over time the size of the SFD changes corresponding to variations in the length of the bar.}
\label{Figure:gas}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Gas Removal}
To understand the drop in star formation in the SFD after the bar forms, we now explore how the gas disk responds to bar formation.
As an example, in Figure \ref{Figure:gas} we present the time evolution of the gas in galaxy 37. \par
Before the bar forms (top left panel, lookback time of 9.8 Gyr), the gas density is peaked in the center and does not show any other overdensities. The slight lopsidedness is due to tidal effects following a fly-by. As the gas disk grows and cools, it first develops spiral arms.
A bar then starts to form at a lookback time of 8.6 Gyr (top right panel). At first, the gas density contrast between the bar and its surroundings is small, but after $\sim$1 Gyr the gas within the bar region starts to be collected by the bar. After 500 Myr (bottom left panel) the bar has strengthened and it becomes clear that there is a deficit of gas within the SFD region, with the bar surrounded by a ring connected to clear spiral arms.
By z=0, there is very little gas remaining inside the SFD region (bottom right panel). \par
In all six galaxies, the gas in the central regions follows a similar evolution, although the bars form at different times.
The removal of gas from the SFD region is a relatively fast process, taking between 1-2 Gyr. This also means that star formation within the SFD is quickly suppressed after the bar forms. However, the star formation histories in Figure \ref{Figure:SFH} (discussed in Section \ref{sec:SFH}) do not show a sharp decline around the time of bar formation and instead imply a more gradual decline in the age distribution of SFD region. With no gas to continue forming young stars in the SFD after the bar formed, the younger population found in that region must be coming from elsewhere in the galaxy.\par
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{/birth/galaxy_37_snapshot_77_bar_removed_sfd_stars.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{/birth/galaxy_37_snapshot_243_bar_removed_sfd_stars.pdf}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{The birth positions of SFD stars before and after the formation of the bar overlaid on the surface stellar density maps for galaxy 37. Upper: Birth positions of SFD stars before bar formation. Lower: Birth positions of SFD stars after the formation of the bar.}
\label{figure:birth_pos}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.36\textwidth]{/birth/galaxy_37_snapshot_77_birth_pos_dist_1.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.36\textwidth]{/birth/galaxy_37_snapshot_243_birth_pos_dist.pdf}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Top: the radial distribution of birth positions for stars born before the formation of the bar. The blue line shows the radial distribution for the SFD stars and orange the radial distribution for bar stars. Before the formation of the bar the stars are mainly born in the same region, within 6\,kpc. Some stars are born in merging satellite galaxies, beyond 20\,kpc. Bottom: the radial distribution of stars born after the formation of the bar, with blue representing the SFD and orange the bar. Bar stars are mainly born in the central regions while SFD stars are mainly born outside the radius of the bar.}
\label{figure:birth_rad}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{birth/birth_frac_sfd_37_new_sfd_37_adj_range0.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{birth/birth_frac_bar_37_new_bar_37_adj_range0.pdf}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Top: the fraction of stars born after the formation of the bar in the SFD, bar and disk selected to be SFD stars at z=0 for galaxy 37. Red represents the total SFD stars born at that time, green the number of SFD stars born in the disk, blue the number of SFD stars born in the bar, and orange the number of SFD stars born inside the SFD region. The majority of the stars ending up in the SFD after the bar is formed come from the disk. Very few stars come from the SFD region. Bottom: the fraction of stars selected to be bar stars at z=0 born in the SFD, bar and disk.}
\label{figure:birth_frac}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Birth positions of SFD stars before \& after bar formation} \label{section:birth_positions}
From Figure \ref{Figure:SFH} it is clear that there is no truncation in the age distribution associated with the onset of the bar: instead it is a gradual process with the number of young stars in the SFD decreasing after the formation of the bar. However, when looking at the evolution of the gas density within the SFD after bar formation we see a distinct lack of gas in the SFD within about 1 Gyr. This is a relatively fast process and does not match up with what we inferred from the age distribution plots, which imply a gradual down turn in the age distribution. This implies that the SFD region, after the formation of the bar, is being supplemented with young stars from elsewhere in the galaxy.\par
Figure \ref{figure:birth_pos} shows the birth positions of stars found in the SFD at z=0 and born before and after the formation of the bar, for galaxy 37. Before the formation of the bar, the stars are born throughout the galaxy. After the formation of the bar there is a distinct difference; the SFD stars are born mainly in the inner ring surrounding the bar with some along the spiral arms. \par
No stars are born within the defined SFD regions. This explains the disparity between Figures \ref{Figure:SFH} and \ref{Figure:gas}. There are no stars forming within the SFD region but younger stars are coming into the SFD from the inner ring and spiral arms, which explains the gradual drop of the SFD age distribution.\par
Figure \ref{figure:birth_rad} shows the distribution of birth radii of SFD and bar stars born before (upper) and after (lower) the formation of the bar for galaxy 37 at the same ages as Figure \ref{figure:birth_pos}. This further supports the conclusion that the SFD is being supplemented with young stars from outside the inner ring and that in the SFD star formation is suppressed. This is a trend that can be seen in all of the galaxies in our sample. For all cases, before bar formation the SFD and bar stars are coming from the same regions. However, stars ending up in the bar and SFD that form after the onset of the bar come from two different regions. SFD stars come mainly from outside the bar radius (mainly from the inner ring and the spiral arms), while bar stars are mainly born inside the bar radius with a portion coming from the spiral arms.\par
Figure \ref{figure:birth_frac} shows the number of stars being born in the disk, SFD and bar for galaxy 37. The top plot in Figure \ref{figure:birth_frac} shows that almost all (75.2\%) of the SFD stars born after the formation of the bar are coming from the region we define as the disk, with only a small fraction (8.1\%) coming from the SFD. The bar also contributes a minor fraction (16.6\%) of SFD stars which may represent some of the bar stars we were not able to remove from the SFD sample selection. At $\sim$1.5 Gyr there is a drop in the age distribution which coincides with a drop in the contribution of SFD stars from the disk. This could be accounted for by the time it takes stars from the disk to migrate to the SFD region. In that case, when we take our SFD sample from the final snapshot (z=0) we are missing out on disk stars which would become SFD stars after this time.\par
The lower half of Figure \ref{figure:birth_frac} shows the number of bar stars being born in the same region defined for the top plot of the same figure. The majority (73.8\%) of bar stars are born within the bar, with a small contribution (17.7\%) from the disk and a negligible amount (8.6\%) coming from the SFD. At late times, less than 1 Gyr, there is no contribution from the disk.\par
By looking at the three plots discussed in this section in conjunction with Figure \ref{Figure:SFH} we find that before the formation of the bar the population in the SFD and bar regions come from the same regions, which is supported by the similarities of the SFD and bar age distributions. However, after the formation of the bar there is a disparity in the regions in which bar and SFD stars are born. The star formation in the SFD region is truncated quickly as gas is removed from the SFD, but young stars are being born in the disk which migrate into the SFD. To determine how the stars from the disk and ring migrate into the SFD we need to track their progression from their birth positions to the SFD region.\par
\subsection{Collective dynamics}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c c}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Tracking/galaxy_45_snapshot_258.pdf} & \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Tracking/galaxy_45_snapshot_267.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Tracking/galaxy_45_snapshot_308.pdf} & \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Tracking/galaxy_45_snapshot_322.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Tracking/galaxy_45_snapshot_336.pdf} & \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Tracking/galaxy_45_snapshot_338.pdf}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Tracking of SFD stars from their birth positions to z=0. Initially stars are born in the inner ring near the ends of the bar and along the spiral arms. They then move along the spiral arms and around the inner ring. Slowly stars begin to spiral from the inner ring into the SFD region. Finally the stars collect near the ends of the bar before circling back into the SFD selection region at z=0.}
\label{figure:tracking}
\end{figure*}
After the formation of the bar the SFD region is supplemented with young stars which are born along the inner ring and spiral arms. To determine how these stars end up in the SFD we track the progression of stars born at a lookback time of 3 Gyr to z=0 in Figure \ref{figure:tracking}. The plot at 3 Gyr shows the birth positions of the SFD stars. Correlating with the results from Section \ref{section:birth_positions}, the stars are born mainly along the inner ring and spiral arms with very few being born in the bar and SFD. Within 300 Myr the stars begin to move along the spiral arms and inner ring. By 1.2 Gyr almost all of the stars are moving along the inner ring and are beginning to fall towards the SFD region by 600 Myr. At 100 Myr the stars are collected near the ends of the bar before they reach their selection point in the SFD regions at 0 Gyr. This implies that it takes approximately 2.4 Gyr before ring stars begin to reach the SFD region, which supports our conclusion that the reduction in SFD stars being born in the disk for the final 1.5 Gyr seen in Figure \ref{figure:birth_frac} could be a result of the time taken for disk stars to migrate to the SFD.\par
\section{Discussion}\label{section:discussion}
\subsection{Limitations of the simulations}
A number of previous papers have explored the properties of simulated disks in the \cite{Martig2012} sample, and have found those disks to be realistic overall, when compared to a range of observational data.
Most importantly for this paper, \cite{KK2012} showed that the fraction of barred galaxies in the simulated sample ($\sim$70\%) is consistent with observations in the local universe, and that the time evolution of the fraction of barred galaxies matches observations by \cite{Sheth2008,Simmons2014}. Additionally, in our simulations, bars, on average, form later in low mass galaxies, which agrees with \cite{Sheth2008}.
\cite{Martig2014a,Martig2014b} have further shown that the vertical structure of the disks is well resolved, and that some galaxies are a good match to observations of the Milky Way.\par
Overall, this is a strong indication that global stellar dynamics is adequately modelled in our simulations, in spite of a spatial resolution of only 150 pc. The global distribution of gas in the central regions also appears to be consistent with observations. In particular the absence of gas within SFDs is clear in the ALMA observations of molecular gas shown by \cite{George2019}.\par
However, a resolution of 150 pc does not allow us to properly track the movement of gas particles within the central regions, or to follow the formation of features like nuclear disks. The motion of gas particles along the bar is also not properly modelled, and for instance we do not see dense gas lanes along the leading edges of the bars.\par
Additionally, the Schmidt relation used to model star formation is based solely on the local gas density, and does not account for dynamical heating from shocks halting the collapse of dense gas regions. Indeed, observations suggest that the star formation efficiency might be reduced in bars \citep{Momose2010}.\par
An imperfect modelling of star formation might be the reason why a majority of our simulated bars are star forming, which is not the case of bars generally in the Local Universe. However, star forming bars do exist \citep{Martin1997,Verley2007}, but a detailed comparison of the fraction of star-forming bars in simulations and observations (controlling for environment and mass) is beyond the scope of this paper.\par
With all of this in consideration, our simulations might overestimate star formation in bars, but probably model SFDs adequately in terms of the global dynamics of gas and stars.\par
\subsection{Potential bar dating method}
For all of the galaxies in our sample, the number of young stars (born after the bar formed) drops with time for the SFD compared to the bar.
In five out of the six galaxies, the time of bar formation closely coincides with a change in the sign of the ``bar-SFD" residual age distribution (galaxy 82 is the exception, and with this case the residual changes sign long before the bar forms). This suggests the possibility to use the sign of the residual as an indicator of the epoch of bar formation.
However, this signal appears to be very subtle, and consists in a gradual downturn in the age distribution instead of the sharp truncation assumed by \cite{James2016,James2018} to model star formation histories in their sample of observed SFDs. This is because young stars coming from the disk are migrating to the SFD, and are ``polluting" it with a young population that should not be present if only in-situ star formation happened.
In the following two subsections, we first explore the possible reasons for the strange behaviour of galaxy 82 and then discuss the usefulness of our method to date bar formation with observational data.\par
\subsubsection{The unusual behaviour of galaxy 82}\label{section:82}
Galaxy 82 is the only galaxy in which the change of sign of the Bar-SFD residual does not coincide with the epoch of bar formation. Within our full sample of 33 galaxies, galaxy 82 is unique in forming a bar as recently as 2 Gyr ago - all others formed their bars no later than 4 Gyr ago. To understand whether galaxy 82's strangeness could come from having a very young bar, we ran the simulation for a further 3 Gyr. We can confirm that even after 3 more Gyr, the age distributions still look different from the ones for the other simulated galaxies. Those differences are probably due to galaxy 82's very unique formation history that in turn could explain why it formed its bar so late.\par
At early times (10 Gyr) it consists of a central low density disk that persists throughout its evolution up until the time of bar formation. Additionally, at this time (from 10 to 9 Gyr) it undergoes the accretion of a satellite which leaves a gaseous ring surrounding the central disk. \par
The ring quickly undergoes fragmentation which is then followed by the formation of spiral arms. After the spiral arms have strengthened, the central regions become bar unstable leading to the formation of the bar. This varies drastically from the other evolutionary histories for the galaxies in our sample. Furthermore, there is a spatial segregation of the bar and SFD stars' birth positions well before the epoch of bar formation (with SFD stars being born at the edge of the low density disk, in the ring, and along the spiral arms while the bar stars are primarily born in the central disk), which is a feature we see only after the formation of the bar in the rest of our sample. This spatial segregation is most likely the cause of the early bar-SFD residual sign change, although what precisely leads to the segregation of the birth positions is not entirely clear.\par
\subsubsection{Application to observational data}
The method we propose to date bar formation in a galaxy relies on a very weak signal, which makes applying the SFD bar dating method more complex than previously suggested in \cite{James2016,James2018}.
Indeed, the method we propose relies on the accurate recovery of SFH shapes for the bar and SFD. Spectra at old ages look very similar to one another and the effect of age and metallicity can be degenerate, which will make finding a bar formation signal for early bars more challenging. Bar and SFD average ages differ by approximately 2 Gyr, which makes comparisons between the SFHs of the components for early bars difficult given the constraints stated above. Additionally, if we have overestimated the star formation efficiency of the bar in the simulations then the signal could be even weaker than anticipated. \par
Should we find a signal in observational data, we face the additional problem that the bar formation time cannot be reliably determined for all simulated galaxies in our sample. Even considering that galaxy 82 may be an unusual case we can not assume that any signal we find is directly related to bar formation. However, we can use the SFD bar dating method in conjunction with several other methods. By measuring the vertical velocity dispersion \citep{Gadotti2005} or shape of the light profiles \citep{Kim2014} we can determine if the bars are old or young and so better constrain the region of the SFH where we would expect to see a signal. In cases where these age indicators disagree the studied galaxy could be flagged as having an unusual history.\par
We can also define a lower limit on the epoch of bar formation by looking at the ages of nuclear disks \citep{Gadotti2015}, which form after the formation of the bar. Additionally, we might also be able to date bar formation by comparing the metallicities of bar and SFD stars as a function of age, due to the spatial segregation in birth positions of bar and SFD stars younger than the bar. \par
\section{Summary}\label{section:conclusion}
\cite{James2015} first described the properties of star formation deserts, regions swept up by bars with very low levels of line emission and little recent star formation. \cite{James2016,James2018} then proposed that the cessation of star formation in those regions was due to the formation of the bar. This would mean that finding a sharp truncation in star formation histories in SFDs could be a way to determine the epoch of bar formation.\par
In this paper, we investigated the validity of these conclusions by studying the properties of SFDs using zoom-in cosmological re-simulations. From the sample of \cite{Martig2012}, we chose 6 simulated disk galaxies with bar formation times ranging from 2 to 8 Gyr ago. We find that the formation of the bar does not appear to have an effect on the global star formation rate of the galaxies but affects the distribution of gas and star formation within the central regions. At $z=0$, we find on both sides of the bar regions that are dominated by old stars, and that resemble the observed SFDs. However, the SFDs in the simulated galaxies actually contain stars of all ages:
\begin{itemize}
\item SFD stars older than the bar are born in similar regions to similarly old stars that end up in the bar.
\item When the bar forms, it efficiently removes gas from the SFD on 1 Gyr timescales, which quickly truncates the local star formation.
\item SFD stars younger than the bar are not formed in-situ but are born in the disk and migrate to the SFD (unlike bar stars of similar ages, which are mostly born in-situ).
\end{itemize}
If there were no radial migration of young stars from the disk to the SFD, then the age distribution of SFD stars would show a truncation within $\sim 1$ Gyr after the time of bar formation. However, this is not the case, and the SFD age distributions show a gradual downturn instead of a truncation, which makes recovering the epoch of bar formation more complicated than \cite{James2016,James2018} anticipated. The different shapes of age distributions for SFD and bar stars can provide an indication of when the bar formed, but the signal is weak and potentially hard to detect. This might still be used to date bars, especially in conjunction with other methods.\par
SFDs could also be used to investigate radial migration. Indeed, they are unique regions with no in-situ star formation: stars younger than the bar all come from the disk (outside of the bar radius).
This can provide an uncontaminated sample of stars only affected by radial migration.
We plan to investigate this further to see if SFDs can be used to constrain migration efficiency and timescales.\par
We also plan to apply our bar dating method to observed galaxies using MUSE data from the TIMER consortium \citep{Gadotti2019} and supplementary long-slit spectroscopy. The signatures we expect in the SFD star formation histories are quite weak, but the comparison of bar, SFD and nuclear ring properties could provide better constraints on the epoch of bar formation in different types of galaxies.\par
\section*{Acknowledgements}
CEDK would like to thank the support and useful comments from B. Mummery and D. Gadotti which helped to improve the clarity of this paper. We thank the reviewer for insightful comments.
CEDK would also like to acknowledge the receipt of a PhD studentship from STFC UK.
\bibliographystyle{mnras}
|
\section{Introduction}
The Epoch of Reionization (EoR) is a pivotal era in the evolution of our Universe. In this era, that is expected to have started approximately 500 million years after the Big Bang, the very first objects in our Universe heated and ionized the intergalactic medium. One of the most promising ways to analyse this process is through detection of the redshifted 21-cm line emission of neutral Hydrogen \citep{liev-2002, morales-2005, furlanetto-2006, mcquinn-2006, pritchard-2012, park-2019}. Current constraints indicate that the EoR has taken place at a redshift of approximately $z=6-10$, implying that the 21-cm signals from the EoR are detectable in the frequency range of approximately $130$--$200$~MHz. Several low-frequency instruments have been built or are planned with the detection of these signals as one of their key science goals \citep{parsons-2012-arraysensitivity, lofar-2013, tingay-2013-mwa, dewdney-2014-ska, deboer-2017-hera, fialkov-2018-LEDA}.
Interferometric experiments aim to detect the EoR signals through power spectrum analysis \citep{paciga-2013-gmrt-eor, beardsley-2016, patil-2017, trott-2016-chips}. Such analysis can combine a large field of view and several MHz of bandwidth to decrease the uncertainty due to the thermal noise of the instrument to ultimately detect the signals from the EoR in a statistical manner. Recently, the LOFAR EoR project is working on interferometric upper limits from 10 nights of observations \citep{mertens-10night-eorlimit-2019}. Direct imaging of the EoR is probably not feasible until the Square Kilometre Array (SKA; \citealt{dewdney-2014-ska}) is functional \citep{zaroubi-2012}.
It is often necessary to average visibility measurements together that observe (almost) the same modes on the sky in order to deal with the enormous volume of visibilities that are produced by modern telescopes. One method to do this is by gridding the visibilities on a regular 2D grid in Fourier ($uv$) space, a step that is also part of making images from interferometric data. This step leads to small errors. Gridding can be avoided in some specific power spectrum methodologies, such as by making use of redundancy \citep{parsons-2009} or by using different transforms based on spherical harmonics or $m$-mode analysis \citep{carozzi-2015,ghosh-2018,eastwood-2018}.
Several 21-cm power spectrum pipelines use gridded $uv$-cubes or image cubes (the third dimension being frequency), such as \textsc{chips} \citep{trott-2016-chips}, a pipeline that constructs a fully invariance-weighted power spectrum; the \textsc{$\epsilon$ppsilon} pipeline \citep{jacobs-2016, barry-2019-eppsilon} that makes use of the Fast Holographic Deconvolution software for imaging (\textsc{fhd}; \citealt{sullivan-fhd-2012}); and the image-based tapered gridded estimater (\textsc{itge}; \citealt{choudhuri-2018}). In this paper we make use of the two LOFAR 21-cm power spectrum pipelines described in \citet{offringa-2019}, which use \textsc{wsclean} \citep{offringa-wsclean-2014} for imaging the data. During calibration or source subtraction, gridded model images are sometimes used to forward predict (continuous) model visibilities. This requires the reverse action of gridding, sometimes referred to as de-gridding, and like gridding, this is also subject to small errors.
In typical scenarios gridding decreases the number of data samples by several orders of magnitude. Besides decreasing the data volume, gridding may also have some other benefits:
\begin{itemize}
\item By imaging only the most sensitive part of the primary beam, emission that falls outside the imaged area is removed. Sidelobes of off-axis emission are not removed. Off-axis emission is often harder to model and calibrate, and removing this emission can, therefore, be a benefit. In the context of power spectrum analysis, this might come at the cost of no longer being able to measure the largest scales and increasing the sample variance \citep{choudhuri-tge-2016}.
Alternatively, visibility-based filters exist that allow some degree of primary beam shaping without gridding \citep{post-correlation-filtering, parsons-beamsculpting-2016, atemkeng-2016}, but these are more limited than what is provided by a gridding anti-aliasing filter or by trimming or windowing in image space.
\item During gridding, projection algorithms for correcting direction-dependent effects can be included, such as the $w$-term, the primary beam and the ionosphere \citep{wprojection-cornwell, bhatnagar-aproj-2008, bhatnagar-2013-wb-aprojection, tasse-2013-awimager}.
\item The output of the gridding algorithm can be stored as a standardized product (e.g. a \textsc{fits} image cube), which improves the overall modularity of a pipeline, making it easier to analyse and compare with different gridders or power spectrum pipelines. This can help in localizing the cause of excess power (such as foreground sources that have not been subtracted properly) and allows using code from regular imaging software that is rigorously tested.
\end{itemize}
Separating the redshifted 21-cm signals from the Galactic and extra-galactic foregrounds requires a high dynamic range: whereas the foregrounds have a brightness temperature of a few thousand kelvin, the expected 21-cm signals are only a few mK. In order to use an approach that includes gridding, the gridding algorithm needs to have a high accuracy in order not to bias the power spectrum measurements, while it is at the same time necessary to process large data volumes within a reasonable time. In this paper, we analyse the influence of gridding on the accuracy of the 21-cm power spectrum. We will investigate the magnitude at which the power spectrum is affected by the gridding, and analyse the minimal required conditions that makes the power spectrum bias sufficiently small to be able to detect 21-cm signals from the EoR or the Cosmic Dawn with their expected signal strength.
In Section \S\ref{sec:gridding}, we describe gridding methods and list their accuracy trade-offs. Section \S\ref{sec:power-spectra} describes the methodology to calculate power spectra from gridded images. The simulated data is described in Section \S\ref{sec:data}, and the gridding accuracy test results are presented in Section \S\ref{sec:results}. In Section \S\ref{sec:discussion}, we discuss the results and draw conclusions.
\section{Gridding} \label{sec:gridding}
To understand the effects caused by interferometric gridding, we start by describing some of the foundations of gridding. An interferometer samples the complex visibility function
\begin{align}\label{eq:visibility-function}
V(u,v,w) = \iint \frac{A(l,m) I(l,m)}{\sqrt{1-l^2-m^2}}
e^{-2\pi i \left(ul + vm + w(\sqrt{1-l^2-m^2}-1)\right)} dl dm,
\end{align}
where $u,v,w$ specifies a baseline coordinate in the coordinate system of the array, $A$ is the primary-beam function, $I$ is the sky function and $l,m$ specifies a cosine sky coordinate. The visibility function $V$ is the result of interferometric observing and calibration. In this work, we ignore any errors that might occur during this process.
When doing polarimetry, $V$, $A$ and $I$ become $2\times 2$ matrices. Without loss of generality we will ignore polarisation and treat imaging as a scalar problem. We will also not cover gridding with the element beam and instead assume $A$ to be unity. Application of the element beam during gridding potentially improves the sensitivity of the power spectrum, because this allows including the primary-beam weighted full field of view into the power spectrum. However, the improvement in power spectrum sensitivity of gridding with the beam is small, because most of the sensitivity is achieved by the central part of the beam. Using only the most sensitive part of the beam avoids parts of the beam that are less well modelled, and this has therefore been the LOFAR EoR approach in practice \citep{patil-2017}.
Imaging consists of solving $I$ from $V$, thereby inverting Eq.~\eqref{eq:visibility-function}. Part of imaging consists of calculating the PSF-convolved (dirty) image $I'$,
\begin{equation}
I'(l,m) = \frac{\sqrt{1-l^2-m^2}}{N} \int \mathcal{F_V}(l, m, w) e^{2\pi i w(\sqrt{1-l^2-m^2}-1)} dw
\end{equation}
with $N$ a normalization constant that corrects for the $uv$-coverage and $\mathcal{F_V}$ the inverse 2D Fourier transform of visibilities $V$ with the same $w$-value,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{F_V}(l, m, w) = \iint V(u,v,w) e^{2\pi i \left(ul + vm\right)} du dv.
\end{equation}
We do not consider deconvolution in this paper. It is common to subtract bright sources before the gridding step \citep{beardsley-2016, patil-2017, trott-2016-chips}.
Gridding consists of discretizing the non-uniformly sampled $u,v,w$ values. We consider gridding with and without $w$-term correction, and investigate the accuracy that different $w$-term correcting methods achieve. The simplest method of gridding is by adding the value of each visibility to the closest $uv$ grid point (nearest-neighbour gridding) and ignoring its $w$-value. Such gridding introduces two types of errors:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Aliasing: Visibilities and the $uv$-sampling function might have frequencies beyond the corresponding Nyquist-rate of the $uv$-grid (i.e., they are not band-limited at the resolution of the $uv$-grid). In other words, sources and sidelobes might exist outside the imaging field of view. Structures outside the field of view are aliased, appearing as ghost structures within the imaging field of view.
\item Discretization of $u$, $v$ and $w$-values: The true continuous $uv$-value of the sample is discretized to match the regular $uv$-grid. This causes smearing and decorrelation of emission. Similarly, any non-coplanarity of the array causes visibilities with different $w$-terms to be averaged together, also leading to smearing and decorrelation.
\end{enumerate}
Visibilities can be band-limited by low-pass filtering the visibilities, thereby avoiding aliasing. The common method to do this is by convolving the visibilities with a smoothing kernel --- the so-called anti-aliasing kernel \citep{brouw-1975, schwab-1980}. Gridding with the element beam $A$ (see Eq.~\ref{eq:visibility-function}) can acts as a natural anti-aliasing kernel \citep{bhatnagar-aproj-2008}. In case the convolution kernel is a continuous function (such as a sinc function), convolutional gridding has the additional benefit that the contribution of the continuous visibilities can be evaluated precisely at each discretized $uv$-position, which solves the second inaccuracy (i.e., point 2 listed above) for $u$ and $v$. The $w$-term can be corrected by one of several $w$-correction methods, such as convolving each visibility with a $w$-correction term that projects it onto the $w=0$ plane \citep{wprojection-cornwell}.
By convolving each visibility with the combination of an anti-alias kernel and a $w$-term correction kernel, it is theoretically possible to perform gridding that matches the accuracy of a direct Fourier transform. In practice, gridders apply further simplifications for various reasons:
\begin{itemize}
\item To reduce the computational cost of the convolution, the spatial anti-aliasing low-pass kernel is windowed to a typical size of 7 $uv$-cells. The prolate spheroidal wave function is commonly used as a compact low-pass filtering kernel and has several beneficial properties for gridding \citep{brouw-1975}. It is sometimes approximated by the easier to evaluate Kaiser-Bessel function (e.g., \citealt{offringa-wsclean-2014}).
\item The kernels are precalculated and interpolated to avoid evaluation of a computationally expensive function for each visibility. This requires discretization of the $uv$ space in which it can be evaluated, resulting in errors. It is possible to more finely sample the kernel and thereby reduce the error. We will refer to the factor by which the kernel is increased as the oversampling factor.
\item Because of the precalculation of kernels, the $w$-values are discretized as well. The number of $w$-discretization levels can strongly affect the computational performance.
\item To limit the size of the kernel in the case of $w$-projection, the $w$-kernel is trimmed at a point at which its power is a small fraction (e.g. 1\%) of its peak power. This error is not made in a pure $w$-stacking algorithm, since the $w$-term is applied in the full image domain.
\end{itemize}
In this paper, we use \textsc{wsclean} as a gridding and imaging platform, which implements several gridding engines: a $w$-stacking gridder (\S\ref{sec:wstack}); an image-domain gridder (\S\ref{sec:idg}); and inversion using a direct Fourier transform. The latter implements an imaging operation that is computationally the most expensive but accurate up to the floating-point precision, and is used as the ground truth in this work. We use \textsc{wsclean} version~2.6, released on 2018-06-11. \textsc{wsclean} is open-source.\footnote{The \textsc{wsclean} software is available at \url{http://wsclean.sourceforge.net/}.} Even though we use a specific gridder implementation, we analyse generic gridding parameters which are applicable to most imaging algorithms. We include an analysis of standard convolutional gridding by turning $w$-stacking off. These results are therefore applicable to any standard (e.g. prolate-spheroidal based) gridding implementation, such as the implementation in \textsc{casa}. Additionally, because \textsc{wsclean} does not implement $w$-projection, we include an analysis of the $w$-projection implementation in \textsc{casa} \citep{casa-2007}.
\subsection{$w$-stacking gridding} \label{sec:wstack}
In the $w$-stacking algorithm, visibilities are gridded on a number of $w$-planes, each corresponding to a certain range of $w$-values. All planes are separately Fourier transformed to the image domain, and the $w$-term is subsequently corrected for by applying multiplication of the images by the spatially-varying $w$-term. The standard gridding engine of \textsc{wsclean} applies the $w$-stacking algorithm to correct for $w$-terms \citep{offringa-wsclean-2014}. This gridder is used in this work for investigating the influence of gridding settings on the power spectrum.
Configurable gridding parameters that we will investigate are:
\begin{itemize}
\item Anti-aliasing kernel size --- the width of the convolution kernel in number of uv-cells. The \textsc{wsclean} default for this setting is 7, which indicates that the kernel covers $7 \times 7$ $uv$-cells.
\item Kernel oversampling factor --- for performance reasons, the kernel is tabulated beforehand and not directly evaluated. When a value is gridded on the $uv$-plane, the nearest tabulated kernel is selected. Other interpolation methods such as linear interpolation help to reduce the error, but increase the per-visibility cost and are not implemented in \textsc{wsclean}. In \textsc{wsclean}, the default is to oversample the kernel 63 times, which implies a precomputed table of size $7 \times 63$.
\item Gridding function --- By default, \textsc{wsclean} uses a sinc function windowed by a Kaiser-Bessel function \citep{kaiser-1980}, which approximates a discrete prolate spheroidal sequence (DPSS).
\item Padding factor --- Factor by which the image size is increased beyond the field of interest, to avoid edge issues. By default, \textsc{wsclean} uses a factor of 1.2.
\item Number of $w$-layers -- Discrete number of $w$-values. Visibilities are moved to their nearest $w$-value. By default, \textsc{wsclean} uses a number of $w$-values such that the maximum phase decorrelation, which occurs at the edge-pixels of the image, is 1 radian.
\end{itemize}
In the $w$-stacking implementation, all calculations are performed with 64-bit (IEEE 754-2008) double-precision floating-point values.
\subsection{Image domain gridding} \label{sec:idg}
Image domain gridding (\textsc{idg}; \citealt{vandertol-idg-2018}) is a method that calculates the contribution of visibilities in image space. Visibilities are grouped into slightly overlapping $uv$-subgrids, each covering a small part of the $uv$-plane (typically 32$^2$ to 128$^2$ cells). The contribution of the visibilities in their subgrid is then calculated by evaluating the image-domain ($lm$-space) contribution directly using a direct Fourier transform, taking into account the offset of the subgrid in $uv$-space. After calculating the contribution of all visibilities within the subgrid, a fast Fourier transform (FFT) is used to transform each subgrid from image domain to $uv$-space, and the contribution of all the subgrids are added to the global $uv$-plane. Finally, the full $uv$-plane is transformed into the image using a FFT.
While this method performs more computations compared to convolutional gridding, it can be executed in parallel and is highly efficient when using graphics processing units (GPUs), resulting in a high gridding throughput. \textsc{idg} has been shown to speed up the gridding by an order of magnitude compared to traditional gridding algorithms \citep{veenboer-gpuidg-2017}.
When \textsc{idg} is used, anti-aliasing and $w$-term corrections are applied in image space, and are evaluated directly. This implies that \textsc{idg} is not affected by some of the errors made in traditional gridding algorithms, such as the discretization of $w$-values and the discretized gridding kernel. When using \textsc{idg} to predict visibilities, it has been shown that \textsc{idg} has a higher per-visibility accuracy compared to the $w$-stacking algorithm of \textsc{wsclean} \citep{vandertol-idg-2018}. Most of the calculations within \textsc{idg} are calculated with 32-bit single precision floating point values (IEEE 754-2008).
The \textsc{idg} implementation allows additional gridding terms, such as $w$-terms, primary beam terms ($a$-terms) and other direction-dependent effects. Unlike the $a$-projection algorithm \citep{bhatnagar-aproj-2008, tasse-2013-awimager, bhatnagar-2013-wb-aprojection}, the kernels are applied as multiplications in image space. Primary beam corrections could be important in the context of EoR experiments, in particular to correct for instrumental polarization leakage \citep{asad-2015, jagannathan-2017}. This is critical in power spectrum estimation \citep{jelic-2008} and for tomography with the SKA \citep{mellema-2015}. Full $a$-correction also allows per-station beam weighting during imaging. This allows an optimally weighted integration of the data. We will not focus on the errors associated with including such corrections, and instead limit the scope of this article to the gridding errors involved in the calculation of $w$-term corrected images without other direction-dependent effects.
\textsc{idg} is open source and available under the GNU General Public License v3.0.\footnote{The \textsc{idg} software is available at \url{https://gitlab.com/astron-idg/idg}.}, and has been integrated into \textsc{wsclean}. Therefore, \textsc{idg} can be combined with the deconvolution algorithms implemented in \textsc{wsclean}, such as the auto-masked multi-scale multi-frequency deconvolution algorithm \citep{offringa-2017}.
We use the \textsc{idg} default settings, which includes an optimized anti-aliasing kernel as described in \citet{vandertol-idg-2018}. For our setup, \textsc{idg} selects a subgrid size of 40 $\times$ 40 elements. IDG employs $w$-stacking to keep the size of the kernel, trimmed at the 1\% level, within the subgrid size. There is no oversampling parameter in IDG, because IDG always calculates the contribution of a visibility in real space, which implies there is no discretization of the $uv$-kernel.
\subsection{$w$-projection gridding} \label{sec:w-projection}
The $w$-projection algorithm applies the $w$-correction as a convolution in $uv$-space \citep{wprojection-cornwell}. For applying the $w$-projection algorithm, we use the \texttt{tclean} task in \textsc{casa} version 5.1.1-5 \citep{casa-2007}. The $w$-projection algorithm shares many of the configurable parameters of $w$-stacking, such as oversampling, anti-aliasing kernel size and padding, but these are not exposed in the \texttt{tclean} interface, and we will therefore use the default values: a prolate spheroidal kernel of $3 \times 3$, oversampling of a factor of 4 and a padding factor of 1.2. As with $w$-stacking, the $w$-direction needs to be discretized for $w$-projection, in order to precalculate a limited set of the $w$-kernels, and this leads to a similar parameter that sets the number of discretized $w$-values (the \texttt{wprojplanes} parameter in \textsc{casa}). In our analysis, we use \texttt{wprojplanes=256}. Furthermore, $w$-projection limits the $w$-kernel to a specific size, typically to the size at which the power goes below 1\% of the peak power \citep{wprojection-cornwell}.
\section{Power spectra} \label{sec:power-spectra}
21-cm power spectra quantify the spatial and spectral fluctuations found in the data. In this work, we calculate the power spectrum values from image cubes. The calculations follow those described in \citet{offringa-2019}, and consist of the following steps: i) spatial Fourier transformation; ii) normalization of the $uv$-values by dividing out the instrumental $uv$-response and converting them to kelvin; iii) a generalized inverse-variance weighted (with a diagonal matrix) least-squares Fourier transform along the line-of-sight direction; iv) cylindrical or spherical averaging. We will analyse data in two ways:
\begin{itemize}
\item Using a foreground avoidance strategy. We will measure the power bias caused by gridding inside the foreground-free EoR window of a cylindrically-averaged power spectrum. In this approach, the modes inside the foreground wedge are not used.
\item Using a foreground removal strategy. We use Gaussian process regression (GPR; \citealt{mertens-2018}) to remove residual foregrounds after gridding, and analyse the resulting full power spectra.
\end{itemize}
A Blackman-Harris window is used both during the spatial Fourier transform and during the least-squares inversion along the line of sight. We calculate the power spectra for baselines sizes of 50--250$\lambda$, corresponding with $k_\perp$-values of approximately 0.05--0.3~$h$Mpc$^{-1}$. These same settings are used in the analysis of LOFAR EoR observations \citep{patil-2017, mertens-10night-eorlimit-2019}.
\section{Simulated data} \label{sec:data}
To analyse the gridding accuracy we simulate a typical EoR observation with point sources drawn from a realistic population distribution. We use a distribution determined from low-frequency (154~MHz) observations \citep{franzen-2016}:
\begin{equation}
\frac{dN}{dS} = 6998\,S^{-1.54} \textrm{Jy}^{-1} \textrm{Sr}^{-1}.
\end{equation}
Using this distribution we predict sources with intrinsic (i.e., before applying the primary beam) flux densities between 1~mJy and 10~Jy in an area with a diameter of 90\degree, resulting in a model of approximately one million sources. We assume that all sources with an apparent flux density (i.e., after multiplying each source with the corresponding primary beam response) of at least 100 mJy can be subtracted from the visibilities before gridding, which is realistic for LOFAR observations: in LOFAR EoR observations the residual peak flux after direction-dependent subtraction of bright sources, imaged with a maximum baseline of 250$\lambda$, is about 70~mJy in the NCP field \citep{yatawatta-2013} and 150~mJy in the 3C\,196 field (Offringa et al. in prep). Therefore, we evaluate the average LOFAR primary beam value for each source and remove sources with an apparent brightness $>100$~mJy. To further limit the number of sources to be predicted, we also remove sources with an apparent flux density $<500$~$\mu$Jy, resulting in a model with $\sim$15,000 sources that are distributed out to 45{\degree} away from the phase centre. The spectral index of each source is drawn from a normal distribution with an average spectral index of $\alpha=-0.8$ (with $\alpha$ defined by $S(\nu)=S_0 (\nu/\nu_0)^\alpha$) and a standard deviation of 0.2. These distribution parameters match those of the weakest sources found by \citet{hurley-walker-2017-gleam}. We do not specifically simulate flattening of fainter (starburst) galaxies or special classes of sources such as USS, CSS or GPS sources that can have steep or curved spectra at the frequencies of interest (see \citealt{callingham-2017} for an overview).
The standard LOFAR software tool \textsc{dppp}\footnote{\textsc{dppp} is available at \url{https://github.com/lofar-astron/DP3}.} is used to predict fully accurate visibilities from the model by analytical evaluation of the visibility function and primary beam model. The observing time, phasing centre and antenna positions are taken from a 6~h night-time 3C\,196 observation. Besides gridding, several other processing steps can cause excess power, such as missing data due to RFI excision \citep{offringa-2019} and calibration with an incomplete model \citep{patil-2016, barry-2016, sardarabadi-2018}. In this work we limit ourselves to the effects of gridding, and therefore predict perfect data without flags or calibration errors. We do however include missing channels in our simulation, which are unavoidable in LOFAR data due to channel aliasing at the sub-band edges. The same effect also causes the sub-band edge channels of the Murchison Widefield Array (MWA; \citealt{tingay-2013-mwa}) to be lost \citep{offringa-2015-mwa-rfi}. In LOFAR EoR processing, two 3~kHz channels at each side of the sub-band are removed before averaging, leaving 60/64 channels in the data for each 195~kHz sub-band. These data are averaged by a factor of 12 in frequency and 6 in time, resulting in 12~s timesteps and 5 channels per sub-band, with gaps between the sub-bands. The decorrelation caused by averaging is $\ll 1\%$. In this work, we directly forward predict the averaged data, and are therefore not affected by time or frequency smearing. We simulate data between 115--134~MHz, 94 sub-bands in total, each with 5 channels.
\section{Results} \label{sec:results}
To assess the effects of gridding, we independently image each of the 470 frequency channels of our simulated data (\S\ref{sec:data}) using \textsc{wsclean}, and construct 21-cm power spectra from the resulting image cube. These power spectra are compared to ground-truth power spectra that are made from the direct-FTed images.
The images cover $3${\degree} by $3${\degree} on the sky with $360 \times 360$ pixels. Our limited imaging field of view implies that only the most sensitive part of the primary beam is used. In the corners of the images, the beam has a gain of approximately 75\%.
\begin{figure*}[p!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=90mm]{img/directft.pdf}%
\includegraphics[width=90mm]{img/nn-padding1-nw32.pdf}\\%
\includegraphics[width=90mm]{img/overs63-gridsize7-padding1_2-bn-nw32.pdf}%
\includegraphics[width=90mm]{img/idg.pdf}\\%
\includegraphics[width=90mm]{img/overs16535-gridsize15-padding2-bn-nw1.pdf}%
\includegraphics[width=90mm]{img/overs16535-gridsize15-padding2-bn-nw16.pdf}%
\caption{Cylindrically-averaged power spectra for various gridding settings. From left to right, top to bottom: direct FT inversion; nearest neighbour gridding (no oversampling); default settings for \textsc{wsclean}; default settings for image domain gridding; increased oversampling and kernel size settings for \textsc{wsclean}, without $w$-correction; and including $w$-correction but with a low number of $w$-layers. Nearest-neighbour gridding results are drawn with a different colour scale. Black dashed line: horizon wedge; pink dashed line: same with extra space for windowing function; blue dashed line: the primary beam (5\degree) wedge. Gridding parameters are abbreviated as follows: o = oversampling factor; s = gridding kernel size; nwl = number of $w$-layers; p = padding factor.}
\label{fig:power-spectra-2d-before-gpr}%
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=15cm]{img/BeforeGPR-SphericalPowerspectrum.pdf}%
\caption{Spherically-averaged ``foreground avoidance'' power spectra errors (absolute difference) without GPR foreground subtraction, compared to the directly FTed data. $k$-values that fall under the wedge are excluded. Gridding parameters are abbreviated as follows: o = oversampling factor; s = gridding kernel size; nwl = number of $w$-layers; p = padding factor.}
\label{fig:powerspectrum-1d-before-gpr}%
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Foreground avoidance results}
We start by investigating a foreground avoidance strategy. In this scenario, the modes that are dominated by foregrounds are not used in the final power spectra, and we therefore do not perform Gaussian progress regression to remove the wedge. Before performing the $k_\parallel$ transform, a third-order polynomial fit in frequency direction is subtracted from the $uv$-cube, from the real and imaginary parts separately. This removes both EoR and foreground power from the low $k_\parallel$-modes inside the wedge. This decreases the dynamic range requirements of the generalized $k_\parallel$ Fourier transform, thereby avoiding some artefacts that are not the focus of this paper, without biasing the power spectrum in the parts that we measure.
Fig.~\ref{fig:power-spectra-2d-before-gpr} shows cylindrically-averaged power spectra for various gridding methods to provide an overview of the artefacts that each method produces. The foreground wedge structure is clearly visible. Power under the wedge is saturated in the colour scale used in these plots. The strongest modes within the wedge have values of $10^{11}$~mK$^2h^{-3}$Mpc$^3$, which implies a dynamic range of over ten orders of magnitude between contaminated and uncontaminated modes. A horizontal line at $k=2.4$~$h$Mpc$^{-1}$ (delay of 5~$\mu$s) is caused by the spectral gap between sub-bands. Fig.~\ref{fig:power-spectra-2d-before-gpr} demonstrates that gridding can cause different artefacts in the 2D power spectra: excess power that is strongest at low $k_\parallel$-values (nearest-neighbour gridding), a uniform level of excess power (default \textsc{wsclean} settings: $w$-stacking with 32 $w$-layers, kernel size of 7, 1.2$\times$ padding, 63$\times$ oversampling), and excess power at the longest baselines (limited $w$-sampling).
An overview of the effect of various settings in a spherically-averaged power spectrum is given in Fig.~\ref{fig:powerspectrum-1d-before-gpr}. Only modes outside the wedge are integrated. We add a delay of 0.6~$\mu$s to the theoretical horizon wedge line to also exclude the convolution kernel size resulting from the windowing in the $k_\parallel$-transform, resulting in the pink dashed line in Fig.~\ref{fig:power-spectra-2d-before-gpr}. When comparing the different methods by their excess power above the wedge, nearest-neighbour gridding results in strong excess power, with an excess of about 100~mK. The $w$-projection implementation in \textsc{casa} shows an excess of $\sim$20-50~mK. Both exceed nearly all 21-cm EoR models. With the default \textsc{wsclean} settings, this decreases to 1~mK at low $k$-values and to 10~mK at high $k$-values. Gridding with \textsc{idg} results in very accurate results with the least excess power (1 to 10~$\mu$K) of all tests.
\begin{figure*}
\centering \vspace*{-5mm} %
\hspace*{-5mm}\includegraphics[width=115mm]{img/powerspectrum-oversampling.pdf}\\%
\hspace*{-5mm}\includegraphics[width=95mm]{img/powerspectrum-kernelsize.pdf}%
\includegraphics[width=95mm]{img/powerspectrum-nwlayers.pdf}\\%
\hspace*{-5mm}\includegraphics[width=95mm]{img/powerspectrum-window.pdf}%
\includegraphics[width=95mm]{img/powerspectrum-padding.pdf}%
\caption{Effect of gridding accuracy for several gridding parameters: a) kernel oversampling (\S\ref{sec:results-oversampling}); b) kernel size (\S\ref{sec:results-kernelsize}); c) the number of $w$-discretization levels (\S\ref{sec:results-wlayers}); d) gridding kernel function and \textsc{idg} comparison (\S\ref{sec:results-kernelfunction} and \S\ref{sec:results-idg}); and e) padding (\S\ref{sec:results-padding}). The plots describe the absolute error of spherically-averaged power spectrum measurements using a foreground avoidance strategy. The direct FT results are used as ground truth. Each plot shows the dependency on one parameter, while keeping the other parameters at their highest accuracy setting (see Table~\ref{tbl:parameters}). }
\label{fig:power-spectra-per-parameter}%
\end{figure*}
\begin{table}
\caption{Gridding parameter values. Columns 2, 3 and 4 specify the default settings in \textsc{wsclean}; the settings used in Fig.~\ref{fig:power-spectra-per-parameter} (unless otherwise specified); and the minimum settings that are required to have an excess power of at most 0.1~mK in the range $k$=0.5--1~$h$Mpc$^{-1}$, respectively. The latter holds for both the foreground avoidance and the foreground subtraction approach.}
\label{tbl:parameters}
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|c|}
\hline
\textbf{Name} & \textbf{Default} & \textbf{Fig.~\ref{fig:power-spectra-per-parameter}} & \textbf{Minimum} \Tstrut\Bstrut \\
\hline
Oversampling & 63 & 16535 & 4095 \Tstrut \\
Kernel size & 7 & 15 & 3\\
$w$-layers & 32 & 1000 & 500 \\
Kernel function & Sinc$\times$KB & Sinc$\times$KB & Sinc$\times$KB \\
Padding & 1.2 & 2 & 1 \Bstrut \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
Fig.~\ref{fig:power-spectra-per-parameter} shows various foreground-avoiding power spectra, each visualizing the result of changing the value of one parameter while the other parameters are fixed to a setting that reflects a high accuracy for that parameter. For each parameter, we will determine the least computationally expensive setting that would still allow a detection of the 21-cm signals from the Epoch of Reionization. The 21-cm signals are expected to have a brightness of a few mK (e.g., \citealt{greig-2015-21cmmc, mellema-2018}), and we therefore require that less than 0.1~mK power is added in the range of $k=0.5$--$1$~$h$Mpc$^{-1}$. The parameter settings are summarized in Table~\ref{tbl:parameters}.
\subsubsection{Oversampling} \label{sec:results-oversampling}
The results indicate that the oversampling factor is the most crucial parameter for avoiding gridding excess power.
Fig.~\ref{fig:power-spectra-per-parameter}a shows that the default setting of 63 for \textsc{wsclean} adds a few mK excess power. Therefore, the default settings do not meet the minimum accuracy. Oversampling with a factor of $4\times10^3$ limits the excess noise below 0.1~mK
(34~$\mu$K at $k=1$~$h$Mpc$^{-1}$).
With an oversampling of approximately $8\times 10^3$ times, the excess power is no longer reduced by increasing the oversampling further, indicating that the error due to sampling of the kernel is no longer the limiting factor. The added computational cost of increasing the oversampling factor is relatively small because the gridding kernel is precalculated. Increasing the oversampling from 63 to $8\times 10^3$ increases the imaging time by less than 10\%. The need for large oversampling factors also explains why the $w$-projection result in Fig.~\ref{fig:powerspectrum-1d-before-gpr}, for which an oversampling factor of 4 is used, shows a high level of excess power.
\subsubsection{Kernel size} \label{sec:results-kernelsize}
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:power-spectra-per-parameter}b, a kernel size of 3 is enough to limit the excess noise below 0.1 mK at $k=1$ $h$Mpc$^{-1}$. This implies that the default size of 7 can be decreased for EoR experiments. However, decreasing the kernel size from 7 to 3 does not improve gridding speed \citep{offringa-wsclean-2014}.
\subsubsection{\textit{w}-layers} \label{sec:results-wlayers}
The bottom left figure of Fig.~\ref{fig:power-spectra-2d-before-gpr} shows the result of applying no $w$-term correction. This demonstrates that $w$-correction is not strictly required to avoid excess noise. However, the lack of $w$-correction causes some decorrelation to occur, which in turn reduces sensitivity. The amount of decorrelation is dependent on the image size, baseline length and array configuration. When disabling $w$-term correction, we measure a root mean square error of 9\% over the full image, and an average loss of 8\% in source strength at $1.5\degree$ distance for our imaging configuration (3$\degree$ $\times$ 3$\degree$ FOV, LOFAR baselines up to 250$\lambda$). Fig.~\ref{fig:power-spectra-per-parameter}c shows that using a small number of $w$-layers of for example 16 causes more excess power compared to using no $w$-layers at all. This can be explained by how $w$-stacking works: it groups visibilities with similar $w$-terms and uses a constant $w$-correction for those. Because the $w$-term is frequency dependent, whereas the maximum $w$-term (and therefore the $\Delta w$ stepsize) is limited by the baseline length threshold (250$\lambda$), this causes fluctuations over frequency. To avoid significant decorrelation and excess noise, at least 300 $w$-layers are necessary. Using 300 $w$-layers increases the imaging time by a factor of 3 compared to no $w$-correction.
\subsubsection{Kernel function} \label{sec:results-kernelfunction}
Fig.~\ref{fig:power-spectra-per-parameter}d shows the results for gridding with different kernel functions: a truncated sinc-function, the Kaiser-Bessel function, and a sinc windowed by a truncated Gaussian, Kaiser-Bessel and Blackman-Nutall function. Windows with stronger sidelobe suppression cause less excess power. This underlines that kernels with discontinuities at the border will cause spectral fluctuations.
\subsubsection{\textsc{idg}} \label{sec:results-idg}
In addition to different kernel functions, Fig.~\ref{fig:power-spectra-per-parameter}d also shows the \textsc{idg} results with CPU and GPU, which both show a low excess power of a few $\mu$K over most of the measured $k$-range. The two results show slightly different results, which might be caused by different implementations of the $\sin$ and $\cos$ functions or the use of a different fast Fourier transform library.
\subsubsection{Padding} \label{sec:results-padding}
Padding mitigates edge effects in the image domain. As demonstrated by Fig.~\ref{fig:power-spectra-per-parameter}e, padding has no significant effect on the gridding excess power in 21-cm analysis. This can be explained by the fact that the edge effects do not cause spectral fluctuations.
\subsubsection{Numerical precision} \label{sec:results-numprec}
We have compared a direct Fourier transform performed with single precision floats and with double-precision floats, and observe no significant differences between the two results. This suggests that gridding with single-precision floating point calculations is accurate enough for EoR experiments. In general, adding a large number of values together can result in a loss of precision, and with $2.6\times10^9$ visibilities that might seem inevitable. A reason why in practice we see no difference between single and double-precision floats, is that values in image space grow with the square root of the number of samples. In $uv$-space, values are naturally dispersed because they are gridded in different $uv$-bins.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{img/gpr/directft.pdf}%
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{img/gpr/nn-padding1-nw32.pdf}\\%
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{img/gpr/overs63-gridsize7-padding1_2-bn-nw32.pdf}%
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{img/gpr/idg.pdf}\\%
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{img/gpr/overs16535-gridsize15-padding2-bn-nw16.pdf}%
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{img/gpr/overs16535-gridsize15-padding2-bn-nw1000.pdf}%
\caption{Residual cylindrically-averaged power spectra after applying GPR. From left to right, top to bottom: direct FT inversion; nearest neighbour gridding (no oversampling); default settings for \textsc{wsclean}; default settings for image domain gridding; increased oversampling and kernel size settings for \textsc{wsclean}; and same but with a high number of $w$-layers. To highlight the excess power, not all power spectra use the same color maps. Black dashed line: horizon wedge; pink dashed line: same with extra space for windowing function; blue dashed line: the primary beam (5\degree) wedge. Gridding parameters are abbreviated as follows: o = oversampling factor; s = gridding kernel size; nwl = number of $w$-layers; p = padding factor. }
\label{fig:power-spectra-2d-after-gpr}%
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=15cm]{img/AfterGPR-SphericalPowerspectrum.pdf}%
\caption{Spherically-averaged ``foreground subtraction'' power spectra errors (absolute difference) after foregrounds removal with GPR. The ground truth (power spectrum from directly FTed data) was subtracted from each resulting power spectra. All $k$-values are included. Gridding parameters are abbreviated as follows: o = oversampling factor; s = gridding kernel size; nwl = number of $w$-layers; p = padding factor.}
\label{fig:powerspectrum-1d-after-gpr}%
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Foreground subtraction results}
In this section, we discuss the results of applying Gaussian progress regression (GPR) to the data to remove the emission in the wedge, and subsequently including the foreground-contaminated modes in the power spectra.
GPR has the potential to cause some bias of the signal \citep{mertens-2018}. A full quantization of this bias is beyond the scope of this paper, but we made a simple simulation to test the performance of GPR with the settings and foregrounds that are used in this paper. This simulation consist of the predicted foregrounds with the most accurate gridding settings, a noise equivalent to 100 nights of 12~h and a realistic system equivalent flux density for LOFAR of 4000~Jy per station, and a 21-cm signal covering a large range of variances and frequency coherence scales.
For each of these signal strengths and coherence-scales, 10 realizations of noise and signal are generated and GPR is performed on the summed images. The ratio of input over recovered signal power-spectra is computed for three different ranges of scales. We find biases in the range 0.7--2.5, and overall similar results to what was found in \citet{mertens-2018}.
We continue by applying GPR to the foreground-only image cubes with different gridding settings, and construct power spectra from the GPR residuals. Fig.~\ref{fig:power-spectra-2d-after-gpr} shows the cylindrically-averaged power spectra after having removed the foregrounds with GPR. In the direct FT result, the residual foreground power is about 2 mK$^2h^{-3}$Mpc$^3$, a factor of $\sim$10$^{11}$ lower compared to the unsubtracted results. GPR also successfully removes the horizontal band of power at 5$\mu$s caused by the sub-band gaps.
Fig.~\ref{fig:powerspectrum-1d-after-gpr} shows the spherically-averaged power spectra that include all modes (including foreground modes) after foreground removal. Foreground removal allows the use of the low-$k$ foreground modes, down to $k=0.07$ $h$Mpc$^{-1}$. LOFAR is much more sensitive at these scales and, compared to foreground avoidance, requires less observing time to achieve comparable EoR constraints.
From the results, it is clear that GPR cannot fully remove the excess gridding power introduced by nearest neighbour gridding or insufficient sampling of the kernel, although even in those cases, it reduces the wedge power considerably. The default \textsc{wsclean} settings show an excess of 0.1 mK at low $k$ values of $0.07$~$h$Mpc$^{-1}$ up to approximately 10 mK at high $k$ values of $0.9$~$h$Mpc$^{-1}$. We define an acceptable excess power in the foreground subtraction strategy to be at most 0.1 mK at $k=0.1$~$h$Mpc$^{-1}$. With this requirement, the default settings do not result in sufficient accuracy. To reach this level of accuracy, the only parameter that requires tuning is the oversampling factor. This is in contrast to the foreground avoidance strategy, where increased $w$-quantization and oversampling factor are required to reach an acceptable level of excess power. GPR is able to remove excess power caused by $w$-quantization, making it possible to use the default of 32 $w$-layers. The GPR results with \textsc{idg} as gridding algorithm meet the required accuracy, with an excess power of 3~$\mu$K at $k$=0.1~$h$Mpc$^{-1}$ and, similar to the foreground avoidance results, overall shows the best accuracy.
\subsection{Required $w$-stacking settings}
The last column of Table~\ref{tbl:parameters} lists the minimal (least expensive) $w$-stacking gridding settings that are required to achieve a maximum excess power of 0.1~mK at $k=1$~$h$Mpc$^{-1}$ and $0.1$~$h$Mpc$^{-1}$ in the case of foreground avoidance and foreground subtraction, respectively. Compared to the default settings, constraining the excess power requires increasing the oversampling factor and the number of $w$-layers, while the kernel size and padding can be decreased.
\begin{table}
\caption{Imaging runtime on the "Dawn" cluster, using both CPU sockets of each of the 15 compute nodes. The IDG-GPU imager additionally uses one of the Tesla K40 GPUs on each node. The factor is the relative time with respect to $w$-stacking with default settings. The last column specifies the visibility throughput for a single node.}
\label{tbl:computation-requirements}
\begin{tabular}{|l|r|r|r|}
\hline
\textbf{Imaging method} & \textbf{Runtime} & \textbf{Factor} & \textbf{Throughput} \\
& & & \textbf{(KVis/s)} \Tstrut\Bstrut \\
\hline
$w$-stacking default & 4 min & 1 & 720 \Tstrut \\
($o=63$, nwl=$32$, p=1.2) & & & \\
$w$-stacking minimum & 7 min & 1.75 & 410 \Tstrut \\
($o=4$K, nwl=$500$, p=1) & & & \\
$w$-projection & 27 min & 6.75 & 110 \Tstrut \\
Direct transform & 38 h & 570 & 1.3 \Tstrut \\
IDG-CPU & 4 min & 1 & 720 \Tstrut \\
IDG-GPU & 16 s & 0.07 & 11000 \Tstrut \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Computational requirements}
In this section we report the computational requirements for the default and minimal gridding settings as listed in Table~\ref{tbl:parameters}. We compare this to the performance of \textsc{idg} and a direct FT. We use 15 compute nodes from the LOFAR EoR ``Dawn'' cluster, which each have the following specifications: 2 Intel Xeon E5-2670v3 CPUs (for a total of 24 physical cores), 128 GB of memory and 4 NVIDIA Tesla K40 GPUs (unless noted otherwise, we use only one GPU in our experiments). The CPUs provide a combined peak performance of 2.0 TFlop/s (single-precision, using FMA and AVX2 instructions), while one Tesla K40 GPU has a single-precision peak performance of 5.0 TFlop/s. The imaging is performed in parallel on the 15 nodes.
We measure the runtime for an imaging task that consists of creating the point spread function and the four Stokes images (I, Q, U, V) for each of the 94 sub-bands, with a total of $2.6\times 10^9$ visibilities
and report results in Table~\ref{tbl:computation-requirements}. We do not include the calculation of the LOFAR primary beam in the runtime measurement.
These results illustrate that a direct transform takes too much time in practice. $w$-projection is significantly faster (more than 84 times than the direct transform), while $w$-stacking is even faster. The difference in runtime for $w$-stacking with a larger kernel is explained as follows: (1) the number of w-layers is increased from 16 to 300 (this increases runtime); (2) the padding factor is reduced from 1.2 to 1.0 (no padding, this reduces runtime). Using kernels smaller than 7 pixels (in case of $w$-stacking or $w$-projection) does not significantly reduce runtime \citep{offringa-wsclean-2014} and we therefore use 7. The CPU version of IDG is about as fast as $w$-stacking with a kernel size of 7, while the GPU version of IDG is much faster. The accuracy of the CPU and GPU versions of IDG is the same.
\citet{veenboer-gpuidg-2017} illustrate that performance of IDG is not bound
by the number of (floating-point) operations alone. They use throughput, measured as the number of visibilities processed per
second as a (floating-point) operation-agnostic performance metric. Throughput therefore provides a meaningfull way to express imaging
performance and we will use it to compare the performance of the different imaging algorithms.
Given the imaging parameters and the runtime measurements, we compute the achieved imaging throughput per node, see the rightmost column of Table~\ref{tbl:computation-requirements}. Note that our visibility count considers the Stokes parameters separately, while \citet{veenboer-gpuidg-2017} consider the four parameters as a single visibility. Taking this into account, and correcting for the faster GPU (GeForce GTX 1080, 9.2 TFLOP/s) in their measurements, we achieve only 5\% of the throughput that they report. The difference is mainly caused by the overhead of applying the IDG gridder kernel as part of a larger application (\textsc{wsclean}) with all associated practical overheads, such as disk access and reordering of visibilities.
To put these results in perspective we also measured the calibration runtime with \textsc{sagecal-co} \citep{kazemi-2011-sagecal,yatawatta-co-2016}, which on the same compute nodes (using 15 nodes with all four GPUs) requires several days. The required imaging time is therefore not a bottleneck in the full LOFAR EoR data processing pipeline \citep{patil-2017}. Nevertheless, fast imaging is very useful for analysis.
\section{Discussion \& conclusions} \label{sec:discussion}
We have shown the bias induced by gridding visibilities on a regular grid with various settings, using traditional convolutional gridding and image domain gridding. If the brightest sources are removed before gridding, the gridding excess power resulting from traditional convolution gridding of LOFAR data sets ranges from approximately 100~mK with simple gridding settings to 10~$\mu$K with tuned gridding settings. Image domain gridding has a superior accuracy, and results without any tuning in accuracies of 2~$\mu$K at $k=0.07$~$h$Mpc$^{-1}$ in a foreground removal approach up to at most 30~$\mu$K for all measured $k$-values in both a foreground removal or foreground avoidance approach. The expected strength of the redshifted 21-cm signal is a few mK, hence the excess power caused by either gridding method can be limited to an insignificant level well below the noise level. This also shows that the SKA will not be limited by gridding noise even in extremely deep integrations. The improved $uv$-coverage of the SKA over LOFAR is likely to lower the gridding noise further.
The two parameters that are crucial for 21-cm experiments are the oversampling rate of the kernel and the quantization in the $w$-direction. The reason for this is that the discretization of $u, v$ and $w$ cause frequency-dependent errors. These spectral fluctuations make it harder to separate the astronomical foreground from the 21-cm signals. For the LOFAR EoR case, where the FOV is $3\degree$ $\times$ $3\degree$ and a maximum baseline of $250 \lambda$ is used, the kernel is required to be at least oversampled by a factor of 4000, implying a table of at least 28000 values in the case of a gridding kernel of size 7. The $w$-direction is required to have at least 500 quantization levels. Alternatively, using an algorithm without $w$-correction also produces good power spectrum results, but leads to a decorrelation loss of $\sim$8\% for the LOFAR field of view.
The current LOFAR EoR results of $\Delta^2 <$~(79.6mK)$^2$ at $k$=0.053~$h$Mpc$^{-1}$ (one night; \citealt{patil-2017}) and $\Delta^2 <$~(72.4~mK)$^2$ at $k$=0.075~$h$Mpc$^{-1}$ (10 nights; \citealt{mertens-10night-eorlimit-2019}) are not significantly affected by gridding noise. Those results use foreground subtraction and different kernel oversampling settings. In both cases a higher kernel oversampling setting was used compared to the default \textsc{wsclean} setting. The default settings would have resulted in a contribution of approximately 0.1 mK to the spherically-averaged power spectrum measurements (Fig.~\ref{fig:powerspectrum-1d-after-gpr}).
In this work, we have focussed on the imaging accuracy. A related operation that is required during calibration, is the prediction of model visibilities from a sky model. The prediction accuracy has a reciprocate relation to the imaging accuracy, and the results in this paper therefore imply that visibility prediction using gridding algorithms can be made to have sufficient accuracy for 21-cm EoR data calibration. This is crucial to calibrate on sky models with large number of sources as will be required for the SKA.
The results imply that the use of the $w$-projection algorithm \citep{wprojection-cornwell} as a $w$-term correcting algorithm is likely not an option for EoR experiments, as oversampling the gridding kernel is inherently difficult in $w$-projection due to the need for tabulating a large number of $w$-value kernels. For example, to oversample 4095 times, the memory cost for the two-dimensional $w$-kernels increases by a factor of $4095^2$. With an average kernel size of $32^2$ pixels and 512 $w$-projection planes, this would require 33 terabyte of memory. \citet{barry-2019-eppsilon} show that for a homogenous array and a beam that is separable in the direction on the sky, large oversampling is possible using \textsc{fhd}. The \textsc{idg} algorithm is an interesting alternative, in particular when ionospheric or beam terms are necessary during gridding. Faceted imaging has shown to be an effective approach for high-quality low-frequency observations \citep{kogan-greisen-2009, vanweeren-2016, tasse-2018-ddfacet}, and is for example used in the LOFAR Two-metre Sky Survey \citep{shimwell-2017-lotss}. However, faceted imaging results in discontinuities in image space, and are therefore unsuitable for 21-cm power spectra in which the Fourier modes of the image are measured.
The high accuracy and speed of \textsc{idg}, combined with its possibility for beam and ionospheric corrections, makes \textsc{idg} an attractive option for experiments that try to detect the 21-cm signals from the Epoch of Reionization. These properties will in particular be important for processing of the future Square Kilometre Array EoR observations.
\begin{acknowledgements}
We thank W. Brouw for useful comments. F.~Mertens and L.~V.~E.~Koopmans would like to acknowledge support from a SKA-NL Roadmap grant from the Dutch ministry of OCW. S. van der Tol was supported by the Astronomy ESFRI and Research Infrastructure Cluster, part of the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, under grant agreement No 653477.
\end{acknowledgements}
\label{lastpage}
\DeclareRobustCommand{\TUSSEN}[3]{#3}
\bibliographystyle{aa}
|
\section{Introduction}
Gamma rays are the highest energy part of the electromagnetic spectrum.
As such they are a unique tool to probe the most energetic and the most extreme processes in the Universe.
Classically the difference between high-energy (HE, $\lesssim 100$\,GeV) and very-high-energy (VHE, $\gtrsim 100$\,GeV) gamma rays is also reflected in the most optimal method for measuring them.
For HE gamma rays the most effective way of measuring them is to flight a detector on a satellite and directly measure the primary gamma rays falling into the detector.
On the other hand for VHE gamma rays the typical fluxes of such sources are low enough that they would require unrealistically large detector sizes.
In the latter case, the Earth's atmosphere becomes a part of a detector, which allows indirect measurement methods of gamma rays.
A gamma ray hitting the atmosphere starts an electromagnetic cascade of secondary $e^-$, $e^+$ and gamma-ray photons, the so-called air shower.
Two separate indirect methods measure such cascades.
Surface arrays of detectors measure the secondary particles that reach the ground level.
Such an instrument has a high (close to 100\%) duty cycle and also a large field of view (FoV).
However their performance parameters, such as energy threshold and resolution as well as short term sensitivity are rather poor.
In contrary Imaging Atmospheric Cherenkov Telescopes (IACTs) measure the Cherenkov light produced by secondary charged particles in the air shower.
They provide a complementary method for studying VHE gamma rays to surface arrays.
The observations of IACTs are mostly limited to good weather and dark nights resulting in a low duty cycle of $\sim 11\%$\footnote{The duty cycle can be somewhat increased by performing observations with a reduced performance under partial cloud coverage or during moonlight.}.
In addition the FoV of IACTs is usually only a few degrees across.
However, their performance parameters, such as energy and angular resolution as well as short-term sensitivity and energy threshold allow in-depth studies of individual sources.
In these proceedings I report on the results presented in the conference that were obtained with those two techniques and on the interpretations of such results.
In Section~\ref{sec:inst} the instruments that mostly contributed to the results in the conference are briefly introduced.
In Section~\ref{sec:gal} the progress in galactic physics is discussed.
Similarly, in Section~\ref{sec:egal} the progress in extragalactic physics (mainly active galactic nuclei) is discussed.
In Section~\ref{sec:trans} the multiwavelength and multimessenger observations of short transients are summarized.
The search for emission from more exotic possible emitters of VHE gamma rays is presented in Section~\ref{sec:exotic}.
A few selected observational methods are discussed in Section~\ref{sec:methods}.
Final summary and outlook are given in Section~\ref{sec:sum}.
\section{Instruments}\label{sec:inst}
At the conference, results from various instruments were presented.
H.E.S.S. \cite{c656} is a system of 4+1 IACTs and the only one currently operating in the Southern hemisphere.
In the Northern hemisphere two major IACT arrays are currently operating: MAGIC \cite{2016APh....72...61A} and VERITAS \cite{c632,c773}.
In addition, a smaller telescope located on the MAGIC site, FACT \cite{c665}, is used for monitoring of bright blazars.
The next generation IACT experiment, the Cherenkov Telescope Array (CTA) Observatory \cite{c741} is currently in the prototyping and harmonization phase and will be constructed in two sites to cover both hemispheres. The first telescope of CTA, LST1 is already installed in the Northern CTA location \cite{c653}.
Currently only the Northern part of the sky is covered by surface arrays (HAWC \cite{c015,c736}, and Tibet AS+MD array \cite{c778}).
A similar installation is also considered for the Southern hemisphere (SWGO, \cite{c785,c786}).
Some instruments combine both measurement techniques of gamma rays in a hybrid system.
The construction of LHAASO \cite{c693} is expected to be finished by the end of 2020 and the first of the WCDA detectors was already able to detect 5 known gamma ray emitters.
The above-mentioned, currently operating experiments have also been undergoing upgrades in the last few years to improve their performance and allow new observation modes.
In particular the cameras of the four smaller H.E.S.S. telescopes were upgraded, which allowed a higher flexibility in the analysis \cite{c834}, lower dead time increasing the effective performance, and larger number of stereo events with the larger, central telescope.
In the case of MAGIC a dedicated trigger (the so-called Sum-Trigger-II, \cite{c802}) has been developed for the lowest energies, while a special observation mode at high zenith angles has been used for the highest energies \cite{c828}.
The VERITAS Collaboration has invested into developing special hardware for allowing optical intensity interferometry \cite{c714}.
The HAWC Collaboration constructed an outrigger array of tanks surrounding the main array \cite{c736} to improve the array performance, in particular at higher energies.
\section{Galactic physics}\label{sec:gal}
Despite the small FoV limiting the survey capabilities, one of the most important contributions of IACTs to Galactic TeV gamma-ray astronomy is the Galactic plane survey performed by H.E.S.S. with almost 2700\,h of data \cite{c697}.
Now those results can be compared with the Galactic plane observations performed with an alternative technique, by HAWC.
The original differences in the observed morphology of sources and most of the differences in the detections of individual sources are instrument-driven, in particular due to the effect of the background estimation \cite{c706} (see Fig.~\ref{fig:hess_hawc_gps}).
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.9\textwidth]{fig/hess_hawc_gal_plane.pdf}
\caption{Top panel: HAWC Galactic plane survey. Bottom panel: H.E.S.S. Galactic plane survey using $0.4^\circ$ correlation radius and field of view background method, adopted from \cite{c706} presentation.}\label{fig:hess_hawc_gps}
\end{figure}
The Galactic Plane Scan allowed probing the population of various types of TeV sources in our Galaxy.
Currently about 150 such sources are known \cite{tevcat}.
The modelling of the source luminosity function suggests that there is still an order of magnitude more sources remaining to be detected and constituting 50\% of the flux of already known sources \cite{c801}.
The observations of the Galactic center by H.E.S.S. resulted in a detection of a diffuse emission with a $1/r$ profile, which suggests a diffusion of Cosmic Rays (CR) injected in a quasi-continuous way from the central source \cite{2016Natur.531..476H}.
This result has been recently confirmed by MAGIC \cite{c680} using an alternative morphology analysis method.
The interpretation of those results is however not that straightforward.
Instead of a single source accelerating protons up to PeV energies, the emission might arise from the inhomogeneous Galactic Cosmic Ray sea \cite{c816}.
\subsection{Pulsars, their nebulae and halos}
Pulsars are rapidly rotating neutron stars.
The wind of $e^+e^-$ particles emitted from the pulsar is causing the formation of the Pulsar Wind Nebula (PWN).
During the conference a detection (with $4.7\sigma$ significance of the excess) of a new pulsar PSR B1706-44 \cite{c799} by H.E.S.S. has been announced, and the MAGIC detection of Geminga \cite{c728} pulsar has been shown, increasing the catalog of the IACT-detected pulsars to 4 sources.
Further searches have been performed in 13 archival pulsars observed by VERITAS, but no additional source has been detected \cite{c773}.
Already within this small population some differences can be seen.
While the Crab pulsar has a spectrum extending up to TeV energies, both Geminga and PSR B1706-44 were detected only at the edge of the \textit{Fermi}-LAT spectrum (at the energies of tens of GeV).
In the case of the Vela pulsar, the detection is also at tens of GeV however, multi-TeV excess has been previously claimed (not presented at the $36^\mathrm{th}$ ICRC conference)
One of the recent surprising results was the detection of the so-called halos around the two neighbouring pulsars: Geminga and Monogem \cite{2017Sci...358..911A}.
They suggest that the $e^+e^-$ leak out from the pulsar neighbourhood into a region of a 100 times smaller diffusion coefficient than the average one of the Galaxy.
The increased dataset presented by HAWC \cite{c832} (see Fig.~\ref{fig:halos}) allowed probing the energy dependent morphology.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.49\textwidth]{fig/hawc_halos.pdf}
\caption{HAWC significance maps of the region of:
Geminga and Monogem (green markers) smoothed by a $2^\circ$ top-hat function (left panel, \cite{c832}),
2HWC J1825-134 region (right panel, \cite{c781}) .
}\label{fig:halos}
\end{figure}
There is however no commonly accepted explanation of the halos, with a few competing models possible.
The halo emission might come from cosmic ray self-containment or from strong interstellar turbulence in the disk \cite{c020}.
Another possibility is that Geminga PWN is still inside the old, not observable anymore supernova remnant (SNR) \cite{c670}.
In addition, the correlation length at which the magnetic field varies might affect strongly the estimation of the diffusion coefficient \cite{c685}.
In order to explain the phenomenon better it would be desirable to detect such halos around other pulsars.
However, the current search for the emission from plausible candidates did not result in the detection of further sources \cite{c797}.
Using a similar morphology model of the emission to other pulsars (PKSB0540+23 and PSR J0633+0632) the diffusion coeffients have been studied, however the sample is too limited for a firm conclussion \cite{c640}.
Currently 36 PWNe are known to emit in VHE gamma rays \cite{tevcat}.
The observations provide both the spectral and morphological information that should be explained by the modelling.
In particular, many of the H.E.S.S.-detected PWNe exhibit an offset between the pulsar position and the centroid of the PWN.
Such offsets might come from the initial pulsar kick back in asymmetrical explosion, from propagation of the ejecta in inhomogeneous ambient medium, or from asymmetrical outflows of ions and leptons from the pulsar.
Modelling of such morphologies require MHD simulations of pulsar winds, PWN and SNR \cite{c809}.
H.E.S.S. observations of the HESS J1825-137 PWN revealed strongly energy-dependent morphology, such that rules out a pure diffusion model \cite{c715}.
Hints of energy dependent morphology have been also seen in Dragonfly PWN \cite{c639}.
The spectrum observed by HAWC is close to the one measured previously by VERITAS (some discrepancy most probably comes from a different integration region).
The same source has also been followed by the MAGIC telescopes exploiting the very high zenith angle observations technique and modelled as an extended source \cite{c827}.
Both instruments managed to measure the spectrum up to a few tens of TeV.
Observations of the 2HWC J1825 region have been reported with HAWC \cite{c781}.
The region is complex (see the right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:halos}) and contains PWN, SNR and molecular clouds.
The VHE gamma-ray emission could be disentangled into two sources and a hint of energy dependent morphology has been seen.
Even while the sources were modelled with leptonic (preferred) and hadronic scenarios the origin of the VHE gamma-ray emission is still not known \cite{c781}.
\subsection{Supernova remnants}
HAWC performed a search for SNRs using 3 years of data.
Out of the 9 sources selected on basis of their GeV detection, the HAWC visibility criterion and the lack of possible source confusion, 3 SNR were detected \cite{c674}.
All three are consistent with known TeV sources (W51, IC 433, $\gamma$ Cygni).
G106.3+2.7, a VERITAS-detected SNR, has been studies with the Tibet AS+MD array, resulting in detection of emission above 10 TeV \cite{c778}, however the spectrum is still under reconstruction.
HESS J1912+101, a bright unassociated TeV source with a shell morphology has been a target of a deep observational campaign with MAGIC and \textit{Fermi}-LAT.
Curiously, while the MAGIC observations, consistently with the earlier H.E.S.S. measurement, prefer a projected shell, at GeV energies the source can be better described with a radially symmetric Gausian \cite{c564}.
\subsection{Search for PeVatrons}\label{sec:100TeV}
Cosmic rays of energies up to $10^{15}$ eV are thought of being of Galactic origin.
To understand the sources accelerating these hadrons up to this energy, gamma rays are an excellent tracer of their interactions.
Since protons would produce in hadronic interactions gamma rays with about one order of magnitude lower energy, searching for sources emitting gamma rays above 100 TeV can point us to PeVatrons.
However, gamma rays with such energies can also be produced in leptonic processes.
Thus, in order to prove that a source is indeed a PeVatron it is important to measure its spectrum with sufficient accuracy that would allow modelling in both leptonic and hadronic scenarios.
To obtain however good statistics of photons at such energies, where fluxes are very low, a combination of large effective area and long observation time is required.
In the conference, multiple contributions were devoted to searches for such sources, either with surface arrays that are natural candidates for long-term observations of the highest energies, or in the case of MAGIC with the very-high-zenith observations technique.
A natural candidate for looking for $> 100$\,TeV emission is the Crab Nebula, the strongest stable source in the VHE gamma-ray sky.
In addition, a long lasting disagreement of the highest energy part of the Crab spectrum measured by HEGRA and H.E.S.S. \cite{2004ApJ...614..897A,2006A&A...457..899A} makes it even more interesting to investigate emission at those energies.
All three instruments MAGIC \cite{c759}, HAWC \cite{c734} and Tibet AS+MD \cite{c712} array reach (or go beyond) energies of 100\,TeV without any visible cut-off (See Fig.~\ref{fig:crab_100tev}).
Individual photons with estimated energies of a few hundred TeV were reported, however the energy resolution as well as possible misclassified events should be taken into account when interpreting those.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{fig/crab_tibet.pdf}
\includegraphics[width = 0.54\textwidth]{fig/crab_hawc.pdf}
\caption{Crab spectrum observed with: Tibet AS+MD array (left panel, \cite{c712}) and HAWC (right panel, \cite{c723}).}
\label{fig:crab_100tev}
\end{figure}
HAWC performed a search of other sources emitting above 100\,TeV \cite{c734}.
Three additional sources have been detected above 100\,TeV, however proving if they are indeed PeVatrons will require careful modelling of the emission.
It is interesting to note that those sources are close to radio pulsars, pointing to PWN or pulsar halo origin, and hence leptonic rather than hadronic origin of the emission \cite{c734}.
\subsection{Binary systems and microquasars}
Binary systems are the only galactic sources in which mid- and long-term variability of TeV emission can be observed, often (but not always) correlated with the changes of the geometry as the two components of the system move along their orbits.
Therefore in order to understand such objects long term monitoring is essential.
In the case of binary systems with mid-scale periods such as HESS J0632+057 (a period of about a year) \cite{c732} or LS I +61 303 (period of about a month, \cite{c713}) an over dozen years of monitoring allowed H.E.S.S., MAGIC and VERITAS Collaborations to probe emission in multiple periods.
The rich data set allows a search for correlation of X-ray and gamma-ray emission and to search for features in the time dependence of the emission.
The gamma-ray as well as X-ray light curve of HESS J0632+057 shows a clear dip at phase $\sim 0.4$ (see left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:binaries_lc}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.95\textwidth]{fig/binaries.pdf}
\caption{Phase folded light curve of HESS J0632+057 (left panels, \cite{c732}) and PSR J2032+4127/MT91213 (right panels, \cite{c824}).
X-ray flux is shown in top panels, gamma ray flux in bottom. }
\label{fig:binaries_lc}
\end{figure}
PSR J2032+4127/MT91213 is a binary with a period of 50 years.
In November 2017 the periastron passage gave a possibility for ``once in a lifetime'' observation of emission in this phase \cite{c824}.
Long period allowed gathering of a large amount of MWL data to probe precisely the emission.
Contrary to the case of HESS J0632+057, the X-ray and gamma ray emission of emission of PSR J2032+4127/MT91213 show completely different shapes, unable to be fully described by the current model.
In particular the rapid increase of X-ray flux without corresponding increase of VHE gamma-ray emission might come from the interaction between the pulsar and circumstellar disk of the companion star (see \cite{c824} and references therein).
It is remarkable to note that we still do not reach a common picture of gamma-ray emission from binary systems.
Even the phase at which the maximum of gamma-ray emission is observed varies between different binaries (see Fig.~\ref{fig:binary_phase}) with additional complication coming from uncertainty in the orbital parameters of binaries \cite{c732}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.95\textwidth]{fig/binary_phase.pdf}
\caption{Position of the maximum (magenta regions) of the VHE gamma-ray emission in different binary systems (presentation of \cite{c732}).
}
\label{fig:binary_phase}
\end{figure}
The parameters of an orbit can be determined classically from the gas kinematics (see e.g. \cite{c813}), but also from the analysis of the gamma-ray light curve \cite{c1178}.
The latter method is however model dependent and therefore using such determined parameters in a modelling could result in biases.
HAWC observations of microquasar SS 433 revealed TeV emission from the jet interaction regions \cite{c772}.
SS 433 is the first microquasar in which the morphology of the TeV jets could be directly probed.
Since the emission from both regions is seen as point-like, showing no evidence for a diffusion of long-lived protons, a leptonic scenario of the emission is favoured.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.4\textwidth]{fig/hawc_ss433.pdf}
\includegraphics[width = 0.54\textwidth]{fig/hess_lmc.pdf}
\caption{Left panel: The significance map of MGRO J1908+06 region by HAWC after subtracting the central source \cite{c772}. In the bottom part two interaction regions of SS 433 can be seen.
Right panel: VHE gamma ray skymap of LMC \cite{c716}.}
\label{fig:hawc_ss433}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Other Galactic sources}
One of the more complicated parts of our Galaxy is the Cygnus region which consists of a number of stellar clusters and associations.
Previous VERITAS observations showed also a complicated morphology of a VHE gamma-ray source in this region, consisting of a PWN and a Cocoon.
HAWC observations revealed that the cocoon emission extends beyond 100\,TeV and shows a spectral break with respect to the \textit{Fermi}-LAT spectrum \cite{c699}.
The CRs in the cocoon could have originated in the OB2 association.
H.E.S.S. observations of the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) allowed for the first time to study the physics of ``galactic'' sources outside of our Galaxy.
The current catalog of sources inside LMC consists of a PWN N 157B, superbubble 30 Dor C, SNR N 132D and a binary system LMC P3 (see \cite{c716} and references therein), showing rich family of types of sources, similarly to our Galaxy.
Even while no new source in LMC had been claimed in this conference, the first VHE gamma-ray skymap of another galaxy (see Fig.~\ref{fig:hawc_ss433}, right panel) has been presented together with limits on a few tens of individual sources \cite{c716}.
\section{Extragalactic physics}\label{sec:egal}
Synergies between the IACT technique and observations with surface arrays show up also in the investigations of processes happening in extragalactic objects.
The catalog of extragalactic sources detected in VHE gamma-rays consists mainly of Active Galactic Nuclei (AGN), mostly blazars \cite{tevcat} in which the jet is pointed towards the observer.
On one hand, the violent variability of those objects favours observations with instruments with high instantaneous sensitivity, i.e. IACTs, for in-depth studies of AGN flares.
Also, the absorption of TeV gamma rays by the extragalactic background light (EBL\footnote{EBL is the integrated over time emission of all the stars and dust in the Universe}) for more distant sources again favours IACTs as they usually have lower energy threshold than surface arrays.
On the other hand, the variable nature of AGNs requires constant monitoring, that is observational time consuming (and good-weather dependent) with IACTs, or follow-up of alerts from lower energies.
In this case surface arrays can provide unbiased monitoring.
Also surface detectors can provide flare alerts, however only for the brightest sources and flares.
\subsection{Monitoring of AGN}
The HAWC Collaboration presented results from three years of a common monitoring with the \textit{Swift} satellite of a classical high energy peaked BL Lac (HBL) object Mrk 421 \cite{c682}.
Such long-term monitoring allows studies of a X-ray to VHE gamma-ray correlation on a global, rather than flare-by-flare basis.
The FACT telescopes also perform long term monitoring of bright blazars with an impressive amount of $\sim 10 000$\,h observation time collected so far.
The monitoring covered 30 individual flares observed together with \textit{Swift} and showed a strong correlation of both fluxes without any significant time delay \cite{c796}.
The long-term monitoring of blazars allows one also to search for possible signatures of periodic emission.
Curiously, the FACT monitoring of another bright blazar Mrk 501 has revealed a hint of quasi-periodic behaviour with a period of 332-days \cite{c665}.
Even while no statistical significance of the hint, or possible systematics effects have been evaluated yet, it is interesting to note that a similar period has been obtained in the analysis of \textit{Fermi}-LAT data of the same source \cite{2019MNRAS.487.3990B}.
VHE gamma-ray monitoring of non-HBL sources is difficult due to their soft emission in this energy range.
The MAGIC monitoring of the Flat Spectrum Radio Quasar (FSRQ) PKS1510-089 performed between 2012 and 2017 showed that the source exhibits persistent VHE gamma-ray emission also during low GeV states \cite{c629}.
\subsection{Extreme HBLs}
Extreme HBLs (EHBLs) lie at the highest energy end of the blazar sequence.
They are the weakest in flux, however their synchrotron peak is shifted to higher energies than for HBLs, peaking above $10^{17}$ Hz.
Only a handful of such sources is known in VHE gamma rays.
An effort to increase the VHE gamma-ray EHBL population was done by the MAGIC Collaboration by observing multiple promising targets.
As a result 4 EHBLs were detected and a fifth one showed a hint of emission \cite{c768}.
While the broadband emission of those objects can be explained in the framework of either spine-layer, synchrotron-self-Compton (SSC) or lepto-hadronic hadronic, the last two models require large deviation from energy equipartition (balance between the energy density of the magnetic field and relativistic particles) \cite{c768}.
With the population of known EHBL sources growing it becomes possible to answer the question whether they form a single population or if there are intrinsic sub-classes.
A natural question is if the extreme location of the synchrotron bump is also reflected in the shape and peak energy of the high energy bump in those sources.
Fig.~\ref{fig:ehbl} shows normalized and corrected for EBL absorption spectra of 18 known in VHE gamma rays EHBLs.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.9\textwidth]{fig/ehbl_spectra.pdf}
\caption{GeV-TeV spectral energy distribution of EHBLs, corrected for EBL absorption and normalized at 147GeV to 1ES0229+200 flux \cite{c676}.}
\label{fig:ehbl}
\end{figure}
While the GeV spectrum is similar between the different sources, a large divergence is seen in the VHE band \cite{c676}.
What complicates the EHBL picture even more is the typical blazar variability, which might even change the classification of a source.
In the case of 1ES2344+514, the source was first detected in VHE gamma rays during a high flare in which the synchrotron peak position was above $3\times10^{18}$\,Hz, classifying the source as EHBL, however further observations of the source in low states showed no further EHBL behaviour (\cite{c620} and references therein).
Nevertheless, a strong flare of 1ES2344+514 in 2016 showed a renewed extreme behaviour \cite{c620}.
Nearby EHBLs are also plausible targets for observations with surface arrays.
Observations of an archetypal EHBL 1ES0229+200 with HAWC, while did not result in a detection, provided flux limits that are in tension with the observations of this source with IACTs \cite{c822}.
This might be caused by the variability of the source.
Independently from the possible variability, the HAWC measurements strongly constrains the model in which the 1ES0229+200 VHE gamma-ray emission would be coming from interactions of the UHE CRs along the line of sight \cite{c822}.
A dedicated search for variability in 6 EHBLs was performed with the VERITAS telescopes, however no variability has been observed in this sample \cite{c689}.
\subsection{Blazar flares}
Nearly all the extragalactic VHE gamma-ray sources belong to the class of blazars, mostly of the BL Lac type.
As blazars are extremely variable, they often give us a possibility to study in detail the emission processes in them during large outbursts when observed fluxes are high enough for precise measurements.
Nevertheless, randomness of this variability makes it difficult to catch such states with a broad coverage of instruments operating at different wavelengths.
A hint of a curious narrow spectral feature has been observed by the MAGIC telescopes in the spectral energy distribution (SED) of Mrk 501 during a historically high X-ray state \cite{c554}.
Even while not statistically significant, such a feature could be produced in a number of interesting emission scenarios, such as a two (possibly interacting) zones model, an emission from the magnetosphere of the black hole, or a pile-up in the electron energy distribution due to the stochastic acceleration \cite{c554}.
A number of other flares and the theoretical interpretation of the emission has been reported in this conference.
1ES 1959+650 experienced a strong and fast flare with a hard VHE gamma-ray spectrum \cite{c635}.
While the broadband SED can be sufficiently well described by either a leptonic, a lepto-hadronic or a proton-synchrotron model, it requires rather extreme parameters to occur in the source.
A strong flare of Mrk 421 with rich MWL coverage has been observed in 2013 \cite{c624}.
The emission shows a slow raise of the flux over time scale of hours and a faster flare.
A possible explanation is a magnetic reconnection layer moving relativistically within the jet of the source.
The slow raise of the flux would correspond to the combined emission of many plasmoids, while the faster flare would be caused by a single dominant plasmoid (see \cite{c624} and references therein).
A flare with a nightly-scale variability has been seen also from 1ES 1218+304 in 2019 showing a remarkably hard VHE gamma-ray spectrum \cite{c755}.
Two outbursts were observed from the BL Lac object S5 0716+714 in 2015 and 2017 \cite{c709}.
The former outburst showed also a concurrent rotation of EVPA rotation and an appearance of a new knot from the 43 GHz VLBI core.
The possible explanation of the VHE gamma ray emission involves the superluminal knot entering and leaving the recollimation shock in the inner jet (see \cite{c709} and references therein).
The broadband emission can be modelled in a framework of a two-zone scenario (see Fig.~\ref{fig:agn_flares}).
Also two outbursts from a known VHE gamma ray emitter 3C 279 has been observed in 2017 and 2018 \cite{c668}.
The level of correlation between the VHE gamma-ray fluxes and the optical emission changes however between the flares making the interpretation of the source more complicated.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.49\textwidth]{fig/magic_s50716.pdf}
\caption{Spectral energy distribution of S5 0716+714 modelled with two zone model \cite{c709}.}
\label{fig:agn_flares}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Radio galaxies}
Radio galaxies, while not as bright as blazars, are normally closer sources, hence we can study the TeV emission without a strong absorption by the EBL.
Moreover, since they are observed at a significant angle to the jet axis, it gives a possibility for imaging of the jet morphology.
The H.E.S.S. Collaboration reported observations of an extended VHE gamma-ray emission from the Cen A radio galaxy.
Nearly 200\,hrs of data combined with careful runwise simulations of the telescope response allowed the detection of a $\sim 2.8$\,kpc projected extension along the direction of the jet axes \cite{c657}.
The VHE gamma-ray catalog of radio galaxies still contains only a handful of sources.
The newest addition is 3C 264 \cite{c651}.
The VERITAS observations of this source were motivated by the upcoming interaction of two knots moving with different velocities along the jet.
Despite an elevated flux in optical and X-rays and the detection of a variable VHE gamma-ray emission, no strong VHE gamma-ray flare has been seen, suggesting that the real interaction of the knots might still happen in the near future \cite{c651}.
\section{VHE gamma-ray follow up of the transients}\label{sec:trans}
In order to obtain possibly the most complete information about the emission of the sources it is important to observe them over broad range of frequencies (multiwavelength, MWL) and even with different messengers (multi messenger, MM).
An important part of such studies are the rapid follow-ups of short electromagnetic alerts (such as Gamma Ray Bursts, GRBs) or observations of sky patches corresponding to the reconstructed directions of selected neutrinos or gravitational wave events.
For the fastest triansients the follow-up must happen automatically, without human intervention.
\subsection{GRBs}
For a long time the Holy Grail of the transient follow-up studies of the $3^\mathrm{rd}$ generation of the IACTs was to detect the emission from a GRB with such an instrument.
Those events, while extremely bright are also very short, and normally happen at cosmological distances (redshift $\gtrsim 1$), which strongly hinders the observations.
So far of the order of 200 GRB follow-up observations were performed by Cherenkov telescopes, but until recently there had been no reports of the detection of the emission \cite{c634,c761,c782}.
In this conference the detection of the GRB190114C by the MAGIC telescopes was reported.
Thanks to the relatively low redshift of this event and fast response of the telescopes, despite the not fully favourable observational conditions (large zenith angle and moderate moonlight) strong detection with a statistical significance of over $50\sigma$ was reached in the first few tens of minutes after the burst.
Moreover, the observed flux was very high, reaching 0.1 kCrab level, making it the strongest VHE gamma-ray source observed up to date \cite{c010}.
Furthermore, the H.E.S.S. Collaboration reported the detection of a $5\sigma$ excess in the analysis of data of GRB180720B \cite{c761}.
In this case, the emission has been observed during the afterglow in a time scale of about ten hours.
Interestingly, a $3 \sigma$ hint of an emission also during an afterglow has been seen in the MAGIC data of short GRB160821B, the only source candidate with better observational conditions than GRB190114C \cite{c703}.
Such emission might be explained with a SSC emission from an external shock \cite{c703}.
The GRBs can also be studied with surface arrays.
In this case, as long as the GRBs are in instantaneous FoV of the instrument the emission can be probed to the very onset of the burst.
However a higher energy threshold of those instruments comparing to IACTs make the detection more difficult.
Nevertheless, the brightest GRBs, if they appear in the FoV of HAWC, could be detected \cite{c679}.
\subsection{Gravitational waves}
In the recent years there is a sudden growth of gravitational wave (GW) astronomy following the successful detection of a number of events \cite{c003}.
The follow up of such events is however very difficult because of the still large uncertainty in the arrival direction.
Therefore clever follow-up algorithms have to be implemented to maximize the exposure in the most probable directions of the alert \cite{c789,c782, c633}.
In this case the large instantaneous FoV of surface array detectors is a strong advantage \cite{c737}, however so far neither Cherenkov telescopes nor surface arrays detected emission coincident with a GW alert.
Interesting limits on the emission have been however obtained by the H.E.S.S. telescopes on the EM170817, the GW alerts associated with a GRB.
The H.E.S.S. observations were performed only 5.5h after the event and also in the next half a year during the ramping up of the radio and X-ray flux and put some constraints on the magnetic field in the merger remnant \cite{c756}.
\subsection{Neutrino follow-up}
The recent detection of gamma-ray emission from the TXS 0506+056 blazar with the MAGIC telescopes consistent with the arrival direction of the high-energy neutrino IceCube-170922A made this previously anonymous blazar famous and renewed interest in hadronic models of gamma-ray emission \cite{2018Sci...361.1378I}.
In order to characterize the source better, it has become the object of MWL campaigns and VHE gamma-ray monitoring.
The source has been re-detected by VERITAS, albeit at lower flux then the one detected by MAGIC, over longer time scale following the original flare \cite{c632}.
Interestingly, the monitoring by MAGIC performed in 2018/2019 was rewarded with a detection of another flare from this object and a hint of an emission in a low state \cite{c646}.
The VHE gamma-ray emission during the flare is very similar to the 2017 event, and can be again explained by mostly leptonic processes, which is also consistent with lack of neutrino events observed during the newer flare \cite{c646}.
The search for other ``neutrino blazars'' continues and new promising neutrino events are being followed \cite{c782, c633, c787} (see Fig.~\ref{fig:mm_followup}), however so far no other VHE gamma-ray flare has been detected associated to another neutrino event.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.53\textwidth]{fig/mm_veritas.pdf}
\includegraphics[width = 0.46\textwidth]{fig/mm_hess.pdf}
\includegraphics[width = 0.46\textwidth]{fig/mm_magic.pdf}
\caption{Sky map showing the followed multimessenger triggers by VERITAS (left panel, equatorial coordinates, \cite{c782}), H.E.S.S. (right panel, galactic coordinates, \cite{c787}) and MAGIC (bottom panel, equatorial coordinates, \cite{c671}.}
\label{fig:mm_followup}
\end{figure}
\subsection{FRB follow-up}\label{sec:frb}
Fast radio bursts are short (ms-duration), bright flashes of radio emission of extragalactic origin.
So far their origin is unknown.
Most of them are one time only events, however two repeating sources have been seen: FRB 121102 and FRB 190814.J0422+73.
To shed light on the origin of FRB gamma-ray observations of FRB repeaters are being performed \cite{c633, c698}.
Due to shortness of the phenomena, observations have to be performed strictly simultaneously with a radio telescope, and the coincidence of a possible signal with FRB is done offline.
Interestingly, Cherenkov telescopes, due to their huge mirror areas can also be used as optical telescopes for looking for optical counterparts of FRBs \cite{c007}.
While during the observations times with the Cherenkov telescopes a number of FRB have been detected by radio telescopes, no significant emission either as gamma-ray excess, nor raise of optical flux has been observed \cite{c698, c633}.
\section{Exotic sources}\label{sec:exotic}
In this section various more ``exotic'' sources are discussed, from which the TeV emission is being searched with Cherenkov telescopes or surface arrays.
\subsection{The Sun}
GeV emission has been detected by \textit{Fermi}-LAT from the Sun during its solar minimum \cite{2011ApJ...734..116A}.
Observations with HAWC so far have not resulted in the detection of a TeV extension of such an emission.
The data taken in 2018, during falling activity of the Sun are above the extrapolation of the \textit{Fermi}-LAT measurement \cite{c369}.
\subsection{UHE gamma rays}
As discussed in Section~\ref{sec:100TeV} the highest energies of detected gamma rays touch hundreds of TeV.
Search of much higher, of the order of EeV, energies is being performed with instruments normally used for studies of CRs (CR surface arrays and hybrid detectors) using differences in the characteristics of CR and gamma ray induced showers \cite{c326, c398}.
Nevertheless so far no such emission has been detected and the limits are still at least a factor of a few away from the model predictions of the diffuse EeV gamma-ray flux \cite{c398}.
Gamma rays of such energies can be affected by the so-called preshower effect, i.e. interaction between the EeV gamma ray and the Earth's magnetic field.
This can both influence the existing searches for EeV gamma rays, as well as provide an alternative method for probing this energy range \cite{c688}.
Also radio detectors can be used to study the VHE gamma-ray emission of sources down to energies as low as 100\,TeV if sufficient number of mini-arrays is used \cite{c655}.
While the method is still in proof of principle state, and there are still many unknowns in this technique, including e.g. the effect of the background from hadronic showers \cite{c655}, it is reassuring that the estimated range of sensitivity starts to overlap with the highest energies seen from Galactic sources (see Section~\ref{sec:100TeV}).
\subsection{Probing fundamental physics and cosmology with gamma rays}
Detection of new, exotic classes of gamma ray sources can also influence fundamental physics.
Moreover, the emission from known sources can also be used to probe cosmology.
An example of the former is the search for evaporating primordial black holes (PBH).
The PBH with masses slightly exceeding $5 \times 10^{14}$\,g would evaporate now, producing gamma rays in their final moments \cite{c719, c804}.
Since the PBH emission can come from an arbitrary direction in the sky, surface arrays like HAWC \cite{c516} can use their whole FoV, and the Cherenkov telescopes \cite{c719, c804} can stack thousands of hours of observations of different FoVs.
While no detection has been claimed yet, competitive upper limits on the PBH evaporation density can be put.
The propagation of gamma rays from extragalactic sources to the observer can also be used to probe the content of the Universe.
The observations of the effect on the spectra of blazars from the absorption of gamma rays by the EBL have become over the last decade a well grounded method for the estimation of the EBL.
Not only new data provide more precise statistical uncertainties, but also inclusion of more refined systematic effect studies makes the results more robust (see e.g. \cite{2017A&A...606A..59H, 2019MNRAS.486.4233A} and references therein).
In the conference the updated results from the VERITAS Collaboration have been presented \cite{c770}.
The EBL constraints obtained with different experiments agree with each other (see Fig.~\ref{fig:ebl}) and with other methods.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.6\textwidth]{fig/veritas_ebl.pdf}
\caption{Constraints on EBL density obtained with various IACTs \cite{c770}.
Note that the treatment of systematic uncertainties varies between different experiments. }
\label{fig:ebl}
\end{figure}
They also agree with the recent EBL models.
However, the EBL is still poorly constrained at the lowest and highest wavelengths, which can be probed by detection of emission from the $z\gtrsim 1$ blazars and by observations of the tens of TeV energies of the closest blazars, respectively.
The absorption of gamma rays from extragalactic sources by the EBL can be used also to probe the intergalactic magnetic fields (IGMF), see references within \cite{c763}.
$e^+e^-$ pairs produced in this process can then inverse Compton scatter the cosmic microwave background photons to produce a secondary gamma-ray emission.
Depending on the strength of IGMF in which the propagation of the electrons is occuring, such secondary emission would be observable either from the same direction (resulting only in modified SED), from a somewhat extended source, or nearly isotropic.
In the recent years the observations both with IACTs and with \textit{Fermi}-LAT considerably limited the phase space of the strength and correlation length of IGMFs using this effect.
No detection of AGN halos (despite some early claims) and the shrinking phase space however raised a question if another energy loss process, such as plasma instabilities \cite{c763} can be competing with the production of secondary gamma rays, preventing the formation of observable AGN halos.
The propagation of gamma rays can also be used to test Lorentz Invariance Violation (LIV), i.e. dependence of the speed of light on the energy of photons.
The most direct method involves searching for energy-dependent delays in fast varying sources observed at large distances up to the highest possible energies.
This makes sources like AGN flares, GRBs and pulsars interesting targets for LIV searches (see e.g. \cite{2013PhRvD..87l2001V}).
However, no update on employing such a method has been presented in this conference.
For the surface arrays the performance of this method is however hindered somewhat by the low sensitivity for short time scales.
Nevertheless, in the case of a superluminal LIV another effect can be exploited.
The highest energy photons then can decay, thus observations of $>100$\,TeV gamma rays can put competitive limits on LIV \cite{c738}.
LIV effects can also affect the absorption of the gamma rays in the EBL.
Exploiting this effect allows putting stringent constraints on the LIV in the subluminal case using a large collection of over a hundred measured spectra from 38 known TeV sources \cite{c658}.
\section{Progress in experimental methods}\label{sec:methods}
Many contributions of the conference were devoted to development of analysis methods, in particular for the upcoming experiments (mainly CTA, but also e.g. LHAASO).
In this section I highlight a few of those that have been already successfully implemented in the existing experiments.
\subsection{Open Cherenkov Astronomy}
With the onset of the CTA Observatory not only higher quality data are expected but also a more open access both to the data and to the analysis tools of Cherenkov telescopes \cite{c717}.
This openness also starts to sink into the current generation of Cherenkov telescopes.
The H.E.S.S. Collaboration has released a data set of about 2500\,hr of the Galactic plane survey, and another release of a similar amount of extragalactic data is planned \cite{c656}.
The MAGIC Collaboration at the moment is providing mostly only the machine readable high-level products of the analysis, however in some cases event lists were provided and there is work ongoing on providing a legacy dataset in CTA-like DL3 format \cite{c666}.
An interesting idea of exploiting Citizen Science has been employed by the VERITAS Collaboration.
Using a popular portal a large set of Cherenkov images of events has been posted with the request for classification to a large sample of volunteer classifiers.
Originally the idea involved separation of gamma-rays from background, however it proved to be much more successful in the identification of muon images \cite{c678}.
\subsection{Observations at very high zenith angles}
In order to perform observations at the highest energies a huge collection area is required due to very low fluxes of sources at such energies.
This can be achieved by making large, sparsely distributed arrays of telescopes (as e.g. SST in CTA, \cite{c741}).
However a large collection area can be also achieved with the current generation of telescopes exploiting observations of very large ($\gtrsim 70^\circ$) zenith angles.
In such a case the shower maximum happens far away from the telescope and thus the Cherenkov light is distributed over a very large area.
This results in a higher collection area at the highest energies at the price of an increased energy threshold and worse low energy performance of the instrument.
The technique has a number of intrinsic difficulties, such as it requires careful monitoring of atmospheric transparency, produces vertical acceptance gradient along the camera, results in more compact Cherenkov images affecting gamma/hadron separation.
Nevertheless, it was successfully applied to the MAGIC telescopes in the search of photons with energies of the order of 100\,TeV \cite{c828}.
It also allowed the study of variability of the Crab Nebula at energies above 10 TeV on time scales of months \cite{c812}.
\subsection{Stellar Intensity Interferometry with IACTs}
Comparing to the classical optical telescopes, Cherenkov telescopes have much larger light collection area, but much worse optical point spread function.
The first characteristic makes them a useful instrument to study very short optical flares, such as possible counterparts of FRBs (see Section~\ref{sec:frb} and \cite{c007}).
An even more interesting application is the Stellar Intensity Interferometry (SII).
Its principle involves simultaneous, continuous observations of an extended optical source with at least two telescopes and calculating the correlation of the signal obtained in both.
The level of correlation depends on the baseline length and on the angular size of the source.
Application of this method made possible for VERITAS telescopes to measure diameters of two stars \cite{c740}.
The full power of SII with Cherenkov telescopes will be released only once CTA is constructed.
Larger number of telescopes, spread over a large area, will provide simultaneous sensitivity to various angular scales making possible to get an actual image of the star \cite{c007}.
\subsection{Surface arrays analysis methods}
Search for the highest energies observable with HAWC motivated the usage of artificial neural networks in the energy estimation of the events resulting in a significant improvement over the original energy estimation technique used in HAWC \cite{c723}.
In addition, an improvement in the HAWC performance is expected soon, when the extra information of the outrigger array is incorporated in the analysis \cite{c736}
\section{Summary}\label{sec:sum}
A number of very important results has been reported in this conference.
The GRB physics can be finally probed above a few hundreds of GeV.
Several sources have been reported to emit at or beyond 100\,TeV, and are candidates for Cosmic Ray PeVatrons.
Two small populations of VHE gamma-ray sources, from which before only individual sources were known, start to appear: pulsars and EHBLs.
Jets of both a radio galaxy and a microquasar have been resolved in TeV gamma rays.
It is expected that with the onset of CTA many more interesting results will come in the nearest future.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
This work is supported by the grant through the Polish Narodowe Centrum Nauki No. \\2015/19/D/ST9/00616.
JS would like to thank R. L\'opez-Coto and M. Cerruti for providing comments to the manuscript.
|
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusions}
In this article we presented a description of the properties of data from the LIGO and Virgo detectors, and an overview of the analysis methods used by the LVC in identifying and characterizing gravitational-wave signals from the coalescence of binary black hole and binary neutron star systems.
We have especially looked closely at the data surrounding the first detection, GW150914~\cite{Abbott:2016blz,LOSC:GW150914,LIGOScientific:2018mvr}.
Contrary to the claims made in~\cite{Creswell:2017rbh}, there are no anomalous or unexpected correlations to be seen in association with the observed gravitational-wave events~\cite{LIGOScientific:2019fpa}, including GW150914~\cite{LOSC:GW150914}. Other analyses by independent researchers have come to similar conclusions about the correctness of the LIGO-Virgo results~\cite{Green:2017voq,Nielsen:2018bhc,Roulet:2018jbe,Nitz:2018imz}.
Proper handling of the LIGO and Virgo data is critical for conducting an analysis correctly.
As an example, in this paper we have used the whitened maximum likelihood waveforms (as described in Sections~\ref{s:pe} and ~\ref{sec:res}) for GW150914, which when subtracted from the data, produce residuals that are consistent with Gaussian noise,
and show no correlation between different detectors.
If the template waveforms subtracted from the data are not sufficiently good matches to the real gravitational-wave signal, then a remainder of that signal will survive in the resulting residuals, which may thus exhibit nontrivial correlations.
Figure 1 of~\cite{Abbott:2016blz} was constructed to show as simply as possible that the signal is compatible with general relativity. It does not illustrate the full LSC-Virgo statistical data analysis.
The figure was described in~\cite{Abbott:2016blz} as a visualization of the gravitational-wave signal at the LIGO detectors and a comparison to one numerical relativity waveform which is consistent with the gravitational-wave data. A statistical claim about the numerical relativity waveform
and the residuals of Figure 1 of \cite{Abbott:2016blz} was not intended, although unfortunately the figure may have been interpreted in that way.
The LVC conducted extensive statistical studies of the GW150914 signal and of the surrounding noise, which are documented in~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016wfe}. Note that a whitened time series of GW150914 was presented in the parameter estimation companion paper for the discovery; see Figure 6 of~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016wfe}. Those studies, as well as the simpler investigations given here, support the interpretation that the signal is well matched by a black hole merger solution of general relativity.
The validity of this conclusion has been supported by subsequent data and analysis by the LVC (including studies on all binary black hole produced gravitational-wave signals detected in observing runs O1 and O2~\cite{LIGOScientific:2019fpa}) as well as independent analyses.
The gravitational-wave data for Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo can be characterized as locally stationary and Gaussian, with deviations when glitches are present.
The LVC conducts extensive data quality, detector characterization, and calibration studies in order to be confident of the reported detections~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016zmo,TheLIGOScientific:2017lwt,Abbott:2016jsd,Acernese:2018bfl}.
However, it is not necessary to assume that the data are stationary and Gaussian to search for, and to detect with high confidence, gravitational waves from compact binary coalescence.
Instead, LIGO-Virgo searches for gravitational waves use various methods to estimate the false alarm rate directly from the data, for example, by introducing a relative time shift between the detectors.
Previous studies have also demonstrated that the LVC's parameter estimation results are reliable~\cite{Raymond:2009cv,vanderSluys:2009bf,vanderSluys:2007st,Berry:2014jja, Abbott:2016wiq, Pankow:2018qpo}. The parameter estimation routines were also robust for the gravitational waves from the binary neutron star merger GW170817 where there was a noise glitch in the LIGO-Livingston data overlapping with the gravitational-wave signal~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2017qsa,Pankow:2018qpo}.
Parameter estimates obtained by researchers outside the LVC for GW170817 are comparable with, and support the conclusions of, the LVC analyses~\cite{Dai:2018dca,Radice:2018ozg,De:2018uhw}; these studies were made possible by the public release of the gravitational-wave data~\cite{LOSC}.
While the examples in this paper have concentrated on the events GW150914 and GW170817, the conclusions presented have been demonstrated to be valid for the analysis of the data containing all 11 gravitational-wave events detected by LIGO and Virgo to date~\cite{LIGOScientific:2018mvr,LIGOScientific:2019fpa}.
As the LIGO and Virgo collaborations report more events~\cite{LIGOScientific:2018mvr,Aasi:2013wya}, independent analyses of the data associated with these events by the broader scientific community will be highly valuable and may well produce new insights. To this end, in this paper we have tried to provide some guidance on the nature of LIGO and Virgo detector noise and on the extraction of gravitational-wave signals. The LVC encourages the scientific community to analyze its data; LIGO and Virgo data will continue to be made publicly available on the GWOSC website~\cite{LOSC}.
\endinput
\section{Properties of LIGO-Virgo data}
\label{sec:data}
The Advanced LIGO~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2014jea} and Advanced Virgo~\cite{TheVirgo:2014hva} second-generation gravitational-wave detectors are large-scale enhanced Michelson interferometers.
The detectors are sensitive to space time strain induced by passing gravitational waves, as well as equivalent terrestrial force and displacement noises, each causing the lengths of the arms to vary over time.
Differences in relative arm length generate power variations in the enhanced Michelson’s output, captured by photodiodes.
The signal from these photodiodes serve as both the gravitational-wave readout and an error signal for controlling the relative arm length below roughly 100~Hz.
The Advanced LIGO gravitational-wave detectors are identical in design,
with 4~km long
arms. Advanced Virgo has a similar design, with 3~km long arms.
Fabry-Perot cavities are used in the arms of the detectors to increase
the interaction time with a gravitational wave, and power recycling is used to
increase the effective laser power.
Signal recycling has been added in the
Advanced LIGO detectors to shape their frequency response~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2014jea}. Advanced Virgo has not yet implemented signal recycling, but will in the future~\cite{TheVirgo:2014hva}.
A calibration procedure is applied to the interferometer photodiode output of each detector (see Section \ref{ss:calibration}) to produce gravitational-wave strain data as a time series, sampled at 16384 Hz for LIGO data
and 20~kHz for Virgo data.
For the Advanced LIGO detectors, the calibration is valid above 10~Hz and below 5~kHz, as described in Section \ref{ss:calibration}.
For Advanced Virgo in O2 the calibration validity range was from 10 Hz to 8 kHz~\cite{Acernese:2018bfl}.
The detectors also record hundreds of thousands of \textit{auxiliary channels}, time series recorded in addition to the strain signal, that monitor the behavior of the detectors and their environment.
The GWOSC provides distilled additional channels of data in which flags pertaining to different levels of problems with the data quality are implemented~\footnote{https://www.gw-openscience.org/segments}.
We employ continuous monitoring of the detector performance
to characterize noise sources that could negatively impact the sensitivity of the searches or the source property estimation~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016zmo,Covas:2018}. Invalid data due to detector malfunction, calibration error, or data acquisition problems are flagged so that they can be removed from analyses, as described in Section \ref{s:further-reading} and~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2017lwt}.
\end{input}
{\color{blue} [sll]: After the introduction, but before the section on Properties of Noise, I think we need another brief section that describes the data itself and outlines the analysis problem at a high level. It can be/should be only a page or so, but I think is needed to provide the uninitiated some framework to understand what is being talked about in the rest of the paper. It should include:
\begin{itemize}
\item Description of the form of the data -- how many channels, how many detectors how often is it sampled
\item A cursory note about the fact that there is considerable environmental monitoring to characterize noise and other factors that might influence detector health and data quality
\item A rough outline describing the scheme for analysis -- quick immediate significance analysis at each detector, followed by comparison between detectors, human interactions at what points, then how it is passed off to analysis
\item A rough enumeration of what we are doing all the time to characterize what is going on in the detector -- simple statements like we are characterizing the noise (point to current section 2), detector charcterization, etc.
\item A rough enumeration of the different analysis pipelines that are being run on the data, and when (e.g. we want to talk about low latency pipelines, also be explicit about multiple independent pipelines that all return the same events, and then also mention that we also have deep digging pipelines like what we just did to produce the catalog paper)
\end{itemize}
As I said -- I don't think it needs to be exhaustive -- it just needs to be some framework that shows this is complex and has many moving parts, and we've done due diligence to address all those moving parts with plenty of internal crosschecks and oversight.}
\endinput
\section{Fourier domain analysis}
\label{sec:freq}
The noise in the LIGO-Virgo detectors is, with isolated exceptions, approximately stationary, and therefore can be most easily characterized in the frequency domain. Stationary, Gaussian noise is uncorrelated between frequency bins, and the noise $\tilde{n}(f)$ in each bin follows a Gaussian distribution with random phase and amplitude $S_n^{1/2}(f)$. The first step in many LVC analyses is to Fourier transform the time-domain data using a fast Fourier transform (FFT)~\cite{CooleyTukey,5217220,Rao:2010:FFT:1941838}. Since the FFT implicitly assumes that the stretch of data being transformed is periodic in time, window functions~\cite{Tukey1967,1455106} have to be applied to the data to suppress spectral leakage~\cite{1455106} using {\it e.g.}\ a Tukey (cosine-tapered) window function. Failing to window the data will lead to spectral leakage and spurious correlations in the phase between bins.
For the analysis of transient data the use of Tukey windows is advantageous as signals will suffer less modification than, for example, Hanning or Flattop windows~\cite{1455106}.
As an illustration, Figure~\ref{fig:101} shows a sequence of processing steps applied to a stretch of calibrated strain data from the LIGO-Hanford detector around the time of GW150914. The raw data are dominated by low-frequency noise. A Tukey window with 0.5 s transition regions was applied to the raw data. Next, the data were whitened by dividing the Fourier coefficients by an estimate of the amplitude spectral density of the noise, which ensures that the data in each frequency bin has equal significance by down-weighting frequencies where the noise is loud. The data were then inverse Fourier transformed to return to the time domain:
\begin{equation}
d(t) \; \xrightarrow{{\rm FFT}}\; \tilde d(f) \; \xrightarrow{{\rm Whiten}}\; \tilde{d}_w(f) = \frac{\tilde d(f)}{S_n^{1/2}(f)}\; \xrightarrow{{\rm iFFT}} \; d_w(t) \, .
\end{equation}
The whitened samples were scaled to have unit variance in the time domain. As a final step, the data were bandpass filtered using a zero-phase, eighth order Butterworth filter with pass band $[35 ~{\rm Hz}, 350 ~{\rm Hz}]$. The bandpass enhances the visibility of features of interest in this band by removing noise outside of the band -- seismic and related noise at low frequencies, and quantum sensing noise at high frequencies.
Note that such narrow bandpassing is only used for visualization purposes and is not employed in the LVC analyses. The gravitational-wave signal GW150914 is visible in the whitened and bandpassed data shown in the lower panel of Figure~\ref{fig:101}.
While the steps above can make loud transient signals like GW150914 more easily visible in the strain time series, LVC's statistical analysis pipelines typically use a different sequence of processing steps.
LVC pipelines for detection and parameter estimation proceed by first high-pass filtering the data, to remove high-amplitude noise below the range of frequencies that will be analyzed by the pipelines which typically starts at $\sim 20~{\rm Hz}$. The data may also be down-sampled, after low-pass filtering to avoid aliasing, to reduce computational costs; thus its frequency content will be affected by the anti-aliasing filter at high frequency, with a formal cutoff at the Nyquist frequency of the down-sampled data~\cite{Messick:2016aqy,Usman:2015kfa}.
The LVC parameter estimation pipelines do not apply any bandpass filter to the data, but limit the likelihood integral calculation to begin at some lower frequency cut-off (typically also $20~{\rm Hz}$).
GW150914 was originally identified with high significance by a generic search for coherent excess power across the detector network~\cite{Abbott:2016blz,TheLIGOScientific:2016uux}, as well as by matched-filtering analyses~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016qqj}, as described in Section \ref{s:searches}, but this loud signal is also clearly visible in the data even with the minimal processing described here.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.23]{./figures/timeH1.png}
\caption{\label{fig:101} A sequence of processing steps applied to the calibrated strain from the LIGO-Hanford detector showing 4 s of data centered on GPS time 1126259462 (September 14, 2015 09:50:45 UTC). First a Tukey window with 0.5 s roll-off is applied, then the data are whitened using an estimate of the noise spectral density. Finally
the data are bandpassed filtered to enhance features in the passband $[35 ~{\rm Hz}, 350 ~{\rm Hz}]$, revealing the presence of
gravitational-wave signal GW150914.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Methods for measuring the noise spectrum}
The power spectral density of the noise $S_n(f)$ is not known {\it a priori} and must be estimated from the data.
One can perform a complex FFT of the entire data stream around some time to be searched for signals, but that yields only two samples (real and imaginary parts) per frequency bin, hence the variance in the estimate of $S_n(f)$ in any single frequency bin is large.
To overcome this, either some form of averaging is used~\cite{Aasi:2013jjl}, or a fit is made to a physical model for the spectrum~\cite{Littenberg:2014oda}. For example, Welch averaging~\cite{1161901} can be used to reduce the variance in the estimated power spectrum, but at the cost of either reducing the frequency resolution or requiring longer
stretches of data. The spectral estimate used to whiten the data in Figure~\ref{fig:101} was found by applying a Welch average to 1024 s of data centered on GPS time 1126259462 (the nearest integer GPS time to the peak of the GW150914 signal). The data were broken up into overlapping 4 s long chunks, each spaced by 2 s. The data in each chunk was Tukey filtered and Fourier transformed. The power spectrum from all the chunks was then averaged.
Figure~\ref{fig:specH1} compares the power spectrum of the Hanford data shown in Figure~\ref{fig:101}, before and after applying the Tukey window, to the power spectrum estimated using Welch averaging.
The non-windowed spectrum is swamped by spectral leakage, and follows a $1/f^2$ scaling. This scaling results from the abrupt step function at the beginning and end of the data to be Fourier transformed. This non-windowed data chunk arises from multiplying a longer stretch of data by a boxcar (or top hat) window. Thus, when it is Fourier transformed, the result is the convolution of the desired spectrum of the original data with the Fourier transform of the 4s-long boxcar window, i.e.\ a cardinal sine (sinc) function whose amplitude decreases as $1/f^2$. Since the noise spectrum rises much more rapidly than $1/f^2$ towards low frequencies, the entire visible frequency range is then dominated by the leakage from this low-frequency component.
When the noise spectrum varies significantly over time
other spectral estimation methods have to be used~\cite{Allen:2005fk,Usman:2015kfa}. One approach used in LVC parameter estimation studies is to fit a parametrized spectral model to the data that has a smooth spline component and a collection of Lorentzian lines~\cite{Littenberg:2014oda}.
In Section~\ref{sec:timefreq} we also discuss in detail the issue of stationarity and non-stationarity of the data, and the effects this has on the data analysis.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{./figures/spectraH1.png}
\caption{\label{fig:specH1} Power spectral density for the data shown in Figure~\ref{fig:101}. The spectrum for the non-windowed data are swamped by spectral leakage, and follow a $1/f^2$ scaling. The Welch average was computed using a longer stretch of data.}
\end{figure}
In addition to causing spectral leakage, improper windowing of the data can result in spurious phase correlations in the Fourier transform. Figure~\ref{fig:phaseH1} shows a scatter plot of the Fourier phase as a function of frequency for the same stretch of data shown in Figure~\ref{fig:specH1}, both with and without the application of a window function. The un-windowed data shows a strong phase correlation, while the windowed data does not.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{./figures/phasesH1.png}
\caption{\label{fig:phaseH1} The Fourier phases of the stretch of LIGO-Hanford data shown in Figure~\ref{fig:101}. If no window is applied before performing the FTT, as was the case in the analysis in~\cite{Creswell:2017rbh}, spectral leakage causes the phase to be correlated. When the Tukey window is applied the phases appear randomly distributed, as expected for Gaussian noise. The phases show some clustering around the $60~{\rm Hz}$ power line, consistent with the deterministic origin of this noise component.}
\end{figure}
The degree to which a time series is consistent with being stationary and Gaussian noise can be diagnosed by looking at the distribution of its Fourier transformed frequency samples.
If the noise is stationary and Gaussian the real and imaginary parts of the whitened noise in each frequency bin will be a collection of independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) random variables with zero mean and unit variance: $x \sim {\cal N}(0,1)$.
Departures from stationarity result in correlations between samples in different Fourier bins, while departures from Gaussianity can be identified by comparing the distribution of samples to a unit normal distribution. Loud instrumental noise transients and loud gravitational-wave bursts do contribute to non-stationary and non-Gaussian features, but away from these transient disturbances the LIGO-Virgo data can be approximated as stationary and Gaussian. Figure~\ref{fig:clean} shows the whitened Fourier amplitudes for a quiet stretch of data from the LIGO-Livingston observatory.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering \includegraphics[height=2.4in]{./figures/Gauss_check.png}
\caption{\label{fig:clean} The panel on the left shows a 2-d density plot of the whitened real and imaginary Fourier amplitude deviations using 256 s of LIGO-Livingston data centered on GPS time 1186741733 covering the band from $32~{\rm Hz}$ to $512~{\rm Hz}$. The panel on the right shows a 1-d histogram of the Fourier amplitudes. The solid line is for a reference ${\cal N}(0,1)$ distribution, while the dashed lines indicate the expected 3-sigma variance from having a finite number of samples. }
\end{figure}
\section{Detector calibration and data quality}\label{s:further-reading}
In this section we provide the central concepts related to the calibration of the data as well as an overview of the data quality checks we perform. These procedures ensure that the strain data used for analyses (namely, the analyses used by the LVC in publication results) and made public on the GWOSC is calibrated properly with known error bars, and that time periods of poor data quality can be avoided, as explained below.
\subsection{Detector calibration} \label{ss:calibration}
The Advanced LIGO~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2014jea,Martynov:2016fzi,TheLIGOScientific:2016agk,Abbott:2016jsd} and Advanced Virgo~\cite{TheVirgo:2014hva,Acernese:2018bfl,casanuevadiaz:tel-01625376} detectors use feedback loops to keep the optical cavities on resonance.
The strain calibration must thus include models and measurements of all readout electronics, as well as of electronics and transfer functions of actuation hardware that act on the mirrors through multiple points in the suspension systems \cite{Robertson_2002}. As shown in Figure~\ref{f:cal}, there are three main components of the differential arm control loop for Advanced LIGO: the actuation function $A(f)$, the sensing function $C(f)$, and the digital filters applied, $D(f)$. All three are measured and modeled as functions of frequency.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./figures/loopcontroldiagram_simple.pdf}
\caption{Differential arm length control loop and calibration diagram of the LIGO detectors from the GW150914 companion paper on calibration \cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016agk}. The left (grey) box shows the realtime detector controls while the right (purple) box shows the calibration procedure. $\Delta L_{free}$ is the unsuppressed change in differential arm length, and hence the desired quantity.
The photodiodes (part of the sensing $C$) measure the residual differential arm length $\Delta L_{res}$, which is suppressed by the feedback loop.
The ``error signal'' $d_{err}$, equal to $\Delta L_{res}$ multiplied by the sensing function $C$,
is passed through digital filters, $D$, and applied to the differential arm length actuators through the actuation function, $A$. In order to reconstruct an estimate of $\Delta L_{free}$ in units of strain we model $A$ and $C$, denoted in the purple box. $x_{T}^{(PC)}$ denotes where in the loop we apply a force to the test mass mirrors, via radiation pressure (photon calibrator), in order to measure $A$ and $C$, as functions of frequency. The output of the calibration pipeline is then a strain signal, $h(t)$, that is a faithful representation of $\Delta L_{free}/L$.}
\label{f:cal}
\end{figure}
The digital filters are known to great precision so the calibration error and uncertainty come from the differences between the model and measurement (including measurement error) of the actuation and sensing functions, $A$ and $C$. To independently measure the actuation and sensing functions, a pair of beams from auxiliary lasers are reflected off of each test mass mirror, with their intensities modulated at a known frequency and amplitude to actuate with radiation pressure. These auxiliary laser assemblies are referred to as photon calibrators~\cite{Karki2016}. Once $A$ and $C$ are known, the true differential arm length is extracted and translated to a strain by dividing by the common length of the arm $L$ (4~km for LIGO, 3~km for Virgo), per the following equation:
\begin{equation}\label{calib}
h(t) = \frac{1}{L}\left[ \mathcal{C}^{-1}*d_{err}(t)+\mathcal{A}*d_{ctrl}(t)\right] ,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{A}$ are time-domain filters derived from frequency-domain measurements of the actuation function $A(f)$ and the sensing function $C(f)$.
Note that the gravitational-wave strain can also appear in the common-mode arm length changes, and in changes to the lengths of all degrees of freedom in the detector. However, only the sensing of the differential change in the interferometer's arm lengths is engineered to have low enough instrumental noise to be sensitive to the strain induced by gravitational waves. The other optical lengths are controlled in order to maintain an optimal and linear response to the gravitational-wave strain in the differential degree of freedom.
Calibration measurements are made periodically in each observing run. In addition, to monitor time dependent parameters such as optical gain, cavity pole frequency and actuation strength drifts, several \emph{calibration lines} are continously injected, at specific frequencies, by applying sinusoidal forces on the test mass mirrors using the photon calibrators; these lines will be present in the raw strain data. The calibration line frequencies are different amongst the detectors.
For the second observing run O2 and onwards, the calibration lines are removed from the calibrated $h(t)$ strain data channel (within the calibration accuracy)~\cite{Driggers:2018gii,Acernese:2018bfl}; the calibration lines were not removed from the O1 data~\cite{Abbott:2016jsd}.
Even for O1, the presence of the calibration lines does not affect the search for compact binary coalescence gravitational-wave signals as the amplitude of data at the frequencies of the lines is suppressed via the whitening~\cite{Cuoco:2000gv,Cuoco:2001wz} of the data when the calculation of the detection statistic is made for the data from each detector (see Section~\ref{s:searches}).
Similarly, for parameter estimation the presence of the noise spectral density in the likelihood (see Section~\ref{s:pe}) minimizes the influence of spectral lines including calibration lines. Because the spectral lines are narrow, this frequency-domain weighting has a negligible effect on signal searches and parameter estimation and does not lead to any spurious effects such as generation of false candidate events or parameter biases.
For the Advanced Virgo calibration in O2 it was necessary to account for the transfer function of the optical response of the interferometer. This requires a calibration of the longitudinal actuators for the mirrors, still based on the laser wavelength as length reference using the so-called {\it free swinging Michelson} configuration described in~\cite{Accadia:2010aa}. In addition, the interferometer's output power as determined by the readout electronics also requires calibration. Calibration measurements are made weekly in each observing run and have shown stable actuation strengths. To monitor the time dependent optical gain and cavity pole frequency, several calibration lines are continously injected, as in LIGO detectors, at specific frequencies, by applying sinusoidal forces on the test mass mirrors using the electro-magnetic actuators. By construction, the calibration lines are removed from the calibrated $h(t)$ strain data channel (within the calibration accuracy).
For Advanced Virgo in O2 the gravitational wave strain reconstruction removed the contributions from control signals to the test mass mirror motion.
A {\it photon calibrator}, namely an auxiliary laser that is used to reflect photons off a mirror and induce momentum transfer, was used to verify the calibration and confirm the sign of the strain channel $h(t)$. See~\cite{Acernese:2018bfl} for more explicit details of the Advanced Virgo calibration system for O2.
Calibrated strain data for the LIGO and Virgo detectors are created online for use in low-latency searches. After the completion of the observing runs, final time-dependent calibrations were generated for each detector. The results presented in GWTC-1~\cite{LIGOScientific:2018mvr} use the full frequency-dependent calibration uncertainties described in~\cite{Cahillane:2017,Viets_2018,Acernese:2018bfl}.
It is important to note that the detector strain channel $h(t)$ is only calibrated between 10 Hz and 5 kHz for Advanced LIGO and 10 Hz and 8 kHz for Advanced Virgo~\cite{Acernese:2018bfl}; the channel is not a faithful representation of strain at lower or higher frequencies.
\subsection{Data quality and terrestrial noise}\label{ss:DQ-Terr-Noise}
As described in Sections \ref{sec:noise} and \ref{sec:timefreq}, calibrated LIGO and Virgo data can be both non-stationary and non-Gaussian at certain times and frequencies. Glitches may mimic true transient astrophysical signals in individual detectors \cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016zmo}, while spectral lines such as those seen in Figure \ref{f:asds} can blind searches for long-duration signals at those specific frequencies \cite{Covas:2018}. In this section we outline how we identify and characterize these noise features so that we can either exclude the bad data or assess the impact of remaining artifacts on searches for gravitational-wave signals.
\begin{figure}[t]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{./figures/l1-blip-mpl-omegascan.pdf}
\caption{Spectrogram of an example of transient noise in the advanced detectors; a \textit{blip} glitch in LIGO-Livingston. This is a zoomed image of the blip glitch shown in Fig.\ 10 of \cite{TheLIGOScientific:2017lwt}.}
\label{f:glitch}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{f:glitch} shows an example of a glitch. Glitches with power comparable to detectable signals have historically occurred on the order of once per minute, with larger glitches occurring less frequently. Even in their nominal state, the detectors' data contain glitches
introduced by behavior of the instruments or complex interactions between the instruments
and their environment.
Many of these glitches (but not all) can be associated with transient signals in auxiliary channels from various sensors which serve as ``witnesses'' to environmental disturbances coupling into the interferometer. These associations allow us to identify and catalog certain classes of glitches.
See~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016zmo} for a detailed presentation on the characterization of transient noise in Advanced LIGO, especially pertaining to the observation of the gravitational-wave signal GW150914.
Descriptions of various noise sources for Advanced Virgo in O2 can be found in~\cite{Cirone:2019zwq,Cirone:2018vdc,Bonnand_2017,ACERNESE2020102386}.
In searches for transient gravitational-wave signals, identified glitches and periods of poor data quality are flagged~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2017lwt,Aasi:2014mqd,Aasi:2012wd}. Periods of data are vetoed at various levels or categories depending on the severity of the problems; the GWOSC open data releases make this information available~\cite{LOSC}. Sections of strongly non-stationary data that would corrupt the noise power spectral density estimates are removed entirely from the searches. Times when noise sources with known physical coupling to the gravitational-wave strain channel of the detector are active, and thus likely to cause glitches, are identified, and candidates at or around these times may be removed (vetoed) from search results. For a more detailed explanation of the strategy for mitigating noise sources, see Section 4 of~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016zmo}.
For searches for long-duration signals, frequency bands known to be dominated by instrument noise are omitted from the analysis~\cite{Covas:2018}.
The strategy of vetoing times of probable glitches is expected to increase confidence in detection candidates that survive the application of vetoes~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2017lwt,Isogai_2010,Smith_2011}, and may thus increase the number of astrophysical signals that can be confidently detected. Detection methods are discussed in detail in Section~\ref{s:searches}.
Although the great majority of transient noise sources are of local origin and thus uncorrelated between detectors, some noise sources exist that are potentially correlated between detectors, such as electromagnetic pulses from lightning coupling inductively into the detectors~\cite{0264-9381-34-7-074002}.
A key feature of the LIGO and Virgo experimental design is an
array of physical environment monitors designed to detect environmental disturbances,
and to have greater sensitivity to those disturbances than the detector's gravitational-wave strain channel does.
The LIGO environmental sensor array includes seismometers, microphones, accelerometers, radio receivers and magnetometers to monitor ambient noise~\cite{Effler_2015} \footnote{See also http://pem.ligo.org}. Virgo has a similar array of sensors~\cite{TheVirgo:2014hva} \footnote{See also https://tds.virgo-gw.eu/?content=3\&r=15647}.
The environmental sensors' sensitivities are verified via a suite of noise injections performed at the beginning and end of each observing run; acoustic, magnetic, radio frequency, and vibrational tests are done to quantify the coupling from ambient noise to the gravitational-wave strain data $h(t)$~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016zmo}. These injections are conducted at multiple locations around the detector such that sensor coupling functions to $h(t)$ via multiple potential coupling paths are verified and well understood.
As shown in Figure 2 of \cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016zmo}, the external transient electromagnetic coupling of the ambient noise to the gravitational-wave data channel $h(t)$ is on the order of a factor of 100 below the current strain level, such that any electromagnetic source would have to register in one of the magnetometers surrounding the detector an SNR of 100 before registering in the gravitational-wave signal channel. This is easily confirmed with the study of lightning strikes during nearby storms~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016zmo}. The description of the coherence between the detectors' output strain signal $h(t)$ and magnetometers about the detector for the AC power frequencies (50/60 Hz) is nontrivial and described in \cite{DavisMassinger2018}.
In Virgo, a detailed study of the electromagnetic coupling to the gravitational-wave data channel was recently carried out~\cite{Cirone:2018vdc,Cirone:2019zwq}.
In addition, a potential correlated noise source in searches for a stochastic gravitational-wave background is Schumann resonances, or low-frequency magnetic field resonances between the Earth's surface and the ionosphere excited by lightning~\cite{PhysRevD.87.123009,PhysRevD.90.023013}. These resonances are also monitored with sensitive magnetometers, with the future goal of subtracting their effect on gravitational-wave strain data \cite{Coughlin:2018str}.
The effect of Schumann resonances on the measured gravitational-wave strain is below the current Advanced LIGO - Advanced Virgo noise floor~\cite{LIGOScientific:2019vic}.
\endinput
\section{Introduction}
Gravitational-wave observations have become an important new means to learn about the Universe. The LIGO Scientific Collaboration and the Virgo Collaboration (LVC) have published a series of discoveries
beginning with the first detected event, GW150914 \cite{Abbott:2016blz}, a binary black hole merger.
Within a span of two years, that event was followed by nine other binary black hole detections (GW151012~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016qqj,LIGOScientific:2018mvr}, GW151226~\cite{Abbott:2016nmj}, GW170104~\cite{Abbott:2017vtc}, GW170608~\cite{Abbott:2017gyy}, GW170729, GW170809, GW170814~\cite{Abbott:2017oio}, GW170818 and GW170823),
and one binary neutron star merger, GW170817~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2017qsa}.
Details about all of these confidently-detected gravitational-wave events have been published in a catalog, GWTC-1~\cite{LIGOScientific:2018mvr}.
The global gravitational-wave detector network currently consists of two Advanced LIGO detectors in the U.S.~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2014jea} in Hanford, Washington and Livingston, Louisiana; the Advanced Virgo detector in Cascina, Italy~\cite{TheVirgo:2014hva}; and the GEO 600 detector in Germany \cite{Dooley_2016}. In the coming years this network will grow through the addition of the Japanese detector, KAGRA~\cite{Aso:2013,Akutsu:2017thy,Akutsu:2019rba}, and a third Advanced LIGO detector to be located in India~\cite{Unnikrishnan:2013qwa}.
The first observing run (O1) of Advanced LIGO took place from September 12, 2015 until January 19, 2016. The second observing run (O2) for the Advanced LIGO detectors began on November 30, 2016, and lasted until August 25, 2017. The Advanced Virgo detector formally commenced observations in O2 on August 1, 2017, enabling the first three-detector observations of gravitational waves~\cite{LIGOScientific:2018mvr}. A third LIGO-Virgo observing run, O3, began on April 1, 2019, with all three detectors operating with their best sensitivity to date.
Consistency between multiple detectors helps greatly to suppress instrumental backgrounds and to allow coherent analysis of gravitational-wave signals.
All of the event detections published to date have involved both of the Advanced LIGO detectors, while
GW170814 and GW170818 were triple-detections sensed by Virgo as well.
Data from Virgo were also used in the parameter estimation analysis and sky localization determination for GW170729, GW170809, and GW170817.
The Virgo data were especially critical in helping to find the source of GW170817~\cite{2017ApJ...848L..12A}.
This binary neutron star merger represented a remarkable debut for multi-messenger astronomy with gravitational waves, as it was closely followed by a short gamma-ray burst, GRB 170817A~\cite{2017ApJ...848L..14G,Monitor:2017mdv}, and the relatively precise localization obtained from the gravitational-wave data enabled the identification and thorough multi-wavelength study of kilonova and afterglow emission from an optical counterpart, SSS17a / AT 2017gfo~\cite{2017Sci...358.1556C,2017ApJ...848L..12A}.
As summarized in~\cite{LIGOScientific:2018mvr}, the LVC detections were made using two independent matched-filter analyses to search for compact binary coalescences in O2~\cite{Usman:2015kfa,Messick:2016aqy}, as well as an unmodeled search for short-duration transient signals or \emph{bursts}~\cite{Klimenko:2015ypf}.
Thus, detection methods that were developed by the LVC and tested using simulated signals added to mock data, or to previous sets of real data where any possible signals were overwhelmed by noise, have now been demonstrated to be effective for astrophysical gravitational-wave signals.
Testing and validation of LVC analyses was achieved using both (simulated) signal injections performed within the analysis, i.e.\ in software, and signal injections made in hardware by moving the detectors' test masses.
The growth of the number of observed gravitational-wave events has stimulated intense interest in the astrophysical implications of the detected sources, as well as interest in the gravitational-wave data. Currently, the LVC releases data through the Gravitational-Wave Open Science Center (GWOSC)~\cite{Vallisneri:2014vxa,LOSC}.
LIGO data releases are described in the LIGO Data Management Plan~\cite{plan}, an agreement between the LIGO Laboratory and the US National Science Foundation. The LVC policy for releasing gravitational-wave triggers and event candidates is presented in ~\cite{plan-LVC,LV_alerts}.
For detections of compact binary mergers, about one hour (4096 seconds) of calibrated strain data around the event time are released at the time of publication. These data are available for all published detections in O1 and O2~\cite{detections}.
Currently the bulk data from the initial LIGO Science Runs since 2005 are available on GWOSC~\cite{LOSC}, as are the Advanced LIGO data from the O1 observing run~\cite{O1_GWOSC} and the Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo data from the O2 observing run~\cite{O2_GWOSC}. Timing for release of data in future observing runs is described in the Data Management Plan~\cite{plan}; for instance, the bulk data from the first 6 months of the O3 run will be released in April 2021. GWOSC is continually updating and releasing data products that address the needs and interests of the broader scientific community. Many of the analysis software packages used by the collaboration are publicly available as open source code; a list of these is available on the GWOSC web site~\cite{LOSC}. Also, a number of intermediate data products are released through the LIGO Document Control Center, typically linked with LVC papers; e.g.\ see~\cite{LIGO-P1800370}.
With the public release of the LIGO and Virgo data, groups outside these collaborations are analyzing the released data.
Most of these analyses are producing results consistent with the LVC's~\cite{Green:2017voq,Nielsen:2018bhc,Roulet:2018jbe,Dai:2018dca,Radice:2018ozg,De:2018uhw,De:2018zrk,Nitz:2018imz}, and some additional significant event candidates have been reported~\cite{Zackay:2019-O1event,Venumadhav:2019-O2events}.
The noise properties of the LIGO data and the correctness of the LVC data analysis for GW150914 have also been questioned~\cite{Creswell:2017rbh,Creswell:2018tsr}, although successive gravitational wave detections have strengthened confidence in our detection and parameter estimation methods~\cite{LIGOScientific:2018mvr}.
Motivated by the widespread interest in analyzing LIGO and Virgo data, in this paper we provide an overview of the properties of the LIGO-Virgo data and its noise components. We also describe the essential features of data analysis procedures that have been used by LIGO and Virgo teams to detect and measure the properties of the cataloged gravitational-wave sources~\cite{LIGOScientific:2018mvr}, as summarized in Figure~\ref{fig:summ_diagram}.
The analysis of LIGO and Virgo data in searching for gravitational-wave signals is complex, as is the correct treatment of the statistical properties of noise. The LVC encourages the broader scientific community to access and analyze its data, and will always be open to discussions about the methods it uses to arrive at its conclusions.
The codes used to analyze LIGO-Virgo data are public. The special purpose codes used to generate many of the figures in this paper are also available~\cite{https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3380539}.
In addition, the LVC has made available a Jupyter notebook to illustrate methods used to produce key figures and results in a simplified implementation~\cite{Tutorial_GWOSC}.
Finally, many of the software packages used by the LVC to process the LIGO-Virgo data, search for events and characterize observed signals can be found at the GWOSC site~\cite{Software_GWOSC}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./figures/diagram_v5.png}
\caption{\label{fig:summ_diagram} A simplified schematic summarizing the main steps in LIGO-Virgo data processing, from the output of the data to the results reported in a catalog of transient events.}
\end{figure}
The paper is organized as follows. In Section~\ref{sec:data} we describe the properties of the LIGO-Virgo data, while in Section~\ref{sec:noise} we discuss the noise that affects those data. Section~\ref{sec:freq} describes the basic data processing steps used to properly Fourier transform the data and estimate the power spectrum.
Section~\ref{sec:timefreq} describes wavelet based time-frequency methods that can be used to assess possible deviations from stationary detector noise. Section~\ref{s:further-reading} addresses detector and calibration issues for LIGO and Virgo. Section~\ref{sec:likelihood} describes the noise model used to define the likelihood function used in parameter estimation studies. Section~\ref{s:searches} gives a description of the means by which the LVC searches for gravitational-wave signals, while Section~\ref{s:pe} presents the means by which the LVC infers the detected waveforms and estimates the physical parameters for the system that emitted the gravitational waves.
To illustrate these concepts, Section~\ref{sec:res} provides a simplified description of how the publicly released data surrounding GW150914 can be used to find a best fit waveform model and to study the correlation properties of the residuals.
We also address claims made in~\cite{Creswell:2018tsr,Creswell:2017rbh} concerning correlations in detector noise, residuals, and the estimation of GW150914's source properties.
In addressing these claims, the LVC notes that it is beneficial for gravitational-wave science that groups external to our collaboration can introduce new ideas and techniques.
Finally, in Section~\ref{sec:conclusions} we provide a summary assessment of LIGO and Virgo data properties as well as LVC data analysis findings and validation.
\endinput
\section{Noise model and likelihood}
\label{sec:likelihood}
The likelihood that the gravitational-wave strain data contains a given signal is the central quantity in both detection and parameter estimation of gravitational-wave events.
In this section we relate this likelihood to the model assumptions commonly made for the noise components of gravitational-wave detector strain data.
The data time series ${\bf d}$ collected from an interferometer can be written as the sum of the gravitational wave response of the
detector, $\mathfrak{h}$, and the combination of all the noise sources in that detector ${\bf n}$ such that ${\bf d}={\bf n}+\mathfrak{h}$.
Since the true gravitational-wave signal in the detector $\mathfrak{h}$ is unknown, we resort to using signal models denoted by $\bf{h}$.
We consider a model $\bf{h}$ to be a good description of the signal in the data if the residuals ${\bf r} = {\bf d} - \bf{h}$ are consistent with our model for the instrument noise.
More quantitatively, the likelihood that the data ${\bf d}$ contains a possible signal $\mathfrak{h}$ is given by the probability that ${\bf r}$ is a realization of the noise model.
In other words, {\em the likelihood function is the noise model}. For Gaussian noise the likelihood can be written:
\begin{equation}\label{like}
p({\bf d} | {\bf h}) = \frac{1}{ {\rm det}(2 \pi {\bf C})^{1/2}} \, e^{- \frac{1}{2} \chi^2({\bf d} , {\bf h})}\, ,
\end{equation}
where ${\bf C}$ is the noise correlation matrix, and
\begin{equation}\label{chi}
\chi^2({\bf d} , {\bf h}) = {\bf r} \cdot {\bf C}^{-1} \cdot {\bf r} = (d_{Ik} - h_{Ik}) C^{-1}_{(I k)(J m)} (d_{Jm} - h_{Jm}) \, .
\end{equation}
The repeated indices include a sum over the network of detectors $I, J$ and the data samples $k$ and $m$. If the noise is uncorrelated between detectors $C_{(Ik)(Jm)} = \delta_{IJ} S^I_{km}$, where $S$ is the noise spectral density. Moreover, if the noise is stationary -- so that correlations depend on only the time lag between data samples -- then the noise correlation matrix in each detector will be diagonal in the Fourier domain: $S^{I}_{km} = \delta_{km} S^{I}(f_k)$. In that case we have $\chi^2({\bf d} , {\bf h}) = ({\bf r} | {\bf r})$ where $({\bf a} | {\bf b})$ is the familiar noise-weighted inner product:
\begin{equation}\label{nwip}
({\bf a} | {\bf b}) =2 \int_0^\infty \frac{ \tilde{a}(f) \tilde{b}^*(f) + \tilde{a}^*(f) \tilde{b}(f) }{S_n(f)} \, df \, .
\end{equation}
The likelihood function (\ref{like}) is central to Bayesian inference~\cite{Gregory:2005:BLD:1051497}, and with the specification of priors~\cite{box2011bayesian} for the signal and noise models, allows for the calculation of the model evidence~\cite{skilling2006,Veitch:2009hd} -- giving the odds that a signal is present -- and posterior distributions for the model parameters, $\boldsymbol{\theta}$, such as the masses and spins of a binary system~\cite{PhysRevD.64.022001,vanderSluys:2007st,Veitch:2014wba}. For stationary, Gaussian noise that is uncorrelated between detectors, the likelihood function takes the form
\begin{equation}\label{like2}
p({\bf d} | \boldsymbol{\theta}) = \exp\left(- \frac{1}{2} \sum_{I} \left[ ({\bf d}_I - {\bf h}_I(\boldsymbol{\theta}) | {\bf d}_I - {\bf h}_I(\boldsymbol{\theta} )) + \int \ln(S^{I}_{n}(f)) \, df \right]\right) \, ,
\end{equation}
where the sum is taken over the detectors in the network and $(a|b)$ is the noise weighted inner product defined in equation (\ref{nwip}).
The likelihood function can also be used to define a frequentist detection statistic~\cite{PhysRevD.46.5236,creighton2012gravitational} given by the likelihood ratio between a signal $\bf{h}$ being present or absent in the data. If the data were stationary and Gaussian this statistic would follow a known distribution and the false alarm rate for an event could be computed analytically. In practice the noise exhibits deviations from stationarity and Gaussianity, and the methods used to detect and characterize signals have to be modified. Robust search methods have been developed that take into account the measured properties of the noise. These are described in Section~\ref{s:searches}. The noise modeling and consistency checks applied to signal characterization and parameters estimation are described in Section~\ref{s:pe}.
\section*{References}
\bibliographystyle{iopart-num}
\section{Basic properties of detector noise}
\label{sec:noise}
\bigskip
The data recorded by the Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo instruments are impacted by many sources of noise, including quantum sensing noise, seismic noise, suspension thermal noise, mirror coating thermal noise, and gravity gradient noise~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2014jea}.
In addition, there are transient noise events, for example coming from anthropogenic sources, weather, equipment malfunctions~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016zmo}, as well as occasional transient noise of unknown origin~\cite{Cabero:2019orq}.
There is also persistent elevated noise confined to certain frequencies, manifesting as very narrow peaks in a plot of noise versus frequency, which we refer to as spectral \emph{lines}; these are typically caused by electrical and mechanical devices or resonances~\cite{Covas:2018}.
The combination of all the noise sources in a detector produces a time series $n(t)$ that can be represented by a vector ${\bf n}$, with components given by the discrete time samples $n_i = n(t_i)$. The noise is described as a stochastic process with statistical properties given by the joint probability distribution $p({\bf n})$. This model can be used to define summary statistics such as the mean $\mu= {\rm E}[{\bf n}]$ (where ${\rm E}$ is defined as the expectation value) and covariance $C_{ij} = {\rm E}[(n_i - \mu)(n_j- \mu)]$
where the expectation values are taken with respect to $p({\bf n})$. The mean can be estimated from the data as
\begin{equation}
\hat{\mu} = \frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^N n_i \, ,
\end{equation}
where $N={\rm dim}({\bf n})$ is the number of data samples. The full covariance matrix cannot be estimated from the data without making additional assumptions as we have only $M=1$ measurements for each data point, rendering the sample covariance matrix formally undefined:
\begin{equation}
\hat{C}_{ij} = \frac{1}{M-1} (n_i-\hat{\mu}) ( n_j-\hat{\mu}) \, .
\end{equation}
Estimates of the covariance matrix can be made if noise is assumed to follow a particular distribution, or if the noise properties are unchanging in time.
Note that in practice, analyses generally do not use all $N$ samples at once, but rather use segments of contiguous data of various lengths from a few seconds up to hours depending on the intended application. Noise is referred to as {\em Gaussian} if the joint probability distribution follows a multi-variate normal distribution:
\begin{equation}\label{gauss}
p({\bf n}) = \frac{1}{ {\rm det}(2 \pi {\bf C})^{1/2}} \, \exp\left[- \frac{1}{2} \sum_{ij} (n_i - \mu)(n_j- \mu) C_{ij}^{-1}\right] \, ,
\end{equation}
where $C_{ij}^{-1}$ is the inverse of the covariance matrix at $i,j$.
The noise is referred to as {\em stationary} if $C_{ij}$ depends only on the lag $|i-j|$. Stationary noise is characterized by the correlation function $C(\tau)$, where $\tau=|t_i-t_j|$ is the time lag.
Transforming to the Fourier domain, where the labels $i, j$ now refer to frequencies $f_i, f_j$, stationary noise has a diagonal covariance matrix $C_{ij} = \delta_{ij} S_n(f_i)$, which defines the power spectral density $S_n(f)$. The power spectral density is given by the Fourier transform of the correlation function $C(\tau)$.
Amplitude spectral density is the square root of power spectral density and has units of Hz$^{-1/2}$.
The noise is referred to as {\em white} if $C_{ij} = \delta_{ij} \sigma^2$ in both the frequency domain and the time domain.
White noise is, however, a poor approximation to LIGO-Virgo detector noise
Understanding the noise is crucial to detecting gravitational-wave signals and inferring the properties of the astrophysical sources that generate them. Improper modeling of the noise can result in the significance of an event being incorrectly estimated, and to systematic biases in the parameter estimation. To guard against these unwanted outcomes, detector characterization and noise modeling are significant activities within the LVC~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016zmo,TheLIGOScientific:2017lwt}. While many textbook treatments of gravitational-wave data analysis~\cite{alma991002489675403836, creighton2012gravitational, Jaranowski2012} describe the idealized case of independent detectors with stationary, Gaussian noise, actual LVC analyses are careful to account for deviations from this ideal.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./figures/spectra_GW170817_L1_linear.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./figures/spectra_GW170817_L1_log.pdf}
\caption{Amplitude spectral density of the LIGO-Livingston detector data, using 10-second fast Fourier transforms and averaged over a three-minute period starting at August 17, 2017 12:36:00 UTC, five minutes before the merger time of GW170817~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2017qsa}. The top plot is a linear frequency scale, highlighting periodic features from 0~Hz to 2000~Hz. The bottom plot is a log scale, illustrating the features in the detector data from 8~Hz to the Nyquist frequency 8192 Hz.
}
\label{f:asds}
\end{figure}
The Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo detector data have a rich structure in both time and frequency.
For a given gravitational-wave source, the noise (as described by its spectral density) governs the measured signal-to-noise ratio (SNR).
Figure \ref{f:asds} shows the spectral frequency content of the LIGO-Livingston detector averaged over a three-minute period shortly before the first detection of gravitational waves from a binary neutron star merger, GW170817.
During the O1 and O2 runs, the Advanced LIGO detectors had an averaged measured noise amplitude of about $10^{-23}$ Hz$^{-1/2}$ at 100 Hz.
(The target sensitivity at 100 Hz for Advanced LIGO is $4 \times 10^{-24}$ Hz$^{-1/2}$~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2014jea}, while for Advanced Virgo it is $5 \times 10^{-24}$ Hz$^{-1/2}$~\cite{TheVirgo:2014hva}.)
The steep shape at low frequencies is dominated by noise related to ground motion. Above roughly 100~Hz, the Advanced LIGO detectors are currently quantum noise limited, and their noise curves are dominated by shot noise~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2014jea, TheLIGOScientific:2016agk}. High amplitude noise features are also present in the data at certain frequencies, including lines due to the AC power grid (harmonics of 60~Hz in the U.S.\ and 50~Hz in Europe), mechanical resonances of the mirror suspensions, injected calibration lines, and noise entering through the detector control systems.
For a detailed account of noise sources that appear at specific frequencies in the Advanced LIGO detectors, see ~\cite{Covas:2018}.
For a list of the Advanced Virgo noise lines for observing run O2, see~\cite{V1-lines-O2}.
\section{Inferring waveform and physical parameters}
\label{s:pe}
Once a candidate gravitational-wave signal is identified, and its significance is established,
the next goal is to use the data to infer the physical parameters of the system that created the gravitational waves~\cite{PhysRevD.58.082001,PhysRevD.64.022001,Veitch:2009hd,Veitch:2014wba,Rover:2006ni,vanderSluys:2008qx,vanderSluys:2007st,TheLIGOScientific:2016wfe}.
The detection of gravitational waves
as well as the inference of the physical parameters relies on knowledge of the generic
shape of the signal one is looking for as well as the distribution of the noise.
Moreover, gravitational-wave signals are weak, therefore uncertainties in these parameters may be large
and \emph{a priori} assumptions about the typical amplitudes and phase evolution of such signals do have a significant impact on the
reconstructed waveform.
For these reasons, inference of the physical parameters of the system, such as masses,
spins of the merging objects, is done within the framework of Bayesian parameter estimation.
The central elements that need defining are a \emph{model} $M$ for the gravitational-wave signal that
allows for the prediction of the form of the signal from the values of the physical parameters of the system, and the
so-called \emph{background} or \emph{prior} information $I$.
Given a model $M$ that depends on a set of parameters $\boldsymbol{\theta}$, background information $I$,
and a set of observations (data) ${\bf d}$, inference is done via application of Bayes' theorem:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bayes}
p(\boldsymbol{\theta} | {\bf d}, M, I) =p(\boldsymbol{\theta} | M, I)\frac{p({\bf d} | \boldsymbol{\theta}, M, I)}{p({\bf d} |M, I)}\,.
\end{equation}
The left hand side is referred to as the \emph{posterior probability density function}, or simply the posterior for $\boldsymbol{\theta}$,
while the three terms on the right hand side are the \emph{prior probability density function} $p(\boldsymbol{\theta} |M, I)$,
the \emph{likelihood function} $p({\bf d}|\boldsymbol{\theta},M\, I)$, given by equation (\ref{like2}) and the \emph{evidence},
\begin{equation}\label{eq:evidence}
p({\bf d} |M, I) = \int d \boldsymbol{\theta}\, p(\boldsymbol{\theta}|M, I) p({\bf d} |\boldsymbol \theta, M, I)\,.
\end{equation}
Within the Bayesian parameter estimation framework, the inference is reduced to the calculation of the posterior
for $\boldsymbol{\boldsymbol{\theta}}$ given the model $M$ and the analysis assumptions $I$ which uniquely determine
the prior distribution and the likelihood function.
\subsection{Waveform models} \label{waveforms}
Let us focus now on the choice of signal model $M$. The signal model
$M$ determines the functional form of $h(t;\boldsymbol{\theta})$ which is key to calculating the
likelihood function. For definiteness, we will concentrate on
parametric forms of $h(t;\boldsymbol{\theta})$, as obtained by solving Einstein's equations.
For a discussion of non-parametric signal models see~\cite{Cornish:2014kda}.
Exact analytic solutions of Einstein's equations are notoriously difficult to obtain;
therefore data-analysis-ready models are either based on perturbative solutions,
e.g.\ the Taylor family of waveforms~\cite{Buonanno:2009zt} or the effective-one-body
waveforms~\cite{Buonanno:1998gg,Damour:2001tu,Taracchini:2013rva,Bohe:2016gbl,Nagar:2018zoe},
or on hybrid/phenomenological approaches such as the Phenom family of waveforms
~\cite{Ajith:2009bn,Hannam:2013oca,Husa:2015iqa,Khan:2015jqa}.
We will not discuss further the details of the waveform models here, but we will restrict ourselves to
the two main types of waveforms employed in the original analysis of GW150914.
For GW150914, the two models used in~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016wfe} were SEOBNRv2 and
IMRPhenomPv2~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016wfe,lalsimulation}. Both waveform models are full inspiral-merger-ringdown models
that succeed in reproducing numerical waveforms, especially in the region of approximately equal mass
and moderate spins magnitudes. The main difference between the two models lays in the treatment of the spin dynamics.
SEOBNRv2 models the dynamics of the component of the spin vectors along the direction of the orbital angular momentum
while IMRPhenomPv2 includes also an effective treatment of the dynamics of the in-plane components of the spins,
and thus includes an approximate precessing dynamics~\footnote{At the time of the discovery of GW150914 another precessing waveform model
was available, SEOBNRv3, which also includes in-plane spin components~\cite{Pan:2013rra,Babak:2016tgq}. The original analysis, however,
did not include results from this model, which were reported in~\cite{Abbott:2016izl}.}.
Because GW150914 was nearly a face-off system (orbital angular momentum vector pointing away from the Earth), the LIGO instruments were not
sensitive to the in-plane spin components, hence the two waveform models
are essentially equivalent.
In~\cite{Abbott:2016wiq}, the LVC has empirically shown that the inferred properties of GW150914
depend relatively weakly on a change in the waveform model.
This finding was confirmed by the analysis presented in~\cite{Nagar:2018zoe}
using an independent effective-one-body implementation and by~\cite{Abbott:2016apu}, in which numerical relativity solutions were directly compared with
GW150914 data.
\subsection{Prior distributions}
The final functions necessary for the application of Bayes' theorem, Eq.~(\ref{eq:bayes}), are
the prior probability distributions for the parameters of interest. These are all the parameters necessary
to completely characterise the gravitational-wave signal emitted during a coalescence event. For quasi-circular orbits,
these are:
\begin{itemize}
\item the component masses $m_1$ and $m_2$;
\item the spin vectors $\vec{S}_1$ and $\vec{S}_2$;
\item the polarisation angle $\psi$ and the angle $\theta_{jn}$ between the total angular momentum $\vec{J}$ and the
propagation direction of the gravitational wave $\hat{n}$;
\item the source luminosity distance $D_L$;
\item the source right ascension $\alpha$ and declination $\delta$;
\item a reference phase $\varphi_0$ and a reference time, typically the gravitational-wave strain peak time, $t_0$.
\end{itemize}
The functional form of the prior distribution must be specified for all parameters.
In some cases the prior distribution is determined via invariance (symmetry) properties of the parameter space~\cite{royden2017real}; for instance, the prior for the source position
$D_L, \alpha, \delta$ in the Universe is
chosen from the requirement that the number density of sources is uniform in the cosmological co-moving volume in accordance with
a Friedmann-Lema\^itre-Robertson-Walker cosmological model. Thus, the probability $p(D_L, \alpha, \delta|M\, I) \propto dV $
and for redshift $z \ll 1$ reduces to $p(D_L, \alpha, \delta|M\, I) \propto D_L^2 \vert \cos(\delta)\vert$.
In cases where invariance arguments do not apply, we choose simple forms of prior distribution so that the resulting posteriors are easily interpretable.
Similar arguments determine the prior for the spin vectors $\vec{S}_1, \vec{S}_2$ and orientation angles $\psi,\theta_{jn}$
to be uniform over the azimuthal angles ranging between $0$ and $2\pi$ as well as uniform in the cosine of the polar angles ranging between $-1$ and $1$.
Regarding the spin vector magnitudes, several possible priors are possible, e.g.\ $p(|\vec{S}_i||M,I) \propto |\vec{S}_i|^2$ or
$p(|\vec{S}_i||M,I) \propto 1$. The main analysis of the events in the GWTC-1 catalog employed a uniform distribution over the norm of the spin vectors.
For the component masses $m_1$ and $m_2$, the chosen prior distribution is uniform, thus $p(m_1, m_2 |M\, I) \propto 1$, but
limited from below so that $m_1,m_2 > 1M_{\odot}$.
\subsection{Calibration uncertainties}
In addition to uncertainties induced by detector noise, the accuracy and precision of our source parameter estimates are also
affected by uncertainties in the amplitude and phase response of the detectors.
For this reason, this source of uncertainty on the data is modelled and included in the analysis. The calibration uncertainty model
employed is based on empirical estimates of the error magnitudes in both amplitude and phase in specified frequency bands~\cite{Abbott:2016jsd,Cahillane:2017,Acernese:2018bfl}. In particular,
the model assumes the value of the errors to be distributed as a Gaussian distribution with zero mean and a variance
given by the empirically determined error magnitudes. Calibration uncertainty curves
are then constructed using third order spline interpolation over the data frequency space. Typically, this introduces a total
of $O(10)$ additional parameters per detector (half for the phase uncertainty and the other half for the amplitude), which
are sampled in concert with the physical parameters of the system. Technical details for the LVC calibration model can be found in~\cite{calibrationerrors}.
\subsection{Numerical methods}
The total number of parameters to be inferred is thus 15 for quasi-circular orbits and generic spin vectors, and 11 for models where spins are
forced to be aligned with the orbital angular momentum.
To the set of physical parameters, we must add the 10 parameters per detector necessary to specify the calibration uncertainty model. Hence,
for a typical three-detector analysis, we sample a grand total of 45 parameters for a quasi-circular system with generic spin orientations.
Parameter spaces of such high dimensionality cannot be efficiently explored with grid-based methods. Therefore,
over many years members of the LVC developed the \texttt{LALInference} stochastic sampler library~\cite{Veitch:2014wba}
which implements two algorithms, a parallel tempering Markov chain Monte Carlo~\cite{Rover:2006bb} and a nested sampling~\cite{Veitch:2009hd}.
The parallel tempering Markov chain Monte Carlo is designed to generate samples from the multidimensional posterior distribution (\ref{eq:bayes}), while the nested sampling
instead is designed to calculate the evidence, Eq.~(\ref{eq:evidence}) and generates samples from the posterior distribution as
a by-product. More details are given in~\cite{Veitch:2014wba} and references therein.
Other parameter estimation pipelines are routinely used by the LVC, such as rapidPE~\cite{Lange:2018pyp} and BILBY~\cite{Ashton:2018jfp}, but for the
rest of the discussion we will focus on \texttt{LALinference}. However, the same considerations will apply to other Bayesian analysis methods.
\subsection{Posterior distributions}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{./figures/m1m2_pdf.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:m1-m2} One- and two-dimensional posterior distribution for the detector-frame masses for the
GW150914 event obtained using the IMRPhenomPv2 waveform model. The three panels show (i) the one-dimensional marginal posterior for $m_1$ (top panel); (ii) the joint two-dimensional $m_1 - m_2$ posterior (bottom left); (iii) the one-dimensional marginal posterior for $m_2$ (bottom right). Posterior samples taken from~\cite{PEsamps}.}
\end{figure}
The end products of the \texttt{LALInference} analyses are posterior samples for all parameters that characterise the gravitational-wave waveform. Of particular interest are posteriors for the \emph{intrinsic parameters}, masses and spin vectors, which help ascertain the nature of the coalescing objects.
For GW150914, the detector-frame masses (i.e., redshifted due to cosmological expansion) measured using the IMRPhenomPv2 waveform model were $38.5_{-3.6}^{+5.6} M_\odot$ and $32.2_{-4.8}^{+3.6} M_\odot$; see Table I in~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016wfe}. The quoted numbers are an extremely concise way of summarising the full posterior distribution. The output of \texttt{LALInference} analyses are samples from the \emph{full} posterior distribution. In particular, a number such as $38.5_{-3.6}^{+5.6} M_\odot$ comes from the marginalisation over 14 of the 15 physical source parameters of the full posterior, as well as the calibration parameters, to obtain a one-dimensional posterior from which the 90\% credible region is then calculated. Naturally, correlations between different parameters are invisible in a one-dimensional representation. For a clearer picture, multidimensional posterior distributions help to display the information extracted from the analysis. Figure~\ref{fig:m1-m2} shows the joint two-dimensional posterior distribution for the component masses $m_1$ and $m_2$ as an example.
In particular, the bottom left panel shows the non-negligible correlation between the component masses.
The full details of the multi-dimensional posterior distribution can be visualised in a compact way by computing the posterior distribution over the waveform itself in the time domain. This is done simply by computing the predicted waveform over each of the posterior samples. Let $\boldsymbol{\theta}_i$ be the $i$-th posterior sample, the corresponding waveform will be $h(t;\boldsymbol{\theta}_i)$. The waveform samples are the set $\{h(t;\boldsymbol{\theta}_i)\}_{i=1,\dots,N}\equiv \{h_i\}$. Each of the waveform samples $h_i$ can be whitened, see Section \ref{sec:noise}, and then used to compute credible intervals at every time $t_j$ at which the original data were sampled. The result of this procedure is summarised in the presentation of Figure 6 of~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016wfe}.
Figure 1 in~\cite{Abbott:2016blz} is representing a different procedure; the second row in this figure shows a comparison between the reconstructed 90\% credible region obtained by the procedure described above, and a numerical relativity solution that, while not corresponding to any of the computed posterior samples, is consistent with the reconstructed 90\% credible region.
\subsection{Validation of source parameter estimates}
The results from Bayesian inference are only as good as the models used in the analysis. If the waveforms used in the signal model or the underlying assumptions of the noise model are inaccurate, the results will suffer from systematic bias.
A multitude of tests are used to check for possible mis-modeling error and to quantify the impact on the analyses. As discussed earlier in Section~\ref{waveforms} the waveform models are compared to highly accurate numerical relativity simulations, and multiple waveform approximants are used in the analyses and cross-compared. The difference between the results found using different waveform models provides an estimate of the systematic error due to the signal model. The noise model can also be checked.
Other checks include
adding simulated signals with similar parameters to the astrophysical events into nearby stretches of data and checking that the parameters are properly recovered by the parameter estimation algorithms.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.33]{./figures/Qscans.png}
\caption{\label{fig:qscan} Scalograms (or Q-scans) of the whitened data and residuals in the LIGO-Hanford and LIGO-Livingston detectors in 3 seconds of data surrounding the GW150914 event.
The residuals are free of glitches or correlated power. The color scale, as displayed by the bar on the right, corresponds to the whitened power.}
\end{figure}
Over long stretches of LIGO-Virgo data, the noise is known to be non-stationary and non-Gaussian. The overall noise levels fluctuate, and there are frequent low-SNR glitches, and less frequently high-SNR glitches, see Section~\ref{sec:timefreq}. On the other hand, the gravitational-wave signals spend very little time in the LIGO-Virgo sensitive band---seconds or less for black hole binaries and minutes for neutron star binaries, and over these shorter stretches of time the noise is generally (but not always) well approximated as stationary and Gaussian. When a significant trigger is found by the search pipelines, the first thing the analysts look at are multi-resolution time-frequency scalograms of the data surrounding the trigger (known as Q-scans).
Q-scans are qualitative checks which require visual inspection~\cite{chatterji:2005,gravityspy}.
These scans reveal whether there are any loud glitches in the data, as was the case with the binary neutron star GW170817~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2017qsa}. Once the parameter estimation analyses have been run, Q-scans of the residuals are closely examined to see if any any unmodelled noise features might have affected the analyses. Figure~\ref{fig:qscan} shows Q-scans of the whitened data and residuals surrounding GPS time 1126259462. The scans of the data reveal the signal from GW150914, while the residuals after subtracting the maximum likelihood waveform from the parameter estimation studies~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016wfe} show no visible evidence of glitches or correlated signal power.
In addition to these qualitative checks, more rigorous quantitative checks can be applied. One test that is routinely applied is to reanalyze the residuals using the wavelet-based BayesWave algorithm~\cite{Cornish:2014kda} which is able to identify any glitches and remaining coherent power. Coherent power in the residuals could be evidence of departures from general relativity, or evidence of shortcomings in the template models or the noise model used for parameter estimation. No significant coherent power was found in the residuals for any of the detected events. In the case of GW150914 the lack of a coherent residual was used to place interesting bounds on possible departures from general relativity~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016src}. In the case of the binary neutron star merger GW170817~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2017qsa}, a loud incoherent glitch was seen to overlap the signal in the Livingston detector. The glitch was reconstructed and removed using the BayesWave algorithm. The glitch removal procedure has been shown to be safe in a study that injected simulated neutron star merger signals into data with similar loud glitches, followed by removing the glitches with BayesWave and accurately recovering the true signal parameters with the LVC parameter estimation algorithms~\cite{Pankow:2018qpo}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.8]{./figures/GaussNorm.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:pe} Histograms and quantile-quantile plots of the whitened Fourier amplitudes of the residuals in the LIGO-Hanford and LIGO-Livingston detectors for 4 seconds of data surrounding GW150914. The shaded band in the upper panels indicates the expected 3-sigma variance from having a finite number of samples.The residuals show no evidence of non-Gaussianity.}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:pe} shows histograms of the whitened Fourier amplitudes of the residuals in the LIGO-Hanford and LIGO-Livingston detectors following the removal of the maximum likelihood waveform for GW150914. The residuals are taken from the parameter estimation analysis published at the time of the discovery~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016wfe}. These residuals were used to test for residual coherent power, which can be framed as a test of general relativity if we assume the template to be a sufficiently accurate solution of the theory. Applying the Anderson-Darling test of normality to the residuals yields p-values of 0.15 for LIGO-Hanford and 0.11 for LIGO-Livingston, indicating that the residuals are consistent with the Gaussian noise model used to define the likelihood.
Even if the residuals had failed the formal tests of stationarity and Gaussianity discussed here, it would not necessarily imply that the parameter estimation would be strongly biased. When the noise deviates from the model the analysis will suffer systematic bias. But for this bias to be significant it has to be large compared to the statistical spread in the posterior distributions. Extensive studies using simulated signals added to real LIGO-Virgo data have shown that systematic errors due to deviations from the noise models are generally negligible compared to the statistical uncertainties~\cite{Raymond:2009cv,vanderSluys:2009bf,vanderSluys:2007st,Berry:2014jja, Abbott:2016wiq, Pankow:2018qpo}. One exception is when the simulated signals cover or overlap the times of glitches, in which case the biases can be large~\cite{Powell:2018csz}. When glitches are present, tools such as BayesWave need to be used to model and remove the glitches, ideally in concert with the parameter estimation.
\subsection{Parameter degeneracies and credible intervals}
Gravitational-wave templates exhibit a variety of parameter degeneracies whereby templates with different parameters can have very similar amplitude and phase evolution, and yield very similar likelihoods. One example of such a degeneracy is evident in the posterior distribution for the component masses of GW150914 shown in Figure~\ref{fig:m1-m2}. The degree of similarity between templates with parameters $\boldsymbol{\lambda}, \boldsymbol{\theta}$ is measured by the {\em match}
\begin{equation}
{\rm M}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}, \boldsymbol{\theta}) = \frac{ ({\bf h}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}) | {\bf h}(\boldsymbol{\theta}))}{\sqrt{({\bf h}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}) | {\bf h}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}) ) ({\bf h}(\boldsymbol{\theta}) | {\bf h}(\boldsymbol{\theta}))} }\, .
\end{equation}
If the true signal is described by ${\bf h}(\boldsymbol{\lambda})$, then the expectation value of the log likelihood for template ${\bf h}(\boldsymbol{\theta})$, maximized over amplitude is
\begin{equation}
{\rm E}[\ln\Lambda (\boldsymbol{\lambda}|\boldsymbol{\theta}) ] = \frac{1}{2} {\rm M}^2(\boldsymbol{\lambda}, \boldsymbol{\theta})\, {\rm SNR}^2 \, ,
\end{equation}
where $\rm SNR$ is the optimal signal-to-noise ratio~\cite{DelPozzo:2014cla}.
We see that signals that have similar morphology, as measured by the match, yield similar likelihoods. Now suppose we hold one parameter, $\theta^k$ fixed, then maximize the likelihood with respect to all the other parameters. Up to an overall constant, we have~\cite{Cornish:2011ys, DelPozzo:2014cla}
\begin{equation}\label{logLFF}
\ln\Lambda ({\bf d}| \bar\theta^k) \equiv {\rm max}_{j\neq k}\ln \Lambda({\bf d}| \theta^j) \simeq \frac{{\rm SNR}^2}{2}\, {\rm FF}^2(\bar\theta^k)\, ,
\end{equation}
where ${\rm FF}(\bar\theta^k)$ is the {\em fitting factor}, or maximized match, between waveforms with $\theta^k=\bar\theta^k$ and the maximum likelihood waveform.
Figure~\ref{fig:postlike} compares the maximum likelihood as a function of the primary detector-frame mass for GW150914 to the fitting factor. The fitting factor as a function of $m_1$ was computed by maximizing the match between the overall maximum likelihood waveform and waveforms with fixed $m_1$.
Note that the posterior distribution for this event had a 90\% credible interval of $m_1 = 38.5_{-3.6}^{+5.6} M_\odot$, but templates with primary masses outside this interval continue to yield large fitting factors because other parameters can be adjusted to partly compensate the effects of the change in primary mass on the waveform. For example, we find a fitting factor between the maximum likelihood template for GW150914 and a template with a primary mass of $m_1=70 \, M_\odot$ of ${\rm FF}= 0.95$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{./figures/match_likelihood.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:postlike} The likelihood (in blue) and the fitting factor (in red) as a function of the detector-frame primary mass $m_1$ for GW150914. The dashed blue line shows the estimate of the likelihood in terms of the fitting factor from equation (\ref{logLFF}).
The likelihood is scaled relative to the maximum likelihood value. The maximization was performed over the secondary mass, spins and extrinsic parameters.}
\end{figure}
The possibility of achieving high matches, or correlations, between templates with large primary masses and the maximum likelihood template have been cited as evidence that the LIGO-Virgo parameter estimation analysis for GW150914 and other systems may be flawed~\cite{Creswell:2018tsr}. It was further hypothesized that the credible intervals were underestimated due to the instrument noise not conforming to the likelihood model~\cite{Creswell:2018tsr}. However, our confidence in the reconstructed credible regions comes from extensive simulations designed to compare the cumulative distributions of simulated populations against the cumulative distribution of reconstructed credible regions. The agreement between the two, see for instance Figure 10 in~\cite{Veitch:2014wba}, demonstrates that our algorithms are properly computing the credible intervals.
Moreover, as we have shown, the noise properties for GW150914 {\em are} compatible with the likelihood model used in the parameter estimation studies, further reinforcing our
confidence in the method used to compute the credible intervals.
There is no contradiction in having templates with parameters outside the quoted credible regions producing large fitting factors with the best fit model, since even small template mismatches come with a large penalty for high signal-to-noise ratio systems such as GW150914. For example, the difference in log likelihood between the signal with $m_1=70 \, M_\odot$ and the global maximum is $\Delta \ln \Lambda = -32$, which is what we expect to see for a ${\rm SNR} \simeq 25$ signal and a template with a fitting factor of ${\rm FF}= 0.95$. But the relative likelihood for the higher mass solution is $e^{\Delta \ln \Lambda}=10^{-13.9}$, thus while templates with large primary masses can produce relatively good matches to the data, the probability that the primary mass is this high is vanishingly small.
\endinput
Explain how we do PE, and cite papers
Note that the PE job essentially fits simultaneously to both data streams, adjusting sky position and distance as well as intrinsic parameters
Different waveform models - discuss relative merits
Discuss: what is the "best" waveform? Maximum likelihood versus maximum posterior density versus credible ranges (note: correlated parameters)
Note that even our best models may not match the signal precisely - e.g. from higher-order modes - but plenty good enough for detection. We're talking small mismatch.
Explain how Figure 1 in GW150914 paper was for illustration, not the best (max likelihood?) waveform
Point out gently that we never claimed that waveform in Figure 1, or templates in tutorial, were best-fit. Creswell et al. assumed that they were
Plot: overlay waveform used in Figure 1, along with max likelihood and max posterior waveforms - time series and ASD - maybe also delta time series
\section{Residuals analysis of LIGO data around GW150914}
\label{sec:res}
\setcounter{footnote}{0}
The notion of a residual -- the data minus the model -- plays an important role in gravitational-wave data analysis.
If the signal model matches well the true signal, then the residual should be consistent with a draw from the noise model
$p({\bf n})$, the probability distribution for the noise. After known sources of correlation with independent witnesses are removed, we expect the instrument noise in the widely separated LIGO-Virgo detectors to be fully independent, and therefore the residuals in each detector to be uncorrelated.
In contrast, gravitational-wave signals will excite a coherent response across the network of detectors, and this difference in correlation properties is one of the ways we are able to separate signals from noise.
As noted in Section~\ref{s:further-reading}, it is possible to have correlated transient noise due to lightning~\cite{0264-9381-34-7-074002}, but monitoring with magnetometers is presently adequate to rule that out as the cause of events like GW150914~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016zmo}. Low-level correlated magnetic noise is more of a concern for the search for a stochastic gravitational-wave background~\cite{Abbott:2006zx,PhysRevD.87.123009,PhysRevD.90.023013,Coughlin:2018str}. Seismic noise is similarly monitored. Since the LIGO detectors share the same design and similar equipment, the frequencies associated with synchronized clocks (GPS), electrical power (60 Hz), and instrument resonances are monitored and suppressed in stochastic background and continuous-wave gravitational wave searches~\cite{Covas:2018}.
In this section we will use the data surrounding GW150914 to illustrate the discussion, but the same considerations apply in general, and analyses of the residuals have been reported for all significant events~\cite{LIGOScientific:2019fpa}.
\subsection{Signal and template comparisons} \label{ss:comparisons}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.3]{./figures/templatesNR.png}
\caption{\label{fig:templates} The reference numerical relativity template provided by the GWOSC~\cite{NRwaveform} for GW150914 is shown in the upper panel. The lower panels show the time, amplitude and phase shifted versions of the template that maximize the likelihood in each LIGO detector individually.}
\end{figure}
As introduced above, the physical parameters of the signal $\boldsymbol{\theta}$ determine the shape and amplitude of the gravitational-wave signal
$h(t;\boldsymbol{\theta})$.
Numerical relativity simulations can be used to generate reference templates~\cite{LOSC} using intrinsic parameters taken from the Bayesian parameter estimation studies. However, the templates still need to be projected onto the detectors using an appropriate set of extrinsic parameters. In a single detector the projection is equivalent to time shifting, phase shifting and rescaling the reference template: $\tilde h(\alpha, \delta t, \delta \phi)(f) = \alpha \, \tilde h_{\rm ref}(f) e^{2 \pi i f \delta t + i\delta \phi}$.
Figure~\ref{fig:templates} shows the reference numerical relativity template from Figure 2 of the GW150914 discovery paper~\cite{Abbott:2016blz} along with maximum likelihood projections onto each detector.
A smooth taper has been applied to the start of the template to avoid spectral leakage when transforming to the Fourier domain.
The data file for the template was taken from the original posting at the GWOSC~\cite{NRwaveform} and originates from the simulation SXS:BBH:0305, calculated for a system with a mass ratio of $q=0.819$, spins aligned with the orbital angular momentum with dimensionless magnitudes $\chi_1=0.330$ and $\chi_2=-0.440$, and detector-frame total mass scaled to $M=74.6 M_\odot$.
These waveform parameters are consistent with those eventually determined for GW150914, within uncertainties, but do not exactly maximize the likelihood globally.
Using the maximization procedure described in Section~\ref{s:searches} one finds that the signal arrived at the LIGO-Livingston detector 7.08 ms before the LIGO-Hanford detector, had a larger amplitude projected onto the antenna response pattern in LIGO-Hanford by a factor of 1.24, and had a phase difference of $-2.9$ radians.
These are, however, based on finding maximum-likelihood matches to the detector data individually with a fixed waveform without constraining them to be consistent (for example, the relative time shift could in principle be greater than the maximum light travel time between the detectors), a simplified procedure compared to the simultaneous multi-detector likelihood maximization described in Section~\ref{s:pe}.
When a loud signal is present in the data the individual and joint maximization techniques yield consistent results.
In Figure 1 of the GW150914 discovery paper~\cite{Abbott:2016blz} the LIGO-Hanford data were inverted (corresponding to a phase shift of $\pm \pi$) and overlaid on the LIGO-Livingston data to illustrate the similarity of the signals in the two detectors with minimal processing of the raw data.
In addition, the reference numerical relativity template described above was approximately matched to the LIGO-Hanford and LIGO-Livingston data by adjusting the relative phase, amplitude and time offset. These adjusted templates for each detector were passed through the same bandpass and notch (band-reject) filters as the data and were then subtracted to produce the residuals plotted in the third row of Figure 1 in that paper. Because those ``Fig 1 PRL'' residuals were not globally optimized and were calculated from filtered data, they produce a somewhat different result than minimizing the residuals in the whitened and bandpassed data, as we will see below.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.3]{./figures/residualsNR.png}
\caption{\label{fig:HL} The upper panels show the whitened and bandpassed data in the LIGO-Hanford and LIGO-Livingston detectors relative to GPS time 1126259462. The maximum likelihood whitened templates have been superimposed on the data. The lower panels show the residuals that are produced by subtracting the templates from the data.}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:HL} compares the whitened data to the whitened numerical relativity templates, maximized over arrival time, amplitude and phase, in the LIGO-Hanford and LIGO-Livingston detectors. Also shown are the residuals produced by subtracting the templates from the data. Prior to the publication of the GW150914 discovery paper~\cite{Abbott:2016blz}, multiple tests were applied to the residuals to verify they were consistent with noise. The whitened residuals in each detector were found to be consistent with a Gaussian distribution: the Fourier amplitudes pass the Anderson-Darling test (see Figure~\ref{fig:pe} in Section~\ref{s:pe}), and the Fourier phases were found to be randomly distributed. The residuals from Bayesian parameter estimation studies~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016wfe} were analyzed using a wavelet reconstruction algorithm~\cite{Cornish:2014kda} that is able to detect coherent signals of general morphology. The degree of coherence in the GW150914 residuals was found to be entirely consistent with noise~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016src}.
\subsection{Correlation analyses} \label{ss:corranal}
A simpler, though less sensitive, test for coherence is to cross-correlate the data in the two detectors.
The cross-correlation can be computed either in the time domain or the frequency domain using the whitened residuals. The correlation in the time domain is defined as:
\begin{equation}
C(\tau) =\frac{ \int H(t-\tau) L(t) dt}{\sqrt{\int H^2(t) dt \int L^2(t) dt }} ~,
\end{equation}
where $H(t)$ and $L(t)$ represent the data streams from LIGO-Hanford and LIGO-Livingston respectively.
When working with a finite data segment of duration $T$ the data may be taken to be periodic: $H(t) = H(t+T)$. The correlation measure is very sensitive to the positioning and duration of the time window and the bandpass filtering that is applied to the data. To make meaningful statements about the significance of the correlation we need to know the distribution of the correlation measure for uncorrelated white noise, and these distributions change depending on the duration and bandpass.
When applied to uncorrelated, unit variance Gaussian noise, the correlation coefficients follow a zero mean Gaussian distribution with a variance that depends on the duration and bandpass.
Following~\cite{Creswell:2017rbh} we apply the correlation analysis to four different time windows.
The standard deviations for white Gaussian noise are $\sigma=0.0870$ for the 0.2 second segment, $\sigma = 0.121$ for either 0.1 second segment and $\sigma=0.193$ for the 40 ms segment.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.8]{./figures/data_correlations.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:corrdata} Correlations between the LIGO-Hanford and LIGO-Livingston detector data using the same four time intervals used in the analysis in~\cite{Creswell:2017rbh}. One time interval covers the full 0.2 seconds of data shown in Figure~\ref{fig:HL}, and two others cover the first and last 0.1 seconds of the data. In addition, a very short time interval of duration 40 ms was selected that covers the peak of the signal. A time lag of 7 ms is highlighted as a dotted vertical line. The upper panel uses the filtered data from Figure 1 of the GW150914 discovery paper~\cite{Abbott:2016blz}, while the lower panel uses the whitened data shown in Figure~\ref{fig:HL}. }
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:corrdata} shows the correlations using the whitened data shown in Figure~\ref{fig:HL} (bottom panel), and in addition, the bandpass/notch-filtered data used to produce the panels
in Figure 1 of the GW150914 discovery paper~\cite{Abbott:2016blz} (top panel). There is a clear anti-correlation peak in the LIGO-Hanford -- LIGO-Livingston data at a time lag of $\sim 7.3$ ms, which is consistent with the time delay inferred for the gravitational-wave signal.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.8]{./figures/correlationsNR.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:corrres} Correlations between the LIGO-Hanford and LIGO-Livingston residuals using the same four time intervals as Figure~\ref{fig:corrdata}.
The upper panel uses the residuals shown in Figure 1 of the GW150914 discovery paper~\cite{Abbott:2016blz}, while the lower panel uses the whitened residual time series shown in Figure~\ref{fig:HL}. The whitened residuals from the maximum likelihood signal subtraction show no significant correlations at any time lag for any of the time windows.}
\end{figure}
In contrast, Figure~\ref{fig:corrres} shows the correlations in the residuals produced using the procedure described above. The residuals from Figure~\ref{fig:HL} show no notable anti-correlation at $\sim 7$ ms (bottom panel), while those from Figure 1 of the GW150914 discovery paper~\cite{Abbott:2016blz} have a slight dip at this time lag (top panel), reflecting the fact that the reference waveform used for illustration in that paper was not the maximum likelihood waveform. For the shortest integration interval, the residuals from Figure 1 of the GW150914 discovery paper have a $\sim 3$ sigma anti-correlation at a time lag of
$\sim 7.45$ ms, which while marginally consistent with noise, is evidence that the signal subtraction was imperfect. In contrast, the residuals produced using the amplitude/time/phase maximized NR waveforms and whitened data show no significant excursions, and are fully consistent with noise. This is also the case for the residuals from the Bayesian parameter estimation described in Section~\ref{s:pe}. Independent analyses of the GW150914 data have also found no significant correlations between the residuals in the Hanford and Livingston detectors~\cite{Green:2017voq,Nielsen:2018bhc}.
\section{Signal detection}
\label{s:searches}
In this section we describe how candidate signals are identified in LIGO-Virgo data and how the statistical significance of each candidate is quantified by comparison with the observed properties of the detector noise.
\subsection{Model comparison and the matched filter}
\label{ss:matchedfilter}
The LVC searches for gravitational waves compare the null hypothesis, ${\cal
H}_0$, that a given stretch of data contains only noise, to the signal hypothesis, ${\cal
H}_1$, that the stretch of data contains both noise and a gravitational-wave signal\footnote{In reality all LIGO-Virgo data may contain some level of gravitational-wave signal, but a signal can only be detected if the null hypothesis is sufficiently disfavored relative to the signal hypothesis.}. Most searches
assume that general relativity correctly describes the gravitational-wave signals.
The likelihood of observing the data under the two hypotheses can be written
in terms of Eq.~(\ref{like}) by
\begin{equation}
p({\bf d} \mid {\cal H}_0) = p_{0}({\bf d}) \quad \text{and} \quad
p({\bf d} \mid {\cal H}_1) = p_{1}({\bf d})
\end{equation}
where ${\cal H}_0$ assumes noise alone with no signal in the data,
while ${\cal H}_1$ assumes a signal parameterized by $\boldsymbol\theta$,
${\bf h}({\boldsymbol\theta})$ is present in addition to the noise.
For the present, we will assume that each detector data stream is being analyzed
independently, and we discuss below how data from multiple detectors is
combined in LVC searches.
The probability of the signal hypothesis given
the observed data, known as the \emph{posterior probability}, is given by Bayes' theorem as
\begin{equation}
p({\cal H}_1 \mid {\bf d}) =
\frac{p({\cal H}_1) p_{1}({\bf d})}%
{p({\cal H}_0) p_{0}({\bf d})
+ p({\cal H}_1) p_{1}({\bf d})}
=
\frac{p_{1}({\bf d})}{p_{0}({\bf d})}
\left[
\frac{p_{1}({\bf d})}{p_{0}({\bf d})}
+
\frac{p({\cal H}_0)}{p({\cal H}_1)}
\right]^{-1}
\end{equation}
where $p({\cal H}_0)$ and $p({\cal H}_1)$ are our prior beliefs of whether
a signal is absent or present in the data. Regardless of these prior
beliefs, the posterior probability is
seen to be monotonic in the \emph{likelihood ratio}
\begin{equation}
\Lambda({\bf d}|\boldsymbol{\theta}) = \frac{p({\bf d} \mid {\cal H}_1)}{p({\bf d} \mid {\cal H}_0)} = \frac{p_{1}({\bf d})}{p_{0}({\bf d})}
\end{equation}
and so this quantity is the optimal test statistic~\cite{Jaranowski2012}.
For Gaussian noise, the log of the likelihood ratio can be written in terms
of the inner product of Eq.~(\ref{nwip}) as
\begin{equation}\label{e:lnlambda}
\log \Lambda({\bf d}|\boldsymbol{\theta}) = ({\bf d} \mid {\bf h}(\boldsymbol{\theta}))-\frac{1}{2}({\bf h}(\boldsymbol{\theta}) \mid {\bf h}(\boldsymbol{\theta})) \, .
\end{equation}
Only the first term of this expression involves the data; it is then observed
that the posterior probability is a monotonic function of
$({\bf d} \mid {\bf h}(\boldsymbol{\theta}))$, a quantity known as the
\emph{matched filter}, which, therefore, is also an optimal test statistic.
\subsection{Signal-to-noise ratio and template banks}
\label{ss:snrbanks}
In a matched-filter search for gravitational-wave signals, the signal
parameters $\boldsymbol\theta$ will not be known in advance.
The optimal detection statistic would be obtained by marginalizing~\cite{everitt2002the} the
likelihood ratio $\Lambda({\bf d}|\boldsymbol{\theta})$ over all unknown parameters by
integrating the likelihood ratio over these parameters\footnote{The integration measure to
obtain an optimal statistic is given by the probability density of gravitational-wave
signals over the unknown parameters~\cite{Searle:2008jv}: for example if the parameters
$\boldsymbol{\theta}$ include $\iota$, the inclination of the binary orbit relative to the
line of sight for a compact binary gravitational-wave source, the signal probability density
over $\iota$ is uniform in $\cos \iota$~\cite{Schutz:2011tw}}.
Since the log likelihood ratio is a linear function of the signal model, its exponential --
the likelihood ratio itself -- will generally be sharply peaked about its maximum, thus the
maximum value of $\Lambda({\bf d}|\boldsymbol{\theta})$ over unknown parameters
$\boldsymbol{\theta}$ is expected to be a good approximation to the marginalized likelihood
ratio (up to a possible constant rescaling). This maximization procedure is equivalent
to minimizing the residuals seen in the detector, which can be seen as
follows: The log likelihood can be written as
\begin{equation}
\log \Lambda({\bf d}|\boldsymbol{\theta}) =
-\frac12({\bf d} - {\bf h}(\boldsymbol{\theta}) \mid ({\bf d} - {\bf h}(\boldsymbol{\theta}))
+\frac12 ({\bf d} \mid {\bf d}).
\end{equation}
Now it is clear that the parameters $\hat{\boldsymbol\theta}$ that maximize
the log likelihood ratio are those that minimize the residuals
${\bf d} - {\bf h}(\boldsymbol{\theta})$ in terms
of the noise weighted inner product.
The parameters ${\boldsymbol\theta}$ describing the strain observed in
a detector
include the signal amplitude $A$ observed in the detector
(which is inversely
proportional to the distance to a gravitational-wave source), the phase $\phi$
of the sinusoidally-varying signal observed in the detector, the arrival time
$t$ of the signal (usually defined by the moment when it reaches peak gravitational-wave amplitude at the detector), and
other parameters $\boldsymbol\mu$ describing the physical parameters of
the source such as the masses and spins of the components. We write
\begin{equation}\label{e:hdecomp}
{\bf h}({\boldsymbol\theta}) =
A {\bf p}(t,{\boldsymbol\mu}) \cos\phi
+ A {\bf q}(t,{\boldsymbol\mu}) \sin\phi
\end{equation}
where
${\bf p}(t,{\boldsymbol\mu})$ and
${\bf q}(t,{\boldsymbol\mu})$ are in-phase (cosine) and quadrature-phase (sine)
waveforms, normalized so that
$({\bf p}\mid{\bf p})=({\bf q}\mid{\bf q})=1$, and which are orthogonal,
$({\bf p}\mid{\bf q})=0$.
Maximization over the amplitude and phase can be done algebraically
as follows:
Eq.~(\ref{e:lnlambda}) can be rewritten using Eq.~(\ref{e:hdecomp}) as
\begin{equation}
\log \Lambda({\bf d}|\boldsymbol{\theta}) =
A \rho(t,{\boldsymbol\mu}) \cos(\phi - \varphi) - \frac12 A^2
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\varphi \equiv \arctan\frac{
({\bf d} \mid {\bf q}(t,{\boldsymbol\mu}))
}{
({\bf d} \mid {\bf p}(t,{\boldsymbol\mu}))
}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\rho(t,{\boldsymbol\mu}) \equiv \sqrt{
({\bf d} \mid {\bf p}(t,{\boldsymbol\mu}))^2
+ ({\bf d} \mid {\bf q}(t,{\boldsymbol\mu}))^2
}
\end{equation}
is the \emph{SNR time series}
for waveform templates with parameters $\boldsymbol\mu$.
The log-likelihood $\log\Lambda$ is maximal for amplitude
$\hat{A} = \rho$ and phase $\hat{\phi} = \varphi$ with
\begin{equation}
\max_{A,\phi} \log \Lambda({\boldsymbol\theta}) \equiv
\log \Lambda(t,\hat{A},\hat{\phi},{\boldsymbol\mu}) =
\frac12 \rho^2(t,{\boldsymbol\mu}) ~ .
\end{equation}
Peaks in this time series correspond to times at which a signal is most likely to be present.
Under the signal (noise) hypothesis, and in the presence of stationary and
Gaussian noise with a known power spectrum,
$\rho^2(t_{\text{peak}},{\boldsymbol\mu})$
follows a non-central (central) chi-squared distribution with two degrees of
freedom.
The SNR time series can be conveniently expressed in terms
of a complex time series as Eq.~(\ref{nwip}) of~\cite{Allen:2005fk}
\begin{equation}\label{complexsnr}
z(t,{\boldsymbol\mu}) = 4 \int_0^\infty \frac{\tilde{d}(f)\tilde{p}^\ast(f,{\boldsymbol\mu})}{S_n(f)}e^{2\pi ift} df
\end{equation}
as $\rho = |z|$ and the phase $\varphi = \arg(z)$; $\tilde{p}(f,{\boldsymbol\mu})$ is the Fourier transform of the in-phase waveform (see Eq.~\ref{e:hdecomp}). Eq.~(\ref{complexsnr})
is the inverse Fourier transform of
\begin{equation}
\tilde{z}(f,{\boldsymbol\mu}) = 4 \frac{\tilde{d}(f)\tilde{p}^\ast(f,{\boldsymbol\mu})}{S_n(f)} \Theta(f)
\end{equation}
where $\Theta(f)$ is the Heaviside step function.
\begin{comment}
OLD TEXT
Maximization over the amplitude and phase can be done algebraically
and results in
\begin{equation}
\max_{A,\phi} \log \Lambda({\boldsymbol\theta}) =
\frac12 \rho^2(t,{\boldsymbol\mu}) =
\frac{
({\bf d} \mid {\bf p}(t,{\boldsymbol\mu}))^2
+ ({\bf d} \mid {\bf q}(t,{\boldsymbol\mu}))^2
}{2}
\end{equation}
where $\rho(t,{\boldsymbol\mu})$ is the \emph{signal to noise ratio timeseries}
for waveform templates with parameters $\boldsymbol\mu$. This quantity
can be expressed via Eq.~(\ref{nwip}) as~\cite{Allen:2005fk}
\begin{equation}\label{snr}
\rho(t,{\boldsymbol\mu}) = 4\left| \int_0^\infty \frac{\tilde{d}(f)\tilde{p}^\ast(f,{\boldsymbol\mu})}{S_n(f)}e^{2\pi ift} df \right|.
\end{equation}
Peaks in time of this time series correspond to times at which a signal might
be present.
Under the signal (noise) hypothesis, and in the presence of stationary and
Gaussian noise with a known power spectrum,
$\rho^2(t_{\text{peak}},{\boldsymbol\mu})$
follows a non-central (central) chi-squared distribution with two degrees of
freedom.
END OPTION
\end{comment}
Parameters such as the masses and spins of the binary components (represented
by $\boldsymbol\mu$) change the
morphology of the gravitational wave.
In order to detect signals with a wide range of possible masses and spins, a bank consisting of large numbers of signal templates spanning the parameter space is produced, and each template in the bank is used as a matched filter.
The template bank used to initially find signals in the data is constructed
with a density in parameter space sufficiently high that the loss
in SNR between a true signal and the best-fit template is
less than 3\%.
See~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016qqj,TheLIGOScientific:2016pea,LIGOScientific:2018mvr} for more details on the template banks used for the O1 and O2 searches.
An important property of the SNR should be noted: in
Eq.~(\ref{complexsnr}) it can be seen that the integrand is proportional to
$\tilde{d}(f)/S_{n}(f)$, so the data are not simply being whitened (which would
have been the case if the denominator were $S^{1/2}(f)$), but in fact
noisier parts of the frequency spectrum (including narrow lines) are \emph{suppressed} in the
matched filter.
Equivalently, the SNR integral can be seen as correlating a whitened data time series with a whitened template.
The SNR therefore provides a natural way to
down-weight the frequency bands where the noise is large,
and effectively notches out the various lines.
\subsection{Rejection of noise artifacts and construction of candidate ranking statistic}
\label{ss:artifacts}
While the SNR is the optimal detection statistic in the
case of stationary Gaussian noise, transient instrumental artifacts make it
a non-optimal statistic with real detector noise.
Although the matched filter naturally suppresses stationary noisy features in
the data, glitches can cause certain templates to produce high SNR
values~\cite{Christensen:2004kh,Christensen:2005gh,0264-9381-27-19-194010,TheLIGOScientific:2017lwt}. We address this in several different
ways:
\edef\keepparindent{\the\parindent}\relax
\begin{enumerate}
\item As explained in Section~\ref{ss:DQ-Terr-Noise}, we use witness sensors to identify times when the
environment or the instrument introduces frequent glitches and we veto
a subset of these times found to impact search performance from our analysis~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2017lwt}. These sensors include those that monitor the physical environment about the gravitational-wave detector, as well as those that record signals from within the internal control systems of the interferometer.
\item We implement waveform consistency tests which characterize the deviation of
the data ${\bf d}$ from the model
${\bf n}+{\bf h}$~\cite{Allen:2004gu,Allen:2005fk,Usman:2015kfa,Messick:2016aqy}.
For signals from compact binary mergers, these tests are extremely powerful and
allow us to reject many glitches which have not been identified and vetoed, though
for short signals the discriminatory power of these tests is diminished~\cite{Allen:2004gu,Nitz:2017lco,Usman:2015kfa,LIGOScientific:2018mvr}.
\hspace*{\keepparindent}%
The exact implementation of these signal consistency tests vary among search
pipelines, but all are based on the following principle: if the gravitational-wave
model waveform is subtracted from the data to produce residuals
${\bf d}-{\bf h}$, the residuals should be consistent with Gaussian noise
if the signal hypothesis is true. These residuals are re-filtered
with the matched filter over different time or frequency intervals to determine
if non-noise-like features persist; evidence of such features suggest that the
model waveform ${\bf h}$ is not a good match to the non-Gaussian feature in the
data, and the detection ranking statistic is down-weighted accordingly.
\hspace*{\keepparindent}%
For example, the consistency test described in~\cite{Allen:2004gu,Allen:2005fk}
constructs a chi-squared test statistic by dividing the matched filter into
$n$ frequency bands as
\begin{equation}
\chi^2 = \sum_{i=1}^{n}
\frac{
|({\bf d}-{\bf h} \mid {\bf p})_i - ({\bf d}-{\bf h} \mid {\bf p})/n|^2
+ |({\bf d}-{\bf h} \mid {\bf q})_i - ({\bf d}-{\bf h} \mid {\bf q})/n|^2
}{1/n}
\end{equation}
where $({\bf a}\mid{\bf b})_i$ is the same as the inner product in
Eq.~(\ref{nwip}) but with the integrand restricted to the frequency interval
$f_{i-1}<f<f_{i}$ with $f_0=0$ and $f_n=\infty$. Here the bands are
chosen so that $({\bf p}\mid{\bf p})_i=({\bf q}\mid{\bf q})_i=1/n$.
If the residual ${\bf d}-{\bf h}$ is Gaussian noise, $\chi^2$ is
chi-squared distributed with $\nu=2n-2$ degrees of freedom;
values of $\chi^2\gg\nu$ are indicative of residual non-Gaussian features
in the data after the model has been subtracted. A re-weighted ranking
statistic proposed in~\cite{Usman:2015kfa}
\begin{equation}
\hat{\rho} = \rho \times \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
1 & \chi^2 \le \nu \\
\left[\frac12 + \frac12(\chi^2/\nu)^3\right]^{-1/6} & \chi^2 > \nu
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
down-weights the SNR for large values of $\chi^2$. A similar time-domain based
signal consistency test is described in~\cite{Messick:2016aqy} and is
incorporated into a likelihood ranking statistic.
\item For all detections published to date we have required that gravitational-wave signals be identified via matched
filtering in at least two independent detectors with consistent parameters. For
example, the arrival times of the gravitational waves at each detector must
differ by no more than the the maximum time-of-flight between the detectors,
e.g.\ 10\,ms for the LIGO Hanford - LIGO Livingston pair, with an extra 5\,ms added in order to
account for uncertainty in the inferred coalescence time at each detector.
This 5\,ms addition to the coincidence window is also used when searching for simultaneous events for the LIGO Hanford - Virgo pair (27\,ms light travel time),
and the LIGO Livingston - Virgo pair (26\,ms light travel time)~\cite{LIGOScientific:2018mvr}.
However, having now established the existence and frequency of gravitational-wave signals,
it may now also be possible to make detections when only one detector is operating,
and thus this time coincidence test is not available~\cite{Callister:2017urp}.
\end{enumerate}
The matched-filter based searches employed by the LVC construct
ranking statistics from the SNR and the waveform consistency
test statistics~\cite{LIGOScientific:2018mvr}.
In addition
an astrophysical signal received in several detectors will have a common set of
parameters $\boldsymbol\mu$ (within limits imposed by limited SNR) in all detectors, and, furthermore, the amplitude,
phase, and time-of-arrival of the signals observed in each detector will be
determined by the direction of propagation of the wave (i.e., from where on the
sky the signal originates) and the polarization state of the signal.
Since gravitational waves have two polarizations (in general relativity),
referred to as the plus-polarization ${\bf h}_+$ and the cross-polarization
${\bf h}_\times$, the strain on detector $I$ is determined by the detector's
antenna response patterns $F_{+,I}$ and $F_{\times,I}$ by
\begin{equation}
{\bf h}_I({\boldsymbol\theta}) =
F_{+,I}(\alpha,\delta,\psi,t) {\bf h}_+(t-\tau_I,D,\iota,{\boldsymbol\mu}) +
F_{\times,I}(\alpha,\delta,\psi,t) {\bf h}_\times(t-\tau_I,D,\iota,{\boldsymbol\mu})
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ and $\delta$ are the right ascension and declination of the
source of the gravitational waves, $D$ is the distance to the source of
the waves, $\iota$ is the inclination of the orbital plane of the binary system (which, for circular
orbits and leading order quadrupole emission, determines the ellipticity angle), and
$\tau_I=\tau_I(\alpha,\delta,t)$ is the travel time of the signal
from the geocenter to the detector. Although a fully-coherent search for
gravitational waves across a network of detectors is possible, we opt instead
to perform searches independently in each detector and then demand that
triggers seen in different detectors have consistent times of arrival and the
same parameters ${\boldsymbol\mu}$ since this provides a powerful glitch
rejection consistency test as described above. However, further signal
consistency requirements are also possible. For the leading-order quadrupole
emission from a circular binary, the ratios of the amplitudes seen in two
detectors is
\begin{equation}
\frac{A_I}{A_J} = \sqrt{
\frac{\displaystyle
F_{+,I}^2\left(\frac{1+\cos^2\iota}{2}\right)^2+F_{\times,I}^2\cos^2\iota
}{\displaystyle
F_{+,J}^2\left(\frac{1+\cos^2\iota}{2}\right)^2+F_{\times,J}^2\cos^2\iota
}}
\end{equation}
while the difference in arrival time is $t_I - t_J = \tau_I - \tau_J$ and the
difference in phase is
\begin{equation}
\phi_I - \phi_J =
\arctan\left(\frac{F_{\times,J}}{F_{+,J}}\frac{2\cos\iota}{1+\cos^2\iota}\right)
-
\arctan\left(\frac{F_{\times,I}}{F_{+,I}}\frac{2\cos\iota}{1+\cos^2\iota}\right)
.
\end{equation}
It is therefore
possible to include an amplitude-phase-time consistency measure in
likelihood-based ranking statistics~\cite{Usman:2015kfa,2015arXiv150404632C,TheLIGOScientific:2017lwt}; this was done for the most recent searches for gravitational-wave signals in the LIGO-Virgo O1 and O2 data~\cite{LIGOScientific:2018mvr}.
\subsection{Background estimation and detection confidence}
\label{ss:background}
After the steps described above which mitigate the effects of noise transients,
the probability of remaining transients occurring simultaneously (within a time window that takes into account the maximal travel time of a signal, for example 10\,ms for the two LIGO detectors)
in two detectors and producing a large joint ranking statistic value
becomes extremely small. Different searches adopt different approaches for
measuring this probability as a function of the ranking statistic~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2017lwt}.
The basic method is to examine the statistical properties of the non-simultaneous transients observed in each detector and to artificially treat them as if they did occur simultaneously.
The statistical significance of any candidate event observed in two or more detectors is quantified by its \emph{false alarm rate}, which is the expected rate of events per time due to noise which would be assigned an equal or larger ranking statistic than the candidate.
One approach to estimating false alarm rates is to shift one detector’s data stream in time (by a time interval larger than the maximum time-of-flight between detectors) and repeat the search. The resulting ``time-shifted'' coincidences are then treated as a background noise sample.
This is done numerous times with different time shifts in order to obtain a probability distribution for
the joint detector ranking statistics.
Each coincident trigger is assigned a false alarm rate given
by the number of background triggers with an equal or larger
ranking statistic, divided by the total time searched for time-shifted coincidences.
For example, in~\cite{Abbott:2016blz} it is found that
the frequency of transients producing more significant events than GW150914
is less than once every 200\,000 years in both of the matched-filter
searches employed by the LVC.
Another similar approach is to accumulate single-detector triggers not having
simultaneous (within the time-of-flight of gravitational waves) triggers in another detector and therefore likely not
associated with gravitational-wave signals.
The distribution of the ranking statistic under the background (noise only) hypothesis is then estimated by randomly drawing
single detector triggers from the inferred
single detector distributions and artificially treating them as if they were
simultaneous when constructing the ranking statistic.
The significance
of an observed ranking statistic value can then be evaluated using this
background distribution~\cite{Messick:2016aqy,2015arXiv150404632C}.
These two independent methods of determining the significance of observed
gravitational-wave candidates have both yielded high significance for the
gravitational waves that have been identified.
Terrestrial noise sources that are potentially correlated between detectors are not taken into account by these background estimation methods.
Thus, as discussed in Section~\ref{ss:DQ-Terr-Noise} above, a detailed examination of physical and environmental sensors which monitor such
noise sources and an assessment of their coupling to the measured gravitational-wave strain channel is carried out in order to check the
validity of a detection candidate.
The LVC also performs searches of LIGO and Virgo data without specific
waveform models~\cite{Klimenko:2015ypf,Klimenko:2008fu}. These searches
first identify periods of excess power in each detector's data stream and
then builds a detection statistic based on the cross-correlation between the
data streams. The significance of a particular detection statistic value
is again assessed using time shift analyses.
In~\cite{Abbott:2016blz}
it was shown that the frequency of noise transients producing more significant
events than GW150914 in such a generic transient search is once every
8\,400 years.
The fact that multiple searches, employing different methods, all found
GW150914 to be a highly significant candidate bolsters our confidence that
this event is not the product of coincident transient noise.
Furthermore, the signal is well matched by the waveform predicted by general
relativity for the coalescence of a binary black hole system.
Various tests performed using the first ten binary black hole mergers
detected by the LVC with high confidence have shown no significant deviation from general relativity models~\cite{LIGOScientific:2019fpa}.
\subsection{Measurement of search sensitivity}
A final component of a search pipeline is the determination of the sensitivity
of the search to astrophysical populations of signals. The purpose of
doing so is two-fold: First, it provides a metric by which a search can
be tuned to optimize its detection efficiency for particular classes of
signals; second, it provides a means for interpreting the rate of signals
detected by the pipeline to the rate at which signals are generated by
the population.
The sensitivity of the search pipeline is normally measured via a
Monte Carlo procedure (see, e.g., \cite{Tiwari:2017ndi}) in which
simulated signals drawn from a hypothetical source population (e.g.,
some distribution of binary component masses and spins, orientation angles,
arrival times, and distance) are added to real detector
noise, and the search is rerun to determine the fraction of signals
from this population that are detected by the search pipeline. A simulated
signal is considered to be detected if the search pipeline produces a
trigger above some chosen ranking statistic threshold. The result is
represented as a time- and population-averaged spacetime sensitivity
$\langle VT\rangle$ for a fixed ranking statistic threshold which corresponds
to a fixed false alarm rate threshold (e.g., a threshold could be chosen
to be one false alarm per century of observation). Alternatively,
threshold-independent
methods of astrophysical rate estimates can also be employed
\cite{Farr:2013yna,Abbott:2016nhf,Abbott:2016drs}.
\endinput
\section{Time-frequency analysis and stationarity}
\label{sec:timefreq}
The LIGO-Virgo data exhibit two main types of non-stationary behavior. The first is slow and continuous adiabatic drifts in the power spectrum occurring over minutes or hours, and the second is short-duration noise transients, which we refer to as \emph{glitches}, that are typically localized in time and frequency.
Additional non-stationarity has been observed in the vicinity of spectral lines, such as those due to electromagnetic couplings to the 50/60 Hz AC power supply. The adiabatic drifts in the power spectrum can be defined in terms of {\em locally stationary} processes~\cite{1057413,zbMATH00894812}. A locally stationary process has a covariance function which is the product of a covariance function for a stationary process and a time-variable function.
The stationarity of the data is evaluated as part of candidate event validation~\cite{TheLIGOScientific:2016zmo, LIGOScientific:2018mvr}.
Here we describe some simplified non-stationarity tests that can be applied to the data.
Non-stationarity can in principle be identified by looking for correlations in the Fourier amplitudes, but it is easier to identify and classify non-stationary behavior using time-frequency methods.
The simplest approach is to divide the data into small chunks of time centered on time $t_i$, and compute a smoothed estimate for the power spectrum for each chunk $S_n(f,t_i)$.
Figure~\ref{fig:sft} shows Bayesian power spectral density estimates~\cite{Littenberg:2014oda} computed using 8-second stretches of data from the LIGO-Hanford instrument that are spaced at 64-second intervals.
The instrument noise level was highly variable during this time period, showing large changes in the power spectral density in the band between 32 Hz and 256 Hz (note that this particular period of time for this example was chosen due to observed large variations in the detector's sensitivity).
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.9]{./figures/psds.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:sft} Power spectral density (solid lines) with 90\% credible intervals (shaded bands) for the LIGO-Hanford detector computed using 8-second stretches of data spaced by 64-second intervals starting at GPS time 1165067724. During this time period there was significant broad-band non-stationarity between 32 and 256 Hz.}
\end{figure}
Wavelets provide a more flexible analysis framework than short-time Fourier transforms. Continuous wavelet transforms are commonly used in LIGO-Virgo data studies to produce spectrograms that provide a visual indication of non-stationary behavior. Quantitative assessments of non-stationarity may also be made by using discrete, orthogonal wavelet transforms. These can be visualized using a \emph{scalogram}, showing the amplitudes of the wavelet basis functions at each discrete time and frequency pixel. Figure~\ref{fig:powtime} shows a scalogram of the same stretch of LIGO-Hanford data which were used to produce Figure~\ref{fig:sft}. The data were first whitened using an amplitude spectral density estimate taken from 256 seconds of data centered at GPS time 1165067917. The whitened data were then transformed using discrete wavepackets~\footnote{Note that the standard discrete wavelet transformation applies successive high and low pass filters in a particular order. The wavelet wave packet transform generalizes this to consider all possible combinations of filter application orders. A particular path through this transformation sequence defines some wavelet wave packet transformation. One is free to choose the decomposition path. Various criteria can be used to select an optimal or near optimal decomposition for a particular data set. In the study presented in this paper we use a path that gives a regular spacing in frequency bands because this choice provides a simple generalization of a discrete Fourier transform to the more flexible time-frequency case. For more information on this method, see~\cite{10.1117/12.55886}.},
built from Meyer wavelets~\cite{meyer1990ondelettes}, that were chosen to give uniform time and frequency coverage with tiles of size $\Delta t=0.5$ seconds and $\Delta f=1$ Hz. The average power at each time was then computed by summing the squares of the wavelet amplitudes (and dividing by a normalization constant) between 16 and 256 Hz. The noise level is elevated for almost a minute around the center of the data segment.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.35]{./figures/powerfluc_05sec.png}
\caption{\label{fig:powtime} Fluctuations in the whitened data for the same stretch of highly non-stationary LIGO-Hanford data used to produce Figure~\ref{fig:sft}. The data were first whitened using an amplitude spectral density estimated from 256 seconds of data centered at GPS time 1165067917,
then a discrete wavelet wavepacket transform
was used to produce the scalogram shown in the lower panel. The upper panel shows the average power as a function of time computed from the scalogram.}
\end{figure}
When this analysis is applied to stationary, Gaussian noise, the power in each time interval follows a chi-squared distribution with $N_f$ degrees of freedom, where $N_f$ is the number of frequency pixels that are summed over.
The distribution of the average power can be compared to this reference distribution using e.g.\ an Anderson-Darling test~\cite{AndersonDarling}, to yield a quantitative measure of the non-stationarity. Note that while stationary noise is stationary no matter what time span is considered, non-stationary noise will produce different measures of departure depending on the averaging scale (here the width of the wavelet pixels in time) and time span of the data. For visualization purposes it is convenient to transform the average power $p(t)$ to a new variable $s(t)$ via the Wilson-Hilferty transformation~\cite{10.2307/86022},
such that $s(t)$ follows a ${\cal N}(0,1)$ Gaussian distribution when the noise is stationary and Gaussian.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.35]{./figures/power_normal_1186741733.png}
\caption{\label{fig:stat1} A quiet stretch of whitened strain data from the LIGO-Livingston laboratory centered on GPS time 1186741733. The upper panel shows the transformed average power statistic $s(t)$ for a variety of wavelet resolutions (plotted in different colors) with pixels ranging from 0.25 seconds to 2 seconds in width. The power fluctuations $s(t)$ should follow a zero mean, unit variance Gaussian distribution when the noise is stationary and Gaussian. The lower panel shows a wavelet scalogram at 0.5 second resolution. }
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.35]{./figures/power_normal_1166358283.png}
\caption{\label{fig:stat2} A stretch of whitened strain data from the LIGO-Livingston laboratory centered on GPS time 1166358283. The upper panel shows the transformed average power statistic $s(t)$ for a variety of wavelet resolutions with pixels ranging from 0.25 seconds to 2 seconds in width. The power fluctuations $s(t)$ should follow a zero mean, unit variance Gaussian distribution when the noise is stationary and Gaussian. The lower panel shows a wavelet scalogram at 0.5 second resolution. A series of glitches causes significant non-stationarity.}
\end{figure}
Applying the Anderson-Darling test to the total power yields $p$-values for the hypothesis that the data are stationary. When applied to the quiet stretch of data shown in Figure~\ref{fig:stat1} the test yields a p-value of $p= 0.74$, indicating that the hypothesis that the data are stationary cannot be rejected over this time period at this wavelet scale.
Applying the same test to the data shown in Figure~\ref{fig:stat2} yields a $p$-value of $p=2.3\times 10^{-6}$, and we can reject the hypothesis that the data are stationary with high confidence.
Any analysis that attempted to detect or estimate the parameters of a possible gravitational-wave signal occurring in this stretch of data would then have to take steps to mitigate, suppress or otherwise account for the departure from stationary noise.
|
\section{Introduction}
Real-time closed loop systems continuously acquire data, process it, make decisions, and act to achieve some objective. An example includes a self-driving car. In a self-driving car, data is acquired, processed to make a decision on steering direction, and this decision is input to a control system that steers the car to achieve an objective such as avoiding pedestrians. In these types of closed loop systems, the data must be processed \emph{online}, i.e., as it is acquired. The decisions must be \emph{reliable} and must be made with an acceptable level of delay. For instance, in a self-driving car, a pedestrian must be detected reliably with little delay otherwise the decision to steer away could be too late for the control system to actuate and avoid a collision. Motivated by closed-loop system applications that acquire and process visual data, we are interested in developing computer vision algorithms that operate \emph{online}, and perform within limits on \emph{delay} and \emph{accuracy}.
In this paper, we look into a specific instance of this general problem in the context of object detection from video. We are interested in the problem of detection in closed loop scenarios. As the video is acquired, we want to as soon as possible 1) determine when an object of interest comes into view, and 2) we want to localize and determine the identity of the object at the frame the object comes into view. Further, we seek to operate under constraints on errors of detection, delay and computational cost. While deep learning has provided a wealth of object detectors \cite{ren2015faster,dai2016r,liu2016ssd,redmon2016you,lin2017focal} that operate on a single image and localize objects of interest, which in some cases are real-time, in many cases, they produce false alarms or fail to fire on objects due to phenomena such as partial occlusion, illumination, and other nuisances. Thus, although they may satisfy delay requirements, the detection accuracy may be poor. Of course one may leverage results over frames from a single-frame detector, i.e., several detections near the same location over multiple frames, ensures reliability. Because of this, there have been many works \cite{feichtenhofer2017detect,kang2017object,kang2018t,Liu_2018_CVPR,Zhu_2018_CVPR,Bertasius_2018_ECCV} that leverage temporal information over video batches to reduce false alarms. However, this comes at added delay before a detection can be declared and increased computational cost. Such delay may not be acceptable. Thus, in one case, one achieves acceptable delay but not detection accuracy, and in the other case one may achieve acceptable accuracy but not delay. In fact any algorithm will have to trade-off one for another.
In this paper, we design an algorithm for detection from videos that, for any given level of a false alarm constraint, minimizes the delay in detection. To do this, we leverage the \emph{Quickest Detection} theory \cite{poor2009quickest,veeravalli2013quickest} from the statistics literature. Quickest Detection addresses the problem of detecting changes in a stochastic process. It is assumed that the stochastic process is determined from some known probability distribution before some unknown change time, after which the stochastic process is determined from a different known distribution. The theory provides a means to derive an online algorithm to determine the unknown change time with \emph{minimum delay} subject to constraints on the false alarm rate or the minimum error subject to constraints on the delay. We pose our problem in that framework, leverage existing state-of-the-art single-frame detectors, and derive algorithms for guaranteed reliable object detection with minimum delay that operates in \emph{real-time}.
\subsection{Contributions}
Our specific contributions are as follows: {\bf 1}.~To the best of our knowledge, we introduce the first online, real-time, video object detector that guarantees minimum detection delay subject to given constraints on detection accuracy. {\bf 2}.~To do this, we formulate the minimum delay video object detector as a Quickest detection problem, and derive algorithms. {\bf 3}.~We provide a recursive approximation to the optimal algorithm, which empirically is shown to have similar detection performance as the optimal algorithm but operates in real-time. {\bf 4}.~We show with 50 fps overhead (un-optimized Matlab code) that we obtain more correct detections with less delay than single-frame detectors. We also show that the overall computational cost to achieve our detections is lower than single-frame detectors under the same levels of accuracy. {\bf 5}.~We introduce a performance analysis of online video object detectors that take into consideration both speed and accuracy, based on QD theory. This can be used to evaluate existing single-frame object detectors in the context of video applications.
\subsection{Related Work}
\textbf{Single Frame Object Detection}: Our work leverages methods for object detection from a single image. These methods take as input a single image and return bounding boxes localizing possible objects of interest; they also return class probabilities of the bounding box corresponding to an object class. Early works (e.g., \cite{dalal2005histograms,viola2001rapid}) for this problem use a sliding window approach along with a classifier trained with traditional machine learning. Currently, CNN based approaches are the dominant approach. There are two families of such detectors: 1) \emph{two-stage detectors} (e.g., \cite{ren2015faster,dai2016r}) which generate region proposals for likely locations of objects, then solve the classification problem via a CNN for each proposed bounding box, and 2) \emph{one-stage} detectors (e.g., \cite{liu2016ssd,redmon2016you,lin2017focal}) which predict the bounding boxes and their class information in one step. The latter are often computationally less costly, but may be less accurate than the former \cite{huang2017speed}. As we will show in this paper, when video is available, all these detectors can be significantly improved in terms of computational time before which an object is detected at any level of detection accuracy.
\textbf{Video-based Data Association}: There is a substantial literature, sometimes referred to as \emph{data association} (e.g., \cite{zhang2008global,huang2008robust,okuma2004boosted}), which relates to a sub-task of the problem we consider in this paper. In the data association problem, given a batch of frames from a video and the output of a single-frame object detector on each of those frames, the goal is to associate or link the bounding boxes corresponding to the same object across frames to produce trajectories. This can then be used in a number of applications, such as object tracking and action recognition. Recent works, e.g., \cite{feichtenhofer2017detect, Chen_2018_CVPR}, make use of deep learning to determine the links and refine them along with the detections in a joint fashion. Similar to this literature is work on determining \emph{tublets}, similar to trajectories, from video motivated by the Imagenet-VID challenge \cite{russakovsky2015imagenet}. These works (e.g., \cite{kang2017object,kang2018t}) make use of CNNs to predict spatio-temporal volumes corresponding to an object over frames, and then an LSTM (a recurrent neural network) to classify the object.
These methods can be used for detection of objects in video to provide more temporal consistent results, though adapting them recursively and real-time is not straightforward. Further, these methods do not address the issue of how small the batch size could be chosen to guarantee an acceptable detection accuracy. Larger batches lead to more reliable detections, but with larger delay and computational cost. Our work explicitly addresses the trade-off between delay (computational cost) and detection accuracy, and provides a guaranteed minimum delay solution.
{\bf Online Object Tracking}: The literature on online object tracking is extensive, and we do not intend to give a review. In this literature, one is given an initial bounding box of the object, and the goal is to determine it in subsequent frames in an online fashion. For instance, \cite{breitenstein2009robust,bolme2010visual,Ma_2015_CVPR,danelljan2015convolutional} use correlation filters for tracking, and recent works (e.g., \cite{wojke2017simple,bae2018confidence}) apply deep learning. These works do not address of problem of \emph{detection}, as that is explicitly assumed in the first frame; one may use our method to initialize such trackers.
\textbf{Online Detection in Videos}: Our work relates to \cite{lao2017minimum}, which addresses the online detection of moving objects from video using motion cues. There, a minimum delay solution with given accuracy constraints is formulated. However the method is far from real-time due to expensive invocations of optical flow and a non-recursive algorithm. In this paper, we leverage existing CNN-based single-frame detectors rather than motion and derive a recursive solution to provide a \emph{real-time} solution. Another method that examines the trade-off between speed and accuracy is \cite{chen2015speed}, motivated by biological systems. A related online method to our work is \cite{Shou_2018_ECCV}, which is a method for determining the start of an action. This method, however, does not address issues of delay versus accuracy.
\section{Review of Quickest Detection Theory}
We briefly highlight the main concepts in Quickest Detection, and refer the reader to \cite{veeravalli2013quickest} for a more detailed survey. Consider a stochastic process $\{X_t \}_{t=0}^{\infty}$. Before an unknown {\it change time} $\Gamma$, $X_t$ has distribution $\,\mathrm{p}_0$ and after the change time $\Gamma$, $X_t$ has distribution $\,\mathrm{p}_1$. Quickest Detection (QD) aims at reliable \emph{online} determination of distributional changes with minimum delay, i.e., minimum time after the change time. The main idea is that reliability can be obtained by observing more (noisy) data, but with added delay, and the theory seeks to provide algorithms addressing this trade-off.
In QD, a {\it stopping time} $\tau$ is a function of the data $\{X_t\}_{t=0}^s$, i.e., realizations of the stochastic process, up to the current time $s$ that returns $s$ when it declares a change has occurred at some time before $s$. QD seeks to find an optimal stopping time, with respect to the optimization problem defined next. The {\it average detection delay} of $\tau$ is
\begin{equation}
\mathsf{ADD}(\tau) = \sup_{t\geq 1} \mathbb E_t [ \tau - t | \tau \geq t ]
\end{equation}
where $\mathbb E_t$ is the expectation given the change time is $t$. This defines the worst case average delay over all change times. The {\it false alarm rate} is defined as $\mathsf{FAR}(\tau) = 1 / \mathbb{E}_{\infty} [ \tau ]$, that is, one over the average stopping time given that there is no change. QD solves the following optimization problem:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:stoppingrule_opt}
\min_{\tau} \mathsf{ADD}(\tau) \mbox{ subject to } \mathsf{FAR}(\tau) \leq \alpha,
\end{equation}
where $\alpha \in [0,1]$ is the maximum tolerable false alarm rate. This formulation
recognizes that without any constraints on the false alarm rate, that the optimal stopping rule is simply to declare a detection in the first frame, which would yield a large false alarm rate, and thus QD imposes a constraint.
It can be proven that the optimal stopping rule that solves the above optimization problem is obtained by computing the following {\it likelihood ratio}:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:max_likelihood}
\Lambda_t = \frac{ \mathbb{ P } [ \Gamma < t | X_1, \ldots, X_t ] }
{ \mathbb{ P } [ \Gamma \geq t | X_1, \ldots, X_t ] }
= \max_{1\leq t_c < t } \prod_{s=t_c}^t \frac{ p_1(X_s) } { p_0(X_s) },
\end{equation}
where the second equality is with the additional assumption that $X_i$ are iid. The optimal stopping rule then declares a change at the first time $t$ that the likelihood exceeds a threshold, i.e., $\Lambda_t>T(\alpha)$. The threshold $T$ is a function of the $\mathsf{FAR}$ constraint, and the distributions.
The aforementioned test in the iid case has a recursive implementation, thus the maximization need not be explicitly computed, as follows:
\begin{align}
&\tau = \inf\{n\geq1: W_n\geq \log T(\alpha)\}\\
&W_t =\left[\max\limits_{1\leq t_c\leq t}\sum_{i=t_c}^t\log\frac{\,\mathrm{p}_1(X_i)}{\,\mathrm{p}_0(X_i)}\right]^+\\
&W_{t+1} = [W_t + \log\,\mathrm{p}_1(X_{t+1})-\log\,\mathrm{p}_0(X_{t+1})]^+ \label{eq:cusum_original}
\end{align}
where $[\bullet]^+\triangleq \max[\bullet,0]$. One declares a change when $W_t$ exceeds a threshold. This recursive likelihood ratio test is named the {\it cumulative sum} (CUSUM) \cite{page1954continuous} algorithm.
In many applications, like ours, the distributions may not be fully known, and may depend on an unknown parameter $\theta$. In this case, one can estimate and re-estimate the parameter $\theta$ via a ML or MAP estimation at each time $t$, and still guarantee optimality of the test in \eqref{eq:max_likelihood}. This, however, does not extend itself to a recursive implementation.~\cite{siegmund1995using} and \cite{lai1998information} provide different methods in this scenario.
\section{Minimum Delay Object Detector}
In this section, we formulate our minimum delay object detector that operates on video by the use of Quickest Detection theory. We first introduce the problem setting and notation, and then proceed to deriving detection algorithms.
\subsection{Notation and Assumptions}\label{notations}
We denote by $b = (x, y, \ell_x, \ell_y)\in \mathbb{R}^4$ a \emph{bounding box} (of an object in an image) where $(x,y)$ is the centroid and $\ell_x$ and $\ell_y$ are the $x$- and $y$-scales of the bounding box. We denote $B \subset \mathbb{R}^4$ to be the space of all bounding boxes in the image under consideration. A \emph{trajectory} is a sequence of bounding boxes over consecutive frames; this will be denoted as $b_{t_s,t_e} \triangleq (b_{t_s}, b_{t_s+1}, \ldots, b_{t_e})$ where $t_s$ and $t_e$ are start and end times and $b_t$ denotes a bounding box at time $t$.
An image from a video sequence at time $t$ will be denoted $I_t$. A \emph{single-frame object detector} operates on an image and outputs a collection of bounding boxes, which we denote $B_{obs} \subset B$ and call the \emph{observed bounding boxes}, of possible locations of objects in an image. It also outputs the probabilities that each bounding box $b\in B_{obs}$ corresponds to one of $n+1$ classes of semantic object categories. These categories are denoted $l_0, \dots, l_n$ where $l_0$ corresponds to the ``background" or the class of objects not of interest. The class probabilities for a particular bounding box $b\in B_{obs}$ are denoted $v_i(b) \triangleq \,\mathrm{p}(l = l_i|I_t, b)$, and the vector of all such probabilities over all classes is denoted $v(b) \triangleq (v_0(b),\dots, v_n(b))^T$. In addition, two-stage detectors, e.g., Fast-RCNN, output a confidence score $\mu(b)\in \mathbb{R}^+$ that the bounding box $b\in B_{obs}$ corresponds to an object.
For convenience in later computations, we will use the function, which we call the \emph{data at time $t$}, $D_t : B \to [0,1]^{n+1} \times B$ that maps a bounding box in image $I_t$ to class probabilities and the bounding box itself, i.e., $D_t(b)\triangleq (v(b), b)$. If $A \subset B$, we define $D_t(A) \triangleq \cup_{b\in A} D_t(b)$. For a given image, the output of the function $D_t$ will only be known for the observed bounding boxes, $B_{obs}$. We will see that it will be important in our algorithm to also estimate probabilities involving $D_t$ even in the set of bounding boxes for which the detector does not output class probabilities. Therefore, we introduce nomenclature for this set, called the \emph{unobserved bounding boxes}, defined by $B_{unobs} \triangleq B \backslash B_{obs}$.
We let $I_{t_s,t_e} \triangleq (I_{t_s},I_{t_s+1}, \ldots,I_{t_e}$) and $D_{t_s,t_e} \triangleq (D_{t_s}, D_{t_s+1}, \ldots, D_{t_e})$, where $t_e$ and $t_s$ are start and end times.
\subsection{Formulating the Object Detector from QD}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/Schematic2.png}
\end{center}
\caption{{\bf Schematic of Our Minimum Delay Detector.} The output from single-frame CNN detectors are data input to our method. The additional computation (at roughly 50 fps) performed recursively provides reliable detection results with minimum delay. See Algorithm~\ref{alg:detection}.}
\label{fig:schematic}
\end{figure*}
We are interested in detecting objects of interest, i.e., only those belonging to the pre-specified categories $l_1, \ldots, l_n$, in the scene as soon as they come into view of the observer. To do so, we setup a Quickest Detection problem for \emph{each} object of interest in the scene. Each object is characterized by its trajectory $b_{1,t}$ from the start time $1$ to the current time $t$, which indicates the object's projection into the imaging plane. Given an estimate of this trajectory, which we estimate and update sequentially, we wish to determine if the object of interest is in view of the observer at time $t$, by posing this as a hypothesis testing problem. The null hypothesis is that the trajectory $b_{1,t}$ describes bounding boxes that do not correspond to a consistent object of interest (i.e., the trajectory corresponds to regions in the images of class $l_0$) and the alternative hypothesis is that the object remains out of view (or consists of bounding boxes that are of class $l_0$) up until a time $\Gamma_{0,i}$, which we call the \emph{change time}, at which point the object is in view and thus the bounding boxes $b_{\Gamma_{0,i},t}$ correspond to a class $l_i$.
At each time $t$, the data available from which we may make the decision of object in view is denoted $D_{1,t}$, which is the output of the single-frame detector at each frame from $1$ to $t$, consisting of class probabilities in the observed set $B_{obs}$ as well as the unobserved set $B_{unobs}$ with class probabilities unknown. Even though one does not have direct measurements of class probabilities in the latter set, we assume prior class probabilities. According to QD, we estimate $\,\mathrm{p}(\Gamma_{0,i}<t|D_{1,t}, b_{1,t})$, which is the probability that the object is in view before time $t$ given the data up to time $t$ and conditioned on a trajectory $b_{1,t}$ that must be estimated. The trajectory is analogous to a parameter $\theta$ in QD of the distributions that is unknown. We also estimate $\,\mathrm{p}(\Gamma_{0,i}\geq t|D_{1,t}, b_{1,t})$, i.e., the probability that the object is not in view before or at time $t$.
According to QD, the optimal detection rule is a threshold of the likelihood ratio, $\Lambda_t$, i.e., the max over all object classes $l_i$ of the two aforementioned probabilities:
\begin{align}\label{eq:lr_test}
\Lambda_{t}(b_{1,t})&=\max\limits_i\frac{\,\mathrm{p}(\Gamma_{0,i}<t|D_{1,t},b_{1,t})}{\,\mathrm{p}(\Gamma_{0,i}\geq t|D_{1,t},b_{1,t})}\\
&= \max\limits_i\max\limits_{t_c \geq 1}\frac{\,\mathrm{p}_i(D_{t_c,t}|b_{t_c,t})}{\,\mathrm{p}_0(D_{t_c,t}|b_{t_c,t})}
\end{align}
where for simplicity of notation, we set $\,\mathrm{p}_i(\bullet)\triangleq\,\mathrm{p}(\bullet|l=l_i)$. Note the data $D_t$ across frames along the known trajectory $b_{1,t}$ of object class $i$ is independent across frames. This is because knowing the object identity along the trajectory removes the class information from the data, which results in random nuisances that are assumed independent. This statement remains true for data near the trajectory due to spatial regularity of the single-frame detector. As our algorithm will only consider data near the trajectory, we assume this is true for all data. This gives that
\begin{align}
\Lambda_{t}(b_{1,t}) &=\max\limits_i\max\limits_{t_c \geq 1}\prod_{j = t_c}^{t}\frac{\,\mathrm{p}_i(D_j|b_j)}{\,\mathrm{p}_0(D_j|b_j)}.\label{eq:lr_simple}
\end{align}
A detection is declared when $\Lambda_{t} > T(\alpha)$. Here $T(\alpha)$ is a threshold chosen according to a given false alarm constraint $\alpha$. The detected object class is the $i^{\ast}$ for which the maximum of \eqref{eq:lr_simple} over $i$ is achieved.
\subsection{Estimating the Trajectory}\label{sec:data_association}
In the previous sub-section, it was assumed that the trajectory $b_{t_c,t}$ of the object of interest was given, however, it is unknown and must be estimated from the data. We now discuss its estimation via an optimization problem, and divulge the solution to a later section. As stated earlier, the trajectory is treated analogously to an unknown parameter $\theta$ of the pre- or post-change distribution in the QD problem. We may estimate that parameter in a number of ways, including a maximum-likelihood or MAP estimation if a prior probability is known. Estimation in these ways guarantees optimality of the detection rule. Since we wish to incorporate a smoothness prior, we use a MAP estimator.
Our prior assumption on the trajectory $b_{1,t}$ is that it is class-independent and of nearly constant velocity in each of the parameters of the bounding box. Therefore, we consider
\begin{equation}\label{eq:constant_speed}
\log \,\mathrm{p}(b_{t_1,t_2}) \propto -\sum_{t=t_1+1}^{t_2-1}\lVert b_{t-1} - 2b_{t} + b_{t+1}\rVert_2^2.
\end{equation}
This prior ensures that paths that are nearly linear have higher prior probability than other paths. One may easily adapt any other assumption about the trajectory accordingly. For example, \cite{xing2009multi,bae2014robust, park2015minimum} provide a series of different techniques for this task. The MAP estimator for the trajectory $b_{1,t}$ given the data $D_{1,t}$ is then as follows:
\begin{align}
b^*_{t_c,t} &= \argmax\limits_{b_{1,t}}\max\limits_i \,\mathrm{p}(b_{1,t})\prod_{j = t_c}^{t}\,\mathrm{p}_i(D_j|b_j),\label{eq:b_est}
\end{align}
which is just the numerator in the likelihood ratio multiplied by the prior. Note that for each candidate change time $t_c$, one has to estimate the trajectory from above. However, in Section~\ref{sec:simplification}, we show how this can be avoided for efficiency. In the next sub-section, we describe how to simplify the likelihood terms so that we can then solve this estimation problem as well as determine the full likelihood ratio.
\subsection{Computing Pre- and Post-Change Probabilities}
In order to compute the likelihood ratio in \eqref{eq:lr_simple} as well as in the estimation of the trajectory \eqref{eq:b_est}, one needs to compute $\,\mathrm{p}_i(D_t|b_t)$. To evaluate this probability, we separate the data $D_t$ into the data from the observed set $B_{obs}$, and the un-observed set $B_{unobs}$. Therefore,
\begin{align}\label{eq:observed_decompose}
\,\mathrm{p}_i(D_t|b_t) & = \,\mathrm{p}_i(D_t(B_{obs})\cup D_t(B_{unobs})|b_t) \nonumber\\
&= \int_{B_{obs}\cup B_{unobs}} \,\mathrm{p}_i(D_t(b)|b_t) \,\mathrm{d} \mu(b)
\end{align}
where $\mu(b)$ is the measure of bounding box $b$. For $b\in B_{obs}$, we set $\mu(b)$ equal to the confidence score from the Region Proposal Network when using two-stage detectors, while $\mu(b)$ is constant when using one-stage detectors. For the unobserved part, $\mu(b)$ is also assumed to be constant.
\indent {\bf Computing the Probability, $\,\mathrm{p}_i(D_t(b)|b_t)$}: We simplify $\,\mathrm{p}_i(D_t(b)|b_t) = \,\mathrm{p}_i(v(b), b|b_t)$ by noting that $v(b)$ and $b$ are independent, i.e., not knowing the image, the output of class probabilities from a single-frame detector is independent of location, as they are built invariant to location. Therefore,
\begin{align}
\,\mathrm{p}_i(v(b), b|b_t)&= \,\mathrm{p}(v(b)|l=l_i)\,\mathrm{p}(b|b_t)\\
&= \frac{\,\mathrm{p}(l = l_i|v(b))\,\mathrm{p}(v(b))}{\,\mathrm{p}(l = l_i)}\,\mathrm{p}(b|b_t)\\
&\propto\frac{v_i(b)\,\mathrm{p}(b|b_t)}{\,\mathrm{p}(l = l_i)}\label{eq:detection_flip}
\end{align}
where we have used that $v_i(b) = \,\mathrm{p}(l = l_i|v(b))$, i.e., given all the class probabilities, the probability of class $l_i$ is just the $i$-th component of $v(b)$, and that $\,\mathrm{p}(v(b))$ is a constant due to positional invariance of the single-frame detector. $\,\mathrm{p}(l = l_i)$ is the prior probability of the object classes.
Following the loss function used in training single-frame object detectors, we set $\,\mathrm{p}(b|b_t)$, i.e., the probability of $b$ knowing the true location $b_t$, to be one if the intersection of union score between the bounding boxes, $\text{IoU}(b,b_t)$, surpasses a fixed threshold and zero otherwise, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:p(b|b)}
\,\mathrm{p}(b|b_t) =\mathbbm{1}\{\text{IoU}(b,b_t) > IoU_{lim}\}.
\end{equation}
{\bf Computing the Probability, $\,\mathrm{p}_i(D_t(B_{unobs})|b_t)$}: Now we compute $\,\mathrm{p}_i(D_t(B_{unobs})|b_t)$ by setting the class probabilities of a bounding box to be the same as the class prior probabilities, i.e., $v_i(b) = \,\mathrm{p}(l=l_i)$, which in the absence of data is a reasonable assumption, and the confidence measure of a bounding box to be $\mu(b)=\textit{constant}$ for all unobserved $b$. Thus, we see that \eqref{eq:detection_flip} becomes
\begin{equation}\label{eq:unobserved_simplify}
\,\mathrm{p}_i(D_t(b)|b_t) \propto \frac{\,\mathrm{p}(l=l_i)}{\,\mathrm{p}(l=l_i)}\,\mathrm{p}(b|b_t) = \,\mathrm{p}(b|b_t), \quad b\in B_{unobs}.
\end{equation}
Therefore,
\begin{align}
\!\!\!\!\,\mathrm{p}_i(D_t(B_{unobs})|b_t) &\propto \int_B\,\mathrm{p}(b|b_t)\,\mathrm{d} \mu(b) - \int_{B_{obs}}\,\mathrm{p}(b|b_t) \,\mathrm{d} \mu(b)\nonumber\\
&= C-\sum_{b \in B_{obs}}\,\mathrm{p}(b|b_t)\mu(b)\label{eq:unobserved_simplify}
\end{align}
where we treat $C=\int_B\,\mathrm{p}(b|b_t)\,\mathrm{d} \mu(b)$ as a constant (independent of $b_t$) that is chosen so that the overall probability above is positive, and is set empirically as discussed below.
{\bf Computing the Probability, $\,\mathrm{p}_i(D_t|b_t)$}: Now we can compute the full probability $\,\mathrm{p}_i(D_t|b_t)$ by combining \eqref{eq:detection_flip}, \eqref{eq:p(b|b)} and \eqref{eq:unobserved_simplify}, which yields
\begin{align}
& \,\mathrm{p}_i(D_t|b_t) \propto \int_{B_{obs}} \frac{v_i(b)\,\mathrm{p}(b|b_t)}{\,\mathrm{p}(l=l_i)} \,\mathrm{d} \mu(b) + \,\mathrm{p}_i(D_t(B_{unobs})|b_t)\nonumber\\
&= \sum_{b \in B_{obs}} \left[ \frac{v_i(b)}{\,\mathrm{p}(l=l_i)}-1\right]\mathbbm{1}\{\text{IoU}(b,b_t) > IoU_{lim}\}\mu(b) + C.\label{eq:detector_computation}
\end{align}
Note that \eqref{eq:detector_computation} is computed by summing, over all observed bounding boxes that are close spatially (with respect to the IoU metric) to the given bounding box $b_t$, a measure of how informative of object class $i$ the single-frame detection of $b$ is over the prior of the detector weighted by the confidence $\mu(b)$ that the box is an object class of interest. The constant $C$ can be interpreted as a prior on the trajectory. Large values of $C$ favors greater dependence on the prior $p(b_{t_c,t})$ in the MAP estimation problem \eqref{eq:b_est} and so the estimated trajectory more likely follows a constant velocity path. This also means that the likelihood ratio accumulates more slowly, but is more robust to imperfections in the data such as failure due to partial occlusion, illumination, etc. Therefore, $C$ controls the robustness to the imperfections.
\subsection{Summing Up: Detection Algorithm}
Our algorithm for minimum delay object detection is described in three steps, which are iterated as new data $D_{t+1}$ becomes available, as follows: 1) update of the existing trajectories via the MAP estimation \eqref{eq:b_est}, 2) new trajectory generation, and 3) evaluation of the likelihood ratio $\Lambda_{t+1}$ test \eqref{eq:lr_simple}. Algorithm~\ref{alg:detection_full} describes this process. We discuss the first two steps in more detail in the paragraphs below.
{\bf Trajectory Update}: At each time $t$, we have a set of candidate trajectories, $b_{1,t}^k, \, k = 1, \ldots, n_{traj}$. We wish to update them into frame $t+1$. At time $t+1$, the data $D_{t+1}$ from the single-frame detector is available. The update of the existing trajectories into frame $t+1$ is done by solving the MAP estimation problem \eqref{eq:b_est} for each of the existing trajectories. This is done by running iterative updates of each bounding box in the trajectory to maximize the objective alternatively. The process is initialized with the trajectory extended into frame $t+1$ with the constant velocity model. This optimization process also computes $\,\mathrm{p}_i(D_{t+1}|b_{1,t+1}^k)$.
Note in the version of Quickest Detection with parameter estimation, new data in future frames can impact the estimation of the unknown parameter, in our case the trajectory, and thus the change time $t_c$ and the likelihood ratio, which could lead to faster detection. However in our specific setup, additional locations on the trajectory predicted before the current estimate of $t_c$ would have already been initialized with our trajectory spawning scheme (below) at the time before $t_c$, therefore, we neglect re-estimating $t_c$, which saves considerable computational cost.
{\bf Trajectory Generation}: We now propose new candidate trajectories as follows. We use the data from the frame $t+1$ to determine candidate bounding boxes $b_{t+1}^{new,k}$ by choosing $b$ such that the object class $i$ probability is greater than background probability, $v_i(b) > v_0(b)$. We use those boxes and their class probabilities and perform non-max suppression with the bounding boxes $b_{t+1}^k$ and probabilities $\,\mathrm{p}_i(D_{t+1}|b_{t,t+1}^k)$ from existing trajectories. The change time $t_c$ of these newly spawned trajectories is $t+1$.
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State{$t=0$}
\State run single-frame detector on $I_{t}$ and obtain $D_t$.\label{step:start_update1}
\State Find new candidates s.t. $v_i(b)>v_0(b)$ and apply NMS
\For {each candidate
\State Update the trajectory by \eqref{eq:b_est}.
\State Update likelihood ratio by computing \eqref{eq:lr_simple} for all $i$.
\If{$\Lambda_{t}>\text{threshold}$,} declare a detection, output the position $b^*_t$ and label $l_i$
\EndIf
\EndFor
\State{$t = t+1$}\label{step:end_update1}. Repeat \ref{step:start_update1}-\ref{step:end_update1}.
\end{algorithmic}
\caption{\sl Minimum Delay Object Detection (Full)}
\label{alg:detection_full}
\end{algorithm}
In the next section, we avoid the expensive requirement of updating the whole trajectory at each time $t$ and revisiting data $D_{1,t}$ by providing a recursive update of the trajectory to obtain a fully recursive algorithm. We also introduce further pruning of candidate trajectories. Although this recursive procedure does not theoretically guarantee optimality of the delay, we analyze the empirical performance against the optimal Algorithm~\ref{alg:detection_full} and show that little is lost in delay with considerable gains in speed.
\section{A Recursive Approximation for Speed}\label{sec:simplification}
We now present a recursive approximation of the trajectory computation, which allows us to derive a fully recursive algorithm allowing one to avoid re-visiting previous data from the single-frame detector.
\subsection{Recursive Trajectory / Likelihood Computation}
To estimate the trajectory $b_{t_c,t}$ recursively in the MAP estimation problem, we decompose the prior of the trajectory \eqref{eq:constant_speed} as follows:
\begin{equation}
\,\mathrm{p}(b_{t_c,t}) = \,\mathrm{p}(b_{t_c})\prod_{k=t_c+1}^t \,\mathrm{p}(b_k|b_{t_c,k-1}).
\end{equation}
Instead of going back to all previous frames, we only estimate the bounding box $b^*_t$ at the current frame by assuming the trajectory at the previous frames are optimized. Therefore, we need only consider the term $\,\mathrm{p}(b_t|b_{t_c,t-1})$ as the prior in the MAP estimation problem. With the constant speed assumption, this term becomes
\begin{equation}
\log \,\mathrm{p}(b_t|b_{t_c},b_{t-1},\dots) \propto -\lVert b_{t-2} - 2b_{t-1} + b_{t}\rVert_2^2.
\end{equation}
The MAP estimation problem in \eqref{eq:b_est} then becomes equivalent to solving
\begin{align}
b^*_t &=\argmax\limits_{b_{t}}\,\mathrm{p}_i(D_t|b_t)\,\mathrm{p}(b_t|b_{t_c,t-1})\\
&=\argmax\limits_{b_{t}}[\log\eqref{eq:detector_computation} -\lVert b_{t-2} - 2b_{t-1} + b_{t}\rVert_2^2]\label{eq:association_recursive},
\end{align}
as the terms $\,\mathrm{p}_{i}(D_{s}|b_s)$ for $s<t$ are independent of $b_t$.
With this approximation, we may compute the likelihood ratio $\Lambda_{t}(b_{1,t})$ in \eqref{eq:lr_simple} recursively by use of the CuSum algorithm \eqref{eq:cusum_original}. Defining $W_{i,t} = [\log{\Lambda_{t}}]^+$, the recursive update of $W_{i,t}$ is as follows:
\begin{align}
&W_{i,t_c} = 0,\nonumber\\
&W_{i,t} =[W_{t-1} + \log\,\mathrm{p}_i(D_t|b^*_t)-\log\,\mathrm{p}_0(D_t|b^*_t)]^+. \label{eq:recursive_update}
\end{align}
As soon as $W_{i,t}$ exceeds a threshold, determined by the false-alarm rate, a detection is declared.
Note that the non-recursive algorithm in the previous section has computational complexity $\mathcal{O}( n\times t^2 )$ where $n$ is the number of objects of interest and $t$ is the time the detection is declared, as at each time, we have to revisit the data up to the current time. The recursive implementation considered in this section has complexity $\mathcal{O}( n\times t )$, a considerable savings, which we explore further in experiments.
\subsection{Further Simplifications and Final Algorithm}
Our final simplified algorithm is Algorithm~\ref{alg:detection} (see also Figure~\ref{fig:schematic}), which summarizes the recursive approximation described in the previous section, and involves two additional simplifications, described below.
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State{$t=0$}
\State run single-frame detector on $I_{t}$ and obtain $D_t$.\label{step:start_update}
\State Find new candidates s.t. $v_i(b)>v_0(b)$ and apply NMS
\For {each candidate
\State Predict the trajectory by \eqref{eq:association_recursive}.
\State Update CUSUM statistic by \eqref{eq:recursive_update}.
\If{$\sum_i W_{i,t} = 0$,} remove this candidate.
\ElsIf{$W_{i,t}>\text{threshold}$,} declare a detection, output the position $b^*_t$ and label $l_i$
\EndIf
\EndFor
\State{$t=t+1$}\label{step:end_update}. Repeat \ref{step:start_update}-\ref{step:end_update}.
\end{algorithmic}
\caption{\sl Recursive Minimum Delay Object Detection}
\label{alg:detection}
\end{algorithm}
\textbf{Reduction of Class-Dependent Trajectories}:
When updating the trajectory by \eqref{eq:association_recursive}, one would have to find the best $b^*_t$ for each $i$. However, we only update the trajectory for the object classes satisfying $W_{i,t} > 0$. This is because if $W_{i,t}=0$, the likelihood ratio is less than 1, indicating the change time is in the future, eliminating the need for consideration of the trajectory under the class $i$ assumption.
\textbf{Removing Trajectories}:
We remove candidate trajectories if $\sum_i W_{i,t} = 0$, i.e., $W_{i,t}=0$ for all $i$. In this case, the trajectory does not carry any information about the object.
\section{Experiments}
\subsection{Datasets}
To test our algorithm, we need a video dataset that contains objects of multiple object classes, objects that appear at various unknown times, and all frames in each video are annotated. To the best of our knowledge, the best dataset that fits all these criteria is the KITTI dataset \cite{Geiger2012CVPR}.
This dataset contains 21 road scene videos and 917 annotated objects (tracklets) including cars, vans, bicycles and pedestrians. The dataset contains significant occlusion, illumination change, and viewpoint changes. Every visible object of these classes are annotated in every frame. Each object has an ID and becomes visible at an unknown frame. We set the ground truth change time of each object to be the first frame that it is annotated.
\subsection{Performance Metrics}
The output of a detection method is bounding boxes with class declarations and times, which represent when the method first detects objects. We make the following definitions for empirical quanitities. A \textbf{correct detection} is a detection whose bounding box overlaps with a ground truth bounding box in the same frame with IoU over $IoU_{lim}$ and the label matches the ground truth. Note an object may be detected multiple times, but this is only counted once for each ground truth object. A \textbf{false alarm} is a declared detection that is not a correct detection.
We use the following performance metrics. The \textbf{false alarm rate} is the number of false alarms divided by the total number of declared detections for the entire dataset. The \textbf{detection delay} is number of frames between when the object is detected minus the change time, i.e., the ground truth frame this object first appears. The \textbf{average detection delay} is the average of delay of all objects annotated in the dataset. If a ground truth object is not detected, it has maximum delay, which is the last frame it is annotated minus the ground truth change time.
\subsection{Methods Evaluated}
\textbf{Single-Frame Detectors:} We test our algorithm with both one-stage and two-stage detectors. We choose SSD \cite{liu2016ssd} and Retinanet \cite{lin2017focal} for one stage detectors, and the Faster-RCNN \cite{ren2015faster} (two-stage) as the single-frame detectors. For Faster-RCNN, we use the original implementation from the authors trained on Pascal-VOC07/12 as the baseline method. The backbone networks are ZF \cite{zeiler2014visualizing} and VGG-16 \cite{simonyan2014very}, and the recent Resnet50 \cite{he2016deep}. For Resnet50 Faster-RCNN and SSD network, we use the implementation from \textit{mmdetection} \cite{mmdetection2018} toolbox.
\textbf{Comparisons:}
We use the direct detection results from single-frame detectors to compare to our method. Different false alarm rate levels are achieved by thresholding the detection response. Since single-frame detectors do not address temporal connection between frames, bounding boxes in adjacent frames are grouped into the same trajectory if the overlap is over $IoU_{lim}$. For each object, the detection delay is computed based on the first correct detection.
For our proposed method, for single-stage detectors that do not output a $\mu(b)$ from the RPN, we manually set $\mu(b) = 1$ for all observed bounding boxes. In all experiments we fix $IoU_{lim} = 0.5$. We set the prior probability $\,\mathrm{p}(l=l_i)$ of the object class to be uniform. The constant $C$ is set empirically for each single-frame detector.
\def\textwidth{\textwidth}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\minipage{0.27\textwidth}
\hspace*{-2mm}\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/far_delay_one_stage.jpg}
\endminipage
\minipage{0.23\textwidth}
\hspace*{-4mm}\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/far_delay_two_stage.jpg}
\endminipage
\caption{{\bf Delay vs False Alarm Rate.} Compared to single-frame detectors, our method achieves less average delay at any FAR.}
\label{fig:far_delay}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Results}
\textbf{False Alarm Rate vs Delay}: Figure \ref{fig:far_delay} plots the false alarm rate verses delay curve by varying the detection threshold. Under all false alarm rates and every single-frame detector, our algorithm has less delay.
Interestingly, single-frame SSD300 and SSD512 have almost identical performance, however, the minimum delay version of SSD512 outperforms minimum delay SSD300. This indicates that SSD512 has more consistent detection results over frames compared to SSD300, thus allowing the likelihood to accumulate more quickly.
\textbf{Detection Accuracy vs Computational Cost}:
Figure \ref{fig:far_delay_cost} shows the average computational cost for detecting an object in seconds. In real-time online applications, the computational resources of the system are always limited. The result shows that one can use a faster but noisier single-frame detector, and still achieve lower overall computational cost under any accuracy constraint by using multiple frames.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\minipage{0.272\textwidth}
\hspace*{-2mm}\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/far_delay_time_1.jpg}
\endminipage
\minipage{0.23\textwidth}
\hspace*{-4mm}\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/far_delay_time_2.jpg}
\endminipage
\end{center}
\caption{{\bf Average Computational Time.} Our method achieves less computational cost than single-frame detectors. The result shows that noisier detectors (e.g. SSD300 and ZF) achieve less computational cost at any FAR by running over multiple frames at a faster speed than more-accurate detectors run on few frames.}
\label{fig:far_delay_cost}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Analysis of Performance Gains}: Figure~\ref{fig:improvement} shows a more detailed analysis of the performance gains. Under all false alarm levels, the minimum delay detector outputs more correct detection results than the baseline, and these correct detections happen with lower delay.
\def\textwidth{\textwidth}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\minipage{0.263\textwidth}
\hspace*{-3mm}\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/FAR_obj1.jpg}
\endminipage
\minipage{0.233\textwidth}
\hspace*{-4.7mm}\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/FAR_obj2.jpg}
\endminipage\hfill
\minipage{0.275\textwidth}
\hspace*{-3mm}\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/far_delay_correct_1.jpg}
\endminipage
\minipage{0.233\textwidth}
\hspace*{-6mm}\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/far_delay_correct_2.jpg}
\endminipage
\end{center}
\caption{{\bf Analysis of Performance Gains}: [Top]: Our method correctly detects more objects, and [Bottom]: with less average detection delay of correct detections than single-frame detectors.}
\label{fig:improvement}
\vspace{-1mm}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Recursive vs Non-Recursive Detection}:
We compare the recursive approximation to the non-recursive version of our algorithm. We use SSD300 and SSD512 for illustration. Figure \ref{fig:recursive} shows the false alarm rate vs delay and computational cost curve. We find the result from the recursive version of the detector is comparable to the non-recursive counterpart while saving considerable computational cost. In SSD512, the recursive version reaches slightly better, though not significant (i.e., one-frame), performance than the non-recursive version.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\minipage{0.28\textwidth}
\hspace*{-5mm}\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/recursive.jpg}
\endminipage
\minipage{0.245\textwidth}
\hspace*{-8mm}\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/recursive_computational_cost.jpg}
\endminipage
\end{center}
\caption{{\bf Recursive vs Non-Recursive Algorithm.} The recursive approximation preserves the optimality of the algorithm while achieving significantly less computational cost.}
\label{fig:recursive}
\vspace{-2mm}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Computational Cost}:
On KITTI, our recursive algorithm typically runs at 40-100 fps with a Matlab implementation (excluding the cost of the single image detection process) depending on the number of objects visible in the scene. A single-frame detector such as SSD-300 runs in 59 fps, and thus our overall algorithm runs at 24-38 fps.
\section{Conclusion}
Our online object detector that operates on video achieves guaranteed minimum delay subject to false alarm constraints following theoretical results from QD. Further, our novel recursive formulation provided significant computational cost savings over the QD optimal detector and almost no loss in performance. Empirically, we showed that our recursive formulation achieves less delay and computational cost than single-frame detectors for any level of false alarm rate. Our method uses single frame detectors and uses \emph{simple} additional logic that runs in roughly 50 fps, and when combined with a single frame detector that is also real-time, results in a real-time algorithm. Thus, this has potential to be used in real-time closed loop applications. Additionally, our algorithm allows single image deep learning detectors to be applied to video without any additional training and have guaranteed minimum delay at any accuracy level.
{\small
\bibliographystyle{ieee_fullname}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{S:1}
In a history of scientific and in particular economic thought one may find various statistical frameworks, which have been developed for expressing necessary assumptions under which statistical results can be endowed with causal interpretation. There is an agreement, that causes should tell us not only that two phenomena are related, but how they are related. They allow us to make reliable prediction about the future, explain the relationships between and occurrence of events and enable to develop effective policies intervention. A causal knowledge should exhibit a certain kind of stability, resistance with respect to possible circumstances under which a phenomenon is observed and with respect to parameters of environment. Causality alone is insufficient basis for undertaking further scientific or decisive acts. In order to use causes to effectively predict, explain or alter behaviour, we must also know the time over which a relationship takes place, the probability with which it will occur, and how other factors alter its efficacy. We need to know when the effect starts and how long it persists. Causal relationships depend on time scales as relationships may persist a while or a long time.
\\ In economics, for several merit justified reasons, causal relations, which are characteristic for an influential majority of objects or agents are of a prime importance (see \cite{Welfare}). An effective way of defining this influential majority of economic objects provide statistical depth function (see \cite{Zuo:2000}), which is a basic notion used within a discipline of multivariate statistics called \emph{data depth concept} (DDC). Using it one may propose very useful multivariate (see \cite{LPS}, \cite{Liu:1995}) or functional (\cite{Fraiman2001,LopezRomo,Nagy2017,Nair}) generalizations of one-dimensional statistical procedures based on order statistics and ranks and in a consequence robust causal inferential procedures. Generally speaking, statistical depth function provides a center-outward order of multivariate or functional objects. It expresses a centrality of an object as a number from an interval $[0,1]$, with values close to $0$ treated as peripheral and values close to $1$ as central. Thus one may consider causal relationships of objects, for which measures of departure from centers are not bigger then prefixed thresholds. This is a natural way of focusing our attention on the influential majority of economic objects.
\\ DDC provides a variety of useful statistical procedures (see \cite{Kos1}) but despite excellent findigs obtained in recent years ( \cite{LiuZuoWang2013}, \cite{DyckMoz2016}) its procedures still exhibit significant limitations in a context of conducting empirical research basing on relatively small, sparse data-sets drawn from resources from statistical offices, with observations often exhibiting "malicious configurations".
\vskip 1mm
One of aims of this paper is to critically discuss selected chances and limitations related to applications of certain tools of DDC in case of robust empirical causal analysis concerning two spatial economic phenomena, namely agricultural subsidies (treatment) and digital development of a country (effect). In the considered empirical example there is a functional dataset as an input set, and a multivariate dataset describing digital development as an output set. Causal inference scheme should be adjusted to these datasets. As it is virtually impossible to repeat the experiment, we treat the typical observations as factual and atypical observations as counterfactual.
\\ Note, that knowledge of such "centre focused causality" seems to be especially desirable in a context of performing social programs dedicated to typical objects (e.g., middle class stimulating program) or for decreasing a fraction of certain atypical objects (e.g., avoiding poverty program).
\vskip 1mm
In statistical literature, one of the most widely recognized conceptualization of causal inference is Rubin's potential outcome representation (see \cite{Rubin1974,Dawid:2000,CoxWermuth}). Rubin postulates, that causal statements can only be derived if one additionally considers what would have happened if an object had experienced something different than its experience. Another especially influential in economic and econometric literature concept is Granger non-causality (GNC, \cite{Hendry2017}) and its variants or generalizations. Its empirical version in essence may be expressed as a prediction error approach. Assuming a specific implementation of the GNC one can easily indicate depth based estimation or testing procedure replacing least squares or maximal likelihood principles used by default. Next influential approach to causality analysis are probabilistic approaches (see \cite{Pearl, Kleinberg}). The basic probabilistic theory of causality is that $C$ is a cause of $E$ if
\begin{equation}
P(E|C)>P(E|\sim C),
\label{eq1}
\end{equation}
where $P(E|C)$ denotes conditional probability of E under condition C, $"\sim "$ denotes complement of an event.
\\ Appealing to the DDC it is straightforward to consider this condition within a central region of a certain degree, and hence focusing on a certain majority of objects.
\section{Applying DDC in the causal inference}
Nowadays for accepting or rejecting an existence of a certain causal relationship between phenomena, one needs to present convincing empirical evidence obtained in a process of statistical inference. Generally, in order to identify a phenomenon X as a cause of a phenomenon Y one has to demonstrate that a variability in X produce a variability in Y. In this context one may consider various kinds of variations: across time, across individuals, across characteristics, across groups and across intervention versus observation (see \cite{CoxWermuth,Hendry2017}).
\\ Currently it seems to be more and more commonly recognized, that properties of the statistical inference strongly depend on a quality of empirical data used in the inference as well as on fulfilling assumptions underlying the procedures (\cite{Wilcox}).
Using depths we, among others, can demonstrate how robustly measured variability of X produce robustly measured variability of Y, where X and Y are expressed as multivariate of functional random variables.
\\ In the spirit of \cite{Rubin1974} the causal effect of one treatment $E$ over another $C$ for a particular unit and time interval from $t_1$ to $t_2$ is a difference between what would have happened at time $t_2$ if the unit had been exposed to E initiated at $t_1$ and what would have happened at time $t_2$ if the unit had been exposed to $C$ initiated at $t_1$.
\\ \cite{Rubin1974} considered $2N$ units (e.g. small regions of a country), half being exposed to a control treatment (C) and half to a treatment (E). If treatments E and C were assigned to units randomly, $y(E)$ denotes value o $Y$ measured at $t_2$ for the unit given the unit received experimental treatment $E$ initiated at $t_1$, similarly $Y(C)$, then $Y(E)-Y(C)$ is causal effect. \\
The problem in measuring $Y(E)-Y(C)$ is that we can never observe both $Y(E)$ and $Y(C)$ since we cannot return to time $t_1$ to give other treatment. Next problematic issue arises, as in practice an usage of truly random samples may be very difficult (see \cite{Kleinberg}).
\vskip 1mm
Although robustness and causality conceptually seem to be very closely tied - surprisingly considerations binding them are relatively rare. From other point of view, one may get an impression that authors conducting researches on causality in the area of economics in fact implicitly assume some kind of "sample-to-sample stability" of their empirical argumentation even if in a center of their statistical considerations stands evidently non-robust least squares method (see \cite{EngleWhite}). For proposing truly robust causality analysis, it is natural to source from concepts and developments of modern robust statistics (see \cite{Wilcox}). For several merit-justified reasons related to the fact that economic systems are multidimensional by default, we focused our attention on the DDC methods.
\\ There are many excellent papers presenting particular DDC tools, which are of minor importance for the aims of this paper.
Here we would like to stress opportunities related to applications of depths for functional objects (e.g., "subsidies trajectories", see \cite{Nieto}) and depth-induced multivariate rank tests (e.g., a comparison of control and treatment groups in terms of various multivariate rank tests basing on ranks induced by depths (see \cite{Jure:2012,Liu:1995,StatPap}). A choice of a specific depth in this context is a statistical as well as merit issue, as the DDC offers a rich overview of depths in terms of a balance between effectiveness, robustness and computational complexivity (see \cite{LiuZuoWang2013,DyckMoz2016}) and thanks to a locality concept (see \cite{Pain:2013}) options as to "resolution" at which we compare phenomena.
Moreover, instead of using the propensity scores (see \cite{Rosenbaum_Rubin1983}) one may consider conducting a family of local Wilcoxon tests for a certain sequence of locality parameters $\beta_1,...,\beta_k$ (see \cite{StatPap}). In the case of a significant difference we expect that majority of the tests reject equality of distributions in the control and intervention group.
\subsection{Depth-based outlyingness and causality}
Formula (\ref{eq1}) gives us some causality inference in a rather simple setup, where $C$ or $\sim C$ occurs.
If the probability space is more complex, (\ref{eq1}) should be a base for some more complex inference.
We are interested in assessing whether the event $\textbf{C}=\{C$ \textit{is one of the central observations in the considered dataset with the locality parameter} $\beta$ $\}$ is a cause of $A$, where locality parameter $\beta$ is understood in the sense of \cite{Pain:2013}, and hence it is a parameter combining probability and outlyingness. For clarity, note that $\sim \textbf{C}=\{C$ \textit{is not one of the central observations in the considered dataset with the locality parameter} $\beta$ $\}$.
\\ Look at the random variable, which is the difference
\begin{equation}
E(A|\textbf{C})-E(A|\sim\textbf{C}).
\label{eq2}
\end{equation}
Realization of the above random variable is a function.
If
$$\mu \{x: E(A(x)|\textbf{C})-E(A(x)|\sim\textbf{C})\}=\mu(D)$$
then $C$ is a cause of $A$, where $\mu(D)$ is a Lebesgue measure of the domain $D$ of the random function $A$.
\\ We can choose a level $\beta$, e.g., it can be equal to $99\%$, $98\%$ or $95\%$.
It seems reasonable to treat the quantity
$$\mu \{x: E(A(x)|\textbf{C})-E(A(x)|\sim\textbf{C})\}=\beta\cdot \mu(D)$$
as a measure of strength of causal relationship restricted to majority of objects of level $\beta$.
On a theoretical level we use a notion of conditional expected value, which is often quite difficult to calculate and estimate for functional objects (see \cite{Bosq}). As robustness stands in the center of our considerations, we propose to use a difference between sample functional medians as estimator of the above quantity.
\\ DDC offers robust measures of multivariate location and scatter, robust regression as well as robust goodness of fit, prediction error measures, and hence it provides natural statistical tools of causal inference.
\\ Let $\mathbf{Y}=\{Y_1,...,Y_k\}$ denote k-dimensional vector of our interest. The DDC enables, among others, to consider the following causal reasoning schemes:
\begin{enumerate}
\item{Assessing the difference $\mathbf{Y(E)}-\mathbf{Y(C)}$ using depths (see (\ref{eq1})).}
\item{For two samples of multivariate or functional objects $\mathbf{Y^n(E)}$ and $\mathbf{Y^m(C)}$ consider a difference between two depth induced sample medians \\ $MED[\mathbf{Y^n(E)}]-MED[\mathbf{Y^m(C)}]$.
\\ One may expect, that estimated distribution of a difference between two depth induced medians should be informative in a context of causal inference.}
\item{For two multivariate or functional "regression samples" $\mathbf{Z^n(E)}$ and $\mathbf{Z^m(C)}$ consider distribution of a difference between two vectors of regression parameters $\Theta$ estimated via depth based procedure, e.g., using depth trimmed samples we would like to estimate the distribution $\Theta[\mathbf{Y^n(E)}]-\Theta[\mathbf{Y^m(C)}]$. The distribution should inform us about details of the treatment effect. }
\item{Depths enable for comparisons of control and treatment groups on sets $C(\beta_i)\backslash C(\beta_j)$, where $C(\beta_i)\backslash C(\beta_j)$ denotes set subtraction of central regions $C(\beta_i),C(\beta_j)$, and $\beta_i,\beta_j$ ($\beta_i>\beta_j$) denote both level of centrality and locality levels (i.e., central regions covering the smallest depth region with probability equal or larger than $\beta$ in the sense of \cite{Pain}), what can be interpreted as a sort of a comparison on levels appealing to the comparison using propensity scores of \cite{Rosenbaum_Rubin1983}.}
\end{enumerate}
In order to effectively use the above approaches in the causal inference we need operationally feasible theory for the listed tools. Unfortunately, with several exceptions depth based inference procedures are conceptually more demanding than classical ones and need asymptotic or re-sampling machinery. The issue is especially evident in the case of a theory of the DDC tools dedicated for functional data (see \cite{Bongiorno1,Bongiorno2}).
\subsection{A framework for causality analysis using functional and multivariate depths}
Without doubts our perception of an economic phenomenon often relates to an evaluation of properties of a function of a certain continuum. One may consider probability density function of random variable describing an income of a household, one may consider GDP per capita trajectory of a country during a decade, day and night number of visits of Internet users in the Internet service, or a behaviour of an investor optimism indicator within a month. Reducing the whole function to a certain set of scalars (e.g., mean, variance) very often implies a significant loss of valuable information on the phenomenon and in a consequence may lead to inappropriate perception of the phenomenon. A "shape" of the consumer price index (CPI) during a month may better express an investor optimism during the considered period as a specific sequence of peaks and valleys in CPI trajectory may denote sequence of an activity bursts and consumer hesitations, hence "a spectrum of moods" called optimism. Considering economic phenomena as functions is natural and enables us to take into account more information than in “classical scalar approach”. One may associate values of economic aggregates with shapes and other properties of other functional aggregates (e.g. yield curves, Lorenz curves, fertility curves, life expectancy curves etc.).
\subsection{Proposal}
\label{Proposal}
We have $V$ objects, for which characteristics $\{S^v(t)\}_{v=1,...,V}$ are given for $t\in (t_0, t_1)$, and thus are treated as functional objects. Moreover, a multidimensional vector representing treatment effect for each object is given, namely $A^v\in \mathbf{R}^l$.
Centrality of an object $v_0$ is expressed in terms of value of empirical functional depth for $S^{v_0}(t)$ among $\{S^v(t)\}_{v=1,...,V}$.
Then we divide original $V$ objects into two groups according to higher ($v\in F$), or lower ($v \in C$) value of calculated functional depth.
Subsequently, rank is calculated for each vector $A^v$ with respect to a chosen multidimensional depth.
In the last step distribution of ranks for both groups, i.e. $A^v$ where $v\in F$ or $v \in C$, is compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum test.
This centrality-oriented causality is a modification of Rubin causality concept, in this sense that it enables to use a DDC and its tools to define factuals and counterfactuals.
\vskip 2mm Note that similarly we are able to define an outlyingness-oriented causality. Namely we divide original $V$ objects into two groups. The first group ($v\in F$) consist of observations with low value of calculated functional depth, which at the same time are frequently much above (or below) a functional median. The second group ($v \in C$) consist of the remaining observations, or some chosen subset of them.
\vskip 2mm Note also that it seems reasonable to fix outlyingness parameter defining groups $C$ and $F$ so that the number of observations in group $C$ is significantly smaller than the number of observations in group $F$. The outlyingness parameter should depend on the considered depth.
\section{Empirical application}
Main aim of a below example is to underline certain difficulties appearing in real applications of DDC based procedures used in robust causal inference as to phenomena responsible for a development of a country consisted of smaller units, e.g., voivodships or counties. These issues are of prime importance for designing various government programs and evaluating their effects. Generally speaking, conditions we face in practice of economic reasoning significantly depart from the conditions postulated in a theory of causal inference (see \cite{Rubin2005,Dawid:2000}).
\\ We consider an issue of an impact of selected agricultural subsidies granted to farmers in Polish voivodships within European Union (EU) funds (we have used data on amount of direct payment for Campaign 2007-2017 in single area payment scheme; subsidies involved single area payment, subsidies to legumes, subsidies to tomatoes, subsidies to soft fruits)
on a digital development of Poland in a period of 2012-2019 (measured via selected indicators of information society, innovation activity and a degree of dissemination of a telecommunication net). Methods used within our considerations may easily be broaden to similar issues.
In other words, in order to show an application of the proposed approach we have considered a problem of evaluation of an impact of EU agricultural subsidies (an indirect intervention/treatment) for a certain kind of regional development of a country namely digital development of Poland.\\
In "the closest to ideal" circumstances we could observe a representative random sample drawn from all the smallest sub-regions of Poland (i.e., 2477 communities) with respect to an objective measure of digital development at time $t_0$, when a subsidy is taken (in a situation of
being exposed to a treatment) and at certain time $t_1>t_0$, and could observe the same collection of communities with respect to the same measure of digital development at moments of time
$t_0, t_1$ when subsidies are not taken (control group). \vskip1mm
In practice, however, basing on Statistics Poland (see \cite{gus}) services we dispose a pair of short already realized time series of treatment variables and response variables concerning bigger sub-regions of higher administrative level of a country (i.e., 16 Polish voivodships).
In a general spirit of an approach of \cite{GillRobins} we decided to propose the following robust causal inference scheme. For several organizational and ethical reasons our degree of control over the "experiment" is very low. As very often in the practice of economic studies we are given data, and then we are looking for an appropriate model for them. In the causal inference we additionally have to take into account a discrimination between a factual (what happens due to a treatment) and the counterfactual (what would have happen if an alternative treatment had been taken) distribution of a variable expressing an effect of a treatment. One of main merit tasks in this context is to indicate reliable alternative for the treatment.
\\ In the considered empirical example another problems appear. Firstly, number of objects is relatively small. Secondly, number of observations per unit is very small. Namely, we are given a data consisting of $4$ types of agricultural subsidies obtained by each of $16$ Polish voivodships (regions) every year in a period of $2012$ to $2019$ and we consider $6$ available variables representing the digital development of a region.
\vskip1mm
According to the Proposal described in subsection \ref{Proposal}, in the first step we define a certain synthetic variable $S^v=h(S^v_1,...,S^v_{4})$ representing all $4$ types of agricultural subsidies and calculate its value for each voivodship, where $h$ in our example is a sum of all subsidies divided by a population in the year. We treat $S^v$ as a functional object, and hence we have $16$ trajectories of the functional variable $S$. Furthermore, for each voivodship $v=1,..,16$ we have a vector variable $A^{v}=(A_1,...,A_6)$, where $A_i\in \mathbf{R}$, where coordinates of the vector represent measures of certain aspects of digital development of the voivodship. Note that components of the aggregate $A^{v}$ are incomparable. In our case they are expenses expressed in currency (Polish Zloty, PLN), number of some goods or fraction of companies fulfilling certain conditions connected with digital development. In this context an application of multidimensional rank tests seems to be a reasonable solution. Following our general conceptual scheme we replace the multidimensional observations for each voivodship by their ranks induced by multivariate depth (in the example we have used the projection depth calculated via exact algorithm implemented in \cite{ProjMatlab2015}).
\\ In the second step we calculate functional depth for $S^v$, $v=1,...,16$. We use modified band depth, Fraiman-Muniz depth and extremal depth for the purpose.
As we consider a centrality-oriented causality scheme, we divide voivodships into two groups (subsets of indices $F,C$) according to higher ($v\in F$) and lower ($v \in C$) value of calculated functional depth. In our simulation study regarding properties of the extremal depth we use a depth value of $\alpha=0.5$ to separate sets $C$ and $F$.
\\ In the third step we calculate multivariate Wilcoxon sum rank statistic for the two samples $A^v$, $v\in F$ or $v \in C$.
\\ Note, that for calculating functional empirical depth we need sufficiently larger number of observation per unit (voivodship) than number of units (voivodships). This requirement is sometimes difficult to fulfill, so we need to apply a certain "replication of data" strategy. Without the strategy in our empirical example we cannot use the extremal depth, which possess relevant statistical properties with regard to coverage properties of depth-induced central regions.
\vskip1mm
Due to a fact, that in the considered empirical example increasing linear trends for each voivodsip are quite evident, we decided to substitute the original data-set by simulated artificial data-set consisting of significantly more observations per voivodship than the original data by generating observations from a mechanism, which does not change the qualitative properties of the whole sample. In our example for this reason we have used a simple linear model with parameters estimated via deepest regression method (see \cite{Hubert:1999}) and error characteristics estimated from original data with assumption of normality (see Figure \ref{fig:1}).
\\ Figure \ref{fig:1} presents an original sequence of consolidated subsidies in a period of 2012-2018 (a data for 2015 is missing in Statistics Poland database) for Opolskie voivodship (left panel) and a simulated sequence of 500 observations (right panel) from a model "imitating" the left panel data and based on a simple linear trend estimated via the deepest regression method and error characteristics estimated from the original data with normality assumption.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{rep_deep.png}
\caption{Original and replicated data for Opolskie voivodship.}
\label{fig:1}
\end{figure*}
In order to treat the treatment as a cause of the aggregate $A$ we have to show that a conditional distribution of $A$ under condition of the factual subsidies differs from a conditional distribution of $A$ under certain alternative treatment plan -- an alternative sequence of subsidies. A fundamental difficulty here is that we have only an access to realized database provided by the Statistics Poland (https://stat.gov.pl/ \cite{gus}) and we obviously do not observe counter factual distribution, i.e., distribution of $A$ under different sequence of subsidies.
\vskip 1mm
In order to overcome this difficulty and taking into account a postulate stating that causal inference should possess a certain stability property we propose to compare a distribution of the aggregate $A$ estimated basing on voivodships with indices $v\in F$, which are central (i.e., typical) in terms of subsidies trajectory with a distribution of the aggregate $A$ estimated basing on voivodships with indices $v\in C$, which are peripheral in terms of subsidies trajectory. The first distribution is treated as factual whereas the second distribution as counteractual.
\\ Note that we have a functional dataset as an input set, and a multivariate dataset as an output set. We have to adapt a causal inference scheme to these datasets.
The proposed approach is arguable, but note that we assume that there exists a feasible digital development path for the considered homogeneous units, i.e., the regional digital development path can be achieved in the real world.
Moreover, it is virtually impossible to repeat the experiment. That is why we treat the typical or central observations as factual and atypical observations as counterfactual.
In other words, we compare the digital development aggregate $A$ conditioned on a treatment identified with subsidies trajectories with high degree of centrality with aggregate $A$ conditioned on subsidies trajectories with a low degree of centrality.
\\ In practice, first we divide voivodships with respect to specified levels of centrality, i.e., probability coverage, and then we estimate appropriate conditional distributions of aggregate $A$ using certain kind of bootstrap method.
\\ As we use random data replication procedure, we propose to repeat the second step 1000 times for 1000 artificially replicated data-sets and infer on differences between factual and counterfactual distributions basing on estimated distribution of multivariate Wilcoxon sum rank test applied to groups of objects indicated in the second step of the procedure (see \cite{StatPap}).
For measuring the centrality of the subsidies trajectory we use a modified band depth (MBD, \cite{LopezRomo}), Fraiman-Muniz depth (FM, \cite{Fraiman2001}) and extremal depth (ED, \cite{Nair}).
\\ In the considered empirical example we have repeated 100 times a whole sequence of of the second and the third steps repeated 1000 times and we have obtained averages of 1000 average values of the multivariate Wilcoxon sum rank statistic equal to $37.72(3.46)$ when ED has been used, $33.23(0.084)$ when FM has been used and $24.212(0.0734)$ when MBD has been used, where in brackets standard deviations of the 100 means are given (see Table 1, the first row).
\\ Additionally, in order to strengthen conclusions drawn from our causal inference procedure, we repeated 1000 times an experiment, in which we have compared two independent random samples $A^j$ and $A^k$, where $j$ is the same as number of observations in $F$ and $k$ is the same as number of observations in $C$ and we have obtained an average value of the multivariate Wilcoxon sum rank statistic equal to $32.281(5.960)$ when ED has been used, $31.761(6.69)$ when FM has been used and $29.2692(6.49)$ when MBD has been used (see Table \ref{tab2}, the second row). A significant difference between average Wilcoxon sum rank statistic for samples representing factual and counterfactual distributions chosen via the proposed functional outlyingness criterion and those chosen at random justifies a validity of the proposal.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c||c|c|c}\hline
Type of samples& MBD &FM&ED\\\hline
Sample defined by outlyingness& 24.212(0.0734)&33.23(0.084) & 37.72(3.46)\\
Sample defined at random& 29.2692(6.49)&31.761(6.69) &32.281(5.960)
\end{tabular}
\caption{Comparison of average values (and standard deviations in brackets) of the multivariate Wilcoxon sum rank statistic for factuals and counterfactuals defined by outlyingness (row 1) and factuals and counterfactuals defined completely at random (row 2).}
\label{tab2}
\end{table}
\\ To sum up, MBD behaves better than ED and FM in this sense that it allows for better discrimination between factual and counterfactual distribution, and hence MBD gives the strongest arguments that EU subsidies influence the digital developement of Poland.
\\ In Table \ref{tab1} a comparison of depth values for 16 Polish voivodships is presented. No replication strategy has been applied in MBD and FM case, so only the original data from Statistics Poland has been used. As previously indicated and implicitly stated in \cite{Nair}, in ED case we had to replicate the original data. We conclude therefore from our studies, that agricultural subsidies may be treated as one of causes of digital development in the regions (voivodships) of Poland.
\\ Figure \ref{fig:2} presents an administrative map of Poland with colors representing an empirical extremal depth of the consolidated subsidies trajectory of the voivodship. The figure has been created using ggplot2 and extdepth R packages (see \cite{R,ggplot2,extdepth}).
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.87\textwidth]{TOR_1.png}
\caption{Typicality of a trajectory of EU subsidies of Polish voivodships with respect to the extremal depth in 2012-2019.}
\label{fig:2}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.87\textwidth]{TOR_2.png}
\caption{Typicality of a trajectory of EU subsidies of Polish voivodships with respect to the FM depth in 2012-2019.}
\label{fig:3}
\end{figure*}
We would like to stress, that we have considered several data replication algorithms including polynomial and constrained polynomial regressions.\\
Although the maximal depth object changed from repetition to repetition, allocations of voivodships within groups $F$ and $C$ exhibited a high level of stability.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c||c|c|c}\hline
Voivodship& MBD &FM&ED\\\hline
Dolno\'sl\k{a}skie& 0.425&0.5249 & 0.8125\\
Kujawsko-Pomorskie& 0.5&0.4986 &0.375\\
Lubelskie & 0.341(6)&0.2937 &0.25 \\
Lubuskie&0.591(6)&0.9702&0.625\\
\L \'odzkie &0.575&0.9320&0.875\\
Ma\l opolskie&0.241(6)&0.2967&0.3125\\
Mazowieckie&0.541(6)&0.7181&1\\
Opolskie&0.475&0.4971&0.5\\
Podkarpackie&0.341(6)&0.4179&0.6875\\
Podlaskie&0.125&0.1844&0.125\\
Pomorskie&0.491(6)&0.5410&0.9375\\
\'Sla\k{s}kie&0.125&0.2458&0.0625\\
\'Swi\k{e}tokrzyskie&0.591(6)&0.9702&0.75\\
Warmi\'nsko-Mazurskie&0.241(6)&0.2796&0.1875\\
Wielkopolskie&0.48(3)&0.4994&0.5625\\
Zachodniopomorskie&0.575&0.5480&0.4375
\end{tabular}
\caption{\label{tab:widgets} Comparison of depth values for 16 Polish voivodships.}
\label{tab1}
\end{table}
\section{Summary and conclusions}
Causal inference is commonly treated as an essence of a scientific comprehension of empirical reality. This kind of reasoning has many variants supported by different schools of economic thought. Although the GNC concept seems to be the most popular in the economics, we have focused our attention on less popular in economics but very prominent in other sciences concept proposed by Donald Rubin and modified it in order to obtain a centrality-oriented causality reasoning scheme. As, generally speaking, in economics it is very difficult to conduct a truly randomized experiment postulated by theory of Rubin, we have proposed a certain kind of implementation of his theory, which uses "a trick" based on an application of a depth for functional data and is possible to apply in practice.
\\ In other words we have proposed a novel DDC based method of indicating factual and counterfactual distributions in causal inference scheme of D. Rubin. This seemingly very simple "trick" is of a prime importance in a context of difficulties we face in real empirical causal analysis based on official statistics. \\
We have applied the centrality-oriented causality scheme to study an impact of agricultural subsidies, which may be treated as an indirect intervention or treatment, on a degree of digital development in the regions of Poland in a period of 2012-2019. We have obtained arguments for an existence of causal relation between these economic phenomena. The proposed scheme may be easily generalized and adjusted to other studies. Having in a disposal richer datasets one can obtain stronger conclusions than these we have obtained.\\
Thus we have shown, that the DDC offers valuable possibilities for conducting robust causal inference in the economics, especially in multivariate and functional cases. The DDC is not a remedy for solving fundamental issues of causal inference of how to perform causal inference basing on already existing datasets. In order to treat procedures of the DDC as real alternatives to classical multivariate of functional methods further theoretical studies on sample properties of the procedures are required.
\\ As a result of our studies, we conclude that MBD and FM functional depths are more applicatively useful than ED in a context of analyzing relatively small and sparse empirical data-sets. As ED has other desired statistical properties, further studies on its modifications for relatively small data-sets are required. Original data-set and simple R code, which have been used in the paper are available upon request.
\vskip1mm
\textbf{Acknowledgements} Daniel Kosiorowski thanks for financial support from the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education within “Regional Initiative of Excellence” Programme for 2019-2022. Project no.: 021/RID/2018/19. Total financing: 11 897 131,40 PLN.", Daniel Kosiorowski thanks for the support related to CUE grant for the research resources preservation 2019.\\ Jerzy P. Rydlewski research has been partially supported by the AGH UST local grant no. 16.16.420.054.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{S_intro}
This paper introduces and explores a largely new invariant of compact
metric spaces: the maximum entropy. Intuitively, this measures how much room
a probability distribution on the space has available to spread out.
Maximum entropy has several claims to importance. First, it is the maximal
value of not just \emph{one} measure of entropy, but an \emph{uncountable
infinity} of them. It is a theorem, proved here, that these entropy
measures all have the same maximum.
Second, the entropies concerned are already established in ecology, where
their exponentials are used as measures of biological
diversity~\cite{LeinsterMeasuring2012}. Indeed, they have been applied to
ecological systems at all scales, from microbes~\cite{BCMV} and
plankton~\cite{JTYP} to fungi~\cite{VPDL}, plants~\cite{CMLT}, and large
mammals~\cite{BRBT}. Relative to other diversity measures, they have been
found to improve inferences about the diversity of natural
systems~\cite{VPDL}.
Third, the exponential of maximum entropy---called maximum
diversity---plays a similar conceptual role for metric spaces as
cardinality does for sets. In the special case of a finite space where all
distances are $\infty$, it is literally the cardinality, and in general, it
increases when the space is enlarged (either by adding new points or
increasing distances).
Fourth, unlike most geometric invariants, maximum entropy is `informative
under rescaling': the maximum entropy of a metric space $X$ does not
determine the maximum entropy of $tX$ for scale factors $t \neq 1$.
Maximum entropy therefore assigns to $X$ not just a single \emph{number},
but a \emph{function}, the maximum entropy of $tX$ as a function of $t$.
The asymptotics of this function turn out to determine the volume and
dimension of $X$---themselves geometric analogues of cardinality.
Finally, maximum diversity is in principle a known quantity in potential
theory, where it belongs to the family of Bessel capacities, although it
lies just outside the part of the family usually studied by potential
theorists (Remark~\ref{rmks:Dmax-euc}(\ref{rmk:Dmax-euc-cap}) below
and~\cite{Leinstermagnitude2017}, Proposition~4.22). This connection has
been exploited by Meckes to prove results on magnitude, a closely related
invariant of metric spaces (\cite{MeckesMagnitude2015}, Corollary~7.2).
These infinitely many entropies do not only attain the same maximum
\emph{value} on a given space $X$; better still, there is a single
\emph{probability distribution} that maximizes them all simultaneously.
Passing to the large-scale limit gives a canonical, scale-independent
probability measure on $X$. For example, if $X$ is isometric to a subset
of Euclidean space then this measure is normalized Lebesgue. It is a general
construction of a `uniform measure' on an abstract metric space.
\paragraph{Measuring diversity}
The backdrop for the theory is a compact Hausdorff topological space \(X\),
equipped with a way to measure the similarity between each pair of
points. This data is encoded as a \emph{similarity kernel}: a continuous
function \(K: X \times X \to [0, \infty)\) taking strictly positive values
on the diagonal. We call the pair \((X,K)\) a \emph{space with
similarities}.
In a metric space, we view points as similar if they are close together,
defining a similarity kernel by \(K(x,y) = e^{-d(x,y)}\). Of course,
other choices of kernel are possible, but this particular choice
proves to be a wise one (Example~\ref{eg:metric_1}). For simplicity, in
this introduction we focus on the case of metric spaces rather than fully
general spaces with similarity.
We would like to quantify the extent to which a probability distribution on
a metric space is spread out across the space, in a way that is sensitive
to distance. A thinly spread distribution will be said to have `high
diversity', or equivalently `high entropy'.
\begin{figure}
\setlength{\unitlength}{1mm}
\begin{picture}(120,25)
\cell{18}{5}{b}{\includegraphics[width=36mm]{newpotato_1}}
\cell{60}{5}{b}{\includegraphics[width=36mm]{newpotato_3}}
\cell{102}{5}{b}{\includegraphics[width=36mm]{newpotato_2}}
\cell{18}{0}{b}{(a)}
\cell{60}{0}{b}{(b)}
\cell{102}{0}{b}{(c)}
\end{picture}
\caption{Three probability measures on a subset of the plane. Dark regions
indicate high concentration of measure.}
\label{fig:distros}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:distros} depicts three distributions on the same space.
Distribution~\hard{(a)} is the least diverse, with most of its mass
concentrated in a small region. Distribution~\hard{(b)} is uniform, and
might therefore seem to be the most diverse or thinly spread distribution
possible. However, there is an argument that~\hard{(c)} is
more diverse. In moving from~\hard{(b)} to~\hard{(c)}, some of the mass
has been pushed out to the ends, so a pair of points chosen at random
according to distribution~\hard{(c)} may be more likely to be far apart
than when chosen according to~\hard{(b)}.
One can indeed define diversity in terms of the expected proximity between
a random pair of points. But that is just one of an infinite family of
ways to quantify diversity, each of which captures something different
about how a distribution is spread across the space.
To define that family of diversity measures, we first introduce the notion
of the \emph{typicality} of a point with respect to a distribution. Given a
compact metric space \(X\), a probability measure \(\mu\) on \(X\), and a
point \(x \in X\), we regard \(x\) as `typical' of \(\mu\) if a point
chosen at random according to \(\mu\) is usually near to \(x\). Formally,
define a function \(K\mu\) on $X$ by
\[
(K\mu)(x) = \int e^{-d(x,\cdot)} \d\mu.
\]
We call $(K\mu)(x)$ the typicality of $x$, and $1/(K\mu)(x)$ its
atypicality.
A distribution is widely spread across \(X\) if most points are distant
from most of the mass---that is, if the atypicality function \(1/K\mu\)
takes large values on most of \(X\). A reasonable way to quantify the
diversity of a probability measure \(\mu\), then, is as the average
atypicality of points in \(X\). Here the `average' need not be the
arithmetic mean, but could be a power mean of any order. Thus, we obtain
an infinite family \((D_q^K)_{q \in [-\infty, \infty]}\) of
diversities. Explicitly, for \(q \neq 1, \pm \infty\), we define the
diversity of order \(q\) of \(\mu\) to be
\[
D_q^K(\mu)
=
\left( \int \left( 1/K\mu \right)^{1-q} \d\mu \right)^{1/(1-q)},
\]
while at \(q=1\) and \(q = \pm \infty\) this expression takes its limiting
values. The entropy $H_q^K(\mu)$ of order $q$ is $\log D_q^K(\mu)$:
entropy is the logarithm of diversity.
\paragraph{Diversity and entropy}
Any finite set can be given the structure of a compact metric space by
taking all distances between distinct points to be $\infty$. The
similarity kernel $K = e^{-d(\cdot, \cdot)}$ is then the Kronecker delta
$\delta$. In this trivial case, the entropy $H_q^\delta$ is precisely the
R\'enyi entropy of order $q$, well-known in information theory. In
particular, $H_1^\delta$ is Shannon entropy.
Entropy is an important quantitative and conceptual tool in many fields,
including in mathematical ecology, where the exponentials $D_q^\delta$ of
the R\'enyi entropies are known as the Hill numbers and used as measures of
biological diversity~\cite{HillDiversity1973}. In this application, $X$ is
the finite set of species in some ecological community, and $\mu$ encodes
their relative abundances.
However, the Hill numbers fail to reflect a fundamental intuition about
diversity: all else being equal, a biological community is regarded as more
diverse when the species are very different than when they are very
similar. To repair this deficiency, one can equip the set of species in an
ecological community with a kernel (matrix) \(K\) recording their pairwise
similarities. The choice \(K = \delta\) represents the crude assumption
that each species is completely dissimilar to each other species. Thus,
for arbitrary $K$, the diversities $D_q^K$ are generalised Hill numbers,
sensitive to species similarity~\cite{LeinsterMeasuring2012}. Here we
generalise further, from a finite set $X$ to any compact Hausdorff space.
\paragraph{The maximisation theorem}
Crucially, when comparing the diversity of distributions, different values
of the parameter \(q\) lead to different judgements. That is, given a
collection \(M\) of probability measures on a metric space and given
distinct $q, q' \in [0, \infty]$, the diversities \(D_q^K\) and
\(D_{q'}^K\) generally give different orderings to the elements of
\(M\). Examples in the ecological setting can be found in Section~5
of~\cite{LeinsterMeasuring2012}.
The surprise of our main theorem (Theorem~\ref{thm:main}) is that when it
comes to \emph{maximising} diversity, there is consensus: there is
guaranteed to exist some probability measure \(\mu\) on our space
that maximises \(D_q^K(\mu)\) for every nonnegative \(q\) at
once. Moreover, the diversity of order $q$ of a maximising distribution is
the same for all $q \in [0, \infty]$. Thus, one can speak unambiguously of
the maximum diversity of a compact metric space \(X\)---defined to be
\[
\Dmx{X} = \sup_{\mu} D_q^K(\mu)
\]
for any \(q \in [0,\infty]\)---knowing that there exists a probability
distribution attaining this supremum for all orders $q$.
In the case of a metric space, Theorem~\ref{thm:main} states the
following.
\begin{theorem*}
Let \(X\) be a nonempty compact metric space.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item
There exists a probability measure \(\mu\) on $X$ that maximises
\(D_q^K(\mu)\) for all \(q \in [0, \infty]\) simultaneously.
\item
The maximum diversity $\sup_{\mu} D_q^K(\mu)$ is independent of
\(q \in [0, \infty]\).
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem*}
This theorem extends to compact spaces a result that was established for
finite spaces in~\cite{LeinsterMaximizing2016}. (The maximising measure on
a finite metric space is not usually uniform, unless, for instance, the
space is homogeneous.) While the proof of the result for compact spaces
follows broadly the same strategy as in the finite case, substantial
analytic issues arise.
\paragraph{Geometric connections}
The maximum diversity theorem has geometric significance, linking diversity
measures to fundamental invariants in classical convex geometry and
geometric measure theory.
More specifically, Corollary~\ref{cor:comp} of our main theorem connects
maximum diversity with another, more extensively studied invariant of a
metric space: its magnitude. First introduced as a generalised Euler
characteristic for enriched categories \cite{LeinsterEuler2008,
Leinstermagnitude2013}, magnitude specialises to metric spaces by way of
Lawvere's observation that metric spaces are enriched
categories~\cite{LawvereMetric1973}. The magnitude \(|X| \in \bb{R}\) of a
metric space \(X\) captures a rich variety of classical geometric data,
including some curvature measures of Riemannian manifolds and intrinsic
volumes in \(\ell_1^n\) and Euclidean space. The definition of magnitude
and a few of its basic properties are given in Sections~\ref{S_magnitude}
and~\ref{S_metric} below; \cite{Leinstermagnitude2017} provides a full
survey.
We show that the maximum diversity of a compact space is equal to the
magnitude of a certain subset: the support of any maximising measure
(Sections~\ref{S_prep_lemmas} and~\ref{S_main}). We then use this fact, and
known facts about magnitude, to establish examples of maximum
diversity for metric spaces (Section~\ref{S_metric}).
Many results on magnitude are asymptotic, in the following sense. Given a
space \(X\) with metric \(d\), and a positive real number \(t\), define the
scaled metric space \(tX\) to be the set \(X\) equipped with the metric \(t
\cdot d\). It has proved fruitful to consider, for a fixed metric space
\(X\), the entire family of spaces \((tX)_{t > 0}\) and the
(partially-defined) magnitude function \(t \mapsto |tX|\). For instance, in
\cite{Barcelomagnitudes2018}, Barcel\'o and Carbery showed that the volume
of a compact subset of $\bb{R}^n$ can be recovered as the leading term in the
asymptotic expansion of its magnitude function, while in
\cite{Gimperleinmagnitude2017}, Gimperlein and Goffeng showed (subject to
technical conditions) that lower order terms capture surface area and the
integral of mean curvature.
Given this, and given the relationship between magnitude and maximum
diversity, it is natural to consider the function \(t \mapsto
\Dmx{tX}\). Indeed, the asymptotic properties of maximum diversity have
already been shown to be of geometric interest. In
\cite{MeckesMagnitude2015}, Meckes defined the maximum diversity of a
compact metric space to be the maximum value of its diversity of order~2, and
used this definition---now vindicated by our main theorem---to prove the
following relationship between maximum diversity and Minkowski dimension:
\begin{thm}[Meckes~\cite{MeckesMagnitude2015}, Theorem~7.1]
\label{thm:minkowski}
For a compact metric space $X$,
\[
\lim_{t \to \infty} \frac{\log \Dmx{tX}}{\log t}
=
\dim_{\mathrm{Mink}}(X),
\]
with the left-hand side defined if and only if the right-hand side is
defined.
\end{thm}
That is, the Minkowski dimension of $X$ is the growth rate of $\Dmx{tX}$
for large $t$. Proposition~\ref{prop:preufm-euc} below is a companion
result for the volume of sets $X \subseteq \bb{R}^n$:
\[
\lim_{t \to \infty} \frac{\Dmx{tX}}{t^n}
\propto
\textrm{Vol}(X).
\]
Thus, maximum diversity determines dimension and volume.
\paragraph{Entropy and uniform measure}
The maximum diversity theorem implies that every compact metric space $X$
admits a probability measure maximising the entropies of all orders $q$
simultaneously. Statisticians have long recognised that maximum entropy
distributions are special. However, the maximum entropy measure on $X$ is
not scale-invariant: if we multiply all distances in $X$ by a constant
factor $t$, the maximising measure changes.
In Section~\ref{S_uniform} we propose a canonical, scale-invariant, choice
of probability measure on a given metric space (subject to conditions), and
call it the \emph{uniform measure}. It is the limit as $t \to \infty$ of
the maximum entropy measure on $tX$. We show that in several familiar
cases, this definition captures the intuitive notion of the `obvious'
probability distribution on a space.
\paragraph*{Other notions of entropy}
There is a vast literature on entropy in geometric contexts. Here we just
make some brief comments to distinguish entropy in our sense from entropy
in other senses.
Our entropy is a real invariant of a metric space equipped with a
probability measure. In contrast, the classical Kolmogorov--Sinai metric
entropy and the related topological entropy of Adler, Bowen, et al.\ are
real invariants of a transformation or flow on a space. Closer in spirit
is the Kolmogorov $\epsilon$-entropy, which is essentially a simple special
case of our maximum entropy (\cite{LeinsterMaximizing2016},
Section~9). Closer still is differential entropy, which is a real invariant
of a probability density function on a measure space; but unlike our
entropy, it is not defined for an arbitrary probability measure on a metric
space.
\paragraph*{Structure of the paper}
In Section \ref{S_background} we collect various topological and analytic
facts that will be used later. Most of the lemmas in this section
are standard, and the reader may prefer to begin at Section
\ref{S_typicality}.
Sections \ref{S_typicality}, \ref{S_diversity} and \ref{S_magnitude}
introduce our main objects of study---typicality functions, diversity and
entropy, and magnitude---and establish their key properties. In Section
\ref{S_prep_lemmas} we prove several lemmas and a proposition which form
the scaffolding for the main theorem, proved in Section \ref{S_main}. The
final two sections of the paper specialise from general spaces with
similarities to metric spaces: Section \ref{S_metric} investigates the
relationship between maximum diversity and magnitude, and in Section
\ref{S_uniform} we discuss our definition of the uniform measure on a
compact metric space. A number of open questions are outlined in Section
\ref{S_conjectures}.
\paragraph*{Conventions}
Throughout, a \demph{measure} on a topological space means a Radon
measure. All measures are positive by default. A function
\(f: \bb{R} \to \bb{R}\) is \demph{increasing} if \(f(y) \leq f(x)\) for
all \(y \leq x\), and
\demph{decreasing}
similarly.
\paragraph*{Acknowledgements}
We thank Mark Meckes for many useful conversations, and especially for
allowing us to include Proposition~\ref{prop:euc-unique}, which is due to
him. Thanks also to Christina Cobbold for helpful suggestions. TL was
partially supported by a Leverhulme Research Fellowship
(RF-2019-519$\backslash$9).
\section{Topological and analytic preliminaries}
\label{S_background}
\paragraph*{Spaces of functions}
For topological spaces $X$ and $Y$, let \(\mathbf{Top}(X,Y)\) denote the set of
continuous maps from $X$ to $Y$.
When \(X\) is compact and \(Y\) is a metric space, the compact-open
topology and the topology of uniform convergence on \(\mathbf{Top}(X,Y)\)
coincide. (This follows, for example, from Theorems~46.7 and~46.8 in
\cite{MunkresTopology2000}.) We will be exclusively concerned with cases
where $X$ is compact and $Y$ is metric, and we will always understand
$\mathbf{Top}(X, Y)$ to be equipped with this topology. In particular, $C(X) =
\mathbf{Top}(X, \bb{R})$ has the topology induced by the uniform norm
$\|\cdot\|_\infty$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:uniform_expbl}
Let \(X\) be any topological space, \(Y\) a compact Hausdorff space, and
\(Z\) a metric space. A map \(f: X \times Y \to Z\) is continuous if and
only if the map \(\overline{f}: X \to \mathbf{Top}(Y,Z)\) given by
\(\overline{f}(x)(y) = f(x,y)\) is continuous.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
This follows from the standard properties of the compact-open topology
(\cite{BorceuxHandbook1994a}, Proposition~7.1.5).
\end{proof}
We will make repeated use of the following elementary fact.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:uniform_functorial}
Let \(X\) be a compact topological space, \(Y\) and \(Y'\) metric spaces,
and \(\phi: Y \to Y'\) a continuous function. Then the induced map
\[
\phi \circ - : \mathbf{Top}(X, Y) \to \mathbf{Top}(X, Y')
\]
is continuous.
\end{lem}
\paragraph*{Spaces of measures}
\glob{From now until Definition \ref{def_powermean}, let $X$ denote a
compact Hausdorff space.} Equip the vector space $C(X)$ with the norm
$\|\cdot\|_\infty$. The Riesz representation theorem identifies its
topological dual $C(X)^*$ with the space $M(X)$ of finite signed measures
on \(X\). The dual norm on $M(X)$ is the total variation norm, $\|\mu\| =
|\mu|(X)$, and the dual pairing is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:pairing}
\begin{array}{cccc}
\langle -, - \rangle: &C(X) \times M(X) &\to &\bb{R}, \\
&(f, \mu) &\mapsto&\int_X f \d\mu.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
We will always understand $M(X)$ and its subsets to be equipped with the
weak* topology. Denote by $P(X)$ the set of probability measures on $X$,
and by $P_\leq(X)$ the set of measures $\mu$ such that $\mu(X) \leq 1$. By
the Banach--Alaoglu theorem, $P(X)$ and $P_\leq(X)$ are compact Hausdorff.
The pairing map~\eqref{eq:pairing} is not in general continuous. However:
\begin{lem}\label{lem:pairing_cts}
Let \(Q\) be a closed bounded subset of \(M(X)\). Then:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item
\label{part:pairing_cts_1}
the assignment \(f \mapsto \langle
f, - \rangle\) defines a continuous map \(C(X) \to C(Q)\);
\item
\label{part:pairing_cts_2}
the restricted pairing map \(\langle -, - \rangle: C(X) \times Q
\to \bb{R}\) is continuous.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
For (\ref{part:pairing_cts_1}), first note that for each \(f \in C(X)\),
the map \(\langle f, - \rangle : Q \to \bb{R}\) is continuous, by definition of
the weak* topology. To show that the resulting map \(C(X) \to C(Q)\) is
continuous, let \(f,g \in C(X)\). Then
\[
\|\langle f, - \rangle - \langle g, - \rangle \|_\infty
=
\sup_{\mu \in Q} |\langle f - g, \mu \rangle|
\leq
\|f-g\|_\infty \sup_{\mu \in Q} \|\mu\|,
\]
and \(\sup_{\mu \in Q} \|\mu\|\) is finite as \(Q\) is bounded.
Part (\ref{part:pairing_cts_2}) follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:uniform_expbl},
since \(Q\) is compact (by the Banach--Alaoglu theorem) and Hausdorff.
\end{proof}
\paragraph*{Supports}
The \demph{support} of a function \(f: X \to [0, \infty)\) is $\mathrm{supp} \, f =
f^{-1}(0, \infty)$. Note that we use this set rather than its closure.
Every measure $\mu$ on $X$ has a \demph{support} $\mathrm{supp} \, \mu$, which is the
smallest closed set satisfying \(\mu(X \setminus \mathrm{supp} \, \mu) = 0\). (Recall
our convention that `measure' means `positive Radon measure', and see, for
instance, Chapter~III, \S2, No.~2 of~\cite{BourbakiIntegration1965}.) It
is characterised by
\[
\mathrm{supp} \, \mu
=
\{x \in X \, : \,
\mu(U) > 0 \text{ for all open neighbourhoods \(U\) of \(x\)}\},
\]
and has the property that $\int_X f \d\mu = \int_{\mathrm{supp} \, \mu} f \d\mu $ for
all $f \in L^1(X, \mu)$.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:disjoint_supps}
Let \(\mu\) be a measure on \(X\),and let \(f: X \to [0,\infty)\) be a
continuous function. Then
$
\mathrm{supp} \, f \cap \mathrm{supp} \, \mu \neq \emptyset
\iff
\int_X f \d\mu > 0.
$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The forwards implication is Proposition~9 in Chapter~III, \S2, No.~3
of~\cite{BourbakiIntegration1965}, and the backwards implication is trivial.
\end{proof}
\paragraph*{Approximations to the identity}
Later, we will want to approximate Dirac measures $\delta_x$ by probability
measures that are absolutely continuous with respect to some fixed measure
$\mu$. We will use:
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:approximate_delta}
Let \(\mu\) be a measure on \(X\) and \(x \in \mathrm{supp} \, \mu\). For each
equicontinuous set of functions \(E \subseteq C(\mathrm{supp} \, \mu)\) and each
\(\epsilon > 0\), there exists a nonnegative function \(u \in C(X)\) such
that \(u\mu\) is a probability measure and for all \(f \in E\),
\[
\left| \int_X f \d(u\mu) - f(x) \right| \leq \epsilon.
\]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
By equicontinuity, we can choose a subset \(U \subseteq \mathrm{supp} \, \mu\),
containing \(x\) and open in \(\mathrm{supp} \, \mu\), such that \(|f(y) - f(x)| \leq
\epsilon\) for all \(y \in U\) and \(f \in E\).
By Urysohn's lemma, we can choose a nonnegative function \(u \in C(\mathrm{supp} \,
\mu)\) such that \(\mathrm{supp} \, u \subseteq U\) and \(u(x) > 0\). Then
\(\int_{\mathrm{supp} \, \mu} u \d\mu > 0\), so by rescaling we can arrange that
\(\int_{\mathrm{supp} \, \mu} u \d\mu = 1\).
By Tietze's theorem, \(u\) can be extended to a nonnegative
continuous function on \(X\), and then \(u\mu\) is a probability measure on
\(X\). Moreover, for all \(f \in E\),
\[
\left| \int_X f \d(u \mu) - f(x) \right|
=
\left| \int_U \bigl(f(y) - f(x)\bigr) u(y) \d\mu(y) \right|
\leq
\epsilon \int_U u(y) \d\mu(y)
=
\epsilon,
\]
as required.
\end{proof}
We will also want to approximate any probability measure on $\bb{R}^n$
by measures that are absolutely continuous with respect to Lebesgue measure
$\lambda$. We do this in the following standard way. Let $G \in
L^1(\bb{R}^n)$ with $\int G = 1$. Define functions $(G_t)_{t > 0}$ on $\bb{R}^n$
by $G_t(x) = t^n G(tx)$. Then $G_t \in L^1(\bb{R}^n)$ and $\int G_t = 1$ for
every $t$. The convolution $G_t * \mu$ with any finite signed measure
$\mu$ on $\bb{R}^n$ also belongs to $L^1(\bb{R}^n)$ (Proposition~8.49
of~\cite{FollandReal1999}).
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:approx-conv}
Let $G \in L^1(\bb{R}^n)$ with $\int_{\bb{R}^n} G \d\lambda = 1$, and let $f \in
C(\bb{R}^n)$ be a function of bounded support. Then for all probability
measures $\mu$ on $\bb{R}^n$,
\[
\int_{\bb{R}^n} f \cdot (G_t * \mu) \d\lambda
\to
\int_{\bb{R}^n} f \d\mu
\quad
\text{ as } t \to \infty,
\]
uniformly in $\mu$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Define $\tilde{G} \in L^1(\bb{R}^n)$ by $\tilde{G}(x) = G(-x)$. It is
elementary that
\[
\int_{\bb{R}^n} f \cdot (G_t * \mu) \d\lambda
-
\int_{\bb{R}^n} f \d\mu
=
\int_{\bb{R}^n} \bigl( f * \tilde{G}_t - f \bigr) \d\mu
\]
for all finite signed measures $\mu$ on $\bb{R}^n$. Hence when $\mu$ is a
probability measure,
\[
\biggl|
\int_{\bb{R}^n} f \cdot (G_t * \mu) \d\lambda
-
\int_{\bb{R}^n} f \d\mu
\biggr|
\leq
\bigl\| f * \tilde{G}_t - f \bigr\|_\infty
\to 0
\]
as $t \to \infty$, by Theorem~8.14(b) of~\cite{FollandReal1999}.
\end{proof}
\paragraph*{Integral power means}
Here we review the theory of power means of a
real-valued function on an arbitrary probability space $(X, \mu)$.
A function \(f: X \to [0,\infty)\) is \demph{essentially bounded} if
\(\mathrm{ess \, sup}_\mu(f)\) is finite.
\begin{defn}\label{def_powermean}
Let \((X, \mu)\) be a probability space and let $f: X \to [0, \infty)$ be a
measurable function such that both $f$ and $1/f$ are essentially
bounded. We define for each $t \in [-\infty, \infty]$ a real number
$
M_t(\mu, f) \in (0, \infty)$,
the \demph{power mean of \(f\) of order \(t\), weighted by \(\mu\)}, by
\begin{align}
\label{powermean_def_1}
M_t(\mu,f) = \left(\int_X f^t \d\mu \right)^{1/t}
\end{align}
when $t \in (-\infty, 0) \cup (0, \infty)$, and in the remaining cases by
\begin{align*}
M_0(\mu,f) &
=
\exp\left(\int_X \log f\d\mu\right), \\
M_{\infty} (\mu, f) &
=
\mathrm{ess \, sup}_\mu f, \\
M_{-\infty} (\mu,f) &
=
\mathrm{ess \, inf}_\mu f.
\end{align*}
\end{defn}
In the case of a finite set $X = \{1, \ldots, n\}$, the mean of order $0$
is the classical weighted geometric mean $\prod_{i = 1}^n f(i)^{\mu\{i\}}$.
\begin{rmk}\label{rmk:powermean_dual}
We have made the assumption that $f$ and $1/f$ are essentially bounded, or
equivalently that $\mathrm{ess \, inf}_\mu(f) > 0$ and $\mathrm{ess \, sup}_\mu(f) < \infty$. This
guarantees that $f^t \in L^1(X, \mu)$ for all $t \in (-\infty, \infty)$ and
that $M_t(\mu, f) \in (0, \infty)$ for all $t \in [-\infty, \infty]$. If
$f$ satisfies our assumption then so does $1/f$, and we have a duality
formula:
\[
M_{-t}(\mu,f)
=
\frac{1}{M_t(\mu, 1/f)}.
\]
\end{rmk}
\begin{prop}\label{prop:powermean_mono}
Let \((X, \mu)\) be a probability space and let $f: X \to [0, \infty)$ be a
measurable function such that both $f$ and $1/f$ are essentially
bounded.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item
\label{part:pm-const}
If there is some constant $c$ such that $f(x) = c$ for almost all $x \in
X$, then $M_t(\mu, f) = c$ for all $t \in [-\infty, \infty]$.
\item
\label{part:pm-strict}
Otherwise, $M_t(\mu, f)$ is strictly increasing in $t \in [-\infty,
\infty]$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Part~(\ref{part:pm-const}) is trivial. Part~(\ref{part:pm-strict}) is
proved in Section~6.11 of~\cite{HardyInequalities1952} in the case where
$X$ is a real interval and $\mu$ is determined by a density function, and
the proof extends without substantial change to an arbitrary probability
space.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}\label{prop:powermean_cts}
Let \((X, \mu)\) be a probability space and let $f: X \to [0, \infty)$ be a
measurable function such that both $f$ and $1/f$ are essentially
bounded. Then $M_t(\mu, f)$ is continuous in $t \in [-\infty, \infty]$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Again, this is proved in the case of a real interval in Section~6.11
of~\cite{HardyInequalities1952}. The generalisation to an arbitrary
probability space is sketched as Exercise~1.8.1
of~\cite{NiculescuConvex2006}, although the hypotheses on $f$ there are
weaker than ours, and at $t = 0$ only continuity from the right is proved.
Under our hypotheses on $f$, continuity from the left then follows from the
duality of Remark~\ref{rmk:powermean_dual}.
\end{proof}
\paragraph*{Differentiation under the integral sign}
We will need the following standard result (Theorem~6.28
of~\cite{KlenkeProbability2013}).
\begin{lem}\label{lem:diff_int}
Let \((X,\mu)\) be a measure space and \(J \subseteq \bb{R}\)
an open interval. Let \(f: X \times J \to \bb{R}\) be a
map with the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item
\label{part:di-int}
for all $t \in J$, the map $f(-, t): X \to \bb{R}$ is integrable;
\item
\label{part:di-diff}
for almost all \(x \in X\), the map \(f(x, -): J \to \bb{R}\) is
differentiable;
\item
\label{part:di-bound}
there is an integrable function $h: X \to \bb{R}$ such that for all \(t \in
J\), for almost all $x \in X$, we have \(\bigl|\tfrac{\partial f}{\partial
t} (x, t)\bigr| \leq h(x)\).
\end{enumerate}
Then $\tfrac{\partial f}{\partial t} (-, t): X \to \bb{R}$ is integrable for
each $t \in J$, and the function $t \mapsto \int_X f(-, t) \d\mu$ on $J$ is
differentiable with derivative $t \mapsto \int_X \tfrac{\partial f}{\partial
t} (-, t) \d\mu$.
\end{lem}
\section{Typicality}
\label{S_typicality}
The setting for the rest of this paper is a space $X$ equipped with a
notion of similarity or proximity between points in $X$ (which may or may
not be derived from a metric). In this section, we show how any probability
measure on $X$ gives rise to a `typicality function' on $X$, whose value at
a point $x$ indicates how concentrated the measure is near $x$.
\begin{defn}\label{def_similarity}
Let \(X\) be a compact Hausdorff space. A \demph{similarity kernel} on
\(X\) is a continuous function \(K: X \times X \to [0, \infty)\) satisfying
\(K(x,x)>0\) for all \(x \in X\). The pair \((X,K)\) is a
\demph{(compact Hausdorff) space with similarities}.
\end{defn}
Since we will only be interested in compact Hausdorff spaces, we omit the
words `compact Hausdorff' and simply refer to spaces with similarities.
\begin{example}\label{eg:ecosystem_1}
In ecology, there has been vigorous discussion of how best to quantify the
diversity of a biological community. This is a conceptual and mathematical
challenge, quite separate from the practical and statistical difficulties,
and many dozens of diversity measures have been proposed over~70 years of
debate in the ecological literature~\cite{MagurranMeasuring2004}.
Any realistic diversity measure should reflect the degree of variation
between the species present. All else being equal, a lake
containing four species of carp should be counted as less diverse than a lake
containing four very different species of fish. The similarity between
species may be measured genetically, phylogenetically, functionally, or in
some other way (as discussed in~\cite{LeinsterMeasuring2012}); how it
is done will not concern us here.
Mathematically, we take a finite set $X = \{1, \ldots, n\}$ (whose elements
represent the species) and a real number $Z_{ij} \geq 0$ for each pair $(i,
j)$ (representing the degree of similarity between species $i$ and $j$). A
similarity coefficient $Z_{ij} = 0$ means that species $i$ and $j$ are
completely dissimilar, and we therefore assume that $Z_{ii} > 0$ for all
$i$. Thus, $Z = (Z_{ij})$ is an $n \times n$ nonnegative real matrix with
strictly positive entries on the diagonal. In the language of
Definition~\ref{def_similarity}, this is the case of finite spaces with
similarities: $X$ has the discrete topology, and the similarity kernel $K$
is given by $K(i, j) = Z_{ij}$. When $Z$ is the identity matrix, $K$ is
the Kronecker delta.
Many ways of assigning inter-species similarities are calibrated on a
scale of $0$ to $1$, with $Z_{ii} = 1$ for all $i$ (each species is
identical to itself). For example, percentage genetic similarity gives
similarity coefficients in $[0, 1]$, as does the similarity measure
$e^{-d(i, j)}$ derived from a metric $d$ and discussed below. The simplest
possible choice of $Z$ is the identity matrix, embodying the crude
assumption that different species have nothing in common whatsoever.
\end{example}
\begin{example}\label{eg:metric_1}
Any compact metric space $(X, d)$ can be regarded as a space with
similarities $(X, K)$ by putting
\[
K(x, y) = e^{-d(x, y)}
\]
($x, y \in X$). The extreme case where $d(x, y) = \infty$ for all $x
\neq y$ produces the Kronecker delta.
Although the negative exponential is not the only reasonable function
transforming distances into similarities, it turns out to be a particularly
fruitful choice. It is associated with the very fertile theory of the
magnitude of metric spaces (surveyed in~\cite{Leinstermagnitude2017}).
Moreover, the general categorical framework of magnitude all but
forces this choice of transformation, as explained in Example~2.4(3)
of~\cite{Leinstermagnitude2017}.
\end{example}
In the examples above, the similarity kernel is \demph{symmetric}: \(K(x,y)
= K(y,x)\) for all \(x,y \in X\). In such cases we say \((X,K)\) is a
\demph{symmetric space with similarities}. We do not include symmetry in
the definition of similarity kernel, partly because asymmetric similarity
matrices occasionally arise in ecology, and also because of the argument of
Gromov (\cite{GromovMetric2001}, p.~xv) and Lawvere
(\cite{LawvereMetric1973}, p.~138--9) that the symmetry condition in the
definition of metric can be too restrictive. To obtain our main result,
however, it will be necessary to assume symmetry.
Most measures of biological diversity depend (at least in part) on the
relative abundance distribution $\vec{p} = (p_1, \ldots, p_n)$ of the
species, where `relative' means that the $p_i$ are normalised to sum to
$1$. Multiplying the similarity matrix $Z$ by the column vector $\vec{p}$
gives another vector $Z\vec{p}$, with $i$th entry
\[
(Z\vec{p})_i = \sum_j Z_{ij} p_j.
\]
This is the expected similarity between an individual of species $i$ and an
individual chosen at random. Thus, $(Z\vec{p})_i$ measures how typical
individuals of species $i$ are within the community. The generalisation to
an arbitrary space with similarities is as follows.
\begin{defn}\label{def_typicality}
Let $(X, K)$ be a space with similarities. For each \(\mu \in M(X)\) and
\(x \in X\), define
\[
(K\mu)(x) = \int_X K(x,-) \d\mu \in \bb{R}.
\]
This defines a function \(K\mu: X \to \bb{R}\), the \demph{typicality
function} of \((X,K,\mu)\).
\end{defn}
When $\mu$ is a probability measure (the case of principal interest),
$(K\mu)(x)$ is the expected similarity between $x$ and a random point. It
therefore detects the extent to which $x$ is similar, or near, to sets of
large measure.
In the next section, we will define entropy and diversity in terms of the
typicality function $K\mu$. For that, we will need to know that $K\mu$
satisfies some analytic conditions, which we now establish.
\glob{For the rest of this section, let $(X, K)$ be a space with
similarities.} The next lemma follows directly from
Lemma~\ref{lem:uniform_expbl}.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:Kbar_cts}
The function $\overline{K}: X \to C(X)$ defined by $x \mapsto K(x, -)$ is
continuous.
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:Kmu_cts}
For each \(\mu \in M(X)\), the function \(K\mu: X \to \bb{R}\) is continuous.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Note that \(K\mu\) is the composite
\[
X \xrightarrow{\overline{K}} C(X) \xrightarrow{\langle-,\mu\rangle} \bb{R}.
\]
By Lemma \ref{lem:Kbar_cts}, $\overline{K}$ is continuous, and
\(\langle-,\mu\rangle = \int_X - \d\mu\) is a continuous linear functional.
Hence $K\mu$ is continuous.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:K_*_cts}
The map
\[
\begin{array}{cccc}
K_*: &P(X) &\to &C(X) \\
&\mu &\mapsto &K\mu
\end{array}
\]
is continuous.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Both \(X\) and \(P(X)\) are compact Hausdorff so, applying
Lemma~\ref{lem:uniform_expbl} twice, an equivalent statement is that
the map
\[
\begin{array}{ccc}
X &\to &C(P(X)) \\
x &\mapsto &(K-)(x) = (\mu \mapsto (K\mu)(x))
\end{array}
\]
is continuous. This map is the composite
\[
X \xrightarrow{\overline{K}} C(X) \to C(P(X)),
\]
where the second map is \(f \mapsto \langle f,-\rangle\) and is continuous
by Lemma~\ref{lem:pairing_cts}(\ref{part:pairing_cts_1}). Hence, \(K_*:
P(X) \to C(X)\) is continuous.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}\label{prop:Kmu_props}
For every measure $\mu$ on $X$,
\begin{enumerate}[(i)
\item
\label{part:Kp-supp}
\(\mathrm{supp} \, K\mu \supseteq \mathrm{supp} \, \mu\);
\item
\label{part:Kp-eb}
both \(K\mu\) and \(1/K\mu\) are essentially bounded with respect to
\(\mu\).
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
For~(\ref{part:Kp-supp}), let \(x \in \mathrm{supp} \, \mu\). Since \(K\) is positive
on the diagonal, \(x \in \mathrm{supp} \, K(x,-)\), so \(\mathrm{supp} \, \mu \cap \mathrm{supp} \, K(x,-)
\neq \emptyset\). Hence by Lemma~\ref{lem:disjoint_supps},
\[
(K\mu)(x) = \int_X K(x,-) \d\mu > 0.
\]
For~(\ref{part:Kp-eb}), $\mathrm{supp} \, \mu$ is compact and \(K\mu\) is continuous with
\(K\mu\big|_{\mathrm{supp} \, \mu} > 0\). So both $K\mu$ and $1/K\mu$ are
bounded on $\mathrm{supp} \, \mu$, hence essentially bounded on $X$.
\end{proof}
\section{Diversity and entropy}
\label{S_diversity}
Here we introduce the main subject of the paper: a one-parameter family of
functions that quantify the degree of spread of a probability measure on
a compact Hausdorff space \(X\), with respect to a chosen notion of
similarity between points of \(X\).
Take a probability measure $\mu$ on a space with similarities $(X, K)$.
Intuitively, $\mu$ is widely spread across $X$ if most points are
dissimilar to most of the rest of $X$, interpreting `most' in terms of
$\mu$. Equivalent ways to say this are that the typicality function $K\mu:
X \to \bb{R}$ takes small values on most of $X$, or that the `atypicality'
function $1/K\mu$ takes large values on most of $X$. Ecologically, a
community is diverse if it is predominantly made up of species that are
unusual or atypical within that community (for example, many rare and
highly dissimilar species).
Diversity of $\mu$ is, therefore, defined as mean atypicality. It is
useful to consider not just the arithmetic mean, but the power means of all
orders:
\begin{defn}\label{def_diversity}
Let \((X, K)\) be a space with similarities and let $q \in [-\infty,
\infty]$. The \demph{diversity of order \(q\)} of a probability measure
$\mu$ on $X$ is
\[
D_q^K(\mu) = M_{1-q}(\mu, 1/K\mu) \in (0, \infty).
\]
The \demph{entropy of order $q$} of $\mu$ is $H_q^K(\mu) = \log D_q^K(\mu)$.
\end{defn}
By the duality of Remark~\ref{rmk:powermean_dual}, an equivalent definition is
\[
D_q^K(\mu) = 1/M_{q - 1}(\mu, K\mu).
\]
On the right-hand side, the denominator is the mean typicality of a point
in $X$, which is a measure of \emph{lack} of diversity; its reciprocal is
then a measure of diversity. The power means in this formula and
Definition~\ref{def_diversity} are well-defined because $K\mu$ and $1/K\mu$
are essentially bounded with respect to \(\mu\)
(Proposition~\ref{prop:Kmu_props}).
Explicitly,
\begin{align*}\label{4}
D_q^K(\mu)=
\begin{cases}
\left( \int_{X} \left( K\mu \right)^{q-1} \d\mu \right)^{1/(1-q)} &
\text{ if } q \in (-\infty, 1) \cup (1, \infty),\\
\exp \left( -\int_X \log (K\mu) \d\mu\right) &
\text{ if } q = 1, \\
1 / \mathrm{ess \, sup}_\mu K\mu &
\text{ if } q = \infty, \\
1 / \mathrm{ess \, inf}_\mu K\mu &
\text{ if } q = - \infty.
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
We usually work with the diversities $D_q^K$ rather than the entropies
$H_q^K$, but evidently it is trivial to translate results on diversity into
results on entropy.
\begin{example}
Let $X$ be the set $\{1, \ldots, n\}$ with the discrete topology, let $K$
be the Kronecker delta on $X$, and let $\mu$ be the uniform measure on $X$.
Then $K\mu \equiv 1/n$, so $D_q^K(\mu) = n$ and $H_q^K(\mu) = \log n$ for
all $q$. This conforms to the intuition that the larger we take $n$ to be,
the more thinly spread the uniform measure on $\{1, \ldots, n\}$ becomes.
\end{example}
The next two examples also concern the finite case. They are described in
terms of the ecological scenario of Example~\ref{eg:ecosystem_1}. Thus, $X
= \{1, \ldots, n\}$ is a set of species, $Z_{ij} = K(i, j)$ is the
similarity between species $i$ and $j$, and $\mu = \vec{p} = (p_1, \ldots,
p_n)$ gives the proportions in which the species are present.
\begin{example}
\label{eg:fin-div-1}
Put $Z = I$ (distinct species have nothing in common). Then
\[
D_0^I(\vec{p})
=
\sum_{i \in \mathrm{supp} \, \vec{p}} p_i \cdot \frac{1}{p_i}
=
|\mathrm{supp} \, \vec{p}|.
\]
This is just the number of species present. It is the simplest diversity
measure of all. But it takes no account of species abundances beyond
presence and absence, whereas, for instance, a community of two species is
ordinarily considered more diverse if they are equally abundant than if
their proportions are $(0.99, 0.01)$.
The diversity of order $1$ is
\[
D_1^I(\vec{p})
=
\exp\Biggl( - \sum_{i \in \mathrm{supp} \, \vec{p}} p_i \log p_i\Biggr)
=
\prod_{i \in \mathrm{supp} \, \vec{p}} p_i^{-p_i}
\]
and the entropy $H_1^I(\vec{p}) = \log D_1^I(\vec{p})$ of order $1$ is the
Shannon entropy $-\sum p_i \log p_i$. The diversity of order $2$
is
\[
D_2^I(\vec{p})
=
1\biggl/\sum_{i = 1}^n p_i^2.
\]
The denominator is the probability that two individuals chosen at
random are of the same species, and $D_2^I(\vec{p})$ itself is the expected
number of such trials needed in order to obtain a matching pair. The
diversity of order $\infty$ is
\[
D_\infty^I(\vec{p})
=
1\bigl/\max_i p_i,
\]
which measures the extent to which the community is dominated by a single
species. All four of these diversity measures (or simple transformations
of them) are used by ecologists~\cite{MagurranMeasuring2004}.
For a general parameter value $q \neq 1, \pm\infty$, the diversity of order
$q$ is
\[
D_q^I(\vec{p})
=
\Biggl( \sum_{i \in \mathrm{supp} \, \vec{p}} p_i^q \Biggr)^{1/(1 - q)}.
\]
In ecology, $D_q^I$ is known as the \demph{Hill number} of order
$q$~\cite{HillDiversity1973}, and in information theory, $H_q^I = \log
D_q^I$ is called the \demph{R\'enyi entropy} of order
$q$~\cite{Renyimeasures1961}. For reasons explained in
Remark~\ref{rmk:q-range}, we usually restrict to $q \geq 0$.
The parameter $q$ controls the emphasis placed on rare or common species.
Low values of $q$ emphasise rare species; high values emphasise common
species. At one extreme, $D_0^I$ depends only on presence/absence, thus
attaching as much importance to rare species as common ones. At the other,
$D_\infty^I$ depends only on the abundance of the most common species,
completely ignoring rarer ones.
If a community loses one or more rare species, while at the same time the
remaining species become more evenly balanced, its low-order diversity
falls but its high-order diversity rises. For example, $D_q^I$
measures the relative abundance distribution $(0.5, 0.5, 0)$ as less
diverse than $(0.8, 0.1, 0.1)$ when $q < 0.853$, but more diverse for
all higher values of $q$.
The moral is that when judging which of two communities is the more
diverse, the answer depends critically on the parameter~$q$. Different
values of $q$ may produce opposite judgements.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
\label{eg:fin-div-2}
Still in the ecological setting, consider now a general similarity matrix
$Z$ encoding the similarities between species (as
in Example~\ref{eg:ecosystem_1}). The diversity measures $D_q^Z$ and the
role of the parameter $q$ can be understood much as in the case $Z = I$,
but now incorporating inter-species similarity. For instance,
\[
D_2^Z(\vec{p}) = 1\Bigl/\sum_{i, j} p_i Z_{ij} p_j
\]
is the reciprocal expected similarity between a random pair of
individuals (rather than the reciprocal probability that they are of the
same species), and
\[
D_\infty^Z(\vec{p}) = 1\Bigl/ \max_{i \in \mathrm{supp} \, \vec{p}} (Z\vec{p})_i
\]
reflects the dominance of the largest cluster of species (rather
than the largest single species).
\end{example}
\begin{example}
\label{eg:div2}
Let $(X, K)$ be an arbitrary space with similarities. Among all the
diversity measures $(D_q^K)_{q \in [0, \infty]}$, one with
especially convenient mathematical properties is the diversity of order
$2$:
\[
D_2^K(\mu)
=
\frac{1}{\int_X \int_X K(x, y) \d\mu(x) \d\mu(y)}.
\]
For instance, Meckes used $D_2^K$, and more particularly the maximum
diversity $\sup_{\mu \in P(X)} D_2^K(\mu)$ of order~$2$, to prove results
on the Minkowski dimension of metric spaces (\cite{MeckesMagnitude2015},
Section~7).
\end{example}
We now establish the basic analytic properties of diversity. First, we
show that when $\mu$ is fixed, \(D_q^K(\mu)\) is a continuous and
decreasing function of its order \(q\). Second, we prove the more
difficult result that when \(q \in (0,\infty)\) is fixed,
$D_q^K(\mu)$ is continuous in the measure $\mu$.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:diversity_cts_q}
Let \((X, K)\) be a space with similarities and let $\mu \in P(X)$.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item
\label{part:dcq-cts}
\(D_q^K(\mu)\) is continuous in its order \(q \in [-\infty, \infty]\).
\item
\label{part:dcq-dec}
If \(K\mu\) is constant on the support of \(\mu\), then the function \(q
\mapsto D_q^K(\mu)\) is constant on \([-\infty, \infty]\); otherwise, it is
strictly decreasing in \(q \in [-\infty, \infty]\).
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The two parts follow from
Propositions~\ref{prop:powermean_cts} and~\ref{prop:powermean_mono},
respectively.
\end{proof}
\begin{rmk}\label{rmk:typicality_constant}
A central role will be played by measures $\mu$ satisfying the first case
of Proposition~\ref{prop:diversity_cts_q}(\ref{part:dcq-dec}). We call
$\mu$ \demph{balanced} if the function $K\mu$ is constant on $\mathrm{supp} \, \mu$.
(In~\cite{LeinsterMaximizing2016}, for finite $X$, such measures were
called `invariant'.) Equivalently, $\mu$ is balanced if $D_q^K(\mu)$ is
constant over $q \in [-\infty, \infty]$. If $(K\mu)|_{\mathrm{supp} \, \mu}$ has
constant value $c$ then $D_q^K(\mu)$ has constant value $1/c$.
\end{rmk}
\begin{prop}\label{prop:diversity_cts_mu}
Let \((X, K)\) be a space with similarities. For every \(q \in (0,
\infty)\), the diversity function \(D_q^K: P(X) \to \bb{R}\) is continuous.
\end{prop}
(Recall that we always use the weak$^*$ topology on $P(X)$.)
The proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:diversity_cts_mu} takes the form of
three lemmas, addressing the three cases \(q \in (1,\infty)\), \(q \in
(0,1)\) and \(q = 1\).
\begin{lem}
For every \(q \in (1,\infty)\), the diversity function \(D_q^K: P(X)
\to \bb{R}\) is continuous.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The map \(\mu \mapsto 1/D_q^K(\mu)\) is the composite
\[
P(X)
\xrightarrow{\triangle}
P(X) \times P(X)
\xrightarrow{K_* \times \text{Id}}
C(X) \times P(X)
\xrightarrow{(-)^{q - 1} \times \text{Id}}
C(X) \times P(X)
\xrightarrow{\langle -, - \rangle}
\bb{R}
\xrightarrow{(-)^{1/(q - 1)}}
\bb{R}.
\]
Here $\triangle$ is the diagonal, which is certainly continuous. The map
$K_*$ was defined and proved to be continuous in Lemma~\ref{lem:K_*_cts},
and $(-)^{q - 1}: C(X) \to C(X)$ is continuous by
Lemma~\ref{lem:uniform_functorial}. The restricted pairing $\langle -, -
\rangle$ on $C(X) \times P(X)$ is continuous by
Lemma~\ref{lem:pairing_cts}. Finally, \((-)^{1/(q-1)}\) is evidently
continuous. Hence $1/D_q^K$ is continuous. But $D_q^K$ takes values in
$(0, \infty)$, so is itself continuous.
\end{proof}
The case $q \in (0, 1)$ is harder. In the following proof, most of the
work is caused by the possibility that \((K\mu)(x) = 0\) for some \(x\),
in which case the function \((K\mu)^{q-1}\) is not defined everywhere.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:q_in_01}
For every \(q \in (0,1)\), the diversity function \(D_q^K: P(X) \to
\bb{R}\) is continuous.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
First we break the space $X$ into convenient smaller pieces. Put
\[
b = \frac{1}{2} \inf_{x \in X} K(x,x) > 0.
\]
By the topological hypotheses on $(X, K)$, we can find
a finite open cover \(U_1,\ldots, U_n\) of \(X\) such that \(K(x,y) \geq
b\) whenever \(x,y \in \overline{U_i}\) for some \(i\), and we can find a
continuous partition of unity \(p_1, \ldots, p_n\) such that \(\mathrm{supp} \, p_i
\subseteq U_i\) for each \(i\).
For all \(\mu \in P(X)\),
\[
D_q^K(\mu)^{1-q}
=
\int_X (K\mu)^{q-1} \d\mu
=
\sum_{i=1}^n \int_X (K\mu)^{q-1} p_i \d\mu.
\]
Hence to see that \(D_q^K\) is continuous it will suffice to show that, for
each \(i\), the map $d_i: P(X) \to \bb{R}$ defined by
\[
d_i(\mu) = \int_X (K\mu)^{q - 1} p_i \d\mu
\]
is continuous. For the rest of the proof, fix \(i \in \{1,\ldots,n\}\).
For each $\mu \in P(X)$, we can bound $K\mu$ below on $\overline{U_i}$.
Indeed, for all \(x \in \overline{U_i}\),
\begin{align}
\label{eq:Kmu-lb}
(K\mu)(x)
\geq
\int_{U_i} K(x,y) p_i(y) \d\mu(y)
\geq
b \int_X p_i \d\mu.
\end{align}
Thus, $(K\mu)|_{\overline{U_i}}$ is bounded below by $b \int p_i \d\mu$,
which by Lemma~\ref{lem:disjoint_supps} is strictly positive if \(\mathrm{supp} \, p_i
\cap \mathrm{supp} \, \mu \neq \emptyset\).
Now we show that $d_i$ is continuous at each point in the set
\[
P_i(X) = \{\mu \in P(X) \, : \, \mathrm{supp} \, p_i \cap \mathrm{supp} \, \mu \neq \emptyset\}.
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:disjoint_supps}, $P_i(X)$ is open in $P(X)$. Thus, it is
equivalent to prove that the restriction of $d_i$ to $P_i(X)$ is continuous.
To do this, we begin by showing that there is a well-defined, continuous
map $G_i: P_i(X) \to C(\overline{U_i})$ given by
\[
G_i(\mu) = (K\mu)^{q - 1}|_{\overline{U_i}}.
\]
It is well-defined because, for each $\mu \in P_i(X)$, the map $K\mu$ is
continuous and strictly positive on $\overline{U_i}$ (as noted
after~\eqref{eq:Kmu-lb}). To show that $G_i$ is continuous, consider the
following spaces and maps, defined below:
\[
P_i(X) \xrightarrow{K_*}
C_i^+(X) \xrightarrow{\text{res}}
C^+(\overline{U_i}) \xrightarrow{(-)^{q - 1}}
C^+(\overline{U_i}) \hookrightarrow
C(\overline{U_i}).
\]
Here
\begin{align*}
C_i^+(X) &
=
\{f \in C(X) \, : \,
f(x) > 0 \text{ for all } x \in \overline{U_i}\}, \\
C^+(\overline{U_i}) &
=
\{g \in C(\overline{U_i}) \, : \,
g(x) > 0 \text{ for all } x \in \overline{U_i}\}
=
\mathbf{Top}(\overline{U_i}, (0, \infty)).
\end{align*}
The first map $K_*$ is the restriction of $K_*: P(X) \to C(X)$; the
restricted $K_*$ is well-defined by~\eqref{eq:Kmu-lb} and continuous by
Lemma~\ref{lem:K_*_cts}. The second map is restriction, which is certainly
continuous, the third map $(-)^{q - 1}$ is continuous by
Lemma~\ref{lem:uniform_functorial}, and the last map is inclusion, also
continuous. The composite of these maps is $G_i$, which is therefore also
continuous, as claimed.
To show that $d_i$ is continuous on $P_i(X)$, consider the chain of maps
\[
P_i(X)
\xrightarrow{\triangle}
P_i(X) \times P(X)
\xrightarrow{G_i \times (p_i \cdot -)}
C(\overline{U_i}) \times P_\leq(\overline{U_i})
\xrightarrow{\langle -,-\rangle}
\bb{R}
\]
(recalling the definition of $P_\leq$ from before
Lemma~\ref{lem:pairing_cts}). The first map is the diagonal followed by an
inclusion; it is continuous. In the second, $p_i \cdot -$ is a restriction
of the map $M(X) \to M(\overline{U_i})$ defined by $\mu \mapsto p_i
\mu$, which is also continuous. Since $G_i$ is continuous, so is $G_i
\times (p_i \cdot -)$. The third map is continuous by
Lemma~\ref{lem:pairing_cts}(\ref{part:pairing_cts_2}). And the composite
of the chain is $d_i|_{P_i(X)}$, which is, therefore, also continuous.
Finally, we show that the function \(d_i\) is continuous at all points
\(\mu \in P(X)\) such that \(\mathrm{supp} \, p_i \cap \mathrm{supp} \, \mu = \emptyset\). Fix
such a \(\mu\).
Given \(\nu\in P(X)\), if \(\mathrm{supp} \, p_i \cap \mathrm{supp} \, \nu = \emptyset\) then
\(d_i(\nu) = 0\), and otherwise
\[
d_i(\nu)
=
\int_{\overline{U_i}} (K\nu)^{q-1} p_i \d\nu
\leq
\int_{\overline{U_i}} \left( b \int_X p_i \d\nu \right)^{q-1} p_i \d\nu =
b^{q-1} \left( \int_X p_i \d\nu
\right)^q
\]
(using the bound~\eqref{eq:Kmu-lb} and that \(q < 1\)). So in either case,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:cts-triv}
0 \leq d_i(\nu) \leq b^{q-1} \left( \int_X p_i \d\nu\right)^q.
\end{equation}
Now as \(\nu \to \mu\) in \(P(X)\), we have
$
\int_X p_i \d\nu \to \int_X p_i \d\mu = 0,
$
so
\[
b^{q-1} \left( \int_X p_i \d\nu\right)^q \to 0
\]
(since \(q > 0\)). Hence the bounds~\eqref{eq:cts-triv} give
$d_i(\nu) \to 0 = d_i(\mu)$, as required.
\end{proof}
The remaining case of Proposition~\ref{prop:diversity_cts_mu}, $q = 1$,
will be deduced from the cases $q \in (0, 1)$ and $q \in (1, \infty)$.
\begin{lem}
The diversity function \(D_1^K: P(X) \to \bb{R}\) is continuous.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let \(\mu \in P(X)\) and \(\epsilon > 0\). Since $D_q^K(\mu)$ is continuous
in $q$ (Proposition~\ref{prop:diversity_cts_q}(\ref{part:dcq-cts})), we can
choose \(q^+ \in (1,\infty)\) such that
\[
|D_1^K(\mu) - D_{q^+}^K(\mu)| < \epsilon/2.
\]
Since \(D_{q^+}^K: P(X) \to \bb{R}\) is continuous, we can find a neighbourhood
\(U^+\) of \(\mu\) such that for all \(\nu \in U^+\),
\[
\bigl|D_{q^+}^K(\mu) - D_{q^+}^K(\nu)\bigr| < \epsilon/2.
\]
Then for all \(\nu \in U^+\), since $D_q^K(\nu)$ is decreasing in $q$
(Proposition~\ref{prop:diversity_cts_q}(\ref{part:dcq-dec})),
\[
D_1^K(\nu) \geq D_{q^+}^K(\nu) > D_1^K(\mu) - \epsilon.
\]
Similarly, we can find a neighbourhood \(U^-\) of \(\mu\) such that for all
\(\nu \in U^-\),
\[
D_1^K(\nu) < D_1^K(\mu) + \epsilon
\]
Hence $|D_1^K(\nu) - D_1^K(\mu)| < \epsilon$ for all $\nu \in U^+ \cap
U^-$.
\end{proof}
This completes the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:diversity_cts_mu}: the
diversity function of each finite positive order is continuous.
\begin{rmk}
Proposition~\ref{prop:diversity_cts_mu} excludes the cases $q = 0$ and $q =
\infty$. Diversity of order $0$ is not continuous even in the simplest
case of a finite set and the identity similarity matrix; for as we saw in
Example~\ref{eg:fin-div-1}, $D_0^I(\vec{p})$ is the cardinality of $\mathrm{supp} \,
\vec{p}$, which is not continuous in $\vec{p}$. Diversity of order
$\infty$ need not be continuous either. For example, take $X = \{1, 2,
3\}$ and the similarity matrix
\[
Z =
\begin{pmatrix}
1 &1 &0 \\
1 &1 &1 \\
0 &1 &1
\end{pmatrix},
\]
and put $\vec{p} = (1/2 - t, 2t, 1/2 - t)$. Then
$D_\infty^Z(\vec{p})$ is $1$ if $t \in (0, 1/2)$, but $2$ if $t = 0$.
\end{rmk}
\section{Magnitude}
\label{S_magnitude}
To show that maximum diversity and maximum entropy are well-defined, we
first have to define a closely related invariant, magnitude. Magnitude has
been studied at various levels of generality, including finite enriched
categories and compact metric spaces, for which it has strong geometric
content~\cite{Leinstermagnitude2017}. We will define the magnitude of a
space with similarities.
First we consider signed measures for which every point has typicality $1$.
\begin{defn}\label{def_weighting}
Let \(X = (X,K)\) be a space with similarities. A \demph{weight measure}
on \(X\) is a signed measure \(\mu \in M(X)\) such that $K\mu \equiv 1$ on
$X$.
\end{defn}
This generalises the definition of weight measure on a compact metric space
(Section~1.1 of \cite{Willertonmagnitude2014}). Note that despite our
convention that `measure' means positive measure, a weight measure is a
\emph{signed} measure.
\begin{example}
\label{eg:mag-fin}
Let $X = \{1, \ldots, n\}$, writing $Z_{ij} = K(i, j)$ as usual. Then a
weight measure on $X$ is a vector \(\vec{w} \in \bb{R}^n\) such that
\((Z\vec{w})_i = 1\) for \(i = 1, \ldots, n\). If $Z$ is invertible then
there is exactly one weight measure, but in general there may be none or
many.
Even if $Z$ has many weight measures, the total weight $\sum_i w_i$ turns
out to be independent of the weighting $\vec{w}$ chosen, as long as $Z$ is
symmetric (or, more generally, the transpose of $Z$ admits a weighting
too). This common quantity $\sum_i w_i$ is called the magnitude of $(X,
K)$, and its independence of the choice of weighting is a special case of
the following result.
\end{example}
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:wtg-ind}
Let $(X, K)$ be a symmetric space with similarities. Then
$\mu(X) = \nu(X)$ for any weight measures $\mu$ and $\nu$ on $X$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Since $\nu$ is a weight measure,
\[
\mu(X)
=
\int_X \d\mu(x)
=
\int_X \left( \int_X K(x, y) \d\nu(y) \right) \d\mu(x).
\]
Since $\mu$ is a weight measure,
\[
\nu(X)
=
\int_X \d\nu(y)
=
\int_X \left( \int_X K(y, x) \d\mu(x) \right) \d\nu(y).
\]
So by symmetry of $K$ and Tonelli's theorem, $\mu(X) = \nu(X)$.
\end{proof}
This lemma makes the following definition valid.
\begin{defn}\label{def_magnitude}
Let \((X, K)\) be a symmetric space with similarities admitting at least
one weight measure. The \demph{magnitude} of \((X,K)\) is
\[
|(X,K)|= \mu(X),
\]
for any weight measure $\mu$ on $(X, K)$. We often write $|(X, K)|$ as
just $|X|$.
\end{defn}
We will mostly use \emph{positive} weight measures, that is,
weight measures that are positive measures. (In an unfortunate clash of
terminology, a weight measure on a finite set is positive if and only if
the corresponding vector is nonnegative.)
\begin{lem}\label{lem:zero_magnitude}
Let $(X, K)$ be a symmetric space with similarities admitting a positive
weight measure. Then $|X| \geq 0$, with equality if and only if $X =
\emptyset$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The inequality is immediate from the definition of magnitude, as is the
fact that $|\emptyset| = 0$. Now suppose that $X$ is nonempty. Choose $x
\in X$ and a positive weight measure $\mu$ on \((X, K)\). Since \(\int_X
K(x,-) \d\mu= 1\), the measure \(\mu\) is nonzero. Hence, \(|X| = \mu(X) >
0\).
\end{proof}
Let $(X, K)$ be a space with similarities. Given a closed subset \(Y\) of
\(X\), we regard $Y$ as a space with similarities by restriction of the
similarity kernel \(K\). Any measure $\nu \neq 0$ on $Y$ can be normalised
and extended by zero to give a probability measure \(\wext{\nu}\) on \(X\),
defined by
\[
\wext{\nu}(U) = \frac{\nu(U \cap Y)}{\nu(Y)}
\]
for Borel sets \(U \subseteq X\). In particular, whenever $\nu$ is a
positive weight measure on $Y \neq \emptyset$, we have $\nu \neq 0$ (by
Lemma~\ref{lem:zero_magnitude}) and
\[
\wext{\nu}(U) = \frac{\nu(U \cap Y)}{|Y|}
\]
for Borel sets \(U \subseteq X\). The construction $\nu \mapsto
\wext{\nu}$ relates the notion of weight measure to that of balanced
measure (defined in Remark~\ref{rmk:typicality_constant}) as follows.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:balanced_tfae}
Let $(X, K)$ be a symmetric space with similarities. The following are
equivalent for a probability measure $\mu$ on $X$:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item
\label{part:it-const}
$\mu$ is balanced (that is, \(K\mu\) is constant on \(\mathrm{supp} \, \mu\));
\item
\label{part:it-flat}
the function \(q \mapsto D_q^K(\mu)\) is constant on \([-\infty,
\infty]\);
\item
\label{part:it-supp}
\(\mu = \wext{\nu}\) for some positive weight measure \(\nu\) on
$\mathrm{supp} \, \mu$;
\item
\label{part:it-wext}
\(\mu = \wext{\nu}\) for some positive weight measure \(\nu\) on
some nonempty closed subset $Y$ of $X$.
\end{enumerate}
When these conditions hold, \(D_q^K(\mu) = |Y|\) for all nonempty closed $Y
\subseteq X$ admitting a positive weight measure $\nu$ such that
$\wext{\nu} = \mu$, and all \(q \in [-\infty, \infty]\).
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The equivalence of~(\ref{part:it-const}) and~(\ref{part:it-flat}) follows from
Proposition~\ref{prop:diversity_cts_q}(\ref{part:dcq-dec}).
Now assuming~(\ref{part:it-const}), we prove~(\ref{part:it-supp}). Write
$c$ for the constant value of $K\mu$ on $\mathrm{supp} \, \mu$. Then $c > 0$ by
Proposition~\ref{prop:Kmu_props}(\ref{part:Kp-supp}), so we can define a
measure \(\nu\) on $\mathrm{supp} \, \mu$ by $\nu(W) = \mu(W)/c$ for all Borel sets $W
\subseteq \mathrm{supp} \, \mu$. This \(\nu\) is a weight measure on \(\mathrm{supp} \, \mu\),
since for all \(y \in \mathrm{supp} \, \mu\),
\[
(K\nu)(y)
=
\int_{\mathrm{supp} \, \mu} K(y,-)\d\nu
=
\frac{1}{c} \int_X K(y,-) \d\mu
=
\frac{1}{c} (K\mu)(y)
=
1.
\]
Moreover, $\wext{\nu} = \mu$: for given a Borel set $U \subseteq X$,
\[
\wext{\nu}(U)
=
\frac{\nu(U \cap \mathrm{supp} \, \mu)}{\nu(\mathrm{supp} \, \mu)}
=
\frac{\mu(U \cap \mathrm{supp} \, \mu)}{\mu(\mathrm{supp} \, \mu)}
=
\mu(U),
\]
proving~(\ref{part:it-supp}).
Trivially, (\ref{part:it-supp}) implies~(\ref{part:it-wext}). Finally, we
assume~(\ref{part:it-wext}) and prove~(\ref{part:it-const}). Take $Y$ and
$\nu$ as in~(\ref{part:it-wext}). For all \(x \in \mathrm{supp} \, \mu\),
\[
(K\mu)(x)
=
\int_X K(x,-) \d\wext{\nu}
=
\frac{1}{\nu(Y)} \int_Y K(x,-) \d\nu
=
\frac{1}{\nu(Y)}
\]
This proves~(\ref{part:it-const}). It also proves the final statement: for
by Remark~\ref{rmk:typicality_constant},
$
D_q^K(\mu) = \nu(Y) = |Y|
$
for all \(q \in [-\infty, \infty]\).
\end{proof}
\section{Balanced and maximising measures}
\label{S_prep_lemmas}
In the case of the Kronecker delta on a finite discrete space, it is
trivial to maximise diversity. Indeed, an elementary classical result
states that for each $q \in [0, \infty]$, the R\'enyi entropy $H_q^I$ of
order $q$ (Example~\ref{eg:fin-div-1}) is maximised by the uniform
distribution, and that unless $q = 0$, the uniform distribution is unique
with this property. The same is therefore true of the diversity measures
$D_q^I$.
For a finite space with an arbitrary similarity kernel, maximising measures
are no longer uniform~\cite{LeinsterMaximizing2016}. We cannot, therefore,
expect that on a general space with similarities, diversity is maximised by
the `uniform' measure (whatever that might mean). Nevertheless, maximising
measures have a different uniformity property: they are balanced. That is
the main result of this section.
\begin{rmk}
\label{rmk:q-range}
We usually restrict the parameter $q$ to lie in the range $[0, \infty]$.
Even in the simplest case of the Kronecker delta on a finite set, $D_q^K$
and $H_q^K$ behave quite differently for negative $q$ than for positive
$q$. When $q < 0$, the uniform measure no longer maximises $D_q^I$ or
$H_q^I$, and in fact \emph{minimises} them among all measures of full
support (as can be shown using
Proposition~\ref{prop:diversity_cts_q}(\ref{part:dcq-dec})).
\end{rmk}
\glob{For the rest of this section, let \((X, K)\) be a symmetric space
with similarities.}
\begin{defn}\label{def_maximising}
For \(q \in [0, \infty]\), a probability measure on \(X\) is
\demph{\(q\)-maximising} if it maximises \(D_q^K\). It is
\demph{maximising} if it is $q$-maximising for all \(q \in [0,\infty]\).
\end{defn}
We will show in Section~\ref{S_main} that any measure that is
$q$-maximising for some $q > 0$ is, in fact, maximising. The proof will
depend on the next result: any measure that is $q$-maximising for some
$q \in (0, 1)$ is balanced.
This result can be understood as follows. In ecological terminology, if a
species distribution is \emph{not} balanced then not all species are
equally typical, and it is intuitively plausible that transferring a little
abundance from the most typical species to the least typical increases
diversity. Thus, the diversity of a non-balanced distribution should not
be maximal; equivalently, a distribution that maximises diversity should be
balanced.
We prove this using a variational argument. The shape of the proof is
similar to that of the finite case (\cite{LeinsterMaximizing2016},
Section~5), but the generalisation to compact spaces makes the argument
much more delicate.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:qmax_balanced}
For \(q \in (0,1)\), every \(q\)-maximising measure on $(X, K)$ is balanced.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let \(q \in (0,1)\) and let \(\mu\) be a $q$-maximising measure on $(X, K)$.
Since \(K\mu\) is continuous and $\mathrm{supp} \, \mu$ is compact, we can choose
\(x^-, x^+ \in \mathrm{supp} \, \mu\) such that
\[
(K\mu)(x^-) = \inf_{\mathrm{supp} \, \mu} K\mu,
\qquad
(K\mu)(x^+) = \sup_{\mathrm{supp} \, \mu} K\mu.
\]
To prove that $\mu$ is balanced, it will suffice to show that \((K\mu)(x^-)
= (K\mu)(x^+)\).
Let $\epsilon > 0$. We first construct functions $u^\pm$ such that the
measures $u^\pm \mu$ approximate the Dirac measures at $x^\pm$, using
Lemma~\ref{lem:approximate_delta}. Write
\[
E =
\{ (K\mu)^{q - 1}|_{\mathrm{supp} \, \mu} \}
\cup
\{ K(x, -)|_{\mathrm{supp} \, \mu} \, : \, x \in X \}
\subseteq
C(\mathrm{supp} \, \mu)
\]
(which is well-defined by Lemma~\ref{lem:Kmu_cts} and
Proposition~\ref{prop:Kmu_props}(\ref{part:Kp-supp})). Then $E$ is
compact, since it is the union of a singleton with the image of the compact
space $X$ under the composite of continuous maps
\[
X \xrightarrow{\overline{K}} C(X) \xrightarrow{\text{restriction}} C(\mathrm{supp} \, \mu)
\]
(using Lemma~\ref{lem:Kbar_cts}). Hence $E$ is equicontinuous. So by
Lemma~\ref{lem:approximate_delta}, we can choose a nonnegative function
$u^- \in C(X)$ such that $\int_X u^- \d\mu = 1$ and
\begin{align*}
\left| \int_X (K\mu)^{q-1} \d(u^-\mu) - (K\mu)(x^-)^{q-1}\right|
&
\leq \epsilon, \\
\left| \int_X K(x,-) \d(u^-\mu) - K(x, x^-) \right|
&
\leq \epsilon,
\end{align*}
the latter for all $x \in X$. Choose $u^+$ similarly for $x^+$.
Since \(u^- - u^+\) is bounded, we can choose an open interval \(I
\subseteq \bb{R}\), containing \(0\), such that the function \(1+ t\left(u^- -
u^+\right) \in C(X)\) is strictly positive for each \(t \in I\). Then for
each \(t \in I\), we have a probability measure
\[
\mu_t = (1 + t(u^- - u^+)) \mu
\]
on $X$, with $\mathrm{supp} \, \mu_t = \mathrm{supp} \, \mu$. Note that $\mu_0 = \mu$.
We will exploit the fact that $D_q^K(\mu_t)$ has a local maximum at $t =
0$, showing that the function $t \mapsto D_q^K(\mu_t)^{1 - q}$ is
differentiable at $0$ and, therefore, has derivative $0$ there. For each
$t \in I$,
\begin{align}
D_q^K(\mu_t)^{1 - q} &
=
\int (K\mu_t)^{q - 1} \d\mu
+
t \int (K\mu_t)^{q - 1} d\bigl((u^- - u^+)\mu\bigr)
\nonumber \\
&
=
a(t) + b(t),
\label{eq:max_bal_0}
\end{align}
say. (Since $\mathrm{supp} \, (K\mu_t) \supseteq \mathrm{supp} \, (\mu_t) = \mathrm{supp} \, \mu$, the
integrand $(K\mu_t)^{q - 1}$ is well-defined and continuous on $\mathrm{supp} \, \mu$,
and both integrals are finite.) We now show that $a(t)$ and $b(t)$ are
differentiable at $t = 0$, compute their derivatives there, and bound the
derivatives below.
To differentiate the integral $a(t)$, we use Lemma~\ref{lem:diff_int}.
Choose a bounded open subinterval $J$ of $I$, also containing $0$, with
$\overline{J} \subseteq I$. We now verify that the function $f:
X \times J \to \bb{R}$ defined by
\[
f(x, t)
=
(K\mu_t)(x)^{q - 1}
=
\Bigl[
(K\mu)(x) + t K\bigl((u^- - u^+) \mu\bigr)(x)
\Bigr]^{q - 1}
\]
satisfies the conditions of Lemma~\ref{lem:diff_int}.
We have already checked condition~\ref{lem:diff_int}(\ref{part:di-int}).
For condition~\ref{lem:diff_int}(\ref{part:di-diff}): for all $x \in
\mathrm{supp} \, \mu$, the function \(f(x, -)\) is differentiable on $I$ (hence $J$),
with derivative
\[
t
\mapsto
\frac{\partial f}{\partial t} (x,t)
=
(q-1)
\Bigl[
(K\mu)(x) + t K\bigl((u^- - u^+) \mu\bigr) (x)
\Bigr]^{q - 2}
\cdot
K\bigl((u^- - u^+)\mu\bigr)(x).
\]
For condition~\ref{lem:diff_int}(\ref{part:di-bound}), this formula shows
that $\partial f/\partial t$ is continuous on $(\mathrm{supp} \, \mu) \times I$. Hence
$|\partial f/\partial t|$ is continuous on the compact space $(\mathrm{supp} \, \mu)
\times \overline{J}$, and therefore bounded on $(\mathrm{supp} \, \mu) \times J$, with
supremum $H$, say. The constant function $H$ on $X$ is
$\mu$-integrable, and $\bigl|\tfrac{\partial f}{\partial t}(x, t)\bigr|
\leq H$ for all $x \in \mathrm{supp} \, \mu$ and $t \in J$, as required.
Now applying Lemma~\ref{lem:diff_int}, $a(t)$ is differentiable at $t = 0$
with
\begin{align}
a'(0) &
=
(q - 1)
\int (K\mu)(x)^{q - 2} K\bigl((u^- - u^+)\mu\bigr)(x) \d\mu(x)
\nonumber \\
&
=
(q-1) \int (K\mu)(x)^{q-2}
\biggl( \int K(x, y) \d ((u^- - u^+) \mu)(y) \biggr)
\d\mu(x)
\nonumber \\
&
\geq
(q-1)
\int (K\mu)^{q-2} \left( K(-, x^-) - K(-, x^+) + 2 \epsilon\right) \d\mu,
\label{eq:a-bound}
\end{align}
where the inequality follows from the defining properties of \(u^-\) and
\(u^+\) and the fact that \(q < 1\).
Next, consider $b(t)$. By definition of derivative, $b$ is differentiable
at $0$ if and only if the limit
\begin{align*}
\lim_{t \to 0}
\int (K\mu_t)^{q-1} \d((u^- - u^+)\mu)
\end{align*}
exists, and in that case $b'(0)$ is that limit. As $t \to 0$, we have
$K\mu_t \to K\mu$ in $C(\mathrm{supp} \, \mu)$, so $(K\mu_t)^{q - 1} \to (K\mu)^{q -
1}$ in $C(\mathrm{supp} \, \mu)$ (by Lemma~\ref{lem:uniform_functorial}). Hence
$b'(0)$ exists and is given by
\[
b'(0) = \int_X (K\mu)^{q - 1} \d\bigl( (u^- - u^+) \mu\bigr).
\]
By the defining properties of \(u^-\) and \(u^+\), it follows that
\begin{align}
\label{eq:b-bound}
b'(0)
\geq
(K\mu)(x^-)^{q-1} - (K\mu)(x^+)^{q-1} - 2\epsilon.
\end{align}
Returning to equation~\eqref{eq:max_bal_0}, we have now shown that both $a(t)$
and $b(t)$ are differentiable at $t = 0$. So too, therefore, is
$D_q^K(\mu_t)^{1 - q}$. But by the maximality of $\mu$, its derivative
there is 0. Hence the bounds~\eqref{eq:a-bound} and~\eqref{eq:b-bound}
give
\begin{align}
0 &
\geq
(q-1)
\int (K\mu)^{q-2} \left( K(-, x^-) - K(-, x^+) + 2\epsilon \right) \d\mu
+
(K\mu)(x^-)^{q-1} - (K\mu)(x^+)^{q-1} - 2\epsilon
\nonumber \\
&
=
(q-1) \left(
\int (K\mu)^{q-2} K(x^-, -) \d\mu
-
\int (K\mu)^{q-2} K(x^+, -) \d\mu
+
2\epsilon \int (K\mu)^{q - 2} \d\mu
\right) \nonumber \\
&
\phantom{= \mbox{}}
\mbox{}
+ (K\mu)(x^-)^{q-1} - (K\mu)(x^+)^{q-1} - 2\epsilon,
\label{eq:ie_calc_1}
\end{align}
using the symmetry of $K$. Consider the first integral
in~\eqref{eq:ie_calc_1}. By definition of $x^-$, and since $q - 2 < 0$, we
have
\[
\int (K\mu)^{q - 2} K(x^-, -) \d\mu
\leq
(K\mu)(x^-)^{q - 2} \int K(x^-, -) \d\mu
=
(K\mu)(x^-)^{q - 1}.
\]
A similar statement holds for $x^+$. Since $q - 1 < 0$, it follows
from~\eqref{eq:ie_calc_1} that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ie_calc_2}
0
\geq
q \left( (K\mu)(x^-)^{q-1} - (K\mu)(x^+)^{q-1} \right)
-
2\epsilon \left( (1-q) \int (K\mu)^{q-2} \d\mu + 1 \right).
\end{equation}
Put \(c = (1-q) \int (K\mu)^{q-2} \d\mu + 1\). Then
by~\eqref{eq:ie_calc_2}, the defining properties of \(x^-\) and \(x^+\),
and the fact that $0 < q < 1$,
\[
2\epsilon c
\geq
q \left( (K\mu)(x^-)^{q-1} - (K\mu)(x^+)^{q-1} \right)
\geq
0.
\]
Taking \(\epsilon \to 0\), we see that \((K\mu)(x^-) = (K\mu)(x^+)\), which
proves the result.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{cor:qmax_balanced}
Assume that $X$ is nonempty. For each \(q \in (0,1)\), there exists a
balanced \(q\)-maximising probability measure on~\(X\).
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Fix \(q \in (0,1)\). The function \(D_q^K\) is continuous on the nonempty
compact space \(P(X)\) (Proposition~\ref{prop:diversity_cts_mu}), so it
attains a maximum at some \(\mu \in P(X)\). By
Corollary~\ref{cor:qmax_balanced}, \(\mu\) is balanced.
\end{proof}
Thus, balanced $q$-maximising measures exist for arbitrarily small $q > 0$.
Later, we will use a limiting argument to find a balanced $0$-maximising
measure. Any such measure maximises diversity of all orders
simultaneously:
\begin{lem}\label{lem:balanced_maximising}
For \(0 \leq q' \leq q \leq \infty\), any balanced probability measure
that is $q'$-maximising is also $q$-maximising. In particular, any
balanced $0$-maximising measure is maximising.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let \(0 \leq q' \leq q \leq \infty\) and let \(\mu\) be a balanced
$q'$-maximising measure. Then for all \(\nu \in P(X)\),
\[
D_q^K(\nu) \leq D_{q'}^K(\nu) \leq D_{q'}^K(\mu) = D_q^K(\mu),
\]
where the inequalities follows from
Proposition~\ref{prop:diversity_cts_q}(\ref{part:dcq-dec}) and the
maximality of \(D_{q'}^K(\mu)\), and the equality from
Lemma~\ref{lem:balanced_tfae} and \(\mu\) being balanced.
\end{proof}
For the limiting argument, we will use:
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:closed}
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item
\label{part:closed-bal}
The set of balanced probability measures is closed in $P(X)$.
\item
\label{part:closed-max}
For each $q \in (0, \infty)$, the set of $q$-maximising probability
measures is closed in $P(X)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
For~(\ref{part:closed-bal}), by Lemma~\ref{lem:balanced_tfae} and
Proposition~\ref{prop:diversity_cts_q}(\ref{part:dcq-dec}), the set of
balanced measures is
\[
\{ \mu \in P(X) \, : \, D_1^K(\mu) = D_2^K(\mu) \}.
\]
But $D_1^K, D_2^K: P(X) \to \bb{R}$ are continuous (by
Proposition~\ref{prop:diversity_cts_mu}), so by a standard topological
argument, this set is closed.
Part~(\ref{part:closed-max}) is immediate from the continuity of $D_q^K$.
\end{proof}
\section{The maximisation theorem}
\label{S_main}
We now come to our main theorem:
\begin{thm}\label{thm:main}
Let \((X, K)\) be a nonempty symmetric space with similarities.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item
\label{part:main-meas}
There exists a probability measure \(\mu\) on $X$ that maximises
\(D_q^K(\mu)\) for all \(q \in [0, \infty]\) simultaneously.
\item
\label{part:main-div}
The maximum diversity $\sup_{\mu \in P(X)} D_q^K(\mu)$ is independent of
\(q \in [0, \infty]\).
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
For each \(q \in (0,1)\), there exists a balanced \(q\)-maximising
probability measure on \(X\) (Corollary~\ref{cor:qmax_balanced}). Since
\(P(X)\) is compact, we can choose some \(\mu \in P(X)\) such that for
every $q > 0$ and neighbourhood $U$ of $\mu$, there exist $q' \in (0, q)$
and a balanced $q'$-maximising measure in $U$. Then by
Lemma~\ref{lem:balanced_maximising}, for every $q > 0$, every neighbourhood
of $\mu$ contains a balanced $q$-maximising measure. To prove both parts
of the theorem, it suffices to show that $\mu$ is balanced and maximising.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:closed}(\ref{part:closed-bal}), $\mu$ is balanced. By
Lemma~\ref{lem:closed}(\ref{part:closed-max}), $\mu$ is $q$-maximising for
each $q > 0$. Now given any $\nu \in P(X)$, we have $D_q^K(\mu) \geq
D_q^K(\nu)$ for all $q > 0$; then passing to the limit as $q \to 0+$ and
using the continuity of diversity in its order
(Proposition~\ref{prop:diversity_cts_q}(\ref{part:dcq-cts})) gives
$D_0^K(\mu) \geq D_0^K(\nu)$. Hence $\mu$ is $0$-maximising. But $\mu$ is
also balanced, so by Lemma~\ref{lem:balanced_maximising}, $\mu$ is
maximising.
\end{proof}
The symmetry hypothesis in the theorem cannot be dropped, even in the
finite case (\cite{LeinsterMaximizing2016}, Section~8).
Part~(\ref{part:main-div}) of the theorem shows that maximum diversity is
an unambiguous real invariant of a space, not depending on a choice of
parameter~$q$:
\begin{defn}\label{def_maxdiv}
Let \((X, K)\) be a nonempty symmetric space with similarities. The
\demph{maximum diversity} of \((X, K)\) is
\[
\Dmax{X}{K} = \sup_{\mu \in P(X)} D_q^K(\mu) \in (0, \infty),
\]
for any \(q \in [0,\infty]\).
Similarly, the \demph{maximum entropy} of $(X, K)$ is
\[
\Hmax{X}{K} = \log\Dmax{X}{K} = \sup_{\mu \in P(X)} H_q^K(\mu).
\]
We often abbreviate $\Dmax{X}{K}$ as $\Dmx{X}$.
\end{defn}
The well-definedness of maximum diversity can be understood as follows. As
established in Section~\ref{S_prep_lemmas}, for a maximising measure $\mu$,
all points in $\mathrm{supp} \, \mu$ are equally typical. Diversity is mean
atypicality, and although the notion of mean varies with the order $q$, all
means have the property that the mean of an essentially constant function
is that constant. Thus, our maximising measure $\mu$ has the same
diversity of all orders. That diversity is $\Dmx{X}$.
To find a measure that maximises diversity of \emph{all} positive orders,
it suffices to find one that maximises diversity of just \emph{one}
positive order:
\begin{cor}\label{cor:one_is_enough}
Let $(X, K)$ be a symmetric space with similarities.
Suppose that \(\mu \in P(X)\) is $q$-maximising for some \(q \in
(0,\infty]\). Then \(\mu\) is maximising.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Fix \(q \in (0,\infty]\) and let \(\mu\) be a \(q\)-maximising measure. Then
\[
D_q^K(\mu) \leq D_0^K(\mu) \leq \Dmx{X} = D_q^K(\mu),
\]
so equality holds throughout. As $D_q^K(\mu) = D_0^K(\mu)$ with $q \neq
0$, Proposition~\ref{prop:diversity_cts_q}(\ref{part:dcq-dec}) implies that
$\mu$ is balanced. But also $D_0^K(\mu) = \Dmx{X}$, so $\mu$ is
$0$-maximising. Lemma~\ref{lem:balanced_maximising} then implies that
$\mu$ is maximising.
\end{proof}
The exclusion of the case $q = 0$ here is necessary: not every
$0$-maximising measure is maximising, even in the finite case
(\cite{LeinsterMaximizing2016}, end of Section~6)
Theorem~\ref{thm:main} asserts the mere \emph{existence} of a maximising
measure and the well-definedness of maximum diversity. But there is a
somewhat explicit \emph{description} of the maximum diversity and
maximising measures, in terms of magnitude and weight measures:
\begin{cor}
\label{cor:comp}
Let $(X, K)$ be a nonempty symmetric space with similarities.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item
\label{part:comp-max}
We have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:max-mag}
\Dmx{X} = \sup_Y |Y|,
\end{equation}
where the supremum is over the nonempty closed subsets $Y$ of $X$ admitting
a positive weight measure.
\item
\label{part:comp-meas}
A probability measure $\mu$ on $X$ is maximising if and only if it is equal
to $\wext{\nu}$ for some positive weight measure $\nu$ on some subset
$Y$ attaining the supremum in~\eqref{eq:max-mag}. In that case,
$\Dmx{X} = |\mathrm{supp} \, \mu|$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
For any $q
\in [0, \infty]$,
\begin{align}
\Dmx{X} &
=
\sup\{D_q^K(\mu) \, : \, \mu \in P(X), \ \mu \text{ is balanced}\}
\label{eq:comp1} \\
&
=
\sup\{|Y| \, : \, \text{nonempty closed } Y \subseteq X \text{ admitting a
positive weight measure}\},
\label{eq:comp2}
\end{align}
where~\eqref{eq:comp1} follows from the existence of a balanced maximising
measure and~\eqref{eq:comp2} from Lemma~\ref{lem:balanced_tfae}. This
proves~(\ref{part:comp-max}). Every maximising measure is balanced,
so~(\ref{part:comp-meas}) also follows, again using
Lemma~\ref{lem:balanced_tfae}.
\end{proof}
It follows that maximum diversity is monotone with
respect to inclusion:
\begin{cor}\label{cor:md_monotone_1}
Let \(X\) be a symmetric space with similarities, and let \(Y
\subseteq X\) be a nonempty closed subset. Then $\Dmx{Y} \leq \Dmx{X}$.
\qedhere
\end{cor}
Maximum diversity is also monotone in another sense: reducing the
similarity between points increases the maximum diversity. For metric
spaces, this means that as distances increase, so does maximum
diversity.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:md_monotone_2}
Let $X$ be a nonempty compact Hausdorff space. Let $K, K'$ be symmetric
similarity kernels on $X$ such that $K(x, y) \geq K'(x, y)$ for all $x, y
\in X$. Then
$
\Dmax{X}{K} \leq \Dmax{X}{K'}.
$
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Fix $q \in [0, \infty]$. We have $K\mu \geq K'\mu$ pointwise, so by
definition of diversity, $D_q^K(\mu) \leq D_q^{K'}(\mu)$ for
all $\mu \in P(X)$. Maximizing over $\mu$ gives the result.
\end{proof}
Maximising measures need not have full support. Ecologically, that may
seem counterintuitive: can maximising diversity really entail eliminating
some species? This phenonemon is discussed fully in Section~11
of~\cite{LeinsterMaximizing2016}, but in short: if a species is so ordinary
that all of its features are displayed more vividly by some other species,
then maximising diversity may indeed mean omitting it in favour of species
that are more distinctive. With this in mind, it is to be expected that
any species absent from a maximising distribution is \hard{(i)}~at least as
ordinary or typical as those present, and \hard{(ii)}~reasonably similar to
at least one species present. Since the typicality function of a
maximising measure $\mu$ takes constant value $1/\Dmx{X}$ on $\mathrm{supp} \, \mu$ (by
Proposition~\ref{prop:qmax_balanced}), this is the content of the following
lemma.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:supertypical}
Let $\mu$ be a maximising measure on a nonempty symmetric space with
similarities $(X, K)$, and let $x \in X$. Then:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item
\label{part:st-st}
$(K\mu)(x) \geq 1/\Dmx{X}$;
\item
\label{part:st-close}
there exists $y \in \mathrm{supp} \, \mu$ such that $K(x, y) \geq 1/\Dmx{X}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
The proof will use the symmetric bilinear form $\ip{-}{-}_X$ on $M(X)$
given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:form}
\ip{\nu}{\pi}_X
=
\int_X \int_X K(x, y) \d\nu(x) \d\pi(y),
\end{equation}
and the observation that $D_2^K(\nu) = 1/\ip{\nu}{\nu}_X$.
\begin{proof}
To prove~(\ref{part:st-st}), for $s \in [0, 1]$, put
\[
\nu_s = (1 - s)\mu + s \delta_x \in P(X).
\]
Then for all $s \in [0, 1]$,
\begin{align*}
1/D_2^K(\nu_S) &
=
\Ip{(1 - s)\mu + s\delta_x}{(1 - s)\mu + s\delta_x}_X \\
&
=
(1 - s)^2 / \Dmx{X} + 2s(1 - s)\cdot (K\mu)(x) + s^2 K(x, x).
\end{align*}
Rearranging gives
\[
\frac{1}{D_2^K(\nu_S)} - \frac{1}{\Dmx{X}}
=
\biggl\{
\biggl( \frac{1}{\Dmx{X}} - 2(K\mu)(x) + K(x, x) \biggr) s
+
2 \biggl( (K\mu)(x) - \frac{1}{\Dmx{X}} \biggr)
\biggr\} s.
\]
But the left-hand side is nonnegative for all $s \in (0, 1]$, so the affine
function $\{\cdots\}$ of $s$ is nonnegative on $(0, 1]$, hence $(K\mu)(x)
- 1/\Dmx{X} \geq 0$.
To prove~(\ref{part:st-close}), it follows from~(\ref{part:st-st}) that
\[
\frac{1}{\Dmx{X}}
\leq
(K\mu)(x)
=
\int_{\mathrm{supp} \, \mu} K(x, y) \d\mu(y)
\leq
\sup_{y \in \mathrm{supp} \, \mu} K(x, y),
\]
and since $\mathrm{supp} \, \mu$ is compact, the supremum is attained.
\end{proof}
\section{Metric spaces}
\label{S_metric}
For the rest of this paper, we specialise to compact metric spaces $X = (X,
d)$, using the similarity kernel $K(x, y) = e^{-d(x, y)}$ and writing
$D_q^K$ as $D_q^X$.
We have seen that maximum diversity is closely related to magnitude
(Corollary~\ref{cor:comp}). Here, we review some of the geometric
properties of magnitude (surveyed in~\cite{Leinstermagnitude2017}) and
state their consequences for maximum diversity. We then compute maximum
diversity for several classes of metric space.
Most of the theory of the magnitude of metric spaces assumes that the space
is \demph{positive definite}, meaning that for every finite sequence $x_1,
\ldots, x_n$ of distinct points, the matrix $(e^{-d(x_i, x_j)})$ is
positive definite. Many familiar metric spaces are positive definite,
including all subsets of $\bb{R}^n$ with the Euclidean or $\ell^1$ (taxicab)
metric, all subsets of hyperbolic space, and all ultrametric spaces
(\cite{MeckesPositive2013}, Theorem~3.6).
There are several equivalent definitions of the magnitude of a positive
definite compact metric space $X$, as shown by
Meckes~\cite{MeckesMagnitude2015,Leinstermagnitude2017}. The simplest is
this:
\[
|X| = \sup \{ |Y| \, : \, \text{finite } Y \subseteq X \}.
\]
When $X$ admits a weight measure (and in particular, when $X$ is finite),
this is equivalent to Definition~\ref{def_magnitude}. Indeed, Meckes
proved (\cite{MeckesPositive2013}, Theorems~2.3 and~2.4):
\begin{thm}[Meckes]
\label{thm:pdms_variational}
Let $X$ be a positive definite compact metric space. Then
\[
|X| =
\sup_\mu
\frac{\mu(X)^2}{\int_X \int_X e^{-d(x, y)} \d\mu(x) \d\mu(y)},
\]
where the supremum is over all $\mu \in M(X)$ such that the denominator is
nonzero. The supremum is attained by $\mu$ if and only if $\mu$ is a
scalar multiple of a weight measure, and if $\mu$ is a weight measure then
$|X| = \mu(X)$.
\qedhere
\end{thm}
Note that the supremum is over \emph{signed} measures, unlike the similar
expression for maximum diversity in Example~\ref{eg:div2}. Work such
as~\cite{Barcelomagnitudes2018} has established that even for some of the
most straightforward spaces (including Euclidean balls), no weight measure
exists. In that case, the supremum is not attained.
An important property of positive definite spaces, immediate from the
definition, is that if $Y \subseteq X$ then $|Y| \leq |X|$. Hence by
Corollary~\ref{cor:comp}(\ref{part:comp-max}),
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:max-leq-mag}
\Dmx{X} \leq |X|
\end{equation}
for all positive definite compact metric spaces $X \neq \emptyset$. Any
one-point subset of $X$ has a positive weight measure and magnitude~$1$,
so again by Corollary~\ref{cor:comp}(\ref{part:comp-max}),
\[
\Dmx{X} \geq 1.
\]
If $X$ does not admit a weight measure then it follows from
Corollary~\ref{cor:comp}(\ref{part:comp-meas}) that no maximising measure
on $X$ has full support. Indeed, the apparent rarity of spaces admitting a
weight measure suggests that the supremum in Corollary~\ref{cor:comp} runs
over a rather small class of subsets $Y$.
There are a few spaces of geometric interest whose magnitude is known
exactly, including spheres with the geodesic metric (Theorem~7
of~\cite{Willertonmagnitude2014}), Euclidean balls of odd dimension (whose
magnitude is a rational function of the radius \cite{Barcelomagnitudes2018,
WillMOBH, Willertonmagnitude2018}), and convex bodies in
$\bb{R}^n$ with the $\ell^1$ metric (Theorem~5.4.6
of~\cite{Leinstermagnitude2017}; the magnitude is closely related to the
intrinsic volumes). But for many very simple spaces, including even the
$2$-dimensional Euclidean disc, the magnitude remains unknown.
In the rest of this section, we analyse the few classes of metric space for
which we are able to calculate the maximum diversity exactly. In principle
this includes all finite spaces, since Corollary~\ref{cor:comp} then
provides an algorithm for calculating the maximum diversity (described in
Section~7 of~\cite{LeinsterMaximizing2016}). This class aside, all our
examples are instances of the following result.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:pos-pos-dmax}
Let $X$ be a nonempty positive definite compact metric space admitting a
positive weight measure $\mu$. Then:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item
\label{part:ppd-meas}
the normalisation $\wext{\mu}$ of $\mu$ is the unique maximising
measure on \(X\);
\item
\label{part:ppd-dmax}
$\Dmx{X} = |X|$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Since $X$ admits a positive weight measure,
Corollary~\ref{cor:comp}(\ref{part:comp-max}) gives $\Dmx{X} \geq |X|$.
But the opposite inequality~\eqref{eq:max-leq-mag} also holds, so $\Dmx{X}
= |X|$. Hence by Corollary~\ref{cor:comp}(\ref{part:comp-meas}),
$\wext{\mu}$ is a maximising measure. For uniqueness, let $\nu$ be any
maximising measure on $X$. Then
\[
\frac{\nu(X)}{\int_X \int_X e^{-d(x, y)} \d\nu(x) \d\nu(y)}
=
D_2^X(\nu)
=
\Dmx{X}
=
|X|,
\]
so Theorem~\ref{thm:pdms_variational} implies that $\nu$ is a scalar multiple
of $\wext{\mu}$. But both are probability measures, so $\nu =
\wext{\mu}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{example}
\label{eg:scattered}
Let $X$ be a finite metric space with $n$ points, satisfying $d(x, y) >
\log(n - 1)$ whenever $x \neq y$. Then $X$ is positive definite and its
unique weight measure is positive (Proposition~2.4.17
of~\cite{Leinstermagnitude2013}), so $\Dmx{X} = |X|$.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
\label{eg:ms-interval}
A line segment $[0,
\ell] \subseteq \bb{R}$ has weight measure
\[
\tfrac{1}{2} (\delta_0 + \delta_\ell + \lambda_{[0, \ell]}),
\]
where $\delta_x$ denotes the Dirac measure at a point $x$ and $\lambda_{[0,
\ell]}$ is Lebesgue measure on $[0, \ell]$
(\cite{Willertonmagnitude2014}, Theorem~2). Hence
\[
|[0, \ell]| = 1 + \tfrac{1}{2}\ell.
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:pos-pos-dmax}, the maximum diversity of $[0, \ell]$ is
equal to its magnitude, and its unique maximising measure is
\[
\frac{\delta_0 + \delta_\ell + \lambda_{[0, \ell]}}{2 + \ell}.
\]
In fact, every compact subset of $\bb{R}$ has a positive weight measure (by
Lemma~2.8 and Corollary~2.10 of~\cite{MeckesPositive2013}), so again,
Lemma~\ref{lem:pos-pos-dmax} applies.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
\label{eg:ms-hgs}
Let $X$ be a nonempty compact metric space that is \demph{homogeneous}
(its isometry group acts transitively on points). There is a unique
isometry-invariant probability measure on $X$, the Haar probability
measure $\mu$ (Theorems~4.11 and~5.3 of~\cite{SteinlageHaar1975}). As
observed in~\cite{Willertonmagnitude2014} (Theorem~1), the measure
\[
\frac{\mu}{\int_X e^{-d(x, y)} \d\mu(x)}
\]
is independent of $y \in X$ and is a positive weight measure on $X$. Hence
\[
|X| = \frac{1}{\int_X e^{-d(x, y)} \d\mu(x)}
\]
for all $y \in X$. This is the reciprocal of the expected similarity
between a random pair of points. If $X$ is positive definite,
Lemma~\ref{lem:pos-pos-dmax} implies that $\Dmx{X} = |X|$ and the Haar
probability measure is the unique maximising measure.
\end{example}
We have shown that every symmetric space with similarities has at least one
maximising measure. Although some spaces have multiple maximising measures
(\cite{LeinsterMaximizing2016}, Section~9), we now show that for many
metric spaces, the maximising measure is unique.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:ip-unique}
Let $X$ be a nonempty compact metric space such that the bilinear form
$\ip{-}{-}_X$ on $M(X)$ (defined in~\eqref{eq:form}) is positive
definite. Then $X$ admits exactly one maximising measure.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Since $\ip{-}{-}_X$ is an inner product, the function $\mu \mapsto
\ip{\mu}{\mu}_X$ on $M(X)$ is strictly convex. Its restriction to the
convex set $P(X)$ therefore attains a minimum at most once. But
$D_2^X(\mu) = 1/\ip{\mu}{\mu}_X$, so $\mu$ minimises $\ip{-}{-}_X$ on
$P(X)$ if and only if $\mu$ is 2-maximising, or equivalently maximising (by
Corollary~\ref{cor:one_is_enough}). The result follows.
\end{proof}
The next proposition follows immediately from Lemma~\ref{lem:ip-unique};
the subsequent more substantial result is due to Mark Meckes (personal
communication, 2019).
\begin{prop}
Every nonempty positive definite finite metric space has exactly one
maximising measure.
\end{prop}
\begin{prop}[Meckes]
\label{prop:euc-unique}
Every nonempty compact subset of Euclidean space has exactly one maximising
measure.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $X$ be a nonempty compact subset of $\bb{R}^n$. Then $X$ is positive
definite, so by Lemma~2.2 of~\cite{MeckesPositive2013}, $\ip{\mu}{\mu}_X
\geq 0$ for all $\mu \in M(X)$. By Lemma~\ref{lem:ip-unique}, it now
suffices to prove that if $\ip{\mu}{\mu}_X = 0$ then $\mu = 0$.
Define $F: \bb{R}^n \to \bb{R}$ by $F(x) = e^{-\|x\|}$. Then
\[
\ip{\mu}{\nu}_X = \int_{\bb{R}^n} (F * \mu) \d\nu
\]
($\mu, \nu \in M(X)$), where $*$ denotes convolution. By the standard
properties of the Fourier transform $\hat{\ }$, it follows that
\[
\ip{\mu}{\mu}_X = \int_{\bb{R}^n} \hat{F} |\hat{\mu}|^2 \d\lambda,
\]
where $\lambda$ is Lebesgue measure. But $\hat{F}$ is everywhere strictly
positive (Theorem~1.14 of~\cite{SteinIntroduction1971}), so if
$\ip{\mu}{\mu}_X = 0$ then $\hat{\mu} = 0$ almost everywhere, which in turn
implies that $\mu = 0$ (paragraph~1.7.3(b) of~\cite{RudinFourier1962}).
\end{proof}
\section{The uniform measure}
\label{S_uniform}
For many of the spaces that arise often in mathematics, there is a choice
of probability measure that seems natural to us. For finite sets, it is
the uniform measure. For homogeneous spaces, it is Haar measure. For
subsets of $\bb{R}^n$ with finite nonzero volume, it is normalised Lebesgue
measure. In this section, we propose a method for assigning a canonical
probability measure to any compact metric space (subject to conditions).
We call it the \emph{uniform measure}.
There are two thoughts behind this method. The first is very standard in
statistics: take the probability distribution that maximises entropy. For
example, in the context of differential entropy of probability distributions
on $\bb{R}$, the maximum entropy distribution supported on a prescribed bounded
interval is the uniform distribution on it, and the maximum entropy
distribution with a prescribed mean and variance is the normal
distribution.
However, on a compact metric space $X$, the maximising measure is in one
sense not a suitable choice of `uniform' measure. The problem is
scale-invariance. For many uses of metric spaces, the choice of scale
factor is somewhat arbitrary: if we multiplied all the distances by a
constant $t > 0$, we would regard the space as essentially unchanged.
(Formally, scaling by $t$ defines an automorphism of the category of metric
spaces, for any of the standard notions of map between metric spaces.) But
the maximising measure depends critically on the scale factor, as almost
every example in the previous section shows.
There now enters the second thought: pass to the large-scale
limit. Thus, we define the uniform measure on a space to be the limit of
the maximising measures as the scale factor increases to $\infty$. Let us
now make this formal.
\begin{defn}
Let $X = (X, d)$ be a metric space and $t \in (0, \infty)$. We write $td$
for the metric on $X$ defined by $(td)(x, y) = t\cdot d(x, y)$, and $K^t$
for the similarity kernel on $X$ defined by $K^t(x, y) = e^{-td(x, y)}$.
We denote by $tX$ the set $X$ equipped with the metric $td$.
\end{defn}
By Proposition~\ref{prop:md_monotone_2}, $\Dmx{tX}$ is increasing in $t \in
(0, \infty)$, for any compact metric space $X$. If $X$ is a subspace of
$\bb{R}^n$ then $tX = (X, td)$ is isometric to $(\{tx \, : \, x \in X\}, d)$, where
$d$ is Euclidean distance. But we will regard the set $X$ as fixed and the
metric as varying with $t$.
\begin{defn}
\label{defn:ufm}
Let $X$ be a compact metric space. Suppose that $tX$ has a unique
maximising measure $\mu_t$ for all $t \gg 0$, and that $\lim_{t \to \infty}
\mu_t$ exists in $P(X)$. Then the \demph{uniform measure} on $X$ is
$\mu_X = \lim_{t \to \infty} \mu_t$.
\end{defn}
The uniform measure has the desired property of scale-invariance:
\begin{lem}
Let $X$ be a compact metric space and $t > 0$. Then $\mu_X = \mu_{tX}$,
with one side of the equality defined if and only if the other is.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
This is immediate from the definition.
\end{proof}
The next few results show that on several significant classes of space, the
uniform measure is the canonical or `obvious' probability measure.
\begin{prop}
\label{prop:ufm-fin}
On a nonempty finite metric space, the uniform measure exists and is
the uniform probability measure in the standard sense.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $X = \{x_1, \ldots, x_n\}$ be a finite metric space. For $t > 0$, write
$Z^t$ for the $n \times n$ matrix with entries $e^{-td(x_i, x_j)}$. For $t
\gg 0$, the space $tX$ is positive definite with positive weight measure,
by Example~\ref{eg:scattered}. Expressed as a vector, the weight measure
on $tX$ (for $t \gg 0$) is
\[
(Z^t)^{-1}
\begin{pmatrix}
1 \\ \vdots \\ 1
\end{pmatrix}.
\]
The normalisation of this weight measure is the unique maximising measure
$\mu_t$ on $tX$, by Lemma~\ref{lem:pos-pos-dmax}. As $t \to \infty$, we
have $Z^t \to I$ in the topological group $\mathrm{GL}_n(\bb{R})$, giving
$(Z^t)^{-1} \to I$ and so $\mu_t \to (1/n, \ldots, 1/n)$.
\end{proof}
This result shows that the uniform measure need not be uniformly
distributed, in the sense that balls of the same radius may have different
measures.
The concept of uniform measure also behaves well on homogeneous spaces. We
restrict to those spaces $X$ such that $tX$ is positive definite for every
$t > 0$, which is equivalent to the classical condition that $X$ is of
\demph{negative type}. (The proof of equivalence is essentially due
to Schoenberg; see Theorem~3.3 of~\cite{MeckesPositive2013}.)
\begin{prop}
\label{prop:ufm-hgs}
On a nonempty, homogeneous, compact metric space of negative type,
the uniform measure exists and is the Haar probability
measure.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $X$ be such a space. The Haar probability measure $\mu$ on $X$ is the
unique isometry-invariant probability measure on $X$, so it is also the
Haar probability measure on $tX$ for every $t > 0$. Hence by
Example~\ref{eg:ms-hgs}, $\mu_t = \mu$ for all $t$, and the result follows
trivially.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}
\label{prop:ufm-interval}
On the line segment $[0, \ell]$ of length $\ell > 0$, the uniform
measure exists and is Lebesgue measure restricted to $[0, \ell]$,
normalised to a probability measure.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Write $X = [0, \ell]$ and $d$ for the metric on $\bb{R}$. For each $t > 0$,
the metric space $tX = (X, td)$ is isometric to the interval $[0, t\ell]$
with metric $d$, which by Example~\ref{eg:ms-interval} has unique
maximising measure
\[
\frac{\delta_0 + \delta_{t\ell} + \lambda_{[0, t\ell]}}{2 + t\ell}.
\]
Transferring this measure across the isometry, $tX$ therefore has unique
maximising measure
\[
\mu_t =
\frac{\delta_0 + \delta_\ell + t\lambda_{[0, \ell]}}{2 + t\ell}.
\]
Hence $\mu_t \to \lambda_{[0, \ell]}/\ell$ as $t \to \infty$.
\end{proof}
We now embark on the proof that Proposition~\ref{prop:ufm-interval} extends
to higher dimensions. Let $X$ be a compact subspace of $\bb{R}^n$ with nonzero
volume, write $\lambda_X$ for $n$-dimensional Lebesgue measure $\lambda$
restricted to $X$, and write $\wext{\lambda_X} = \lambda_X/\lambda(X)$ for
its normalisation to a probability measure. We will show that
$\wext{\lambda_X}$ is the uniform measure on $X$. Unlike in
Propositions~\ref{prop:ufm-fin}--\ref{prop:ufm-interval}, we have no
formula for the maximising measure on $tX$, so the argument is
less direct.
We begin by showing that at large scales, $\wext{\lambda_X}$ comes close to
maximising diversity, in the sense of the last part of the following
proposition.
\begin{prop}
\label{prop:preufm-euc}
Let $X$ be a compact subspace of $\bb{R}^n$ with nonzero volume $\lambda(X)$.
Then
\[
\lim_{t \to \infty} \frac{\Dmx{tX}}{|tX|} = 1
\qquad \text{and} \qquad
\lim_{t \to \infty} \frac{\Dmx{tX}}{t^n} = \frac{\lambda(X)}{n!\omega_n},
\]
where $\omega_n$ is the volume of the unit ball in $\bb{R}^n$. Moreover, for
all $q \in [0, \infty]$,
\[
\lim_{t \to \infty} \frac{D_q^{tX}(\wext{\lambda_X})}{\Dmx{tX}}
=
1.
\]
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We first show that for all $t > 0$ and $q \in [0, \infty]$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ue1}
|tX| \geq
\Dmx{tX} \geq
D_q^{tX}(\wext{\lambda_X}) \geq
\frac{\lambda(X)t^n}{n!\omega_n}.
\end{equation}
The first inequality in~\eqref{eq:ue1} is an instance
of~\eqref{eq:max-leq-mag}, since $tX$ is positive definite. The second
is immediate. For the third, diversity is decreasing in its order,
so it suffices to prove the case $q = \infty$. The inequality then states
that
\[
\frac{1}{\sup_{x \in \mathrm{supp} \, \wext{\lambda_X}} (K^t \wext{\lambda_X})(x)}
\geq
\frac{\lambda(X)t^n}{n!\omega_n},
\]
or equivalently, for all $x \in \mathrm{supp} \, \wext{\lambda_X}$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ue2}
(K^t \wext{\lambda_X})(x)
\leq
\frac{n!\omega_n}{\lambda(X)t^n}.
\end{equation}
Now for all $x \in X$,
\[
(K^t \wext{\lambda_X})(x)
=
\frac{1}{\lambda(X)} \int_X e^{-t\|x - y\|} \d y
\leq
\frac{1}{\lambda(X)} \int_{\bb{R}^n} e^{-t\|x - y\|} \d y.
\]
The last integral is $n!\omega_n/t^n$, by a standard calculation (as in
Lemma~3.5.9 of~\cite{Leinstermagnitude2013}). So we have now proved
inequality~\eqref{eq:ue2} and, therefore, all of~\eqref{eq:ue1}.
Dividing~\eqref{eq:ue1} through by $|tX|$ gives
\[
1 \geq
\frac{\Dmx{tX}}{|tX|} \geq
\frac{D_q^{tX}(\wext{\lambda_X})}{|tX|} \geq
\frac{\lambda(X)t^n}{n! \omega_n |tX|}
\]
for all $t > 0$ and $q \in [0, \infty]$. Theorem~1
of~\cite{Barcelomagnitudes2018} states, in part, that the final term
converges to $1$ as $t \to \infty$. Hence all terms do, and the result
follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{rmks}
\label{rmks:Dmax-euc}
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item
\label{rmk:Dmax-euc-cap}
The fact that $\Dmx{X}/|tX| \to 1$ as $t \to \infty$ is one of a collection
of results expressing the relationship between maximum diversity and
magnitude. Perhaps the deepest of these is a result of Meckes, who showed
that maximum diversity is equal to a quantity that is already known (if
little explored) in potential theory: up to a constant, $\Dmx{X}$ is the
Bessel capacity of order $(n + 1)/2$ of $X$ (\cite{MeckesMagnitude2015},
Section~6). He used this fact to prove that for each $n \geq 1$, there is
a constant $\kappa_n$ such that
\[
|X| \leq \kappa_n \Dmx{X}
\]
for all nonempty compact $X \subseteq \bb{R}^n$ (Corollary~6.2
of~\cite{MeckesMagnitude2015}). This is a companion to the elementary
fact that $\Dmx{X} \leq |X|$ (inequality~(\ref{eq:max-leq-mag})).
\item
The second equation in Proposition~\ref{prop:preufm-euc} implies that the
volume of $X \subseteq \bb{R}^n$ can be recovered from the function $t \mapsto
\Dmx{tX}$. This result is in the same spirit as
Theorem~\ref{thm:minkowski}, which states that one can also recover the
Minkowski dimension of $X$ from the asymptotics of $\Dmx{tX}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{rmks}
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:ufm-euc}
On a compact set $X \subseteq \bb{R}^n$ of nonzero Lebesgue measure, the
uniform measure exists and is equal to Lebesgue measure restricted to $X$,
normalised to a probability measure.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
By Proposition~\ref{prop:euc-unique}, $tX$ has a unique maximizing measure
$\mu_t$ for each $t > 0$. We must prove that $\lim_{t \to \infty} \int_X
f \d\mu_t = \int_X f\d\wext{\lambda_X}$ for each $f \in C(X)$.
Define $F \in C(\bb{R}^n)$ by $F(x) = e^{-\|x\|}$; then $\int_{\bb{R}^n} F
\d\lambda = n!\omega_n$, as noted in the proof of
Proposition~\ref{prop:preufm-euc}. We will apply
Lemma~\ref{lem:approx-conv} to the function $G = F/n!\omega_n$. We have
$G_t = t^n F^t/n!\omega_n$ for $t > 0$, and $\int_{\bb{R}^n} G \d\lambda = 1$.
First we prove the weaker statement that for all nonnegative $f \in C(X)$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:liminf}
\liminf_{t \to \infty} \int_X f \d\mu_t
\geq
\int_X f \d\wext{\lambda_X}.
\end{equation}
Fix $f$, and choose a nonnegative extension $\bar{f} \in C(\bb{R}^n)$ of
bounded support. Let $\epsilon > 0$. By Lemma~\ref{lem:approx-conv}, we
can choose $T_1 > 0$ such that for all $t \geq T_1$,
\[
\int_{\bb{R}^n}
\bar{f} \cdot \biggl( \frac{t^n F^t}{n!\omega_n} * \mu_t \biggr)
\d\lambda
-
\int_{\bb{R}^n} \bar{f} \d\mu_t
\leq
\frac{\epsilon}{2}.
\]
By Proposition~\ref{prop:preufm-euc}, we can also choose $T_2 > 0$ such
that for all $t \geq T_2$,
\[
\frac{t^n/n!\omega_n}{\Dmx{tX}}
\geq
\frac{1}{\lambda(X)} -
\frac{\epsilon}{2\int_X f \d\lambda}.
\]
Then for all $t \geq \max\{T_1, T_2\}$,
\begin{align}
\int_X f \d\mu_t &
=
\int_{\bb{R}^n} \bar{f} \d\mu_t
\label{eq:euc1} \\
&
\geq
\int_{\bb{R}^n}
\bar{f} \cdot \biggl( \frac{t^n F^t}{n!\omega_n} * \mu_t \biggr)
\d\lambda
- \frac{\epsilon}{2}
\label{eq:euc2} \\
&
\geq
\int_X
f \cdot \biggl( \frac{t^n F^t}{n!\omega_n} * \mu_t \biggr)
\d\lambda
- \frac{\epsilon}{2}
\label{eq:euc3} \\
&
=
\int_X f \cdot \frac{t^n}{n!\omega_n} (K^t \mu_t) \d\lambda
- \frac{\epsilon}{2}
\label{eq:euc4} \\
&
\geq
\int_X f \cdot \frac{t^n/n!\omega_n}{\Dmx{tX}} \d\lambda
- \frac{\epsilon}{2}
\label{eq:euc5} \\
&
\geq
\int_X f \d\wext{\lambda_X}
- \epsilon,
\label{eq:euc6}
\end{align}
where~\eqref{eq:euc1} holds because $\mu_t$ is supported on $X$,
\eqref{eq:euc2} because $t \geq T_1$, \eqref{eq:euc3}~because $\bar{f}$,
$F^t$ and $\mu_t$ are nonnegative, \eqref{eq:euc4}~because $F^t * \mu_t =
K^t\mu_t$, \eqref{eq:euc5}~by
Lemma~\ref{lem:supertypical}(\ref{part:st-st}), and~\eqref{eq:euc6} because
$t \geq T_2$ and $f \geq 0$. The claimed inequality~\eqref{eq:liminf}
follows.
Now observe that if $f \in C(X)$ satisfies~\eqref{eq:liminf} then so does
$f + c$ for all constants~$c$. But every function in $C(X)$ can be
expressed as the sum of a continuous nonnegative function and a constant,
so~\eqref{eq:liminf} holds for all $f \in C(X)$. Let $f \in C(X)$.
Applying~\eqref{eq:liminf} to $-f$ in place of $f$ gives
\[
\limsup_{t \to \infty} \int_X f \d\mu_t
\leq
\int_X f \d\wext{\lambda_X},
\]
which together with~\eqref{eq:liminf} itself gives the desired result.
\end{proof}
\begin{rmk}
Let $X \subseteq \bb{R}^n$ be a compact set of nonzero volume. Then
$\mathrm{supp} \, \mu_t \to X$ in the Hausdorff metric $d_{\mathrm{H}}$ as $t \to \infty$.
Indeed, Lemma~\ref{lem:supertypical}(\ref{part:st-close}) applied to the
similarity kernel $K^t$ gives $t d_{\mathrm{H}}(X, \mathrm{supp} \, \mu_t) \leq \Hmx{tX}$, so
\[
d_{\mathrm{H}}(X, \mathrm{supp} \, \mu_t)
\leq
\frac{\Hmx{tX}}{t}
=
\frac{\Hmx{tX}}{\log t} \cdot \frac{\log t}{t}
\to
n \cdot 0
=
0
\]
as $t \to \infty$, by Theorem~\ref{thm:minkowski}. (The same argument
applies to any compact metric space of finite Minkowski dimension.)
However, the support of the uniform measure $\wext{\lambda_X} =
\lim_{t \to \infty} \mu_t$ need not be $X$; that is, some nonempty open
sets may have measure zero. Any nontrivial union of an $n$-dimensional set
with a lower-dimensional set gives an example.
\end{rmk}
\section{Open questions}\label{S_conjectures}
(1)~As a numerical invariant of compact metric spaces (and more generally,
of symmetric spaces with similarity), how does maximum diversity behave with
respect to products, unions, etc., of spaces? What are the maximising
measures on a product or union of spaces, and what is the uniform measure?
(2)~Beyond the finite case, very few examples of maximising measures are
known. What, for instance, is the maximising measure on a Euclidean ball or
cube? We do not even know its support. In the case of a Euclidean ball,
we conjecture that the support of the maximising measure is a finite union
of concentric spheres, the number of spheres depending on the radius.
(3)~The uniform measure, when defined, is a canonical probability measure
on a given metric space. But so too is the Hausdorff measure. More
exactly, if the Hausdorff dimension $d$ of $X$ is finite then we have the
Hausdorff measure $\mathcal{H}^d$ on $X$, which if $0 < \mathcal{H}^d(X) <
\infty$ can be normalised to a probability measure. What is the
relationship between the Hausdorff probability measure and the uniform
measure? It is probably not simple: for example, on $\{1, 1/2, 1/3,
\ldots, 0\} \subseteq \bb{R}$, the uniform measure is well-defined (it is
$\delta_0$), but the Hausdorff probability measure is not.
(4)~What is the relationship between our notion of the uniform measure on a
compact metric space and that proposed by Ostrovsky and
Sirota~\cite{OstrovskyUniform2014} (based on entropy of a
different kind)?
(5)~For finite spaces with similarity, the diversity measures
$D_q^K$ were first introduced in ecology~\cite{LeinsterMeasuring2012} and
have been successfully applied there. What are the biological applications
of our diversity measures on non-finite spaces? In particular, in
microbial biology it is common to treat the space of possible organisms as
a continuum. Sometimes groupings are created, such as serotypes (strains)
of a virus or operational taxonomic units (genetically similar classes) of
bacteria, but it is recognised that these can be artificial. What
biological information do our diversity measures
convey about continuous spaces of organisms?
|
\section{\bf Introduction}
Consider the following elliptic system with $d\geq 2$ equations:
\begin{equation}\label{S-system}
\begin{cases}
-\Delta u_{i}+\lambda_{i}u_{i}=u_{i}\sum_{j = 1}^{d}\beta_{ij} u^2_{j} ~\text{ in } \Omega,\\
u_{i}=0 \text{ on } \partial\Omega, \quad i=1,...d,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\Omega=\mathbb{R}^{N}$ and $\lambda_i>0$, or $\Omega\subset \mathbb{R}^{N}$ is a smooth bounded domain and $\lambda_i>-\lambda_1(\Omega)$, $N\leq 4$, $\beta_{ii}>0$ for $i=1,\ldots, d$, $\beta_{ij}=\beta_{ji}\in \mathbb{R}$ for $i\neq j$. Here and in what follows $\lambda_{1}(\Omega)$ denotes the first eigenvalue of $(-\Delta, H_{0}^{1}(\Omega))$. System \eqref{S-system} appears when looking for standing wave solutions $\phi_i(x,t)=e^{\imath \lambda_i t}u_i(x)$ of the corresponding nonlinear Schr\"odinger system
\begin{equation*}
\imath \partial_t \phi_i + \Delta \phi_i + \phi_i \sum_{j=1}^d\beta_{ij} |\phi_j|^2=0,
\end{equation*}
which has applications in many physical models such
as nonlinear optics (see \cite{Mitchell 1996}) or Bose-Einstein condensation for multi-species condensates (see \cite{Timmermans 1998}). Physically the $\beta_{ii}$ represent self-interactions within the same component, while the $\beta_{ij}$ $(i\neq j)$ express the strength and the type of interaction between different components $i$ and $j$. When $\beta_{ij}>0$ the interaction is of cooperative type, while $\beta_{ij}<0$ represents competition. The relation $\beta_{ij}=\beta_{ji}$ expresses symmetry in the interaction between different components and provides a variational structure to the problem. Indeed, solutions of \eqref{S-system} correspond to critical points of the energy functional $J:H^1_0(\Omega; \mathbb{R}^d)\to \mathbb{R}$ defined by
\begin{equation*}
J(\mathbf{u}):=\int_{\Omega}\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^{d}\left(|\nabla u_{i}|^{2}+\lambda_{i}u_{i}^{2}\right)-\frac{1}{4}
\sum_{i,j=1}^{d}\beta_{ij}u^2_{i}u^2_{j}\, dx
\end{equation*}
(where we used the vector notation $\mathbf{u}=(u_{1},\cdots,u_{d})$). In particular, this allows to consider \emph{least energy positive solutions}, which are defined as solutions $\mathbf{u}$ of the system with positive components and achieving the level
\[
\inf\{J(\mathbf{u}):\ J'(\mathbf{u})= 0,\ \mathbf{u}\in H^1_0(\Omega;\mathbb{R}^d),\ u_i> 0\ \forall i\}.
\]
Since the system may admit solutions with trivial components (i.e., $u_i=0$ for some $i$'s), this level may or may not coincide with the \emph{ground state level}:
\begin{equation}\label{eqgroundstatelevel}
\inf\{J(\mathbf{u}):\ J'(\mathbf{u})= 0,\ \mathbf{u}\in H^1_0(\Omega;\mathbb{R}^d), \mathbf{u}\neq \mathbf{0} \}.
\end{equation}
We call a solution \emph{fully nontrivial} when all its components are nontrivial, and \emph{semi-trivial} when some components (but not all) are zero. A solution $\mathbf{u}\neq \mathbf{0}$ is called a \emph{ground state} if it achieves \eqref{eqgroundstatelevel}.
\medbreak
Let us first focus on the subcritical case $N\leq 3$. Several existence results are available in the literature for the purely cooperative and for the purely competitive cases (respectively $\beta_{ij}>0$ for all $i\neq j$, and $\beta_{ij}<0$ for all $i\neq j$); we refer to the introduction of \cite{Tavares 2016-1} for an overview on the topic and for a complete list of references. In particular, the two equation case ($d=2$) is completely characterized. In this case there is only one interaction parameter, $\beta:=\beta_{12}=\beta_{21}$, and by collecting the results in \cite{Ambrosetti 2007,Zou 2013,Wei 2005-1,Wei 2005,Maia 2006,Mandel 2015,Sirakov 2007} it is known that there exist least energy positive solutions for $\beta\in (-\infty,\underline{\beta})\cup(\overline{\beta},+\infty)$, for some $0<\underline{\beta}\leq \overline{\beta}$; moreover, these solutions are actually ground states for $\beta>\bar \beta$. This holds when $\Omega$ is a bounded domain, or $\Omega=\mathbb{R}^N$ and one works with radially symmetric functions. We remark that there are ranges of parameters for which there are no positive solutions.
For three or more equations ($d\geq 3$) the situation is much richer, since in this case system \eqref{S-system} admits the possible coexistence of cooperation and competition, that is, the existence of pairs $(i_{1}, j_{1})$ and $(i_{2}, j_{2})$ such that $\beta_{i_{1}j_{1}}>0$ and $\beta_{i_{2}j_{2}}<0$. More recently, the existence of least energy positive solutions under simultaneous cooperation and competition has attracted great attention, starting from \cite{Wang 2015,Soave 2015}. In \cite{Soave 2015, Tavares 2016-1}, several existence results are obtained
whenever the $d$ components are divided into groups. These papers are complemented by \cite{BSWang 2016,Wang 2015,Wang 2015-2}, where the $d=3$ component system in a bounded domain is treated, and by \cite{Wang 2019,Wei 2019} in the case $\Omega=\mathbb{R}^N$. On the other hand, the study and classification of ground state solutions is done in \cite{Correia 2016-1,Correia 2016-2}.
\medbreak
All the papers mentioned above deal with the subcritical case. For the critical case $N=4$, when $d=1$ (one equation), system \eqref{S-system} is reduced to the well-known Brezis-Nirenberg problem \cite{Brezis 1983}, where the existence of a positive ground state is shown for $-\lambda_1(\Omega)<\lambda_1<0$. From this perspective, the study of \eqref{S-system} can be seen as a generalization of this classical problem to systems, working with the natural assumption $-\lambda_1(\Omega)<\lambda_i<0$ for every $i$. For the $d=2$ equation case, Chen and Zou \cite{Zou 2012} proved that there exists $0<\beta_{1}<\beta_{2}$ (depending on $\lambda_{i}$ and $\beta_{ii}$) such that \eqref{S-system} has a least energy positive solution if $\beta_{12}\in (-\infty, \beta_{1}) \cup (\beta_{2}, +\infty)$ (exactly as in the subcritical case). We would also like to point out paper \cite{Zou 2015} where it is shown, for more general powers, that the dimension has a great influence in the existence of least energy positive solutions.
For a system with an arbitrary number of equations in the whole space, Guo, Luo and Zou \cite{Zou 2018} obtained the existence and classification of least energy positive solutions to \eqref{S-system} under $-\lambda_1(\Omega)<\lambda_{1}=\cdots=\lambda_{d}<0$ in case of a bounded smooth domain of $\mathbb{R}^4$, in the pure cooperative case with some additional technical conditions on the coupling coefficients. In the same paper the case $\lambda_1=\ldots=\lambda_d=0$ and $\Omega=\mathbb{R}^4$ is also treated under the same conditions on the $\beta_{ij}$. The existence and classification of ground states is done in \cite{Yang 2018}.
\medbreak
To conclude the state-of-the art, we would like to mention also a few related problems in the critical case. In \cite{Tavares 2017}, the first author and A. Pistoia constructed, via a Lyapunov-Schmidt reduction and under appropriate assumptions on the domain $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{4}$, families of positive solutions of \eqref{S-system} in the competitive or weakly cooperative cases with all the components $u_{i}$ blowing up at different points as $\lambda_{i}\rightarrow 0^{-}$. In \cite{Pistoia 2018-2, Wei 2014, Wang 2016}, the authors investigated the existence and multiplicity of fully nontrivial solutions to \eqref{S-system} with $\lambda_{i}=0$ for the critical case in $\mathbb{R}^{N}$. Recently \cite{Pistoia 2018-1,Tavares 2017} are concerned with existence and concentration results for
a Coron-type problem in a bounded domain with one or multiple small holes in the case $\lambda_{i}=0$.
In \cite{Tavares 2019-1}, the first author with D. Cassani and J. Zhang studied the existence of least energy positive solutions in the critical exponential case when $N=2$.
\medbreak
To the best of our knowledge, there are no papers considering \eqref{S-system} with mixed cooperation and competition terms, with $\lambda_{i}\neq 0$ being possibly different and for $\Omega$ a bounded domain. We are interested in providing conditions on the coefficients that insure the existence of least energy positive solutions; our main purpose is to extend the results proved in \cite{Tavares 2016-1} (in the subcritical case) to the critical case, thus generalizing to many equations results from \cite{Zou 2012} and improving at the same time results from \cite{Zou 2018}. We refer for the next subsection to the actual statements.
\medbreak
Throughout this text we always work under the assumptions
\begin{equation}\label{eq:coefficients}
-\lambda_1(\Omega)<\lambda_1,\ldots, \lambda_d<0,\qquad \Omega \text{ a bounded smooth domain of } \mathbb{R}^4,
\end{equation}
where we recall that $\lambda_1(\Omega)$ is the first Dirichlet eigenvalue of the Laplacian, and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:beta_ij}
\beta_{ii}>0 \quad \forall i=1,\ldots, d,\qquad \beta_{ij}=\beta_{ji}\quad \forall i, j=1,\ldots, d,\ i\neq j.
\end{equation} In order to present the main results of this paper, we firstly introduce some notations already used in \cite{Soave 2015, Tavares 2016-1}.
\begin{itemize}
\item We work with the \emph{coupling matrix} $B:=(\beta_{ij})_{i,j=1,\ldots,d}$.
\item We endow the space $H^{1}_{0}(\Omega)$ with
\begin{equation*}
\langle u,v\rangle_{i}:= \int_{\Omega}\nabla u \cdot\nabla v+\lambda_{i}uv \, dx \quad \text{ and } \quad \|u\|^{2}_{i}:=\langle u,u\rangle_{i},\qquad \text{ for every } i=1,\ldots, d.
\end{equation*}
Observe that these are in fact inner products and norms, respectively, due to assumption \eqref{eq:coefficients}.
\item Having in mind the idea of organizing the components of a solution to the system into several groups, given an arbitrary $1\leq m \leq d$ we say that a vector $\mathbf{a}=(a_{0},...,a_{m})\in \mathbb{N}^{m+1}$ is an $m$-decomposition of $d$ if
\begin{equation*}
0=a_{0}<a_{1}<\cdot \cdot \cdot<a_{m-1}<a_{m}=d.
\end{equation*}
Given an $m$-decomposition $\mathbf{a}$ of $d$, for $h=1,...,m$ we define
\begin{align*}
& I_{h}:=\left\{i\in \{1,...,d\}:a_{h-1}<i\leq a_{h}\right\},
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
& \mathcal{K}_{1}:=\left\{(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2} \text{ for some } h=1,...,m, \text{ with } i\neq j\right\},\\
& \mathcal{K}_{2}:=\left\{(i,j)\in I_{h}\times I_{k} \text{ with } h\neq k\right\}.
\end{align*}
\end{itemize}
In this way we say that $u_i$ and $u_j$ belong to the same group if $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_1$ and to a different group if $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_2$. As we will see ahead, we will get existence results wherever the interaction between elements of the same group is cooperative, while there is either weak cooperation or competition between elements of different groups.
\medbreak
Next we introduce the main results of this paper. We split them into two subsections: the first one is concerned with existence results for \eqref{S-system} in the case $\Omega$ bounded, the second one with the case $\Omega=\mathbb{R}^4$.
\subsection{ Main results: existence}
Consider the Nehari-type set
\begin{align}\label{Manifold-1}
\mathcal{N}&=
\left\{ \mathbf{u}\in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega;\mathbb{R}^{d}):\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\|u_{i}\|_{i}\neq 0 \text{ and } \sum_{i\in I_{h}}
\partial_{i}J(\mathbf{u})u_{i}=0 \text{ for every } h=1,...,m
\right\}\\
&=\left\{ \mathbf{u}\in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega;\mathbb{R}^{d}): \sum_{i\in I_{h}}\|u_{i}\|_{i}\neq 0 \text{ and }
\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\|u_{i}\|_{i}^2=\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_\Omega u_i^2 \sum_{j=1}^d \beta_{ij}u_j^2 \text{ for every } h=1,...,m
\right\},
\end{align}
and the infimum of $J$ on the set $\mathcal{N}$:
\begin{equation}\label{Minimizer-1}
c:=\inf_{\mathbf{u}\in \mathcal{N}}J\left(\mathbf{u}\right).
\end{equation}
The first main result of this paper is the following.
\begin{thm}\label{Theorem-1}
Assume \eqref{eq:coefficients}, \eqref{eq:beta_ij}, let $\mathbf{a}$ be an m-decomposition of $d$ for some $1\leq m\leq d$, and assume that
$\beta_{ij}\geq 0$ $\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1}$.
There exists $\Lambda>0$ such that, if
\begin{equation*}
-\infty<\beta_{ij}< \Lambda \quad\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2},
\end{equation*}
then $c$ is attained by a nonnegative $\mathbf{u}\in \mathcal{N}$. Moreover, any minimizer is a solution of \eqref{S-system}.
\end{thm}
\begin{remark}\label{2}
We mention that $\Lambda$ is dependent on $\beta_{ij}\geq 0$ for $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1}$, $\beta_{ii}, \lambda_{i}, i=1,\ldots, d$ (see \eqref{Constant-8} ahead for the explicit expression).
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{2-2}
In \cite{Tavares 2016-1} the authors proved that the above theorem holds true in the subcritical case $N\leq 3$ in a bounded domain $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{N}$, where however the compactness of $H^{1}_{0}(\Omega)\hookrightarrow L^{4}(\Omega)$ plays a key role. This loss of compactness makes problem \eqref{S-system} very complicated and substantially different, requiring new ideas. In \cite[Theorem 1.2]{Tavares 2016-1} the constant $\Lambda$ is only dependent on $\beta_{ii}, \lambda_{i}$; affected by the presence of a critical exponent in \eqref{S-system}, the constant $\Lambda$ in our statement is also dependent on $\beta_{ij}$ for $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1}$.
\end{remark}
Observe that, when we are dealing with one single group ($m=1$, $\mathbf{a}=(0,d)$), the level $c$ reduces to
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{c}:=\inf_{\mathcal{\widetilde N}}J\left(\mathbf{u}\right),\quad \text{ where } \quad\mathcal{\widetilde N}:= \Big\{\mathbf{u}\in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega;\mathbb{R}^{d}):\mathbf{u}\neq \mathbf{0} \text{ and }
\langle\nabla J(\mathbf{u}),\mathbf{u}\rangle=0 \Big\}.
\end{equation*}
As a consequence of Theorem \ref{Theorem-1} we can thus obtain the existence of \emph{ground state} solutions (recall the definition in \eqref{eqgroundstatelevel}) for the purely cooperative case, as well as its classification in case $\lambda_1=\ldots=\lambda_d$. Following \cite{Correia 2016-1,Tavares 2016}, define $f: \mathbb{R}^{d}\mapsto \mathbb{R}$ by
\begin{equation}\label{f-define}
f(x_{1}, \cdots, x_{d})=\sum_{i,j=1 }^{d}\beta_{ij}x_{i}^{2}x_{j}^{2},\quad \text{ let } \quad f_{max}:=\max_{|X|=1}f(X),
\end{equation}
and denote by $\mathcal{X}$ the set of elements in the unit sphere of $\mathbb{R}^d$ achieving $f_{max}$.
\begin{cor}\label{Classification}
Assume \eqref{eq:coefficients},\eqref{eq:beta_ij}, and that
\[
\beta_{ij}\geq 0 \quad \text{ for } i,j=1,\ldots, d.
\]
Then $\widetilde{c}$ is achieved by a nonnegative $\mathbf{u}\in \mathcal{\widetilde N}$, which is a ground state solution of \eqref{S-system}. Moreover, when $\lambda:=\lambda_1=\ldots=\lambda_d$, $\mathbf{u}$ is a ground state of \eqref{S-system} if and only if $\mathbf{u}=X_{0}U$, where $X_{0} \in \mathcal{X}$ and $U$ is a positive ground state solution of
\begin{equation}\label{Class-2-4}
-\Delta v +\lambda v =f_{max}v^{3} ~\text{ in } \Omega.
\end{equation}
\end{cor}
We mention that $\widetilde{c}$ is achieved by Theorem \ref{Theorem-1}. The classification result is shown by applying the strategy of \cite[Theorem 2.1]{Tavares 2016} (see also \cite[Theorem 1]{Correia 2016-1}). Clearly, whenever each component of $X_0$ is nonzero, by the maximum principle and the invariance of $J$ and $ \mathcal{\widetilde N}$ under the transformation $\mathbf{u}\mapsto (|u_1|,\ldots, |u_d|)$, the ground state level coincides with the least energy positive level.
\begin{remark}\label{1}
We point out that in \cite[Theorem 1.2]{Zou 2012}, for the two equations case $d=2$ and $\lambda:=\lambda_1=\lambda_2$, it is proved that least energy positive solutions have the form $(u,v)=(\sqrt{k}\omega, \sqrt{l}\omega)$ for $0<\beta_{12}<\min\{\beta_{11}, \beta_{22}\}$ or $\beta_{12}>\max\{\beta_{11}, \beta_{22}\}$, where $\omega$ is a positive ground state solution of \eqref{Class-2-4} with $f_{max}=1$. Moreover, a pair $(\sqrt{k}\omega,\sqrt{l}\omega)$ is a positive least energy solution if $k,l$ solve a certain linear system (see \cite[Theorem 1.1]{Zou 2012}). For a system with an arbitrary number of equations, $\lambda:=\lambda_1=\ldots=\lambda_d$ and $\beta_{ij}\geq 0$, \cite[Theorem 1.1]{Zou 2018} presented the existence of least energy positive solutions of the form $u_{i}=\sqrt{c_{i}}\omega, i=1,\ldots,d$ for $B$ an invertible matrix such that the sum of each column of $B^{-1}$ is greater than $0$, obtaining also in \cite[Theorem 1.2]{Zou 2018} that all minimizers are of this form if moreover $B$ is positive or negative definite. By a direct computation we deduce that \cite[Theorems 1.1 \& 1.2]{Zou 2012} and \cite[Theorem 1.1 \& 1.2]{Zou 2018} are a special case of Corollary \ref{Classification}.
\end{remark}
Based on Theorem \ref{Theorem-1}, we obtain least energy positive solutions of \eqref{S-system} by following ideas from \cite{Tavares 2016-1}. Firstly, using Theorem \ref{Theorem-1} in the particular situation $m=d$ (so that $\mathbf{a}=(0,1,2,\ldots, d)$ necessarily), we obtain the existence of least energy positive solution of \eqref{S-system} under competition and/or weak cooperation.
\begin{cor}\label{Theorem-1-1}
Assume \eqref{eq:coefficients} and \eqref{eq:beta_ij}.
There exists $\Lambda>0$, depending only on $\beta_{ii}, \lambda_{i} ~(i=1,\ldots, d)$ such that, if
\begin{equation*}
-\infty<\beta_{ij}<\Lambda \quad\forall i\neq j,
\end{equation*}
then \eqref{S-system} has a least energy positive solution.
\end{cor}
The following two results allow strong cooperation between elements which belong to the same group. They correspond to Theorem 1.4 and Theorem 1.5 in \cite{Tavares 2016-1} (which dealt with the subcritical case $N\geq 3$)
\begin{thm}\label{Theorem-2}
Assume \eqref{eq:coefficients}, \eqref{eq:beta_ij}, and let $\mathbf{a}$ be an m-decomposition of $d$ for some $1\leq m\leq d$. Let $\Lambda$ be the constant defined in Theorem \ref{Theorem-1}. If
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\lambda_{i}=\lambda_{h}$ for every $i\in I_{h}, h=1,\ldots, m$;
\item $\beta_{ij}=\beta_{h}>\max\{\beta_{ii}: i\in I_{h}\}$ for every $(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}$ with $i\neq j, h=1,\ldots, m$.
\item $\beta_{ij}=b<\Lambda$ for every $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}$;
\end{enumerate}
then system \eqref{S-system} has a least energy positive solution.
\end{thm}
\begin{thm}\label{Theorem-3}
Assume \eqref{eq:coefficients}, \eqref{eq:beta_ij}, and let $\mathbf{a}$ be an m-decomposition of $d$ for some $1\leq m\leq d$. Let $\Lambda$ be the constant defined in Theorem \ref{Theorem-1} and fix $\alpha>1$. If
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\lambda_{i}=\lambda_{h}$ for every $i\in I_{h}, h=1,\ldots, m$;
\item $\beta_{ij}=\beta_{h}>\frac{\alpha}{\alpha-1}\max_{i\in I_h}\{\beta_{ii}\}$ for every $(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}$ with $i\neq j, h=1,\ldots, m$;
\item $ |\beta_{ij}|\leq \frac{\Lambda}{\alpha d^{2}}$ for every $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}$;
\end{enumerate}
then system \eqref{S-system} has a least energy positive solution.
\end{thm}
In the next subsection, we describe our main results on the case $\Omega=\mathbb{R}^4$ for $\lambda_1=\ldots=\lambda_k=0$.
\subsection{ Main results: the limiting system case}
In \cite{Zou 2012}, for the two equation case ($d=2$), in order to prove the existence of fully nontrivial solutions an important role is played by the limiting equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:single_critical}
-\Delta u=u^3 \qquad \text{ in } \mathbb{R}^4,
\end{equation}
whose positive solutions in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}^4)$ are given by
\begin{equation}\label{Class-2}
U_{\epsilon,y}(x):=\frac{2\sqrt{2}\epsilon}{\epsilon^{2}+|x-y|^{2}},\qquad \epsilon>0,\ y\in \mathbb{R}^4.
\end{equation}
In our situation (arbitrary number of equations and mixed cooperation/competition parameters), the role of \eqref{eq:single_critical} is replaced by the role of the following sub-systems
\begin{equation}\label{sub-system}
\begin{cases}
-\Delta v_{i}=\sum_{j \in I_{h}}\beta_{ij}v_{j}^{2}v_{i} ~\text{ in } \mathbb{R}^{4},\\
v_{i}\in \mathcal{D}^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}^{4}) \quad \forall i\in I_{h}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Existence and classification results for ground states of this system were shown in \cite{Yang 2018}. Here we complement such result by presenting new characterizations of the ground state level in the purely cooperative case, which will be of key importance in the nonexistence result we present at the end of the introduction.
\subsubsection{Existence, classification and characterization of ground state solutions for sub-systems}
Set $\mathbb{D}_h:=(\mathcal{D}^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}^{4}))^{a_{h}-a_{h-1}}$ with the norm $\|\mathbf{u}\|_{\mathbb{D}_h}:=\left(\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}|\nabla u_{i}|^{2}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}$. Take the energy functional
\begin{equation*}
E_{h}(\mathbf{v}):=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}|\nabla v_{i}|^{2}-\frac{1}{4}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}}
\beta_{ij}v_{j}^{2}v_{i}^{2}\, dx,
\end{equation*}
and well as the level
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Ground State-2}
l_{h}:= \inf_{\mathcal{M}_{h}}E_{h},\quad \text{ with } \quad \mathcal{M}_{h}:=\Big\{\mathbf{v}\in \mathbb{D}_h:\mathbf{v}\neq \mathbf{0} \text{ and }
\langle\nabla E_{h}(\mathbf{v}),\mathbf{v}\rangle=0 \Big\}.
\end{equation}
Assume $\beta_{ij}\geq 0$ for every $(i,j)\in I_h^2$ with $\beta_{ii}>0$. It is standard to prove that $l_{h}>0$, and that
\begin{align}\label{Vector Sobolev Inequality-1}
l_{h} = \inf_{\mathbf{v}\in\mathbb{D}_h\backslash \{\mathbf{0}\}}\max_{t>0}E_{h}(t\mathbf{v})
= \inf_{\mathbf{v}\in\mathbb{D}_h\backslash \{\mathbf{0}\}}\frac{1}{4}\frac{\left(\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}|\nabla v_{i}|^{2}\right)^{2}}{\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}}
\beta_{ij}v_{j}^{2}v_{i}^{2}}.
\end{align}
Therefore we get the following vector Sobolev inequality
\begin{equation}\label{Vector Sobolev Inequality}
4l_{h}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}}\beta_{ij}v_{j}^{2}v_{i}^{2}\leq \left(\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}|\nabla v_{i}|^{2}\right)^{2},~\forall \mathbf{v}\in \mathbb{D}_h,
\end{equation}
which will play an important role in the study of the system \eqref{S-system}. In order to state an alternative characterization of ground states we also introduce, for $h=1,...,m$,
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{E}_{h}(\mathbf{v}):=\frac{1}{4}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}|\nabla v_{i}|^{2}=\frac{1}{4}\|\mathbf{v}\|_{\mathbb{D}_h}^{2},
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:tilde_l_h}
\widetilde{l}_{h}:= \inf_{\widetilde{\mathcal{M}}_{h}}\widetilde{E}_{h}, \quad \text{ with } \quad \widetilde{\mathcal{M}}_{h}:=\Big\{\mathbf{v}:\mathbf{v}\neq \mathbf{0} \text{ and } \|\mathbf{v}\|_{\mathbb{D}_h}^{2}\leq \int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}}
\beta_{ij}v_{j}^{2}v_{i}^{2}
\Big\}.
\end{equation}
Clearly, $\widetilde l_h \leq l_h$.
Finally, consider $f_h: \mathbb{R}^{|I_{h}|}\mapsto \mathbb{R}$ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{f-define}
f_h(x_{1}, \cdots, x_{|I_{h}|})=\sum_{i,j=1 }^{|I_{h}|}\beta_{ij}x_{i}^{2}x_{j}^{2},
\end{equation}
and denote by $\mathcal{X}_h$ the set of solutions to the maximization problem
\begin{equation}\label{Class-1}
f_h(X_{0})=f^h_{max}:=\max_{|X|=1}f_h(X),\quad |X_{0}|=1.
\end{equation}
\begin{thm}\label{limit system-6-1}
Assume \eqref{eq:coefficients} and that $\beta_{ij}\geq 0$ $\forall (i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}$, $\beta_{ii}>0$. Then $l_{h}=\widetilde l_h$, and any minimizer for $\widetilde{l}_{h}$ is a minimizer for $l_{h}$. This level is attained by a nonnegative $\mathbf{V}_{h}$, a solution of \eqref{sub-system}. Moreover, any of such minimizers has the form $\mathbf{V}_{h}=X_{0}(f^h_{max})^{-\frac{1}{2}}U_{\epsilon,y}$, where $X_{0} \in \mathcal{X}_h$, $y\in \mathbb{R}^4$, $\epsilon>0$.
\end{thm}
\begin{remark}\label{7-3}
The existence and classification of ground states has been established in \cite{Yang 2018} for more general assumptions on the coefficients $\beta_{ij}$ and on the exponents. In the cooperative case we complement these results by providing a characterization in terms of a Nehari manifold, which is crucial in the proof of Theorem \ref{Theorem-1}. Moreover, we provide the characterization $l_h=\widetilde l_h$, which is crucial to present the nonexistence results for the limiting system (namely in the proof of the forthcoming Theorem \ref{limt system-6}).
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{7}
Every $\mathbf{V}_{h}$ is a least energy positive solution of \eqref{sub-system} when each component of $X_{0}$ is not zero. We point out that both $X_{0}$ and $f^h_{max}$ are only dependent on $\beta_{ij}$ for $(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}$.
\end{remark}
In the next subsection we will study the nonexistence of least energy solutions for $\Omega=\mathbb{R}^4$, $\lambda_1=\ldots=\lambda_d=0$. We remark that such result is independent of Theorem \ref{Theorem-1}, as it plays no role in its proof.
\subsubsection{A nonexistence result for $\Omega=\mathbb{R}^4$}
Observe that if $\Omega=\mathbb{R}^{4}$ and $\mathbf{u}$ is any a solution of \eqref{S-system}, then by the Pohozaev Identity and $\langle \nabla J(\mathbf{u}),\mathbf{u}\rangle=0$, it is easy to see that $\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\sum_{i=1}^{d}\lambda_{i}u_{i}^{2}=0$. This yields that $\mathbf{u}\equiv \mathbf{0}$ if $\lambda_{1},\ldots,\lambda_{d}$ have the same sign. A natural question is what happens in the limiting case $\lambda_1,\ldots, \lambda_d=0$. Are there least energy positive solutions, or at least nonnegative solutions with nontrivial grouping? In this section we state a nonexistence result under assumptions of cooperation between elements withing the same group, competition between elements of different groups.
Consider the limiting system:
\begin{equation}\label{limit-system}
\begin{cases}
-\Delta u_{i}=\sum_{j=1}^{d}\beta_{ij}u_{j}^{2}u_{i} ~\text{ in } \mathbb{R}^{4},\\
u_{i}\in \mathcal{D}^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}^{4}) \quad \forall i=1,...,d.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Define the associated energy
\begin{equation*}
E\left(\mathbf{u}\right):=\sum_{h=1}^{m}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}|\nabla u_{i}|^{2}-\frac{1}{4}\sum_{h,k=1}^{m}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}\times I_{k}}\beta_{ij}u_{j}^{2}u_{i}^{2}\,
\end{equation*}
and the level
\begin{equation}\label{Minimizer-2}
l:=\inf_{\mathcal{M}}E\left(\mathbf{u}\right),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align}
\mathcal{M}:=
\Bigg\{ \mathbf{u}\in \mathcal{D}^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}^{4};\mathbb{R}^{d}): \sum_{i\in I_{h}}\|u_{i}\|_{i}\neq 0 \text{ and } \sum_{i\in I_{h}}
\partial_{i}E(\mathbf{u})u_{i}=0, \text{ for every } h=1,...,m
\Bigg\}.
\end{align}
Our last main result is the following.
\begin{thm}\label{limt system-6}
Assume \eqref{eq:beta_ij} and let $\mathbf{a}$ be an m-decomposition of $d$ for some $2\leq m\leq d$. If
\begin{itemize}
\item $\beta_{ij}\geq 0$, $\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1}$;
\item $\beta_{ij}\leq 0$, $\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}$, and there exists $h_{1}\neq h_{2}$ such that $\beta_{ij}< 0$ for every $(i,j)\in I_{h_{1}}\times I_{h_{2}}$;
\end{itemize}
then $l$ is not achieved and $l=\sum_{h=1}^{m}l_{h}$.
\end{thm}
Clearly, as a byproduct of this result, under the previous assumptions all ground state solutions of \eqref{limit-system} have some components that vanish, and there are no least energy positive solutions.
\begin{remark}\label{1.3-2}
We observe that the first authors and N. Soave in \cite{Tavares 2016-1} proved $l$ is not achieved for the subcritical case $N\leq 3$. Here, based on Theorem \ref{limit system-6-1}, we show that the above result holds also for critical case.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
This result plays no role in the proof of Theorem \ref{Theorem-1}. Actually, the later does not depend on any existence result for the limiting system \eqref{limit-system}, only on results for the sub-systems \eqref{sub-system}.
\end{remark}
Applying Theorem \ref{limt system-6} in the particular case $m=d$, we obtain the following.
\begin{cor}\label{1-4}
If
\begin{itemize}
\item $\beta_{ii}> 0$, for every $i=1,\ldots, d$;
\item $\beta_{ij}\leq 0$ for every $i\neq j$, $i,j=1,\ldots, d$;
\item there exists $i_{1}\neq j_{1}$ such that $\beta_{i_{1}j_{1}}< 0$;
\end{itemize}
then $l$ is not achieved and $l=\sum_{h=1}^{d}l_{h}$.
\end{cor}
Up to our knowledge, \cite{Zou 2018} is the only reference considering nonexistence results for problem \eqref{Minimizer-2} in the critical case with mixed coefficients. Our Theorem \ref{limt system-6} improves \cite[Theorems 1.4 \& 1.5]{Zou 2018}, which deal with a situation with $m=2$ (two groups) and an arbitrary number of equations, together with some technical conditions for the coefficient matrix $B$.
\subsection{Structure of the paper}
In Section \ref{sec2} we prove Theorem \ref{limit system-6-1} and Theorem \ref{limt system-6}. Section \ref{sec3} is devoted to some auxiliary results which will ultimately lead to Theorem \ref{Theorem-1}. In Subsection \ref{subsec3.1} and Subsection \ref{subsec3.2} we present some new energy estimates, see Lemma \ref{Pre-1}, Theorem \ref{Energy Estimates} and Theorem \ref{Energy Estimation-1,2,m-1}, which are important to prove Theorem \ref{Theorem-1}. We construct a Palais-Smale sequence at level $c$ in Subsection \ref{subsec3.3}. Section \ref{sec4} is devoted to the proofs of the main theorems on a bounded domain. In Subsection \ref{subsec4.1} we show that Theorem \ref{Theorem-1} holds for the case of one group. Subsection \ref{subsec4.2} is then devoted to the proof of Theorem \ref{Theorem-1} in the general case, as well as to the proof of its corollaries.
Theorem \ref{Energy Estimation-1,2,m-1} compares the energy between all possible subsystems. Its proof is inspired by
\cite[Lemma 5.1]{Zou 2012}; however, because of the presence of multi-components, the method in \cite{Zou 2012} cannot be used here directly, and we need some crucial modifications for our proof. The fact that we are dealing with many components does not allow to perform explicit computations as in the two equation case; this is for instance the case in order to show positive definiteness of certain matrices, and so we rely on the notion of strictly diagonally dominant matrices as in \cite{Soave 2015,Tavares 2016-1}, see Lemma \ref{Con-4-1} and Proposition \ref{PS Sequence}. On the other hand, whenever projecting in the Nehari manifold one cannot in general obtain the explicit expression of the coefficients, and we rely on qualitative estimates instead (check for instance Lemma \ref{t-positive} ahead).
The loss of compactness due to the appearance of the Sobolev critical exponent makes it difficult to acquire the existence of fully nontrivial solutions to \eqref{S-system}. For $d=2$, Chen and Zou \cite{Zou 2012} obtained their existence by comparing the least energy level to \eqref{S-system} with that of limit system ($\Omega=\mathbb{R}^{4}$ and $\lambda_{i}=0$) and scalar equations. They mainly use the equation \eqref{eq:single_critical} to estimate the energy level. However, for the mixed case with multi-components, \eqref{S-system} becomes very complicated, and we need some new ideas for our proof.
We separate the components into $m$ groups as in \cite{Soave 2015,Tavares 2016-1}, and require that the interaction between components of the same group is cooperative, while the interaction between components belonging to different groups is competitive or weakly cooperative. We call each group as a sub-system and investigate the ground state level of the sub-system. Since the system \eqref{S-system} involves multi-components, we need to establish new estimates (see Theorem \ref{Energy Estimates} and Theorem \ref{Energy Estimation-1,2,m-1}). Then we can compare energy levels of the system with those of appropriate sub-systems and sub-groups, and obtain the existence of nonnegative solutions with $m$ nontrivial components by induction on the number of groups. Moreover, under additional assumptions on $\beta_{ij}$, we acquire existence of least energy positive solutions of \eqref{S-system}. We stress that our method does not require a comparison between the level $c$ and the ground state level of the limiting system \eqref{limit-system}.
\subsection{Further notations}\label{subsec1.4}
\begin{itemize}
\item The $L^{p}(\Omega)$ norms will be denoted by $|\cdot|_{p}$, $1\leq p\leq \infty$.
\item Let
\begin{equation}\label{eq:def_of_S}
S:= \inf_{i=1,\ldots,d}\inf_{u\in H^{1}_{0}(\Omega)\setminus \{0\}}\frac{\|u\|^{2}_{i}}{|u|^{2}_{4}}.
\end{equation}
By the Sobolev embedding $H^1_0(\Omega)\hookrightarrow L^4(\Omega)$ and since $\lambda_i\in (-\lambda_1(\Omega),0)$, we have $S>0$. Moreover,
\begin{equation}\label{Constant-1}
S|u|^{2}_{4}\leq \|u\|^{2}_{i}\leq \int_{\Omega}|\nabla u|^2, ~\forall u \in H^{1}_{0}(\Omega).
\end{equation}
\item For $1\leq k\leq d$ and $\mathbf{u}=(u_{1},\cdots, u_{k})$, denote $|\nabla \mathbf{u}|^{2}:=\sum_{i=1}^{k}|\nabla u_{i}|^{2}$ and $|\mathbf{u}|:=(|u_{1}|,\cdots, |u_{k}|)$.
\end{itemize}
Take $\mathbf{a}=(a_1,\ldots, a_m)$ an $m$-decomposition of $d$, for some integer $m\in [1,d]$.
\begin{itemize}
\item Given $\mathbf{u}=(u_1,\ldots, u_d)\in H^{1}_{0}(\Omega; \mathbb{R}^{d})$ we set
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{u}_{h}:=\left(u_{a_{h-1}+1},\ldots,u_{a_{h}}\right)\qquad \text{ for $h=1,\ldots,m$}.
\end{equation*}
This way, we have $\mathbf{u}=(\mathbf{u}_1,\ldots, \mathbf{u}_m)$ and $H^1_0(\Omega;\mathbb{R}^d)= \prod_{h=2}^{m} H^1_0(\Omega)^{a_{h}-a_{h-1}}$. Each space $(H^{1}_{0}(\Omega))^{a_{h}-a_{h-1}}$ is naturally endowed with the following scalar product and norm
\begin{equation*}
\langle\mathbf{u}^{1},\mathbf{u}^{2}\rangle_{h}:=\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\langle u^{1}_{i},u^{2}_{i}\rangle_{i} \text{ and }
\|\mathbf{u}\|^{2}_{h}:=\langle\mathbf{u},\mathbf{u}\rangle_{h}.
\end{equation*}
Sometimes we will use the notation $\mathbb{H}:= H^{1}_{0}(\Omega; \mathbb{R}^d)$, with norm $\|\mathbf{u}\|^{2}=\sum_{h=1}^{m}\|\mathbf{u}_{h}\|_{h}^{2}$.
\item Let $\Gamma\subseteq \{1,\ldots,m\}$ and set $d_\Gamma:=|\cup_{k\in\Gamma}I_k|$. For $\mathbf{u}\in H^{1}_{0}(\Omega, \mathbb{R}^{d_\Gamma})$ define the $|\Gamma|\times |\Gamma|$ matrix
\begin{equation*}
M_{B}^\Gamma(\mathbf{u}):= \left( \sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}\times I_{k} }\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2}\right)_{h, k\in \Gamma}.
\end{equation*}
Consider
\begin{align}\label{Diagonally Dominant}
\mathcal{E}_\Gamma&:= \left\{\mathbf{u}\in H^{1}_{0}(\Omega, \mathbb{R}^{d_\Gamma}): M_{B}^\Gamma(\mathbf{u}) \text{ is strictly diagonally dominant } \right\}\nonumber\\
&=\left\{\mathbf{u}\in H^{1}_{0}(\Omega, \mathbb{R}^{d_\Gamma}): \left|\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}}\int_\Omega \beta_{ij} u_i^2u_j^2 \right| > \sum_{k\in \Gamma,k\neq h} \left|\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}\times I_{k} }\int_\Omega \beta_{ij} u_i^2u_j^2 \right|, \text{ for } h\in\Gamma \right\}.
\end{align}
For simplicity, denote $\mathcal{E}:=\mathcal{E}_\Gamma$ and $M_{B}(\mathbf{u}):=M_{B}^\Gamma(\mathbf{u})$ when $\Gamma=\{1,\ldots,m\}$.
\end{itemize}
Recall that a square matrix that is strictly diagonally dominant and has positive diagonal terms is positive definite. Therefore, $M_{B}^\Gamma(\mathbf{u})$ is positive definite if $\mathbf{u}\in\mathcal{E}_\Gamma$ and $\beta_{ij}\geq 0$ for every $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_1$.
\section{\bf The limit system}\label{sec2}
In this section, we prove Theorem \ref{limit system-6-1} and Theorem \ref{limt system-6}. Take $\mathbf{a}=(a_1,\ldots, a_m)$ an $m$-decomposition of $d$, for some integer $m\in [1,d]$, and fix $h\in \{1,\ldots, m\}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{2.2-2}
Assume $\beta_{ij}\geq 0$ $\forall (i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}$ and $\beta_{ii}>0$. Then ${l}_{h}$ is attained.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[\bf{Proof}]
Firstly, we need to introduce some notations as in \cite{Yang 2018}. Set $|I_{h}|=M$. Define
$$
I^{\gamma}_{M}:=\inf_{J_{M}(\mathbf{u})=\gamma}I_{M}(\mathbf{u}), \quad \gamma_{G}:=\left(\inf_{J_{M}(\mathbf{u})=1}I_{M}(\mathbf{u})\right)^{2},
$$
where
$$
J_{M}(\mathbf{u}):=\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\beta_{ij}u_i^2u_j^2, \quad
I_{M}(\mathbf{u}):=\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}|\nabla u_i|^2.
$$
It is clear that
\begin{equation}\label{2-2-1}
\gamma_{G}=(I^{1}_{M})^2=\gamma^{-1}(I^{\gamma}_{M})^2.
\end{equation}
We deduce from \eqref{Vector Sobolev Inequality-1} that $\gamma_{G}=4l_h$. It remains to prove that $I^{\gamma}_{M}$ is attained for some $\gamma>0$. Observe that the assumptions in \cite[Lemma 2.4]{Yang 2018} are true due to the fact that $\beta_{ij}\geq 0$ $\forall (i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}$ and $\beta_{ii}>0$; thus $I^{\gamma_{G}}_{M}$ is achieved. Therefore, ${l}_{h}$ is attained.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:equality_l}
We have $l_h=\widetilde l_h$, and every minimizer for $\widetilde l_h$ is a minimizer for $l_h$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[\bf{Proof}]
This was proved in \cite[Lemma 5.2]{Tavares 2016-1}, but we sketch it here for completeness. We already know that $\tilde l_h\leq l_h$. If $\mathbf{v}\in \widetilde M_h$ then take $t^2:=(\int_\Omega |\nabla \mathbf{v}|^2)/(\int_\Omega \sum_{(i,j)\in I_h^2} \beta_{ij} v_i^2 v_j^2)\leq 1 $, so that $t\mathbf{v}\in \mathcal{M}_h$. Then
\[
l_h \leq E_h(tv) = \frac{t^2}{4}\int_\Omega |\nabla \mathbf{v}|^2\leq \widetilde E_h(\mathbf{v}),
\]
and by taking the infimum for $\mathbf{v}\in \mathcal{M}_h$ we get $l_h\leq \widetilde l_h$ and so $l_h=\widetilde l_h$. If $\mathbf{v}$ is a minimizer for $\widetilde l_h$ (there exists at least one by what we have just seen combined with Lemma \ref{2.2-2}), then necessarily $t=1$ and $\mathbf{v}\in \mathcal{M}_h$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[\bf Proof of Theorem \ref{limit system-6-1}.] The first part of the theorem follows from Lemmas \ref{2.2-2} and \ref{lemma:equality_l}. Now let $\mathbf{V}_h$ be a minimizer. By taking the absolute value, we may assume that it is nonnegative. By using the Lagrange multiplier rule and observing that $\mathcal{M}_h$ is a natural constraint, we see that $\mathbf{V}_h$ solves \eqref{sub-system}. Finally, once we know that the ground state level is achieved, we can follow the proof of \cite[Theorem 2.1]{Tavares 2016} (which is stated for subcritical problems, for $\lambda>0$ and $\beta_{ij}=b$ but works exactly in the same way in our framework) and deduce that $\mathbf{V}_h=X_0W$, where $W$ is a ground state solution of $-\Delta W=f_{max}W^3$. We can now conclude by taking the scaling $W=(f_{max}^h)^{-1/2}U_{\epsilon,y}$. Hence, $\mathbf{V}_{h}=X_0(f_{max}^h)^{-1/2}U_{\epsilon,y}$.
\end{proof}
The rest of the section is dedicated to the proof of Theorem \ref{limt system-6}. Having Lemmas \ref{2.2-2} and \ref{lemma:equality_l} at hand also in the critical case, we can now follow the strategy of \cite[Theorem 1.6]{Tavares 2016-1}. We will therefore sketch the proof, highlighting both the similarities as well as the differences. Take a nonnegative minimizer $\mathbf{V}_h=(V^h_i)_{i\in I_h}$ of $h=1,\ldots, m$. We need the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{Decay 2.5}
Let $e_{1}\neq e_{2}\in \mathbb{S}^{N-1}$. Then, whenever $h_{1}\neq h_{2}$,
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{R\rightarrow +\infty}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h_{1}}\times I_{h_{2}}}
\left(V_{i}^{h_{1}}(x-Re_{1})V_{j}^{h_{2}}(x-Re_{2})\right)^{2}=0.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[\bf{Proof}]
For every $(i,j)\in I_{h_{1}}\times I_{h_{2}}$, we only need to prove that
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{R\rightarrow +\infty}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\left(V_{i}^{h_{1}}(x)V_{j}^{h_{2}}(x+Re_{1}-Re_{2})\right)^{2}=0.
\end{equation*}
Here we cannot argue as in \cite[Lemma 5.3]{Tavares 2016-1} due to the decay of $V_h$ in the critical case. Set $V_{j,R}^{h_{2}}(x):=V_{j}^{h_{2}}(x+Re_{1}-Re_{2})$.
Since $e_{1}\neq e_{2}$, $R|e_{1}- e_{2}|\rightarrow +\infty$ as $R\rightarrow +\infty$, and each component of $V_h$ is a multiple of a bubble $U_{\epsilon, y}$ (by Theorem \ref{limit system-6-1}). Then $V_{j}^{h_{2}}(x+Re_{1}-Re_{2})$ converges almost everywhere to 0 as $R\to \infty$, and it is uniformly bounded in $L^4(\mathbb{R}^4)$. Therefore, by \cite[Proposition 5.4.7]{Willem 2013}, $V_{j}^{h_{2}}(x+Re_{1}-Re_{2})\rightharpoonup 0$ weakly in $L^{4}(\mathbb{R}^{4})$ as $R\rightarrow\infty$.
Hence,
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{R\rightarrow +\infty}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\left(V_{i}^{h_{1}}(x)V_{j,R}^{h_{2}}(x)\right)^{2}\leq
\lim_{R\rightarrow +\infty}\left(\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}(V_{i}^{h_{1}})^{3}V_{j,R}^{h_{2}}\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}
\left(\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}(V_{j,R}^{h_{2}})^{4}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}=0. \qedhere
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[\bf Proof of Theorem \ref{limt system-6}.]
Firstly, we claim that $l=\sum_{h=1}^{m}l_{h}$. Based on Lemma \ref{Decay 2.5}, the proof is similar to those of Lemma 5.4 and Lemma 5.5 in \cite{Tavares 2016-1}, so we omit it. Now assume by contradiction that there exists $\mathbf{u}\in \mathcal{M}$ such that $E(\mathbf{u})=l$. By \cite[Lemma 2.3]{Tavares 2016-1} (which also holds in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}^4)$) we know that $\mathcal{M}$ is a natural constraint, and so $\mathbf{u}$ is a solution of \eqref{limit-system}. Moreover, we can suppose that $\mathbf{u}$ is nonnegative. Note that for every $h$ there exists $i_{h}$ such that $u_{i_{h}}\neq 0$; by the strong maximum principle, we see that $u_{i_{h}}>0$ in $\mathbb{R}^{4}$.
Observe that $\mathbf{u}\in \mathcal{M}$ and $\beta_{ij}\leq 0$ for every $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}$, then we get that
\begin{equation*}
0<\|\mathbf{u}_{h}\|_{h}^{2}=\sum_{k=1}^{m}M_B(\mathbf{u})_{hk}\leq {M}_{B}(\mathbf{u})_{hh},
\end{equation*}
where $M_B(\mathbf{u})$ is defined at the end of Subsection \ref{subsec1.4}.
Then we see that $\mathbf{u}_{h}\in \widetilde{\mathcal{M}}_{h}$ for every $h=1,...,m$. Therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{2.6-1}
\frac{1}{4}\|\mathbf{u}_{h}\|_{h}^{2}\geq \inf_{\mathbf{v}\in\widetilde{\mathcal{M}}_{h}}\frac{1}{4}\|\mathbf{v}\|_{h}^{2}=\widetilde{l}_{h}=l_{h}, \text{ and }
E(\mathbf{u})=\sum_{h=1}^{m}\frac{1}{4}\|\mathbf{u}\|_{h}^{2}\geq \sum_{h=1}^{m}l_{h}.
\end{equation}
Combining these with $E(\mathbf{u})=l=\sum_{h=1}^{m}l_{h}$ we have
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{4}\|\mathbf{u}_{h}\|_{h}^{2}=l_{h}=\widetilde{l}_{h}.
\end{equation*}
That is, $\mathbf{u}_{h}$ minimizes for $\widetilde{l}_{h}$. By Lemma \ref{lemma:equality_l}, $\mathbf{u}_{h}$ is a minimizer for $l_{h}$ and $\mathbf{u}_{h}\in \mathcal{M}_{h}$. Hence,
\begin{equation*}
\|\mathbf{u}_{h}\|_{h}^{2}=M_{B}(\mathbf{u})_{hh}, ~\forall h=1,\ldots,m,
\end{equation*}
On the other hand, since $\mathbf{u}\in\mathcal{M}$, then we have
\begin{equation*}
\|\mathbf{u}_{h_{1}}\|_{h_{1}}^{2}=\sum_{k=1}^{m}\mathbf{M}_{B}(\mathbf{u})_{h_{1}k}\leq M_{B}(\mathbf{u})_{h_{1}h_{1}}+
\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\beta_{i_{h_{1}}i_{h_{2}}}u^{2}_{i_{h_{1}}}u^{2}_{i_{h_{2}}}<M_{B}(\mathbf{u})_{h_{1}h_{1}},
\end{equation*}
which is a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\section{\bf Energy estimates and existence of Palais-Smale sequences}\label{sec3}
In this section we show crucial energy estimates, as well as other preliminary lemmas. All these results will be used to prove Theorem \ref{Theorem-1} in the next section.
Fix $\mathbf{a}=(a_1,\ldots, a_m)$, an $m$-decomposition of $d$, for some integer $m\in [1,d]$. Observe that this fixes the sets $\mathcal{K}_1$ and $\mathcal{K}_2$.
Throughout this section we always assume \eqref{eq:coefficients}, \eqref{eq:beta_ij}, and so we omit these conditions in the statements.
To start with, we consider an analogue of the level $c$ where we just consider some components of the $m$ groups in which we divided $\{1,\ldots,d\}$. Given $\Gamma\subseteq \{1,\ldots,m\}$, we define
\begin{equation*}
J_\Gamma(\mathbf{u}):=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{k\in \Gamma}\|\mathbf{u}_{k}\|_{k}^{2}-\frac{1}{4}\sum_{k,l\in \Gamma}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_k\times I_l}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2},
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:def_of_E}
E_\Gamma\left(\mathbf{u}\right):=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{k\in \Gamma}\sum_{i\in I_{k}}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}|\nabla u_{i}|^{2}-\frac{1}{4}\sum_{k,l\in \Gamma}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{l}\times I_{k}}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\beta_{ij}u_{j}^{2}u_{i}^{2},
\end{equation}
\begin{align}\label{Manifold-4.1}
\mathcal{N}_{\Gamma}:=
\Bigg\{(\mathbf{u}_h)_{h\in \Gamma}: \mathbf{u}_{h} \neq \mathbf{0},\ \sum_{i\in I_{h}}
\partial_{i}J_\Gamma(\mathbf{u})u_{i}=0, \text{ for every } h\in \Gamma
\Bigg\},
\end{align}
\begin{equation}\label{Minimizer-4}
c_{\Gamma}=\inf_{\mathbf{u}\in\mathcal{N}_{\Gamma}}J_{\Gamma}(\mathbf{u}).
\end{equation}
Observe that $c=c_{\{1,\ldots,m\}}$.
\subsection{A uniform energy estimate and preliminary results}\label{subsec3.1}
\begin{lemma}\label{Pre-1}
Take
\begin{equation}\label{Pre-2}
\overline{C}=\frac{1}{4}\max_{ h\in \Gamma}\min_{i\in I_{h}}\left\{\frac{1}{\beta_{ii}}\right\}
\inf_{\Omega \supset\Omega_1,\ldots,\Omega_{m}\neq \emptyset \atop \Omega_{i}\cap\Omega_{j}=\emptyset, i\neq j}\sum_{h=1}^{m}\widetilde{S}^{2}(\Omega_{h}),
\end{equation}
where $\widetilde{S}(\Omega)$ is the best Sobolev constant for the embedding $H_{0}^{1}(\Omega)\hookrightarrow L^{4}(\Omega)$, defined by
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{S}(\Omega):=\inf_{u\in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega)\setminus \{0\}}\frac{\int_{\Omega}|\nabla u|^{2}}{\left(\int_{\Omega}|u|^{4}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}}.
\end{equation*}
Then
\begin{equation*}
c_\Gamma\leq \overline{C} \qquad \text{ for every } \Gamma\subseteq \{1,\ldots, m\}.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[\bf{Proof}]
The following proof is inspired by that of Lemma 2.1 in \cite{Tavares 2016-1}.
For each $h\in \Gamma$, set $i_{h}$ the index attaining $\min_{i\in I_{h}}\{\frac{1}{\beta_{ii}}\}$. Take $\widehat{u}_{i_{1}},\ldots, \widehat{u}_{i_{|\Gamma|}}\not\equiv 0$ such that $\widehat{u}_{i_{h}}\cdot\widehat{u}_{i_{k}}\equiv 0$ whenever $h\neq k$. Denote $\widetilde{\mathbf{u}}$ by $\widetilde{u}_{i_{h}}=t_{h}\widehat{u}_{i_{h}}$, where $t_{h}=\|\widehat{u}_{i_{h}}\|_{i_{h}}/(\sqrt{\beta_{i_{h}i_{h}}}|\widehat{u}_{i_{h}}|^{2}_{L^{4}})$ for $h\in \Gamma$, and $\widetilde{u}_{i}=0$ for $i\neq i_{1},\ldots, i_{|\Gamma|}$. It is easy to see that $\widetilde{\mathbf{u}}_{h}\not \equiv 0$ for $h\in \Gamma$, and $\widetilde{\mathbf{u}}\in \mathcal{N}_\Gamma$. Thus, since $\lambda_i<0$, we infer that
\begin{align*}
c_\Gamma & \leq J_\Gamma(\widetilde{\mathbf{u}})=\frac{1}{4}\sum_{h\in \Gamma}\|\widetilde{\mathbf{u}}_{h}\|^{2}_{h}=\frac{1}{4} \sum_{h\in \Gamma}t_{h}^{2}\|\widehat{u}_{i_{h}}\|_{i_{h}}^{2}\\
& \leq\frac{1}{4}\sum_{h\in \Gamma}\frac{1}{\beta_{i_{h}i_{h}}}\frac{\|\widehat{u}_{i_{h}}\|_{H^{1}_0}^{4}}
{|\widehat{u}_{i_{h}}|^{4}_{L^{4}}}
\leq\frac{1}{4}\max_{ h\in \Gamma}\left\{\frac{1}{\beta_{i_{h}i_{h}}}\right\}\sum_{h\in \Gamma}\frac{\|\widehat{u}_{i_{h}}\|_{H^{1}_0}^{4}}
{|\widehat{u}_{i_{h}}|^{4}_{L^{4}}},
\end{align*}
where
\begin{equation*}
\|u\|_{H^{1}_0}^{2}:=\int_{\Omega}|\nabla u|^{2}.
\end{equation*}
Therefore
\begin{equation}\label{Constant-6-2}
c_\Gamma\leq \frac{1}{4}\max_{ h\in \Gamma}\min_{i\in I_{h}}\left\{\frac{1}{\beta_{ii}}\right\}
\inf_{\Omega \supset\Omega_1,\ldots,\Omega_{|\Gamma|}\neq \emptyset \atop \Omega_{i}\cap\Omega_{j}=\emptyset, i\neq j}\sum_{h=1}^{|\Gamma|}\widetilde{S}^{2}(\Omega_{h})\leq \frac{1}{4}\max_{ h\in \Gamma}\min_{i\in I_{h}}\left\{\frac{1}{\beta_{ii}}\right\}
\inf_{\Omega \supset\Omega_1,\ldots,\Omega_{m}\neq \emptyset \atop \Omega_{i}\cap\Omega_{j}=\emptyset, i\neq j}\sum_{h=1}^{m}\widetilde{S}^{2}(\Omega_{h}),
\end{equation}
which yields that $c_\Gamma\leq \overline{C}$, where $\overline{C}$ is defined in \eqref{Pre-2}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{3-1}
In \cite[Lemma 2.1]{Tavares 2016-1} a related estimate was proved for the level $c$. Here, however, we will need estimates between the different levels $c_\Gamma$ (see Theorem \eqref{Energy Estimation-1,2,m-1}), and for that the uniform estimate independent of $\Gamma$ we have just obtained is crucial.
\end{remark}
Denote
\begin{equation}\label{Constant-6}
\Lambda_{1}:=S^{2}/(32\overline{C}),
\end{equation}
where $S$ is defined in \eqref{eq:def_of_S}. From Lemma \ref{Pre-1} and \cite[Lemma 2.2]{Tavares 2016-1} we have the following.
\begin{lemma}\label{Positive Definite}
Let $\Gamma\subseteq \{1,\ldots,m\}$. If
\begin{equation*}
\beta_{ij}\geq 0 \quad\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1} \quad and \quad
-\infty<\beta_{ij}< \Lambda_{1} \quad\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2},
\end{equation*}
then there holds
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{N}_\Gamma\cap \left\{(\mathbf{u}_h)_{h\in \Gamma}: \sum_{h\in \Gamma}\|\mathbf{u}_h\|_{h}^{2}\leq 8\overline{C}\right\}\subset \mathcal{E}_\Gamma,
\end{equation*}
where $\mathcal{E}_\Gamma$ is defined in \eqref{Diagonally Dominant}.
\end{lemma}
Repeating the proof of Proposition 1.2 in \cite{Soave 2015}, we have the following.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lagrange}
Let $\Gamma\subseteq \{1,\ldots, m\}$ and assume that $c_\Gamma$ is achieved by $\mathbf{u}\in \mathcal{N}_\Gamma\cap \mathcal{E}_\Gamma$. Then $\mathbf{u}$ is a critical point of $J_\Gamma$ with at least $|\Gamma|$ nontrivial components.
\end{lemma}
We finish this preliminary subsection with a lower and upper uniform estimate on the $L^4$-norms of elements in the Nehari set which are below a certain energy level.
\begin{lemma}\label{Bounded}
Let $\Gamma\subseteq \{1,\ldots, m\}$. If
\begin{equation*}
\beta_{ij}\geq 0 \quad\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1} \quad and \quad
-\infty<\beta_{ij}< \Lambda_{1} \quad\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2},
\end{equation*}
then there exists $C_{2}>C_{1}>0$, such that for any $\mathbf{u}\in \mathcal{N}_\Gamma$ with $J_\Gamma(\mathbf{u})\leq 2\overline{C}$,
there holds
\begin{equation*}
C_{1}<\sum_{i\in I_{h}}|u_{i}|_{4}^{2}<C_{2}, ~h\in \Gamma,
\end{equation*}
where $C_{1},C_2$ are dependent only on $\beta_{ij}\geq 0$ for $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1}$, $\beta_{ii}, \lambda_{i}, i=1,\ldots, d$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[\bf{Proof}]
For any $\mathbf{u}\in \mathcal{N}_\Gamma$ with $J_\Gamma(\mathbf{u})\leq 2\overline{C}$ and for any $h\in \Gamma$, we have
\begin{equation*}
S\sum_{i\in I_{h}}|u_{i}|_{4}^{2}\leq\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\|u_{i}\|_{i}^{2} \leq\sum_{h\in \Gamma}\|\mathbf{u}_{h}\|_{h}^{2}
\leq 8\overline{C},
\end{equation*}
which yields that $\sum_{i\in I_{h}}|u_{i}|_{4}^{2}<C_{2}$. Similarly to Lemma 2.4 in \cite{Tavares 2016-1} we get that $\sum_{i\in I_{h}}|u_{i}|_{4}^{2}> C_{1}$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Comparing least energy levels}\label{subsec3.2}
In this subsection we present crucial estimates both for $c$ and for all levels $c_\Gamma$, so that we can obtain in the next section that these levels are achieved. The following theorem plays a critical role in presenting that limits of minimizing sequences are nontrivial. The presence of a $\delta$ allows to consider also positive $\beta_{ij}\in \mathcal{K}_2$ in Theorem \ref{Theorem-1}.
\begin{thm}\label{Energy Estimates}
Assume that $\beta_{ij}\geq 0$ for $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1}$. There exists $\delta>0$, depending only on $\beta_{ij}\geq 0$ for $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1}$ and $\beta_{ii}, \lambda_{i} ~i=1,\ldots,d$, such that
\begin{equation*}
c_\Gamma<\sum_{h\in \Gamma}l_{h}-\delta \qquad \forall \Gamma\subseteq \{1,\ldots, m\},
\end{equation*}
where $c_\Gamma$ is defined in \eqref{Minimizer-4} and $l_{h}$ is defined in \eqref{eq:Ground State-2}. In particular,
\[
c<\sum_{h=1}^m l_h -\delta.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}[\bf{Proof}]
In order to reduce technicalities with indices, we present the proof for $\Gamma=\{1,\ldots, m\}$; the general case follows exactly in the same way. Take $y_{1}, ..., y_{m}\in \Omega$ such that
\begin{equation*}
0<4\rho:= \min_{1\leq h\neq k\leq m}|y_{h}-y_{k}|<\min_{1\leq h\leq m}dist(y_{h}, \partial\Omega).
\end{equation*}
Then $B_{2\rho}(y_{h})\subseteq \Omega$ and $B_{2\rho}(y_{h})\cap B_{2\rho}(y_{k})=\emptyset$ for $h\neq k$. Let $\xi_{h}\in C^{1}_{0}(B_{2\rho}(y_{h}))$ be such that $0\leq\xi_{h}\leq 1$ and $\xi_{h}\equiv 1$ for $|x-y_{h}|\leq\rho$, $h=1,...,m$.
Define
\begin{equation}\label{D-5}
\mathbf{V}_{h}^{\varepsilon}:=\varepsilon^{-1}\mathbf{V}_{h}\left(\frac{x-y_{h}}{\varepsilon}\right),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{V}_{h}=X_0(f_{max}^h)^{-1/2}U_{1,0} ~\text{is a minimizer for $l_h$}
\end{equation*}
(recall Theorem \ref{limit system-6-1} and observe that $X_{0}, f_{max}^h$ are defined in \eqref{Class-1}) and so
\[
\mathbf{V}_{h}^{\varepsilon}=\varepsilon^{-1}X_0(f_{max}^h)^{-1/2}U_{1,0}\left(\frac{x-y_{h}}{\varepsilon}\right).
\]
Then we see that
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}|\nabla V_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}|\nabla V_{i}|^{2}, \quad
\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}|V_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{4}=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}|V_{i}|^{4}, ~i\in I_{h}.
\end{equation*}
Define
\begin{equation}\label{Definition-2}
\widehat{\mathbf{V}}_{h}^{\varepsilon}:=\xi_{h}\mathbf{V}_{h}^{\varepsilon}.
\end{equation}
Therefore, by Lemma 1.46 in \cite{Willem 1996} we get the following inequalities
\begin{equation}\label{2.14}
\int_{\Omega}|\widehat{V}_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}\geq C_{i}\varepsilon^{2}|ln\varepsilon|+O(\varepsilon^{2}), \text{ for every } i\in I_{h},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{2.12}
\int_{\Omega}|\nabla \widehat{V}_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}= \int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}|\nabla V_{i}|^{2}+O(\varepsilon^{2}), \text{ for every } i\in I_{h},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{Constant-2-9}
C_{i}=8(X_{0})_{i}^{2}(f_{max}^h)^{-1}.
\end{equation}
Observe that all these quantities depend on $\beta_{ij}$ for $(i,j)\in I_h^2$. For every $(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}$, we claim the following inequality
\begin{equation}\label{2.13}
\int_{\Omega}|\widehat{V}_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}|\widehat{V}_{j}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}\geq \int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}| V_{i}|^{2}| V_{j}|^{2}+O(\varepsilon^{4}).
\end{equation}
Observe that
\begin{align*}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}(1-\xi_{h}^{4})|\widehat{V}_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}|\widehat{V}_{j}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}&\leq
\int_{|x|\geq \rho}\varepsilon^{-4}|V_{i}(x/\varepsilon)|^{2}|V_{j}(x/\varepsilon)|^{2}=\int_{|x|\geq \rho/\varepsilon}|V_{i}|^{2}|V_{j}|^{2} \\
& =\int_{|x|\geq \rho/\varepsilon}\frac{C}{(1+|x|^2)^4}\leq\int_{|x|\geq \rho/\varepsilon} \frac{C}{|x|^8}
=O(\varepsilon^{4}),
\end{align*}
where $C$ is only dependent on $\beta_{ij}$ for $(i,j)\in I_h^2$.
Hence
\begin{align*}
\int_{\Omega}|\widehat{V}_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}|\widehat{V}_{j}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}&=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}|{V}_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}|{V}_{j}^{\varepsilon}|^{2} -\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}(1-\xi_{h}^{4})|\widehat{V}_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}|\widehat{V}_{j}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}
\geq \int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}| V_{i}|^{2}| V_{j}|^{2}+O(\varepsilon^{4}),
\end{align*}
which implies that \eqref{2.13} holds.
Recall that $\lambda_{1},\cdots,\lambda_{d}<0$, $\beta_{ij}\geq 0$ for every $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1}$ and $\beta_{ii}>0$. Note that $\int_{\Omega}|\widehat{V}_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}|\widehat{V}_{j}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}dx=0$ for every $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}$. Then we deduce from \eqref{2.14}-\eqref{2.12} that, given $t_1,\ldots, t_m>0$,
\begin{align}\label{2.15}
J \left(\sqrt{t_{1}}\widehat{\mathbf{V}}_{1}^{\varepsilon},..., \sqrt{t_{m}}\widehat{\mathbf{V}}_{m}^{\varepsilon}\right)&=
\frac{1}{2}\sum_{h=1}^{m}t_{h}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla \widehat{V}_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}+\lambda_{i}| \widehat{V}_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}
-\frac{1}{4}\sum_{h=1}^{m}t_{h}^{2}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}|\widehat{V}_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}
|\widehat{V}_{j}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}\nonumber\\
&\leq
\frac{1}{2}\sum_{h=1}^{m}t_{h}\left(\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}|\nabla \mathbf{V}_{h}|^{2}-C^h\varepsilon^{2}|ln\varepsilon|+ O(\varepsilon^{2})\right) \nonumber\\
& \quad -\frac{1}{4}\sum_{h=1}^{m}t_{h}^{2}\left(\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\beta_{ij}|V_{i}|^{2}|V_{j}|^{2}
+O(\varepsilon^{4})\right) \nonumber\\
&= \frac{1}{2}\sum_{h=1}^{m}t_{h}\left(4l_{h}-C^h\varepsilon^{2}|ln\varepsilon|+ O(\varepsilon^{2})\right)-\frac{1}{4}\sum_{h=1}^{m}t_{h}^{2}\left(4l_{h}+O(\varepsilon^{4})\right),
\end{align}
where $C^h:= \sum_{i\in I_h}C_i|\lambda_{i}|=\sum_{i\in I_h}8(X_{0})_{i}^{2}(f_{max}^h)^{-1}|\lambda_{i}|>0$ and $C_i$ is defined in \eqref{Constant-2-9}.
Denote
\begin{equation*}
A_{h}^{\varepsilon}:=4l_{h}-C^h\varepsilon^{2}|ln\varepsilon|+ O(\varepsilon^{2}),\quad
B_{h}^{\varepsilon}:=4l_{h}+O(\varepsilon^{4}).
\end{equation*}
It is easy to see that
\begin{equation*}
0<A_{h}^{\varepsilon}<B_{h}^{\varepsilon}, \text{ for } \varepsilon \text{ small enough. }
\end{equation*}
Combining these we have
\begin{align}\label{2.15-3}
\max_{t_{1},\ldots,t_{m}>0}J \left(\sqrt{t_{1}}\widehat{\mathbf{V}}_{1}^{\varepsilon},..., \sqrt{t_{m}}\widehat{\mathbf{V}}_{m}^{\varepsilon}\right)
&\leq\max_{t_{1},\ldots,t_{m}>0}\sum_{h=1}^{m}\left( \frac{1}{2}t_{h}A_{h}^{\varepsilon}- \frac{1}{4}t_{h}^{2}B_{h}^{\varepsilon}\right)= \frac{1}{4}\sum_{h=1}^{m}\frac{\left(A_{h}^{\varepsilon}\right)^{2}}{B_{h}^{\varepsilon}} \nonumber\\
&< \frac{1}{4}\sum_{h=1}^{m}A_{h}^{\varepsilon}=\sum_{h=1}^{m}\left(l_{h}-\frac{1}{4}C^h\varepsilon^{2}|ln\varepsilon|+ O(\varepsilon^{2})\right)\nonumber\\
&< \sum_{h=1}^{m}l_{h}-\delta ~\text{ for } \varepsilon \text{ small enough, }
\end{align}
where
\begin{equation}\label{4-p-9}
\delta:=\frac{1}{16}\min_{1\leq h\leq m}\{C^h\}\varepsilon^{2}|ln\varepsilon|,
\end{equation}
$\delta$ being a positive constant, only dependent on $\beta_{ij}\geq 0$ for $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1}$ and $\beta_{ii}, \lambda_{i} ~i=1,\ldots, d$.
Note that the matrix $M_{B}(\widehat{\mathbf{V}}^{\varepsilon})$ is diagonal, so it is easy to see that there exists $t_{1}^{\varepsilon},...,t_{m}^{\varepsilon}>0$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\left(\sqrt{t_{1}^{\varepsilon}}\widehat{\mathbf{V}}_{1}^{\varepsilon},..., \sqrt{t_{m}^{\varepsilon}}\widehat{\mathbf{V}}_{m}^{\varepsilon}\right)\in \mathcal{N}.
\end{equation*}
Thus,
\begin{equation*}
c\leq J\left(\sqrt{t_{1}^{\varepsilon}}\widehat{\mathbf{V}}_{1}^{\varepsilon},..., \sqrt{t_{m}^{\varepsilon}}\widehat{\mathbf{V}}_{m}^{\varepsilon}\right)\leq \max_{t_{1},\ldots,t_{m}>0}J \left(\sqrt{t_{1}}\widehat{\mathbf{V}}_{1}^{\varepsilon},..., \sqrt{t_{m}}\widehat{\mathbf{V}}_{m}^{\varepsilon}\right)
<\sum_{h=1}^{m}l_{h}-\delta,
\end{equation*}
which yields that $c<\sum_{h=1}^{m}l_{h}-\delta$.
\end{proof}
The following is an extension of Theorem \ref{Energy Estimates}. It compares the energy of a level $c_\Gamma$ with all the levels $c_G$ with $G\subsetneq \Gamma$, assuming the later are achieved. In the next section this will play a crucial role in proving (via mathematical induction in the number of sub-groups) that $c$ is achieved by a solution with $m$ nontrival components. Define
\begin{equation}\label{Constant-4-1}
\Lambda_{2}:= \frac{S^{2}}{16(\sum_{h=1}^{m}l_{h}-2\delta)} ~~\text{ and } \Lambda_{3}:=\min\{\Lambda_{1}, \Lambda_{2}\},
\end{equation}
where $l_{h}$ is defined in \eqref{eq:Ground State-2}, $h=1,\ldots,m$ and $\delta$ is defined in Theorem \ref{Energy Estimates}. Then we have the following result.
\begin{thm}\label{Energy Estimation-1,2,m-1}
Take
\begin{equation*}
\beta_{ij}\geq 0 \quad\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1} ~and~
-\infty<\beta_{ij}< \Lambda_{3} \quad\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}.
\end{equation*}
Given $\Gamma\subseteq\{1,\ldots, m\}$, assume that
\[
c_G \text{ is achieved by a nonnegative } \mathbf{u}_G \text{ for every } G\subsetneq \Gamma.
\]
Then
\begin{equation*}
c_\Gamma<\min\left\{ c_G + \sum_{h\in \Gamma\setminus G } l_h-\delta:\ G\subsetneq \Gamma \right\},
\end{equation*}
where $\delta$ is defined in Theorem \ref{Energy Estimates}, depending only on $\beta_{ij}\geq 0$ for $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1}$ and $\beta_{ii}, \lambda_{i} ~i=1,\ldots, d$. (and not depending on $\Gamma$).
\end{thm}
The rest of this section is dedicated to the proof of this theorem. Without loss of generality, we fix $1\leq p<m$ and prove that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:c<c_p}
c<c_{1,\ldots,p}+\sum_{h=p+1}^{m}l_{h}-\delta
\end{equation}
(where we use the notation $c_{1,\ldots, p}$ instead of $c_{\{1,\ldots,p\}}$ for simplicity); the other inequalities follow in the same way. The important fact that we like to stress is that $\delta$ does not depend on $\Gamma$ nor on $\beta_{ij}$ for $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_2$; in order to highlight that, we always exhibit the explicit dependences of the constants.
Let $-\infty<\beta_{ij}< \Lambda_{1} ~\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}$. Suppose that $c_{1,\ldots,p}$ is attained by a nonnegative $\mathbf{u}^{p}=(\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots, \mathbf{u}_{p})$. Then by Lemma \ref{Pre-1}, Lemma \ref{Positive Definite} and Lemma \ref{Lagrange} we infer that $\mathbf{u}^{p}$ is a solution of the corresponding subsystem. By theory of elliptic regularity we get that $u_{i}\in C^{2}(\overline{\Omega})$.
Observe that $u_{i}\equiv 0$ on $\partial\Omega$, $i\in I^{p}:=I_1\cup\ldots
\cup I_p$. Taking $x_{1}\in \partial\Omega$, there exists $\rho_{1}>0$
such that
\begin{align}\label{3-p-23}
\Pi^{2}&:= \max_{i\in I^{p}}\sup_{x\in B_{2\rho_{1}}(x_{1})\cap \Omega}u_{i}^{2}(x)\leq \min\Bigg\{ \frac{\min_{1\leq i\leq d}\{|\lambda_{i}|\}}{2d\max_{(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}}\{|\beta_{ij}|\}\widehat{t}}, \nonumber\\
& \frac{SC_{1}}{4d^{3}\widetilde{C}\max_{(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}}\{|\beta_{ij}|\}}, ~~
\frac{\min_{1\leq h\leq m}\{l_{h}\}}{d^{3}\widetilde{C}\max_{(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}}\{|\beta_{ij}|\}}\Bigg\},
\end{align}
where $C_{1}$ is defined in Lemma \ref{Bounded}, $\widetilde{C}:=\sqrt{\frac{4\max_h\{l_h\} |\Omega|}{\min_i\{\beta_{ii}\}}}$, and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:t_and_theta}
\widehat{t}= \frac{8\max\{\overline{C},l_1,\ldots, l_m \}}{\theta},\qquad \text{ where } \theta:=\min\left\{\frac{S}{4}C_{1}, l_{1},\ldots, l_{m}\right\}.
\end{equation}
Therefore, there exists $\rho>0$ such that $B_{2\rho}(x_{0})\subseteq B_{2\rho_{1}}(x_{1})\cap \Omega$, and so
\begin{equation}\label{3-p-16}
\sup_{x\in B_{2\rho}(x_{0})}u_{i}^{2}(x)\leq \Pi^{2} ~\forall i\in I^{p}.
\end{equation}
Take $x_{p+1},\cdots, x_{m}\in B_{2\rho}(x_{0})$ and $\rho_{p+1},\cdots,\rho_{m}>0$ such that $B_{2\rho_{p+1}}(x_{p+1}), \cdots, B_{2\rho_{m}}(x_{m})\subset B_{2\rho}(x_{0})$ and $B_{2\rho_i}(x_i)\cap B_{2\rho_j}(x_j)=\emptyset$ for every $i\neq j$, $i,j\in \{p+1,\ldots, m\}$. Let $\xi_{h}\in C^{1}_{0}(B_{2\rho_{h}}(x_{h}))$ be a nonnegative function with $\xi_{h}\equiv 1$ for $|x-x_{h}|\leq \rho_{h}, h=p+1,\ldots,m$.
Define
\begin{equation}\label{3-p-21}
\mathbf{v}_{h}^{\varepsilon}:=\xi_{h}\mathbf{V}^{\varepsilon}_{h},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{V}_{h}^{\varepsilon}:= \varepsilon^{-1}\mathbf{V}_{h}\left(\frac{x-y_{h}}{\varepsilon}\right)= \varepsilon^{-1}X_0(f_{max}^h)^{-1/2}U_{1,0}\left(\frac{x-y_{h}}{\varepsilon}\right), \quad \mathbf{V}_{h}=X_0(f_{max}^h)^{-1/2}U_{1,0} ~\text{ a minimizer for $l_h$}.
\end{equation*}
Similarly to \eqref{2.14}-\eqref{2.12} from the proof of the previous theorem, we have the following inequalities
\begin{equation}\label{2.12-1,2-m}
\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}= \int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}|\nabla V_{i}|^{2}+O(\varepsilon^{2}),\text{ for every } i\in I_{h}, ~h=p+1,\ldots,m,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{2.13-1,2-m}
\int_{\Omega}|v_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}|v_{j}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}\geq \int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}| V_{i}|^{2}| V_{j}|^{2}+O(\varepsilon^{4}),\text{ for every } (i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}, ~h=p+1,\ldots,m.
\end{equation}
Moreover, we have
\begin{align}
\int_{\Omega}|v_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{2} &\leq |\Omega|^{\frac{1}{2}} \left(\int_{\Omega}|v_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{4}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}
\leq |\Omega|^{\frac{1}{2}} \left(\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}|V_{i}|^{4}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\nonumber\\
&=\frac{|\Omega|^{\frac{1}{2}}}{\beta_{ii}^\frac{1}{2}} \left(\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\beta_{ii}|V_{i}|^{4}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}
\leq \frac{|\Omega|^{\frac{1}{2}}}{\min\{\beta_{ii}^\frac{1}{2}\}} \left(\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\beta_{ij}V_{i}^{2}V_{j}^{2}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\nonumber\\
&\leq \sqrt{\frac{4\max_h\{l_h\} |\Omega|}{\min_i\{\beta_{ii}\}}}=\widetilde{C}.
\end{align}
Combining this with \eqref{2.14}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{2.14-1,2-m}
C\varepsilon^{2}|ln\varepsilon|+O(\varepsilon^{2})\leq\int_{\Omega}|v_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}\leq \widetilde{C}, \text{ for every } i\in I_{h},
\end{equation}
where we remark that $C, \widetilde{C}>0$ are dependent only on $\beta_{ii}>0$, $\beta_{ij}\geq 0$ for $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1}$.
Let us now explain the idea of the proof of \eqref{eq:c<c_p} (and so, of Theorem \ref{Energy Estimation-1,2,m-1}).
Consider
\begin{align}\label{3-p-4}
\Phi(t_{1},\cdots,t_{m}):&=J(\sqrt{t_{1}}\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots, \sqrt{t_{p}}\mathbf{u}_{p}, \sqrt{t_{p+1}}\mathbf{v}_{p+1}^{\varepsilon},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}}\mathbf{v}_{m}^{\varepsilon})\nonumber\\
& =\frac{1}{2}\sum_{k=1}^{p}t_{k}\|\mathbf{u}_{k}\|_{k}^{2}
+\sum_{h=p+1}^{m}\frac{1}{2}t_{h}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v^{\varepsilon}_{i}|^{2}+\lambda_{i}| v^{\varepsilon}_{i}|^{2}\, dx-\frac{1}{4}M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})\mathbf{t}\cdot\mathbf{t},
\end{align}
where
\begin{equation}\label{3-p-6-1}
\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon}:= (\mathbf{u}_{1}^{\varepsilon},\cdots, \mathbf{u}_{m}^{\varepsilon})=(\mathbf{u}^{p}, \mathbf{v}_{p+1}^{\varepsilon},\cdots, \mathbf{v}_{m}^{\varepsilon}),
\end{equation}
$\mathbf{u}^{p}=(\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots, \mathbf{u}_{p})$ is a vector with nonnegative components attaining $c_{1,\ldots,p}$, and $\mathbf{v}_{h}^{\varepsilon}$ is defined in \eqref{3-p-21}.
The strategy is to prove that
\begin{equation}\label{3-p-3-18}
\max_{t_{1},\cdots,t_{m}>0} J\left(\sqrt{t_{1}}\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots, \sqrt{t_{p}}\mathbf{u}_{p},\sqrt{t_{p+1}}\mathbf{v}_{p+1}^{\varepsilon},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}}\mathbf{v}_{m}^{\varepsilon}\right)<
c_{1,\ldots,p}+\sum_{h=p+1}^{m}l_{h}-\delta,
\end{equation}
and that there exists $t_{1}^{\varepsilon},\ldots,t_{p}^{\varepsilon},\ldots,t_{m}^{\varepsilon}>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{3-p-3-4}
\left(\sqrt{t_{1}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{p}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{u}_{p}, \sqrt{t_{p+1}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{v}_{p+1}^{\varepsilon},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{v}_{m}^{\varepsilon}\right)\in \mathcal{N}.
\end{equation}
Obviously \eqref{eq:c<c_p} is a consequence of \eqref{3-p-3-18} and \eqref{3-p-3-4}.
Firstly we show that $M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})$ is positive definite.
\begin{lemma}\label{Con-4-1}
If
\begin{equation*}
\beta_{ij}\geq 0 \quad\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1} ~and~
-\infty<\beta_{ij}< \Lambda_{1} \quad\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}
\end{equation*}
then $M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})$ is strictly diagonally dominant and $M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})$ is
positive definite for small $\varepsilon$. Moreover, we can get that
\begin{equation}\label{3-p-7-3}
\kappa_{min}\geq \theta,
\end{equation}
where $\kappa_{min}$ is the minimum eigenvalues of $M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})$ and $\theta$ is defined in \eqref{eq:t_and_theta}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[\bf{Proof}] We need to check that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:diagonallydominant}
\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}^{2}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}(u_{i}^\varepsilon)^{2}(u_{j}^\varepsilon)^{2} -\sum_{l=1,l\neq k}^{m}
\left|\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{l}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij} (u_{i}^\varepsilon)^{2}(u_{j}^\varepsilon)^{2}\right|\geq \theta \qquad k=1,\ldots,m
\end{equation}
(recall that $\beta_{ij}\geq 0$ for every $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_1$). We separate the proof in two cases: first for $k=1,\ldots, p$, and then for $k=p+1,\ldots, m$.
\noindent \textbf{Case 1.} Firstly, we claim that
\begin{equation}\label{3-p-7}
\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}^{2}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2} -\sum_{l=1,l\neq k}^{p}
\left|\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{l}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij} u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2}\right|\geq \frac{S}{2}C_{1}, ~k=1,\ldots, p,
\end{equation}
where $C_{1}$ is defined in Lemma \ref{Bounded}.
In fact, without loss of generality, there exists $\overline{m}_{1}\in \{0,\ldots,p\}$ such that
\begin{align}\label{Matrix-6-3}
\sum_{l=1,l\neq k}^{p}
\left|\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{l}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij} u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2}\right| =
-\sum_{l=1,l\neq k}^{\overline{m}_{1}}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{l}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij} u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2}
+\sum_{l=\overline{m}_{1}+1,l\neq k}^{p}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{l}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2}.
\end{align}
Note that $\mathbf{u}^{p}\in\mathcal{N}_{1,\ldots,p}$, then we have
\begin{equation}\label{Matrix-5-3}
\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}^{2}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2}=\sum_{i\in I_{k}}\|u_{i}\|_{i}^{2}-
\sum_{l=1,l\neq k}^{p}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{l}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2}.
\end{equation}
Combining this with \eqref{Matrix-6-3} we know that
\begin{align}\label{Matrix-7-3}
\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}^{2}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2} & -\sum_{l=1,l\neq k}^{p}
\left|\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{l}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij} u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2}\right|=\nonumber\\
& \sum_{i\in I_{k}}\|u_{i}\|_{i}^{2}
-2\sum_{l=\overline{m}_{1}+1,l\neq k}^{p}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{l}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2}.
\end{align}
We deduce from Lemma \ref{Pre-1} that $\sum_{k=1}^{p}\|\mathbf{u}_{k}\|_{k}^{2}=4c_{1,\ldots,p}<4\overline{C}$, then we have
\begin{align}\label{Matrix-7-1-3}
2\sum_{l=\overline{m}_{1}+1,l\neq k}^{p}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{l}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2}&<
\frac{2\Lambda_{2}}{S^{2}} \sum_{l=\overline{m}_{1}+1,l\neq k}^{p}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{l}}\|u_{i}\|_{i}^{2}\|u_{j}\|_{j}^{2}\nonumber\\
& \leq \frac{8\Lambda_{2}\overline{C}}{S^{2}}\sum_{i\in I_{k}}\|u_{i}\|_{i}^{2}<\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i\in I_{k}}\|u_{i}\|_{i}^{2}.
\end{align}
We see from \eqref{Matrix-7-3}-\eqref{Matrix-7-1-3} and Lemma \ref{Bounded} that
\begin{align}\label{Matrix-2}
\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}^{2}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2} & -\sum_{l=1,l\neq k}^{p}
\left|\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{l}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij} u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2}\right|\nonumber\\
& \geq\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i\in I_{k}}\|u_{i}\|_{i}^{2}\geq \frac{S}{2}\sum_{i\in I_{k}}|u_{i}|_{4}^{2}\geq \frac{S}{2}C_{1}, ~k=1,\ldots, p.
\end{align}
For $k=1,\ldots, p$ and $h=p+1,\ldots, m$, by \eqref{3-p-16} and \eqref{2.14-1,2-m} we see that
\begin{align}\label{3-p-8}
\left|\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{h}}
\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}u_{i}^{2}(v^{\varepsilon}_{j})^{2}\right|& \leq \max_{(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}}\{|\beta_{ij}|\} \Pi^{2}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{h}}
\int_{B_{2\rho_{h}}(x_{h})}|v^{\varepsilon}_{j}|^{2}\nonumber\\
& \leq d^{2}\widetilde{C}\max_{(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}}\{|\beta_{ij}|\} \Pi^{2},
\end{align}
where $\widetilde{C}$ is defined in \eqref{2.14-1,2-m}. It follows from \eqref{3-p-23}, \eqref{Matrix-2}-\eqref{3-p-8} that
\begin{align}\label{3-p-10}
\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}^{2}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2} &-\sum_{l=1,l\neq k}^{p}
\left|\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{l}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij} u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2}\right|-\sum_{l=p+1,l\neq k}^{m}\left|\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{l}}
\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}|u_{i}|^{2}|v^{\varepsilon}_{j}|^{2}\right|\nonumber\\
& \geq\frac{S}{2}C_{1}-d^{3}\widetilde{C}\max_{(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}}\{|\beta_{ij}|\}\Pi^{2}\geq\frac{S}{4}C_{1}\geq \theta, ~k=1,\ldots, p.
\end{align}
\noindent \textbf{Case 2.} For every $k=p+1,\ldots,m$, we see from \eqref{2.13-1,2-m} that
\begin{equation}\label{2.13-1,2-p}
\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}^{2}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}|v_{i}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}|v_{j}^{\varepsilon}|^{2}\geq \sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}^{2}}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{4}}\beta_{ij}| V_{i}|^{2}| V_{j}|^{2}+O(\varepsilon^{4})\geq 2l_{k} \text{ for } \varepsilon \text{ small enough}.
\end{equation}
Combining this with \eqref{3-p-23} and \eqref{3-p-8}, since $u_i^\varepsilon\cdot u_j^\varepsilon=v_i^\varepsilon\cdot v_j^\varepsilon=0$ whenever $i\in I_k,j\in I_l$, $k\neq l$, $k,l\in \{p+1,\ldots, m\}$, we see that
\begin{align}\label{3-p-11}
\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}^{2}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}| u^{\varepsilon}_{i}|^{2}|u^{\varepsilon}_{j}|^{2} &-\sum_{l=1,l\neq k}^{m}\left|\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{l}}
\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}|u^{\varepsilon}_{i}|^{2}|u^{\varepsilon}_{j}|^{2}\right|\nonumber\\
&=\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}^{2}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}| v^{\varepsilon}_{i}|^{2}|v^{\varepsilon}_{j}|^{2} -\sum_{l=1,l\neq k}^{p}\left|\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{l}}
\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}|u_{i}|^{2}|v^{\varepsilon}_{j}|^{2}\right|\nonumber\\
& \geq 2l_{k}-d^{3}\widetilde{C}\max_{(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}}\{|\beta_{ij}|\} \Pi^{2}
\geq l_{k}\geq \theta, ~k=p+1,\ldots, m.
\end{align}
We deduce from \eqref{3-p-10} and \eqref{3-p-11} that $M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})$ is strictly diagonally dominant, and so $M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})$ is positive definite.
For any eigenvalue $\kappa$ of $M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})$, from \eqref{eq:diagonallydominant} and by the Gershgorin circle theorem we see that $\kappa\geq \theta$. Thus, $\kappa_{min}\geq \theta$.
\end{proof}
Based upon the former lemma, we can now prove that \eqref{3-p-3-18} holds.
\begin{lemma}\label{Con-4-2}
Assume that
\begin{equation*}
\beta_{ij}\geq 0 \quad\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1} ~and~
-\infty<\beta_{ij}< \Lambda_{1} \quad\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}.
\end{equation*}
Then we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:maximum_estimate}
\max_{t_{1},\cdots,t_{m}>0} J\left(\sqrt{t_{1}}\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots, \sqrt{t_{p}}\mathbf{u}_{p},\sqrt{t_{p+1}}\mathbf{v}_{p+1}^{\varepsilon},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}}\mathbf{v}_{m}^{\varepsilon}\right)<
c_{1,\ldots,p}+\sum_{h=p+1}^{m}l_{h}-\delta
\end{equation}
for small $\varepsilon$, where $\delta$ is as in Theorem \ref{Energy Estimates} and $c_{1,\ldots,p}$ is defined in \eqref{Minimizer-4}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[\bf{Proof}]
Recalling the definition of $\Phi$ (see \eqref{3-p-4}), it follows from Lemma \ref{Con-4-1} that
\begin{align}\label{3-p-4.2}
\Phi(t_{1},\cdots,t_{m})
\leq\frac{1}{2}\sum_{k=1}^{p}t_{k}\|\mathbf{u}_{k}\|_{k}^{2}
+\sum_{h=p+1}^{m}\frac{1}{2}t_{h}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v^{\varepsilon}_{i}|^{2}+\lambda_{i}| v^{\varepsilon}_{i}|^{2}\, dx-\frac{1}{4}\theta\sum_{k=1}^{m}t^{2}_{k}.
\end{align}
Similarly to \eqref{2.15} we infer that
\begin{align}\label{3-p-4.3}
\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v^{\varepsilon}_{i}|^{2}+\lambda_{i}| v^{\varepsilon}_{i}|^{2} \, dx< 4l_{h},~~ \forall h=p+1, \ldots, m,
\end{align}
for small $\varepsilon$. Note that
\begin{equation}\label{3-p-4.4}
\|\mathbf{u}_{k}\|_{k}^{2}\leq \sum_{h=1}^p\|\mathbf{u}_{h}\|_{h}^{2}=4c_{1,\ldots,p}\leq 4\overline{C}.
\end{equation}
We deduce from \eqref{3-p-4.2}, \eqref{3-p-4.3} and \eqref{3-p-4.4} that
\begin{align}\label{3-p-4-1}
\Phi(t_{1},\cdots,t_{m})&\leq \sum_{k=1}^p 2t_k\overline C + \sum_{h=p+1}^m 2t_k l_k- \sum_{k=1}^{m}\frac{1}{4}\theta t_k^2\\
& \leq \sum_{k=1}^m \left(2t_k \max\{\overline C,l_{1},\ldots, l_m\}-\frac{1}{4}\theta t_k^2\right),
\end{align}
which yields that $\Phi(t_{1},\cdots,t_{m})<0$ when $t_{1},\ldots,t_{m}>\widehat{t}$, where
\begin{equation}\label{1,2,3-7-3}
\widehat{t}= \frac{8\max\{\overline{C},l_1,\ldots, l_m \}}{\theta}.
\end{equation}
Thus,
\begin{align}\label{1,2,3-7}
\max_{t_{1},\ldots,t_{m}>0}& J\left(\sqrt{t_{1}}\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots, \sqrt{t_{p}}\mathbf{u}_{p},\sqrt{t_{p+1}}\mathbf{v}_{p+1}^{\varepsilon},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}}\mathbf{v}_{m}^{\varepsilon}\right)
=\nonumber\\\
& \max_{0<t_{1},\ldots,t_{m} \leq \widehat{t}}J\left(\sqrt{t_{1}}\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots, \sqrt{t_{p}}\mathbf{u}_{p},\sqrt{t_{p+1}}\mathbf{v}_{p+1}^{\varepsilon},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}}\mathbf{v}_{m}^{\varepsilon}\right).
\end{align}
By \eqref{3-p-23} and \eqref{3-p-16} we have, for $k=1,\ldots, p$, $h=p+1,\ldots,m$ and $t_{h}>0$, $0<t_{k}<\widehat{t}$,
\begin{align}\label{1,2-11-m}
\sum_{k=1}^{p}t_{k}t_{h}\left|\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{h}}\beta_{ij}
\int_{\Omega}|u_{i}|^{2}|v^{\varepsilon}_{j}|^{2}\right| &\leq d\max_{(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}}|\beta_{ij}|\widehat{t}\Pi^{2}t_{h}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{B_{2\rho}(x_{0})}|v^{\varepsilon}_{i}|^{2}\nonumber\\
& \leq -\frac{1}{2}t_{h}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\lambda_{i}\int_{\Omega}|v^{\varepsilon}_{i}|^{2}
\end{align}
(recall that $\lambda_i<0$).
Hence, since $v_i^\varepsilon\cdot v_j^\varepsilon=0$ whenever $i\in I_h,j\in I_l$, $h\neq l$, $h,l\in \{p+1,\ldots, m\}$, we have that
\begin{align}\label{1,2,3-8}
J(&\sqrt{t_{1}}\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots, \sqrt{t_{p}}\mathbf{u}_{p},\sqrt{t_{p+1}}\mathbf{v}_{p+1}^{\varepsilon},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}}\mathbf{v}_{m}^{\varepsilon}) =\frac{1}{2}\sum_{k=1}^{p}t_{k}\|\mathbf{u}_{k}\|_{k}^{2}
-\frac{1}{4}\sum_{k,l=1}^{p}t_{k}t_{l}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{l}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij} u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2} \nonumber\\
&+\sum_{h=p+1}^{m}\left(\frac{t_{h}}{2}\|\mathbf{v}^{\varepsilon}_{h}\|_{h}^{2}-\frac{t_{h}^{2}}{4}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}| v^{\varepsilon}_{i}|^{2}|v^{\varepsilon}_{j}|^{2}\right)
-\sum_{k=1}^{p}\sum_{h=p+1}^{m}\frac{t_{k}t_{h}}{2}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij} u_{i}^{2}|v^{\varepsilon}_{j}|^{2}\nonumber\\
& \leq\frac{1}{2}\sum_{k=1}^{p}t_{k}\|\mathbf{u}_{k}\|_{k}^{2}
-\frac{1}{4}\sum_{k,l=1}^{p}t_{k}t_{l}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{l}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij} u_{i}^{2}u_{j}^{2} \nonumber\\
& \quad +\sum_{h=p+1}^{m}\left(\frac{1}{2}t_{h}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v^{\varepsilon}_{i}|^{2}+\frac{\lambda_{i}}{2}| v^{\varepsilon}_{i}|^{2}\, dx-\frac{1}{4}t_{h}^{2}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}| v^{\varepsilon}_{i}|^{2}|v^{\varepsilon}_{j}|^{2}\right)\nonumber\\
& =: f(t_{1},\ldots,t_{p})+ g_\varepsilon(t_{p+1},\ldots,t_{m}).
\end{align}
We claim that
\begin{equation}\label{3-p-2}
\max_{t_{1},\cdots,t_{p}>0}f(t_{1},\cdots,t_{p})=f(1,\cdots,1)=J_{1,\cdots,p}(\mathbf{u}^{p})=c_{1,\cdots,p}.
\end{equation}
It follows from Lemma \ref{Positive Definite} that $M_{B}^{1,\cdots,p}(\mathbf{u}^{p})$ is positive definite. Then we see that $f$ is strictly concave and has a maximum point in $\overline{\mathbb{R}_{+}^p}$. Note that the point $\mathbf{1}=(1,\ldots,1)$ is a critical point of $f$ due to the fact that $\mathbf{u}^{p}\in \mathcal{N}_{1,\ldots,p}$. Moreover, it is easy to see that $f$ is of class $C^1$ in $\overline{\mathbb{R}_{+}^p}$. Therefore, we know that $\mathbf{1}$ is the unique critical point of $f$ and is a global maximum by strict concavity, which yields that \eqref{3-p-2} holds.
On the other hand, similarly to \eqref{2.15} we see that
\begin{equation}\label{3-p-3}
\max_{t_{p+1},\cdots,t_{m}>0}g_\varepsilon (t_{p+1},\cdots,t_{m})<\sum_{h=p+1}^{m}l_{h}-\delta,
\end{equation}
for the same $\delta$ as in \eqref{4-p-9}, by taking $\varepsilon$ sufficiently small.
It follows from \eqref{1,2,3-7}, \eqref{1,2,3-8}, \eqref{3-p-2} and \eqref{3-p-3} that
\begin{align}\label{3-p-3-6}
\max_{t_{1},\ldots,t_{m}>0}& J\left(\sqrt{t_{1}}\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots, \sqrt{t_{p}}\mathbf{u}_{p},\sqrt{t_{p+1}}\mathbf{v}_{p+1}^{\varepsilon},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}}\mathbf{v}_{m}^{\varepsilon}\right)
=\nonumber\\
& \max_{0<t_{1},\ldots,t_{m} \leq \widehat{t}}J\left(\sqrt{t_{1}}\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots, \sqrt{t_{p}}\mathbf{u}_{p},\sqrt{t_{p+1}}\mathbf{v}_{p+1}^{\varepsilon},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}}\mathbf{v}_{m}^{\varepsilon}\right)\nonumber\\
& \leq \max_{t_{1},\cdots,t_{p}>0}f(t_{1},\cdots,t_{p})+\max_{t_{p+1},\cdots,t_{m}>0}g(t_{p+1},\cdots,t_{m})\nonumber\\
& <c_{1,\ldots,p}+\sum_{h=p+1}^{m}l_{h}-\delta. \qedhere
\end{align}
\end{proof}
By the previous lemma, we know that $\Phi$ has a global maximum $\mathbf{t}^{\varepsilon}$ in $\overline{\mathbb{R}^{m}_{+}}$ for sufficiently small $\varepsilon>0$. From now on we fix such an $\varepsilon$. It is easy to see that $\partial_{k}\Phi(\mathbf{t}^{\varepsilon})\leq 0$ if $t^{\varepsilon}_{k}=0$ and $\partial_{k}\Phi(\mathbf{t}^{\varepsilon})= 0$ if $t^{\varepsilon}_{k}>0$. Moreover, for the latter case we have
\begin{equation}\label{3-p-12}
\|\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon}_{k}\|_{k}^{2}=\sum_{h=1}^{m}M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})_{kh}t^{\varepsilon}_{h}, ~\text{ for } t^{\varepsilon}_{k}>0.
\end{equation}
Recall the definition of $\Lambda_{3}$ (see \eqref{Constant-4-1}). In the following we show that \eqref{3-p-3-4} holds.
\begin{lemma}\label{t-positive}
If
\begin{equation*}
\beta_{ij}\geq 0 \quad\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1} ~and~
-\infty<\beta_{ij}< \Lambda_{3} \quad\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2},
\end{equation*}
then there holds
\begin{equation*}
t^{\varepsilon}_{1},\cdots,t^{\varepsilon}_{k},\cdots, t^{\varepsilon}_{m}>0.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[\bf{Proof}]
Firstly, we claim that
\begin{equation}\label{3-p-13}
\sum_{k=1}^{m}t^{\varepsilon}_{k}\|\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon}_{k}\|_{k}^{2}\leq 4\left(\sum_{k=1}^{m}l_{k}-2\delta\right).
\end{equation}
We deduce from \eqref{3-p-12} that for $t^{\varepsilon}_{k}>0$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{3-p-12-2}
\|\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon}_{k}\|_{k}^{2}t^{\varepsilon}_{k}=\sum_{h=1}^{m}M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})_{kh}t^{\varepsilon}_{h}t^{\varepsilon}_{k}, \end{equation}
and clearly \eqref{3-p-12-2} also holds for $t^{\varepsilon}_{k}=0$. Hence, we know that \eqref{3-p-12-2} is true for $k=1,\ldots, m$. It follows that
\begin{equation}\label{3-p-14-2}
J(\sqrt{t_{1}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{p}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{u}_{p},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{v}_{m}^{\varepsilon})
= \frac{1}{4}\sum_{k=1}^{m}\|\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon}_{k}\|_{k}^{2}t^{\varepsilon}_{k}.
\end{equation}
Note that $c_{1,\ldots,p}<\sum_{k=1}^{p}l_{k}-\delta$ by Theorem \ref{Energy Estimates}. Combining this with \eqref{eq:maximum_estimate} we see that
\begin{equation}\label{3-p-14}
J(\sqrt{t_{1}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{p}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{u}_{p},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{v}_{m}^{\varepsilon})
\leq \sup_{t_{1},\ldots,t_{m}\geq 0}J(\sqrt{t_{1}}\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{p}}\mathbf{u}_{p},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}}\mathbf{v}_{m}^{\varepsilon})\leq\sum_{k=1}^{m}l_{k}-2\delta.
\end{equation}
We infer from \eqref{3-p-14-2} and \eqref{3-p-14} that \eqref{3-p-13} holds.
By contradiction, we suppose that $t^{\varepsilon}_{1}=0$, and the maximum point has the form $(0, t_{2}^{\varepsilon},\cdots,t_{m}^{\varepsilon})$. Consider the function
\begin{align}\label{3-p-19}
\varphi(t_1):=J(\sqrt{t_{1}}\mathbf{u}_{1}^{\varepsilon},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{u}_{m}^{\varepsilon}) &=\frac{1}{2}t_{1}\|\mathbf{u}_{1}^{\varepsilon}\|_{1}^{2}-\frac{1}{2}\sum_{k=2}^{m}M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})_{1k}t_{1}t^{\varepsilon}_{k}-\frac{1}{4}M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})_{11}t_{1}^{2}\nonumber\\ & \quad + \frac{1}{2}\sum_{k=2}^{m}t_{k}^{\varepsilon}\|\mathbf{u}_{k}^{\varepsilon}\|_{k}^{2}-\frac{1}{4}\sum_{k,h=2}^{m}M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})_{kh}t_{k}^{\varepsilon}t_{h}^{\varepsilon}.
\end{align}
By assumption we have that
\begin{align*}
\sum_{k=2}^{m}M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})_{1k}t_{k}^{\varepsilon}&=\sum_{k=2}^{m}t_{k}^{\varepsilon}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{1}\times I_{k}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}| u^{\varepsilon}_{i}|^{2}|u^{\varepsilon}_{j}|^{2}\leq \frac{\Lambda_{2}}{S^{2}}\sum_{k=2}^{m}t_{k}^{\varepsilon}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{1}\times I_{k}}\|u^{\varepsilon}_{i}\|_{i}^{2}\|u^{\varepsilon}_{j}\|_{j}^{2}\\
& \leq \frac{\Lambda_{2}}{S^{2}}\|\mathbf{u}_{1}^{\varepsilon}\|_{1}^{2}\sum_{k=2}^{m}t_{k}^{\varepsilon}\|\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon}_{k}\|_{k}^{2}
\leq \frac{4\Lambda_{2}\left(\sum_{k=1}^{m}l_{k}-2\delta\right)}{S^{2}}\|\mathbf{u}_{1}^{\varepsilon}\|_{1}^{2}\leq \frac{1}{4}\|\mathbf{u}_{1}^{\varepsilon}\|_{1}^{2}.
\end{align*}
Combining this with \eqref{3-p-19} we have
\begin{align}\label{3-p-20}
\frac{1}{2}&t_{1}\|\mathbf{u}_{1}^{\varepsilon}\|_{1}^{2}-\frac{1}{2}\sum_{k=2}^{m}M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})_{1k}t_{1}t^{\varepsilon}_{k}-\frac{1}{4}M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})_{11}t_{1}^{2}\nonumber\\ &=\frac{1}{2}t_{1}\left(\|\mathbf{u}_{1}^{\varepsilon}\|_{1}^{2}-\sum_{k=2}^{m}M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})_{1k}t^{\varepsilon}_{k}-\frac{1}{2}M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})_{11}t_{1}\right)
\geq\frac{1}{2}t_{1}\left(\frac{3}{4}\|\mathbf{u}_{1}^{\varepsilon}\|_{1}^{2}- \frac{1}{2}M_{B}(\mathbf{u}^{\varepsilon})_{11}t_{1}\right)>0,
\end{align}
for $t_{1}>0$ small enough. It follows from \eqref{3-p-19} and \eqref{3-p-20} that
\begin{equation*}
J\left(\sqrt{t_{1}}\mathbf{u}_{1}^{\varepsilon},\sqrt{t_{2}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{u}_{2}^{\varepsilon},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{u}_{m}^{\varepsilon}\right)
>J\left(0,\sqrt{t_{2}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{u}_{2}^{\varepsilon},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{u}_{m}^{\varepsilon}\right),
\end{equation*}
which is a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[\bf Proof of Theorem \ref{Energy Estimation-1,2,m-1}.]
Without loss of generality, we prove that $c<c_{1,\ldots,p}+\sum_{h=p+1}^{m}l_{h}-\delta$.
By Lemma \ref{t-positive}, there exists $t_{1}^{\varepsilon},\ldots,t_{m}^{\varepsilon}>0$ such that
$$
\left(\sqrt{t_{1}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{p}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{u}_{p}, \sqrt{t_{p+1}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{v}_{p+1}^{\varepsilon},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{v}_{m}^{\varepsilon}\right)\in \mathcal{N}.
$$
It follows from Lemma \ref{Con-4-2} that
\begin{align*}
c &\leq J\left(\sqrt{t_{1}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{p}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{u}_{p},\sqrt{t_{p+1}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{v}_{p+1}^{\varepsilon},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{v}_{m}^{\varepsilon}\right)\\
&\leq
\max_{t_{1},\ldots,t_{m}>0}J(\sqrt{t_{1}}\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{p}^{\varepsilon}}\mathbf{u}_{p},\sqrt{t_{p+1}}\mathbf{v}_{p+1}^{\varepsilon},\cdots,\sqrt{t_{m}}\mathbf{v}_{m}^{\varepsilon}) <c_{1,\ldots,p}+\sum_{h=p+1}^{m}l_{h}-\delta. \qedhere
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{5.1}
We mention that Theorem \ref{Energy Estimation-1,2,m-1} also holds for $d=m=2$, where in this case it gives the estimate:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:accurateestimate}
c<\min\{c_1+l_2-\delta,c_2+l_1-\delta\},
\end{equation}
where $\delta$ is independent of $\beta:=\beta_{12}=\beta_{21}$. Observe that $l_{i}=\frac{1}{4}\beta_{ii}^{-1}\widetilde{S}^{2}, i=1,2$, where $\widetilde{S}$ is the Sobolev best constant. This accurate estimate allows us to answer a question which was left open in \cite{Zou 2012}, where the authors dealt with the case $d=m=2$. Indeed, let us recall the following statement from that paper:
\begin{thm}\cite[Theorem 1.4]{Zou 2012}
Assume that $-\lambda_1(\Omega)<\lambda_1\leq \lambda_2<0$. Let $\beta_{n}<0, n\in \mathbb{N}$ satisfy $\beta_{n}\rightarrow -\infty$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$, and let $(u_n,v_n)$ be a least energy positive solution of \eqref{S-system} with $\beta_{12}=\beta_{21}=\beta_{n}$. Then $\int_{\Omega}\beta_{n}u_n^2v_n^2\rightarrow 0$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$ and, passing to a subsequence, one of the following conclusions holds.
\begin{itemize}
\item [(1)] $u_n\rightarrow u_{\infty}$ strongly in $H_0^1(\Omega)$ and $v_n\rightharpoonup 0$ weakly in $H_0^1(\Omega)$, where $u_{\infty}$ is a least energy positive solution of
\begin{equation}
-\Delta u+\lambda_{1}u=\beta_{11}u^3, \qquad u\in H_0^1(\Omega).
\end{equation}
\item [(2)] $v_n\rightarrow v_{\infty}$ strongly in $H_0^1(\Omega)$ and $u_n\rightharpoonup 0$ weakly in $H_0^1(\Omega)$, where $v_{\infty}$ is a least energy positive solution of
\begin{equation}
-\Delta v+\lambda_{2}v=\beta_{22}v^3, \qquad v\in H_0^1(\Omega).
\end{equation}
\item [(3)] $(u_n,v_n)\rightarrow (u_{\infty},v_{\infty})$ strongly in $H_0^1(\Omega)\times H_0^1(\Omega)$ and $u_{\infty}\cdot v_{\infty}\equiv 0$, where $u_{\infty}\in C(\overline{\Omega})$ is a least energy positive solution of
\begin{equation}
-\Delta u+\lambda_{1}u=\beta_{11}u^3, \qquad u\in H_0^1(\{u_{\infty}>0\}),
\end{equation}
and $v_{\infty}\in C(\overline{\Omega})$ is a least energy positive solution of
\begin{equation}
-\Delta v+\lambda_{2}v=\beta_{22}v^3, \qquad v\in H_0^1(\{v_{\infty}>0\}).
\end{equation}
Furthermore, both $\{u_{\infty}>0\}$ and $\{v_{\infty}>0\}$ are connected domains, and $\{v_{\infty}>0\}=\Omega\backslash\overline{\{u_{\infty}>0\}}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{thm}
The question left open in \cite{Zou 2012} was whether $(1)$ and $(2)$ could actually happen. Combining \cite[Remark 6.1]{Zou 2012} with \eqref{eq:accurateestimate} we can show that actually $(1)$ and $(2)$ \emph{cannot} happen, therefore $(3)$ always holds.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Construction of Palais-Smale sequence}\label{subsec3.3}
In this subsection, we construct a Palais-Smale sequence at level $c_\Gamma$.
Recalling that $\Lambda_{1}=S^{2}/(32\overline{C})$ (see \eqref{Constant-6}) we have the following result.
\begin{prop}\label{PS Sequence}
Assume that
\begin{equation*}
\beta_{ij}\geq 0 \quad\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{1} ~and~
-\infty<\beta_{ij}< \Lambda_{1} \quad\forall (i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}.
\end{equation*}
Then there exists a sequence $\{\mathbf{u}_{n}\}\subset\mathcal{N}_\Gamma$ satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{Inequality16-1}
\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}J_\Gamma(\mathbf{u}_{n})=c_\Gamma,\quad \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}J_\Gamma'(\mathbf{u}_{n})=0.
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}[\bf{Proof}]
We adapt the idea of the proof \cite[Lemma 2.5]{Tavares 2016-1} to the critical case.
Notice that $J_\Gamma$ is coercive and bounded from below on $\mathcal{N}_\Gamma$. By Lemma \ref{Pre-1} we can assume that $J_\Gamma(\mathbf{u}_{n})\leq 2\overline{C}$ for $n$ large enough. Then by the Ekeland variational principle (which we can use, since $\mathcal{N}_\Gamma\cap \left\{\mathbf{u}: J_\Gamma(\mathbf{u})\leq 2\overline{C}\right\}$ is a closed set by Lemma \ref{Bounded}), there exists a minimizing sequence $\{\mathbf{u}_{n}\}\subset\mathcal{N}_\Gamma$ satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{Inequality14}
J_\Gamma(\mathbf{u}_{n})\rightarrow c_\Gamma,\quad
J_\Gamma'(\mathbf{u}_{n})-\sum_{k\in \Gamma}\lambda_{k,n}\Psi'_{k}(\mathbf{u}_{n})=o(1), \text{ as } n\rightarrow \infty,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{Func-1}
\Psi_{k}(\mathbf{u}):= \|\mathbf{u}_{k}\|_{k}^{2}-\sum_{h\in \Gamma}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}u^{2}_{i}u^{2}_{j}.
\end{equation}
Since $J_\Gamma(\mathbf{u}_{n})\leq 2\overline{C}$ for $n$ large enough, $\{u^{n}_i\}$ is uniformly bounded in $H^1_0(\Omega)$. We suppose that, up to a subsequence,
\begin{equation*}
u_{i}^{n}\rightarrow u_{i} \text{ weakly in } H^{1}_{0}(\Omega),
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation}\label{limit-1}
\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}\times I_{k}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}| u_{i}^{n}|^{2}|u_{j}^{n}|^{2}:= a_{hk}, \quad \widetilde{B}:= (a_{hk})_{ h,k\in \Gamma}.
\end{equation}
Let us prove that $\widetilde{B}$ is positive definite.
We claim that
\begin{align}\label{Matrix-2-7-1}
\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}^{2}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}| u_{i}^{n}|^{2}|u_{j}^{n}|^{2} -\sum_{h\neq k}\left|\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{k}\times I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}| u_{i}^{n}|^{2}|u_{j}^{n}|^{2}\right|\geq \frac{S}{2}C_{1},
\end{align}
where $C_{1}$ is defined in Lemma \ref{Bounded}. We can prove this claim by performing exactly as in the proof of \eqref{3-p-7}, due to the fact that $\mathbf{u}_{n}\subset\mathcal{N}_\Gamma$ and $\sum_{k\in\Gamma}\|\mathbf{u}_{k}^{n}\|_{k}^{2}\leq 8\overline{C}$.
Then we see from \eqref{Matrix-2-7-1} that
\begin{equation}\label{Matrix-3-1}
a_{kk}-\sum_{h\neq k}|a_{hk}|\geq \frac{S}{2}C_{1}>0 ~~k\in \Gamma,
\end{equation}
which yields that $\widetilde{B}$ is positive definite.
Consider $\overline{\mathbf{u}}^k_n$ defined by
\begin{equation}
\overline{u}^k_{i,n}:=
\begin{cases}
u_{i}^n ~~\text{ if } i\in I_k,\\
0 ~~\text{ if } i\not\in I_k.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Testing the second equation in \eqref{Inequality14}, together with \eqref{limit-1} we get that
\begin{equation}\label{limit-2}
\mathbf{o}(1)=M_B^\Gamma(\mathbf{u}_n)\mathbf{\lambda}^\Gamma_n=(\widetilde{B}+\mathbf{o}(1))\mathbf{\lambda}^\Gamma_n,
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{\lambda}^\Gamma_n:=(\lambda_{k,n})_{ |\Gamma|\times 1}$, $k\in \Gamma$. Denote by $(\mathbf{\lambda}^\Gamma_n)'$ the transpose of $\mathbf{\lambda}^\Gamma_n$. Multiplying the equation \eqref{limit-2} by $(\mathbf{\lambda}^\Gamma_n)'$, we deduce from the positive definiteness of $\widetilde{B}$ that
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{o}(1)|(\mathbf{\lambda}^\Gamma_n)'|\geq C|(\mathbf{\lambda}^\Gamma_n)'|^2+\mathbf{o}(1)|(\mathbf{\lambda}^\Gamma_n)'|^2,
\end{equation}
where $C$ is independent on $n$. It follows that $\lambda_{k,n}\rightarrow 0$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$. Observe that ${\Psi_{k}'(\mathbf{u}_n)}$ is a uniformly bounded family of operators and that $\{u^{n}_i\}$ is uniformly bounded in $H^1_0(\Omega)$; then by \eqref{Inequality14} we get that $J_\Gamma'(\mathbf{u}_{n})\rightarrow 0$. Therefore, $\mathbf{u}_{n}$ is a standard Palais-Smale sequence.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of the main theorems}\label{sec4}
As stated in the introduction, we prove Theorem \ref{Theorem-1} by induction in the number of sub-groups. We start in the next subsection by proving the first induction step.
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{Theorem-1} for the case of one group} \label{subsec4.1}
Given $h=1,\ldots, m$, consider the following system
\begin{equation}\label{System-h-1}
\begin{cases}
-\Delta u_{i}+\lambda_{i}u_{i}=\sum_{j \in I_{h}}\beta_{ij}u_{j}^{2}u_{i} \text{ in } \Omega,\\
u_{i}\in H^{1}_{0}(\Omega) \quad \forall i\in I_{h}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
We will consider the levels $c_\Gamma$ with $|\Gamma|=1$. We recall that, with $\Gamma=\{h\}$ (and dropping the parenthesis in the notations from now on):
\begin{equation*}
J_{h}(\mathbf{u}):=\int_{\Omega}\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}(|\nabla u_{i}|^{2}+\lambda_{i}u_{i}^{2})-\frac{1}{4}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}}
\beta_{ij}u_{j}^{2}u_{i}^{2}\, dx,
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation}\label{Energy-h}
c_{h}:= \inf_{\mathbf{u}\in \mathcal{N}_{h}}J_{h}(\mathbf{u})>0,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{N}_{h}:=\Big\{\mathbf{u}\in (H^{1}_{0}(\Omega))^{a_{h}-a_{h-1}}:\mathbf{u}\neq \mathbf{0} \text{ and }
\langle \nabla J_{h}(\mathbf{u}),\mathbf{u}\rangle=0 \Big\}.
\end{equation*}
From Theorem \ref{Energy Estimates} we know that the following lemma holds.
\begin{lemma}\label{Energy Estimation-h}
Assume that $\beta_{ij}\geq0$ for every $(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}, i\neq j$, $\beta_{ii}>0, i\in I_{h}$. Then
\begin{equation*}
c_{h}<l_{h}-\delta.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
The following lemma is the counterpart of Br\'ezis-Lieb Lemma (see \cite{Brezis Lieb lemma}) for two component and its proof can be found in \cite[p. 538]{Zou 2015}.
\begin{lemma}\label{BL}
Let $u_{n}\rightharpoonup u, v_{n}\rightharpoonup v$ in $H^{1}_{0}(\Omega)$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$. Then, up to a subsequence, there holds
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}\int_{\Omega}(|u_{n}|^{2}|v_{n}|^{2}-|u_{n}-u|^{2}|v_{n}-v|^{2}-|u|^{2}|v|^{2})=0.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{thm}\label{System-h}
Assume that $\beta_{ij}\geq0$ for every $(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}, i\neq j$, $\beta_{ii}>0, i\in I_{h}$. Then
$c_{h}$ is achieved by a nonnegative $\mathbf{u}\in \mathcal{N}_{h}$. Moreover, any minimizer is a nonnegative solution of \eqref{System-h-1}.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}[\bf{Proof}]
From Proposition \ref{PS Sequence} there exists $\{\mathbf{u}_{n}\}$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}J_{h}(\mathbf{u}_{n})=c_{h},\quad \lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}J'_{h}(\mathbf{u}_{n})=0.
\end{equation*}
It is standard to see that $\{u^{n}_{i}\}$ is bounded in $H^{1}_{0}(\Omega)$, and so we may assume that $u^{n}_{i}\rightharpoonup u_{i}$ weakly in $H^{1}_{0}(\Omega)$, $i\in I_{h}$. Passing to a subsequence, we may assume that
\begin{equation*}
u_{i}^{n}\rightharpoonup u_{i}, ~weakly ~in ~L^{4}(\Omega), ~i\in I_{h}.
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
(u_{i}^{n})^{2}\rightharpoonup u_{i}^{2}, ~weakly ~in ~L^{2}(\Omega), ~i\in I_{h}.
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation}\label{h-1}
u_{i}^{n}\rightarrow u_{i}, ~strongly ~in ~L^{2}(\Omega), ~i\in I_{h}.
\end{equation}
Set $v_{i}^{n}=u_{i}^{n}-u_{i}$, and so
\begin{equation}\label{h-2-1}
v_{i}^{n}\rightharpoonup 0 \text{ weakly } \text{ in } H^{1}_{0}(\Omega), \quad v_{i}^{n}\rightarrow 0 \text{ strongly in } L^{2}(\Omega).
\end{equation}
Note that since $\mathbf{u}_{n}\in \mathcal{N}_{h}$, then we have
\begin{equation}\label{h-3-2}
\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla u_{i}^{n}|^{2}+\lambda_{i}|u_{i}^{n}|^{2}\, dx=
\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}| u_{i}^{n}|^{2}|u_{j}^{n}|^{2}.
\end{equation}
We deduce from \eqref{h-1} and \eqref{h-2-1} that
\begin{equation}\label{h-2-2}
\int_{\Omega}|\nabla u_{i}^{n}|^{2}=\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{n}|^{2}+|\nabla u_{i}|^{2}+o(1), \quad \int_{\Omega}|u_{i}^{n}|^{2}=\int_{\Omega}u_{i}^{2}+o(1),
\end{equation}
and by Lemma \ref{BL} we have
\begin{equation}\label{h-2}
\int_{\Omega}| u_{i}^{n}|^{2}|u_{j}^{n}|^{2}=\int_{\Omega}| v_{i}^{n}|^{2}|v_{j}^{n}|^{2}+ \int_{\Omega}| u_{i}|^{2}|u_{j}|^{2}+o(1).
\end{equation}
It follows from \eqref{h-3-2}-\eqref{h-2} and $J_{h}'(\mathbf{u}_{h})\mathbf{u}_{h}=0$ that
\begin{equation}\label{h-3}
\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{n}|^{2}-
\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}| v_{i}^{n}|^{2}|v_{j}^{n}|^{2}=o(1).
\end{equation}
We deduce from \eqref{h-2-2}-\eqref{h-3} that
\begin{equation}\label{thm-4-2-0}
J_h(\mathbf{u}_{n})=J_h(\mathbf{u}_h)+\frac{1}{4}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{n}|^{2}+o(1).
\end{equation}
Passing to a subsequence, we may assume that
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{n}|^{2}=d_{h}.
\end{equation*}
Combining this with \eqref{thm-4-2-0} yields
\begin{equation}\label{S-h-1}
0\leq J_{h}(\mathbf{u}_{h})\leq J_{h}(\mathbf{u}_{h})+\frac{1}{4}d_{h}=\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}J_{h}(\mathbf{u}_{n})=c_{h}.
\end{equation}
Next, we prove that $\mathbf{u}_{h}\neq \mathbf{0}$. By contradiction, assume that $\mathbf{u}_{h}\equiv \mathbf{0}$. By \eqref{S-h-1} we have $d_{h}=4c_h>0$. Then by \eqref{Vector Sobolev Inequality} and \eqref{h-3} we get that
\begin{align*}
\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{n}|^{2} =
\sum_{(i,j)\in I^{2}_{h}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}| v_{i}^{n}|^{2}|v_{j}^{n}|^{2}+o(1)
\leq (4l_{h})^{-1}\left(\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{n}|^{2}\right)^{2}+o(1),
\end{align*}
which yields that $d_{h}\geq 4l_{h}$. It follows from \eqref{S-h-1} that
\begin{equation*}
c_{h}=\frac{1}{4}d_{h}\geq l_{h},
\end{equation*}
which contradicts Lemma \ref{Energy Estimation-h}. Therefore, $\mathbf{u}_{h}\neq\mathbf{0}$ and $\mathbf{u}_{h}\in \mathcal{N}_{h}$. Then we see from \eqref{S-h-1} that
\begin{equation*}
c_{h}\leq J_{h}(\mathbf{u}_{h})\leq\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}J_{h}(\mathbf{u}_{n})=c_{h}.
\end{equation*}
That is, $J_{h}(\mathbf{u}_{h})=c_{h}$, and so $J_{h}(|\mathbf{u}_{h}|)=c_{h}$. By Lemma \ref{Lagrange} we get that $|\mathbf{u}_{h}|$ is a nonnegative solution of \eqref{System-h-1}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{Theorem-1} in the general case}\label{subsec4.2}
Set
$$
\Lambda_{4}:= \frac{\delta S^{2}}{8\overline{C}\sum_{l=1}^{m}l_{h}},
$$
where $l_{h}$ is defined in \eqref{eq:Ground State-2}, $\overline{C}$ is defined in \eqref{Pre-2}, and $\delta$ is defined in Theorem \ref{Energy Estimates}.
Let
\begin{equation}\label{Constant-8}
\Lambda:= \min\{\Lambda_{3},\Lambda_{4}\},
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda_{3}$ is defined in \eqref{Constant-4-1}. From now on, we assume that $-\infty<\beta_{ij}< \Lambda$ for every $(i,j)\in \mathcal{K}_{2}$.
\begin{proof}[\bf Conclusion of the proof of Theorem \ref{Theorem-1}]
We will proceed by mathematical induction on the number of sub-groups. Denote by $p$ the number of sub-groups considered (that is, the cardinality of $|\Gamma|$) and $p=1,2,\ldots,m$. We have proved in the previous subsection that the result holds true for $p=1$, i.e, for all levels $c_\Gamma$ with $|\Gamma|=1$. We suppose by induction hypothesis that the result holds true for every level $c_\Gamma$ with $|\Gamma| \leq p$, for some $1\leq p\leq m-1$. In particular, observe that the estimates of Theorem \ref{Energy Estimation-1,2,m-1} hold for $c_\Gamma$. We want to prove Theorem \ref{Theorem-1} for $c_G$, with $|G|=p+1$. Without loss of generality, we will show it for $G=\{1,\ldots, p+1\}$. Observe that the estimates of Theorem \ref{Energy Estimation-1,2,m-1} hold for $c_G$.
From Proposition \ref{PS Sequence} we know that there exists a sequence $\{\mathbf{u}_{n}\}\subset\mathcal{N}_G$ satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{thm-1}
\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}J_G(\mathbf{u}_{n})=c_G,\quad \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}J_G'(\mathbf{u}_{n})=0.
\end{equation}
Since $\{u^{n}_i\}$ is uniformly bounded in $H^1_0(\Omega)$, we may assume that $u^{n}_i\rightharpoonup u_i$ weakly in $H^1_0(\Omega)$. Passing to a subsequence, we may assume that
\begin{equation*}
u_{i}^{n}\rightharpoonup u_{i}, ~weakly ~in ~L^{4}(\Omega), ~i\in I_{h}, ~h=1, \ldots, p+1.
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
(u_{i}^{n})^{2}\rightharpoonup u_{i}^{2}, ~weakly ~in ~L^{2}(\Omega), ~i\in I_{h}, ~h=1, \ldots, p+1.
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
u_{i}^{n}\rightarrow u_{i}, ~strongly ~in ~L^{2}(\Omega), ~i\in I_{h}, ~h=1, \ldots, p+1.
\end{equation*}
Set $v_{i}^{n}=u_{i}^{n}-u_{i}$, so that
\begin{equation}\label{thm-2-1}
v_{i}^{n}\rightharpoonup 0 \text{ in } H^{1}_{0}(\Omega).
\end{equation}
Note that $\mathbf{u}_{n}\in\mathcal{N}_G$. Then for $\forall h=1, \ldots, p+1$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{thm-3-2}
\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla u_{i}^{n}|^{2}+\lambda_{i}|u_{i}^{n}|^{2}=
\sum_{k=1}^{p+1}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}\times I_{k}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}| u_{i}^{n}|^{2}|u_{j}^{n}|^{2}.
\end{equation}
We deduce from \eqref{thm-2-1} that
\begin{equation}\label{thm-2-2}
\int_{\Omega}|\nabla u_{i}^{n}|^{2}=\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{n}|^{2}+|\nabla u_{i}|^{2}+o(1), \quad \int_{\Omega}|u_{i}^{n}|^{2}=\int_{\Omega}u_{i}^{2}+o(1),
\end{equation}
and by Lemma \ref{BL} we have
\begin{equation}\label{thm-2}
\int_{\Omega}| u_{i}^{n}|^{2}|u_{j}^{n}|^{2}=\int_{\Omega}| v_{i}^{n}|^{2}|v_{j}^{n}|^{2}+ \int_{\Omega}| u_{i}|^{2}|u_{j}|^{2}+o(1).
\end{equation}
It follows from \eqref{thm-3-2}-\eqref{thm-2} and $J_G'(\mathbf{u})\mathbf{u}=0$ that
\begin{equation}\label{thm-3}
\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{n}|^{2}-
\sum_{k=1}^{p+1}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}\times I_{k}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}| v_{i}^{n}|^{2}|v_{j}^{n}|^{2}=o(1), ~h=1, \ldots, p+1,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{thm-4}
J_G(\mathbf{u}_{n})=J_G(\mathbf{u})+E_G(\mathbf{v}_{n})+o(1),
\end{equation}
where we recall that $E_G$ is defined in \eqref{eq:def_of_E}. Passing to a subsequence, we may assume that
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{n}|^{2}=d_{h}, ~h=1, \ldots, p+1.
\end{equation*}
Hence, by \eqref{thm-3} we have $E_G(\mathbf{v}_{n})= \frac{1}{4}\sum_{h=1}^{p+1}d_{h}+o(1)$. Letting $n\rightarrow\infty$ in \eqref{thm-4}, we see that
\begin{equation}\label{thm-5}
0\leq J_G(\mathbf{u})\leq J_G(\mathbf{u})+\frac{1}{4}\sum_{h=1}^{p+1}d_{h}=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}J_G(\mathbf{u}_{n})=c_G\leq \overline{C},
\end{equation}
and so we can assume that $J_G(\mathbf{u}_{n})\leq 2\overline{C}$ for $n$ large enough. Next, we show that $\mathbf{u}\in \mathcal{N}_G$ using a contradiction argument.
{\bf Case 1}. $\mathbf{u}=(\mathbf{u}_{1},\cdots, \mathbf{u}_{h},\cdots, \mathbf{u}_{p+1})\equiv \mathbf{0}$.
Firstly, we claim that $d_{h}>0, ~h=1, \ldots, p+1$. In fact, by contradiction we assume that $d_{h_{1}}=0$ for some $h_{1}$. Then we get that $v_{i}^{n}\rightarrow 0$ strongly in $H^{1}_{0}(\Omega)$ and so $u_{i}^{n}\rightarrow 0$ strongly in $H^{1}_{0}(\Omega), \forall i\in I_{h_{1}}$. Thus
$$
\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{i\in I_{h_{1}}}|u_{i}^{n}|_{4}^{2}=0,
$$
which contradicts Lemma \ref{Bounded}. Therefore, $d_{h}>0, ~h=1, \ldots, p+1$.
Then we see from \eqref{Vector Sobolev Inequality}, \eqref{thm-2-2}-\eqref{thm-3} that
\begin{align}\label{thm-5-8}
\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{n}|^{2}&=\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}^{2}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}| v_{i}^{n}|^{2}|v_{j}^{n}|^{2}+
\sum_{k\neq h}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}\times I_{k}}\left(\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}| u_{i}^{n}|^{2}|u_{j}^{n}|^{2}+o(1)\right)+o(1)\nonumber\\
&\leq (4l_{h})^{-1}\left(\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{n}|^{2}\right)^{2}+\frac{\Lambda}{S^{2}}\sum_{k\neq h}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}\times I_{k}}
\|u_{i}^{n}\|_{i}^{2}\|u_{j}^{n}\|_{j}^{2}+o(1)\nonumber\\
&\leq (4l_{h})^{-1}\left(\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{n}|^{2}\right)^{2}+\frac{8\Lambda\overline{C}}{S^{2}}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla u_{i}^{n}|^{2}+o(1)\nonumber\\
&\leq (4l_{h})^{-1}\left(\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{n}|^{2}\right)^{2}+\frac{8\Lambda\overline{C}}{S^{2}}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{n}|^{2}+o(1).
\end{align}
Hence, $d_{h}\geq 4l_{h}\left(1-\frac{8\overline{C}}{S^{2}}\Lambda\right), h=1, \ldots, p+1$. It follows from \eqref{Constant-8} and \eqref{thm-5} that
\begin{equation}\label{thm-5-3}
c_G=\frac{1}{4}\sum_{h=1}^{p+1}d_{h}\geq \sum_{h=1}^{p+1}l_{h}\left(1-\frac{8\overline{C}}{S^{2}}\Lambda\right)>\sum_{h=1}^{p+1}l_{h}-\delta,
\end{equation}
which contradicts Theorem \ref{Energy Estimates}. Hence, $\mathbf{u}\not \equiv \mathbf{0}$.
{\bf Case 2}. Only one component of $\mathbf{u}$ is not zero.
Without loss of generality, we may assume that $\mathbf{u}_{1}\neq \mathbf{0}, \mathbf{u}_{2}=\cdots=\mathbf{u}_{h}=\cdots= \mathbf{u}_{p+1}=\mathbf{0}$. Similarly to Case 1, we can get that $d_{h}>0, h=2,\ldots, p+1$. Moreover, similarly to \eqref{thm-5-8}, we deduce from \eqref{Vector Sobolev Inequality} and \eqref{thm-3} that
$d_{h}\geq 4l_{h}\left(1-\frac{8\overline{C}}{S^{2}}\Lambda\right), h=2,\ldots,p+1$. Note that $\mathbf{u}_{1}$ is a solution of \eqref{System-h-1} with $h=1$, and so $J_G(\mathbf{u}_{1}, \mathbf{0}, \cdots,\mathbf{0})\geq c_{1}$. It follows from \eqref{Constant-8} and \eqref{thm-5} that
\begin{equation*}
c_G\geq J_G(\mathbf{u}_{1}, \mathbf{0}, \cdots, \mathbf{0})+\frac{1}{4}\sum_{h=2}^{p+1} d_{h}\geq c_{1}+\sum_{h=2}^{p+1}l_{h}\left(1-\frac{8\overline{C}}{S^{2}}\Lambda\right)>c_{1}+\sum_{h=2}^{p+1}l_{h}-\delta,
\end{equation*}
a contradiction with Theorem \ref{Energy Estimation-1,2,m-1}. Therefore, Case 2 is impossible.
{\bf Case 3}. Only $q$ components of $\mathbf{u}$ are not zero, $q=2,3,\ldots, p$.
Without loss of generality, we may assume that $\mathbf{u}_{1}\neq \mathbf{0}, \mathbf{u}_{2}\neq \mathbf{0}, \cdots, \mathbf{u}_{q}\neq \mathbf{0}, \mathbf{u}_{q+1}=\cdots= \mathbf{u}_{h}=\cdots= \mathbf{u}_{p+1}=\mathbf{0}$. Similarly to Case 1, we can get that $d_{h}>0, h=q+1,\ldots,p+1$. Thus by \eqref{Vector Sobolev Inequality} and \eqref{thm-3} we get that
\begin{align*}
\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{n}|^{2}& =
\sum_{(i,j)\in I^{2}_{h}}\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}| v_{i}^{n}|^{2}|v_{j}^{n}|^{2}+\sum_{k\neq h}\sum_{(i,j)\in I_{h}\times I_{k}}\left(\int_{\Omega}\beta_{ij}| u_{i}^{n}|^{2}|u_{j}^{n}|^{2}+o(1)\right)+o(1) \\
&\leq (4l_{h})^{-1}\left(\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{n}|^{2}\right)^{2}+\frac{8\Lambda\overline{C}}{S^{2}}\sum_{i\in I_{h}}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v_{i}^{n}|^{2}+o(1),
\end{align*}
which yields that $d_{h}\geq 4l_{h}\left(1-\frac{8\overline{C}}{S^{2}}\Lambda\right), h=q+1,\ldots,p+1$. Note that $(\mathbf{u}_{1},\mathbf{u}_{2},\cdots, \mathbf{u}_{q}, \mathbf{0}, \cdots,\mathbf{0})$ is a solution of \eqref{S-system} with the number of sub-group is $q$, and so $J_G(\mathbf{u}_{1},\mathbf{u}_{2}, \cdots, \mathbf{u}_{q}, \mathbf{0}, \cdots,\mathbf{0})\geq c_{1\ldots q}$. It follows from \eqref{Constant-8} and \eqref{thm-5} that
\begin{equation*}
c_G\geq J_G(\mathbf{u}_{1}, \cdots, \mathbf{u}_{q},\mathbf{0}, \cdots, \mathbf{0})+\frac{1}{4}\sum_{h=q+1}^{p+1} d_{h}\geq c_{1\ldots q}+\sum_{h=q+1}^{p+1}l_{h}\left(1-\frac{8\overline{C}\Lambda}{S^{2}}\right)>c_{1\ldots q}+\sum_{h=q+1}^{p+1}l_{h}-\delta,
\end{equation*}
which contradicts Theorem \ref{Energy Estimation-1,2,m-1}. Therefore, Case 3 is impossible.
Since Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3 are impossible, then we get that $\mathbf{u}_{h}\neq \mathbf{0}$ for any $h=1,2,\ldots, p+1$. Therefore, $\mathbf{u} \in \mathcal{N}_G$. It follows from \eqref{thm-5} that
\begin{equation}\label{thm-5-5}
c_G\leq J_G(\mathbf{u})\leq J_G(\mathbf{u})+\frac{1}{4}\sum_{h=1}^{p+1}d_{h}=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}J_G(\mathbf{u}_{n})=c_G,
\end{equation}
that is, $J_G(\mathbf{u})=c_G$. It is easy to get that
\begin{equation*}
|\mathbf{u}|\in \mathcal{N}_G ~~and ~~J_G(|\mathbf{u}|)=c_G.
\end{equation*}
It follows from Lemma \ref{Lagrange} that $|\mathbf{u}|$ is a solution to system \eqref{S-system} with the number of sub-group is $p+1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{5-3}
We deduce from \eqref{thm-5-5} that $d_{h}=0$ for any $h=1,2,\ldots, p+1$. Then we know that $v^{n}_i\rightarrow 0$ strongly in $H^1_0(\Omega)$, and so
$u^{n}_i\rightarrow u_i$ strongly in $H^1_0(\Omega)$.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Proof of the remaining results}
All the remaining results follow either directly from Theorem \ref{Theorem-1} or exactly as results in other papers.
Regarding Corollary \ref{Classification}, the existence of ground states follow directly from Theorem \ref{Theorem-1} in the case $m=1$ and $\mathbf{a}=(0,d)$. Indeed, $\tilde c$ is achieved by a solution of \eqref{S-system}. Therefore $\tilde c=\inf\{J(\mathbf{u}):\ J'(\mathbf{u})= 0,\ \mathbf{u}\in H^1_0(\Omega;\mathbb{R}^d), \mathbf{u}\neq \mathbf{0} \}$, the ground state level. The classification result, on the other hand, follows applying exactly as in \cite[Theorem 2.1]{Tavares 2016} (\emph{cf.} also the proof of Theorem \ref{limit system-6-1} in Section \ref{sec2}).
Corollary \ref{Theorem-1-1} is a direct consequence of Theorem \ref{Theorem-1} in the case $m=d$, $\mathbf{a}=(0,1,\ldots, d)$.
Finally, having established that $c$ is achieved in Theorem \ref{Theorem-1}, the proofs of Theorems \ref{Theorem-2} and \ref{Theorem-3} follow word by word the ones of Theorem 1.4 and Theorem 1.5 in \cite{Tavares 2016-1}.
\medbreak
\noindent{\bf Acknowledgments}
H. Tavares is partially supported by the Portuguese government through FCT/Portugal - Funda\c c\~ao para a Ci\^encia e a Tecnologia, I.P. under the project PTDC/MAT-PUR/28686/2017 and through the grant UID/MAT/04561/2013.
S. You would like to thank the China Scholarship Council of China (NO.201806180084)
for financial support during the period of his overseas study and to express his gratitude to
the Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Sciences of the University of Lisbon for its kind hospitality.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\def1.2{1.75}
\begin{tabular}{p{.175\textwidth}|p{.25\textwidth}p{.25\textwidth}p{.25\textwidth}p{.225\textwidth}}
\multicolumn{1}{p{.175\textwidth}}{\textbf{Training Strategy}} & \includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth, height=0.15\textwidth ]{Figures/iccv_19/Supplementary/Qual/175187} & \includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth, height=0.15\textwidth]{Figures/iccv_19/Supplementary/Qual/957447} & \includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth, height=0.15\textwidth]{Figures/iccv_19/Supplementary/Qual/232749} & \includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth, height=0.15\textwidth]{Figures/iccv_19/Supplementary/Qual/602780} \tabularnewline
\hline
\textbf{(a)} Noisy Data \& Supervised CNN \textbf{(NS)} & i like the angle and the composition & i like the colors and the composition & i like the composition and the lighting & i like the composition and the bw \tabularnewline
\hline
\textbf{(b)} Clean Data \& Supervised CNN \textbf{(CS)} & i like the idea , but i think it would have been better if the door
was in focus . & i like the colors and the water . the water is a little distracting
. & i like the way the light hits the face and the background . & i like this shot . i like the way the lines lead the eye into the
photo .\tabularnewline
\hline
\textbf{(c)} Clean Data \& Weakly Supervised CNN \textbf{(CWS)} & i like the composition , but i think it would have been better if
you could have gotten a little more of the building & i like the composition and the colors . the water is a little too
bright . & this is a great shot . i love the way the light is coming from the
left . & i like the composition and the bw conversion . \tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{center}
\caption{Aesthetic image captions. We show candidates generated by three different frameworks discussed in this paper: \textbf{(a)} For NS, we use an ImageNet trained CNN and LSTM trained on noisy comments \textbf{(b)} For CS, we use an ImageNet trained CNN and LSTM trained on compiled AVA-Captions dataset \textbf{(c)} For CWS, we use a weakly-supervised CNN and LSTM trained on AVA-Captions}
\label{fig:title_fig}
\end{figure*}
Availability of large curated datasets such as MS-COCO~\cite{lin2014microsoft} ($100K$ images), Flickr30K~\cite{plummer2015flickr30k} ($30K$ images) or Conceptual Captions \cite{sharma2018conceptual} ($3M$ images) made it possible to train deep learning models for complex, multi-modal tasks such as natural image captioning (NIC)~\cite{xushow} where the goal is to factually describe the image content. Similarly, several other captioning variants such as visual question answering \cite{antol2015vqa}, visual storytelling \cite{Kiros2015}, stylized captioning \cite{mathews2018semstyle} have also been explored. Recently, the PCCD dataset ($\sim4200$ images) ~\cite{chang2017aesthetic} opened up a new area of research of describing images aesthetically. Aesthetic image captioning (AIC) has potential applications in the creative industries such as developing smarter cameras or web-based applications, ranking, retrieval of images and videos \etc. However in~\cite{chang2017aesthetic}, only six well-known photographic/aesthetic attributes such as composition, color, lighting, \etc have been used to generate aesthetic captions with a small curated dataset. Hence, curating a large-scale dataset to facilitate a more comprehensive and generalized understanding of aesthetic attributes remains an open problem.
Large-scale datasets have always been pivotal for research advancements in various fields~\cite{deng2009imagenet,lin2014microsoft,plummer2015flickr30k,ra2019TIP}. However, manually curating such a dataset for AIC is not only time consuming, but also difficult due to its subjective nature. Moreover, a lack of unanimously agreed `standard' aesthetic attributes makes this problem even more challenging as compared to its NIC counterpart, where deep models are trained with known attributes/labels~\cite{lin2014microsoft}. In this paper, we make two contributions. Firstly, we propose an automatic cleaning strategy to generate a large scale dataset by utilizing the noisy comments or aesthetic feedback provided by users for images on the web.
Secondly, for a CNN-based visual feature extractor as is typical in NIC pipelines, we propose a weakly-supervised training strategy. By automatically discovering certain `meaningful and complex aesthetic concepts', beyond the classical concepts such as composition, color, lighting, \etc, our strategy can be adopted in scenarios where finding clean ground-truth annotations is difficult (as in the case of many commercial applications). We elaborate these contributions in the rest of this section.
To generate a clean aesthetic captioning dataset, we collected the raw user comments from the Aesthetic Visual Analysis (AVA) dataset \cite{murray2012ava}. AVA is a widely used dataset for aesthetic image analysis tasks such as aesthetic rating prediction \cite{lu2014rapid, Ma_2017_CVPR}, photographic style classification \cite{Karayev2014, ghosalgeometry}. However, AVA was not created for AIC. In this paper, we refer to the original AVA with raw user comments as AVA raw-caption. It contains $\sim250,000$ photographs from dpchallenge.com and the corresponding user comments or feedback for each photograph ($~3$ billion in total). Typically, in Dpchallenge, users ranging from casual hobbyists to expert photographers provide feedback to the images submitted and describe the factors that make a photograph aesthetically pleasing or dull. Even though these captions contain crucial aesthetic-based information from images, they cannot be directly used for the task of AIC. Unlike the well instructed and curated datasets~\cite{lin2014microsoft}, AVA raw-captions are unconstrained user-comments in the wild with typos, grammatically inconsistent statements, and also containing a large number of comments occurring frequently without useful information. Previous work in AIC~\cite{chang2017aesthetic} acknowledges the difficulty of dealing with the highly noisy captions available in AVA.
In this work, we propose to clean the raw captions from AVA by proposing a probabilistic n-gram based filtering strategy. Based on word-composition and frequency of occurrence of n-grams, we propose to assign an informativeness score to each comment, where comments with a little or vague information are discarded. Our resulting clean dataset, \textbf{AVA-Captions} contains $\sim230,000$ images and $\sim1.5M$ captions with an average of $\sim5$ comments per image and can be used to train the Long and Short Term Memory (LSTM) network in the image captioning pipeline in the traditional way. Our subjective study verifies that the proposed automatic strategy is consistent with human judgement regarding the informativeness of a caption. Our quantitative experiments and subjective studies also suggest that models trained on AVA-Captions are more diverse and accurate than those trained on the original noisy AVA-Comments. It is important to note that our strategy to choose the large-scale AVA raw-caption is motivated from the widely used image analysis benchmarking dataset, MS-COCO, which is now used as an unified benchmark for diverse tasks such as object detection, segmentation, captioning, \etc. We hope that our cleaned dataset will serve as a new benchmarking dataset for various creative studies and aesthetics-based applications such as aesthetics based image enhancement, smarter photography cameras, \etc.
Our second contribution in this work is a weakly supervised approach for training a CNN, as an alternative to the standard practice. The standard approach for most image captioning pipelines is to train a CNN on large annotated datasets \eg ImageNet \cite{deng2009imagenet}, where rich and discriminative visual features are extracted corresponding to the physical properties of objects such as cars, dogs etc. These features are provided as input to an LSTM for generating captions. Although trained for classification, these ImageNet-based features have been shown to translate well to other tasks such as segmentation \cite{long2015fully}, style-transfer \cite{gatys2016image}, NIC. In fact, due to the unavailability of large-scale, task-specific CNN annotations, these ImageNet features have been used for other variants of NIC such as aesthetic captioning \cite{chang2017aesthetic}, stylized captioning \cite{mathews2018semstyle}, product descriptions \cite{yashima2016learning}, \etc.
However, for many commercial/practical applications, availability of such datasets or models is unclear due to copyright restrictions \cite{meduim_annotation, quartz_annotation,racolor}. On the other hand, collecting task-specific manual annotations for a CNN is expensive and time intensive. Thus the question remains open if we can achieve better or at least comparable performance by utilizing easily available weak annotations from the web (as found in AVA) and use them for training the visual feature extractor in AIC.
To this end, motivated from weakly supervised learning methods \cite{doersch2017multi, ren2018cross}, we propose a strategy which exploits the large pool of unstructured raw-comments from AVA and discovers latent structures corresponding to meaningful \textit{photographic concepts} using Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) \cite{blei2003latent}.
We experimentally observe that the weakly-supervised approach is effective and its performance is comparable to the standard ImageNet trained supervised features.
In essence, our contributions are as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item We propose a caption filtering strategy and compile AVA-Captions, a large-scale and clean dataset for aesthetic image captioning (Sec \ref{subsec:Caption-filtering-strategy}).
\item We propose a weakly-supervised approach for training the CNN of a standard CNN-LSTM framework (Sec \ref{subsec:Discovering-Aesthetic-Attributes}
\item We showcase the analysis of the AIC pipeline based on the standard automated metrics (such as BLEU, CIDEr, SPICE \etc \cite{papineni2002bleu,vedantam2015cider,anderson2016spice}), diversity
of captions and subjective evaluations which are publicly available for further explorations (Section \ref{sec:Experiments}).
\end{enumerate}
\section{Related Work}
\label{sec:reltd}
Due to the multi-modal nature of the task, the problem spans into many different areas of image and text analysis and thus related literature abound. However, based on the primary theme we roughly divide this section into four areas as follows:
\textbf{Natural Image Captioning:} While early captioning methods ~\cite{hodosh2013framing,socher2014grounded,farhadi2010every,ordonez2011im2text,jia2011learning}
followed a dictionary look-up approach, recent parametric methods
~\cite{johnson2016densecap,fang2015captions,karpathy2015deep,mao2016generation,anne2016deep,mao2014deep,donahue2015long,mao2015learning,geman2015visual,malinowski2015ask,tu2014joint,bigham2010vizwiz,agrawal2018don,jin2015aligning}
are generative in the sense that they learn a mapping from visual to textual
modality. Typically in these frameworks, a CNN is followed by a RNN or LSTM \cite{xushow,johnson2016densecap,fang2015captions,karpathy2015deep,mao2016generation,anne2016deep,mao2014deep,donahue2015long,mao2015learning}, although fully convolutional systems have been proposed by Aneja \emph{et al}\onedot \cite{aneja2018convolutional} recently.
\textbf{Image Aesthetics:}
Research in understanding the perceptual and aesthetic concepts in images can be divided
into the model-based ~\cite{datta2006studying,ke2006design,luo2008photo,obrador2012towards,dhar2011high,joshi2011aesthetics,san2012leveraging,aydin2015automated}
and the data-driven ~\cite{lu2015deep,lu2014rapid,Ma_2017_CVPR,mai2016composition,Karayev2014,1707.03981}
approaches. While model-based approaches rely on manually hard-coding
the aspects such as the Rule of Thirds, depth of field,
colour harmony, etc., the
data driven approaches usually train CNNs
on large-scale datasets and either predict
an overall aesthetic rating \cite{lu2014rapid,lu2015deep,mai2016composition}
or a distribution over photographic attributes ~\cite{Karayev2014,lu2014rapid,lu2015deep,ghosalgeometry}.
\textbf{Learning from Weakly-Annotated / Noisy Data:} Data dependency of very deep neural nets and the high cost of human supervision has led to a natural interest towards exploring the easily available web-based big data. Typically in these approaches, web-crawlers collect easily available noisy multi-modal data \cite{berg2010automatic, chen2013neil, vittayakorn2016automatic} or e-books \cite{divvala2014learning} which is jointly processed for labelling and knowledge extraction. The features are used for diverse applications such as classification and retrieval \cite{sun2015automatic,2014feature} or product description generation \cite{yashima2016learning}.
\begin{comment}
Berg \emph{et al}\onedot \cite{berg2010automatic} build a visual attribute vocabulary by jointly mining noisy text and image data from e-commerce images. NEIL \cite{chen2013neil} gathers information continuously from the internet and perform simultaneous labelling and knowledge extraction. In \cite{divvala2014learning}, Divvala \emph{et al}\onedot crawl through a vast number of online books and train a model to automatically discover diverse appearance attributes for a given concept. Sun \emph{et al}\onedot \cite{sun2015automatic} discover discriminative visual concepts by parallely training text and images from the web and apply it for retrieval. Vittayakorn \emph{et al}\onedot \cite{vittayakorn2016automatic} use neural activations for automatic attribute discovery from noisy web data. Yashima \emph{et al}\onedot \cite{yashima2016learning} use online e-commerce text to generate product descriptions.
\end{comment}
\textbf{Aesthetic Image Captioning:} To the best of our knowledge, the problem of aesthetic image captioning
has been first and only addressed by Chang \emph{et al}\onedot in ~\cite{chang2017aesthetic}.
The authors propose a framework which extracts features covering seven
different aspects such as general impression, composition and perspective,
color and lighting, etc. and generate meaningful captions by fusing
them together. They compile the photo critique captioning dataset (PCCD)
with $\sim4K$ images and $\sim30K$ captions. While their method is purely supervised and the network is trained using strong labels, we adopt a weakly-supervised approach to train our network with indirect labels. Additionally, AVA-Captions is a significantly bigger ($\sim60$ times) dataset with $\sim240K$ and $\sim1.3M$ images and captions, respectively. The scale of AVA allows training deeper and more complex architectures which can be generalized to PCCD as well. We demonstrate this later in Table \ref{tab:automated_metrics}b.
\section{Caption Filtering Strategy}
\label{subsec:Caption-filtering-strategy}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{.45\textwidth}{!}{
\def1.2{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{p{0.15\textwidth}p{0.25\textwidth}|p{0.05\textwidth}}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{Image}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{Comments}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{Scores}}\tabularnewline
\hline
\hline
\multirow{7}{*}{\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{Figures/iccv_19/771300.jpg}} & Photo Quality : Awesome & $9.62$ \tabularnewline
\cline{2-3}
& I love the \textbf{colors} here & $1.85$ \tabularnewline
\cline{2-3}
& I like the \textbf{trees} in the \textbf{background} and the \textbf{softness} of the \textbf{water}. & $28.41$ \tabularnewline
\cline{2-3}
& The \textbf{post processing} \textbf{looks great} with the \textbf{water}, but the \textbf{top half} of the photo doesn't work as well. & $47.44$\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\caption{Informativeness of captions. We suggest the readers to check the supplementary material for more comments and the corresponding scores.}
\label{fig:Informativeness-of-captions}
\end{figure}
In AVA raw-caption, we observe two main types of undesirable captions. First, there are
captions which suffer from generic noise frequently observed in most text corpora, especially those compiled from social media. They include typing errors, non-English comments, colloquial acronyms, exclamatory words (such as ``woooow''), extra punctuation (such as ``!!!!''), etc. Such noise can be handled using standard natural language processing techniques \cite{Loper:2002:NNL:1118108.1118117}.
Second, we refer to the \textit{safe} comments, which carry a little or no useful
information about the photograph. For example, in Figure \ref{fig:Informativeness-of-captions}, comments such as ``\emph{Photo Quality : Awesome}'' or ``\emph{I love the colors here}'' provide a
valid but less informative description of the photograph .
It is important to filter these comments, otherwise the network ends up learning these less-informative, \emph{safe} captions by ignoring the more informative and discriminative ones such as ``\emph{The post processing looks great with the water, but the top half of the photo doesn't work as well.}'' \cite{chang2017aesthetic}.
To this end, we propose a probabilistic strategy for caption filtering based on the informativeness of a caption. Informativeness is measured by the presence of certain n-grams. The approach draws motivation from two techniques frequently used in vision-language problems --- word composition and term-frequency - inverse document frequency (TF-IDF).
\textbf{Word Composition:} Bigrams of the ``descriptor-object'' form often convey more information than the unigrams of the objects alone. For example, ``post processing'' or ``top half'' convey more information than ``processing'' or ``half''.
On the other hand, the descriptors alone may not always be sufficient to describe a complete concept and its meaning is often closely tied to the object \cite{nagarajan2018attributes}. For example, ``sharp`` could be used in two entirely different contexts such as ``sharp contrast'' and ``sharp eyes''. This pattern is also observed in the 200 bigrams (or ugly and beautiful attributes) discovered from AVA by Marchesotti \emph{et al}\onedot \cite{murray2012ava} such as ``nice colors'', ``beautiful scene'', ``too small'', ``distracting background'', \etc. Similar n-gram modelling is found in natural language processing as adjective-noun \cite{socher2014grounded, misra2017red, santa2018neural} or verb-object \cite{sadeghi2011recognition,zhang2017visual} compositions.
\textbf{TF-IDF:} The other motivation is based on the intuition
that the key information in a comment is stored in certain n-grams which occur less frequently in the comment corpus
such as ``softness'', ``post processing'', ``top half'' \etc. A sentence composed of frequently occurring n-grams such as ``colors" or ``awesome" is less likely to contain useful information. The intuition follows from the motivation of commonly used TF-IDF metric in document classification, which states that more frequent words of a vocabulary are less discriminative for document classification \cite{ramos2003using}. Such hypothesis also forms a basis in the CIDEr evaluation metric \cite{vedantam2015cider} widely used for tasks such as image captioning, machine translation, \etc.
\textbf{Proposed ``Informativeness'' Score:} Based on these two criteria, we start by constructing two vocabularies as follows: for unigrams we choose only the nouns and for bigrams we select ``descriptor-object'' patterns \ie where the first term is a noun, adjective or adverb and the second term is a noun or an adjective. Each n-gram $\omega$ is assigned a corpus probability $P$ as:
\begin{equation}
P(\omega)=\frac{C_{\omega}}{\sum_{i=1}^{D}C_{i}}\label{eq:probability_tf}
\end{equation}
where the denominator sums the frequency of each n-gram $\omega$ such that $\sum_{i=1}^{D} P(\omega_i) = 1$, where $D$ is the vocabulary size, and $C_\omega$ is the corpus frequency of n-gram $\omega$. Corpus frequency of an n-gram refers to the number of times it occurs in the comments from all the images combined. This formulation assigns high probabilities for more frequent words in the comment corpus.
Then, we represent a comment as the union of its unigrams
and bigrams i.e., $S=(S_{u}\cup S_{b})$ , where $S_{u}=(u_{1}u_{2}\dots u_{N})$
and $S_{b}=(b_{1}b_{2}\dots b_{M})$ are the sequences of unigrams
and bigrams, respectively. A comment is assigned an informativeness
score $\rho$ as follows:
\begin{equation}
\rho_{s}=-\frac{1}{2}[\log\prod_{i}^{N}P(u_{i})+\log\prod_{j}^{M}P(b_{j})]\label{eq:informativeness}
\end{equation}
where $P(u)$ and $P(b)$ are the probabilities of a unigram or bigram given by Equation \ref{eq:probability_tf}. Equation \ref{fig:Informativeness-of-captions}
is the average of the negative log probabilities of $S_{u}$ and $S_{b}$.
Essentially, the score of a comment is modelled as the joint probability of n-grams in it, following the simplest Markov assumption \ie all n-grams are independent \cite{jurafsky2000speech}. If the n-grams in a sentence have higher corpus probabilities then the corresponding score $\rho$ is low due to the negative logarithm, and vice-versa.
Note that the score is the negative logarithm of the product of probabilities and longer captions tend to receive higher scores. However, our approach does not \textit{always} favour long comments, but does so only if they consist of ``meanigful'' n-grams conforming to the ``descriptor-object'' composition. In other words, randomly long sentences without useful information are discarded. On the other hand, long and informative comments are kept. This is also desirable as longer comments in AVA tend
to be richer in information as expert users are specifically asked
to provide detailed assessment which is referred to as \emph{critique club effect} in \cite{marchesotti2015discovering}.
We label a comment as informative or less-informative by thresholding (experimentally kept $20$) the score $\rho$. Some sample scores are provided in Figure \ref{fig:Informativeness-of-captions}. The proposed strategy discards about $1.5 M$ ($55\%$) comments from the entire corpus. Subsequently, we remove the images which are left with no informative comments. Finally, we are left with $240,060$ images and $1,318,359$ comments, with an average of $5.58$ comments per image. We call this cleaner subset as \textbf{AVA-Captions}
The proposed approach is evaluated by human subjects and the results are discussed in Figure~\ref{fig:sub_test_1} and Section \ref{subsec:subjective}.
\section{Weakly Supervised CNN}
\label{subsec:Discovering-Aesthetic-Attributes}
Although the comments in AVA-Captions are cleaner than the raw comments, they cannot be directly used for training the CNN \ie the visual feature extractor. As discussed in Sec \ref{sec:introduction}, the standard approach followed in NIC and its variants is to use an ImageNet trained model for the task. In this section, we propose an alternative weakly supervised strategy for training the CNN from scratch by exploiting the \textit{latent} aesthetic information within the AVA-Captions. Our approach is motivated from two different areas: visual attribute learning and text document clustering.
\subsection{Visual and Aesthetic Attributes}
Visual Attribute Learning is an active and well-studied problem in computer vision. Instead of high-level object/scene annotations, models are trained for low-level attributes such as ``smiling face'', ``open mouth'', ``full sleeve'' \etc and the features are used for tasks such as image-ranking \cite{parikh2011relative}, pose-estimation \cite{zhang2014panda}, fashion retrieval \cite{wang2016walk}, zero-shot learning \cite{huang2015learning}, \etc. Similarly, our goal is to identify aesthetic attributes and train a CNN. A straightforward approach is to use the n-grams from comments (Sec \ref{subsec:Caption-filtering-strategy}) and use them as aesthetic attributes. However, there are two problems with this approach: Firstly, the set of n-grams is huge ($\sim25K$) and thus training the CNN directly using them as labels is not scalable. Secondly, several n-grams such as ``grayscale'', ``black and white'', ``bw'' refer to the same concept and carry redundant information.
Therefore, we apply a clustering of semantically similar n-grams and thereby grouping the images which share similar n-grams in their corresponding comments. For example, portraits are more likely to contain attributes such as ``cute expression", ``face" \etc and landscape shots are more likely to share attributes such as ``tilted horizon", ``sky", ``overexposed clouds" \etc. Essentially, the intuition behind our approach is to discover clusters of photographic attributes or topics from the comment corpus and use them as labels for training the CNN. In text document analysis, it is a common practice to achieve such grouping of topics from a text corpus using a technique called Latent Dirichlet Allocation \cite{blei2003latent}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{.5\textwidth}{!}{
\def1.2{1.5}
\begin{tabular}{p{0.2\textwidth}p{0.3\textwidth}}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{Topics}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{Images}}\\
\hline
\hline
``Cute-Expression", ``Face", ``Ear" & \multirow{5}{*}{\includegraphics[width = .3\textwidth]{Figures/iccv_19/Lda_topics.png}} \\
\cline{1-1}
``Landscape",``Sky'', ``Cloud'' &\\
\cline{1-1}
``Action Shot", ``Sport", ``Great Action" & \\
\cline{1-1}
``Black and white", ``Tone", ``Contrast" & \\
\cline{1-1}
``Motion Blur", ``Movement", ``Shutter Speed" & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{center}
\caption{Some topics / labels discovered from AVA-Captions using LDA. }
\label{fig:lda_topics}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA)}
LDA is an unsupervised generative
probabilistic model, widely used for topic modelling in text corpora.
It represents text documents as a probabilistic mixture of topics, and each topic as a probabilistic mixture of words. The words which co-occur frequently in the corpus are grouped together by LDA to form a topic. For example, by running LDA on a large corpus of news articles, it is possible to discover topics such as ``sports'', ``government policies'', ``terrorism'' etc \cite{lda-medium}.
Formally stated, given a set of documents $D_{i}=\{D_{1},D_{2}...D_{N}\}$,
and a vocabulary of words $\omega_{i}=\{\omega_{1},\omega_{2}...\omega_{M}\}$,
the task is to infer K latent topics $T_{i}=\{T_{1,}T_{2,}\dots T_{K}\}$,
where each topic can be represented as a collection of words (term-topic
matrix) and each document can be represented as a collection of topics
(document-topic matrix). The term-topic matrix represents the probabilities of each word associated with a topic and the document-topic matrix refers to the distribution of a document over the $K$ latent topics. The inference is achieved using a variational Bayes approximation \cite{blei2003latent} or Gibb's sampling \cite{porteous2008fast}. A more detailed explanation can be found in \cite{blei2003latent}.
\subsection{Relabelling AVA Images}
We regard all the comments corresponding to a given image as a document. The vocabulary is constructed by combining the unigrams and bigrams
extracted from the AVA-Captions as described in Section \ref{subsec:Caption-filtering-strategy}.
In our case: $N=230,698$ and $M=25,000$, and $K$ is experimentally
fixed to $200$. By running LDA with these parameters on AVA-Captions, we discover $200$ latent topics, composed of n-grams which co-occur
frequently. The method is based on the assumption that the visual aesthetic
attributes in the image are correlated with the corresponding comments
and images possessing similar aesthetic properties are described using
similar words.
Even after the caption cleaning procedure, we observe that n-grams such as ``nice composition" or ``great shot" still occur more frequently than others. But, they occur mostly as independent clauses in bigger comments such as ``\textit{I like the way how the lines lead the eyes to the subject. Nice shot}!". In order to avoid inferring topics consisting of these less discriminative words, we consider only those n-grams in the vocabulary which occur in less than $10\%$ comments.
In Figure \ref{fig:lda_topics}, we select $5$ topics thus inferred and some of the corresponding images whose captions belong to these topics. It can be observed that the images and the words corresponding to each topic are fairly consistent and suitable to be used as labels for training the CNN.
\subsection{Training the CNN}
Given an image and its corresponding captions, we estimate the
topic distribution $D_{T}$ of the comments. The CNN is trained
using $D_{T}$ as the ground-truth label. We adopt the ResNet101 \cite{he2016deep} architecture and replace the last fully connected layer with $K$ outputs, and train the framework using cross-entropy loss \cite{rubinstein2013cross} as shown in Figure \ref{fig:framework}a.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{.475\textwidth}{!}{
\def1.2{1.75}
\begin{tabular}{|c|}
\hline
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Figures/iccv_19/framework_1}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{p{0.5\textwidth}}{\textbf{ (a) Weakly-supervised training of the CNN: } Images and comments are provided as input. The image is fed to the CNN and the comment is fed to the inferred topic model. The topic model predicts a distribution over the topics which is used as a label for computing the loss for the CNN.}\\
\hline
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Figures/iccv_19/framework_2} \tabularnewline
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{p{0.5\textwidth}}{\textbf{ (b) Training the LSTM: } Visual features extracted using the CNN and the comment is fed as an input to the LSTM which predicts a candidate caption.}
\end{tabular}}
\end{center}
\caption{\textbf{Proposed pipeline}}
\label{fig:framework}
\end{figure}
\section{The Final Framework}
We adopt the NeuralTalk2 \cite{Luo2017} framework as our basis. Note, that our approach is generic and can be used with any CNN-LSTM framework for image captioning. In \cite{Luo2017}, visual features are extracted using an ImageNet trained ResNet101 \cite{he2016deep} which are passed as input to an LSTM for training the language model using the ground-truth captions. For our framework, we use two alternatives for visual features (a) ImageNet trained (b) weakly supervised (Sec \ref{subsec:Discovering-Aesthetic-Attributes}). The LSTM architecture is kept unchanged except hyper-parameters such as vocabulary size, maximum allowed length of a caption \etc. The language model is trained using the clean and informative comments from the AVA-Captions dataset (See Figure \ref{fig:framework}b).
\section{Experiments}
\label{sec:Experiments}
The experiments are designed to evaluate the two primary contributions: First, the caption
cleaning strategy and second, the weakly-supervised training of the
CNN. Specifically, we investigate: \textbf{(a)} the effect of caption filtering and the weakly supervised approach on the quality of captions generated in terms of accuracy (Sec \ref{subsec:accuracy}) and diversity (Sec \ref{subsec:diversity}), \textbf{ (b)} the generalizability of the captions learnt from AVA, when tested on other image-caption datasets (Sec \ref{subsec:generalizability}), \textbf{(c)} subjective or human opinion about the performance of the proposed framework (Sec \ref{subsec:subjective}).
\subsection{Datasets}
\textbf{AVA-Captions: } The compiled AVA-Captions dataset is discussed in detail in Section \ref{subsec:Caption-filtering-strategy}. We use $230,698$ images and $1,318,359$ comments for training; and $9,362$ images for validation.
\textbf{AVA raw-caption: } The original AVA dataset provided by Murray \emph{et al}\onedot \cite{murray2012ava} and the raw unfiltered comments are used to train the framework in order to observe the effects of caption filtering.
\textbf{Photo Critique Captioning Dataset (PCCD): } This dataset was introduced by \cite{chang2017aesthetic}
and is based on www.gurushots.com. Professional photographers provide
comments for the uploaded photos on seven aspects: general impression,
composition and perspective, color and lighting, subject of photo,
depth of field, focus and use of camera, exposure and speed. In order to verify whether the proposed framework can generate aesthetic captions for images beyond the AVA dataset we trained it with AVA-Captions and tested it with PCCD.
For a fair comparison, we use the same validation
set provided in the original paper.
\subsection{Baselines}
\label{sec:baselines}
We compare three implementations: \textbf{ (a) Noisy - Supervised (NS): } NeuralTalk2 \cite{Luo2017} framework trained on AVA-Original. It has an ImageNet trained CNN, followed by LSTM trained on raw, unfiltered AVA comments. NeuralTalk2 is also used as a baseline for AIC in \cite{chang2017aesthetic}. \textbf{(b) Clean - Supervised (CS): } The LSTM of the NeuralTalk2 is trained on AVA-Captions \ie filtered comments. The CNN is same as NS \ie Imagenet trained. \textbf{ (c) Clean and weakly-supervised (CWS): } NeuralTalk2 framework, where the CNN is trained with weak-supervision using LDA and the language model is trained on AVA-Captions.
\subsection{Results and Analysis}
\label{sec:results}
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\def1.2{1.2}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\resizebox{.6\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{|p{1.5cm}|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\textbf{Method} & \textbf{B1} & \textbf{B2} & \textbf{B3} & \textbf{B4} & \textbf{M} & \textbf{R} & \textbf{C} & \textbf{S} & \textbf{S-1}\tabularnewline
\hline
\hline
NS & 0.379 & 0.219 & 0.122 & 0.061 & 0.079 & 0.233 & 0.038 & 0.044 & 0.135\tabularnewline
CS & 0.500 & 0.280 & 0.149 & 0.073 & 0.105 & 0.253 & \textbf{0.060} & \textbf{0.062} & \textbf{0.144} \tabularnewline
CWS & \textbf{0.535} & \textbf{0.282} & \textbf{0.150} & \textbf{0.074} & \textbf{0.107} & \textbf{0.254} & 0.059 & 0.061 & \textbf{0.144}\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
} &
\resizebox{.4\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\textbf{Method} & \textbf{Train} & \textbf{Val} &\textbf{S-1} & \textbf{P} & \textbf{R}\tabularnewline
\hline
\hline
CNN-LSTM-WD &PCCD&PCCD& 0.136 & 0.181 & 0.156\tabularnewline
AO&PCCD&PCCD&0.127 & 0.201 & 0.121\tabularnewline
AF &PCCD&PCCD& 0.150 & 0.212 & 0.157\tabularnewline
\hline
CS &AVA-C&PCCD& 0.144 & 0.166 & 0.166\tabularnewline
CWS &AVA-C&PCCD& 0.142 & 0.162 & 0.161\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}}\\
\textbf{(a) Accuracy} & \textbf{(b) Generalizability} \\
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\caption{(a) \textbf{Results on AVA-Captions:} Both CS and CWS, trained on AVA-Captions perform significantly better than NS, which is trained on nosiy data. Also, the performance of CWS and CS is comparable, which proves the effectiveness of the weakly supervised approach (b) \textbf{Generalization results on PCCD:} Models trained on AVA-C perform well on PCCD validation set, when compared with models trained on PCCD directly. We argue that this impressive generalizability is achieved by training on a larger and diverse dataset.}
\label{tab:automated_metrics}
\end{table*}
\subsubsection{Accuracy}
\label{subsec:accuracy}
\begin{comment}
\textbf{Scores:} Most of the existing standards for evaluating
image captioning such as BLEU~(B) \cite{papineni2002bleu}, METEOR~(M) \cite{banerjee2005meteor},
ROGUE~(R) \cite{lin2004rouge}, CIDEr~(C), \cite{vedantam2015cider} etc. are
mainly more accurate extensions of the brute-force method \cite{cui2018learning} \ie comparing the n-gram overlap between candidate and reference captions.
However, as Anderson \emph{et al}\onedot \cite{anderson2016spice, gimenez2007linguistic} states, ``n-gram
overlap is neither necessary nor sufficient for two sentences to convey
the same meaning''. It is
particularly inefficient in capturing the semantic similarity between
two sentences.
The problem is more pronounced in case of AIC due
to the inherent subjective nature of the captions. Not only can there
be many different interpretations of the same aspect but also, the
set of aspects or aesthetic attributes is non-exhaustive. A photograph
can be appreciated for its content or geometry or exposure or all
of them and each can be an equally valid description. The recently introduced
metric SPICE~(S) \cite{anderson2016spice} addresses this by comparing
scene graphs computed from the candidate and reference captions. It
has been shown that SPICE is closer to human judgement more than the
rest.
Traditionally, SPICE is computed between the candidate and all the reference captions. A variant of SPICE (which we refer to as S-1) is used in \cite{chang2017aesthetic} where the authors compute SPICE between the candidate and each of the reference captions and choose the best. In this paper, we report both S and S-1.
\end{comment}
Most of the existing standards for evaluating
image captioning such as BLEU~(B) \cite{papineni2002bleu}, METEOR~(M) \cite{banerjee2005meteor},
ROGUE~(R) \cite{lin2004rouge}, CIDEr~(C) \cite{vedantam2015cider} etc. are
mainly more accurate extensions of the brute-force method \cite{cui2018learning} \ie comparing the n-gram overlap between candidate and reference captions.
\begin{comment}
However, as Anderson \emph{et al}\onedot \cite{anderson2016spice, gimenez2007linguistic} states, ``n-gram
overlap is neither necessary nor sufficient for two sentences to convey
the same meaning''. It is
particularly inefficient in capturing the semantic similarity between
two sentences.
The problem is more pronounced in case of AIC due
to the inherent subjective nature of the captions. Not only can there
be many different interpretations of the same aspect but also, the
set of aspects or aesthetic attributes is non-exhaustive. A photograph
can be appreciated for its content or geometry or exposure or all
of them and each can be an equally valid description.
\end{comment}
Recently introduced
metric SPICE~(S) \cite{anderson2016spice} instead compares
scene graphs computed from the candidate and reference captions. It
has been shown that SPICE captures semantic similarity better and is closer to human judgement more than the
rest. Traditionally, SPICE is computed between the candidate and all the reference captions. A variant of SPICE (which we refer to as S-1) is used in \cite{chang2017aesthetic} where the authors compute SPICE between the candidate and each of the reference captions and choose the best. In this paper, we report both S and S-1.
From Table \ref{tab:automated_metrics}(a), we observe that both CS and CWS outperform NS significantly over all metrics. Clearly, training the framework with cleaner captions results in more accurate outputs. On the other hand, the performance of CWS and CS is comparable. We argue that this indicates that the proposed weakly-supervised training strategy is capable of training the CNN as efficiently as a purely supervised approach and extract meaningful aesthetic features. Additionally as mentioned in Sec \ref{sec:introduction}, the proposed CWS approach has an advantage that it does not require expensive human annotations to train. Thus, it is possible to scale to deeper architectures, and thus learn more complex representations simply by crawling the vast, freely-available and weakly-labelled data from the web.
\subsubsection{Diversity}
\label{subsec:diversity}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\def1.2{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{Figures/iccv_19/Diversity_uni} & \includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{Figures/iccv_19/Diversity_bi} &
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{Figures/iccv_19/Diversity_4} & \includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{Figures/iccv_19/Diversity_All}\\
(a) 1-gram & (b) 2-gram & (c) 4-gram & (d) Overall\tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{\textbf{Diversity:} Figures (a) - (c) report diversity of captions following \cite{aneja2018convolutional}. The $x$-axes correspond to n-gram positions in a sentence. The $y$-axes correspond to the number of unique n-grams at each position, for the entire validation set. Figure (d) plots the overall diversity, as reported in \cite{chang2017aesthetic}. We observe that the diversity of the captions increase significantly when the framework is trained on cleaner ground-truth \ie AVA-Captions (CS or CWS) instead of AVA-Original (NS).}
\label{fig:diversity}
\end{figure*}
Image Captioning pipelines often suffer from monotonicity of captions \ie similar captions are generated for the validation images.
This is attributed to the fact that the commonly used cross-entropy
loss function trains the LSTM by reducing the entropy of the output
word distribution and thus giving \emph{a peaky} posterior probability
distribution \cite{aneja2018convolutional}. As mentioned earlier in Section \ref{sec:introduction}, this is more pronounced in AIC due to the vast presence of the \textit{easy} comments in the web. Diversity of the captions is usually measured by overlap between the candidate and the reference captions. We evaluate diversity following two state-of-the-art
approaches~\cite{chang2017aesthetic,aneja2018convolutional}. In \cite{chang2017aesthetic}, the authors define that
two captions are different if the ratio of common words between them
is smaller than a threshold ($3\%$ used in the paper).
In \cite{aneja2018convolutional},
from the set of all the candidate captions, the authors compute the
number of unique n-grams ($1,2,4$) at each position starting from
the beginning up to position 13.
We plot diversity using \cite{chang2017aesthetic} in Figure \ref{fig:diversity}d. We compute using the alternative approach of \cite{aneja2018convolutional} in Figure \ref{fig:diversity}(a-c) but up to 25 positions since on an average the AVA captions are longer than the COCO captions. From both, we notice that diversity of NS is significantly lesser than CS or CWS. We observe that NS ends up generating a large number of ``safe" captions such as ``I like the composition and colours" or ``nice shot" \etc. We argue, that our caption filtering strategy reduces the number of useless captions from the data and thus the network learns more accurate and informative components.
\begin{comment}
Image Captioning pipelines often suffer from monotonicity of captions \ie similar captions are generated for the validation images.
This is attributed to the fact that the commonly used cross-entropy
loss function trains the LSTM by reducing the entropy of the output
word distribution and thus giving \emph{a peaky } posterior probability
distribution \cite{aneja2018convolutional}. As mentioned earlier in Section \ref{sec:introduction}, this is more pronounced in AIC due to the vast presence of the \textit{easy} comments in the web.
Diversity of the captions is usually measured by overlap between the candidate and the reference captions. We evaluate diversity following two state-of-the-art
approaches~\cite{chang2017aesthetic,aneja2018convolutional}. We compute the same in Figure \ref{fig:diversity} (a-c) but up to 25 positions as the
average length of a AVA caption is more than a COCO caption . From both, we notice that diversity of NS is significantly lesser than CS or our approach. We observe that NS ends up generating a large number of ``safe" captions such as ``I like the composition and colours" or ``nice shot" \etc. We argue, that our caption filtering strategy reduces the number of useless captions from the data and thus the network learns more accurate and informative components.
In \cite{chang2017aesthetic}, the authors define that
two captions are different if the ratio of common words between them
is smaller than a threshold ($3\%$ used in the paper). We plot diversity using this approach in Figure \ref{fig:diversity}d. In \cite{aneja2018convolutional},
from the set of all the candidate captions, the authors compute the
number of unique n-grams ($1,2,4$) at each position starting from
the beginning up to position 13. We compute the same in Figure \ref{fig:diversity} (a-c) but up to 25 positions as the
average length of a AVA caption is more than a COCO caption . From both, we notice that diversity of NS is significantly lesser than CS or our approach. We observe that NS ends up generating a large number of ``safe" captions such as ``I like the composition and colours" or ``nice shot" \etc. We argue, that our caption filtering strategy reduces the number of useless captions from the data and thus the network learns more accurate and informative components.
\end{comment}
\subsubsection{Generalizability}
\label{subsec:generalizability}
We wanted to test whether the knowledge gained by training on a large-scale but weakly annotated dataset is generic \ie transferable to other image distributions. To do so, we train our frameworks on AVA-Captions and compare them with the models from \cite{chang2017aesthetic}, trained on PCCD. Everything is tested on the PCCD validation set.
The models used by \cite{chang2017aesthetic} are: (a) CNN-LSTM-WD is the NeuralTalk2 framework trained on PCCD. (b) Aspect oriented (AO) and (c) Aspect fusion (AF) are supervised methods, trained on PCCD. Note, that all the models are based on the NeuralTalk2 framework \cite{Luo2017} and hence comparable in terms of architecture.
In Table \ref{tab:automated_metrics}(b), we observe that both CS and CWS outperform CNN-LSTM-WD and AO in S-1 scores. AF is still the best strategy for the PCCD dataset.
Please note, both AO and AF are supervised strategies and require well defined ``aspects" for training the network. Hence, as also pointed out in \cite{chang2017aesthetic}, it is not possible to train these frameworks on AVA as such aspect-level annotations are unavailable. However, we observe that both CS and proposed CWS, trained on AVA-Captions score reasonably well on PCCD. They are also generic strategies which can be easily mapped to other captioning tasks with weak supervision. We argue that the observed generalization capacity is due to training with a large and diverse dataset.
\subsubsection{Subjective (Human) Evaluation}
\label{subsec:subjective}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{.5\textwidth}{!}{
\def1.2{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{Figures/iccv_19/Exp_1_Expert} & \includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{Figures/iccv_19/Exp_1_Non_Expert}\tabularnewline
(a) Experts & (b) Non Experts\tabularnewline
\end{tabular}}
\end{center}
\caption{\textbf{Subjective evaluation of caption filtering: } The matrix compares our scoring strategy and human judgement for distinguishing a \textit{good} and a \textit{bad} caption. The rows stand for our output, and the columns represent what humans thought. We observe that the proposed caption filtering strategy is fairly consistent with what humans think about the informativeness of a caption.}
\label{fig:sub_test_1}
\end{figure}
Human judgement is still the touchstone for evaluating image captioning, and all the previously mentioned metrics are evaluated based on how well they correlate with the same. Therefore, we perform quality assessment of the generated captions by a subjective study. Our experimental procedure
is similar to Chang \emph{et al}\onedot \cite{chang2017aesthetic}. We found $15$ participants with varying degree of expertise in photography
($4$ experts and $11$ non-experts) to evaluate our framework. In order to familiarize the participants with the grading process, a brief training with $20$ trials was provided
beforehand. The subjective evaluation was intended to assess: (a) whether the caption scoring strategy (Equation \ref{eq:informativeness}) is consistent with human judgement regarding the same (b) the effect of cleaning on the quality of generated captions.
\textbf{(a) Consistency of Scoring Strategy:}
We chose $25$ random images from
the validation set, and from each image, we selected $2$ accepted and $2$ discarded captions. During the experiment the subject was shown an image and a caption, and was asked to give a score on a scale of $100$. In Figure \ref{fig:sub_test_1}a and \ref{fig:sub_test_1}b, we plot our predictions and human judgement in a confusion matrix. We find that our strategy is fairly consistent with what humans think as a good or a bad caption. Interestingly, with the experts, our strategy produces more false positives for bad captions. This is probably due to the fact that our strategy scores long captions higher, which may not always be the case and is a limitation.
\textbf{(b) Effect of Caption Filtering: }
Similarly, $25$ random images were chosen
from the validation set. Each image had 3 captions, the candidates generated by NS, CS and CWS frameworks. During each
trial, the subject was shown an image and one of the captions and
asked to rate it into one of the categories - Good, Average and Bad.
These categories follow from \cite{chang2017aesthetic} and the participants were asked to rate a caption based on whether it conveyed enough information about a photograph. We observe in Table \ref{tab:sub_2} the percentage of good, common and bad captions generated by each method.
We observe that humans did not find any caption from NS to be good. Most of them were common or bad. This is due to its high tendency to generate the short, safe and common captions. Humans find CS to be performing slightly better than CWS which can probably be attributed to the lack of supervision during training the CNN. But as mentioned in Section~\ref{sec:introduction}, semi-supervised training is effective in practical scenarios due the easy availability of data and it might be worth investigating whether it is possible to improve its performance using more data and more complex representations. Additional qualitative results are provided in Figure \ref{fig:title_fig} and also the supplementary material.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{.475\textwidth}{!}{
\def1.2{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{|c|p{.5cm}p{.5cm}p{.5cm}|c|p{.5cm}p{.5cm}p{.5cm}|c|}
\cline{2-9}
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{\textbf{Experts}} & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{\textbf{Non-Experts}}\tabularnewline
\hline
\textbf{Method} & \textbf{Good} (3) & \textbf{Com} (2) & \textbf{Bad} (1) & \textbf{Avg} & \textbf{Good} (3) & \textbf{Com} (2) & \textbf{Bad} (1) & \textbf{Avg}\tabularnewline
\hline
NS & 0 & 80 & 20 & 1.80 & 0 & 84 & 16 & 1.84\tabularnewline
CS & 8 & 84 & 8 & 2.0 & 28 & 68 & 4 & 2.24\tabularnewline
CWS & 4 & 80 & 16 & 1.88 & 20 & 72 & 8 & 2.12\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\caption{\textbf{Subjective comparison of baselines: } We observe that human subjects find CS and CWS to be comparable but both significantly better than NS. This underpins the hypothesis derived from the quantitative results that filtering improves the quality of generated captions and the weakly supervised features are comparable with the ImageNet trained features}
\label{tab:sub_2}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion}
In this work, we studied aesthetic image captioning which is a
variant of natural image captioning. The task is challenging not only due to its inherent subjective nature but also due to the absence of a suitable dataset. To this end, we propose a strategy to clean the weakly annotated data easily available from the web and compile AVA-Captions, the first large-scale dataset for aesthetic image captioning. Also, we propose a new weakly-supervised approach to train the CNN.
We validated the proposed framework thoroughly, using automatic metrics and subjective studies.
As future work, it could be interesting to explore alternatives for utilizing the weak-labels and exploring other weakly-supervised strategies for extracting rich aesthetic attributes from AVA. It could also be interesting to extend this generic approach to other forms of captioning such as visual storytelling \cite{Kiros2015} or stylized captioning \cite{mathews2018semstyle} by utilizing the easily available and weakly labelled data from the web.\footnote{This publication has emanated from research conducted with the financial support of Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) under the Grant Number 15/RP/2776}
{\small
\bibliographystyle{ieee_fullname}
|
\section{Introduction}
The axial vector meson $f_1(1285)$ of spin-isospin and
parity quantum numbers $I^GJ^{PC}=0^+(1^{++})$ has many
interesting aspects from the standpoint of QCD; the mixing
of gluon contents in the $f_1$ wave function associated
with $U(1)_A$ anomaly \cite{kochelev1} and its application
to vector meson photoproduction \cite{omega,phi},
the Primakoff effect via the $f_1\to\gamma^*\gamma$ decay
in the presence of electromagnetic interaction \cite{osipov},
and the branching ratio $f_1\to a^0 \pi\approx 36\,\%$
which is large enough to study the exotic four-quark state
$a_0(980)$ \cite{oset}. Moreover, the decay width
$\Gamma_{f_1}=22.7\pm1.1$ MeV from Particle Data Group (PDG)
(and 18.4$\pm$1.4 MeV from the recent measurement by the
CLAS Collaboration \cite{dickson}) is much smaller than the
typical meson decay width, which can be advantageous in
finding the formation of exotics such as $\pi_1(1400)$
via the $\gamma p\to\Delta\pi_1\to p\eta\pi\pi$ process
\cite{szcze,jpac1,ghoul,jpac2,kuhn,schott}.
Recent reports of differential cross sections for $\gamma p \to
pf_1(1285)$ measured from the reaction $\gamma p\to
p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$ by CLAS Collaboration \cite{dickson} draw our
attention, because it is the first measurement to provide
information on the static and dynamical properties of $f_1$ meson
that can access the above issues through theoretical studies and
comparisons of experiments on $f_1$ photoproduction. On the other
hand, however, the existing models that predict $f_1$
photoproduction \cite{kochelev,domokos} using the $\rho^0+\omega$
Regge poles in the $t$-channel are poor to agree with CLAS
experimental data. This is mainly because their contributions with
the anomaly coupling constants of $\gamma\rho^0 f_1$ (and
$\gamma\omega f_1\approx{1\over3}\gamma\rho^0 f_1$) determined
from PDG are too large to be consistent with data. Furthermore,
since the exclusive reaction $\gamma p\to pf_1$ should be
reconstructed through the multi-meson production in the final
state from the aforementioned CLAS data, experimental
circumstances such as the branching ratio $f_1\to\eta\pi^+\pi^-$
should be considered in the analysis of CLAS data for the single
process $\gamma p\to pf_1$.
In this work, we investigate photoproduction of $f_1$ based on the
CLAS data of the reaction $\gamma p\to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$ using a
Reggeized model for $\rho^0+\omega$ exchanges. We recall that the
data were extracted from the experiment in which case the
interference of $\eta(1295)$ photoproduction was neglected in the
region overlapping with $f_1(1285)$. Viewed from the PDG,
productions of $\eta'$ and $\eta(1295)$ as well as $f_1(1285)$ are
other sources of decay to $\eta\pi^+\pi^-$, so the reactions
$\gamma p\to p\eta'$ and $\gamma p\to p\eta(1295)$ are also
involved in the reaction $\gamma p\to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$. Thus, we
examine the respective contributions of $\eta'$ and $\eta(1295)$
photoproductions to the CLAS data first, starting from
photoproductions of these $\eta$'s. The $f_1$ photoproduction will
then be described with the trajectories of $\rho^0+\omega$ Regge
poles and their $VNN$ coupling constants the same as in the case
of $\eta$ and $\eta'$. The reliability of model prediction is
confirmed by the roles of $\rho^0+\omega$ Regge poles in the
$\eta$ and $\eta'$ cases, which were rather well established in
previous studies \cite{chiang,tiator}.
In the model study of $f_1$ photoproduction, the $\rho^0$ exchange
plays the leading role over the $\omega$. Therefore, it is of
importance to consider the decay width $f_1\to\rho^0\gamma$ more
appropriate for a consistent description with CLAS data. As
mentioned earlier, the PDG value is very large and there is a
significant difference from the one extracted from the CLAS
experiment. In Ref. \cite{osipov} this issue was revisited to
evaluate the decay width $f_1\to\rho^0\gamma$ based on the
well-known triangle diagram for the $AVV$ coupling vertex. The
quark loop calculation using Bose symmetry and gauge invariance
yields the decay width $f_1\to\rho^0\gamma$ much smaller than the
PDG value, supporting the one extracted from the CLAS experiment
\cite{dickson}.
In addition to the vector meson exchange we consider another
subprocess of nonmesonic exchange that has different energy
dependence from vector mesons. By the $C$-even property of $f_1$
meson and $\eta$ as well, the virtual photon of $C$-odd is allowed
to exchange in the $t$-channel, the so-called the Primakoff effect
that manifests itself at very forward angles as a rapid
enhancement in the differential cross section
\cite{kaskulov,sibirtsev}. In the energy range of the CLAS
experiment where the vector meson exchanges are dominant the
Primakoff effect is expected to be suppressed by the charge
coupling with the nucleon. Nevertheless, since the exchange of
virtual photon is not to be Reggeized, its role could become
significant at high energy, where there is decrease of vector
meson exchange according to the energy dependence $\sim
s^{\alpha_V(0)-1}$.
Now that the Primakoff effect in the photoproduction of $\eta$
and of $\eta'$ is related to the flavor mixing of $\eta$-$\eta'$
(the theme of the PrimEx project at CLAS \cite{gasparian} and the
current upgrade to GlueX at CLAS12), measurements of the Primakoff
effect in the reaction can give clues to understanding the
structure of the flavor symmetry, e.g., the mixing of flavor octet
and singlet between $\eta$-$\eta'$, and so is the mixing between
$f_1(1285)$-$f_1(1420)$ \cite{yang}. This point will be addressed
in the context of the two-gamma decay in the photoproduction of
pseudoscalar meson $\pi^0$, $\eta$ and $\eta'$, and will be
extended to the Primakoff effect in the $\gamma p\to pf_1$
reaction at high energies.
This paper is organized as follows: In Section II,
photoproductions of $\eta$, $\eta'$ and $\eta(1295)$ on proton
target are investigated in the Reggeized model for $\rho^0+\omega$
exchanges. Sec. III devotes to an analysis of the exclusive $f_1$
photoproduction on proton from the multimeson reaction $\gamma
p\to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$ within the same approach as in Sec. II.
Differential and total cross sections for the CLAS experiment are
reproduced in the subsection (a). Predictions for the energy
dependence of differential cross section and the beam polarization
asymmetry are presented to distinguish between the reactions
aforementioned for future experiments. The Primakoff effect by the
virtual photon exchange is studied in the photoproduction of $f_1$
in the subsection (b), and $\pi^0$, $\eta$ and $\eta'$ cases in
(c). Summary and conclusion are given in the Section IV.
\section{photoproductions of $\eta(548)$, $\eta'(958)$, and
of $\eta(1295)$ on the proton target}
As the threshold energies of the exclusive processes $\gamma p\to
p\eta(1295)$ and $\gamma p\to p f_1(1285)$ are over the region
$\sqrt{s}_{thres.}\approx 2.2$ GeV, the contribution of nucleon
resonances in the direct and crossed channels are not expected, and,
hence, it is good to consider only the $t$-channel meson exchange
for the description of these reactions.
In this section we treat the photoproduction of $\eta'$ and
$\eta(1295)$ in a single framework where the vector meson exchange
is reggeized with vector meson nucleon coupling constants $(VNN)$
common in all the reactions we are dealing with in the current
work. For consistency, let us start from $\gamma p\to p\eta(548)$
to provide a basic formalism which will be extended to $\eta'$ and
$\eta(1295)$ with each radiative decay constant determined from
the empirical decay width for the different $\eta$ mass,
respectively.
For the exclusive $\eta$ photoproduction on nucleon,
\begin{eqnarray}
\gamma(k)+N(p)\to \eta(q)+N(p')
\end{eqnarray}
we denote the particle momenta $k$, $q$, $p$ and $p'$ to stand for
the incident photon, outgoing $\eta$ meson, and the initial and
final nucleons, respectively. $s=(p+k)^2$ and $t=(q-k)^2$ are the
Mandelstam variables in the reaction kinematics. We restrict our
discussion only to the production mechanism by the meson exchange,
as depicted in Fig. \ref{fig1}, for our purpose here is to see how
the meson exchange works well in the kinematical region of
$\eta(1295)$ and $f_1(1285)$ photoproductions.
The photoproduction amplitude for the exchange of $C$-odd vector
meson on nucleon is written as,
\begin{eqnarray}
&&M(\gamma N\to N\eta)=\pm\rho+\omega,\label{amp1}
\end{eqnarray}
with the sign of $\rho$ for proton and neutron, respectively.
The effective Lagrangians for the vector meson exchange is written as
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{\cal L}_{V NN}=\bar{N}\left(g^v_{VNN}\gamma^\mu
+\frac{g^t_{VNN}}{2M}\sigma^{\mu\nu}\partial_\nu\right)V_\mu N
\label{vnn}\\%
&&{\cal L}_{\gamma\eta V}=\frac{g_{\gamma\eta
V}}{4m_0}\epsilon_{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}
F^{\mu\nu}V^{\alpha\beta}\eta+\mbox{H.c.},\label{etann}
\end{eqnarray}
and the corresponding production amplitude is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{vec}
&&{\cal M}_{V}=\frac{g_{\gamma\eta V}}{m_0}
\epsilon_{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}\epsilon^{\mu}k^{\nu}Q^{\alpha}
\left(-g^{\beta\rho}+ {Q^{\beta}Q^{\rho}\over m_V^2}\right)
\nonumber\\&&
\times\overline{u}'(p')\left( g^v_{VNN}\,\gamma_{\rho} +
\frac{g^t_{VNN}}{4M}[\gamma_\rho, \rlap{\,/}{Q}]
\right)u(p){\cal R}^V(s,t).
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $\epsilon^\mu$ is the incident photon polarization and
$Q^\mu=(q-k)^\mu$ is the momentum transfer in the $t$-channel
with $Q^2=t$. The coupling constant is normalized by
the mass parameter $m_0$ chosen to be 1 GeV.
The Regge pole for spin-1 vector meson is given by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{vec-regge}
{\cal R}^V(s,t
=\frac{\pi\alpha'_V\times{\rm phase}}{\Gamma[\alpha_V(t)]
\sin\pi\alpha_V(t)}
\left(\frac{s}{s_0}\right)^{\alpha_V(t)-1}
\ \
\end{eqnarray}
for the vector meson $V(=\rho,\ \omega)$ collectively.
\begin{figure}[]
\centering \epsfig{file=fig1.eps, width=0.3\hsize}
\caption{$\rho$ and $\omega$ exchanges in the
exclusive $\eta$ photoproduction. $Q^\mu=(q-k)^\mu$
denotes the momentum transfer in the $t$-channel.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
The choice of $\rho$ trajectory is not unanimous. Viewed from the
reactions \cite{yu-kong-rho,yu-kong-pin} where the single $\rho$
exchange is involved to test its role, it is better to choose
$\rho$ trajectory as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{trajectory}
&&\alpha_{\rho}(t)=0.9\,t+0.46,\\
&&\alpha_{\omega}(t)=0.9\,t+0.44,
\label{omega-traj}
\end{eqnarray}
and for the $\omega$ trajectory as well with the coupling constants
$g^v_{\rho NN}=2.6$ and $g^t_{\rho NN}=9.62$. For the
$\omega NN$ couplings, we use $g^v_{\omega NN}=15.6$ and
$g^t_{\omega NN}=0$ consistent with the ratio
$f_{\rho}:f_{\omega}=1:3$ by the vector meson dominance.
The radiative decay constant $g_{\gamma\eta V}$ is
determined from the measured decay width,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:etapdecay}
\Gamma_{V \rightarrow \eta\gamma}
= \frac{1}{96\pi}\frac{g^2_{\gamma\eta V}}{m_0^2}
\left(\frac{m_{V}^2-m_\eta^2}{m_V}\right)^3.
\end{eqnarray}
For the process $\gamma p\to p\eta'$ and $\gamma p\to p\eta(1295)$
in which cases the decay modes are reversed, i.e., $\eta'\ (\eta(1295))\to V$,
the decay width in Eq. (\ref{eq:etapdecay}) is multiplied by
the factor of 3 to recover the initial $\eta'\ (\eta(1295))$
spin degree of freedom.
\begin{table}\caption{Compilation of coupling constants
used for the eta-maid \cite{chiang} and
Regge model \cite{kochelev} for $\eta$ photoproduction.
Radiative coupling constant $g_{\gamma\eta V}$ is given
in units of GeV$^{-1}$.
}
\begin{ruledtabular}\label{tb1}
\begin{tabular}{lccccccl}
& $\eta$-MAID \cite{chiang}& Regge model \cite{kochelev} & This work &\\
\hline
$g_{\gamma\eta\rho}$ & $0.448$ & - & $0.448$ & \\%
$g_{\gamma\eta'\rho}$ &$0.392$ & - & $0.36$ & \\%
$g_{\gamma\eta(1295)\rho}$ &- &$0.0566$ & $0.0566$ & \\%
$g^v_{\rho NN}$ &2.4 &3.9 & 2.6 & \\%
$g^t_{\rho NN}$ &8.88 &23.79 & 9.62 & \\%
\hline
$g_{\gamma\eta\omega}$ & $0.16$ & - & 0.106 & \\%
$g_{\gamma\eta'\omega}$& $-0.136$ & - & $0.12$ & \\%
$g_{\gamma\eta(1295)\omega}$& - &0.0189 & $0.0189$ & \\%
$g^v_{\omega NN}$ & 9 &10.6 & 15.6 & \\%
$g^t_{\omega NN}$ & 0 & 0 & 0 & \\%
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}
Given the trajectories in Eqs. (\ref{trajectory}) and
(\ref{omega-traj}) together with the ratios
$g_{\gamma\eta\rho}/g_{\gamma\eta\omega}\simeq 4$ and $2g^v_{\rho
NN}/g^v_{\omega NN}\simeq1/3$ in Table \ref{tb1}, the $\omega$
exchange is expected to give the contribution quite the same as
the $\rho$, if the same phase is taken. This observation could be
valid for $\eta'$ and $\eta(1295)$ as well within the present
framework. We choose the complex phase $e^{-i\pi\alpha_V(t)}$ for
both $\rho$ and $\omega$ Reggeons in the case of proton target,
because there is no dip from the nonsense zeros of the Regge poles
in the differential cross section data
\cite{braunschweig70,dewire,crede}. This agrees with the general
features of reaction cross sections. For the reaction $\gamma n\to
n\eta$, we take the constant phase $1$ for $\rho$, and $-1$ for
$\omega$ Reggeons for a better description of the total cross
section.
\begin{figure}[]
\centering \epsfig{file=fig2.eps, width=0.9\hsize} \caption{Scaled
differential cross section, beam polarization, total cross
sections for $\gamma p\to p\eta$ and total cross section for
$\gamma n\to n\eta$. The solid curve results from $\rho^0+\omega$
Reggeon exchanges. Scaled differential cross section at
$E_\gamma=3$ GeV is shown with data taken from Ref.
\cite{bussey76}, and for beam polarization with respect to $-t$ at
$E_\gamma=3$ GeV \cite{bussey76} and at 9 GeV \cite{ghoul}. Data
for $p\eta$ total cross section at $E_\gamma=4$ and 6 GeV are from
the integration of DESY differential data in Ref.
\cite{braunschweig70} and open squares in the $1.6\leq
E_\gamma\leq 6.3$ GeV are from AHHM data in Ref. \cite{struc76}.
Data for resonance peaks are from
world dataset \cite{jaegle,crede05,crede09}. \\
} \label{fig2}
\end{figure}
To illustrate the validity of the $\rho+\omega$ Reggeon exchanges
for the reaction $\gamma N\to N\eta$, we present the scaled
differential cross section by the factor $(s-M^2)^2$ reproduced at
$E_\gamma=3$ GeV(solid curve), beam polarizations at $E_\gamma=3$
GeV(dash-dotted) and $E_\gamma=9$ GeV(solid), and the respective
total cross sections for $\gamma p\to p\eta$ and $\gamma n\to
n\eta$ as well in Fig. \ref{fig2}. The (red) dashed and (blue)
dash-dotted curves correspond to the $\rho$ and $\omega$ Reggeon
contributions to differential and total cross sections from a
proton taget, respectively. As mentioned before, they play the
role roughly equal to each other. A few remarks are in order;
$\eta$ photoproduction is sensitive to a choice of phase of
Reggeon as well as the $\rho$ trajectory between
$\alpha_\rho=0.8t+0.55$ and that in Eq. (\ref{trajectory}). In the
former case, it is advantageous to choose one of the Reggeon,
i.e., $\omega$ to have the exchange-nondegenerate phase. But, in
that case, the contribution of the $\omega$ is suppressed, and the
production mechanism resulting from the dominance of $\rho$ over
the $\omega$ would be quite different from the present one as
shown in Fig. \ref{fig2}.
In the meanwhile, most of the Regge models for $\eta$
photoproduction introduce hadron form factors at the $\gamma\eta V$
and $VNN$ vertices to fit to
experimental data \cite{chiang}. However, it is natural to dispense with
such form factors in the Regge amplitude, because it
contains the gamma function $\Gamma(\alpha_V(t))$ in Eq.
(\ref{vec-regge}) to suppress the singularity from the sequential
zeros of $\sin\pi\alpha_V(t)$. Thus, as
demonstrated in Figs. \ref{fig5} and \ref{fig6}, the present approach
without form factors is less model dependent than those in Refs.
\cite{kochelev,domokos} to describe the CLAS data.
\begin{figure}[]
\centering \epsfig{file=fig3.eps, width=0.9\hsize} \hspace{0.5cm}
\caption{Differential cross section $d\sigma/d\Omega$ versus
$\cos\theta$ for $\gamma p\to p\eta'(958)$. The solid curve
results from $\rho+\omega$ Reggeon exchanges with a factor of
$0.43$ taken to account for the branching fraction from the
$\gamma p\to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$ experiment. Below $\sqrt{s}\approx
2.55$ GeV there is a room for nucleon resonances to contribute to
the backward rise as well as the forward enhancement. Notations
for $\rho$ and $\omega$ contributions are the same as in Fig.
\ref{fig2}. Data are taken from Ref.~\cite{dickson}. \\
}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[]
\centering \epsfig{file=fig4.eps, width=0.9\hsize} \caption{Total
cross sections for $\gamma p\to p\eta'$ and $\gamma p\to
p\eta(1295)$. The solid and dotted curves correspond to $\eta'$
and $\eta(1295)$ production cross sections scaled by the branching
ratio. For comparison, the dashed curve for $\eta'$ cross section
without scaling is presented to reproduce the
AHHM data \cite{struc76}.} \label{fig4}
\end{figure}
In the next we calculate the exclusive $\gamma p\to p\eta'$ and
$\eta(1295)$ within the same framework. However, in order to
compare with the CLAS data from the multimeson photoproduction
process $\gamma p\to\eta(958)p\to
p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$, we consider the branching ratio
$\Gamma_{\eta'\to\eta\pi^+\pi^-}/\Gamma_{\eta'\to all}\approx
43\%$, from PDG to implement the reduction by an overall factor
of $0.43$ to the cross section from the exclusive process
$\gamma p\to p\eta'$. In Table
\ref{tb1} we list the coupling constants compiled for the $\eta'$
and $\eta(1295)$ in addition to $\eta$ photoproduction above. For
the physical status of $\eta(1295)$ only the mass
$m_{\eta(1295)}=1294\pm4$ MeV and decay width
$\Gamma_{\eta(1295)}=55\pm5$ MeV are known. We follow the
coupling constants deduced from Ref. \cite{kochelev} to
calculate total cross section with the same ratio of the reduction
as in the case of $\eta'$.
Figures \ref{fig3} and \ref{fig4} show the differential and total
cross section for $\eta'$ and total cross section for $\eta(1295)$.
As before, the complex phase $e^{-i\pi\alpha}$ is
chosen for both $\rho+\omega$ Reggeons in both reactions.
Data of differential cross sections are from
the CLAS measurement and the data for the total cross section in
Fig. \ref{fig4} are from the AHHM \cite{struc76}.
These reaction cross sections are scaled, as discussed above.
The angular distribution reproduced in Fig. \ref{fig3}
is consistent with data.
Nevertheless, in addition to the $t$-channel exchanges,
the underestimate of differential data below
$\sqrt{s}\approx 2.55$
GeV implies the need for the contribution of baryon resonances in the
$s$- and $u$-channel in order to reproduce
the backward rise as well as the forward enhancement in the cross section.
As for the total cross sections in Fig. \ref{fig4}, we first note
that the model prediction without correction
is consistent with the exclusive AHHM cross section \cite{struc76}
as shown by the dashed curve. Within the present framework the
$\eta(1295)$ cross section is smaller than the $\eta'$ by two
orders of magnitude, and, hence, it is reasonable to neglect
the $\eta(1295)$ production in the data analysis for
$f_1$ production from the reaction $\gamma p\to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$,
as performed by the CLAS Collaboration.
\section{$f_1(1285)$ photoproduction on the proton target}
\subsection{Analysis of CLAS data from $\gamma p\to pf_1\to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$
below $\sqrt{s}=3$ GeV}
In the CLAS experiment on
the $\gamma p\to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$ reaction,
the structure of $f_1(1285)$ was observed at $m_X\simeq1280$ MeV of
the $\gamma p$
missing mass spectrum with a great
statistics $\simeq 1.5 \times 10^5\times(1280)$ events. Since
$\eta(1295)$ as well as $f_1(1285)$ is decaying to $\eta\pi\pi$,
care must be taken for the potential overlap with each other to
extract the structure associated with the $f_1(1285)$ with
$p$-wave decay and positive parity from the Dalitz analysis of
$x\to \eta\pi^+\pi^-$. The experiment leads to a conclusion
on $f_1$ with mass $m_{f_1}=1281.0 \pm 0.8$ MeV and width
$\Gamma_{f_1}=18.4\pm 1.4$ MeV which is narrower than PDG value $24.2 \pm
1.1$ MeV.
In the theoretical side, Kochelev \cite{kochelev} and Domokos
\cite{domokos} calculated the reaction cross section for the
exclusive $\gamma p\to pf_1$ by using the Reggeized model for
the $t$-channel $\rho$ and $\omega$ vector meson exchanges.
As depicted in Fig. \ref{fig1} where the outgoing $\eta$ meson
is now replaced by the $f_1$ meson in the Feynman diagram,
the following form of the $\gamma VA$
coupling vertex,
\begin{eqnarray}
\Gamma^\beta_{\gamma VA}(k,Q)\eta_\beta={g_{\gamma VA}\over m_0^2}
Q^2\epsilon^{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}\epsilon_\mu
k_\nu\xi_{\alpha}^*\eta_\beta, \hspace{0.5cm}\label{gva1}
\end{eqnarray}
is utilized in Ref. \cite{kochelev} for the $t$-channel
vector meson exchange. Here $\xi^\alpha(q)$ and $\eta^\beta(Q)$
are spin polarizations of axial vector meson and vector meson with
the momenta $q$ and $Q$, respectively.
Given the $VNN$ coupling vertex in Eq. (\ref{vnn}),
the vector meson exchange is now written as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{amp2}
&&\mathcal{M}_V=
\Gamma^\beta_{\gamma VA}(k,Q)(-g_{\beta\lambda}+Q_\beta Q_\lambda/m^2_V)
\nonumber\\&&\times\overline{u}(p')\left(g^v_{VNN}\gamma^\lambda+{g^t_{VNN}\over
4M}[\gamma^\lambda, \rlap{/}Q]\right)u(p){\cal R}^V(s,t)
\end{eqnarray}
with the hadron form factors of the form,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{ff}
\left({\Lambda_1^2-m_V^2\over \Lambda_1^2-t}\right)\, {\rm and}\,
\left({\Lambda_2^2-m_V^2\over \Lambda_2^2-t}\right)^n,
\end{eqnarray}
which are assigned to the $\gamma Vf_1$
and $f_1NN$ vertices, respectively, in the amplitude in Eq. (\ref{amp2}).
The decay width of the $\gamma VA$ vertex corresponding to Eq. (\ref{gva1}) is
given by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gva-decay}
\Gamma_{A\to V\gamma}={1\over 96\pi}{g^2_{\gamma VA}\over
m_0^4}{m_V^2\over m_A^5} (m_A^2+m_V^2)(m_A^2-m_V^2)^3,\hspace{0.5cm}
\end{eqnarray}
and the coupling constant $g_{\gamma\rho^0f_1}=0.94$ is
determined from the decay width $\Gamma_{f_1\to\rho^0\gamma}\approx1330$ keV
presently reported in the PDG. The coupling constant
$g_{\gamma\omega f_1}=-g_{\gamma\rho f_1}/3$ is taken from the
quark model estimation.
However, with the trajectories and $VNN$ coupling constants given
in Ref. \cite{kochelev}, the model prediction for the CLAS
data is poor, even though the model
assumes the reduction of the calculated cross section
by the branching ration 35$\%$ as applied in
Figs. \ref{fig3} and \ref{fig4} for comparison with the CLAS
cross section $\gamma p\to pf_1\to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$.
The crucial point of the issue is that the PDG width $f_1\to\rho^0\gamma$
chosen above
is too large to agree with the CLAS data.
Theoretical estimates based on the QCD inspired models such as the
constituent quark model (CQM) \cite{ishida} and the Four quark state
with the triangle loop for the $AVV$ anomaly \cite{osipov}
suggest half the value of the current PDG fit. Moreover, the
width $453\pm 177$ keV extracted from the CLAS experiment further supports
these smaller values rather than the PDG one as shown in Table \ref{tb2}.
\begin{table}
\centering\caption{Estimate of $\gamma VA$ coupling constant
from the decay width of Ref. \cite{dickson}$^a$,
Ref. \cite{ishida}$^b$, Ref. \cite{osipov}, and PDG
which are given in units of keV. For comparison we list $g_{\gamma\rho
f_1}=0.59^b$, $0.45^c$ and $0.94^d$. $g_{\gamma\omega
f_1}=0.152^c$ from these references.
}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
\hline\hline
&$g_{\gamma VA}$&CLAS\cite{dickson}&CQM\cite{ishida}&4quark\cite{osipov} &PDG &\\%
\hline
$f_1\to\rho\gamma$ & $0.54^a$ & 453$^a$ & $509^b$ &$311^c$ &$1330^d$ &\\%
$f_1\to\omega\gamma$ & $-0.18^b$ & - & $48^b$ &$34.3^c$ &- & \\%
\hline\hline
\\
\end{tabular}
\label{tb2}
\end{table}
Avoiding the model dependence such as the cutoff mass with form
factors in Eq. (\ref{ff}), we perform the analysis of the CLAS
data with the decay width $\Gamma_{f_1\to \rho^0\gamma}=453$ keV
determined from the CLAS experiment. We then demonstrate how the
production mechanism could account for the CLAS data, while
comparing our results with Ref. \cite{kochelev}. It is legitimate
to consider simply the $\rho^0+\omega$ exchanges as in Fig.
\ref{fig1}, because threshold energy of the reaction,
$\sqrt{s}_{thres.}\approx2.2$ GeV is high enough to neglect
nucleon resonances. This might be a contradiction to the finding
in Ref. \cite{dickson} that the production mechanism is more
consistent with $s$-channel decay of a high-mass $N^*$ state not
with $t$-channel meson exchange, because the hadron models
aforementioned are insufficient to reproduce the CLAS data. The
role of nucleon resonance $N^*(2300)(1/2^+)$ together with the
nucleon in the $s$ and $u$-channel is discussed to account for the
$u$-channel rise at $\sqrt{s}=2.65$ and 2.75. \cite{wang}.
Nevertheless, it should be pointed out that the results from these
models follow the dependence on the cutoff mass of the form
factors, which is the point that is quite different from the current
calculation.
In the Table \ref{tb2} we choose $g_{\gamma\rho f_1}=0.54$ from the CLAS width
and $g_{\gamma\omega f_1}=-0.18$ from the Relativistic quark
model which resumes the ratio of $g_{\gamma\rho^0f_1}/g_{\gamma\omega f_1}\approx-3$.
\begin{figure}[]
\centering \epsfig{file=fig5.eps, width=0.9\hsize}
\caption{Differential cross section $d\sigma/d\Omega$ versus
$\cos\theta$ for $\gamma p\to pf_1\to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$. The solid
cross sections are scaled by a factor of $0.35$ to account for the
branching fraction from the $\gamma p\to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$. The
(Green) dash-dot-dotted curve is from Ref. \cite{kochelev} with
$\Lambda_1=1.2$ and $\Lambda_2=1.4$ GeV and $n=1$ for the $\gamma
Vf_1$ form factor. Data are taken from Ref.~\cite{dickson}. \\
}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[]
\centering \epsfig{file=fig6.eps, width=0.9\hsize}
\caption{Total
cross sections for $\gamma p\to Pf_1\to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$ and
$\gamma p\to p\eta(1295)\to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$. Five data points in
the $f_1$ cross section are obtained by integrating out the
differential cross sections given in Fig. \ref{fig5} for
illustration purposes. The cross sections are scaled by the same
factors as in Figs. \ref{fig4} and \ref{fig5}, respectively. For
comparison the cross section for $f_1$ from Ref. \cite{kochelev}
is presented by the green dash-dot-dotted curve. The cross section
for $\gamma p\to\eta(1295)p$ scaled by 43$\%$ is shown to be
negligible in the region overlapping with $f_1$ production.
} \label{fig6}
\end{figure}
With the $VNN$ coupling constants in Table \ref{tb1} and the
vector meson trajectories in Eqs. (\ref{trajectory}) and
(\ref{omega-traj}), we reproduce the CLAS differential cross
section in Fig. \ref{fig5}. In order to describe the exclusive
$\gamma p\to pf_1$ reaction from the CLAS data which are extracted
from the $\gamma p\to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$ in the final state, we have
to consider a scaling of the cross section by the fraction
$\Gamma_{f_1\to\eta\pi^+\pi^-}/\Gamma_{f_1\to all}\approx0.35$,
similar to the case of $\eta'$ photoproduction, as before. As the
differential cross section data show no oscillatory behavior, the
complex phase $e^{-i\pi\alpha_{\rho}(t)}$ for the $\rho$ is
mandatory and the canonical phase
$1/2(-1+e^{-i\pi\alpha_{\omega}(t)})$ is chosen for $\omega$ to
be consistent with data. The roles of $\rho$ and $\omega$ are
displayed at $\sqrt{s}=2.55$ GeV.
The (green) dash-dotted curve results from Ref. \cite{kochelev}
with the cutoff masses $\Lambda_1=1.2$
and $\Lambda_2=1.4$ GeV together with $n=1$ for the form factors.
In the model only $g_{\gamma Vf_1}$ is taken the same as
ours for comparison.
It is shown that the cross section is too
much suppressed in the nonforward direction due to the
form factors, which is different from the present approach
without form factors.
\begin{figure}[]
\vspace{.5cm} \centering \epsfig{file=fig7.eps, width=0.9\hsize}
\caption{Differential cross section and beam polarization
asymmetry for $f_1$, $\eta'$, and $\eta(1295)$ photoproductions
from the CLAS experiment $\gamma p \to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$.
Differential cross sections scaled by the respective factors are
predicted as a function of $\sqrt{s}$ at the production angle
$\theta^*=40^\circ$ in the center of mass system. The
$t$-dependence of beam polarizations are presented at
$E_\gamma=9$ GeV with the same notation as in the differential
cross sections. } \label{fig7}
\end{figure}
Total cross sections for $f_1$ and $\eta(1295)$ photoproductions
are shown in Fig. \ref{fig6}. For reference purposes, we present
the $f_1$ cross section data by integrating out the differential
cross section data in Fig. \ref{fig5} over the angle. The
respective contributions of $\rho$ and $\omega$ exchanges are
shown with the same notations. The dash-dot-dotted curve from Ref.
\cite{kochelev}, as in Fig. \ref{fig5}, yields the smaller cross
section at low energy. The cross section for $\eta(1295)$
photoproduction is shown with a correction by the factor of
$0.43$. By comparison we agree with the negligence of $\eta(1295)$
component in the CLAS analysis of $f_1(1285)$ cross section from
the reaction $\gamma p\to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$.
For further studies on the CLAS data, we present the energy
dependence of differential cross section at the forward angle
$\theta=40^\circ$ (corresponding to a forward peak at
$\cos\theta\approx0.75$ and $\sqrt{s}=2.75$ GeV in Fig.
\ref{fig5}) in Fig. \ref{fig7} for $f_1(1285)$, $\eta(958)$, and
$\eta(1295)$ cross sections involved in the overlapped potential
region. The discrimination between these reactions is more
apparent in the beam polarization $\Sigma$ as can be seen in Fig.
\ref{fig7}. As the present model includes only the natural parity
exchange of $\rho$ and $\omega$, the $\Sigma$ is always positive.
But, the different size of the $\Sigma$ between pseudoscalar and
axial vector meson photoproductions reveals the different scheme
of the interference between $\rho$ and $\omega$ Reggeons among
these reactions.
\subsection{Primakoff effect in the $f_1$ process}
Now that the decay $f_1\to \gamma^*\gamma$ is another source of
the reaction $\gamma p\to pf_1$ to proceed in the forward direction,
the virtual photon exchange serves to the exclusive $f_1$
photoproduction via one of the two photons off-mass shell in the
$t$-channel. This is the so-called the Primakoff effect
which is observed at very forward angles, in general, in the photoproduction
of charge-neutral meson of $C$-parity even \cite{kaskulov,sibirtsev}.
The Primakoff effect provides an opportunity to test non-perturbative
properties of QCD through the mixing of the nonet members in the
axial anomaly \cite{gasparian}.
Moreover, as the virtual photon exchange is not to be reggeized,
it is not subject to the energy dependence $s^{\alpha(0)-1}$ at high energies.
Therefore, by virtue of it, such energy independent behavior
is expected in the reaction, as in the case of the Pomeron exchange
at high energies in vector meson photoproduction.
The nature of the Pomeron and virtual photon exchange is,
of course, quite different. Because the origin of the
former process comes from strong interaction by the exchange of two
gluon correlation \cite{landshoff}, whereas
the latter exchange results from the axial anomaly in
the presence of electromagnetic interaction.
Thus, this subprocess in the $t$-channel will be an example
of seeking the nonmesonic process that can
survive at high energies in the photoproduction
of axial vector meson.
Given the $\gamma VA$ vertex in Eq. (\ref{gva1}),
we replace the vector meson polarization $\eta_\beta$
by the virtual photon $\epsilon'_\beta$ with 4-momentum $Q^\mu$ in
the $t$-channel for the virtual photon exchange.
Then, the $\gamma^*$ exchange is now written as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{2photon}
&&\mathcal{M}_{\gamma^*}=
-\Gamma^\beta_{\gamma\gamma^* A}(k,Q)F_{\rho}(t)
{\left(-g_{\beta\lambda}\right)\over t}
\nonumber\\&&\hspace{1cm}
\times e\,\overline{u}(p')\left(e_N\gamma^\lambda
+{\kappa_{N}\over4M}[\gamma^\lambda, \rlap{\,/}Q]\right)F_{1}(t)u(p)\,,
\end{eqnarray}
where the coupling constant $g_{\gamma VA}$ in Eq. (\ref{gva1})
is read as $g_{\gamma\gamma^*A}$ and the vector meson polarization
$\eta$ as $\epsilon$ with the vector meson propagator and $VNN$ vertex
replaced by the virtual photon propagator and $\gamma NN$ vertex
in Eq. (\ref{amp2}). $e_N=1$ for proton with $\kappa_p=1.79$ and 0
for neutron with $\kappa_n=-1.91$.
The coupling constant $g_{\gamma\gamma^*A}$ now in Eqs. (\ref{gva1})
and (\ref{2photon})
cannot be estimated from the decay width as before, because of
vanishing of $Q^2$ for the case of real photons.
Following Ref. \cite{osipov}, we determine the coupling constant
$g_{\gamma\gamma^* A}$ in Eq. (\ref{gva1}) as
\begin{eqnarray}
{g_{\gamma\gamma^* A}\over m_0^2}=8\pi\alpha
F^{(0)}_{AV\gamma^*\gamma^*}(m_f^2,0,0),
\end{eqnarray}
which yields $g_{\gamma\gamma^*f_1}$=0.043 by taking
$F^{(0)}_{AV\gamma^*\gamma^*}(m_f^2,0,0)=(0.234\pm0.034)$ GeV$^{-2}$
from the PDG.
Since we are dealing with the virtual photon exchange,
the following vertex form factors
\begin{eqnarray}
&&F_{\rho}(t)=\left(1-t/m_\rho^2\right)^{-1},
\label{vmd}\\
&&F_{1}(t)={4M^2-2.8t\over(4M^2-t)(1-t/0.71\,{\rm GeV}^2)^2}
\label{f1nn}
\end{eqnarray}
are introduced to $\gamma\gamma^* f_1$
and $\gamma^*NN$ vertices in the $t$-channel.
By the vector meson dominance, a combination of
$\rho$-$\omega$-$\phi$ meson poles should be applied to the
$\gamma\gamma^*f_1$ vertex
with the mixing between $\rho+\omega$ and $\phi$
vector mesons
as discussed in Ref. \cite{kaskulov} for the cases of $\gamma\gamma^*\eta$
and $\gamma\gamma^*\eta'$ vertices.
Suppose that there is no difference between vector
meson masses, then, these form factors lead roughly to a unity
as the mixing has no meaning between $\rho+\omega$
and $\phi$ \cite{kaskulov}. Thus, we choose the
$\rho$-meson pole here as a representative for simplicity.
For the $\gamma^*NN$ vertex, we employ the nucleon isoscalar form factor
in Eq. (\ref{f1nn}) which replaces the Dirac form factors
$F_1$ and $F_2$, as discussed in Ref. \cite{donnachie}.
The form factors in Eqs. (\ref{vmd}) and (\ref{f1nn}) with
cutoff masses are well established in other hadronic processes so that
we have no model dependence in calculating
reaction cross sections for the $\gamma p\to pf_1$ reaction.
In Fig. \ref{fig8} differential
cross section is presented at forward angles below $\theta=35^\circ$
at $\sqrt{s}=6$ GeV and total cross section is shown up to
$\sqrt{s}\approx50$ GeV in Fig. \ref{fig9}.
Since there is no information about
the sign of the $\gamma\gamma^*f_1$ coupling relative to that of the vector
meson exchange, $\gamma V f_1$, the cross section is shown for
both signs of $g_{\gamma\gamma^*f_1}$ for illustration purposes.
The solid and dashed (red) curves are from the full calculation
of the differential and total cross sections corresponding to positive
and negative signs. The exchange of $\gamma^*$ is denoted by the dotted
curve in both cross sections.
\begin{figure}[]
\centering \epsfig{file=fig8.eps, width=0.9\hsize}
\caption{Differential cross section for the exclusive $\gamma p\to
pf_1$ reaction as a function of angle $\theta$. The Primakoff
effect between positive and negative sign of the coupling constant
$f_{\gamma\gamma^*f_1}$ shows a different angle dependence below
$\theta\approx 5^\circ$. \\
\\
}\label{fig8}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[]
\centering \epsfig{file=fig9.eps, width=0.9\hsize} \caption{Total
cross section for the exclusive $\gamma p\to pf_1$ process up to
$\sqrt{s}=50$ GeV. Contributions of $\gamma^*$ and $\rho+\omega$
exchanges are shown by the dotted and dash-dotted curves,
respectively. The solid (dashed) curve corresponds to total cross
section with the relative sign of $\gamma^*$ exchange positive
(negative) to vector meson exchanges. The exchange of $\gamma^*$
gives the contribution $\sigma\approx 0.25$ nb at $\sqrt{s}\approx
50$ GeV persistent up to the higher energies. The solid cross
section without form factor $F_1(t)$ diverges, as shown by the
dash-dot-dotted curve. }\label{fig9}
\end{figure}
It is found that in the total cross section the role of form
factor $F_{\rho}(t)$ in Eq. (\ref{vmd}) is negligible. However,
without the nucleon isoscalar form factor $F_1(t)$, the cross
section is highly divergent, as can be seen by the dash-dotted
curve. The energy dependence of the cross section shows a growth
of the Primakoff effect up to $\sqrt{s}\approx5$ GeV and remains
constant, i.e., $\sigma\approx0.1$ nb up to $\sqrt{s}\approx50$
GeV. Beyond $\sqrt{s}\approx25$ GeV the contribution of $\gamma^*$
exchange becomes stronger than those of vector meson exchanges
which are decreasing by the energy dependence $\sim
s^{\alpha_V(0)-1}$.
\subsection{Primakoff effect in pseudoscalar meson photoproduction}
Pseudoscalar meson photoproduction is a typical reaction to
observe the Primakoff effect by the $\gamma^*$ exchange
\cite{kaskulov}\cite{sibirtsev}.
A precise measurement of the Primakoff effect has been advocated
to test the nonperturbative QCD based on the flavor mixing of the chiral
symmetry \cite{gasparian}.
Here we shall reproduce the Primakoff effect in the photoproduction
of $\pi^0$ and $\eta$ as well as $\eta'$ in the PrimEx energy region
\cite{gasparian} and compare the result with the data available.
Nevertheless, our interest in this issue is still more in understanding the
role of the nonmesonic scattering in the pseudoscalar meson
photoproduction at high energies, as demonstrated in the $f_1$
photoproduction.
For the Primakoff effect the virtual photon exchange in the
$\eta$ photoproduction is written as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{prima3}
&&{\cal M}_{\gamma^*}={f_{\gamma\gamma^*\eta}\over m_\eta}
F_{\gamma\gamma^*\eta}(t)
\epsilon^{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}\epsilon_\mu k_\nu Q_\alpha
{\left(-g_{\beta\lambda}\right)\over t}
\nonumber\\&&\hspace{1cm}
\times e\,\bar{u}(p')\left(e_{N}\gamma^\lambda+{\kappa_N\over
4M}[\gamma^\lambda, \rlap{/}Q]\right)F_{1}(t)u(p),
\end{eqnarray}
where
the vertex form factors $F_{\gamma\gamma^*\eta}(t)$
and $F_1(t)$ are given by Eqs. (\ref{vmd}) and (\ref{f1nn}),
respectively.
The radiative coupling constant $f_{\gamma\gamma^*\eta}$
is estimated from the decay width
\begin{eqnarray}
\Gamma_{\eta\to\gamma\gamma}={f_{\gamma\gamma\eta}^2m_\eta
\over64\pi}
\end{eqnarray}
with the PDG value taken for the $\eta\to\gamma\gamma$ decay.
In Fig. \ref{fig10} the differential cross sections for $\gamma
p\to p\eta$ with the DESY data \cite{braunschweig70}, and $\gamma
p\to p\eta'$ and $\gamma p\to p\pi^0$ \cite{mbraunschweig70} are
presented to exhibit the role of $\gamma^*$ exchange at very
forward angles. The solid curve results from the
$\rho+\omega+\gamma^*$ exchanges in Eqs. (\ref{vec}) and
(\ref{prima3}) with $f_{\gamma\gamma^*\eta}/m_\eta=-0.014/m_\eta$
from $\Gamma_{\eta\to\gamma\gamma}=0.52$ keV,
$f_{\gamma\gamma^*\eta'}/m_{\eta'}=-0.03/m_{\eta'}$ from
$\Gamma_{\eta'\to\gamma\gamma}=4.28$ keV and
$f_{\gamma\gamma^*\pi^0}/m_{\pi^0}=+0.00342/m_{\pi^0}$ from
$\Gamma_{\pi^0\to\gamma\gamma}=7.74$ eV cases, respectively
\cite{amsler}. The coupling constants $g_{\gamma\pi^0\rho}=0.255$
and $g_{\gamma\pi^0\omega}=0.7$ are used for the $\pi^0$ cross
sections with the $VNN$ coupling constants given in Table
\ref{tb1}. The trajectories are taken the same as the $\eta$ case,
but the phase $e^{-i\pi\alpha_\rho}$ and
${1\over2}(-1+e^{-i\pi\alpha_\omega})$ are chosen for $\rho^0$ and
$\omega$, respectively.
In the case of $\eta$, the negative sign is
chosen for the constructive interference between $\gamma^*$
and $\rho+\omega$ exchanges.
However, the result shows a discrepancy
with experimental data, in particular,
below $\theta\approx5^\circ$, which is comparable to that of
Ref. \cite{kaskulov} at the same energy.
In order to agree with the data the coupling constant $f_{\gamma\gamma^*\eta}$
should grow by three times larger than the one given above,
as shown by the (red) dash-dot-dotted curve.
In this case the result is similar to Ref. \cite{sibirtsev}.
This is, however, unattainable, even though the maximum value
for the mixing angle is chosen between $\eta_0$ and $\eta_8$,
when we express the decay width $\eta\to\gamma\gamma$ and
$\eta'\to\gamma\gamma$ as in Eqs. (\ref{width}) and (\ref{width1})
given below.
In consideration of the mixing of the $SU_f(3)$ flavor singlet and
octet members the decay widths for $\eta\to\gamma\gamma$ and
$\eta'\to\gamma\gamma$ are written as \cite{gasparian}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{width}
&&\Gamma_{\eta\to\gamma\gamma}={\alpha^2\over64\pi^3}
{m_\eta^3\over3f_\pi^2}\left({f_\pi\over f_{\eta_8}}\cos{\theta_p}
-\sqrt{8}{f_\pi\over f_{\eta_0}}\sin{\theta_p}\right)^2,\hspace{0.5cm}\\
&&\Gamma_{\eta'\to\gamma\gamma}={\alpha^2\over64\pi^3}
{m_{\eta'}^3\over3f_\pi^2}\left({f_\pi\over f_{\eta_8}}\sin{\theta_p}
+\sqrt{8}{f_\pi\over f_{\eta_0}}\cos{\theta_p}\right)^2,\hspace{0.5cm}
\label{width1}
\end{eqnarray}
where $f_{\eta_0}$ and $f_{\eta_8}$ are the flavor singlet
and octet decay constants and $\theta_p$ is the mixing angle
for pseudoscalar mesons. They are estimated as
$f_{\eta_8}\approx 1.3f_\pi$ by ChPT and $f_{\eta_0}\approx f_\pi$
in the Large $N_c$ limit. The ratio measured in the experiment
\begin{eqnarray}
R={1\over3}\left({f_\pi^2\over f^2_{\eta_8}}+8{f_\pi^2\over f^2_{\eta_0}}\right)
=2.5\pm0.5
\end{eqnarray}
is consistent with the theoretical estimates,
$f_\pi/f_{\eta_0}=0.93$ with $f_\pi/f_{\eta_8}=1/1.3$.
\begin{figure}[]
\centering \epsfig{file=fig10.eps, width=0.9\hsize}
\caption{Differential cross sections for $\gamma p\to p\eta$
in (a) and (b),
$\gamma p\to p\eta'$ in (c) and (d),
and $\gamma p\to p\pi^0$ in (e) and (f).
The (red) dash-dot-dotted, (blue) dash-dotted, and
solid curves result from the case of coupling constant
$f_{\gamma\gamma^*\eta}$ as denoted in the panel (a),
respectively.
In (f) the dip at $\theta\approx18^\circ$ is due to the
nonsense zero of $\omega$ exchange.
Data of $\eta$ and of $\pi^0$ production are taken from
Ref. \cite{braunschweig70} and
Ref. \cite{mbraunschweig70}, respectively.
}\label{fig10}
\end{figure}
Let us now make an estimate of the decay width
based on Eqs. (\ref{width}) and (\ref{width1}).
In terms of $f_{\eta_0}=100.1$ MeV and $f_{\eta_8}=121$ MeV
that are given by taking $f_\pi=93.1$ MeV above,
the $\eta$ decay width $0.52$ keV taken here corresponds to the mixing
angle $\theta_p\approx-23.4^\circ$. At the
angle the corresponding $\eta'$ decay width leads to 4.03 keV
from Eq. (\ref{width1}), which is close to the empirical value quoted above.
In practice the maximum angle $\theta_p$
in Eq. (\ref{width}) exists at $-74^\circ$ (or $106^\circ$),
which yields the decay width $1.27$ keV.
The (blue) dash-dotted curve corresponds to the decay
width at such an angle $\theta_p$ with $f_{\gamma\gamma^*\eta}=-0.022$,
which is, however, still deficient to agree with data. Moreover,
in that case the $\eta'$ decay width from Eq. (\ref{width1}) is
vanishing, i.e about 0.2 eV at the angle.
Therefore, from the relations between $\eta$ and
$\eta'$ mixing above, the coupling constant $f_{\gamma\gamma^*\eta}=|0.042|$
cannot be achievable and we notice that the discrepancy below the production angle
$\theta\approx 5^\circ$ can no longer be covered over even with
the mixing angle maximally allowed. In future experiments such as
the PrimEX project at CLAS 12 GeV a precise measurement of
the cross section at very forward angles is desirable to decide
whether such a disagreement is still due to a theoretical deficiency,
or an experimental uncertainty.
Figure \ref{fig11} shows total cross sections for $\gamma p\to
p\pi^0$, $\gamma p\to p\eta$, and $\gamma p\to p\eta'$ reactions
up to $\sqrt{s}\approx 250$ GeV. The solid cross sections are from
the $\rho+\omega+\gamma^*$ exchanges in the $t$-channel. Beyond
$\sqrt{s}\approx100$ GeV where there exists the dominating
$\gamma^*$ exchange, the $\pi^0$ and $\eta$ cross sections are
persistently scaled to a common limit $\sigma\simeq1.5$ nb around
$\sqrt{s}\simeq250$ GeV. This coincidence is understood, if one
notes that $f_{\gamma\gamma^*\pi^0}\approx f_{\gamma\gamma^*\eta}$
in unit of GeV$^{-1}$. The $\eta'$ cross section reaches at the
limit $\sigma\simeq2.2$ nb with the coupling constant larger than
the two. Together with the $f_1$ case as shown in Fig.
\ref{fig9}, the role of $\gamma^*$ exchange in these cross
sections scaling up to 250 GeV can be compared to that of the
Pomeron exchange in the vector meson photoproduction. The limit of
the cross section at high energies is determined only by the
coupling strength of each meson decaying to two gamma's.
Therefore, a measurement of the $\eta$ and $\eta'$ cross sections
at such limiting energies enables us to determine the mixing
angles from Eqs. (\ref{width}) and (\ref{width1}).
\begin{figure}[]
\centering \epsfig{file=fig11.eps, width=0.9\hsize}
\caption{Primakoff effect in $\gamma p\to p\pi^0$, $\gamma p\to
p\eta$ and $\gamma p\to p\eta'$ reactions at high energies. The
dotted curve is the contribution of $\gamma^*$ exchange which
shows a nearly energy independent behavior up to
$\sqrt{s}\approx250$ GeV. The rapid peak of the total cross
section near threshold is reproduced by the $\rho+\omega$
exchanges depicted by the dashed curve in the $\eta'$ process, for
instance. }\label{fig11}
\end{figure}
Before closing this section, we would give a remark on the
specialty of photoproductions of pseudoscalar and axial vector
meson, which exhibits the dynamical features as interesting as the
Pomeron exchange in the vector meson photoproduction at high
energies. Of course, in these reactions besides the virtual photon
exchange we note that there is an important mechanism to prove
QCD, called the exchange of Odderon which can be another entity
comparable to the Pomeron \cite{berger,adloff}. Likewise the
Pomeron exchange in the high energy vector meson photoproduction,
the search of the Odderon is a most interesting topic to study the
role of odd numbers of gluons in hadron reactions. Thus, to
predict the $\gamma^*$ exchange as in Figs .\ref{fig9} and
\ref{fig11} should be important to find out the Odderon exchange
in future experiments, if available at such high energies. This
topic will be our next work which appears elsewhere.
\section{summary}
The first half of the present work is devoted to analyzing CLAS
data on the $\eta'$ and $f_1(1285)$ photoproductions based on the
$\rho+\omega$ Reggeon exchanges. The observables of $\eta$
photoproduction is reproduced to confirm the validity of the
vector meson contributions, prior to the studies of the $\eta'$
and $\eta(1295)$ photoproductions. To describe the exclusive
reaction $\gamma p\to p\eta'$ from the multi-meson photoproduction
in the final state $\gamma p\to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$, and similarly in
the case of $\eta(1295)$, the reaction cross section is corrected
by the branching ratio, taking into account the final decay mode
reported in the PDG. The Regge calculation of axial vector meson
$f_1(1285)$ photoproduction is performed within the same
framework. It is found that the $\eta(1295)$ photoproduction is
small enough to be neglected in the reconstruction of $\gamma p
\to pf_1$ from the reaction $\gamma p\to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$. Our
model could reproduce the differential cross section to a good
degree, if the branching ratio for $f_1\to\eta\pi^+\pi^-$ of
35$\%$ and the decay width 453 keV are feasible to use. To
demonstrate the production mechanism different between
pseudoscalar and axial vector meson photoproduction, predictions
for the energy dependence of differential cross sections and the
$t$-dependence of the beam polarization asymmetry are presented.
In particular, the beam polarization asymmetry shows the feature
quite contrasting to each other.
The rest of the present work is focused on the exclusive
$f_1$ photoproduction with a special interest in the search of
nonmesonic scattering process such as the Pomeron exchange
in the vector meson photoproduction.
The Primakoff effect by the virtual photon exchange
shows the behavior of energy independence at high energies
so that the total cross section remains constant persistently
up to $\sqrt{s}\approx50$ GeV with the size of
$\sigma\approx 2$ nb. This feature from the virtual photon exchange
is also implemented in the pseudoscalar meson photoproduction
with the cross section approaching to the limiting
value 1.5 nb in the $\pi^0$ and $\eta$, and 2.2 nb in the $\eta'$ cases
at high energies.
These results provide useful information for the study of
the Primakoff effect by the PrimEX project at CLAS 12 GeV,
and also the detailed analysis of $\gamma p\to p\eta\pi^+\pi^-$
reaction presented in this work helps searching for exotic mesons
via multimeson photoproduction in the GlueX
project at the Jefferson Lab.
\section*{Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of
Korea Grant No. NRF-2017R1A2B4010117.
|
\section{Introduction}
Kidney cancer is one of the most common types of cancer and it is estimated that more than 175,000 people dying of kidney cancer and 400,000 new cases \cite{bray2018global}.
The morphometry of the kidney tumor revealed from contrast-enhanced Computed Tomography (CT) is an important factor in the clinical decision but it is difficult to segment tumors as they are usually small and have the similar contrast with tissues in background.
As such, techniques that can automatically and accurately segment the kidney (including tumor) from CT images is urgently needed for research and clinical purposes.
It is a necessary and important prior step to do further analysis for a kidney tumor.
\par There are a lot of challenges to segment kidney.
For example, the kidney occupies a small part in the whole CT images and the relative size and location for two kidneys are varied, especially for kidneys with tumors.
In the last few years, Deep learning has been widely used in natural image segmentation and have promising results \cite{badrinarayanan2017segnet}.
However, challenges make that directly using deep learning is usually ineffective for the medical image segmentation tasks.
\par Motivated by that a smaller input region may lead to a more accurate segmentation in deep learning-based methods \cite{zhou2017fixed}, coarse to fine strategy is useful in medical image segmentation.
Jia et al. proposed a coarse-to-fine segmentation algorithm combining the atlas-based method and convolutional neural network (CNN) \cite{jia2018atlas}.
Its coarse segmentation stage using registration and fusion nevertheless is quite time-consuming.
For other CNN methods performing direct segmentation, they mainly used 2D or 3D patches \cite{wu2019multi}, which however still have two limitations.
On the one hand, the image intensities of surrounding tissues are similar to that of the kidney, which may cause false positive.
On the other hand, a large number of patches need to be extracted at the testing stage, which is again time-consuming.
Different from the patch based method, 2D sliced based can capture global shape features \cite{zhang2019Prostate}, but it usually causes abnormal missing or extra sub-regions due to the fuzzy background.
\par In such context, we propose a novel and efficient coarse-to-fine (C2F) segmentation framework and apply it to kidney segmentation using CT images.
We formulate kidney segmentation as a two-step task involving two CNNs; one CNN is trained to predict the rough location of the kidney based on the entire 2D MR slices (coarse stage) and the other CNN is trained to predict the accurate shape based on the previously-obtained coarse segmentation and cropped 2D CT slices (fine stage).
All of our experiments were conducted on the MICCAI KiTS19 Challenge dataset \cite{heller2019kits19}.
\section{Method}
Let a CT image be \textbf{X} and the corresponding ground truth segmentation be \textbf{Y} where $y_i =1$ indicates a foreground voxel(including kidney and tumor).
Both image size and voxel size are usually varied for the clinical dataset.
Since spatially inconsistent data might not be ideal for machine learning applications, we firstly interpolated all the dataset to the same voxel size $d\times h\times w $ but the corresponding image size $ D\times H \times W $ still varied.
Previous coarse-fo-fine work \cite{zhou2017fixed} inspires us to make use of a coarsely predicted segmentation mask to constrain the input region with the same image size and the same pixel size.
In other words, we use one CNN (coarse segmentation model $\mathbb{C}$) to find the rough location of the kidney and then use another CNN (fine segmentation model $\mathbb{F}$) to localize the kidney more accurately.
We also design a CNN (abnormal correction model $\mathbb{A}$) to correct the ill segmentation in the coarse stage.
$\mathbb{C}$, $\mathbb{A}$ and $\mathbb{F}$ have the same network architecture and the architecture used in this work is U-net \cite{unet}.
\subsection{Training}
Firstly, we divide each 3D volume $\textbf{X}$, $\textbf{Y}$ into a set of 2D slices $\{\textbf{x}$, $\textbf{y}\}$ with image size $H\times W$ and pixel size $h \times w$.
The 2D slices are typically isotropic in terms of both size and resolution, i.e., $H=W$ and $h=w$.
Otherwise, resizing and padding can be easily used to make the 2D slices isotropic.
For 2D slices of different subjects, either the image size or the pixel size can be different.
To begin our C2F segmentation pipeline, we conduct two-fold preprocessing.
On the one hand, we directly resize all $\{\textbf{x}$, $\textbf{y}\}$ to be of the same image size $H^\mathbb{C}\times W^\mathbb{C}$ (this transformation is denoted as $\mathcal{R}_{W}$) and obtain 2D image and ground truth pairs $\{\textbf{x}^\mathbb{C},\textbf{y}^\mathbb{C} \}$, which are then fed into a coarse segmentation model $\mathbb{C}:\textbf{p}^\mathbb{C} = f(\textbf{W}^\mathbb{C},\textbf{x}^\mathbb{C})$, where $\textbf{W}^\mathbb{C}$ denotes the model parameters and $\textbf{p}^\mathbb{C}$ is the predicted mask at the coarse stage.
On the other hand, we crop images with the same pixel size ($w\times h$ mm$^2$) to obtain image patches of the same image size $W^\mathbb{F} \times H^\mathbb{F}$ surrounding a single kidney (this transformation is denoted as $\mathcal{C}^\mathbb{F}$).
The processed images and labels $\{\textbf{x}^\mathbb{F},\textbf{y}^\mathbb{F}\}$ are then fed into a fine segmentation model $\mathbb{F}:\textbf{p}^\mathbb{F} = f(\textbf{W}^\mathbb{F},\textbf{x}^\mathbb{F})$.
To train an abnormal correction model $\mathbb{A}$, the similar cropping operation $\mathcal{C}^\mathbb{A}$ was used along the sagittal plane to get image patches with the same image size ($D^\mathbb{A} \times H^\mathbb{A}$) as well the same pixel size ($d\times h$ mm$^2$).
In the context of a deep segmentation network, the Dice loss $ \mathcal{L}(\textbf{p},\textbf{y})$ is optimized with respects to $\textbf{W}$ via gradient back-propagation. The objective function is
\begin{equation}
\textbf{W}^*=\mathop{\arg}\min_{\textbf{W}} \frac{1}{N} \sum_{n=1}^{N} \mathcal{L}(\textbf{p}_n,\textbf{y}_n),
\end{equation}
where $N$ denotes the total number of samples, $\textbf{W}^*$ denotes the optimal weights obtained from the training procedure.
After the training process, $\textbf{W}^\mathbb{*C}$, $\textbf{W}^\mathbb{*A}$ and $\textbf{W}^\mathbb{*F}$ are saved.
\subsection{Testing}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.16]{Fig1.pdf}
\caption{Flow chart of the entire testing procedure }
\label{fig:test}
\end{figure*}
The overall testing flow chart is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:test} and the voxel spacing of input images has been normalized to be $d \times h\times w$ as that in the training stage.
The image transformation operations $\mathcal{R}_{W}$ and cropping operation $\mathcal{C}^\mathbb{F}$ and $\mathcal{C}^\mathbb{A}$ are similar to that used in the training stage.
The only difference is that the cropping operation refers to the ground truth in the training stage now refers to the coarse segmentation in the testing stage.
$\mathcal{R}_{W}^{-1},\mathcal{C}^\mathbb{-F}$ and $\mathcal{C}^\mathbb{-A}$ respectively denote their inverse transformation operations.
\subsubsection{Coarse-to-fine prediction}
At the coarse segmentation stage, we resize all 2D CT slices $\textbf{x}$ at the axial view to be of image size $H^\mathbb{C}\times W^\mathbb{C}$ and predict the coarse segmentation result $\textbf{S}^{\mathbb{C}}$ by
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\textbf{p}^{\mathbb{C}} &= f(\textbf{W}^\mathbb{C*},\mathcal{R}_{W} (\textbf{x})) \\
\textbf{S}^{\mathbb{C}} &= \{ \mathcal{R}_{W}^{-1}(\textbf{p}^{\mathbb{C}} )\},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\{ \cdot \}$ denote composing all axial sliced segmentation results $\textbf{p}^\mathbb{C}$ of one 3D coarse segmentation $\textbf{S}^{\mathbb{C}}$ for each 3D CT image $\textbf{X}$.
And then $\textbf{S}^{\mathbb{C}}$ will be judged according to the criterion defined in \ref{abnormal}.
Under different circumstances, the mask $\textbf{M}$ used to guide fine segmentation stage is defined by
\begin{equation}
\textbf{M}=\left\{
\begin{aligned}
&\textbf{S}^{\mathbb{C}}, & \rm Normal\\
&\{
\mathcal{C}^{-\mathbb{A}}(
f(\textbf{W}^\mathbb{A*}, \mathcal{C}^\mathbb{A} (\textbf{x}, \textbf{S}^{\mathbb{C}} ))
)
\} , & \rm Abnormal.\\
\end{aligned}
\right.
\end{equation}
For normal case, $\textbf{S}^{\mathbb{C}}$ is directly set as $\textbf{M}$.
For abnormal case, $\textbf{S}^{\mathbb{C}}$ is used to decide the centroid in the sagittal plane and the cropping operation $\mathcal{C}^\mathbb{A}$ is used to get image patches with size $D^\mathbb{A} \times H^\mathbb{A}$.
$\mathcal{C}^\mathbb{-A}$ is used to pad the predication to the original size using 0.
At the fine segmentation stage, we crop the resultant images to obtain image patches of image size $H^\mathbb{F}\times W^\mathbb{F}$ according to the separated centroid in axial plane decided by $\textbf{M}$.
Two kidneys are predicted separately in fine segmentation stage by
\begin{equation}
\textbf{S}^{\mathbb{F}}=
\{
\mathcal{C}^{-\mathbb{F}}(
f(\textbf{W}^\mathbb{F*}, \mathcal{C}^\mathbb{F} (\textbf{x}, \textbf{M} ))
)
\}.
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Abnormal detection}\label{abnormal}
A typical drawback of coarse-to-fine strategy is that the performance of the fine model depends on that of the coarse model.
For example, most people have two kidneys, but there are a few who only have one kidney.
As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:test}, the abnormal coarse segmentation result fails to detect the whole kidney.
For these abnormal cases, we design an automatic abnormal detection method based on component analysis and correct it using a CNN.
Specifically, we first extract all sub structures of the coarse segmentation result $\textbf{S}^{\mathbb{C}}$ using connected component analysis \cite{van2014scikit}.
The voxel number of each substructure can be counted.
Given that kidney volumes are 202 $\pm$ 36 ml for men and 154 $\pm$ 33 ml for women \cite{cheong2007normal} and we have normalized all image to the same voxel size at the beginning, we can set a threshold voxel number $TH_{vn}$ to count the kidney number $N_{kidney}$.
Based on $N_{kidney}$ detected in $\textbf{S}^{\mathbb{C}}$, we define a discriminate criterion like
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
&N_{kidney}=2, & \rm Normal\\
&\rm else , & \rm Abnormal.\\
\end{aligned}
\right.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Implementation Details}
The normalized spacing size $d\times h\times w$ is set as $3\times0.7816\times0.7816$ mm$^3$ as the public dataset has the interpolated version with this voxel spacing.
The normalized image size in three CNN models ($\mathbb{C},\mathbb{A},\mathbb{F}$) are set as $H^\mathbb{C}=W^\mathbb{C}=128$, $H^\mathbb{A}=256$, $D^\mathbb{A}=64$, and $H^\mathbb{F}=W^\mathbb{F}=160$ empirically.
The threshold voxel number $TH_{vn}$ is set as 10000, which is roughly equal to 18 ml based on previous setting voxel spacing.
We set this value relative lower to the real kidney volume to reduce the false-negative rate and this value is large enough to remove the noisy small lesions and judge the predicted kidney number.
\section{EXPERIMENTS AND RESULTS}
\subsection{Dataset}
All data used in this study came from the MICCAI KiTS19 Challenge \cite{heller2019kits19}.
The public dataset consists of 210 abdominal CT images and the associated segmentation ground truth.
And we divided them into 168 training data and 42 testing data
The testing data were identified to be the images of indices $\{0,5,10,15,\dots,205 \}$.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.33]{Fig2.pdf}
\caption{Representative segmentation results with human annotation.
The red and green curves are manual delineation, segmentation in coarse stage and fine stage, respectively.
Segmentation boundaries of our fine stage segmentation results and ground truth sometimes are too close to distinguish.}
\label{fig:results}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Results}
The segmentation results of the proposed approach are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:results}.
The coarse segmentation shows zigzag edge but the fine segmentation is smooth and sometimes totally the same as ground truth.
These zigzag edge can be partially repaired if we increase the image size $H^\mathbb{C}=W^\mathbb{C}$ in the coarse model.
But the missing parts shown in the first row will still damage the performances.
The 3D reconstruction of ground truth and segmentation are also shown in Fig. \ref{fig:results}.
Compared with human annotation, the fine segmentation can keep the overall shape and more details than coarse segmentation.
\par Volumetric Dice similarity coefficient (vDSC) is a major quantitative standard to compare the similarity between ground truth and segmentation results,
i.e., the higher the DSC is, the better the segmentation results will be.
Comparisons between the coarse segmentation and fine segmentation in terms of the average with standard deviation, max, and min DSC scores over 42 testing images are tabulated in Table \ref{table1}.
Evidently, the fine stage segmentation has the highest segmentation accuracy and the lowest standard deviation.
\begin{table}[H]
\centering
\vspace{-2em}
\footnotesize
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0ex
\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{2pt}%
\caption{Quantitative comparisons of coarse segmentation and fine segmentation. Keys: STD--Standard deviation.}
\medskip
\label{table1}
\begin{tabular}{cccc} \hline
& Mean $\pm$ STD [\%] &Max [\%] & Min [\%] \\ \hline
Coarse & 84.47 $\pm$ 14.70 &92.75 & 2.36\\
Fine & \textbf{94.53} $\pm$ \textbf{8.33} &\textbf{98.69} & \textbf{57.89}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{CONCLUSION}
For a sliced based CNN, the input image size should be the same and the image size of the 2D slice is usually varied.
In this work, we proposed a coarse-fo-fine framework jointly considering image size and pixel size.
In addition, we designed an abnormal detection and correction method between coarse stage and fine stage,
which was efficient to repair the abnormal coarse segmentation and guarantee better performance in the fine stage.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEbib}
|
\section*{SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL}
\subsection{ A particular example.}
Extremal mass relations (\ref{eq20}) or (\ref{eq21}) are valid
for two center BHs in any N2 SUGRA.
In Fig.(\ref{aafg}) we present some explicit results for a
toy model with a complex scalar field $n = 2$ theory with prepotential
$F= -i X_0X_1$ (see further details in
\cite{Bellorin:2006xr,Fernandez-Melgarejo:2013ksa}).
For this quadratic prepotential the matrix
$S$ is scalar independent. The only scalar of the theory is
$\chi+i e^{-\phi}\equiv -i z$.
The Kahler potential and scalar metric
are ${\cal K}=-\log \re{z}, {\cal G}_{z\bar{z}}=(2 \re{z})^{-2}$.
Let us first take a configuration with
the charge sympletic vectors
$q_1=(1,8,0,-1 )q_0$ and
$q_2=(1,8,-4,1 )q_0$.
In this case
$\mbox{$A$}>0, -\det(S)>0$.
The minimal ADM mass configuration
corresponds to relative masses
$m_i=M_i/M_{ADM}= (9/16, 7/16).$
The limiting mass is
$M_\infty^2=\sp{\mbox{${\cal S}$} Q}{Q}\left(1-J^2/\det(S)\right)=8 \sqrt{26/17} q_0$.
The initial free parameters for this
fixed configuration of charges are
$M_1,M_2,r,z_\infty$ which have to
satisfy three real equations
(the mass relation, (\ref{eq20}) and
a complex scalar equation of the type (\ref{eq02})).
If in addition we choose a minimal ADM mass
configuration it remains only one free parameter (see figure).
Let us take a second exemplary
configuration with
$q_1=(1,8,0,-1 )q_0$ and
$q_2=(1,8,-8,0 )q_0$. In this case
$\mbox{$A$}= 80 q_0^2$, $-\det(S)= 320 q_0^4$,
$J^2=0$.
Now the intercenter distance is unrestricted
while the scalar at infinity is fixed ($z_\infty=8$).
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{tabular}{c}
\hspace{-0.97cm}\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{g3.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{g4.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption{
(A)(top). Dependence of $M_{ADM}$, $dM/dr,\re(z_\infty)$
with respect to the intercenter distance
$r$ for two configurations,
the minimal mass configuration and another $m_i=(9/19,10/19)$.
(B)(bottom)
$M_{ADM}$, $dM/dr$ and $r$ dependence
with respect to the real part of the
scalar field at infinity, the dilaton, $\re{z_\infty}$.}
\label{aafg}
\end{figure}
\end{document}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{tabular}{lr}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{g1.pdf} &\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{g2.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{g3.pdf}& \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{g3b.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{g4.pdf}& \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{g4b.pdf}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{.}
\end{figure}
\end{document}
\bibitem{Sabra:1996xg}
W.~Sabra, {\it {Symplectic embeddings and special Kahler geometry of
CP(**n-1,1)}}, {\em Nucl.Phys.} {\bf B486} (1997) 629--649,
[\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/9608106}{{\tt hep-th/9608106}}].
\bibitem{Sabra:1996kw}
W.~Sabra, S.~Thomas, and N.~Vanegas, {\it {Symplectic embeddings, the
prepotentials and automorphic functions of SU(1,n) / U(1) x SU(n)}},
\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/9608075}{{\tt hep-th/9608075}}.
\bibitem{Ferrara:2012qp}
S.~Ferrara, R.~Kallosh, and A.~Marrani, {\it {Degeneration of Groups of Type E7
and Minimal Coupling in Supergravity}}, {\em JHEP} {\bf 1206} (2012) 074,
[\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/1202.1290}{{\tt arXiv:1202.1290}}].
\bibitem{Sabra:1996bk}
W.~Sabra, {\it {Classical entropy of N=2 black holes: The Minimal coupling
case}}, {\em Mod.Phys.Lett.} {\bf A12} (1997) 789--798,
[\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/9611210}{{\tt hep-th/9611210}}].
\bibitem{Behrndt:1997fq}
K.~Behrndt and W.~Sabra, {\it {Static N=2 black holes for quadratic
prepotentials}}, {\em Phys.Lett.} {\bf B401} (1997) 258--262,
[\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/9702010}{{\tt hep-th/9702010}}].
\bibitem{Ferrara:2010cw}
S.~Ferrara, A.~Marrani, and E.~Orazi, {\it {Split Attractor Flow in N=2
Minimally Coupled Supergravity}}, {\em Nucl.Phys.} {\bf B846} (2011)
512--541, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/1010.2280}{{\tt arXiv:1010.2280}}].
\bibitem{hepth9611210}
W.~Sabra, {\it {Classical entropy of N=2 black holes: The Minimal coupling
case}}, {\em Mod.Phys.Lett.} {\bf A12} (1997) 789--798,
[\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/9611210}{{\tt hep-th/9611210}}].
\bibitem{hepth9608075}
W.~Sabra, S.~Thomas, and N.~Vanegas, {\it {Symplectic embeddings, the
prepotentials and automorphic functions of SU(1,n) / U(1) x SU(n)}},
\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/9608075}{{\tt hep-th/9608075}}.
\bibitem{Israel:1972vx}
W.~Israel and G.~Wilson, {\it {A class of stationary electromagnetic vacuum
fields}}, {\em J.Math.Phys.} {\bf 13} (1972) 865--871.
\bibitem{Perjes:1971gv}
Z.~Perjes, {\it {Solutions of the coupled Einstein Maxwell equations
representing the fields of spinning sources}}, {\em Phys.Rev.Lett.} {\bf 27}
(1971) 1668.
\bibitem{Sabra:1997yd}
W.~Sabra, {\it {General BPS black holes in five-dimensions}}, {\em
Mod.Phys.Lett.} {\bf A13} (1998) 239--251,
[\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/9708103}{{\tt hep-th/9708103}}].
\bibitem{Youm:1997hw}
D.~Youm, {\it {Black holes and solitons in string theory}}, {\em Phys.Rept.}
{\bf 316} (1999) 1--232, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/9710046}{{\tt
hep-th/9710046}}].
\bibitem{Galli:2012ji}
P.~Galli, P.~Meessen, and T.~Ortin, {\it {The Freudenthal gauge symmetry of the
black holes of N=2,d=4 supergravity}}, {\em JHEP} {\bf 1305} (2013) 011,
[\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/1211.7296}{{\tt arXiv:1211.7296}}].
\bibitem{Kallosh:2012yy}
R.~Kallosh and T.~Ortin,
JHEP {\bf 1209}, 137 (2012)
[arXiv:1205.4437 [hep-th]].
\bibitem{Mohaupt:2008gt}
T.~Mohaupt, {\it {From Special Geometry to Black Hole Partition Functions}},
\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/0812.4239}{{\tt arXiv:0812.4239}}.
\bibitem{thesiskatmadas}
S.~Katmadas, {\em {Extremal black holes in $N=2$ supergravity}}.
\newblock PhD thesis. ISBN: 0471491101, 2011.
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
Deep neural networks (DNNs) have demonstrated excellent performance in source separation tasks, such as speech separation~\cite{hershey2016deep,kolbaek2017multitalker,drude2018deep} and music separation~\cite{jansson2017singing,luo2017deep}.
Permutation invariant training (PIT), for example, trains a DNN to output time-frequency (TF) masks for corresponding sources.
Such a method requires a large number of clean source signals and their mixtures for supervised training.
It is, however, practically difficult to prepare such supervised data in several tasks.
Source separation for audio scene analysis, for example, has to separate daily-life audio events,
which are generally captured only in mixture recordings.
This calls for an unsupervised method that works without any supervised data.
Unsupervised source separation based on spatial information observed in multichannel recordings has widely been studied~\cite{ozerov2010mnmf, kim2010realtime, ono2011stable,otsuka2014bayesian}.
A standard approach is to estimate TF masks from phase and power differences among microphones.
A complex Gaussian mixture model (cGMM)~\cite{higuchi2016robust,otsuka2014bayesian,azcarreta2018permutation}, for example, represents such spatial characteristics as spatial covariance matrices (SCMs)
and estimates TF masks by clustering TF bins.
Since the cGMM is independently formulated at frequency bins, it has permutation ambiguity that the indices of sources are not aligned over frequency bins.
This ambiguity can be resolved by aligning estimated sources based on the direction of arrival (DoA) of each source,
and several methods have been proposed to jointly estimate the TF masks and DoAs~\cite{otsuka2014bayesian,azcarreta2018permutation}.
The directional information also makes it possible to estimate the number of sources~\cite{otsuka2014bayesian,azcarreta2018permutation}, which many methods require in advance~\cite{ozerov2010mnmf, kim2010realtime, ono2011stable}.
The multichannel methods, however, are often sensitive to parameter initialization and degraded when the sources are located close to each other.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\hsize]{overview.pdf}
\vspace{-9mm}
\caption{Overview of cGMM-based unsupervised training.}
\label{fig:overview}
\vspace{-3mm}
\end{figure}
Unsupervised training for neural source separation using multichannel mixture signals has recently gained a lot of attention~\cite{drude2019unsupervised,seetharaman2018bootstrapping,tzinis2018unsupervised,drude2019unsupervised2}.
One approach is to generate supervised data by using multichannel separation methods~\cite{drude2019unsupervised,seetharaman2018bootstrapping,tzinis2018unsupervised}.
This approach suffers from the estimation errors of the multichannel methods mentioned above.
To solve this problem, Drude et~al.~\cite{drude2019unsupervised2} trained a separation network by directly optimizing the likelihood function of a cGMM.
They reported that the performance of a conventional multichannel method was improved by initializing it with the network output.
To solve the frequency permutation ambiguity by using the correlation of TF masks over frequency bins~\cite{sawada2007measuring},
the method requires the number of latent sources in advance.
It is thus difficult to apply this method for recordings of daily-life audio events, which include an unknown number of source signals.
To tackle this problem,
we solve the frequency permutation ambiguity by jointly training separation and localization networks instead of using the correlation of masks (Fig.~\ref{fig:overview}).
The objective function is derived as an evidence lower bound (ELBO)~\cite{kingma2013auto} of a cGMM that has TF masks and DoAs as latent variables.
Given the geometry of a microphone array,
the two networks are trained to respectively estimate the posterior probabilities of the TF masks and DoAs.
Since DoAs can be used for counting the number of sources in a mixture recording,
our framework could be extended to deal with training data including an unknown number of sources by utilizing a non-parametric Bayesian model~\cite{kurihara2007collapsed, otsuka2014bayesian}.
The main contribution of this paper is to resolve the frequency permutation ambiguity with a unified deep Bayesian framework during the unsupervised training.
We show that the separation network can be trained from random weights by maximizing the ELBO without any additional solvers or steps for the permutation problem.
The trained network can be used not only for conducting monaural source separation but also for efficiently initializing a multichannel separation algorithm.
Experimental results also show that the proposed method outperforms an existing initialization method.
\section{Related Work}
This section overviews cGMM-based TF clustering and then introduces unsupervised neural source separation.
\subsection{Complex Gaussian mixture models}
A popular approach to separating a multichannel mixture signal is to mask each TF bin~\cite{araki2009blind,mandel2007algorithm,higuchi2016robust,otsuka2014bayesian,azcarreta2018permutation}.
This mask is conventionally estimated by clustering hand-crafted features at each TF bin ~\cite{araki2009blind,mandel2007algorithm}.
To directly conduct a clustering on a multichannel spectrogram,
probabilistic mixture models for a multichannel observation have been studied~\cite{higuchi2016robust,otsuka2014bayesian,azcarreta2018permutation}.
The cGMM, for example, represents the multichannel spectrogram as a mixture of complex Gaussian distributions with SCMs and power spectral densities of sources~\cite{higuchi2016robust}.
A complex angular central Gaussian mixture model (cACGMM)~\cite{ito2016complex} is defined on a multichannel spectrogram normalized by power at each TF bin.
It has been proven that the expectation-maximization (EM) algorithms for the cGMM and cACGMM are equivalent~\cite{ito2016complex}.
Since these models are independently formulated at frequency bins, they have the frequency permutation ambiguity.
To solve this problem, a cGMM-based method estimates the TF mask and DoA of each source by using an inverse Wishart mixture prior on the SCMs~\cite{azcarreta2018permutation}.
Wishart distributions of this mixture represent potential DoAs characterized by using premeasured steering vectors.
Another cGMM-like spatial model inspired by latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA)~\cite{otsuka2014bayesian} jointly estimates the TF mask and the DoA of each source, and the number of sources in a unified framework.
This joint estimation is conducted with a collapsed Gibbs sampling by assuming a hierarchical Dirichlet process.
\subsection{Unsupervised training of neural source separation}
Unsupervised training of neural source separation has been studied by using visual information~\cite{efrosaudio,rouditchenko2019self} or multichannel recordings~\cite{drude2019unsupervised,seetharaman2018bootstrapping,tzinis2018unsupervised}.
The audio-visual-based methods use video recordings that capture the audio events and corresponding visual events,
such as music signals and corresponding performances~\cite{efrosaudio,rouditchenko2019self}.
These methods are based on the co-occurrence of the audio and visual events and train a network so that the separated signals correlate to the visual events.
Multichannel-audio-based methods, on the other hand, can train a DNN to separate sound sources out of view or behind obstacles.
Tzinis et~al.~\cite{tzinis2018unsupervised} trained a monaural separation network by using source signals estimated by applying $K$-means clustering on interchannel phase differences (IPDs) between two microphones.
Almost simultaneously, Drude et~al.~\cite{drude2019unsupervised} proposed a similar approach that uses signals separated by the cACGMM~\cite{ito2016complex}.
They reported that the cACGMM performance was improved by initializing it with the pre-trained separation network.
Seetharaman et~al.~\cite{seetharaman2018bootstrapping} designed a loss function weighted by a confidence measure of the estimated references.
Drude et~al.~\cite{drude2019unsupervised2} also proposed a novel approach that directly trains a separation network from the cACGMM likelihood.
They applied the method to noisy speech recordings and reported that the performance of automatic speech recognition was superior to that of their previous approach mentioned above.
\section{Deep Bayesian Source Separation}
\vspace{-0.5mm}
The proposed method trains separation and localization networks by using only multichannel mixture signals
and resolves the frequency permutation ambiguity in a unified framework.
This training is based on the LDA model~\cite{otsuka2012bayesian, otsuka2014bayesian}, which has TF masks and DoAs of sources as latent variables.
The objective function is derived as an ELBO of the spatial model, which consists of an expectation of the likelihood function and a Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence between the network outputs and their prior distributions.
Since the existing studies~\cite{otsuka2012bayesian, otsuka2014bayesian} only show Bayesian inference for the LDA model,
we also describe an EM algorithm of the model and initialize it with the pre-trained network.
\subsection{Probabilistic generative model}
\vspace{-0.5mm}
To jointly estimate the TF-masks and DoAs of latent sound sources,
an observed $M$-channel spectrogram $\x@ \in \mathbb{C}^M$ is represented as a sum of $K$ source spectrograms $\s \in \mathbb{C}$:
\begin{align}
\x@ = \sum_{k=1}^K \sum_{d=1}^D \z \w \left( \sv@ \s \right), \label{eq:lda-mix}
\end{align}
where $\z \in \{0, 1\}$ ($\sum_{k=1}^K \z = 1$) is a TF mask that indicates which source is relevant at each TF bin,
$\w \in \{0, 1\}$ ($\sum_{d=1}^D \w = 1$) is a DoA variable that assigns source $k$ to a DoA candidate $d \in \{1, \ldots, D\}$,
and $\sv@ \in \mathbb{C}^M$ is a steering vector for direction $d$.
As in other cGMMs~\cite{higuchi2016robust,otsuka2014bayesian,azcarreta2018permutation}, the TF mask $\z$ is introduced by assuming a sparseness that each TF bin has exclusively one relevant source.
The potential directions $d$ are, in this paper, assumed as directions with an angular interval of 5$^\circ$ on a horizontal plane ($D=72$).
The TF masks and DoAs are estimated as their posterior probabilities by putting prior distributions on them.
Since the activity of each source changes over time frames,
a frame-wise categorical distribution (denoted as $\mathrm{Cat}$) is put on the TF-masks $z_{tfk}$ as follows:
\begin{align}
[\z[tf1], \ldots, \z[tfK]]^\mathsf{T} \mid \zrate@ \sim \distcategorical{\zrate[t1], \ldots, \zrate[tK]},
\end{align}
where $\pi_{tk} \in \mathbb{R}_+$ ($\sum_{k=1}^K \pi_{tk} = 1$) is a model parameter to be estimated.
On the other hand, the following categorical distribution is put on $\w$ as follows:
\begin{align}
\w@ = [\w[k1], \ldots, \w[kD]]^\mathsf{T} \sim \distcategorical{\wrate[1], \ldots, \wrate[D]}. \label{eq:pphi}
\end{align}
where $\wrate \in \mathbb{R}_+$ ($\sum_{d=1}^D \wrate = 1$) is a model parameter.
Each source spectrogram $\s$ is assumed to follow a zero-mean complex Gaussian distribution:
\begin{align}
\s \sim \distcmpnormal{0}{\psd}, \label{eq:s}
\end{align}
where $\distcmpnormal{\mu}{\sigma^2}$ is a complex Gaussian distribution with mean $\mu$ and variance $\sigma^2$, and $\psd \in \mathbb{R}_+$ represents the power spectral density of source $k$.
Using \eqref{eq:lda-mix} and \eqref{eq:s}, an observed mixture signal $\x@$ is found to follow a multivariate complex Gaussian mixture distribution as follows:
\begin{align}
\x@ \sim \prod_{k=1}^K \prod_{d=1}^{D} \distcmpnormal{\bm{0}}{\psd \scm}^{\z\w},
\end{align}
where $\scm = \mathbb{E}[\sv@ \sv@^\mathsf{H}] \in \mathbb{C}^{M\times M}$ is a SCM of direction $d$.
To estimate $\scm$ while constraining it to direction $d$, the following complex inverse Wishart distribution is put on $\scm$:
\begin{align}
\scm \sim \distcmpinvwishart{\nu}{(\nu - M)\scmt}, \label{eq:pw}
\end{align}
where $\mathcal{IW}_\mathbb{C}(\nu, \mathbf{G}) \propto |\mathbf{H}|^{-(\nu+{M})}\exp[-\mathrm{tr}(\mathbf{G} \mathbf{H}^{-1})]$ represents the complex inverse Wishart distribution, $\nu > M$ is a hyperparameter,
$\scmt = \svt@ \svt@^\mathsf{H} + \epsilon \mathrm{I} \in \mathbb{C}^{M\times M}$ is a template SCM for direction $d$.
The $\svt@$ is a template steering vector for direction $d$ and prepared in advance, and $\epsilon\mathbf{I}$ ($\epsilon > 0$) is added to make $\scmt$ positive definite.
\vspace{-1.0mm}
\subsection{Variational inference framework}
\vspace{-1.0mm}
Both the proposed unsupervised training and multichannel separation are based on a variational inference that estimates the posterior distribution $p(\z*,\w*|\x*, \bm{\Theta})$,
where $\bm{\Theta} = \{ \scm[], \psd*, \zrate*, \wrate* \}$ represents the parameters obtained by point estimation.
Since it is difficult to analytically calculate the true posterior distribution $p(\z*, \w* |\x*, \bm{\Theta})$,
we approximate it with the following variational posterior distribution:
\begin{align}
p(\z*, \w*|\x*, \bm{\Theta}) \approx q(\z*)q(\w*).
\end{align}
The variational inference is conducted by maximizing the following lower bound of the log marginal likelihood $p(\x*|\bm{\Theta})$:
\begin{align}
\hspace{-2mm}\mathcal{L} &= \mathbb{E}_q \left[ \log p(\x* \mid \psd*, \scm[], \z*, \w*)\right] \nonumber \\
&\hspace{3mm}- \mathbb{KL}\left[ q(\z*) | p(\z*|\zrate*)\right] - \mathbb{KL}\left[ q(\w*) | p(\w*|\wrate*)\right]. \label{eq:elbo}
\end{align}
The lower bound $\mathcal{L}$ is called an ELBO, and its maximization corresponds to the minimization of KL divergence between the variational and true posterior distributions.
This framework iteratively and alternately updates the variational posteriors $q$ and parameters $\bm{\Theta}$ until convergence.
The SCM $\scm[]$ is updated with maximum a posteriori (MAP) estimation and the other parameters $\psd*$, $\zrate*$, and $\wrate*$ are updated with maximum likelihood estimation.
Since it is also difficult to analytically calculate these variables, we update them by using the ELBO \eqref{eq:elbo} as follows:
\begin{align}
\scm &\leftarrow \frac{\scmt + \sum_{t,k=1}^{T,K} \ez\ew \frac{1}{\psd} \x@ \x@^\mathsf{H}}{\nu + \sum_{t,k=1}^{T,K} \ez\ew + M}, \label{eq:m-step0} \\
\psd &\leftarrow \frac{1}{M} \sum_{d=1}^D \ew \x@^\mathsf{H} \scm^{-1} \x@,\\
\zrate &\leftarrow \frac{1}{F}\sum_{f=1}^F \ez, \hspace{5mm} \wrate \leftarrow \frac{1}{K} \sum_{k=1}^K \ew, \label{eq:m-step}
\end{align}
where $\ez$ is $q(\z=1)$ and $\ew$ is $q(\w=1)$.
\subsection{Training based on amortized variational inference}
By using $N$ mixture signals $\x@^{(n)}$, we train separation and localization networks that respectively estimate the TF mask $z_{tfk}$ and DoA $w_{kd}$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:overview}).
The suffix $^{(n)}$ is hereinafter omitted
because the objective function is a sum of the local loss value for each mixture signal $\x@^{(n)}$.
The separation network (denoted by $g_{tfk}$) takes as input a monaural log-magnitude spectrogram and expects the posterior distribution of the TF mask $q_g(\z=1)$:
\begin{align}
q_g(\z=1) &= \ez = g_{tfk}(\log|\x*|),
\end{align}
where $\log|\x*| \in \mathbb{R}^{T\times F}$ denotes a monaural log-magnitude spectrogram.
We simply take the recording of the first microphone ($m=1$) as the input.
The localization network (denoted by $h_{kd}$), on the other hand, expects the probability that direction $d$ is selected for the $k$-th source $q_h(\w=1)$:
\begin{align}
q_h(\w=1) &= \ew = h_{kd}\left( \bm{\omega} \right),
\end{align}
where $\bm{\omega} =\{ \omega_{kd}\}_{k,d=1}^{K,D}\in \mathbb{R}^{K\times D}$ is an input feature that represents spatial characteristics.
Since it is difficult for networks to directly take complex numbers as input,
we alternatively use the following Gaussian-mixture log likelihood:
\begin{align}
\omega_{kd} &= \sum_{t=1}^{T}\sum_{f=1}^{F} \ez \log \distcmpnormal{\x@; \bm{0}}{\scmt}.
\end{align}
The training of networks $\sep$ and $\loc$ is conducted by maximizing the ELBO $\mathcal{L}$ for each mixture signal in the training data.
For numerical stability,
we fix $\psd$ and $\scm$ to $\avepwr=\frac{1}{TFM}\sum_{t,f=1}^{T,F}\x@^\mathsf{H}\x@$ and $\scmt$, respectively.
More specifically, the proposed training is conducted by iteratively executing the following three steps:
{\vspace{-2mm}%
\setlength{\leftmargini}{13pt}%
\begin{enumerate}
\renewcommand{\labelenumi}{\arabic{enumi})}
\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}
\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}
\item predict TF masks $\ez$ and DoAs $\ew$ with $g_{tfk}$ and $h_{kd}$ for each mixture recording in a mini-batch,
\item update model parameters $\bm{\Theta} = \{ \zrate*, \wrate* \}$ with \eqref{eq:m-step}, and
\item calculate $\mathcal{L}$ and update the network parameters by using a stochastic gradient descent (SGD) method.
\end{enumerate}%
\vspace{-2mm}}%
\noindent The ELBO $\mathcal{L}$ can be calculated as follows:
\begin{align}
\hspace{-2mm}\mathcal{L} &= -\sum_{t,f,k,d=1}^{T,F,K,D} \ez \ew \left( \log|\scmt| + \frac{1}{\avepwr}\x@^\mathsf{H} \scmt^{-1}\x@ \right) \nonumber \\
&\hspace{-2mm}+ \sum_{t,f,k=1}^{T,F,K} \ez \log \frac{\zrate}{\ez} + \sum_{k,d=1}^{K,D} \ew \log \frac{\wrate}{\ew} + \mathrm{const}..
\end{align}
The loss value for a mini-batch is a sum of this local ELBO normalized with $\frac{1}{TF}$.
Our method trains neural networks to estimate posterior distributions for unseen observed data by using a training data prepared in advance.
This kind of training is called amortized variational inference~\cite{ranganath2014black, kingma2013auto}.
\subsection{Multichannel separation based on an EM-algorithm}
Although the trained network $\sep$ can be used to separate sources from a monaural mixture signal,
it can also improve the performance of a multichannel EM algorithm by initializing TF masks with the network output.
The EM algorithm for the cGMM (EM-cGMM) alternately iterates the following E-step and M-step.
The E-step updates the TF masks $\ez$ and DoAs $\ew$ so that the ELBO $\mathcal{L}$ is maximized:
\newcommand{\zrate \prod_{d=1}^D \distcmpnormal{\x@; \bm{0}}{\psd \scm}^{\ew}}{\zrate \prod_{d=1}^D \distcmpnormal{\x@; \bm{0}}{\psd \scm}^{\ew}}
\newcommand{\wrate \prod_{t,f=1}^{T,F} \distcmpnormal{\x@; \bm{0}}{\psd \scm}^{\ez}}{\wrate \prod_{t,f=1}^{T,F} \distcmpnormal{\x@; \bm{0}}{\psd \scm}^{\ez}}
\begin{align}
\ez &\leftarrow \frac{\zrate \prod_{d=1}^D \distcmpnormal{\x@; \bm{0}}{\psd \scm}^{\ew}}{\sum_{K=1}^K \zrate \prod_{d=1}^D \distcmpnormal{\x@; \bm{0}}{\psd \scm}^{\ew}}, \\
\ew &\leftarrow \frac{\wrate \prod_{t,f=1}^{T,F} \distcmpnormal{\x@; \bm{0}}{\psd \scm}^{\ez}}{\sum_{d=1}^D \wrate \prod_{t,f=1}^{T,F} \distcmpnormal{\x@; \bm{0}}{\psd \scm}^{\ez}}.
\end{align}
The M-step, on the other hand, updates the parameters $\bm{\Theta}$ by using \eqref{eq:m-step0}--\eqref{eq:m-step}.
Since the EM algorithm alternately updates these variables until convergence,
the careful initialization is important to avoid falling into a local optimum.
The TF masks $\ez$ are initialized by using the output of the separation network $\sep$.
Since the localization network $\sep$ can potentially overfit to the spatial bias of the training data,
we initialize the DoA $\ew$ by using the following formula instead of the output of $\loc$:
\begin{align}
\ew \propto \exp \left( -\sum_{t=1}^T\sum_{f=1}^{F} \ez \x@^\mathsf{H} \scmt^{-1}\x@ \right). \label{eq:init-w}
\end{align}
\section{Experimental Evaluation}
We conducted an evaluation with speech mixture signals generated by using simulated room impulse responses (RIRs).
\subsection{Dataset}
The mixture signals used in this evaluation were generated by convolving RIRs to source signals in the WSJ0-mix dataset~\cite{hershey2016deep},
which is widely used for neural speech separation~\cite{hershey2016deep,drude2018deep,kolbaek2017multitalker}.
Each of the mixture signals in this dataset included two utterances from two randomly selected speakers in the WSJ0 corpus.
The two speech signals were mixed with a signal-to-noise ratio randomly chosen between $-5$ and $+5$\,dB.
The RIRs applied to the speech signals were simulated by using the image method\footnote{\url{https://github.com/ty274/rir-generator}}~\cite{allen1979image} with the room configuration randomly changed at each mixture signal between 5\,m$\times$5\,m$\times$3\,m and 10\,m$\times$10\,m$\times$4\,m.
We assumed a 4-channel microphone array with the diameter of 8\,cm located at the center of the room.
The source locations of two speech signals were randomly placed in the room.
The reverberation time (RT$_{60}$) was chosen at random between 0.2 and 0.4\,s.
The training and validation sets had 20,000 and 5,000 mixture signals, respectively.
The test set had 3,000 mixture signals whose speakers were separated from the training and validation sets.
We generated these signals with a sampling rate of 8\,kHz to reduce computational and memory costs.
\subsection{Experimental Condition}
The network architectures for the proposed method were experimentally determined as follows.
The separation network $\sep$ had three layers of bi-directional long short-term memory (BiLSTM),
each with 600 units for each direction,
and one fully connected layer followed by a softmax activation.
To reduce the parameters of the localization network $\loc$,
the network $\loc$ consisted of three layers of 1D-convolution with the direction axis $d$ as the convolution axis of each layer.
The filter size of the convolution layers and the number of the filters were respectively set to 1 and 2 ($=K$).
The network $\loc$ outputs $\log \ew$ through a residual connection with the network input.
The separation network $\sep$ and localization network $\loc$ were jointly optimized
using the Adam optimizer~\cite{kingma2014adam}.
The learning rate of the optimizer was initialized to $1.0 \times 10^{-3}$ and scaled down by 0.7 when the training loss value increased compared to that of the last epoch.
The spectrograms $\x@$ were obtained with the short-time Fourier transform (STFT) with a window length of 512 samples and a shifting interval of 128 samples.
The hyperparameters $\nu$ and $\epsilon$ were set to $M + 5.0$ and $1.0 \times 10^{-2}$, respectively.
The template steering vectors $\svt@$ were theoretically calculated under the planewave assumption.
Note that the $\svt@$ and the RIRs used for generating the mixture signals were much different because the sound sources were randomly located on the room under reverberant conditions.
We iterated the EM-cGMM 50 times.
The source signals were obtained by masking the observation $\x@$ with the estimated TF mask $\ez$.
The proposed method was compared with an independent vector analysis (AuxIVA)~\cite{ono2011stable}, and the supervised methods of PIT and deep clustering (DPCL)~\cite{hershey2016deep}.
AuxIVA was evaluated with two channels in all the four channels because it assumes that the number of microphones equals that of sources.
To use all the four microphones, we also evaluated an extension of AuxIVA (AuxIVA+) that conducts AuxIVA with a 4-channel input and clusters the separated signals into two sources~\cite{kitamura2015relaxation}.
The dimension of the latent space for DPCL was set to 20.
The separation networks for PIT and DPCL had the same condition as $\sep$ in the proposed method.
We compared the proposed neural initialization for EM-cGMM with the initialization method proposed by Otsuka et al.~\cite{otsuka2012bayesian,otsuka2014bayesian}.
Given a sufficient number of source classes $K$,
this method splits directions $d=1, \ldots, D$ into $K$ groups and initializes the TF masks $\ez$ by using the directional information:
\begin{align}
\ew &\propto \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
1 & (k-1)\frac{D}{K} \leq d < k\frac{D}{K} \\
0 & \text{otherwise}
\end{array} \right., \label{eq:dini-w} \\
\ez &\propto \exp\left( - \sum_{d=1}^D \ew \x@^\mathsf{H} \scmt^{-1} \x@ \right). \label{eq:dini-z}
\end{align}
We set the number of source classes $K=6$ for this method.
The separation performance was evaluated using the signal-to-distortion ratio (SDR)~\cite{BSSEVAL}.
\subsection{Experimental Results}
\begin{table}
\setlength\abovecaptionskip{0mm}
\setlength\belowcaptionskip{1mm}
\centering
\caption{Averages and standard deviations of SDRs}
\label{tab:sdr}
\newcommand{\color{gray}}{\color{gray}}
\footnotesize
\begin{tabular}{lc|cc|c}
\toprule
\multirow{2}{*}{Method} & \multirow{2}{*}{Init.} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{\# of mics. $M$} & SDR \\
& & train & test & [dB] \\
\midrule
EM-cGMM & $\sep$ & 4 & 4 & \bf 10.6 $\pm$ 4.2 \\
EM-cGMM & \eqref{eq:dini-w}--\eqref{eq:dini-z} & -- & 4 & 9.7 $\pm$ 5.0 \\
\midrule
AVI-cGMM & -- & 4 & 1 & 5.3 $\pm$ 4.5 \\
\midrule
AuxIVA+ & -- & -- & 4 & 9.9 $\pm$ 4.4 \\
AuxIVA & -- & -- & 2 & 5.6 $\pm$ 4.0 \\
\midrule
\color{gray} PIT & \color{gray} -- & \color{gray} 1 & \color{gray} 1 & \color{gray} 7.7 $\pm$ 4.5 \\
\color{gray} DPCL & \color{gray} -- & \color{gray} 1 & \color{gray} 1 & \color{gray} 6.9 $\pm$ 4.7 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The average SDRs for the test set were summarized in Table~\ref{tab:sdr}.
The EM-cGMM initialized with $\sep$ outperformed that with the conventional initialization (\eqref{eq:dini-w}--\eqref{eq:dini-z}).
In addition, it outperformed AuxIVA+, which uses the same number of microphones as the EM-cGMMs.
Fig~\ref{fig:scat} shows the relationship between the DoA differences and SDRs.
The EM-cGMM initialized with \eqref{eq:dini-w}--\eqref{eq:dini-z} significantly deteriorated when the DoA difference was less than 60$^\circ$.
The EM-cGMM initialized with $\sep$ improved the SDRs in such a condition.
The monaural separation with $\sep$ (AVI-cGMM) achieved 5.3\,dB in the average SDR.
When the mixture signals had speakers of difference genders (m+f in Table~\ref{tab:sdr-gender}),
AVI-cGMM outperformed AuxIVA with 2-ch observations.
The initialization with $\sep$ occasionally decreased the performance regardless of the DoA differences,
which is shown as the SDR results around $0$\,dB in Fig.~\ref{fig:scat}.
This is because $\sep$ (AVI-cGMM) deteriorated with the mixture signals of the same gender speakers (m+m and f+f in Table~\ref{tab:sdr-gender}), which are difficult to separate from spectral features.
Since the performances of PIT and DPCL were higher than that of the AVI-cGMM,
the $\sep$ has a potential to separate such signals.
Comparing AVI-cGMM with EM-cGMM initialized with $\sep$,
AVI-cGMM could be further improved by making it possible to estimate $\psd$ and $\scm$ during the training.
This extension will compensate with the mismatch between the fixed parameters $\avepwr$ and $\scmt$ and the observation due to reverberations and reflections.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\vspace{2mm}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\hsize]{scat.pdf}
\vspace{-8mm}
\caption{Scatter plots for the DOA difference of two sources and the corresponding SDR performance.}
\label{fig:scat}
\vspace{-6mm}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\setlength\abovecaptionskip{0mm}
\setlength\belowcaptionskip{1.5mm}
\centering
\caption{\fussy SDRs [dB] averaged by the genders (m: male, f: female) of the speakers in mixture signals.}
\label{tab:sdr-gender}
\newcommand{\color{gray}}{\color{gray}}
\footnotesize
\begin{tabular}{lc|ccc}
\toprule
Method & Init. & m+m & f+f & m+f \\
\midrule
EM-cGMM & $\sep$ & 9.2 $\pm$ 4.9 & \bf 10.2 $\pm$ 5.2 & \bf 11.5 $\pm$ 3.1 \\
EM-cGMM & \eqref{eq:dini-w}--\eqref{eq:dini-z} & 9.5 $\pm$ 4.6 & 10.1 $\pm$ 5.2 & 9.7 $\pm$ 5.1 \\
\midrule
AVI-cGMM & -- & 2.0 $\pm$ 4.0 & 3.0 $\pm$ 4.4 & 7.9 $\pm$ 2.8 \\
\midrule
AuxIVA+ & -- & \bf 10.2 $\pm$ 4.4 & 9.3 $\pm$ 4.5 & 9.9 $\pm$ 4.4 \\
AuxIVA & -- & 5.7 $\pm$ 3.9 & 5.4 $\pm$ 4.1 & 5.7 $\pm$ 4.0 \\
\midrule
\color{gray} PIT & -- & \color{gray} 4.9 $\pm$ 4.4 & \color{gray} 5.2 $\pm$ 4.8 & \color{gray} 10.1 $\pm$ 2.7 \\
\color{gray} DPCL & -- & \color{gray} 3.8 $\pm$ 4.6 & \color{gray} 4.0 $\pm$ 4.8 & \color{gray} 9.6 $\pm$ 2.8 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-2mm}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion}
We presented an unsupervised method that trains neural source separation by using only multichannel mixture signals.
The proposed method trains separation and localization networks by using a cost function based on a cGMM that has the TF masks and DoAs as latent variables.
This joint training enables us to resolve the frequency permutation ambiguity without any additional solvers or steps.
In addition, the trained network can also be used for efficiently initializing the cGMM-based multichannel EM algorithm.
We experimentally confirmed that the proposed initialization method outperformed a conventional initialization method.
To deal with the training data having an unknown number of sources,
we plan to train a separation network while estimating the number of sources with the directional information.
We also plan to improve the proposed training method with the joint estimation of SCMs and power spectral densities.
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0$ (resp. $\mathcal{X},\mathcal{Y}$) be Hilbert spaces (resp. Banach spaces) and $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{X},\mathcal{Y})$ (resp. $ \mathcal{K}(\mathcal{X},\mathcal{Y})$) be the Banach space of all bounded linear operators (resp. compact operators) from $\mathcal{X}$ to $\mathcal{Y}$. We set $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{X})\coloneqq\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{X},\mathcal{X})$, $\mathcal{K}(\mathcal{X})\coloneqq\mathcal{K}(\mathcal{X},\mathcal{X})$ and for $A \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$, $ [A]\coloneqq (A^*A)^{1/2}$.
\begin{definition}\cite{SCHATTEN}
For $x,y \in \mathcal{H}$, define $x\otimes \overline{y}:\mathcal{H}\ni h \mapsto \langle h, y\rangle x\in \mathcal{H}$.
\end{definition}
In Chapter 1 of \cite{SCHATTEN}, Schatten made a detailed study of operators of the form
\begin{align}\label{FIRST EQUATION}
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n (x_n\otimes \overline{y_n}),
\end{align}
where $\{\lambda_n\}_n$ is in $\ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$ and $\{x_n\}_n$, $\{y_n\}_n$ are orthonormal sequences in a Hilbert space. It is then showed that every compact operator (what Schatten called as a completely continuous operator) is of the form in (\ref{FIRST EQUATION}) with $\lambda_n\geq 0, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$ and $\lambda_n\to 0$ as $n\to \infty$ (the spectral theorem for compact operators). Chapters 2 and 3 of \cite{SCHATTEN} contain Hilbert Schmidt $\mathcal{S}(\mathcal{H})$ and trace class operators $\mathcal{T}(\mathcal{H})$, respectively. These two chapters mainly contain results obtained by Schatten and von Neumann in their joint paper \cite{SCHATTENVONNEUMANN}. It was showed that both $\mathcal{S}(\mathcal{H})$ and $\mathcal{T}(\mathcal{H})$ admit norms under which they are complete and they are two sided star closed ideals in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$. It is further proved that the norm on $\mathcal{S}(\mathcal{H})$ comes from an inner product and hence $\mathcal{S}(\mathcal{H})$ is a Hilbert space. Since a Hilbert space is self-dual, a natural question occurs in Chapter 3 of \cite{SCHATTEN} is $-$ what is the dual of $\mathcal{T}(\mathcal{H})$? This is answered in Chapter 4, of \cite{SCHATTEN} which shows that $\mathcal{T}(\mathcal{H})^*=\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ and $\mathcal{K}(\mathcal{H})^*=\mathcal{T}(\mathcal{H})$. Chapter 5 of \cite{SCHATTEN} introduces the definitions of cross norms and norm ideals, (studied in \cite{SCHATTEN4, SCHATTEN5, SCHATTEN6, SCHATTENVONNEUMANN1, SCHATTENVONNEUMANN}). Symmetric gauge functions are also introduced in Chapter 5 of \cite{SCHATTEN}.
Consequently, Chapters 2, 3 and 5 of \cite{SCHATTEN} are extended to Schatten p-classes \cite{RINGROSE, DIESTEL} and operator ideals \cite{DEFANTFLORET, PIETSCH}. It was in 2007, when P. Balazs \cite{BALAZS3} generalized the operator in (\ref{FIRST EQUATION}) by relaxing orthonormal sequences $\{x_n\}_n$, $\{y_n\}_n$ to Bessel sequences (we refer \cite{CHRISTENSEN} for Bessel sequence and its properties). The first question while considering the operator in (\ref{FIRST EQUATION}) is its existence. Whenever $\{x_n\}_n$ and $\{y_n\}_n$ are orthonormal, Schatten considered (for $n, m \in \mathbb{N}$ and $h \in \mathcal{H}$),
\begin{align*}
\left\|\sum_{k=n}^{m}\lambda_k (x_k\otimes \overline{y_k})h\right\|^2=\sum_{k=n}^{m}\sum_{r=n}^{m}\lambda_k\overline{\lambda_r}\langle h, y_k\rangle\langle y_r,h\rangle\langle x_k, x_r\rangle= \sum_{k=n}^{m}|\lambda_k|^2|\langle h, y_k\rangle|^2.
\end{align*}
Bessel's inequality now tells that the operator in (\ref{FIRST EQUATION}) exists. This idea won't work when we drop the orthonormality. In the case $\{x_n\}_n$ and $\{y_n\}_n$ are Bessel sequences, Balazs realized that the operator in (\ref{FIRST EQUATION}) exists and appears as the composition of three bounded linear operators (Theorem 6.1 in \cite{BALAZS3}) acting on Hilbert spaces whose existence comes from frame theory. Balazs and Stoeva studied invertibility of these operators in \cite{STOEVABALAZS1, STOEVABALAZS2, STOEVABALAZS3, STOEVABALAZS4, STOEVABALAZS5}.
In Section \ref{MULTIPLIERSSECTION} we generalize the work of Balazs by considering operator-valued Bessel sequence (see (\ref{GENERALOPERATOR})) and we derive various properties of it and continuity of multipliers. Section \ref{HSCLASSSECTION} extends the class of Hilbert-Schmidt operators and Section \ref{TRACECLASSSECTION} extends trace class operators. The classes which we define in Sections \ref{HSCLASSSECTION} and \ref{TRACECLASSSECTION} will depend upon a conjugate-linear isometry, an operator-valued orthonormal basis and a sequence in a Hilbert space (unlike Hilbert-Schmidt classes and trace classes which do not depend upon orthonormal bases of the Hilbert space (Lemma 2.1 and Lemma 2.3 in \cite{SCHATTENVONNEUMANN})). We show that generalized Hilbert-Schmidt class admits a semi-norm and it is a two sided star closed ideal in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$. We are unable to do this for generalized trace class where we show this class is closed under multiplication and taking adjoints. In both Sections \ref{HSCLASSSECTION} and \ref{TRACECLASSSECTION} we follow the same strategy done in Chapters 2 and 3 of \cite{SCHATTEN}, respectively.
We remark here that certain generalizations of the operator studied by Balazs (in \cite{BALAZS3}) has been studied in \cite{FAROUGHIELNAZ, RAHIMI2, RAHIMIBALAZS2, JAVANSHIRICHOUBIN, ARIASPACHECO}.
In the remaining part of introduction we list some definitions and results which we use in the sequel.
\begin{definition} \cite{DUFFINSCHAEFFER}
A sequence $\{x_n\}_n$ in $\mathcal{H}$ is said to be a frame if there exist $a,b>0$ such that
\begin{align*}
a\|h\|^2\leq \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} |\langle h, x_n\rangle|^2\leq b \|h\|^2, ~ \forall h \in \mathcal{H}.
\end{align*}
Constants $a$ and $b$ are called frame bounds. If $a$ is allowed to take the value 0, then $\{x_n\}_n$ is called as a Bessel sequence with bound $b$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition} \cite{SUN}
A collection $\{A_n\}_n$ in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$ is said to be an operator-valued Bessel sequence (g-Bessel sequence) with bound $b>0$ if
$\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|A_nh\|^2\leq b\|h\|^2,\forall h \in \mathcal{H}.$
\end{definition}
It can be seen easily that if $\{A_n\}_n$ is an operator-valued Bessel sequence in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$ with bound $b$, then $\|A_n\|\leq \sqrt{b}, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$. In fact, $\|A_nh\|^2\leq \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\|A_kh\|^2\leq b\|h\|^2, \forall h \in \mathcal{H}, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$.
\begin{definition}\cite{SUN}
A collection $\{A_n\}_n$ in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$ is said to be
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item an operator-valued Riesz basis (g-Riesz basis) if $\{h \in \mathcal{H}: A_nh=0, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}\}=\{0\}$ and there exist $a,b>0$ such that for every finite $\mathbb{S} \subseteq \mathbb{N}$,
\begin{align*}
a \sum_{n \in \mathbb{S}} \|y_n\|^2\leq \left\| \sum_{n \in \mathbb{S}} A_n^*y_n\right\|^2\leq b \sum_{n \in \mathbb{S}} \|y_n\|^2, ~\forall y_n \in \mathcal{H}_0.
\end{align*}
\item an operator-valued orthonormal basis (g-basis) if $\langle A_n^*y , A_m^*z\rangle =\delta_{n,m} \langle y,z\rangle, \forall n, m \in \mathbb{N} , \forall y,z \in \mathcal{H}_0$, and $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|A_nh\|^2=\|h\|^2,\forall h \in \mathcal{H}.$
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
We refer the reader \cite{SUN} for examples and properties of operator-valued orthonormal bases and Riesz bases.
\begin{definition}\cite{MAHESHKRISHNASAMJOHNSON}
A collection $\{A_n\}_n$ in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$ is said to be an operator-valued
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item orthogonal sequence if $\langle A_n^*y , A_m^*z\rangle =\delta_{n,m} \langle y,z\rangle, \forall n, m \in \mathbb{N} , \forall y,z \in \mathcal{H}_0.$
\item orthonormal sequence if it is orthogonal and $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|A_nh\|^2\leq\|h\|^2,\forall h \in \mathcal{H}.$
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
We provide the proofs of following two theorems for the sake of reader.
\begin{theorem}\cite{MAHESHKRISHNASAMJOHNSON} \label{ORTHONORMALBASISCRITERION}
If $\{A_n\}_n$ and $\{B_n\}_n$ are two operator-valued orthonormal bases in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$, then there exists a unique unitary $U \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ such that $A_n=B_nU, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
(Existence) Define $ U\coloneqq \sum_{n=1}^\infty B_n^*A_n.$ This operator exists in the strong-operator topology, since for every $n,m \in \mathbb{N}$ with $n<m$ and $ h \in \mathcal{H},$
\begin{align*}
\left\|\sum_{j=n}^mB_j^*A_jh\right\|^2=\left\langle\sum_{j=n}^mB_j^*A_jh, \sum_{k=n}^mB_k^*A_kh\right\rangle= \sum_{j=n}^m\left\langle A_jh, B_j\left(\sum_{k=n}^mB_k^*A_kh\right) \right\rangle=\sum_{j=1}^n\|A_jh\|^2.
\end{align*}
Now $ B_nU=B_n(\sum_{m=1}^\infty B_m^*A_m)=A_n, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}.$ We now show that $ U$ is unitary. For,
\begin{align*}
UU^*=(\sum_{n=1}^\infty B_n^*A_n)(\sum_{m=1}^\infty A^*_mB_m)=\sum_{n=1}^\infty B_n^*(\sum_{m=1}^\infty A_nA^*_mF_m)=\sum_{n=1}^\infty B_n^*B_n=I_\mathcal{H}
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
U^*U=(\sum_{n=1}^\infty A_n^*B_n)(\sum_{m=1}B^*_mA_m)=\sum_{n=1}^\infty A_n^*(\sum_{m=1}^\infty B_nB^*_mA_m)=\sum_{n=1}^\infty A_n^*A_n=I_\mathcal{H}.
\end{align*}
(Uniqueness) Let $W \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ also satisfies $B_nU=B_nW=A_n, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$. Then $U=I_\mathcal{H}U=\sum_{n=1}^\infty B_n^*(B_nU)=\sum_{n=1}^\infty B_n^*(B_nW)=W.$
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\cite{MAHESHKRISHNASAMJOHNSON}\label{RIESZBASISCRITERION}
If $\{F_n\}_n$ in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$ is an operator-valued orthonormal basis in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$ and $\{A_n\}_n$ is an operator-valued Riesz basis in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$, then there exists a unique invertible $T \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ such that $A_n=F_nT, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
(Existence) From the definition of operator-valued Riesz basis, there exists an operator-valued orthonormal basis $\{G_n\}_n$ in $ \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$ and invertible $ R :\mathcal{H}\rightarrow \mathcal{H} $ such that $ A_n=G_nR, \forall n \in \mathbb{N} $. Define $ T\coloneqq\sum_{n=1}^\infty F_n^*G_nR.$ Since $\{F_n\}_n$ and $\{G_n\}_n$ are orthonormal bases, similar to the proof of Theorem \ref{ORTHONORMALBASISCRITERION}, $ T$ is well-defined. Now $ F_nT=G_nR=A_n, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$,
\begin{align*}
T (R^{-1}(\sum_{k=1}^\infty G_k^*F_k))= (\sum_{n=1}^\infty F_n^*G_nR) (R^{-1}(\sum_{k=1}^\infty G_k^*F_k)) =\sum_{n=1}^\infty F_n^* (\sum_{k=1}^\infty G_nG_k^*F_k)=\sum_{n=1}^\infty F_n^*F_n =I_{\mathcal{H}}
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
(R^{-1}(\sum_{k=1}^\infty G_k^*F_k))T =R^{-1}(\sum_{n=1}^\infty G_n^*F_n)(\sum_{k=1}^\infty F_k^*G_kR)=R^{-1}(\sum_{n=1}^\infty G_n^*(\sum_{k=1}^\infty F_nF_k^*G_kR))=R^{-1}(\sum_{n=1}^\infty G_n^*G_n)R =I_{\mathcal{H}}.
\end{align*}
(Uniqueness) Let $W \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ also satisfies $F_nT=F_nW=A_n, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$, then $T=I_\mathcal{H}T=\sum_{n=1}^\infty F_n^*(F_nT)=\sum_{n=1}^\infty F_n^*(F_nW)=W.$
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\cite{SCHATTEN}\label{POLARDECOMPOSITIONSCHATTEN} (Polar decomposition)
Let $A \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$. Then there exists a partial isometry $W$ whose initial space is $\overline{[A](\mathcal{H})}$ and the final space is $\overline{A(\mathcal{H})}$, satisfying the following conditions.
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item $A=W[A]$.
\item $[A]=W^*A$.
\item $A^*=W^*[A^*]$.
\item $[A^*]=W[A]W^*$.
\end{enumerate}
The above decomposition of $A$ is unique in the following sense: If $A=W_1B_1$ where $B_1\geq0$ and $W_1$ is a partial isometry with initial space $\overline{B_1(\mathcal{H})}$, then $B_1=[A]$ and $W_1=W$. Further, if $A$ is a finite rank operator, then we can take $W$ as unitary.
\end{theorem}
\begin{definition}\cite{SCHATTENVONNEUMANN}\label{SCHMIDTCLASS}
Let $\{e_n\}_n$ be an orthonormal basis for $\mathcal{H}$. The Hilbert-Schmidt class is defined as
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{S}(\mathcal{H})\coloneqq \left\{ A \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}):\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|Ae_n\|^2<\infty \right\}
\end{align*}
with the norm of $A \in \mathcal{S}(\mathcal{H})$ is $\sigma(A)\coloneqq\left(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|Ae_n\|^2\right)^{1/2}$.
\end{definition}\label{TRACECLASS}
\begin{definition}\cite{SCHATTENVONNEUMANN}
Let $\{e_n\}_n$ be an orthonormal basis for $\mathcal{H}$. The trace class is defined as
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{T}(\mathcal{H})\coloneqq \{AB:A,B \in \mathcal{S}(\mathcal{H})\}
\end{align*}
with the trace of $C \in \mathcal{T}(\mathcal{H})$ is $\operatorname{Tr}(C)\coloneqq \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle Ce_n,e_n \rangle $ and the norm of $C \in \mathcal{T}(\mathcal{H})$ is $\tau(C)\coloneqq\operatorname{Tr}([C])$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}\cite{PIETSCH}
An operator $T \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{X},\mathcal{Y})$ is called nuclear if there exist sequences $\{f_n\}_n$ in $\mathcal{X}^*$ and $\{y_n\}_n$ in $\mathcal{Y}$ such that $Tx=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}f_n(x)y_n, \forall x \in \mathcal{X}$. In this case, we define the nuclear-norm of $T$ as
\begin{align*}
\|T\|_{\operatorname{Nuc}}\coloneqq \inf\left\{\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|f_n\|\|y_n\|:T \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{X},\mathcal{Y}) \text{ is nuclear with } T=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}f_n(\cdot)y_n\right\}.
\end{align*}
\end{definition}
\section{Multipliers for operator-valued Bessel sequences} \label{MULTIPLIERSSECTION}
\begin{theorem}\label{DEFINITIONEXISTENCE}
Let $\{A_n\}_n$ and $\{B_n\}_n$ be operator-valued Bessel sequences in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$ with bounds $b$, $d$, respectively. If $\{\lambda_n\}_n \in \ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$, and $\{x_n\}_n$, $\{y_n\}_n$ are sequences in $\mathcal{H}_0$ such that $\{\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\}_n $ $ \in \ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$, then the map
\begin{align*}
T: \mathcal{H} \ni h \mapsto \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n (A^*_nx_n\otimes \overline{B^*_ny_n})h \in \mathcal{H}
\end{align*}
is a well-defined bounded linear operator with norm at most $\sqrt{bd}\|\{\lambda_n\}_n\|_\infty\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|.$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $n,m \in \mathbb{N}$ with $n\leq m$. Then for each $h \in \mathcal{H}$,
\begin{align*}
&\left\|\sum_{k=n}^{m}\lambda_k (A^*_kx_k\otimes \overline{B^*_ky_k})h\right\|=\sup_{g\in \mathcal{H},\|g\|\leq 1}\left|\left \langle \sum_{k=n}^{m}\lambda_k (A^*_kx_k\otimes \overline{B^*_ky_k})h, g\right \rangle \right| \\
&=\sup_{g\in \mathcal{H},\|g\|\leq 1}\left|\sum_{k=n}^{m}\lambda_k \langle h, B^*_ky_k\rangle \langle A^*_kx_k, g\rangle \right|
\leq \sup_{g\in \mathcal{H},\|g\|\leq 1}\sum_{k=n}^{m}|\lambda_k \langle h, B^*_ky_k\rangle \langle A^*_kx_k, g\rangle |\\
&=\sup_{g\in \mathcal{H},\|g\|\leq 1}\sum_{k=n}^{m}|\lambda_k \langle B_kh, y_k\rangle \langle x_k, A_kg\rangle |
\leq \sup_{g\in \mathcal{H},\|g\|\leq 1}\sum_{k=n}^{m}|\lambda_k |\|B_kh\|\|y_k\|\| x_k\|\|A_kg\|\\
&\leq \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|
\lambda_n|\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\sup_{g\in \mathcal{H},\|g\|\leq 1}\sum_{k=n}^{m} \|B_kh\|\|A_kg\|\\
&\leq \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|
\lambda_n|\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\sup_{g\in \mathcal{H},\|g\|\leq 1} \left(\sum_{k=n}^{m} \|B_kh\|^2\right)^\frac{1}{2}\left(\sum_{k=n}^{m} \|A_kg\|^2\right)^\frac{1}{2}\\
&\leq \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|
\lambda_n|\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\sup_{g\in \mathcal{H},\|g\|\leq 1} \left(\sum_{k=n}^{m} \|B_kh\|^2\right)^\frac{1}{2}\left(\sum_{k=n}^{\infty} \|A_kg\|^2\right)^\frac{1}{2}\\
&\leq \sqrt{b}\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|
\lambda_n|\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\left(\sum_{k=n}^{m} \|B_kh\|^2\right)^\frac{1}{2}\sup_{g\in \mathcal{H},\|g\|\leq 1}\|g\|\\
&=\sqrt{b}\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|
\lambda_n|\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\left(\sum_{k=n}^{m} \|B_kh\|^2\right)^\frac{1}{2},
\end{align*}
and $\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\|B_kh\|^2$ converges with $\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\|B_kh\|^2\leq d \|h\|^2$. Hence $T$ is well-defined linear. Above calculations also show that $\|T\|\leq \sqrt{ab}\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\lambda_n|\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|.$
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
Let $\{A_n\}_n$ be an operator-valued orthonormal sequence in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$, $\{B_n\}_n$ be an operator-valued Bessel sequence in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$ with bound $b$. If $\{\lambda_n\}_n \in \ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$, $\{x_n\}_n$, $\{y_n\}_n$ are sequences in $\mathcal{H}_0$ such that $\{\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\}_n \in \ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$, then the map $T: \mathcal{H} \ni h \mapsto \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n (A^*_nx_n\otimes \overline{B^*_ny_n})h \in \mathcal{H}$ is a well-defined bounded linear operator with norm at most $\sqrt{b}|\|\{\lambda_n\}_n\|_\infty\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|.$
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Even though this is a Corollary of Theorem \ref{DEFINITIONEXISTENCE}, we shall write a direct argument using orthonormality of $A_n$'s.
Let $n,m \in \mathbb{N}$ with $n\leq m$ and $h \in \mathcal{H}$. Consider
\begin{align*}
&\left\|\sum_{k=n}^{m}\lambda_k (A^*_kx_k\otimes \overline{B^*_ky_k})h\right\|^2=\left\langle \sum_{k=n}^{m}\lambda_k (A^*_kx_k\otimes \overline{B^*_ky_k})h,\sum_{r=n}^{m}\lambda_r (A^*_rx_r\otimes \overline{B^*_ry_r})h \right \rangle \\
&=\left\langle\sum_{k=n}^{m}\lambda_k\langle h, B^*_ky_k\rangle A^*_kx_k , \sum_{r=n}^{m}\lambda_r\langle h, B^*_ry_r\rangle A^*_rx_r \right \rangle
= \sum_{k=n}^{m}\lambda_k\langle h, B^*_ky_k\rangle\sum_{r=n}^{m}\overline{\lambda_r}\langle B^*_ry_r,h\rangle \langle A_k^*x_k, A_r^*x_r\rangle \\
&= \sum_{k=n}^{m}\lambda_k\langle h, B^*_ky_k\rangle\overline{\lambda_k}\langle B^*_ky_k,h\rangle\langle x_k, x_k\rangle
=\sum_{k=n}^{m}|\lambda_k|^2|\langle h, B^*_ky_k\rangle|^2\|x_k\|^2 \\
&\leq \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\lambda_n|^2\sum_{k=n}^{m}|\langle h, B^*_ky_k\rangle|^2\|x_k\|^2
=\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\lambda_n|^2\sum_{k=n}^{m}|\langle B_kh,y_k\rangle|^2\|x_k\|^2\\
&\leq \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\lambda_n|^2\sum_{k=n}^{m}\| B_kh\|^2\|y_k\|^2\|x_k\|^2\leq \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\lambda_n|^2\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|^2\|y_n\|^2\sum_{k=n}^{m}\| B_kh\|^2,
\end{align*}
the last sum converges.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{COROLLARYFIRST}
Theorem \ref{DEFINITIONEXISTENCE} holds by replacing the condition $\{\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\}_n \in \ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$ with the condition $\{\|x_n\|\}_n, \{\|y_n\|\}_n \in \ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{remark}
Corollary \ref{COROLLARYFIRST} can also be derived by using Theorem 6.1 in \cite{BALAZS3}. In fact, if $\{\|x_n\|\}_n, \{\|y_n\|\}_n $ $ \in \ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$, then we observe that both $\{A_n^*x_n\}_n$, $ \{B_n^*y_n\}_n$ are Bessel sequences. For, $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle h, A_n^*x_n\rangle |^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle A_nh, x_n\rangle |^2\leq \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|A_nh\|^2\|x_n\|^2\leq \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|^2\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|A_nh\|^2\leq a\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|^2\|h\|^2$. Similarly $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle h, B_n^*y_n\rangle |^2\leq b\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|y_n\|^2\|h\|^2, \forall h \in \mathcal{H}$. Now \text{\upshape(i)} in Theorem 6.1 in \cite{BALAZS3} says that $T$ is a well-defined bounded linear operator with $\|T\|\leq \sqrt{ab}\|\{\lambda_n\}_n\|_\infty\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|y_n\|.$
\end{remark}
A partial converse of Theorem \ref{DEFINITIONEXISTENCE} is given in Theorem \ref{CHARACTERIZATIONRESULTORTHO} (which extends Theorem 1 of Chapter 1 in \cite{SCHATTEN}).
\begin{theorem}\label{CHARACTERIZATIONRESULTORTHO}
Let $\{A_n\}_n$, $\{B_n\}_n$ be operator-valued orthonormal sequences in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$, $\{x_n\}_n$, $\{y_n\}_n$ be sequences in $\mathcal{H}_0$ such that $\{\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\}_n \in \ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$, $\inf_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|>0$, and let $\{\lambda_n\}_n$ be a sequence of scalars. Then the family
\begin{align*}
\{\lambda_n\langle h, B_n^*y_n\rangle A^*_nx_n\}_n
\end{align*}
is summable for every $h \in \mathcal{H}$ if and only if $\{\lambda_n\}_n$ is bounded. Whenever $\{\lambda_n\}_n$ is bounded, the map $ \mathcal{H} \ni h \mapsto \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n (A^*_nx_n\otimes \overline{B^*_ny_n})h \in \mathcal{H}$ is a well-defined bounded linear operator with norm at most $\|\{\lambda_n\}_n\|_\infty\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|.$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
$(\Leftarrow)$ Follows from Theorem \ref{DEFINITIONEXISTENCE} (since an orthonormal operator-valued sequence is an operator-valued Bessel sequence). Note that in this case we can take $a=b=1$.
$(\Rightarrow)$ Let us suppose that $\{\lambda_n\}_n$ is not bounded. Then we can extract a subsequence $\{\lambda_{n_k}\}_{k=1}^\infty$ from $\{\lambda_n\}_n$ such that $|\lambda_{n_k}|\geq k, \forall k \in \mathbb{N}$. For each $m\in \mathbb{N}$, define $ T_m: \mathcal{H} \ni h \mapsto \sum_{k=1}^{m}\lambda_{n_k}\langle h, B^*_{n_k}y_{n_k} \rangle A^*_{n_k}x_{n_k} \in \mathcal{H}$. Also define $ T: \mathcal{H} \ni h \mapsto \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\lambda_{n_k}\langle h, B^*_{n_k}y_{n_k} \rangle A^*_{n_k}x_{n_k} \in \mathcal{H}$. Then for all $r,s \in \mathbb{N}$, $r\leq s$, since $n_k\geq k , \forall k \in \mathbb{N}$,
\begin{align*}
\left\| \sum_{k=r}^s \lambda_{n_k}\langle h, B^*_{n_k}y_{n_k} \rangle A^*_{n_k}x_{n_k}\right\|^2&=\left\langle \sum_{k=r}^s \lambda_{n_k}\langle h, B^*_{n_k}y_{n_k} \rangle A^*_{n_k}x_{n_k}, \sum_{j=r}^s \lambda_{n_j}\langle h, B^*_{n_j}y_{n_j} \rangle A^*_{n_l}x_{n_l}\right \rangle \\
&=\sum_{k=r}^{s}|\lambda_{n_k}|^2|\langle h, B^*_{n_k}y_{n_k} \rangle|^2 \|x_{n_k}\|^2 \leq \sum_{k=r}^{s}|\lambda_{k}|^2|\langle h, B^*_{k}y_{k} \rangle|^2 \|x_{k}\|^2\\
&=\left\|\sum_{k=r}^{s}\lambda_{k}\langle h, B^*_{k}y_{k} \rangle A^*_{k}x_{k} \right\|^2
\end{align*}
which is convergent (by assumption). Therefore $T$ is well-defined bounded linear operator. Further, for each fixed $h\in \mathcal{H}$,
\begin{align*}
\|T_mh-Th\|^2&=\left\|\sum_{k=1}^{m}\lambda_{n_k}\langle h, B^*_{n_k}y_{n_k} \rangle A^*_{n_k}x_{n_k}-\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\lambda_{n_k}\langle h, B^*_{n_k}y_{n_k} \rangle A^*_{n_k}x_{n_k} \right\|^2\\
&= \left\|\sum_{k=m+1}^{\infty}\lambda_{n_k}\langle h, B^*_{n_k}y_{n_k} \rangle A^*_{n_k}x_{n_k} \right\|^2= \sum_{k=m+1}^{\infty}|\lambda_{n_k}|^2|\langle h, B^*_{n_k}y_{n_k} \rangle|^2 \|x_{n_k}\|^2\\
&\leq \sum_{k=m+1}^{\infty}|\lambda_{k}|^2|\langle h, B^*_{k}y_{k} \rangle|^2 \|x_{k}\|^2 =\left\|\sum_{k=m+1}^{\infty}\lambda_{k}\langle h, B^*_{k}y_{k} \rangle A^*_{k}x_{k} \right\|^2\rightarrow 0 \text{ as } m \rightarrow \infty .
\end{align*}
Hence $T_m \rightarrow T$ pointwise which says that $\{T_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$ is bounded pointwise. Now Uniform Boundedness Principle says that there exists $R>0$ such that $\sup_{m \in \mathbb{N}}\|T_m\|\leq R$. Next, for each $m \in \mathbb{N}$, using orthonormality of $B_n$'s,
\begin{align*}
T_m\left(\frac{B^*_{n_m}y_{n_m}}{\|y_{n_m}\|}\right)&=\sum_{k=1}^{m}\lambda_{n_k}\left\langle \frac{B^*_{n_m}y_{n_m}}{\|y_{n_m}\|}, B^*_{n_k}y_{n_k} \right\rangle A^*_{n_k}x_{n_k} \\
&=\lambda_{n_m}\|y_{n_m}\|A^*_{n_m}x_{n_m}
\end{align*}
(the condition $\inf_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|>0$ says that none of the $y_n$'s equals zero). Previous equation along with the observation
\begin{align*}
\left\|\frac{B^*_{n_m}y_{n_m}}{\|y_{n_m}\|}\right\|\leq \frac{\|B^*_{n_m}\|\|y_{n_m}\|}{\|y_{n_m}\|}=\frac{1.\|y_{n_m}\|}{\|y_{n_m}\|}=1
\end{align*}
gives $R\geq\sup_{m \in \mathbb{N}}\|T_m\|\geq \|T_m\|\geq|\lambda_{n_m}|\|y_{n_m}\|\|A^*_{n_m}x_{n_m}\| =|\lambda_{n_m}|\|y_{n_m}\|\|x_{n_m}\| \geq m\|y_{n_m}\|\|x_{n_m}\|\geq m\inf_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|y_n\|\|x_n\|$, $\forall m \in \mathbb{N} $ $\Rightarrow $ $m \leq \frac{R}{\inf_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|y_n\|\|x_n\|}$, $\forall m \in \mathbb{N}$ which is a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
Theorem \ref{CHARACTERIZATIONRESULTORTHO} holds by replacing the condition $\inf_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|>0$ with one of the following conditions.
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item $\inf_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\langle x_n,y_n\rangle| >0$.
\item $\inf_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\inf_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|y_n\|>0.$
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
We apply Theorem \ref{CHARACTERIZATIONRESULTORTHO} by noting
$$ \inf_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\geq\inf_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\langle x_n,y_n\rangle| >0,$$
$$ \inf_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\geq\inf_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\inf_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|y_n\|>0.$$
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}\label{DEFINITION}
Let $\{A_n\}_n$ and $\{B_n\}_n$ be operator-valued Bessel sequences in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$ and let $\{x_n\}_n$, $\{y_n\}_n$ be sequences in $\mathcal{H}_0$ such that $\{\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\}_n \in \ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$. For $\{\lambda_n\}_n \in \ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$, the multiplier for $\{A_n\}_n$ and $\{B_n\}_n$ is defined as the operator
\begin{align}\label{GENERALOPERATOR}
M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}\coloneqq \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n (A^*_nx_n\otimes \overline{B^*_ny_n}).
\end{align}
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
Let $\mathcal{H}_0=\mathbb{K}$ and $\{e_n\}_n$, $\{f_n\}_n$ be Bessel (resp. orthonormal) sequences in $\mathcal{H}$. Define $x_n\coloneqq1, y_n\coloneqq1, A_n: \mathcal{H} \ni h \mapsto \langle h, e_n\rangle \in \mathbb{K}, B_n: \mathcal{H} \ni h \mapsto \langle h, f_n\rangle \in \mathbb{K}, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$. Then $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n (A^*_nx_n\otimes \overline{B^*_ny_n})=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n (e_n\otimes \overline{f_n})$. Thus Definition \ref{DEFINITION} reduces to the operator of the form $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n (e_n\otimes \overline{f_n})$, considered by Balazs \cite{BALAZS3} (resp. Schatten and von Neumann \cite{SCHATTEN}).
\end{remark}
Following theorem collects various properties of $M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{PROPERTIESOFM}
Let $\{A_n\}_n$, $\{B_n\}_n$, $\{C_n\}_n$, $\{D_n\}_n$ be operator-valued Bessel sequences in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$ with bounds $a, b,c, d$, respectively, $\{\lambda_n\}_n, \{\mu_n\}_n \in \ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$, $\alpha \in \mathbb{K}$ and let $\{x_n\}_n$, $\{y_n\}_n$, $\{z_n\}_n$, $\{v_n\}_n$, $\{z_n\}_n$ be sequences in $ \mathcal{H}_0$ such that $\{\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\}_n$, $\{\|y_n\|\|z_n\|\}_n$, $\{\|x_n\|\|z_n\|\}_n$, $\{\|z_n\|\|v_n\|\}_n \in \ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$. Then
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item $M_{\lambda,A,B, x,y}^*=M_{\overline{\lambda},B,A, y,x}$, where $\overline{\lambda}\coloneqq\{\overline{\lambda_n}\}_n$. In particular, if $\lambda$ is real valued, then $M_{\lambda,A,A, x,x}$ is self-adjoint.
\item If $\{\lambda _n\|y_n\|\}_n \in \ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$, $\{A_n\}_n$ is orthonormal and $\{B_n\}_n$ is orthogonal, then $M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}^*=M_{\mu,A,A,x,x} $, where $\mu\coloneqq\{|\lambda _n|^2\|B_n^*y_n\|^2\}_n$. In this case, if $x_n \neq0, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$, then $(M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}^*)^{1/2}$ $=M_{\sqrt{\mu},A,A,x,x} $, where $\sqrt{\mu}\coloneqq\{|\lambda _n|\frac{\|B_n^*y_n\|}{\|x_n\|}\}_n$.
\item If $\{\lambda _n\|x_n\|\}_n \in \ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$, $\{A_n\}_n$ is orthogonal and $\{B_n\}_n$ is orthonormal, then $M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}^*M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}=M_{\gamma,B,B,y,y} $, where $\gamma\coloneqq\{|\lambda _n|^2\|A_n^*x_n\|^2\}_n$. In this case, if $y_n \neq0, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$, then $(M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}^*M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y})^{1/2}$ $=M_{\sqrt{\gamma},B,B,y,y} $, where $\sqrt{\gamma}\coloneqq\{|\lambda _n|\frac{\|A_n^*x_n\|}{\|y_n\|}\}_n$.
\item If $\langle A^*_kx_k, B_n^*y_n\rangle =0 , \forall k, n \in \mathbb{N}$ with $ k\neq n$, then for all $k \in \mathbb{N}$,
\begin{align*}
M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}^k=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n^k\langle A_n^*x_n, B_n^*y_n\rangle ^{k-1} (A^*_nx_n\otimes \overline{B^*_ny_n}).
\end{align*}
In particular, if $\{A_n\}_n$ is orthogonal, then $M_{\lambda,A,A,x,y}^k=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n^k\langle A_n^*x_n, A_n^*y_n\rangle ^{k-1} (A^*_nx_n\otimes \overline{A^*_ny_n}), \forall k \in \mathbb{N}.$
\item $ M_{\alpha\lambda,A,B,x,y}= M_{\lambda,A,B,\alpha x,y}= M_{\lambda,A,\alpha B,x,y}=\alpha M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}$, $M_{\lambda,\alpha A,B,x,y}=M_{\lambda,A,B,x,\alpha y}=\overline{\alpha}M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y} $.
\item $ M_{\lambda+\mu,A,B,x,y}= M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}+ M_{\mu,A,B,x,y}$.
\item $ M_{\lambda,A+C, B,x,y}= M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}+ M_{\lambda,C,B,x,y}$.
\item $ M_{\lambda,A,B+C,x,y}= M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}+ M_{\lambda,A,C,x,y}$.
\item $ M_{\lambda,A,B,x+y,z}= M_{\lambda,A,B,x,z}+ M_{\mu,A,B,y,z}$.
\item $ M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y+z}= M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}+ M_{\mu,A,B,x,z}$.
\item If $\{A_n\}_n$ is orthogonal, then $\|M_{\lambda\mu,A,B,x,y}\|\leq \min\{\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\lambda_n|\|M_{\mu,A,B,x,y}\|,\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\mu_n|\|M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}\| \}$, where $\lambda \mu\coloneqq\{\lambda_n\mu_n\}_n$.
\item (Symbolic calculus) If $\langle A^*_kx_k, B_n^*y_n\rangle =0 , \forall k, n \in \mathbb{N}$ with $ k\neq n$, then $M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}M_{\mu,A,B,x,y}= M_{\nu,A,B,x,y}$, where $\nu \coloneqq \{\lambda_n\mu_n\langle A_n^*x_n, B_n^*y_n\rangle \}_n$. Moreover, if $A_n^*x_n=x,B_n^*y_n=y,\forall n \in \mathbb{N}$, then $M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}M_{\mu,A,B,x,y}=\langle x, y\rangle M_{\lambda\mu,A,B,x,y}.$ In particular, if $\langle x, y\rangle =1$, then $ M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}M_{\mu,A,B,x,y}=M_{\lambda\mu,A,B,x,y}.$
\item If $\{A_n\}_n$ is orthogonal, then $M_{\lambda,A,A, x,x}$ is normal.
\item If $\{T_n\}_n$ in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}_0)$ is such that $\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|T_n\|< \infty$, then $ M_{\lambda,A,TB,x,y}= M_{\lambda,A,B,x,T^*y}$, where $T^*y\coloneqq\{T_n^*y_n\}_n$.
\item If $S \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$, then $M_{\lambda,A,BS,x,y}=M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}S.$
\item If $\{T_n\}_n$ in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}_0)$ is such that $\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|T_n\|< \infty$, then $ M_{\lambda,TA,B,x,y}= M_{\lambda,A,B,T^*x,y}$, where $T^*y\coloneqq\{T_n^*x_n\}_n$.
\item If $S \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$, then $M_{\lambda,AS,B,x,y}=S^*M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}$.
\item If $\{T_n\}_n$ in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}_0)$ is such that $\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|T_n\|< \infty$, then $ M_{\lambda,A,B,x,Ty}= M_{\lambda,A,T^*B,x,y}$, where $T^*B\coloneqq\{T_n^*B\}_n$.
\item If $\{T_n\}_n$ in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}_0)$ is such that $\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|T_n\|< \infty$, then $ M_{\lambda,A,B,Tx,y}= M_{\lambda,T^*A,B,x,y}$.
\item If $\langle C_k^*z_k,B_n^*y_n \rangle=0,\forall k, n \in \mathbb{N}$ with $ k\neq n$, then $M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}M_{\mu,C,D,z,v}=M_{\lambda\mu\langle Cz, Dy\rangle,A,D,x,v}$, where $\lambda\mu\langle Cz, Dy\rangle\coloneqq\{\lambda_n\mu_n\langle C_n^*z_n, D_n^*y_n\rangle\}$. In particular, if $\{B_n\}_n$ is orthogonal, then $M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}M_{\mu,B,D,z,v}$ $=M_{\lambda\mu\langle Bz, Dy\rangle,A,D,x,v}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item $M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}^*= \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}(\lambda_n (A^*_nx_n\otimes \overline{B^*_ny_n}))^*=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\overline{\lambda_n}(B^*_ny_n\otimes \overline{A^*_nx_n})$.
\item
\begin{align*}
M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}^*&=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n(A_n^*x_n\otimes \overline{B_n^*y_n})\left(\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\overline{\lambda_k} (B_k^*y_k\otimes \overline{A_k^*x_k})\right)\\
&=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\overline{\lambda_k} (A_n^*x_n\otimes \overline{B_n^*y_n})(B_k^*y_k\otimes \overline{A_k^*x_k})\\
&=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\overline{\lambda_k}\langle B_k^*y_k, B_n^*y_n\rangle (A_n^*x_n \otimes \overline{A_k^*x_k})\\
&=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\overline{\lambda_n}\langle B_n^*y_n, B_n^*y_n\rangle (A_n^*x_n \otimes \overline{A_n^*x_n})\\
&=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_n|^2 \|B_n^*y_n\|^2 (A_n^*x_n \otimes \overline{A_n^*x_n}).
\end{align*}
Define $T \coloneqq M_{\sqrt{\mu},A,A,x,x}=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_n| \frac{\|B_n^*y_n\|}{\|x_n\|} (A_n^*x_n \otimes \overline{A_n^*x_n})$. Then
\begin{align*}
T^2&=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_n| \frac{\|B_n^*y_n\|}{\|x_n\|}(A_n^*x_n \otimes \overline{A_n^*x_n})\left(\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_k| \frac{\|B_k^*y_k\|}{\|x_k\|} (A_k^*x_k \otimes \overline{A_k^*x_k})\right)\\
&=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_n|\frac{\|B_n^*y_n\|}{\|x_n\|}\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_k|\frac{\|B_k^*y_k\|}{\|x_k\|}\langle A_k^*x_k, A_n^*x_n\rangle (A_n^*x_n \otimes \overline{A_k^*x_k})\\
&=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_n|^2\frac{\|B_n^*y_n\|^2}{\|x_n\|^2}\|x_n\|^2(A_n^*x_n \otimes \overline{A_n^*x_n})=M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}^*.
\end{align*}
Therefore $T=(M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}^*)^{1/2} $.
\item Similar to the proof of (ii).
\item The proof is by induction. When $k=2,$
\begin{align*}
M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}^2&=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n(A_n^*x_n\otimes \overline{B_n^*y_n})\left(\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\lambda_k (A_k^*x_k\otimes \overline{B_k^*y_k})\right)\\
&=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n^2\langle A_n^*x_n, B_n^*y_n\rangle ^{1} (A^*_nx_n\otimes \overline{B^*_ny_n}).
\end{align*}
Assume the result is true for $m$. Then
\begin{align*}
M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}^{m+1}&=M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}^{1}M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}^{m}\\
&=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n(A_n^*x_n\otimes \overline{B_n^*y_n})\left(\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\lambda_k^m\langle A_k^*x_k, B_k^*y_k\rangle^{m-1} (A_k^*x_k\otimes \overline{B_k^*y_k})\right)\\
&=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\lambda_k^m\langle A_k^*x_k, B_k^*y_k\rangle^{m-1}\langle A_k^*x_k, B_n^*y_n\rangle(A_n^*x_n\otimes \overline{B_k^*y_k})\\
&=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n^{m+1}\langle A_n^*x_n, B_n^*y_n\rangle ^{m} (A^*_nx_n\otimes \overline{B^*_ny_n}).
\end{align*}
Hence the conclusion.
\item This is clear.
\item $ M_{\lambda+\mu,A,B,x,y}=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}(\lambda_n+\mu_n) (A^*_nx_n\otimes \overline{B^*_ny_n})=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n (A^*_nx_n\otimes \overline{B^*_ny_n})+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\mu_n (A^*_nx_n\otimes \overline{B^*_ny_n})= M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}+ M_{\mu,A,B,x,y}$.
\item We first note that the sum of two operator-valued Bessel sequences is again an operator-valued Bessel sequence. In fact,
\begin{align*}
\left(\sum_{n=1}^\infty\|(A_n+C_n)h\|^2 \right)^\frac{1}{2}&=\left(\sum_{n=1}^\infty\|A_nh+C_nh\|^2 \right)^\frac{1}{2}\leq \left(\sum_{n=1}^\infty(\|A_nh\|+\|C_nh\|)^2 \right)^\frac{1}{2}\\
&\leq \left(\sum_{n=1}^\infty\|A_nh\|^2 \right)^\frac{1}{2}+\left(\sum_{n=1}^\infty\|C_nh\|^2 \right)^\frac{1}{2}\\
&\leq a\|h\|+c\|h\|=(a+c)\|h\|,~ \forall h \in \mathcal{H}.
\end{align*}
Now $ M_{\lambda,A+C,B,x,y}h=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\langle h,B^*_ny_n \rangle (A_n^*+C_n^*)x_n= M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}h+ M_{\lambda,C,B,x,y}h, \forall h \in \mathcal{H}$.
\item Similar to (vii).
\item This follows from the linearity of $A_n^*$ for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$.
\item This follows from the linearity of $B_n^*$ for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$ and linearity of inner product.
\item For all $h \in \mathcal{H}$, $\|M_{\lambda\mu,A,B,x,y}h\|^2=\|\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\mu_n(A_n^*x_n\otimes \overline{B_n^*y_n})h\|^2=\langle \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\mu_n\langle h, B_n^*y_n\rangle A_n^*x_n, $ $\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\lambda_k\mu_k\langle h, B_k^*y_k\rangle A_k^*x_k\rangle=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_n\mu_n|^2|\langle h, B_n^*y_n\rangle|^2\|x_n\|^2\leq \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\lambda_n| \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\mu_n|^2|\langle h, B_n^*y_n\rangle|^2\|x_n\|^2= \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\lambda_n|^2\|M_{\mu,A,B,x,y}h\|^2\leq \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\lambda_n|^2\|M_{\mu,A,B,x,y}\|^2\|h\|^2$. Similarly $\|M_{\lambda\mu,A,B,x,y}h\|^2\leq$ \\
$\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\mu_n|^2\|M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}\|^2\|h\|^2$.
\item Note that $\{\lambda_n\mu_n\langle A_n^*x_n, B_n^*y_n \rangle \}_n \in \ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$. In fact,
$ \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\lambda_n\mu_n\langle A_n^*x_n, B_n^*y_n \rangle|\leq \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\lambda_n|\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\mu_n|\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|A_n\|\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|B_n\|\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|<\infty.$
Then
\begin{align*}
M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}M_{\mu,A,B,x,y}h&=M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}\left(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\mu_n\langle h,B^*_ny_n \rangle A^*_nx_n\right)\\
&=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\mu_n\langle h,B^*_ny_n \rangle M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}(A_n^*x_n)\\
&=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\mu_n\langle h,B^*_ny_n \rangle\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\lambda_k\langle A_n^*x_n, B^*_ky_k\rangle A^*_kx_k\\
&=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\mu_n\lambda_n\langle h,B^*_ny_n \rangle \langle A^*_nx_n, B^*_ny_n\rangle A^*_nx_n= M_{\nu,A,B,x,y}h.
\end{align*}
\item Comes from (i) and symbolic calculus.
\item First we verify that $\{T_nB_n\}_n$ is an operator-valued Bessel sequence in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$: $ \left(\sum_{n=1}^\infty\|T_nB_nh\|^2 \right)^\frac{1}{2}\leq \left(\sum_{n=1}^\infty\|T_n\|^2\|B_nh\|^2 \right)^\frac{1}{2}
\leq \sup_{n \in \mathbb{N}}\|T_n\|\left(\sum_{n=1}^\infty\|B_nh\|^2 \right)^\frac{1}{2}\leq \sup_{n \in \mathbb{N}}\|T_n\|b\|h\|, \forall h \in \mathcal{H}.$ We next see $\sup_{n\in\mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|T_n^*y_n\|\leq \sup_{n\in\mathbb{N}}\|T_n\|\sup_{n\in\mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|<\infty$. Now $ M_{\lambda,A,TB,x,y}h=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\langle h,(T_nB_n)^*y_n \rangle A_n^*x_n$ $=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\langle h,B_n^*(T_n^*y_n) \rangle A_n^*x_n= M_{\lambda,A,B,x,T^*y}h, \forall h \in \mathcal{H}$.
\item Note that $\{B_nS\}_n$ is an operator-valued Bessel sequence. In fact, $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|B_nSh\|^2\leq b \|Sh\|^2 \leq b\|S\|^2\|h\|^2, \forall h \in \mathcal{H}$. Next, $M_{\lambda,A,BS,x,y}h=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\langle h, (B_nS)^*y_n\rangle A_n^*x_n=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\langle Sh, B_n^*y_n\rangle A_n^*x_n$ $=M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}Sh, \forall h \in \mathcal{H}.$
\item $ M_{\lambda,TA,B,x,y}h=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\langle h,B_n^*y_n \rangle (T_nA_n)^*x_n=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\langle h,B_n^*y_n \rangle A_n^*(T_n^*x_n)= M_{\lambda,A,B,T^*x,y}h, \forall h \in \mathcal{H}$.
\item $M_{\lambda,AS,B,x,y}h=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\langle h,B_n^*y_n \rangle (A_nS)^*x_n=S^*(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\langle h,B_n^*y_n \rangle A_n^*x_n)=S^*M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}h,\forall h \in \mathcal{H}$.
\item $ M_{\lambda,A,B,x,Ty}=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\langle h,B_n^*T_ny_n \rangle A_n^*x_n=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\langle h,(T_n^*B_n)^*y_n \rangle A_n^*x_n= M_{\lambda,A,T^*B,x,y}$.
\item $M_{\lambda,A,B,Tx,y}=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\langle h,B_n^*y_n \rangle A_n^*Tx_n=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\langle h,B_n^*y_n \rangle (T^*A_n)^*x_n=M_{\lambda,T^*A,B,x,y}$.
\item $M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}M_{\mu,C,D,z,v}h=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\langle M_{\mu,C,D,z,v}h,B_n^*y_n \rangle A_n^*x_n=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\mu_k \langle h, D_k^*v_k\rangle \langle C_k^*z_k,B_n^*y_n \rangle A_n^*x_n$ $=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\mu_n\langle C_n^*z_n, D_n^*y_n\rangle\langle h, D_n^*v_n\rangle A_n^*x_n$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
Let $a $ (resp. $b $) be a Bessel bound for $\{A_n\}_n$ (resp. $\{B_n\}_n$).
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item If $\{\lambda_n\}_n \in c_0(\mathbb{N})$, then $M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}$ is a compact operator.
\item If $\{\lambda_n\}_n \in \ell^1(\mathbb{N})$, then $\|M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}\|_{\operatorname{Nuc}}\leq\sqrt{ab}\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\|\{\lambda_n\}_n\|_1$.
\item If $\{\lambda_n\}_n \in \ell^2(\mathbb{N})$ and $\{A_n\}_n$ is orthogonal, then $M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator with
$\sigma(M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y})\leq \sqrt{ab}\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\|\{\lambda_n\}_n\|_2$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item For $m \in \mathbb{N}$, define $M_{\lambda_m,A,B,x,y}\coloneqq\sum_{n=1}^{m}\lambda_n(A_n^*x_n\otimes B_n^*y_n)$. Then $M_{\lambda_m,A,B,x,y}(\mathcal{H})\subseteq\operatorname{span}\{A_n^*x_n\}_{n=1}^m$ and $\|M_{\lambda_m,A,B,x,y}h-M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}h\|=\|\sum_{n=m+1}^{\infty}\lambda_n(A_n^*x_n\otimes B_n^*y_n)h\|\leq$
$ \sqrt{ab} \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\|h\|\sup_{m+1\leq n<\infty }|\lambda_n|$, $ \forall h \in \mathcal{H}$. Hence $\{M_{\lambda_m,A,B,x,y}\}_{m=1}^\infty$ is a sequence of finite rank operators and $\|M_{\lambda_m,A,B,x,y}-M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}\|\leq\sqrt{ab} \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\sup_{m+1\leq n<\infty }|\lambda_n|$ $\rightarrow$ $0$ as $m \rightarrow \infty$. Thus $M_{\lambda_m,A,B,x,y}$ is compact.
\item Define $f_n: \mathcal{H}\ni h \mapsto \langle h,B_n^*y_n \rangle \in \mathbb{K}$ for each $n \in \mathbb{N}$. Then $f_n\in \mathcal{H}^*$ and $ \|f_n\|=\|B_n^*y_n\|$ for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$. This yields $\|M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}\|_{\operatorname{Nuc}}\leq\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|f_n\|\|\lambda_nA_n^*x_n\|=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_n|\|A_n^*x_n\|\|B_n^*y_n\|\leq\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_n|\|A_n^*\|\|x_n\|\|B_n^*\|\|y_n\|\leq \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_n|\|x_n\|\sqrt{ab}\|y_n\|\leq\sqrt{ab}\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_n|\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\| =$
$\sqrt{ab}\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\|\{\lambda_n\}_n\|_1$.
\item Let $\{e_n\}_n$ be an orthonormal basis for $\mathcal{H}$. Then $\sigma(M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y})^2= \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}e_n\|^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\lambda_k(A_k^*x_k\otimes \overline{B_k^*y_k})\|^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\lambda_k(A_k^*x_k\otimes \overline{B_k^*y_k})e_n,\sum_{r=1}^{\infty}\lambda_r(A_r^*x_r\otimes \overline{B_r^*y_r})e_n \rangle=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_k|^2\|A_k^*x_k\|^2|\langle e_n, B_k^*y_k\rangle|^2 =\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_k|^2\|A_k^*x_k\|^2|\langle e_n, B_k^*y_k\rangle|^2=$
$\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_k|^2\|A_k^*x_k\|^2$ $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle e_n, B_k^*y_k\rangle|^2=\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_k|^2\|A_k^*x_k\|^2\|B_k^*y_k\|^2 \leq \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_k|^2\|A_k^*\|^2\|x_k\|^2\|B_k^*\|^2\|y_k\|^2\leq ab \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|^2\|y_n\|^2$ $\|\{\lambda_n\}_n\|^2_2$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
We derive continuity of multiplier in the next proposition.
\begin{proposition}
Let $\lambda_n^{(k)}=\{\lambda_n^{(k)}\}_n$. If $\{\lambda_n^{(k)}\}_{k=1}^\infty $ converges to $\{\lambda_n\}_n $ as $k \rightarrow \infty $ in
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item $\ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$, then $\{M_{\lambda^{(k)},A,B,x,y}\}_{k=1}^\infty$ converges to $M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}$ as $k \rightarrow \infty $ in the operator-norm.
\item $\ell^1(\mathbb{N})$, then $\{M_{\lambda^{(k)},A,B,x,y}\}_{k=1}^\infty$ converges to $M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}$ as $k \rightarrow \infty $ in the nuclear-norm.
\item $\ell^2(\mathbb{N})$ and $\{A_n\}_n$ is orthogonal, then $\{M_{\lambda^{(k)},A,B,x,y}\}_{k=1}^\infty$ converges to $M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}$ as $k \rightarrow \infty $ in the Hilbert-Schmidt norm.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $a$ (resp. $b$) be a Bessel bound for $\{A_n\}_n $ (resp. $\{B_n\}_n $).
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item For each $h \in \mathcal{H}$, $\|M_{\lambda^{(k)},A,B,x,y}h- M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}h\|=\|\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}(\lambda_n^{(k)}-\lambda_n)(A_n^*x_n\otimes \overline{B_n^*y_n})h\|\leq \sqrt{ab} \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\lambda_n^{(k)}-\lambda_n|\|h\|\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|$. Therefore $ \|M_{\lambda^{(k)},A,B,x,y}-M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}\|\leq\sqrt{ab}\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\lambda_n^{(k)}-\lambda_n|\rightarrow 0 $ as $k \rightarrow \infty $.
\item $\|M_{\lambda^{(k)},A,B,x,y}- M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}\|_{\operatorname{Nuc}}=\|\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}(\lambda^{(k)}_n-\lambda_n)(A_n^*x_n\otimes \overline{B_n^*y_n})\|_{\operatorname{Nuc}}\leq\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda^{(k)}_n-\lambda_n|\|A_n^*x_n\|\|B_n^*y_n\| $ $\leq \sqrt{ab}\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|\|y_n\|\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda^{(k)}_n-\lambda_n|\rightarrow 0$ as $k \rightarrow \infty $.
\item Starting with an orthonormal basis $\{e_n\}_n$ for $\mathcal{H}$, we see that $ \sigma(M_{\lambda^{(k)},A,B,x,y}- M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y})^2=\sigma(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}(\lambda^{(k)}_n-\lambda_n)(A_n^*x_n\otimes \overline{B_n^*y_n}))^2=\sum_{r=1}^{\infty}\|\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}(\lambda^{(k)}_n-\lambda_n)(A_n^*x_n\otimes \overline{B_n^*y_n})e_r\|^2=\sum_{r=1}^{\infty}\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda^{(k)}_n-\lambda_n|^2\|A_n^*x_n\|^2|\langle e_r,B_n^*y_n \rangle |^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda^{(k)}_n-\lambda_n|^2\|A_n^*x_n\|^2\|B_n^*y_n\|^2\leq ab \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\|x_n\|^2\|y_n\|^2\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda^{(k)}_n-\lambda_n|^2 \rightarrow 0$ as $k \rightarrow \infty $.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
Following proposition shows that in a special case, the multiplier is bounded below.
\begin{proposition}
Let $\{A_n\}_n$ be an operator-valued orthonormal basis in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$ and $\{B_n\}_n$ be an operator-valued Riesz basis in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$.
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item If $x_n\neq0 \neq y_n, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$, then the map $ S: \ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})\ni \{\lambda_n\}_n \mapsto M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y} \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ is a well-defined injective bounded linear operator.
\item There exists a unique invertible $T \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ such that
\begin{align*}
\sup_{g \in \mathcal{H}_0, g \neq 0}\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\frac{|\lambda_n\langle g, y_n\rangle |\|x_n\|}{\|T^{-1}A_n^*g\|}\leq\|M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}\|\leq \|T\|\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}} |\lambda_n|\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}} \|x_n\| \|y_n\|.
\end{align*}
In particular, if $x_n\neq 0, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$ (resp. $y_n\neq 0, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$), then
\begin{align*}
\frac{\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|\lambda_n\langle x_n, y_n\rangle |}{\|T^{-1}\|}\leq\|M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}\|\quad \left(\text{resp. } \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\frac{|\lambda_n \|x_n\| \|y_n\|}{\|T^{-1}\|}\leq\|M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}\|\right).
\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $T \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ be the unique invertible operator such that $B_n=A_nT, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$, given by Theorem \ref{RIESZBASISCRITERION}.
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item By using Theorem \ref{DEFINITIONEXISTENCE}, $\|S\{\lambda_n\}_n\|=\| M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}\|\leq\|T\|\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}} \|x_n\| \|y_n\|\|\{\lambda_n\}_n\|_\infty$, $\forall \{\lambda_n\}_n \in \ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$ which implies $S$ is bounded. From (v) and (vi) in Theorem \ref{PROPERTIESOFM} we see that $S$ is linear. Now suppose $S\{\lambda_n\}_n=0$ for some $\{\lambda_n\}_n \in\ell^\infty(\mathbb{N})$. Then $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\langle Th,A^*_ny_n\rangle A_n^*x_n=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\langle h,B^*_ny_n\rangle A_n^*x_n =\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n (A^*_nx_n\otimes \overline{B^*_ny_n})h=M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}h=(S\{\lambda_n\}_n)h=0,\forall h \in \mathcal{H}$. By taking $h=T^{-1}A_k^*y_k, k \in \mathbb{N}$ we get $\lambda_k\|y_k\|^2x_k=A_k(\lambda_k\|y_k\|^2A_k^*x_k)=A_k0=0,\forall k \in \mathbb{N}$. Hence $S$ is injective.
\item Let $n \in \mathbb{N}$ be fixed and $g \in \mathcal{H}_0$ be nonzero. We note that $A_n^*g\neq0$. Else $0=A_nA_n^*g=g$, which is forbidden. Upper bound for the operator norm is clear and for lower,
\begin{align*}
\|M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}\|&=\sup _{h\in \mathcal{H}, \|h\|\leq 1}\|M_{\lambda,A,B,x,y}h\|=\sup _{h\in \mathcal{H}, \|h\|\leq 1}\left\|\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\lambda_k\langle Th,A^*_ky_k \rangle A^*_kx_k\right\|\\
&\geq \left\|\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\lambda_k\langle T\frac{T^{-1}A^*_ng}{\|T^{-1}A^*_ng\|},A^*_ky_k \rangle A^*_kx_k\right\|=\frac{|\lambda_n\langle g, y_n\rangle |\|x_n\|}{\|T^{-1}A_n^*g\|}.
\end{align*}
If $x_n\neq 0, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$ (resp. $y_n\neq 0, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$), then we take $g=x_n$ (resp. $g=y_n$) to get
\begin{align*}
&\frac{|\lambda_n\langle x_n, y_n\rangle |\|x_n\|}{\|T^{-1}A_n^*x_n\|}\geq \frac{|\lambda_n\langle x_n, y_n\rangle |\|x_n\|}{\|T^{-1}\|\|A_n^*x_n\|}=\frac{|\lambda_n\langle x_n, y_n\rangle |\|x_n\|}{\|T^{-1}\|\|x_n\|}=\frac{|\lambda_n\langle x_n, y_n\rangle |}{\|T^{-1}\|}\\
\bigg(\text{resp. } \quad &\frac{|\lambda_n\langle y_n, y_n\rangle |\|x_n\|}{\|T^{-1}A_n^*y_n\|}\geq\frac{|\lambda_n| \|y_n\|^2 \|x_n\|}{\|T^{-1}\|\|A_n^*y_n\|}=\frac{|\lambda_n| \|y_n\| \|x_n\|}{\|T^{-1}\|}\bigg).
\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\section{Generalized Hilbert-Schmidt class}\label{HSCLASSSECTION}
Let $\{x_n\}_n$ be a frame for $\mathcal{H}$. In \cite{BALAZS4, FRANKPAULSENTIBALLI}, operators $A\in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ satisfying $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|Ax_n\|^2<\infty$ are studied. In Lemma 1.2 of \cite{FRANKPAULSENTIBALLI} it was showed that if $\{x_n\}_n$, $\{y_n\}_n$ are Parseval frames, then $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|Ax_n\|^2<\infty$ if and only if $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|Ay_n\|^2<\infty$ and in this case, $\sigma(A)^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|Ax_n\|^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|Ay_n\|^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|A^*x_n\|^2$.
In the situation of operator-valued sequences, we set up the following definition.
\begin{definition}\label{SCHMIDTGENERALIZED}
Let $\theta :\mathcal{H}_0 \rightarrow \mathcal{H}_0$ be a conjugate-linear isometry. Let $\{F_n\}_n$ be an operator-valued orthonormal basis in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$ and $\{x_n\}_n$ be a sequence in $\mathcal{H}_0$. Define (the generalized Hilbert-Schmidt class)
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})\coloneqq \bigg\{ A\in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}):& \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|AF_n^*x_n\|^2<\infty, \theta(F_mV^*A^*U^*F_n^*x_n)= F_nUAVF_m^*x_m,\\
&\theta(F_mV^*AU^*F_n^*x_n)= F_nUA^*VF_m^*x_m, \forall n, m \in \mathbb{N},\forall U,V \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}) \bigg\}.
\end{align*}
If $A \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, then we define
\begin{align*}
\sigma_{\theta, F,x}(A)\coloneqq\left(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|AF_n^*x_n\|^2\right)^\frac{1}{2}.
\end{align*}
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
Definition \ref{SCHMIDTGENERALIZED} reduces to the definition of class of Hilbert-Schmidt operators (as well as Hilbert-Schmidt norm), Definition \ref{SCHMIDTCLASS}, given by R. Schatten and J. von Neumann, whenever $\mathcal{H}_0=\mathbb{K}$, map $\theta$ is conjugation, $x_n=1, F_n:\mathcal{H}\ni h \mapsto \langle h, e_n\rangle \in \mathbb{K} , \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$, where $\{e_n\}_n$ is an orthonormal basis for $\mathcal{H}$. Then $\{F_n\}_n$ is an operator-valued orthonormal basis in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathbb{K})$. Observe now that the conditions $\overline{F_mV^*A^*U^*F_n^*x_n}= F_nUAVF_m^*x_m,$ $ \overline{F_mV^*AU^*F_n^*x_n}= F_nUA^*VF_m^*x_m, \forall n, m \in \mathbb{N} $ holds for all $A, U, V\in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$. Indeed, for $A, U, V\in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$, $\overline{F_mV^*A^*U^*F_n^*x_n}=\overline{F_mV^*A^*U^*F_n^*1}=\overline{F_mV^*A^*U^*e_n}=\overline{\langle V^*A^*U^*e_n , e_m \rangle } =\overline{\langle e_n , UAVe_m\rangle}=\langle UAVe_m ,e_n \rangle=F_nUAVe_m=F_nUAVF_m^*x_m, \forall n, m \in \mathbb{N} $. Similarly $ \overline{F_mV^*AU^*F_n^*x_n}= F_nUA^*VF_m^*x_m, \forall n, m \in \mathbb{N},\forall U,V \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}) $.
\end{remark}
\begin{theorem}\label{IDEAL}
Let $ A, B \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, $\alpha \in \mathbb{K}$, $T \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$. Then
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item $ \alpha A\in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(\alpha A)=|\alpha|\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\item $ A+B\in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $\sigma_{\theta, F,x}(A+B)\leq\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)+\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(B)$.
\item $\mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ is a subspace of $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$.
\item $ A^*\in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $ \sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A^*)= \sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\item $ TA\in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(TA)\leq \|T\|\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\item $ AT\in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(AT)\leq \|T\|\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\item If there exist $a>0$ and $2\leq p <\infty$ such that
\begin{align*}
a\|h\|&\leq \left(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle h, F_n^*x_n\rangle |^p\right)^\frac{1}{p},~ \forall h \in \mathcal{H},
\end{align*}
then $\|A\|\leq \sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)/a, \forall A \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(\cdot)$ is a norm on $\mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $\mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ is complete in this norm. In particular, if $\{F_n^*x_n\}_n $ is a frame for $\mathcal{H}$, then $\mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ is complete.
\item If $A^*A\leq B^*B$, then $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)\leq \sigma_{\theta,F,x}(B)$.
\item If $C \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$, then $ C\in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ if and only if $ [C] \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$. In this case, $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(C)=\sigma_{\theta,F,x}([C])$.
\item If $\|A\|<1$, then $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A^n)\rightarrow 0$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$.
\item If $F_n^*x_n$ is an eigenvector for $A$ with eigenvalue $\lambda_n$ for each $n\in \mathbb{N}$, then $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_n|^2\|x_n\|^2.$
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item $\sigma_{\theta, F,x}(\alpha A)^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|\alpha AF_n^*x_n\|^2=|\alpha|^2\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|AF_n^*x_n\|^2=|\alpha|^2\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)^2$, $\theta(F_mV^*(\alpha A)^*U^*F_n^*x_n)$ $=\alpha \theta(F_mV^* A^*U^*F_n^*x_n)= \alpha F_nUAVF_m^*x_m=F_nU(\alpha A)VF_m^*x_m$, $\forall n,m \in \mathbb{N}, \forall U,V \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$. Similarly $\theta(F_mV^*(\alpha A)U^*F_n^*x_n)=F_nU(\alpha A)^*VF_m^*x_m$, $\forall n,m \in \mathbb{N}, \forall U,V \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$.
\item $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A+B)=\left(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|AF_n^*x_n+BF_n^*x_n\|^2\right)^{1/2}\leq \left(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|AF_n^*x_n\|^2\right)^{1/2}+\left(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|BF_n^*x_n\|^2\right)^{1/2}=\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)+\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(B)$, $\theta(F_mV^*(A+B)^*U^*F_n^*x_n)=\theta(F_mV^*A^*U^*F_n^*x_n)+\theta(F_mV^*B^*U^*F_n^*x_n)=F_nUAVF_m^*x_m+F_nUBVF_m^*x_m=F_nU(A+B)VF_m^*x_m$, and $\theta(F_mV^*(A+B)U^*F_n^*x_n)=F_nU(A+B)^*VF_m^*x_m$, $\forall n,m \in \mathbb{N}, \forall U,V \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$.
\item comes from (i) and (ii).
\item For every $ k \in \mathbb{N}$,
\begin{align*}
\sum_{n=1}^{k}\|A^*F_n^*x_n\|^2&=\sum_{n=1}^{k}\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\|F_mA^*F_n^*x_n\|^2=\sum_{n=1}^{k}\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\|\theta(F_mA^*F_n^*x_n)\|^2\\
&=\sum_{n=1}^{k}\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\|F_nAF_m^*x_m\|^2
=\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\sum_{n=1}^{k}\|F_nAF_m^*x_m\|^2\\
&\leq \sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|F_n(AF_m^*x_m)\|^2=\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\|AF_m^*x_m\|^2.
\end{align*}
Therefore $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|A^*F_n^*x_n\|^2<\infty$. A similar procedure gives $ \sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A^*)^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|A^*F_n^*x_n\|^2=\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|F_n(AF_m^*x_m)\|^2=\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\|AF_m^*x_m\|^2=\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)^2.$
\item $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(TA)^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|TAF_n^*x_n\|^2\leq\|T\|^2\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|AF_n^*x_n\|^2=\|T\|^2\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)^2$, $\theta(F_mV^*(TA)^*U^*F_n^*x_n)$ $=\theta(F_mV^*A^*(T^*U^*)F_n^*x_n)= F_n(T^*U^*)^*AVF_m^*x_m=F_nU(TA)VF_m^*x_m $ and $\theta(F_mV^*(TA)U^*F_n^*x_n)$ $=F_nU(TA)^*VF_m^*x_m $, $\forall n,m \in \mathbb{N}, \forall U,V \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$.
\item It is enough to show $(AT)^* \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta, F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ (using (iv)). For, $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}((AT)^*)^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|T^*A^*F_n^*x_n\|^2\leq\|T^*\|^2\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|A^*F_n^*x_n\|^2=\|T\|^2\sigma_{F,x}(A^*)^2=\|T\|^2\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)^2$. Further, $\theta(F_mV^*(AT)^*U^*F_n^*x_n)$ $=\theta(F_m(V^*T^*)A^*U^*F_n^*x_n)= F_nUA(V^*T^*)^*F_m^*x_m=F_nU(AT)VF_m^*x_m $, $\theta(F_mV^*(AT)U^*F_n^*x_n)=F_nU(AT)^*VF_m^*x_m $, $\forall n,m \in \mathbb{N}, \forall U,V \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$.
\item For all $h \in \mathcal{H}$,
\begin{align*}
a\|A^*h\|&\leq \left(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle A^*h, F_n^*x_n\rangle |^p\right)^\frac{1}{p}=\left(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle h, AF_n^*x_n\rangle |^p\right)^\frac{1}{p}\\
&\leq \|h\|\left(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \|AF_n^*x_n \|^p\right)^\frac{1}{p}\leq \|h\|\left(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \|AF_n^*x_n \|^2\right)^\frac{1}{2}=\|h\|\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A).
\end{align*}
This gives $a\|A^*\|=a\|A\|\leq\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)$ which tells $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)=0$ $\Rightarrow$ $A=0$.
Let $\{A_n\}_{n=1}^{\infty}$ be a Cauchy sequence in $\mathcal{S}_{\theta, F,x}(\mathcal{H})$. Then $\|A_n-A_m\|\leq \sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A_n-A_m)/a, \forall n,m\in \mathbb{N}$ tells that $\{A_n\}_{n=1}^{\infty}$ is a Cauchy sequence in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ w.r.t. operator-norm. Let $A\coloneqq \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty}A_n$, in the operator-norm. Choose $N \in \mathbb{N}$ such that $\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\|(A_n-A_m)F_k^*x_k\|^2=\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A_n-A_m)<1,\forall n,m \geq N$. This gives that for each $r\in \mathbb{N}$, $\sum_{k=1}^{r}\|(A_n-A_m)F_k^*x_k\|^2<1,\forall n,m \geq N$ $\Rightarrow$ for each $r\in \mathbb{N}$, $\sum_{k=1}^{r}\|(A_n-A)F_k^*x_k\|^2=\lim_{m\rightarrow \infty}\sum_{k=1}^{r}\|(A_n-A_m)F_k^*x_k\|^2\leq1,\forall n \geq N$ $\Rightarrow$ $\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\|(A_n-A)F_k^*x_k\|^2\leq1, \forall n \geq N$.
Now for $n, m \in \mathbb{N}$ and $U,V \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$, $\theta(F_mV^*(A-A_N)^*U^*F_n^*x_n)=\theta(F_mV^*\lim_{k \rightarrow \infty}(A_k^*-A_N^*)U^*F_n^*x_n)=\lim_{k \rightarrow \infty}\theta(F_mV^*(A_k^*-A_N^*)U^*F_n^*x_n)=\lim_{k \rightarrow \infty}(\theta(F_mV^*A_k^*U^*F_n^*x_n)-\theta(F_mV^*A_N^*U^*F_n^*x_n))$ $=\lim_{k \rightarrow \infty}(F_nUA_kVF_m^*x_m-F_nUA_NVF_m^*x_m)=F_nU\lim_{k \rightarrow \infty}(A_k-A_N)VF_m^*x_m= F_nU(A-A_N)VF_m^*x_m$. Similarly $\theta(F_mV^*(A-A_N)U^*F_n^*x_n)= F_nU(A-A_N)^*VF_m^*x_m$. Therefore $A-A_N\in \mathcal{S}_{\theta, F,x}(\mathcal{H})$. Hence $A=(A-A_N)+A_N\in \mathcal{S}_{\theta, F,x}(\mathcal{H})$.
\item $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|AF_n^*x_n\|^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle A^*AF_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle\leq\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle B^*BF_n^*x_n,F_n^* x_n\rangle=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|BF_n^*x_n\|^2$ $=\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(B)^2 $.
\item Let $C=W[C]$ be the polar decomposition of $C$ as in Theorem \ref{POLARDECOMPOSITIONSCHATTEN}. $(\Rightarrow)$ From (ii) in Theorem \ref{POLARDECOMPOSITIONSCHATTEN} we have $[C]=W^*C$. Now (v) tells that $[C]=W^*C \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$. $(\Leftarrow)$ Polar decomposition of $C$ and (v) give $C \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$. Further, using (v), $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(C)=\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(W[C])\leq\|W\|\sigma_{\theta,F,x}([C])=\sigma_{\theta,F,x}([C])=\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(W^*C)\leq \|W^*\|\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(C)=\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(C)$.
\item $0 \leq\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A^n)\leq \|A^{n-1}\|\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)\leq \|A\|^{n-1}\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)\rightarrow 0$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$.
\item $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_n|^2\|F_n^*x_n\|^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_n|^2\|x_n\|^2.$
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
Theorem \ref{IDEAL} says that $\mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ is a two sided ideal in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$. Further, if assumption in (vii) holds, then it is two sided closed ideal.
\begin{lemma}\label{TRACECLASSEXISTENCELEMMA}
If $ A, B \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, then the series $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle AF_n^*x_n, BF_n^*x_n\rangle |$ converges. Further, if $\mathcal{H}$ and $\mathcal{H}_0 $ are over $ \mathbb{C}$, then
\begin{align*}
4\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle AF_n^*x_n, BF_n^*x_n\rangle =& \sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A+B)^2-\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A-B)^2+i\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A+iB)^2-i\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A-iB)^2
\end{align*}
and if $\mathcal{H}$ and $\mathcal{H}_0 $ are over $ \mathbb{R}$, then
\begin{align*}
4\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle AF_n^*x_n, BF_n^*x_n\rangle =&\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A+B)^2-\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A-B)^2.
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $ \mathcal{H} $ and $ \mathcal{H}_0 $ be over $ \mathbb{C}$. For all $m \in \mathbb{N}$, we have $\sum_{n=1}^{m}|\langle AF_n^*x_n, BF_n^*x_n\rangle |\leq (\sum_{n=1}^{m}\|AF_n^*x_n\|^2)^{1/2}$ $(\sum_{n=1}^{m}\|BF_n^*x_n\|^2)^{1/2}\leq \sigma_{\theta, F,x}(A)\sigma_{\theta, F,x}(B)$. We next use the polarization identity,
\begin{align*}
&4\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle AF_n^*x_n, BF_n^*x_n\rangle =\\
& \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}(\|AF_n^*x_n+BF_n^*x_n\|^2-\|AF_n^*x_n-BF_n^*x_n\|^2+i\|AF_n^*x_n+iBF_n^*x_n\|^2-i\|AF_n^*x_n-iBF_n^*x_n\|^2)\\
&=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|(A+B)F_n^*x_n\|^2-\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|(A-B)F_n^*x_n\|^2+i\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|(A+iB)F_n^*x_n\|^2-i\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|(A-iB)F_n^*x_n\|^2\\
&=\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A+B)^2-\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A-B)^2+i\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A+iB)^2-i\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A-iB)^2.
\end{align*}
The argument is similar if $ \mathcal{H} $ and $ \mathcal{H}_0 $ are over $ \mathbb{R}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}
Given $ A, B \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta, F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, we define
\begin{align}\label{IPWELL}
\langle A, B\rangle \coloneqq \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle AF_n^*x_n, BF_n^*x_n\rangle.
\end{align}
\end{definition}\label{HILBERTSCHMIDTHHILBERT}
Lemma \ref{TRACECLASSEXISTENCELEMMA} says that the series in Equation (\ref{IPWELL}) is well-defined. We observe that $\sigma_{\theta, F,x}(A)^2= \langle A, A\rangle, \forall A \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$.
\begin{proposition}\label{SHIFTPROPOSITION}
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item $\langle A, A\rangle\geq0 ,\forall A \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$.
\item If there exist $a>0$ and $2\leq p <\infty$ such that
\begin{align*}
a\|h\|&\leq \left(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle h, F_n^*x_n\rangle |^p\right)^\frac{1}{p},~ \forall h \in \mathcal{H},
\end{align*}
then $\langle A, A\rangle=0$ implies that $A=0.$
\item $\langle A+B, C \rangle =\langle A, C \rangle+\langle B, C \rangle $, $\langle \alpha A, B\rangle=\alpha \langle A, B \rangle, \forall A,B,C \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H}), \forall \alpha \in \mathbb{K}$.
\item $\overline{\langle A, B\rangle}=\langle B, A\rangle, \forall A,B \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$.
\item $\langle A^*, B^*\rangle=\overline{\langle A, B\rangle}, \forall A,B \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$.
\item If $ A, B \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $T \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$, then $ \langle TA, B\rangle= \langle A, T^*B\rangle$ and $ \langle AT, B\rangle= \langle A, BT^*\rangle$.
\item $ |\langle A, B \rangle| \leq \sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(B), \forall A,B \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item $\langle A, A\rangle=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\| AF_n^*x_n\|^2\geq0$.
\item From (vii) in Theorem \ref{IDEAL}, $0=\langle A, A\rangle=\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)\geq a\|A\|$.
\item $\langle A+B, C \rangle =\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle AF_n^*x_n, CF_n^*x_n\rangle+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle BF_n^*x_n, CF_n^*x_n\rangle =\langle A, C \rangle+\langle B, C \rangle $, $\langle \alpha A, B\rangle=\alpha\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle AF_n^*x_n, BF_n^*x_n\rangle=\alpha \langle A, B \rangle$.
\item $\overline{\langle A, B\rangle}=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle BF_n^*x_n, AF_n^*x_n\rangle=\langle B, A\rangle$.
\item We consider the case $\mathbb{K}=\mathbb{C}$, the case $\mathbb{K}=\mathbb{R}$ is similar. For $A,B \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta, F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, by taking the help of Lemma \ref{TRACECLASSEXISTENCELEMMA}
\begin{align*}
&4\langle A^*, B^*\rangle=4\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle A^*F_n^*x_n, B^*F_n^*x_n\rangle\\
&=\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A^*+B^*)^2-\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A^*-B^*)^2+i\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A^*+iB^*)^2-i\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A^*-iB^*)^2\\
&=\sigma_{\theta,F,x}((A+B)^*)^2-\sigma_{\theta,F,x}((A-B)^*)^2+i\sigma_{\theta,F,x}((A-iB)^*)^2-i\sigma_{\theta,F,x}((A+iB)^*)^2\\
&=\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A+B)^2-\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A-B)^2+i\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A-iB)^2-i\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A+iB)^2\\
&=\overline{\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A+B)^2-\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A-B)^2+i\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A+iB)^2-i\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A-iB)^2}\\
&=4\overline{\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle AF_n^*x_n, BF_n^*x_n\rangle}=4\overline{\langle A, B\rangle}.
\end{align*}
\item $ \langle TA, B\rangle=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle TAF_n^*x_n, BF_n^*x_n\rangle=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle AF_n^*x_n, T^*BF_n^*x_n\rangle=\langle A, T^*B\rangle,$ $ \langle AT, B\rangle=\overline{\langle B, AT\rangle }=\langle B^*, (AT)^*\rangle=\overline{\langle T^*A^*, B^*\rangle}=\overline{\langle A^*, TB^*\rangle}=\overline{\langle A^*, (BT^*)^*\rangle}= \langle A, BT^*\rangle$.
\item $ |\langle A, B \rangle|\leq \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|AF_n^*x_n\|\|BF_n^*x_n\|\leq (\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|AF_n^*x_n\|^2)^{1/2}(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|BF_n^*x_n\|^2)^{1/2}= \sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(B)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\section{Generalized trace class}\label{TRACECLASSSECTION}
\begin{lemma}\label{GTRACECLASSEXISTENCELEMMA}
If $A=BC$, where $B,C \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta, F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, then the series $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle AF_n^*x_n,F_n^*x_n \rangle |$ converges.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $B^*\in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $\langle AF_n^*x_n,F_n^*x_n \rangle=\langle CF_n^*x_n,B^*F_n^*x_n \rangle, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$, the convergence follows from Lemma \ref{TRACECLASSEXISTENCELEMMA}.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}\label{TRACECLASSDEFINITION}
We define the generalized trace class as
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})\coloneqq\{AB: A,B \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})\}.
\end{align*}
If $A \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, then we define the trace of $A$ as
\begin{align*}
\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A)\coloneqq\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle AF_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle.
\end{align*}
\end{definition}
Since $\mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ is closed under multiplication, we naturally have $\mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})\subseteq\mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$.
\begin{lemma}\label{CHARACTERIZATIONST}
For $ A \in\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$, we have \text{\upshape(i)} $\Rightarrow$ \text{\upshape(ii)} $\Rightarrow$ \text{\upshape(iii)} $\Rightarrow$ \text{\upshape(iv)}, where
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item $[A]^{1/2} \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$.
\item $A \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$.
\item $[A] \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$.
\item $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle [A]F_n^*x_n,F_n^*x_n \rangle $ converges.
\end{enumerate}
If $\theta(F_mV^*[A]^{1/2}U^*F_n^*x_n)= F_nU[A]^{1/2}VF_m^*x_m$, $\forall n, m \in \mathbb{N}, \forall U,V \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ -----$(\star)$, then \text{\upshape(iv)} $\Rightarrow$ \text{\upshape(i)}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $A=W[A]$ be the polar decomposition of $A$ as given in Theorem \ref{POLARDECOMPOSITIONSCHATTEN}. Then $[A]=W^*A$.
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item $\Rightarrow$ (ii) Since $\mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ is an ideal in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ and $[A]^{1/2} \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ we have $W^*[A]^{1/2} \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$. But then $A=(W^*[A]^{1/2})[A]^{1/2} \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, from the Definition \ref{TRACECLASSDEFINITION}.
\item $\Rightarrow$ (iii) From Definition \ref{TRACECLASSDEFINITION} $A=BC$ for some $B,C \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$. Then $W^*B \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ which gives $[A]=W^*A=(W^*B)C \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$.
\item $\Rightarrow$ (iv) Let $A=BC$ for some $B,C \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$. From Lemma \ref{GTRACECLASSEXISTENCELEMMA}, $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle [A]F_n^*x_n,F_n^*x_n \rangle $ converges.
\item and $(\star)$ $\Rightarrow$ (i) $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|[A]^{1/2}F_n^*x_n\|^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle [A]F_n^*x_n,F_n^*x_n \rangle<\infty $.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{TRACEIPCONNECTION}
Let $A, B \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, $\alpha \in \mathbb{K}$ and $T \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$. Then
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item $A^* \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $ \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A^*)= \overline{\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A)}$.
\item $\alpha A \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $ \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(\alpha A)=\alpha \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\item $TA \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, $AT \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$.
\item $\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A^*A)=\sigma_{\theta, F,x}(A)^2=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(AA^*)$.
\item If $\theta(F_mV^*[A+B]^{1/2}U^*F_n^*x_n)= F_nU[A+B]^{1/2}VF_m^*x_m$, $\forall n, m \in \mathbb{N}, \forall U,V \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$, then $ A +B \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $ \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A+B)= \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A)+\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(B)$.
\item $\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(B^*A)=\langle A, B\rangle.$
\item $|\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(B^*A)|\leq (\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A^*A))^{1/2}(\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(B^*B))^{1/2}.$
\item $|\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A^2)|\leq\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A^*A).$
\item If $0\leq A\leq B$, then $\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A)\leq \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(B)$.
\item If $F_n^*x_n$ is an eigenvector for $A$ with eigenvalue $\lambda_n$ for each $n\in \mathbb{N}$, then $\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\|x_n\|^2.$
\item If $A\geq0$, $F_n^*x_n$ is an eigenvector for $A$ with eigenvalue $\lambda_n$ for each $n\in \mathbb{N}$ and $\|x_n\|\geq1,\forall n \in \mathbb{N}$, then $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)\leq\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A).$
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $A=CD$ for some $C,D \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$.
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item Since $ \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ is closed under $*$ and $A^*=D^*C^*$ we see that $A^* \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $ \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A^*)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle A^*F_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle =\overline{\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle AF_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle} =\overline{\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A)}$.
\item Since $ \alpha C\in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, we have $\alpha A \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $ \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(\alpha A)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle \alpha AF_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle=\alpha\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle AF_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle=\alpha \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\item $TA=(TC)D \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, $AT=C(DT) \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$.
\item $\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A^*A)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle A^*AF_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\| AF_n^*x_n\|^2=\sigma_{\theta, F,x}(A)^2=\sigma_{\theta, F,x}(A^*)^2=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(AA^*)$.
\item Let $A+B=W^*[A+B]$ be the polar decomposition of $A+B$, given by Theorem \ref{POLARDECOMPOSITIONSCHATTEN}. From (iii) we see that $W^*A,W^*B\in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$. Then from Lemma \ref{GTRACECLASSEXISTENCELEMMA}, both series $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle W^*AF_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle$, $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle W^*BF_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle$ converge which implies $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle [A+B]F_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle (W^*A+W^*B)F_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle<\infty$. Lemma \ref{CHARACTERIZATIONST} now tells that $ A +B \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$. We now easily see $ \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A+B)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle (A+B)F_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle= \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A)+\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(B)$.
\item $\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(B^*A)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle B^*AF_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle AF_n^*x_n, BF_n^*x_n\rangle=\langle A, B\rangle$.
\item $|\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(B^*A)|^2=|\langle A, B\rangle|^2\leq \sigma_{\theta, F,x}(A)^2\sigma_{\theta, F,x}(B)^2= \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A^*A)\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(B^*B).$
\item $|\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A^2)|=|\langle A,A^* \rangle|\leq \sigma_{\theta, F,x}(A)\sigma_{\theta, F,x}(A^*)=\sigma_{\theta, F,x}(A)^2=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A^*A).$
\item $\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle AF_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle\leq \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle BF_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle= \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(B)$.
\item $\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \lambda_n \|F_n^*x_n\|^2 =\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\|x_n\|^2.$
\item $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}(A)=(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|\lambda_nF_n^*x_n\|^2)^{1/2}=(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|\lambda_nx_n\|^2)^{1/2}\leq\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|\lambda_nx_n\|\leq \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\lambda_n|\|x_n\|^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n\|x_n\|^2 =\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A).$
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{TRACIALCOROLLARY}
If $A \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $T \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$, then $ \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(TA)= \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(AT)$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
We shall write $A=CD$ for some $C,D \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$. Using (v) in Theorem \ref{TRACEIPCONNECTION} and (v) in Proposition \ref{SHIFTPROPOSITION}, $ \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(TA)=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}((TC)D)=\langle D, C^*T^*\rangle =\langle DT,C^*\rangle=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(CDT)= \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(AT)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}
For $A \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, we define
\begin{align*}
\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)\coloneqq \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}([A]).
\end{align*}
\end{definition}
Lemma \ref{CHARACTERIZATIONST} says that $A \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ implies $[A] \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$. Therefore $\tau_{\theta,F,x}(\cdot)$ is well-defined.
\begin{proposition}\label{PROPOSITIONTRACE}
Let $A \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$.
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item If $A \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, then $[A] \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)=\tau_{\theta,F,x}([A])$.
\item If $[A] \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $\theta(F_mV^*[A]^{1/2}U^*F_n^*x_n)= F_nU[A]^{1/2}VF_m^*x_m$, $ \forall n, m \in \mathbb{N}, \forall U,V \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$, then $A \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $\tau_{\theta,F,x}([A])=\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\item If $[A]^{1/2} \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, then $A \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}([A]^{1/2})^2=\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\item If $A \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $\theta(F_mV^*[A]^{1/2}U^*F_n^*x_n)= F_nU[A]^{1/2}VF_m^*x_m$, $ \forall n, m \in \mathbb{N}, \forall U,V \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$, then $[A]^{1/2} \in \mathcal{S}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)=\sigma_{\theta,F,x}([A]^{1/2})^2$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We have to argue only for ``=", others are proved in Lemma \ref{CHARACTERIZATIONST}.
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item $\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}([A])=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(([A]^*[A])^{1/2})=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}([[A]])=\tau_{\theta,F,x}([A])$.
\item We write the proof of (i) in reverse way.
\item Using (v) in Theorem \ref{TRACEIPCONNECTION}, $\sigma_{\theta,F,x}([A]^{1/2})^2=\langle [A]^{1/2}, [A]^{1/2}\rangle =\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(([A]^{1/2})^*[A]^{1/2})=\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\item We write the proof of (iii) in reverse way.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{TAULEMMA}
Let $T \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$, $A \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $\theta(F_mV^*[A]^{1/2}U^*F_n^*x_n)= F_nU[A]^{1/2}VF_m^*x_m,$ $ \forall n, m \in \mathbb{N}, \forall U,V \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$. Then $T[A]\in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $|\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(T[A])|\leq \|T\|\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Proposition \ref{PROPOSITIONTRACE} shows that $[A] \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and (iv) in Theorem \ref{TRACEIPCONNECTION} tells that $T[A]\in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$. Next, using (iv) in Proposition \ref{PROPOSITIONTRACE}, $|\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(T[A])|=|\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(([A]^{1/2}T^*)^*[A]^{1/2})|=|\langle [A]^{1/2},[A]^{1/2}T^* \rangle |\leq \sigma_{\theta, F,x}([A]^{1/2})\sigma_{\theta, F,x}([A]^{1/2}T^*)\leq\sigma_{\theta, F,x}([A]^{1/2})^2\|T\| = \|T\|\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{TRACETAUINEQUALITY}
$A, B \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, $T \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ and $\alpha \in \mathbb{K}$.
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item $\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A^*)=\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\item $\tau_{\theta,F,x}(\alpha A)=|\alpha|\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\item If $A+B \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$, then $\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A+B)\leq\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)+\tau_{\theta,F,x}(B)$.
\item $\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)\geq0$.
\item Suppose $\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)=0$. If there exist $a>0$ and $2\leq p <\infty$ such that
\begin{align*}
a\|h\|&\leq \left(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle h, F_n^*x_n\rangle |^p\right)^\frac{1}{p},~ \forall h \in \mathcal{H},
\end{align*}
then $A=0$. In particular, if $\{F_n^*x_n\}_n$ is a frame for $\mathcal{H}$, then $A=0$.
\item $ \tau_{\theta,F,x}(TA)\leq \|T\|\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)$, $ \tau_{\theta,F,x}(AT)\leq \|T\|\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\item $|\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A)|\leq\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\item $\sigma_{\theta, F,x}(A)^2\leq\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A^*A).$
\item If $[A]\leq [B]$, then $\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)\leq\tau_{\theta,F,x}(B)$.
\item If $\|A\|<1$, then $\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A^n)\rightarrow 0$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $A=W[A]$ be the polar decomposition of $A$.
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape(i)]
\item Using Corollary \ref{TRACIALCOROLLARY}, $\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A^*)=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}([A^*])=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(W[A]W^*)=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(W^*W[A])=$
$\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle W^*W[A]F_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle W^*AF_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle [A]F_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}([A])=\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\item $\tau_{\theta,F,x}(\alpha A)=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}([\alpha A])=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(|\alpha| [A])=|\alpha|\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\item Let $B=W_1[B],A+B=W_2[A+B]$ be polar decompositions of $B, A+B$, respectively. By using Lemma \ref{TAULEMMA}, $\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A+B)=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}([A+B])=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(W_2^*(A+B))=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(W_2^*W[A])+\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(W_2^*W_1[B])=|\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(W_2^*W[A])+\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(W_2^*W_1[B])| $ $\leq |\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(W_2^*W[A])|+|\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(W_2^*W_1[B])| $ $\leq\|W_2^*W\|\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)+\|W_2^*W_1\|\tau_{\theta,F,x}(B)\leq\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)+\tau_{\theta,F,x}(B)$.
\item Since $[A]\geq0$, $\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle [A]F_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle\geq0$.
\item $0=\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}([A])=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle [A]F_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\|[A]^{1/2}F_n^*x_n\|^2$ $\Rightarrow$ $[A]^{1/2}F_n^*x_n=0,\forall n \in \mathbb{N}$ $\Rightarrow$ $[A]F_n^*x_n=0,\forall n \in \mathbb{N}$ $\Rightarrow$ $a\|[A]h\|\leq (\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle [A]h, F_n^*x_n\rangle |^p)^{1/p}=(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle h, [A]F_n^*x_n\rangle |^p)^{1/p}$ $=(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle h, 0\rangle |^p)^{1/p}=0, \forall h \in \mathcal{H}$ $\Rightarrow$ $[A]=0$ $\Rightarrow$ $A=W[A]=0$.
\item We start from the polar decomposition of $TA=W_3[TA]$ to get $ \tau_{\theta,F,x}(TA)=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}([TA])=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(W_3^*TA)=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(W_3^*TW[A])=\|W_3^*TW\|\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)\leq \|T\|\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)$. Similarly the polar decomposition of $AT=W_4[AT]$ gives $ \tau_{\theta,F,x}(AT)=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}([AT])=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(W_4^*AT)=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(W_4^*W[A]T)$ $=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(TW_4^*W[A])\leq\|TW_4^*W\|\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}([A])\leq \|T\|\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\item $|\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A)|=|\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(W[A])|\leq\|W\|\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A) = \tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\item From (iv) in Theorem \ref{TRACEIPCONNECTION}, $\sigma_{\theta, F,x}(A)^2=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(A^*A)\leq\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A^*A)$.
\item Using (ix) in Theorem \ref{TRACEIPCONNECTION}, $\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)=\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}([A])\leq \operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}([B])= \tau_{\theta,F,x}(B)$.
\item Using (vi), $0\leq \tau_{\theta,F,x}(A^n)\leq \|A^{n-1}\|\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)\leq\|A\|^{n-1}\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)\rightarrow 0$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
Let $A \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and $\{G_n\}_n$ be an operator-valued orthonormal basis in $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H},\mathcal{H}_0)$. Then the series $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle AF_n^*x_n, G_n^*x_n\rangle|$ converges and $|\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle AF_n^*x_n, G_n^*x_n\rangle|\leq\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
From Theorem \ref{ORTHONORMALBASISCRITERION}, there exists a unique unitary $U \in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ such that $G_n=F_nU, \forall n \in \mathbb{N}$. Now $UA \in \mathcal{T}_{\theta,F,x}(\mathcal{H})$ and hence $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle UAF_n^*x_n, F_n^*x_n\rangle|$ converges i.e., $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle AF_n^*x_n, U^*F_n^*x_n\rangle|=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|\langle AF_n^*x_n, G_n^*x_n\rangle|$ converges. A usage of Theorem \ref{TRACETAUINEQUALITY} gives $|\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\langle AF_n^*x_n, G_n^*x_n\rangle|=|\operatorname{Tr}_{\theta,F,x}(UA)|$ $\leq\|U\|\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)=\tau_{\theta,F,x}(A)$.
\end{proof}
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The first author thanks the National
Institute of Technology Karnataka (NITK), Surathkal for giving financial support. The third author is grateful to the Mohapatra Family Foundation for their support to pursue this research.
\section*{Data Availability}
The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
For a smooth projective variety $X$ over an algebraically closed field
and a positive integer $k$,
the $k$-th Chern character $\mathrm{ch}_k(X)$ is said to be {\em positive}
(resp.\ {\em nef})
if the intersection number $(\mathrm{ch}_k(X)\cdot z)$ is positive (resp.\ non-negative)
for any $z\in\overline{\rm NE}_k(X)\setminus\{0\}$,
where ${\rm NE}_k(X)$ is the cone of numerical effective $k$-cycles
on $X$.
A variety with $\mathrm{ch}_1(X)$ positive is nothing but a Fano variety.
Fano varieties with $\mathrm{ch}_2(X)$ nef are called {\em 2-Fano manifolds}
and they are first studied by de Jong--Starr \cite{ds}
in order to investigate the existence of rational surfaces on a Fano variety.
Fano $d$-folds with $\mathrm{ch}_2(X)$ positive and index $\geq d-2$
are classified in \cite{ac}.
In this paper, we focus on the toric case.
A {\em toric manifold} is a smooth complete toric variety.
For $d\ge 2$,
the $d$-dimensional projective space $\mathbb{P}^d$ is a toric manifold
and one can easily see that the second Chern character $\ch_2(\mathbb{P}^d)$ is positive.
On the other hand,
we do not know toric manifolds whose second Chern character
is positive other than projective spaces
at the present moment. Therefore,
we study projective toric manifolds of Picard number three in order to
find a new example of such toric manifolds. However, on the contrary,
we show the following:
\begin{thm}[Theorem \ref{mainthm}]\label{introthm}
The second Chern character of
any projective toric manifold of Picard number three which does not have
a Fano contraction is not {\em nef}.
\end{thm}
Moreover, by combining Theorem \ref{introthm} with
the known result in \cite{sato3} (see Theorem \ref{extremalsato}), we obtain the following:
\begin{cor}[Corollary \ref{maincor}]
Let $X$ be a smooth projective toric $d$-fold of Picard number at most three. If
the second Chern character $\ch_2(X)$ of $X$ is {\em positive}, then $X$ is
isomorphic to the $d$-dimensional projective space $\mathbb{P}^d$.
\end{cor}
Also, we deal with the positivity of higher Chern characters of projective toric manifolds.
In contrast to the second Chern character,
we show that there exists a projective toric manifold with $\ch_k(X)$ positive
other than the projective space for each $k \geq 3$.
We also give some phenomena which do not appear
in the case of the positivity of the second Chern character.
\medskip
This paper is organized as follows: In Section \ref{junbi}, we collect
basic results in the toric geometry. We define the positivity
of Chern characters for a projective toric manifold. Section \ref{pic3calc}
is devoted to the calculation of intersection numbers on
projective toric manifolds of Picard number three which admit no
Fano contraction. As a result, we can show that the second Chern characters
of such manifolds are not nef.
In Section \ref{highercase}, we introduce various phenomena about
the positivity of higher Chern characters.
\begin{ack}
The authors would like to thank Professor Osamu Fujino for his supports.
The first author was partially supported by JSPS KAKENHI
Grant Number JP18K03262.
The second author was partially supported
by JSPS KAKENHI
Grant Number JP18J00022.
\end{ack}
\section{Preliminaries}\label{junbi}
In this section, we introduce the fundamental notation and concepts in the toric geometry.
For details, please see
\cite{cls}, \cite{fulton} and \cite{oda} for the toric geometry. Also see
\cite{fujino-sato}, \cite{matsuki} and \cite{reid} for
the toric Mori theory.
We will work over an algebraically closed field $K=\overline{K}$.
Let $N:=\mathbb{Z}^d$, $M:=\Hom_{\mathbb{Z}}(N,\mathbb{Z})$,
$N_{\mathbb{R}}:=N\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}\mathbb{R}$ and
$M_{\mathbb{R}}:=M\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}\mathbb{R}$.
$\Cone(S)$
stands for the cone generated by $S\subset N_{\mathbb{R}}$.
For a fan $\Sigma$ in $N$, we denote by $X=X_\Sigma$
the toric $d$-fold associated to $\Sigma$.
We denote by $T=T_N$ the algebraic torus for $N$.
For a smooth complete fan $\Sigma$, put
\[
\G(\Sigma):=\left\{\mbox{the primitive generators of
$1$-dimensional cones in $\Sigma$}\right\}\subset N.
\]
For a cone $\sigma\in\Sigma$,
we put $\G(\sigma):=\sigma\cap\G(\Sigma)$, that is, the set of
primitive generators of
$\sigma$.
For any $x\in\G(\Sigma)$, there is the corresponding torus invariant
divisor $D_x$ on $X$.
It is well-known that there exists the following isomorphism
of abelian groups:
\[
{\mathrm A}_1(X)\cong
\left\{(a_x)_{x\in\G(\Sigma)}\in \mathbb{Z}^{\G(\Sigma)}\,\left|\,
\sum_{x\in\G(\Sigma)}a_xx=0\right.\right\},
\]
where ${\mathrm A}_1(X)$ is the group of numerical $1$-cycles on $X$.
Thus, we can regard a linear relation among elements in $\G(\Sigma)$ as
a numerical $1$-cycle on $X$.
For a $(d-1)$-dimensional cone $\tau\in\Sigma$, there exists a linear relation
\[
y_1+y_2+a_1x_1+\cdots+a_{d-1}x_{d-1}=0,
\]
where $\G(\tau)=\{x_1,\ldots,x_{d-1}\}$, $a_1,\ldots,a_{d-1}\in\mathbb{Z}$ and
for $\{y_1,y_2\}\subset\G(\Sigma)$,
$\G(\tau)\cup\{y_1\}$ and $\G(\tau)\cup\{y_2\}$ generate
maximal cones in $\Sigma$.
This linear relation corresponds to the torus invariant curve $C_{\tau}$
associated to $\tau$. We remark that
\[
2+a_1+\cdots+a_{d-1}=(-K_X\cdot C_{\tau}).
\]
The following relation is convenient to describe a complete smooth fan:
\begin{defn}[{\cite[Definitions 2.6, 2.7 and 2.8]{bat1}}]\label{pcpc}
Let $X=X_\Sigma$ be a toric manifold.
We call a nonempty subset $P\subset \G(\Sigma)$ a {\em primitive collection} in
$\Sigma$ if $P$ does not generate a cone in $\Sigma$, while
any proper subset of $P$ generates a cone in $\Sigma$.
For a primitive collection $P=\{x_1,\ldots,x_r\}$, there exists the unique cone
$\sigma(P)\in\Sigma$ such that $x_1+\cdots+x_r$ is contained in the
relative interior of $\sigma(P)$. Put $\G(\sigma)=
\{y_1,\ldots,y_s\}$. Then, we have a linear relation
\[
x_1+\cdots+x_r=a_1y_1+\cdots+a_sy_s\ (a_1,\ldots,a_s\in\mathbb{Z}_{>0}).
\]
We call this relation the {\em primitive relation} of $P$.
Thus, by the above argument,
we obtain the numerical $1$-cycle $r(P)\in{\mathrm A}_1(X)$ for any
primitive collection $P\subset\G(\Sigma)$.
We remark that
\[
r-(a_1+\cdots+a_s)=\left(-K_X\cdot r(P)
\right).
\]
\end{defn}
We can characterize toric Fano manifolds using the notion of primitive relations
as follows:
\begin{thm}[{\cite[Proposition 2.3.6]{bat2}}]\label{Fano}
Let $X=X_\Sigma$ be a toric manifold.
Then $X$ is Fano if and only if $\left(-K_X\cdot r(P)\right)>0$
for any primitive collection $P$ in $\Sigma$.
\end{thm}
In this paper, we study the positivity of the $k$-th Chern character $\ch_k(X)$ for
a smooth projective toric $d$-fold $X=X_\Sigma$.
Let $D_1,\ldots,D_n$ be the torus invariant prime divisors on $X$. Then,
$\ch_k(X)$ is described as
\[
\ch_k(X)=\frac{1}{k!}\left(D_1^k+\cdots+D_n^k\right).
\]
The following proposition is fundamental for our theory.
The proof is completely similar to the one for
\cite[Proposition 2.26]{oda} in the Japanese version.
We describe a sketch of the proof for the reader's convenience.
\begin{prop}\label{torusinv}
Let $X=X_\Sigma$ be a toric manifold of $\dim X=d$ and $1\le k\le d$. For any $k$-dimensional
irreducible closed subvariety $Y\subset X$, there exist torus invariant
$k$-dimensional irreducible closed subvarieties $Y_1,\ldots,Y_l$ such that
$Y$ is numerically equivalent to
\[
a_1Y_1+\cdots+a_lY_l
\]
for positive integers $a_1,\ldots,a_l$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}[Sketch of the proof]
Let $\V(\sigma)$ be the smallest torus invariant irreducible closed subvariety
associated to a cone $\sigma\in\Sigma$
which contains $Y$. Obviously, $\dim \sigma\le d-k$. So, there exists a
$(d-k)$-dimensional cone $\tau\in\Sigma$ such that
$\sigma$ is a face of $\tau$.
For $n\in\left(\relint (\tau)\right)\cap N$, where $\relint (\tau)$
stands for the relative interior of $\tau$,
let $\gamma_n:K^{\times}\to T$ be the corresponding one-parameter subgroup.
For a morphism
\[
\begin{array}{cccc}
\Phi: & \V(\sigma)\times K^{\times} & \to & \V(\sigma)\times K^{\times}, \\
&\rotatebox{90}{$\in$} & & \rotatebox{90}{$\in$} \\
&(u,\lambda) & \mapsto & (\gamma_n(\lambda)u,\lambda)
\end{array}
\]
let $Z:=\overline{\Phi\left(Y\times K^{\times}\right)}$ be the closure of
$\Phi\left(Y\times K^{\times}\right)$ in
$\V(\sigma)\times K$ and $\pr_2:Z\to K$ the second projection. Then,
there exist $(d-k)$-dimensional cones $\tau_1,\ldots,\tau_l$ which contain $\sigma$
as a face such that
\[
\pr_2^{-1}(1)=Y,\mbox{ while }\pr_2^{-1}(0)=\V(\tau_1)\cup\cdots\cup\V(\tau_l)
\]
as sets, where $\V(\tau_1),\ldots,\V(\tau_l)$ are the
torus invariant irreducible closed subvarieties
associated to $\tau_1,\ldots,\tau_l$, respectively
(see \cite[Proposition 3.2.2]{cls} and \cite[Proposition 1.6 (v)]{oda}).
Therefore, $Y$ is rationally equivalent to
\[
a_1\V(\tau_1)+\cdots+a_l\V(\tau_l)
\]
for positive integers $a_1,\ldots,a_l$.
In particular, they are numerically equivalent.
\end{proof}
Proposition \ref{torusinv} tells us that for a toric manifold $X$,
we may define the positivity (resp. non-negativity) of $\ch_k(X)$ as follows:
\begin{defn}\label{positivedef}
Let $X$ be a toric manifold of $\dim X=d$. For $1\le k\le d$, we say
$\ch_k(X)$ is {\em positive} (resp. {\em nef}) if $(\ch_k(X)\cdot Y)>0$ (resp. $\ge 0$)
for any
$k$-dimensional closed torus invariant subvariety $Y\subset X$.
When $\ch_k(X)$ is positive (resp. nef), we say $X$ is $\ch_k$-{\em positive} (resp. $\ch_k$-{\em nef}).
\end{defn}
\begin{rem}
When $k=1$, we have $\ch_1(X)=\mathrm{c}_1(X)=-K_X$. So, a $\ch_1$-positive (resp. $\ch_1$-nef)
toric manifold is nothing but a
toric Fano (resp. weak Fano) manifold.
\end{rem}
It is not difficult to see that the $d$-dimensional projective space $\mathbb{P}^d$ is
$\ch_k$-positive for $1\le k\le d$. Moreover, for $k=2$, the following holds:
\begin{thm}[{\cite[Theorem 1.3]{sato3}}]\label{extremalsato}
Let $X=X_\Sigma$ be a smooth projective toric $d$-fold.
If $X=X_\Sigma$ is $\ch_2$-positive and
$X$ has a Fano contraction, then $X\cong\mathbb{P}^d$.
In particular, if $\rho(X)=2$, then $X$ is not $\ch_2$-positive.
\end{thm}
\section{Toric manifolds of Picard number three}\label{pic3calc}
In this section, we determine whether a projective toric manifold $X$ of
$\rho(X)=3$ is $\ch_2$-positive or not. By Theorem \ref{extremalsato},
we may assume $X$ has no Fano contraction.
We use the notation of \cite{bat1} throughout this section:
\begin{thm}[{\cite[Theorem 6.6]{bat1}}]\label{batpic3}
Let $X=X_\Sigma$ be a projective toric manifold of Picard number three.
If $X$ has no Fano contraction, then the fan $\Sigma$ is
explicitly described as follows:
Let
\[
\G(\Sigma)=\{
v_1,\ldots,v_{p_0},
y_1,\ldots,y_{p_1},
z_1,\ldots,z_{p_2},
t_1,\ldots,t_{p_3},
u_1,\ldots,u_{p_4}
\},
\]
where $p_0,p_1,p_2,p_3,p_4$ are positive integers and
$p_0+p_1+p_2+p_3+p_4-3=d:=\dim X$. Then, the primitive relations of $\Sigma$ are
\[
v_1+\cdots+v_{p_0}+y_{1}+\cdots+y_{p_1}=c_2z_2+\cdots+c_{p_2}z_{p_2}+(b_1+1)t_1+\cdots+(b_{p_3}+1)t_{p_3},
\]
\[
y_1+\cdots+y_{p_1}+z_1+\cdots+z_{p_2}=u_1+\cdots+u_{p_4},
\]
\[
z_1+\cdots+z_{p_2}+t_1+\cdots+t_{p_3}=0,
\]
\[
t_1+\cdots+t_{p_3}+u_1+\cdots+u_{p_4}=y_{1}+\cdots+y_{p_1}\mbox{ and}
\]
\[
u_1+\cdots+u_{p_4}+v_1+\cdots+v_{p_0}=c_2z_2+\cdots+c_{p_2}z_{p_2}+b_1t_1+\cdots+b_{p_3}t_{p_3}
\]
for $b_1,\ldots,b_{p_3},c_2,\ldots,c_{p_2}\in\mathbb{Z}_{\ge 0}$.
\end{thm}
We may assume $c_2=\min\{c_2,\ldots,c_{p_2}\}$ and
$b_1=\min\{b_1,\ldots,b_{p_3}\}$.
Let
\[
V_1,\ldots,V_{p_0},
Y_1,\ldots,Y_{p_1},
Z_1,\ldots,Z_{p_2},
T_1,\ldots,T_{p_3},
U_1,\ldots,U_{p_4}
\]
be the torus invariant divisors in $\Pic(X)$ associated to
\[
v_1,\ldots,v_{p_0},
y_1,\ldots,y_{p_1},
z_1,\ldots,z_{p_2},
t_1,\ldots,t_{p_3},
u_1,\ldots,u_{p_4},
\]
respectively.
By calculating the rational functions for the dual basis of
$\G(\Sigma)\setminus\{v_1,z_1,u_1\}$, we have the relations
\[
V_2-V_1=0,\ldots,V_{p_0}-V_1=0,
\]
\[
Y_1+U_1-V_1=0,\ldots,Y_{p_1}+U_1-V_1=0,
\]
\[
Z_2-Z_1+c_2V_1=0,\ldots,Z_{p_2}-Z_1+c_{p_2}V_1=0,
\]
\[
T_1-Z_1-U_1+(b_1+1)V_1=0,\ldots,T_{p_3}-Z_1-U_1+(b_{p_3}+1)V_1=0,
\]
\[
U_2-U_1=0,\ldots,U_{p_4}-U_1=0
\]
in $\Pic(X)$. In particular, we obtain
\[
V_1=\cdots=V_{p_0},\ Y_1=\cdots =Y_{p_1},\
U_1=\cdots=U_{p_4},\ T_i=T_1+(b_1-b_i)V_1\ (2\le i\le p_3).
\]
On the other hand, the primitive collections of $\Sigma$ tell us that
\[
V_1\cdots V_{p_0}\cdot Y_1\cdots Y_{p_1}=0,\
Y_1\cdots Y_{p_1}\cdot Z_1\cdots Z_{p_2}=0,\
Z_1\cdots Z_{p_2}\cdot T_1\cdots T_{p_3}=0,
\]
\[
T_1\cdots T_{p_3}\cdot U_1\cdots U_{p_4}=0\mbox{ and }
U_1\cdots U_{p_4}\cdot V_1\cdots V_{p_0}=0.
\]
Finally, we should remark that
\[
2\ch_2(X)=V^2_1+\cdots+V^2_{p_0}+
Y^2_1+\cdots+Y^2_{p_1}+
Z^2_1+\cdots+Z^2_{p_2}+
T^2_1+\cdots+T^2_{p_3}+
U^2_1+\cdots+U^2_{p_4}
\]
for our calculation below.
\medskip
\medskip
First of all, we calculate $(\ch_2(X)\cdot S_1)$ for
the torus invariant subsurface $S_1$ associated to
the $(d-2)$-dimensional cone $\tau\in\Sigma$ such that
\underline{$\G(\tau)=\G(\Sigma)\setminus
\{v_{1},y_{1},z_{1},t_{1},u_{1}\}$}. In this case,
$\rho(S_1)=3$.
Since
\[
S_1=V_2\cdots V_{p_0}\cdot Y_2\cdots Y_{p_1}\cdot Z_2\cdots Z_{p_2}
\cdot T_2\cdots T_{p_3}\cdot U_2\cdots V_{p_4},
\]
we have
\[
V_1\cdot Y_1\cdot S_1=Y_1\cdot Z_1\cdot S_1=Z_1\cdot
T_1\cdot S_1=T_1\cdot U_1\cdot S_1=U_1\cdot V_1\cdot S_1=0.
\]
We can calculate the intersection numbers as follows:
\[
(V_1^2\cdot S_1)=\left(V_1\cdot (Y_1+U_1)\cdot S_1\right)=0,
\]
\[
(Y_1^2\cdot S_1)=\left(Y_1\cdot (V_1-U_1)\cdot S_1\right)=-1,
\]
\[
(U_1^2\cdot S_1)=\left(U_1\cdot (V_1-Y_1)\cdot S_1\right)=-1,
\]
\[
(Z_1^2\cdot S_1)=\left(Z_1\cdot (T_1-U_1+(b_1+1)V_1)\cdot S_1\right)=-1+b_1+1=b_1,
\]
\[
(Z_2^2\cdot S_1)=\left( (Z_1-c_2V_1)\cdot (Z_1-c_2V_1)\cdot S_1\right)
=(Z_1^2\cdot S_1)-2c_2(Z_1\cdot V_1\cdot S_1)+c_2^2(V_1^2\cdot S_1)=b_1-2c_2,
\]
\[
\vdots
\]
\[
(Z_{p_2}^2\cdot S_1)=b_1-2c_{p_2},
\]
\[
(T_1^2\cdot S_1)=\left( T_1\cdot (Z_1+U_1-(b_1+1)V_1)\cdot S_1\right)=-(b_1+1),
\]
\[
(T_2^2\cdot S_1)=\left( (T_1+(b_1-b_2)V_1)\cdot (Z_1+U_1-(b_2+1)V_1)\cdot S_1\right)
\]
\[
=(T_1\cdot(-(b_2+1)V_1)\cdot S_1)+((b_1-b_2)V_1\cdot Z_1\cdot S_1)
+((b_1-b_2)V_1\cdot (-(b_2+1)V_1)\cdot S_1)
\]
\[
=-(b_2+1)+(b_1-b_2)=b_1-2b_2-1,
\]
\[
\vdots
\]
\[
(T_{p_3}^2\cdot S_1)=-(b_{p_3}+1)+(b_1-b_{p_3})=b_1-2b_{p_3}-1.
\]
Therefore,
\begin{align*}
2(\ch_2(X)\cdot S_1) & =-p_1-p_4+b_1p_2
-2(c_2+\cdots+c_{p_2}) \\
& -(b_1+1)+(b_1-b_2-(b_2+1))+\cdots+
(b_1-b_{p_3}-(b_{p_3}+1)).
\end{align*}
So, we have the following:
\begin{lem}\label{p2p3}
If $\ch_2(X)$ is nef, then
$b_1\ge 1$ and $p_2>p_3$. In particular, $p_2\ge 2$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
By the above calculation,
\[
2(\ch_2(X)\cdot S_1)
\le -p_1-p_4+b_1p_2-(b_1+1)p_3=-p_1-p_3-p_4+b_1(p_2-p_3).
\]
Thus, $b_1$ and $p_2-p_3$ have to be positive.
\end{proof}
Next, we treat the case where the Picard number of the torus invariant subsurface
$S=S_\tau\subset X_{\Sigma}$ associated to a $(d-2)$-dimensional cone $\tau\in\Sigma$
is two.
In this case, we can apply the following result:
\begin{prop}[{\cite[Theorem 3.5 and Proposition 4.4]{sato2}}]\label{polyinter}
Let $X=X_{\Sigma}$ be a projective toric manifold and $S=S_{\tau}$
the torus invariant subsurface associated to a $(d-2)$-dimensional cone
$\tau\in\Sigma$ in $X$ such that $\rho(S)=2$.
In this case, $S$ is isomorphic to the Hirzebruch surface $F_\alpha$ of degree $\alpha\ge 0$.
Let $\G(\tau)=\{x_1,\ldots,x_{d-2}\}$. We have exactly four maximal cones
\[
\Cone(\G(\tau)\cup\{w_1,w_2\}),\ \Cone(\G(\tau)\cup\{w_2,w_3\}),
\]
\[
\Cone(\G(\tau)\cup\{w_3,w_4\})\mbox{ and }\Cone(\G(\tau)\cup\{w_4,w_1\})
\]
which contain $\tau$
for $w_1,w_2,w_3,w_4\in\G(\Sigma)$ such that
\[
w_1+w_3+a_1x_1+\cdots +a_{d-2}x_{d-2}=0\mbox{ and }
w_2+w_4-\alpha w_1+e_1x_1+\cdots +e_{d-2}x_{d-2}=0.
\]
Then,
\[
(\ch_2(X)\cdot S)=\frac{1}{2}\left(\alpha(2+a_1^2+\cdots+a_{d-2}^2)
+2(-\alpha+a_1e_1+\cdots +a_{d-2}e_{d-2})\right).
\]
\end{prop}
We calculate the intersection number $(\ch_2(X)\cdot S)$ for two cases:
(1)
$\G(\tau)=\G(\Sigma)\setminus\{v_1,z_1,z_2,t_1,t_2\}$ and
(2)
$\G(\tau)=\G(\Sigma)\setminus\{v_1,y_1,z_1,z_2,u_1\}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \underline{$\G(\tau)=\G(\Sigma)\setminus\{v_1,z_1,z_2,t_1,t_2\}$}.
We have two linear relations
\[
z_1+z_2+z_3+\cdots+z_{p_2}+y_1+\cdots+y_{p_1}-(u_1+\cdots+u_{p_4})=0\mbox{ and}
\]
\[
t_1+t_2+t_3+\cdots+t_{p_3}+u_1+\cdots+u_{p_4}-(y_1+\cdots+y_{p_1})=0
\]
for $\Cone(\G(\tau)\cup\{t_1\})$ and $\Cone(\G(\tau)\cup\{z_1\})$, respectively.
One can easily see that $S\cong \mathbb{P}^1\times\mathbb{P}^1$, and we obtain
\[
2(\ch_2(X)\cdot S)=2(-p_1-p_4)<0
\]
by Proposition \ref{polyinter}.
So, we have the following by Lemma \ref{p2p3}:
\begin{lem}\label{p3is1}
If $\ch_2(X)$ is nef, then $p_3=1$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
If $p_2\ge 2$ and $p_3\ge 2$, then $(\ch_2(X)\cdot S)<0$.
Lemma \ref{p2p3} says that $p_2\ge 2$. So, we have $p_3=1$.
\end{proof}
Therefore, we may assume $p_3=1$ in the following calculation.
\item
\underline{$\G(\tau)=\G(\Sigma)\setminus\{v_1,y_1,z_1,z_2,u_1\}$.}
First, we remark that this subsurface always exists by Lemma \ref{p2p3}.
We have two linear relations
\[
z_1+z_2+\cdots+z_{p_2}+t_1=0\mbox{ and}
\]
\[
v_1+y_1+v_2+\cdots+v_{p_0}+y_{2}+\cdots+y_{p_1}-(c_2z_2+\cdots+c_{p_2}z_{p_2}+(b_1+1)t_1)=0
\]
for $\Cone(\G(\tau)\cup\{v_1\})$ and $\Cone(\G(\tau)\cup\{z_2\})$, respectively.
One can easily see that $S\cong F_{c_2}$, and we obtain
\[
2(\ch_2(X)\cdot S)=c_2(p_2+1)+2(-(c_2+\cdots+c_{p_2}+b_1+1))
\]
by Proposition \ref{polyinter}.
If $p_2\ge 3$, we have
\[
2(\ch_2(X)\cdot S)=c_2+(c_2-c_2)+\cdots+(c_2-c_{p_2})+c_2-(c_2+\cdots+c_{p_2})-2(b_1+1)<0.
\]
Thus, we obtain the following lemma (see Lemma \ref{p2p3}):
\begin{lem}\label{p2p22}
If $\ch_2(X)$ is nef, then $p_2=2$ and $c_2-2(b_1+1)\ge 0$.
\end{lem}
\end{enumerate}
Thus, we conclude the following:
\begin{thm}\label{mainthm}
Let $X$ be a projective toric manifold. If $\rho(X)=3$ and
$X$ has no Fano contraction,
then $\ch_2(X)$ is {\em not} nef.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $\ch_2(X)$ is nef. Then, we may assume that $p_2=2$, $p_3=1$, $b_1\ge 1$
and $c_2-2(b_1+1)\ge 0$ by Lemmas \ref{p2p3}, \ref{p3is1} and \ref{p2p22}.
However, the last inequality
obviously contradicts the another
inequality
\[
2(\ch_2(X)\cdot S_1)=-p_1-p_4+2b_1-2c_2-(b_1+1)\ge 0
\]
\[
\Longleftrightarrow\ b_1\ge2c_2+p_1+p_4+1.
\]
Thus, $\ch_2(X)$ is not nef.
\end{proof}
By combining Theorems \ref{extremalsato} and \ref{mainthm}, we have the following:
\begin{cor}\label{maincor}
If $X=X_\Sigma$ is a $\ch_2$-positive smooth projective toric $d$-fold
and $\rho(X)\le 3$, then
$X\cong\mathbb{P}^d$.
\end{cor}
\section{Positivities of higher Chern characters}\label{highercase}
In this section we study toric manifolds $X$ with $\mathrm{ch}_k(X)$ nef for $k \geq 3$.
In the case $d=k$, it is not difficult to construct
toric $d$-folds $X$ with $\mathrm{ch}_d(X)$ positive.
\begin{ex}
Let $d \geq 3$ and $a \geq 1$.
Let $X=X_\Sigma$ be a toric manifold of $\rho(X)=2$
such that $\G(\Sigma)=\{x_1, x_2, x_3, y_1, \ldots, y_{d-1}\}$
and the primitive relations of $\Sigma$ are
\begin{equation*}
x_1+x_2+x_3=ay_1 \mbox{ and } y_1+\cdots+y_{d-1}=0.
\end{equation*}
Then $X$ is isomorphic to the $\mathbb{P}^{d-2}$-bundle
\[
\mathbb{P}_{\mathbb{P}^2}\left(\mathcal{O}(a) \oplus \mathcal{O}^{\oplus d-2}\right)
\]
over $\mathbb{P}^2$.
We denote by
$D_1, D_2, D_3, E_1, \ldots, E_{d-1}$
the torus invariant divisors in $\Pic(X)$
associated to $x_1,x_2,x_3,y_1,\ldots,y_{d-1}$, respectively.
Then we have the relations
\begin{equation*}
D_1=D_2=D_3 \mbox{ and } aD_3+E_1=E_2=\cdots=E_{d-1}
\end{equation*}
in $\Pic(X)$.
We can calculate the intersection numbers as follows:
\begin{align*}
D_1^d&=D_2^d=D_3^d=0,\\
E_1^d&=E_1^2(E_2-aD_3)^{d-2}\\
&=E_1^2\left(E_2^{d-2}-a(d-2)D_3 \cdot E_2^{d-3}
+a^2\frac{(d-2)(d-3)}{2}D_3^2 \cdot E_2^{d-4}\right)\\
&=E_1^2 \cdot E_2 \cdots E_{d-1}
-a(d-2) D_3 \cdot E_1^2 \cdot E_2 \cdots E_{d-2} \\
&+a^2\frac{(d-2)(d-3)}{2} D_2 \cdot D_3 \cdot E_1^2 \cdot E_2 \cdots E_{d-3}\\
&=0-a(d-2)\cdot(-a)+a^2\frac{(d-2)(d-3)}{2}\\
&=a^2(d-2)+a^2\frac{(d-2)(d-3)}{2}>0,\\
E_2^d&=\cdots=E_{d-1}^d=(aD_3+E_1) \cdot E_2 \cdot E_3 \cdots E_{d-1}^2
=aD_3 \cdot E_2 \cdot E_3 \cdots E_{d-1}^2=a \cdot a=a^2>0.
\end{align*}
Thus, $\mathrm{ch}_d(X)$ is positive.
Note that $X$ is Fano if $a \leq 2$
(this follows from Theorem \ref{Fano}).
\end{ex}
Next we consider the case $d>k$.
For odd $k$, there is a toric $d$-fold $X$ with $\mathrm{ch}_k(X)$ positive.
However, our example does not provide
an example of a toric manifold with $\mathrm{ch}_k(X)$ positive for even $k$.
\begin{prop}\label{p1bdle}
Let $d>k \geq 3$ and $a \geq 1$ with $d-a^k \geq 1$.
Let $X=X_\Sigma$ be a toric manifold of $\rho(X)=2$
such that $\G(\Sigma)=\{x_1, \ldots, x_d, y_1, y_2\}$
and the primitive relations of $\Sigma$ are
\begin{equation*}
x_1+\cdots+x_d=ay_1 \mbox{ and } y_1+y_2=0.
\end{equation*}
Then the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $k$ is odd, then $\mathrm{ch}_k(X)$ is positive.
\item If $k$ is even, then $\mathrm{ch}_k(X)$ is nef, but not positive.
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{rem}
In Proposition \ref{p1bdle},
$X$ is isomorphic to the $\mathbb{P}^1$-bundle
$\mathbb{P}_{\mathbb{P}^{d-1}}(\mathcal{O}(a) \oplus \mathcal{O})$
over $\mathbb{P}^{d-1}$, and it is Fano by Theorem \ref{Fano}.
\end{rem}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{p1bdle}]
We denote by
$D_1, \ldots, D_d, E_1, E_2$
the torus invariant divisors in $\Pic(X)$
associated to $x_1, \ldots, x_d, y_1, y_2$, respectively.
Then we have the relations
\begin{equation*}
D_1=\cdots=D_d \mbox{ and } aD_d+E_1=E_2
\end{equation*}
in $\Pic(X)$.
Put $\tau_1$ (resp.\ $\tau_2$) as the $(d-k)$-dimensional cone in $\Sigma$
whose generators are $x_1, \dots, x_{d-k}$ (resp.\ $x_1, \dots, x_{d-k-1}, y_1$).
We denote by $V_i$ the $k$-dimensional torus invariant closed subvariety
of $X$ associated to $\tau_i$ for $i=1, 2$.
It follows from Proposition \ref{torusinv} and the relations in $\Pic(X)$
that $\mathrm{ch}_k(X)$ is positive (resp.\ nef)
if and only if $(\mathrm{ch}_k(X) \cdot V_i)$ is positive (resp. non-negative)
for each $i=1, 2$.
Since
\begin{align*}
D_1^k \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-k}&=D_2^k \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-k}
=\cdots=D_d^k \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-k}=0, \\
E_1^k \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-k}&=D_1 \cdots D_{d-k} \cdot (E_2-aD_d)^{k-2} \cdot E_1^2
=D_1 \cdots D_{d-k} \cdot (-aD_d)^{k-2} \cdot E_1^2 \\
&=(-a)^{k-2} D_1 \cdots D_{d-2} \cdot E_1^2=(-a)^{k-1}, \\
E_2^k \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-k}&=D_1 \cdots D_{d-k} \cdot (aD_d+E_1)^{k-2} \cdot E_2^2
=D_1 \cdots D_{d-k} \cdot (aD_d)^{k-2} \cdot E_2^2 \\
&=a^{k-2} D_1 \cdots D_{d-2} \cdot E_2^2=a^{k-1},
\end{align*}
we have
\begin{equation*}
(\mathrm{ch}_k(X) \cdot V_1)=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
2a^{k-1} & (k \mbox{ is odd}), \\
0 & (k \mbox{ is even}). \end{array}\right.
\end{equation*}
Since
\begin{align*}
D_1^k \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-k-1} \cdot E_1&=D_2^k \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-k-1} \cdot E_1
=\cdots=D_d^k \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-k-1} \cdot E_1=1, \\
E_1^k \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-k-1} \cdot E_1
&=D_1 \cdots D_{d-k-1} \cdot (E_2-aD_d)^{k-1} \cdot E_1^2 \\
&=(-a)^{k-1} D_1 \cdots D_{d-2} \cdot E_1^2=(-a)^k, \\
E_2^k \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-k-1} \cdot E_1&=0,
\end{align*}
we have
\begin{equation*}
(\mathrm{ch}_k(X) \cdot V_2)=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
d-a^k & (k \mbox{ is odd}), \\
d+a^k & (k \mbox{ is even}). \end{array}\right.
\end{equation*}
Thus, $\mathrm{ch}_k(X)$ is nef for any $k \geq 3$,
and it is positive if and only if $k$ is odd.
\end{proof}
At present, the only known examples of toric $d$-folds
with $\mathrm{ch}_4(X)$ positive for $d \geq 5$ are projective spaces.
Finally, we prove the following theorem:
\begin{thm}
Any smooth complete toric $d$-fold $X$ of $\rho(X)=2$ with $d \geq 5$
is not $\mathrm{ch}_4$-positive.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Any toric manifold of Picard number two
is a projective space bundle over a projective space.
Let $s-1$ be the dimension of a fiber.
If $s=2$, then $\mathrm{ch}_4(X)$ is not positive by Proposition \ref{p1bdle}.
Thus, it suffices to prove the assertion in the case $s \geq 3$.
(1) {\it The case where $s=3$}.
Let $X=X_\Sigma$ be a toric manifold of $\rho(X)=2$
such that $\G(\Sigma)=\{x_1, \ldots, x_{d-1}, y_1, y_2, y_3\}$
and the primitive relations of $\Sigma$ are
\begin{equation*}
x_1+\cdots+x_{d-1}=a_1y_1+a_2y_2 \mbox{ and } y_1+y_2+y_3=0,
\end{equation*}
where $a_1 \geq a_2 \geq 0$.
Then $X$ is the $\mathbb{P}^2$-bundle
$\mathbb{P}_{\mathbb{P}^{d-2}}(\mathcal{O}(a_1) \oplus \mathcal{O}(a_2) \oplus \mathcal{O})$
over $\mathbb{P}^{d-2}$.
We denote by
$D_1, \ldots, D_{d-1}, E_1, E_2, E_3$
the torus invariant divisors in $\Pic(X)$
associated to $x_1, \ldots, x_{d-1}, y_1, y_2, y_3$, respectively.
Then we have the relations
\begin{equation*}
D_1=\cdots=D_{d-1} \mbox{ and } a_iD_{d-1}+E_i-E_3=0
\end{equation*}
for $i=1, 2$ in $\Pic(X)$.
Put $\tau$ as the $(d-4)$-dimensional cone in $\Sigma$
whose generators are $x_1, \ldots, x_{d-5}, y_1$.
We denote by $V$ the $4$-dimensional torus invariant closed subvariety
of $X$ associated to $\tau$.
We show $(\mathrm{ch}_4(X) \cdot V) \leq 0$.
Since
$D_i^4 \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-5} \cdot E_1=0$ for every $i=1, \ldots, {d-1}$,
$E_2^4 \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-5} \cdot E_1=-a_2^3$
and $E_3^4 \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-5} \cdot E_1=a_2^3$,
it suffices to show $E_1^4 \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-5} \cdot E_1 \leq 0$.
We calculate the intersection number as follows:
\begin{align*}
&E_1^4 \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-5} \cdot E_1 \\
&=D_1 \cdots D_{d-5} \cdot E_1^3 \cdot (E_2-(a_1-a_2)D_{d-1}) \cdot (E_3-a_1D_{d-1}) \\
&=D_1 \cdots D_{d-5} \cdot E_1^3
\cdot (-a_1D_{d-1} \cdot E_2-(a_1-a_2)D_{d-1} \cdot E_3 +a_1(a_1-a_2)D_{d-1}^2) \\
&=D_1 \cdots D_{d-5} \cdot E_1^3
\cdot (-a_1D_{d-1} \cdot E_2-(a_1-a_2)D_{d-1} \cdot (a_2D_{d-1}+E_2)+a_1(a_1-a_2)D_{d-1}^2) \\
&=D_1 \cdots D_{d-5} \cdot E_1^3 \cdot ((a_2-2a_1)D_{d-1} \cdot E_2+(a_1-a_2)^2D_{d-1}^2) \\
&=D_1 \cdots D_{d-5} \cdot E_1^2
\cdot (E_3-a_1D_{d-1}) \cdot ((a_2-2a_1)D_{d-1} \cdot E_2+(a_1-a_2)^2D_{d-1}^2) \\
&=(a_1-a_2)^2 D_1 \cdots D_{d-3} \cdot E_1^2 \cdot E_3
-a_1(a_2-2a_1) D_1 \cdots D_{d-3} \cdot E_1^2 \cdot E_2 \\
& -a_1(a_1-a_2)^2 D_1 \cdots D_{d-2} \cdot E_1^2 \\
&=-(a_1-a_2)^3+a_1^2(a_2-2a_1)-a_1(a_1-a_2)^2 \leq 0.
\end{align*}
Thus, $(\mathrm{ch}_4(X) \cdot V) \leq 0$.
(2) {\it The case where $s \geq 4$}.
Let $X=X_\Sigma$ be a toric manifold of $\rho(X)=2$
such that $\G(\Sigma)=\{x_1, \ldots, x_{d-s+2}, y_1, \ldots, y_s\}$
and the primitive relations of $\Sigma$ are
\begin{equation*}
x_1+\cdots+x_{d-s+2}=a_1y_1+\cdots+a_{s-1}y_{s-1} \mbox{ and } y_1+\cdots+y_s=0,
\end{equation*}
where $a_1 \geq \cdots \geq a_{s-1} \geq 0$.
Then $X$ is the $\mathbb{P}^{s-1}$-bundle
$\mathbb{P}_{\mathbb{P}^{d-s+1}}
(\mathcal{O}(a_1) \oplus \cdots \oplus \mathcal{O}(a_{s-1}) \oplus \mathcal{O})$
over $\mathbb{P}^{d-s+1}$.
We denote by
$D_1, \ldots, D_{d-s+2}, E_1, \ldots, E_s$
the torus invariant divisors in $\Pic(X)$
associated to $x_1, \ldots, x_{d-s+2}, y_1, \ldots, y_s$, respectively.
Then we have the relations
\begin{equation*}
D_1=\cdots=D_{d-s+2} \mbox{ and } a_iD_{d-s+2}+E_i-E_s=0
\end{equation*}
for $i=1, \ldots, s-1$ in $\Pic(X)$.
Put $\tau$ as the $(d-4)$-dimensional cone in $\Sigma$
whose generators are $x_1, \ldots, x_{d-s}, y_1, \ldots, y_{s-4}$.
We denote by $V$ the $4$-dimensional torus invariant closed subvariety
of $X$ associated to $\tau$.
We show $(\mathrm{ch}_4(X) \cdot V) \leq 0$.
For every $i=1, \ldots, d-s+2$, we have
$D_i^4 \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-s} \cdot E_1 \cdots E_{s-4}=0$.
We calculate
\begin{align*}
&E_1^4 \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-s} \cdot E_1 \cdots E_{s-4} \\
&=D_1 \cdots D_{d-s} \cdot E_1^2 \cdot E_2 \cdots E_{s-4}
\cdot (E_{s-3}+(a_{s-3}-a_1)D_{d-s+2}) \\
&\cdot (E_{s-2}+(a_{s-2}-a_1)D_{d-s+2})
\cdot (E_{s-1}+(a_{s-1}-a_1)D_{d-s+2}) \\
&=D_1 \cdots D_{d-s} \cdot E_1^2 \cdot E_2 \cdots E_{s-4}
\cdot (E_{s-3} \cdot E_{s-2} \cdot E_{s-1}
+(a_{s-3}-a_1) D_{d-s+2} \cdot E_{s-2} \cdot E_{s-1} \\
&+(a_{s-2}-a_1) D_{d-s+2} \cdot E_{s-3} \cdot E_{s-1}
+(a_{s-1}-a_1) D_{d-s+2} \cdot E_{s-3} \cdot E_{s-2}) \\
&=-a_1+(a_{s-3}-a_1)+(a_{s-2}-a_1)+(a_{s-1}-a_1) \leq 0.
\end{align*}
Similarly,
\begin{equation*}
E_i^4 \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-s} \cdot E_1 \cdots E_{s-4}
=-a_i+(a_{s-3}-a_i)+(a_{s-2}-a_i)+(a_{s-1}-a_i) \leq 0
\end{equation*}
for every $i=2, \ldots, s-4$.
Hence it suffices to show
\begin{equation*}
(E_{s-3}^4+E_{s-2}^4+E_{s-1}^4+E_s^4) \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-s} \cdot E_1 \cdots E_{s-4}
\leq 0.
\end{equation*}
We calculate
\begin{align*}
&E_{s-3}^4 \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-s} \cdot E_1 \cdots E_{s-4} \\
&=D_1 \cdots D_{d-s} \cdot E_1 \cdots E_{s-4} \cdot E_{s-3}^2 \\
&\cdot (E_{s-2}+(a_{s-2}-a_{s-3})D_{d-s+2})
\cdot (E_{s-1}+(a_{s-1}-a_{s-3})D_{d-s+2}) \\
&=D_1 \cdots D_{d-s} \cdot E_1 \cdots E_{s-4} \cdot E_{s-3}^2 \\
&\cdot (E_{s-2} \cdot E_{s-1}
+(a_{s-2}-a_{s-3})D_{d-s+2} \cdot E_{s-1}
+(a_{s-1}-a_{s-3})D_{d-s+2} \cdot E_{s-2}) \\
&=-a_{s-3}+(a_{s-2}-a_{s-3})+(a_{s-1}-a_{s-3}) \\
&=(a_{s-3}+a_{s-2}+a_{s-1})-4a_{s-3}.
\end{align*}
Similarly,
\begin{align*}
&E_{s-2}^4 \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-s} \cdot E_1 \cdots E_{s-4}
=(a_{s-3}+a_{s-2}+a_{s-1})-4a_{s-2}, \\
&E_{s-1}^4 \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-s} \cdot E_1 \cdots E_{s-4}
=(a_{s-3}+a_{s-2}+a_{s-1})-4a_{s-1}.
\end{align*}
Furthermore, we calculate
\begin{align*}
&E_s^4 \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-s} \cdot E_1 \cdots E_{s-4} \\
&=D_1 \cdots D_{d-s} \cdot E_1 \cdots E_{s-4} \cdot E_s^2
\cdot (E_{s-2}+a_{s-2}D_{d-s+2}) \cdot (E_{s-1}+a_{s-1}D_{d-s+2}) \\
&=D_1 \cdots D_{d-s} \cdot E_1 \cdots E_{s-4} \cdot E_s^2
\cdot (E_{s-2} \cdot E_{s-1}+a_{s-2}D_{d-s+2} \cdot E_{s-1}+a_{s-1}D_{d-s+2} \cdot E_{s-2}) \\
&=a_{s-3}+a_{s-2}+a_{s-1}.
\end{align*}
Hence we have
\begin{align*}
&(E_{s-3}^4+E_{s-2}^4+E_{s-1}^4+E_s^4) \cdot D_1 \cdots D_{d-s} \cdot E_1 \cdots E_{s-4} \\
&=4(a_{s-3}+a_{s-2}+a_{s-1})-4a_{s-3}-4a_{s-2}-4a_{s-1}=0.
\end{align*}
Thus, $(\mathrm{ch}_4(X) \cdot V) \leq 0$.
In every case, $\mathrm{ch}_4(X)$ is not positive.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
We will study a mathematical model from biology describing chemotaxis, the directed movement of cells along a chemical gradient towards an attractant, and its interaction with the fluid said cells are suspended in. While pure chemotaxis models, which generally consist of two coupled partial differential equations, without added fluid interaction have been quite heavily studied for some time now (initiated by the seminal work of Keller and Segel in \cite{keller1970initiation}), recent findings by Dombrowski et al.\ (cf.\ \cite{PhysRevLett.93.098103}) have shown that in populations of \emph{Bacillus subtilis} much stronger liquid movement than could originate from independent bacteria can be observed after cell aggregates have been formed. This calls into question the prior modeling assumption that the liquid-cell interaction can basically be disregarded because each single organism has negligible influence on the liquid. This observation then led Tuval et al.\ (cf.\ \cite{Tuval2277}) to an extended modeling approach, which adds a full Navier--Stokes type fluid equation to the standard chemotaxis model. The central new interactions are that the attractant and the cells suspended in the solution are affected by convective forces exerted by the fluid, while the fluid is affected by buoyant forces exerted by the cells because of their comparatively large size.
\\[0.5em]
In mathematical terms and after some normalization of parameters, this modeling approach by Tuval et al.\ leads to a system of coupled partial differential equations of the following form:
\[
\left\{\;\;
\begin{aligned}
n_t + u \cdot \nabla n &\;\;=\;\; \Delta n - \div (nS(x,n,c) \nabla c), &&x\in \Omega, t > 0, \\
c_t + u\cdot \nabla c &\;\;=\;\; \Delta c - n f(c), && x\in \Omega, t > 0, \\
u_t + (u\cdot \nabla) u &\;\;=\;\; \Delta u + \nabla P + n \nabla \phi, \;\;\;\;\;\; \div u = 0, \;\;\;\;\;\; && x\in \Omega, t > 0.
\end{aligned}
\right.
\numberthis \label{problem}
\]
Here $\Omega \subseteq \mathbb{R}^N$ with $N \in \mathbb{N}$ is some space domain and the functions $n = n(x,t)$, $c = c(x,t)$, $u = u(x,t)$, $P = P(x,t)$ model the bacteria population, the attractant (e.g.\ oxygen) concentration and the fluid velocity field and associated pressure respectively. The system is further parameterized by the given functions $S$, which models the chemotactic sensitivity of the bacteria, $f$, which models the attractant consumption rate, and $\phi$, which represents the gravitational potential. Convection is modeled by the terms $u \cdot \nabla n$ and $u \cdot \nabla c$, while buoyant forces are modeled by the term $n \nabla \phi$.
\\[0.5em]
This system is fairly well understood if we assume the chemotactic sensitivity $S$ to be a scalar function as this brings the system quite close to the classical Keller--Segel model in terms of the chemotactic interaction (cf.\ \cite{keller1970initiation}). Amongst many other things, global well-posedness of this system in two or three dimensions with different assumptions on the initial data and parameter functions $f$, $S$, $\phi$ has been extensively studied (cf.\ e.g.\ \cite{MR3208807}, \cite{MR2754058}, \cite{WinklerExistence}, \cite{MR2838394}). In some two dimensional settings, there are global, unique classical existence results available (cf.\ \cite{WinklerExistence}).
While in three dimensional cases there are still existence results available, they are somewhat less ambitious and deal with weaker notions of solutions and only consider eventual smoothness properties (cf.\ \cite{WinklerExistence}, \cite{MR3542616}, \cite{MR3605965}). For a more broad survey of mathematical chemotaxis models and recent results about them, consult for instance \cite{MR3351175}.
\paragraph{Main result.} The central goal of this paper is to expand the weak existence results seen in \cite{WinklerStokesCase} to our system (\ref{problem}) containing a full Navier--Stokes fluid equation as opposed to the simpler Stokes equation in the reference. Or put more precisely, we will consider the following setting:
\\[0.5em]
We analyze the system (\ref{problem}) in a convex, bounded domain $\Omega \subseteq \mathbb{R}^2$ with smooth boundary. We then add the boundary conditions
\begin{equation}
\nabla n \cdot \nu = n(S(x,n,c)\nabla c) \cdot \nu, \;\; \nabla c \cdot \nu = 0, \;\; u = 0 \;\;\;\; \forall x \in \partial\Omega, t > 0 \label{boundary_conditions}
\end{equation}
and initial conditions
\begin{equation}
n(x, 0) = n_0(x),\;\;c(x,0) = c_0(x),\;\;u(x,0) = u_0(x) \;\;\;\; \forall x\in\Omega
\label{initial_data}
\end{equation}
for initial data with the following properties:
\begin{equation}
\left\{\;
\begin{aligned}
n_0 &\in C^{\iota}(\overline{\Omega}) && \text{ for some } \iota > 0\text{ with } n_0 \geq 0 \text{ and } n_0 \not\equiv 0 \text{ in } \Omega, \\
c_0 &\in W^{1,\infty}(\Omega) &&\text{ with } c_0 \geq 0 \text{ in } \Omega, \\
u_0 &\in D(A_2^\vartheta)&& \text{ for some } \vartheta \in (\tfrac{1}{2}, 1)
\end{aligned}
\right.
\label{initial_data_props}
\end{equation}
Here $A_2$ denotes the Stokes operator in the Hilbert space $L^2_\sigma(\Omega) \coloneqq \{ \varphi \in (L^2(\Omega))^2 \;|\; \div \varphi = 0 \}$ of all solenoidal functions in $(L^2(\Omega))^2$. Further $W_{0,\sigma}^{k,2}(\Omega) \coloneqq (W_{0}^{k,2}(\Omega))^2 \cap L^2_\sigma(\Omega)$ for $k \in \mathbb{N}$ denote the corresponding Sobolev spaces of solenoidal functions.
\\[0.5em]
For the functions $f, S$ and $\phi$ that parametrize (\ref{problem}), we will throughout this paper assume that
\begin{equation}
f \in C^1([0,\infty)) \stext{is nonnegative with } f(0) = 0
\label{f_regularity}
\end{equation}
and that, for $S = (S_{ij})_{i,j \in\{1,2\}}$,
\begin{equation}
S_{ij} \in C^2(\overline{\Omega}\times[0,\infty)\times[0,\infty)) \;\;\text{ for } i,j \in \{1,2\}
\label{S_regularity}
\end{equation}
and that
\begin{equation}
|S(x,n,c)| \leq S_0(c) \;\;\;\; \forall (x,n,c) \in \overline{\Omega}\times[0,\infty)^2 \;\; \text{ for some nondecreasing } S_0: [0,\infty) \rightarrow [0, \infty)
\label{S_0_bound}
\end{equation}
and that
\begin{equation}
\phi \in W^{2,\infty}(\Omega) \label{phi_regularity}.
\end{equation}
Under all of these assumptions, we then show that (\ref{problem}) has a global mass-preserving generalized solution:
\begin{theorem}
If we assume that $f$, $S$, $\phi$ satisfy (\ref{f_regularity})--(\ref{phi_regularity}), then the system (\ref{problem}) with boundary conditions (\ref{boundary_conditions}) and initial data (\ref{initial_data}) of regularity class (\ref{initial_data_props}) has a global mass-preserving generalized solution $(n,c,u)$ in the sense of \Cref{definition:weak_solution} below.
\end{theorem}
\paragraph{Complications: Loss of energy structure and nonlinear convection.}
The above setting presents us with two key complications, one inherited from the Stokes case already discussed in \cite{WinklerStokesCase} and one we reintroduce from the original model by Tuval et al.
\\[0.5em]
The complication we inherited is of course the non-scalar chemotactic sensitivity $S$. Such $S$ are especially interesting from a biological point of view because scalar $S$ have been shown to lead to long time homogenization for some common parameters, which does not agree with the structure formation seen in experiments (cf.\ \cite{MR3149063}). As these observations further suggest that spatial inhomogeneities often originate at the boundary (cf.\ \cite{PhysRevLett.93.098103}), modern modeling approaches introduce rotational flux components near said boundary, which necessitate sensitivity functions that look somewhat like
\[
S = a\left(\,\begin{matrix}1 & 0 \\ 0 & 1\end{matrix}\, \right) + b \left(\,\begin{matrix}0 & -1 \\ 1& 0\end{matrix} \,\right) \;\;\;\; \text{ for }a > 0, \; b \in \mathbb{R}
\]
with significant non-diagonal entries near the boundary (cf.\ \cite{MR3294964}, \cite{MR2505083}). The most devastating consequence of this for the analysis of the model is that this leads to the apparent loss of an energy type functional, which is present in the scalar case and often key to proving global existence of solutions (cf.\ \cite{MR2754058}, \cite{MR3369260}, \cite{WinklerExistence}, \cite{TemamNavierStokes}) or understanding their long time behavior (cf.\ \cite{MR3149063}, \cite{MR3605965}). Results dealing with non-scalar sensitivities therefore often analyze the system under some very strong restriction on either $S$ or the initial data (cf.\ \cite{MR3531759}, \cite{MR3401606}, \cite{MR3542964}).
\\[0.5em]
Even in the fluid-free version of (\ref{problem}), this loss
of structure has led to a significant lack of knowledge and, e.g.\ for $N = 2$, global smooth solutions have thus far only been constructed under significant smallness conditions for $c_0$ (cf.\ \cite{MR3302296} or \cite{MR3562314} for an extension to the fluid case). For arbitrarily large data and dimension $N$, it is possible to construct global generalized solutions (not unlike those constructed in this paper) as seen in \cite{WinklerLargeDataGeneralized} at the very least.
\\[0.5em]
The complication we reintroduced is adding the nonlinear convection term, which is disregarded in \cite{WinklerStokesCase}, back into the third equation making it a full Navier--Stokes fluid equation. This means that especially the semigroup methods used in the Stokes case lose some of their effectiveness reducing our immediate access to regularity information for the third equation and making it in general much tougher to handle.
\paragraph{Main ideas.}
A lot of ideas from the Stokes case \cite{WinklerStokesCase} translate fairly immediately for the first two equations in (\ref{problem}), especially concerning the handling of the somewhat problematic chemotactic sensitivity $S$ as long as we still manage to provide similar bounds for $u$ as in the reference. Therefore it is in establishing these bounds where our key ideas come in. As already mentioned, semigroup techniques lose some of their fruitfulness in the third equation due to the newly introduced nonlinear convection term, but similarly to the Stokes case, the rather weak regularity information of the form
\[
\int_0^\infty \int_\Omega \frac{|\nabla n|^2}{(n+1)^2} \leq C
\]
in \Cref{lemma:basic_props} is of central importance yet again (In the Stokes case, it was mostly used to tease out integrability properties of the time derivative of $\ln(n + 1)$ and for some additional compactness properties). It in fact allows us in conjunction with some functional inequalities derived from the Trudinger--Moser inequality seen in \Cref{lemma:functional_ineq} to conclude that terms of the form
\[
\int_\Omega (n + 1)\ln\left( \frac{n+1}{\overline{n} + 1} \right)
\]
and
\[
\int_\Omega n \nabla \phi \cdot u
\]
have similar time integrability properties. Time integrability of the former term proves useful to simplify some compactness results for $n$ that have already been shown in \cite{WinklerStokesCase}, while integrability of the latter term will be the central keystone to showing sufficient $L^2$ type bounds for $u$ and $\nabla u$ (cf.\ \Cref{lemma:basic_u_bounds}) by testing the third equation with $u$ itself. While not as strong a set of bounds for $u$ as in the Stokes case, this then proves to be enough for the construction of global mass-preserving generalized solutions in the sense of \Cref{definition:weak_solution} below via a similar approximation approach as the one seen in \cite{WinklerStokesCase}.
\section{Generalized solution concept and approximate solutions}
As regularity information is rather hard to come by due to the complications outlined in the introduction, we will not endeavor to construct a global classical solution for (\ref{problem}), but instead confine ourselves to a very generalized notion of solution.
Because of the similarities to the pure Stokes case in \cite{WinklerStokesCase} and our desire to not unnecessarily duplicate effort, we let ourselves be guided by the generalized solution concept seen in said reference, which we of course slightly adapt to the full Navier--Stokes case. This reads as follows:
\begin{definition}
\label{definition:weak_solution}
We call a triple of functions
\begin{align*}
&n \in L^\infty((0,\infty); L^1(\Omega)), \\
&c \in L^\infty_\mathrm{loc}(\overline{\Omega}\times[0,\infty)) \cap L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty); W^{1,2}(\Omega)) \;\; \text{ and } \;\; \numberthis\label{wsol:regularity} \\
&u \in L^\infty_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty);(L^2(\Omega))^2) \cap L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty);(W_0^{1,2
}(\Omega))^2)
\end{align*}
with $n \geq 0$, $c \geq 0, \div u = 0$ a.e.\ in $\Omega\times(0,\infty)$,
\begin{equation}
\int_{\Omega} n(\cdot,t) = \int_{\Omega} n_0 \;\;\;\; \text{ for a.e.\ } t > 0 \label{wsol:mass_perservation}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\ln(n + 1) \in L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty);W^{1,2}(\Omega))
\label{wsol:ln_n_regularity}
\end{equation}
a global mass-preserving generalized solution of (\ref{problem}), (\ref{boundary_conditions}), (\ref{initial_data}) and (\ref{initial_data_props}) if the inequality
\begin{align*}
-\int_0^\infty \int_{\Omega} \ln(n+1)\varphi_t - \int_{\Omega} \ln(n_0 + 1)\varphi(\cdot, 0) \geq& \int_0^\infty \int_{\Omega} \ln(n+1)\Delta\varphi + \int_0^\infty \int_{\Omega} |\nabla \ln(n+1)|^2\varphi \\
& - \int_0^\infty \int_{\Omega} \frac{n}{n+1} \nabla \ln(n+1) \cdot (S(x,n,c)\nabla c)\varphi \\
& + \int_0^\infty \int_{\Omega} \frac{n}{n+1} (S(x,n,c) \nabla c)\cdot \nabla \varphi \\
& + \int_0^\infty \int_\Omega \ln(n+1)(u\cdot \nabla \varphi) \numberthis \label{wsol:ln_n_inequality}
\end{align*}
holds for all nonnegative $\varphi\in C_0^\infty(\overline{\Omega}\times[0,\infty))$ with $\nabla \varphi \cdot \nu = 0$ on $\partial \Omega\times[0,\infty)$, if further
\begin{equation}
\int_0^\infty\int_{\Omega} c\varphi_t + \int_{\Omega} c_0\varphi(0, \cdot) = \int_0^\infty \int_\Omega \nabla c \cdot \nabla \varphi + \int_0^\infty \int_\Omega n f(c) \varphi - \int_0^\infty \int_\Omega c(u \cdot \nabla \varphi) \label{wsol:c_equality}
\end{equation}
holds for all $\varphi \in L^\infty(\Omega\times(0,\infty)) \cap L^2((0,\infty); W^{1,2}(\Omega))$ having compact support in $\overline{\Omega}\times[0,\infty)$ with $\varphi_t \in L^2(\Omega\times(0,\infty))$, and if finally
\begin{equation}
-\int_0^\infty \int_\Omega u \cdot \varphi_t - \int_\Omega u_0 \cdot \varphi(\cdot, 0) = -\int_0^\infty \int_\Omega \nabla u \cdot \nabla \varphi + \int_0^\infty \int_\Omega (u \otimes u)\cdot\nabla \varphi + \int_0^\infty\int_\Omega n\nabla\phi \cdot \varphi
\label{wsol:u_equality}
\end{equation}
holds for all $\varphi \in C_0^\infty(\Omega\times[0,\infty); \mathbb{R}^2)$ with $\div \varphi = 0$ on $\Omega\times[0,\infty)$.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
It can be shown that generalized solutions of this type become classical if the functions $n$, $c$ and $u$ are sufficiently regular. The argument for this can be sketched as follows: For the $u$ and $c$ components of the solution, this is fairly obvious as both satisfy the standard variational formulation of both of their equations, while the $n$ component presents somewhat more of a challenge as it only satisfies a very specific integral inequality and mass conservation property. That this is already sufficient has been for instance argued in \cite[Lemma 2.1]{WinklerLargeDataGeneralized} for the case $u \equiv 0$ and the argument transfers easily.
\\[0.5em]
Furthermore at least in the Stokes case, some similar generalized solutions have been shown to eventually (from some large $t > 0$ onwards) attain such a level of regularity (cf.\ \cite{WinklerEventualSmoothness}).
\end{remark}
\noindent Similar to Reference \cite{WinklerStokesCase}, the key to our existence results will be approximate problems defined in the following way: We first fix families of functions $(\rho_\varepsilon)_{\varepsilon \in (0,1)}$ and $(\chi_\varepsilon)_{\varepsilon \in (0,1)}$ with
\[
\rho_\varepsilon \in C_0^\infty(\Omega) \stext{such that} 0 \leq \rho_\varepsilon \leq 1 \text{ in } \Omega \stext{and} \rho_\varepsilon \nearrow 1 \text{ pointwise in } \Omega \text{ as } \varepsilon \searrow 0
\]
and
\[
\chi_\varepsilon \in C_0^\infty([0,\infty)) \stext{such that} 0 \leq \chi_\varepsilon \leq 1 \text{ in } [0,\infty) \stext{and} \chi_\varepsilon \nearrow 1 \text{ pointwise in } [0,\infty) \text{ as } \varepsilon \searrow 0
\]
constructed by standard methods.
For $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$, we then define
\[
S_\varepsilon(x,n,c) \coloneqq \rho_\varepsilon(x) \chi_\varepsilon(n) S(x,n,c), \;\;\;\;\;\; \forall (x,n,c) \in \overline{\Omega}\times[0,\infty)^2
\]
and consider the following initial boundary value problem:
\[
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
{n_\varepsilon}_t + u_\varepsilon \cdot \nabla n_\varepsilon \;=&\;\; \Delta n_\varepsilon - \div (n_\varepsilon S_\varepsilon(x, n_\varepsilon, c_\varepsilon)\nabla c_\varepsilon), \;\;\;\;\;\;\; && x \in \Omega, \; t > 0,\\
{c_\varepsilon}_t + u_\varepsilon \cdot \nabla c_\varepsilon \;=&\;\; \Delta c_\varepsilon - n_\varepsilon f(c_\varepsilon), && x \in \Omega, \; t > 0,\\
{u_\varepsilon}_t + (u_\varepsilon \cdot \nabla ) u_\varepsilon \;=&\;\; \Delta u_\varepsilon + \nabla P_\varepsilon + n_\varepsilon\nabla \phi, && x \in \Omega, \; t > 0, \\
\div u_\varepsilon \;=&\;\; 0, && x \in \Omega, \; t > 0, \\
\nabla n_\varepsilon \cdot \nu = \nabla c_\varepsilon \cdot \nu = 0&, \;\; u_\varepsilon = 0, && x \in \partial\Omega, \; t > 0, \\
n_\varepsilon(x,0) = n_0(x), \;\; &c_\varepsilon(x,0) = c_0(x), \;\; u_\varepsilon(x,0) = u_0(x), && x \in \Omega.
\end{aligned}
\numberthis \label{approx_system}
\right.
\]
This kind of regularized version of (\ref{problem}) with (\ref{boundary_conditions}) and (\ref{initial_data}) then easily admits a global classical solution because it substitutes standard Neumann boundary conditions for the more complex no-flux boundary condition seen in (\ref{boundary_conditions}) and makes the first equation accessible to comparison arguments with a non-zero constant to gain a global upper bound for $n_\varepsilon$, which would be much harder to achieve otherwise. This of course only works under similar assumptions on the parameter functions $f$, $S$, $\phi$ as proposed in the introduction. As the techniques to achieve an existence result for the approximated system above are fairly well-documented and do not appreciably differ for our case in comparison to e.g.\ the case studied in \cite{WinklerExistence}, we will only give a short sketch to justify the following existence theorem:
\begin{theorem}
For $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$, initial data of regularity (\ref{initial_data_props}) and $f$, $S$, $\phi$ satisfying (\ref{f_regularity})--(\ref{phi_regularity}), there exist functions
\begin{align*}
n_\varepsilon, c_\varepsilon &\in C^0(\overline{\Omega}\times[0,\infty))\cap C^{2,1}(\overline{\Omega}\times(0,\infty)), \\
u_\varepsilon &\in C^0(\overline{\Omega}\times[0,\infty);\mathbb{R}^2)\cap C^{2,1}(\overline{\Omega}\times(0,\infty);\mathbb{R}^2) \\
P_\varepsilon &\in C^{1,0}(\Omega\times(0,\infty))
\end{align*}
such that $n_\varepsilon > 0$, $c_\varepsilon \geq 0$ on $\overline{\Omega}\times(0,\infty)$ and $(n_\varepsilon, c_\varepsilon, u_\varepsilon, P_\varepsilon)$ is a classical solution of (\ref{approx_system}).
\label{lemma:approx_existence}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Standard contraction mapping approaches in an appropriate setting (as e.g.\ seen in \cite[Lemma 2.1]{WinklerExistence} for a similar system) provide us with a classical solution for (\ref{approx_system}) on a space time cylinder $\Omega\times[0,T_{\text{max}, \varepsilon})$ with some maximal $T_{\text{max}, \varepsilon} \in (0,\infty]$ and a blow-up criterion of the following type:
\[
\text{If } T_{\text{max}, \varepsilon} < \infty, \text{ then } \limsup_{t\nearrow T_{\text{max}, \varepsilon}} \left( \; \|n_\varepsilon(\cdot, t)\|_{L^\infty(\Omega)} +\|c_\varepsilon(\cdot,t)\|_{W^{1,q}(\Omega)} + \|A_2^\alpha u_\varepsilon(\cdot,t)\|_{L^2(\Omega)} \; \right) = \infty.
\]
Here $q$ is some number greater than $2$. Non-negativity and positivity on $\overline{\Omega}\times(0,\infty)$ of $c_\varepsilon$ and $n_\varepsilon$ respectively are immediately ensured by maximum principle.
Note now further that, because we defined the $S_\varepsilon$ to be zero for sufficiently large values of $n$, well-known comparison arguments can be used to already gain a global upper bound for $n_\varepsilon$ on the whole cylinder. This already rules out blowup regarding $n_\varepsilon$. As the second equation in (\ref{approx_system}) is generally fairly unproblematic, similar boundedness results can be achieved for $c_\varepsilon$ (cf.\ \Cref{lemma:basic_props} later in this paper). Regarding the possible blowup of $c_\varepsilon$ or $u_\varepsilon$, we can look at the prior work done in Section 4.2 of Reference \cite{WinklerExistence}, where it is proven for much weaker prerequisites as already established here that the two norms in the blowup criteria regarding $c_\varepsilon$ and $u_\varepsilon$ respectively are bounded as well. Note that this is mostly done using the second and third equation of the system studied in said reference, which are apart from some slight generalizations the same as the second and third equation in (\ref{approx_system}). Only one step in the reference uses an energy inequality not available to us to establish a bound for $\int_\Omega |\nabla c_\varepsilon|^2$, which is also easily gained by a straightforward testing procedure for the second equation in (\ref{approx_system}) without using said energy inequality.
\end{proof}\noindent
For the rest of this paper, we now fix initial values $(n_0, c_0, u_0)$ of regularity class (\ref{initial_data_props}) and parameter functions $f$, $S$ and $\phi$ satisfying (\ref{f_regularity})--(\ref{phi_regularity}). We then further fix a corresponding family of solutions $(n_\varepsilon, c_\varepsilon, u_\varepsilon, P_\varepsilon)_{\varepsilon \in (0,1)}$ according to \Cref{lemma:approx_existence}.
\section{A priori estimates for the approximate solutions}
\subsection{Results for $n_\varepsilon$ and $c_\varepsilon$ reusable from the Stokes case}
Let us now start by revisiting some key results for the approximate solutions $n_\varepsilon, c_\varepsilon$, which can be derived in a very similar way to the Stokes case (cf.\ \cite{WinklerStokesCase}) as they stem from just considering the first two equations in (\ref{approx_system}).
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:basic_props}
Let $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$. The mass conservation equality
\begin{equation}
\int_\Omega n_\varepsilon(x,t) \d x = \int_\Omega n_0 \label{eq:mass_perservation}
\end{equation}
holds for all $t > 0$ and, for each $p \in [1,\infty]$, the inequality
\begin{equation}
\|c_\varepsilon(\cdot, t)\|_\L{p} \leq \|c_\varepsilon(\cdot, s)\|_\L{p}
\label{eq:c_monoticity}
\end{equation}
holds for $t \geq s \geq 0$. We further have that
\begin{equation}
\int_0^\infty\int_\Omega |\nabla c_\varepsilon|^2 \leq \frac{1}{2}\int_\Omega c_0^2
\label{eq:grad_c_bound}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\int_0^\infty\int_\Omega \frac{|\nabla n_\varepsilon|^2}{(n_\varepsilon + 1)^2} \leq 2\int_\Omega n_0 + S_0^2(\|c_0\|_\L{\infty})\int_\Omega c_0^2 \label{eq:weak_grad_n_smallness}
\end{equation}
with $S_0$ as in (\ref{S_0_bound}).
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The mass conservation property (\ref{eq:mass_perservation}) is immediately evident after integration of the first equation in (\ref{approx_system}). Further, testing the second equation in (\ref{approx_system}) with $c_\varepsilon^{p-1}$ for $p \in [1,\infty)$ gives us
\[
\frac{1}{p}\int_\Omega c^p_\varepsilon(\cdot, t) + (p-1)\int_0^t \int_\Omega c_\varepsilon^{p-2} |\nabla c_\varepsilon|^2 + \int_0^t \int_\Omega n_\varepsilon c_\varepsilon^{p-1} f(c_\varepsilon) = \frac{1}{p} \int_\Omega c_0^p \;\;\;\; \forall t > 0,
\]
which for fitting choices of $p$ yields (\ref{eq:c_monoticity}) for finite $p$ as well as (\ref{eq:grad_c_bound}). The case $p = \infty$ in (\ref{eq:c_monoticity}) then follows via the limit process $p \rightarrow \infty$. To now derive (\ref{eq:weak_grad_n_smallness}), we test the first equation in (\ref{approx_system}) with $\frac{1}{n_\varepsilon + 1}$ to obtain
\[
\frac{\d }{\d t} \int_\Omega \ln(n_\varepsilon + 1) = \int_\Omega \frac{|\nabla n_\varepsilon|^2}{(n_\varepsilon + 1)^2} - \int_\Omega \frac{n_\varepsilon}{(n_\varepsilon + 1)^2} \nabla n_\varepsilon \cdot S_\varepsilon(x, n_\varepsilon, c_\varepsilon) \nabla c_\varepsilon \;\;\;\; \forall t > 0,
\]
which we then further improve to
\[
\frac{1}{2}\int_\Omega \frac{|\nabla n_\varepsilon|^2}{(n_\varepsilon + 1)^2} \leq \frac{\d}{\d t} \int_\Omega \ln(n_\varepsilon + 1) + \frac{S_0^2(\|c_0\|_\L{\infty})}{2} \int_\Omega|\nabla c_\varepsilon|^2 \;\;\;\; \forall t > 0
\]
by application of Young's inequality, (\ref{S_0_bound}) and (\ref{eq:c_monoticity}). Time integration of the above in combination with (\ref{eq:grad_c_bound}) then results in the desired inequality (\ref{eq:weak_grad_n_smallness}).
\end{proof}
\subsection{Estimates for $u_\varepsilon$ based on the Trudinger--Moser inequality}
While semigroup methods proved very fruitful when the third equation in (\ref{approx_system}) is of Stokes type, they are in our case thoroughly thwarted by the nonlinear convection term $(u_\varepsilon \cdot \nabla) u_\varepsilon$. As such, we will use very different tools to at least partially recover some of the $L^p$ boundedness results for $u_\varepsilon$ and its derivatives seen in Lemma 3.3 of Reference \cite{WinklerStokesCase} for the Stokes case. To fill the role of these tools, we therefore start by deriving two functional inequalities based on the Trudinger--Moser inequality (pioneered in \cite{trudinger1967imbeddings}, \cite{moser1971sharp}) and inspired by \cite{WinklerMoserTrudingerFluidInteraction}:
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:functional_ineq}
There exists a constant $C > 0$ such that
\begin{equation}
\int_\Omega \varphi (\psi - \overline{\psi}) \leq \frac{1}{a} \left[\;\int_\Omega \psi \ln\left(\frac{\;\psi\;}{\overline{\psi}}\right) + C\int_\Omega \psi \; \right] + \frac{a}{8\pi}\left\{\int_\Omega \psi\right\} \int_\Omega |\nabla \varphi|^2 \label{eq:fucntional_ineq_1}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\int_\Omega \psi \ln\left(\frac{\;\psi\;}{\overline{\psi}}\right) \leq \frac{1}{2\pi} \left\{\int_\Omega \psi \right\}\int_\Omega \frac{|\nabla \psi|^2}{\psi^2} + C\int_\Omega \psi
\label{eq:fucntional_ineq_2}
\end{equation}
with $\overline{\psi} \coloneqq \frac{1}{|\Omega|} \int_\Omega \psi$ for all $\varphi \in C^1(\overline{\Omega})$, positive $\psi \in C^1(\overline{\Omega})$ and $a > 0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By using the Trudinger--Moser inequality seen in Proposition 2.3 of Reference \cite{chang1988conformal}, which is applicable because $\Omega$ is convex and therefore finitely connected, we gain a constant $K_1 \geq |\Omega|$ with
\begin{equation}
\int_\Omega e^{2\pi\xi^2} \leq K_1 \label{eq:moser-trudinger-raw}
\end{equation}
for all $\xi\in C^1(\overline{\Omega})$ with $\int_\Omega \xi = 0$ and $\int_\Omega |\nabla \xi|^2 \leq 1$. Note that we can choose the constant $\beta$ seen in Proposition 2.3 from the reference equal to $2\pi$ because $\Omega$ has a smooth boundary. Using Young's inequality to see that
\[
\xi - \overline{\xi} \leq |\xi - \overline{\xi}| \leq 2\pi\left(\frac{\xi - \overline{\xi}}{\|\nabla \xi\|_\L{2}}\right)^2 + \frac{1}{8\pi} \int_\Omega |\nabla \xi|^2
\]
with $\overline{\xi} \coloneqq \frac{1}{|\Omega|} \int_\Omega \xi$, the inequality in (\ref{eq:moser-trudinger-raw}) directly implies that
\[
\int_\Omega e^{\xi-\overline{\xi}} \leq K_1\exp\left( \frac{1}{8\pi} \int_\Omega |\nabla \xi|^2 \right)
\]
or further that
\begin{equation}
\int_\Omega e^{\xi} \leq K_1\exp\left( \frac{1}{8\pi} \int_\Omega |\nabla \xi|^2 + \frac{1}{|\Omega|}\int_\Omega \xi \right) \label{eq:moser-trudinger-cons}
\end{equation}
for all $\xi \in C^1(\overline{\Omega})$.
\\[0.5em]
Now fix $\varphi\in C^1(\overline{\Omega})$, positive $\psi \in C^1(\overline{\Omega})$ and $a > 0$.
We then observe that the estimate
\[
\ln\left( \int_\Omega e^{a\varphi} \right) = \ln\left( \int_\Omega e^{a\varphi} \frac{m}{\psi} \frac{\psi}{m} \right) \geq \frac{a}{m}\int_\Omega \varphi \psi - \frac{1}{m}\int_\Omega \psi\ln\left(\frac{\psi}{m}\right)
\]
holds with $m \coloneqq \int_\Omega \psi$ because of Jensen's inequality. If we now apply (\ref{eq:moser-trudinger-cons}) with $\xi \coloneqq a \varphi$ to this and multiply by $\frac{m}{a}$, we get that
\[
\int_\Omega \varphi \psi \leq \frac{1}{a}\int_\Omega \psi\ln\left(\frac{\psi}{m}\right) + \frac{am}{8\pi} \int_\Omega |\nabla \varphi|^2 + \frac{m}{|\Omega|} \int_\Omega \varphi + \frac{m}{a}\ln(K_1)
\]
or further that
\[
\int_\Omega \varphi (\psi - \overline{\psi}) \leq \frac{1}{a} \left[ \; \int_\Omega \psi \ln\left(\frac{\;\psi\;}{\overline{\psi}}\right) + \ln\left(\frac{K_1}{|\Omega|}\right)\int_\Omega \psi \; \right] + \frac{a}{8\pi}\left\{\int_\Omega \psi\right\} \int_\Omega |\nabla \varphi|^2 \numberthis \label{eq:proto_functional_eq1}
\]
after some rearranging. This gives us our first result.
\\[0.5em]
Now only fix a positive $\psi \in C^{1}(\overline{\Omega})$.
We can then choose $\varphi \coloneqq \ln\left(\frac{\;\psi\;}{\overline{\psi}}\right)$ and $a \coloneqq 2$ in (\ref{eq:proto_functional_eq1}) to get that
\[
\int_\Omega \psi \ln\left(\frac{\;\psi\;}{\overline{\psi}}\right) \leq \frac{1}{2} \int_\Omega \psi \ln\left(\frac{\;\psi\;}{\overline{\psi}}\right) + \frac{1}{4\pi} \left\{\int_\Omega \psi\right\} \int_\Omega \frac{|\nabla \psi|^2 }{\psi^2} + \frac{1}{2}\ln\left(\frac{K_1}{|\Omega|}\right)\int_\Omega \psi + \overline{\psi}\int_\Omega \ln\left(\frac{\;\psi\;}{\overline{\psi}}\right).
\]
Because by Jensen's inequality $\int_\Omega \ln\Big(\tfrac{\,\psi\,}{\overline{\psi}}\Big) \leq 0$, this directly implies our second result.
\end{proof}\noindent
Employing the second functional inequality (\ref{eq:fucntional_ineq_2}), we can now use the fairly weak regularity information in (\ref{eq:weak_grad_n_smallness}) to derive the following preliminary integrability property for the family $(n_\varepsilon)_{\varepsilon \in (0,1)}$, which will not only prove useful to derive bounds for the family $(u_\varepsilon)_{\varepsilon \in (0,1)}$, but also to later simplify a compactness argument, which was already used in the Stokes case.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:nlogn_bound}
For each $T > 0$, there exists $C(T) > 0$ such that
\begin{equation}
\int_0^T \int_\Omega (n_\varepsilon + 1)\ln\left(\frac{n_\varepsilon + 1}{\overline{n_0} + 1}\right) \leq C(T)
\label{eq:nlogn_bound}
\end{equation}
for all $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Applying the functional inequality (\ref{eq:fucntional_ineq_2}) from \Cref{lemma:functional_ineq} to $\psi \coloneqq n_\varepsilon + 1$ directly yields that
\begin{align*}
\int_\Omega (n_\varepsilon + 1) \ln\left( \frac{\;n_\varepsilon + 1\;}{\overline{n_0} + 1}\right) \leq \frac{1}{2\pi}\left\{ \int_\Omega (n_\varepsilon + 1) \right\} \int_\Omega \frac{|\nabla n_\varepsilon|^2}{(n_\varepsilon + 1)^2} + K_1 \int_\Omega (n_\varepsilon + 1)
\;\;\;\; \forall t \in [0,T] \numberthis \label{eq:initial_nlnn}
\end{align*} for
all $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$ and some constant $K_1 > 0$ given by the lemma. We further know from \Cref{lemma:basic_props} that there exists a constant $K_2 > 0$ such that
\[
\int_0^\infty \int_\Omega \frac{|\nabla n_\varepsilon|^2}{(n_\varepsilon + 1)^2} \leq K_2
\]
for all $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$. After time integration of (\ref{eq:initial_nlnn}), this then gives us that
\[
\int_0^T \int_\Omega (n_\varepsilon + 1) \ln\left( \frac{\;n_\varepsilon + 1\;}{\overline{n_0} + 1}\right) \leq \left(\frac{K_2}{2\pi} + K_1T\right) \int_\Omega (n_0 + 1)
\]
for all $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$, which completes the proof.
\end{proof}\noindent
This in combination with another application of our functional inequalities above then serves as the basis to prove the central result of this section, namely the $L^2$ type bounds for the functions $(u_\varepsilon)_{\varepsilon \in (0,1)}$ and their gradients, which replace the results gained via semigroup arguments in the Stokes case:
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:basic_u_bounds}
For each $T > 0$, there exists a $C(T) > 0$ such that
\begin{equation}
\|u_\varepsilon(\cdot, t)\|_\L{2} \leq C(T) \;\;\;\;\;\; \forall t \in [0,T]
\label{eq:u_bound}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\int_0^T \int_\Omega |\nabla u_\varepsilon|^2 \leq C(T) \label{eq:grad_u_bound}
\end{equation}
for all $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
As our first step, we test the third equation in (\ref{approx_system}) with $u_\varepsilon$ itself to gain that
\[
\frac{1}{2}\frac{\d}{\d t}\int_\Omega |u_\varepsilon|^2 = -\int_\Omega |\nabla u_\varepsilon|^2 + \int_\Omega n_\varepsilon \nabla \phi \cdot u_\varepsilon = -\int_\Omega |\nabla u_\varepsilon|^2 + \int_\Omega \nabla \phi \cdot u_\varepsilon (n_\varepsilon - \overline{n_\varepsilon}) \;\;\;\; \forall t\in[0,T] \text{ and }\varepsilon \in (0,1).
\]
We now apply (\ref{eq:fucntional_ineq_1}) from \Cref{lemma:functional_ineq} (with $\varphi \coloneqq \nabla \phi \cdot u_\varepsilon$ and $\psi \coloneqq n_\varepsilon + 1$) to the rightmost term in the previous inequality to gain a constant $K_1 > 0$ such that
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{2}\frac{\d}{\d t}\int_\Omega |u_\varepsilon|^2
&\leq -\int_\Omega |\nabla u_\varepsilon|^2 \\
&+ \frac{1}{a} \left[\int_\Omega (n_\varepsilon + 1) \ln\left( \frac{\;n_\varepsilon + 1\;}{\overline{n_0} + 1}\right) + K_1\int_\Omega (n_0 + 1) \right] + \frac{a}{8\pi}\left\{\int_\Omega (n_0 + 1)\right\} \int_\Omega |\nabla (\nabla \phi \cdot u_\varepsilon)|^2 \label{eq:u_with_u_test}\numberthis
\end{align*}
for any $a > 0$ and each $t \in [0,T], \varepsilon \in (0,1)$. Further note that
\begin{align*}
\int_{\Omega}|\nabla (\nabla \phi \cdot u_\varepsilon)|^2 &\leq 2\int_{\Omega}| \nabla \phi |^2 |\nabla u_\varepsilon|^2 + 2\int_{\Omega} |H_\phi|^2 |u_\varepsilon|^2 \\
&\leq 2\|\nabla \phi\|_\L{\infty}^2\int_{\Omega} |\nabla u_\varepsilon|^2 + 2\|H_\phi\|_\L{\infty}^2 \int_{\Omega} |u_\varepsilon|^2 \\
&\leq K_2 \int_{\Omega}|\nabla u_\varepsilon|^2 \;\;\;\; \forall t\in[0,T] \text{ and } \varepsilon \in (0,1)
\end{align*}
with $K_2 \coloneqq 2\|\nabla \phi\|_\L{\infty}^2 + 2\|H_\phi\|_\L{\infty}^2 C_p^2$. Here $H_\phi$ denotes the Hessian of $\phi$ and $C_p$ is the Poincaré constant for $\Omega$. If we now apply this to (\ref{eq:u_with_u_test}) and set
\[
a \coloneqq K_3 \coloneqq \frac{8\pi}{2K_2}\left\{\int_\Omega (n_0 + 1) \right\}^{-1} \;\;\;\; \forall t\in[0,T],
\]
we gain that
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{2}\frac{\d}{\d t}\int_\Omega |u_\varepsilon|^2 + \frac{1}{2}\int_\Omega |\nabla u_\varepsilon|^2 \leq \frac{g_\varepsilon(t)}{2}
\end{equation*}
or rather
\begin{equation}
\frac{\d}{\d t}\int_\Omega |u_\varepsilon|^2 + \int_\Omega |\nabla u_\varepsilon|^2 \leq g_\varepsilon(t)
\label{eq:u_with_u_test_mod}
\end{equation}
with
\[
g_\varepsilon(t) \coloneqq \frac{2}{K_3} \left[\int_\Omega (n_\varepsilon + 1) \ln\left( \frac{\;n_\varepsilon + 1\;}{\overline{n_0} + 1}\right) + K_1\int_\Omega (n_0 + 1) \right] \geq 0
\]
for all $t\in[0,T]$ and $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$.
Because of \Cref{lemma:nlogn_bound}, there further exists a constant $K_4(T) > 0$ such that
\[
\int_0^T g_\varepsilon(t) \d t \leq \frac{2}{K_3}\left[ \; K_4(T) + K_1 T \int_\Omega (n_0 + 1) \; \right] =: K_5(T)
\]
for all $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$. If we now integrate (\ref{eq:u_with_u_test_mod}), this property of $g_\varepsilon$ then directly gives us that
\[
\int_\Omega |u_\varepsilon(\cdot, t)|^2 + \int_0^t \int_\Omega |\nabla u_\varepsilon|^2 \leq \int_\Omega |u_0|^2 + \int_0^t g_\varepsilon(t) \leq \int_\Omega |u_0|^2 + K_5(T)
\]
for all $t\in[0,T]$, which immediately implies (\ref{eq:u_bound}) and (\ref{eq:grad_u_bound}).
\end{proof}
\subsection{Construction of limit functions}
Having now established weaker (though still suitable) uniform bounds for $u_\varepsilon$ than those seen in the Stokes case, we will make the final preparations for the construction of limit function for our family of approximate solutions as $\varepsilon \searrow 0$. We do this by proving some additional, albeit fairly weak, boundedness results for the time derivatives of all three families $(n_\varepsilon)_{\varepsilon \in (0,1)}$, $(c_\varepsilon)_{\varepsilon \in (0,1)}$ and $(u_\varepsilon)_{\varepsilon \in (0,1)}$ as this will provide the last prerequisite for some key applications of the Aubin-Lions lemma (cf.\ \cite{TemamNavierStokes}):
\begin{lemma}
For all $T > 0$, there exists a constant $C(T) > 0$ such that
\begin{gather}
\int_0^T \|\partial_t \ln(n_\varepsilon(\cdot, t) + 1)\|_{(W^{2,2}_0(\Omega))^\star} \d t \leq C(T),
\label{eq:dual_space_n_bound} \\
\int_0^T \|{c_\varepsilon}_t(\cdot, t) \|_{(W^{2,2}_0(\Omega))^\star}\d t \leq C(T)
\label{eq:dual_space_c_bound}
\end{gather}
and
\begin{equation}
\int_0^T \|{u_\varepsilon}_t(\cdot, t) \|_{(W^{2,2}_{0,\sigma}(\Omega))^\star} \d t \leq C(T)
\label{eq:dual_space_u_bound}
\end{equation}
for all $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$.
\label{lemma:dual_space_bounds}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We will only give this proof in full detail for (\ref{eq:dual_space_u_bound}) and then just provide a sketch for (\ref{eq:dual_space_n_bound}) and (\ref{eq:dual_space_c_bound}) as all three inequalities can be proven in quite similar a fashion and more detailed proofs for (\ref{eq:dual_space_n_bound}) and (\ref{eq:dual_space_c_bound}) can be found in \cite{WinklerStokesCase}.
\\[0.5em]
As such, we first fix a $\psi \in W^{2,2}_{0,\sigma}(\Omega)$ and then test the third equation in (\ref{approx_system}) with $\psi$ to gain that
\[
\int_\Omega {u_\varepsilon}_t \cdot \psi = -\int_\Omega (u_\varepsilon \cdot \nabla) {u_\varepsilon} \cdot \psi -\int_\Omega \nabla {u_\varepsilon} \nabla \psi - \int_\Omega P_\varepsilon (\div \psi) + \int_\Omega n_\varepsilon \nabla \phi \cdot \psi \;\;\;\;\;\; \forall t \in [0,T] \text{ and } \varepsilon \in (0,1)
\]
after some partial integration steps.
This then leads to
\begin{align*}
\left| \; \int_\Omega {u_\varepsilon}_t \cdot \psi \; \right| &\leq
\int_\Omega |u_\varepsilon| |\nabla u_\varepsilon| |\psi| + \int_\Omega |\nabla u_\varepsilon| |\nabla \psi| + \int_\Omega n_\varepsilon |\nabla \phi| |\psi| \\
&\leq \|u_\varepsilon\|_\L{2} \|\nabla u_\varepsilon\|_\L{2} \|\psi\|_\L{\infty} + \|\nabla u_\varepsilon\|_\L{2} \|\nabla \psi\|_\L{2} + \|\nabla \phi\|_\L{\infty} \|\psi\|_\L{\infty} \int_\Omega n_\varepsilon \\
&\leq \left\{\left(\|u_\varepsilon\|_\L{2} + 1\right)\|\nabla u_\varepsilon\|_\L{2} + \|\nabla \phi\|_\L{\infty} \int_\Omega n_0 \right\} \left(\|\nabla \psi\|_\L{2} + \|\psi\|_\L{\infty} \right)
\end{align*}
for all $t \in [0,T]$ and $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$ by using the Cauchy--Schwarz inequality and the fact that $\div \psi = 0$.
By employing Young's inequality, the fact that $W^{2,2}(\Omega)$ embeds continuously into $L^\infty(\Omega)$ and the inequality (\ref{eq:u_bound}) from \Cref{lemma:basic_u_bounds}, we see that there exist constants $K_1(T), K_2(T) > 0$ such that
\[
\int_0^T \|{u_\varepsilon}_t \|_{(W^{2,2}_{0,\sigma}(\Omega))^\star} \leq \int_0^T \left(K_1(T) \int_\Omega |\nabla u_\varepsilon|^2 + K_2(T)\right)
\]
for all $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$. Another application of \Cref{lemma:basic_u_bounds} and specifically the inequality (\ref{eq:grad_u_bound}) therein then directly gives us the desired bound for the family $(u_\varepsilon)_{\varepsilon \in (0,1)}$.
\\[0.5em]
By testing the first equation in (\ref{approx_system}) with $\frac{\psi}{n_\varepsilon + 1}$ and the second equation in (\ref{approx_system}) with $\psi$ for any $\psi \in W^{2,2}(\Omega)$, we gain that
\[
\left|\;\int_\Omega \partial_t \ln(n_\varepsilon + 1) \cdot \psi \; \right| \leq K_3(T) \left\{ 1 + \int_\Omega \frac{|\nabla n_\varepsilon|^2}{(n_\varepsilon + 1)^2} + \int_\Omega |\nabla c_\varepsilon|^2 + \int_\Omega |u_\varepsilon|^2 \right\} \left(\|\nabla \psi\|_\L{2} + \|\psi\|_\L{\infty} \right)
\]
and
\[
\left|\;\int_\Omega {c_\varepsilon}_t \cdot \psi \; \right| \leq K_3(T) \left\{ 1 + \int_\Omega |\nabla c_\varepsilon|^2 + \int_\Omega |u_\varepsilon|^2 \right\} \left(\|\nabla \psi\|_\L{2} + \|\psi\|_\L{\infty} \right)
\]
for all $t \in [0,T]$, $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$ and some $K_3(T) > 0$ by similar techniques as seen above or in the proof of Lemma 3.4 in Reference \cite{WinklerStokesCase}. Combining these two inequalities with \Cref{lemma:basic_props} and \Cref{lemma:basic_u_bounds} then yields the remaining two bounds for the families $(n_\varepsilon)_{\varepsilon \in (0,1)}$, $(c_\varepsilon)_{\varepsilon \in (0,1)}$ and therefore this completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\noindent
This then allows us to use essentially three applications of the Aubin-Lions lemma (cf.\ \cite{TemamNavierStokes}) to prove the following sequence selection and convergence result:
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:subsequence_extraction}
There exists a sequence $(\varepsilon_j)_{j\in\mathbb{N}} \in (0,1)$ with $\varepsilon_j \searrow 0$ as $j\rightarrow\infty$ such that
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
&n_\varepsilon \rightarrow n && \text{a.e.\ in } \Omega \times (0,\infty), \\
&\ln(n_\varepsilon + 1) \rightharpoonup \ln(n + 1) \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; && \text{in } L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty);W^{1,2}(\Omega)), \\
&c_\varepsilon \rightarrow c && \text{in } L^2_\mathrm{loc}(\overline{\Omega}\times[0,\infty)) \text{ and a.e.\ in } \Omega \times (0,\infty), \\
&c_\varepsilon(\cdot, t) \rightarrow c(\cdot, t) && \text{in } L^2(\Omega) \text{ for a.e.\ } t > 0, \\
&c_\varepsilon \rightharpoonup c && \text{in } L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty);W^{1,2}(\Omega)) , \\
& u_\varepsilon \rightarrow u && \text{in } (L^2_\mathrm{loc}(\overline{\Omega}\times[0,\infty)))^2\text{ and a.e.\ in } \Omega \times (0,\infty) \;\;\;\; \text{ and } \\
& u_\varepsilon \rightharpoonup u && \text{in } L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty);W^{1,2}_{0,\sigma}(\Omega))
\end{aligned}
\right.
\label{eq:basic_convergence_props}
\end{equation}
as $\varepsilon = \varepsilon_j \searrow 0$ and a triple of limit functions $(n,c,u)$ defined on $\Omega\times(0,\infty)$ and satisfying $n,c \geq 0$ and $\div u = 0$ almost everywhere.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By applying \Cref{lemma:basic_props} and \Cref{lemma:dual_space_bounds} and the Aubin-Lions lemma (cf.\ \cite{TemamNavierStokes}), we immediately gain relative compactness of the families $(\ln(n_\varepsilon + 1))_{\varepsilon \in (0,1)}$ and $(c_\varepsilon)_{\varepsilon \in (0,1)}$ in $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty);W^{1,2}(\Omega))$ with respect to the weak topology and in $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty);L^2(\Omega))$ and therefore $L^2_\mathrm{loc}(\overline{\Omega}\times[0,\infty))$ with respect to the strong topology. Moreover, by the boundedness properties presented in \Cref{lemma:basic_u_bounds} and \Cref{lemma:dual_space_bounds} and another application of the Aubin-Lions lemma to the triple of function spaces
\[
W^{1,2}_{0,\sigma}(\Omega) \subseteq L^2_\sigma(\Omega) \subseteq (W^{2,2}_{0,\sigma}(\Omega))^\star,
\]
we gain relative compactness of the family $(u_\varepsilon)_{\varepsilon \in (0,1)}$ in $(L^2_\mathrm{loc}(\overline{\Omega}\times[0,\infty)))^2$ with respect to the strong topology and in $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty);W^{1,2}_{0,\sigma}(\Omega))$ with respect to the weak topology because of inequalities (\ref{eq:u_bound}), (\ref{eq:grad_u_bound}) and (\ref{eq:dual_space_u_bound}). By multiple standard subsequence extraction arguments, we can therefore construct a sequence $(\varepsilon_j)_{j\in\mathbb{N}}$ such that $\varepsilon_j \searrow 0$ as $j \rightarrow \infty$ with the convergence properties seen in (\ref{eq:basic_convergence_props}).
\\[0.5em]
Note that the non-negativity properties directly transfer from the approximate functions because of the pointwise convergence, while $\div u = 0$ is directly ensured by $u$ being an element of $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty);W^{1,2}_{0,\sigma}(\Omega))$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Stronger convergence properties for $(n_{\varepsilon_j})_{j\in\mathbb{N}}$ and $(c_{\varepsilon_j})_{j\in\mathbb{N}}$}
While the convergence properties outlined in \Cref{lemma:subsequence_extraction} would already take us quite far in proving that the limit functions found in said lemma are in fact solutions in the sense of \Cref{definition:weak_solution}, we will still need to prove that the sequences converge in slightly stronger ways. Our first target for this is the sequence $(n_{\varepsilon_j})_{j\in\mathbb{N}}$ as it thus far exhibits the weakest convergence properties. We therefore want to show now that $n_{\varepsilon_j}$ converges towards $n$ in at least some $L^1$ fashion. While we can find a proof for this in Reference \cite{WinklerStokesCase}, which should still work in our case without any modification, we want to present a somewhat shorter argument here based on our \Cref{lemma:nlogn_bound}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:l1_convergence}
Let the function $n$ and the sequence $(\varepsilon_j)_{j \in \mathbb{N}}$ be as in \Cref{lemma:subsequence_extraction}. Then
\[
n_\varepsilon \rightarrow n \;\;\;\; \text{ in } L^1_\mathrm{loc}(\overline{\Omega}\times[0,\infty)) \text{ as }\varepsilon = \varepsilon_j \searrow 0.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Fix a $T > 0$. For
\[
G(t) \coloneqq (t+1)\ln\left(\frac{t+1}{\overline{n_0} + 1}\right) \;\;\;\; \forall t \geq 0,
\]
observe that
\[
\lim_{t \rightarrow \infty} \frac{G(t)}{t} \geq \lim_{t \rightarrow \infty}\ln\left(\frac{t+1}{\overline{n_0} + 1}\right) = \infty
\]
and there exists a constant $C(T) > 0$ such that
\[
\int_0^T \int_\Omega G(|n_\varepsilon|) = \int_0^T \int_\Omega (n_\varepsilon + 1)\ln\left(\frac{n_\varepsilon + 1}{\overline{n_0} + 1}\right) \leq C(T)
\]
for all $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$ by \Cref{lemma:nlogn_bound}. Therefore, the family $(n_\varepsilon)_{\varepsilon \in (0,1)}$ fulfills the De La Vallée Poussin criterion for uniform integrability (cf.\ \cite[p.24]{PropabilitiesAndPotential}).
\\[0.5em]
Because \Cref{lemma:subsequence_extraction} furthermore ensures pointwise convergence of the sequence $n_{\varepsilon_j}$ almost everywhere, all prerequisites for the Vitali convergence theorem (cf.\ \cite[p.23]{PropabilitiesAndPotential}) are therefore met and it directly provides us with the desired $L^1_\mathrm{loc}(\overline{\Omega}\times[0,\infty))$ convergence as $T > 0$ was arbitrary.
\end{proof}\noindent
Though we have already ensured certain weak convergence properties for the first derivatives of the sequence $(c_{\varepsilon_j})_{j\in\mathbb{N}}$, they appear to be insufficient to handle the chemotaxis derived terms in (\ref{wsol:ln_n_inequality}) of \Cref{definition:weak_solution} when passing to the limit to show that $(n,c,u)$ is in fact a generalized solution in the sense of said definition. As the techniques used to show the following stronger convergence property for $(\nabla c_{\varepsilon_j})_{j\in\mathbb{N}}$ are very similar to the ones seen in the proof of Lemma 4.4 of Reference \cite{WinklerStokesCase} and Lemma 8.2 of Reference \cite{WinklerLargeDataGeneralized}, we will only give the following sketch:
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:grad_u_convergence}
Let the function $c$ and the sequence $(\varepsilon_j)_{j \in \mathbb{N}}$ be as in \Cref{lemma:subsequence_extraction}.
Then $c$ satisfies (\ref{wsol:c_equality}) for all $\varphi$ as in \Cref{definition:weak_solution} and
\[
\nabla c_{\varepsilon} \rightarrow \nabla c \;\;\;\; \text{ in } L^2_\mathrm{loc}(\overline{\Omega}\times[0,\infty)) \text{ as }\varepsilon = \varepsilon_j \searrow 0.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Note first that the convergence properties seen in \Cref{lemma:subsequence_extraction} are already sufficient to show that $c$ in fact satisfies (\ref{wsol:c_equality}) for appropriate $\varphi$ by showing that all $c_\varepsilon$ do this and then passing to the limit. We will therefore not further expand on this as it is a fairly straightforward limit process. Nonetheless this property of $c$ is in fact the key to proving the desired convergence property for the gradients $\nabla c_\varepsilon$.
\\[0.5em]
We first note that the convergence properties for $c$ shown in \Cref{lemma:subsequence_extraction} already give us that
\[
\int_0^T\int_\Omega |\nabla c|^2 \leq \liminf_{\varepsilon=\varepsilon_j \searrow 0} \int_0^T\int_\Omega |\nabla c_\varepsilon|^2
\]
for all $T > 0$ and we therefore only need to show that a similar estimate from below also holds.
\\[0.5em]
This is essentially a two step process: Firstly, we construct a family of test functions $\varphi$ that are essentially time averaged versions of $c$ with approximated initial data, which sufficiently approximate $c$ itself. This ensures the necessary regularity for the family of test functions to be used in (\ref{wsol:c_equality}) and after some limit processes we gain that
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{2} \int_\Omega c^2(\cdot, T) - \frac{1}{2} \int_\Omega c_0^2 + \int_0^T \int_\Omega |\nabla c|^2 \geq - \int_0^T \int_\Omega ncf(c)
\label{eq:c_lower_bound_prep}
\end{equation}
for all $T \in (0,\infty)\setminus N$ whereby $N$ is a null set such that
$(0,\infty)\setminus N$ contains only Lebesgue points of the map
\[
(0,\infty) \rightarrow [0,\infty), \;\; t \mapsto \int_\Omega c^2(x,t) \d x.
\]
Only considering these Lebsgue points is needed to ensure that some of the time averages converge properly. For all the details, see e.g.\ Lemma 8.1 in Reference \cite{WinklerLargeDataGeneralized}.
\\[0.5em]
Secondly by potentially enlarging $N$, we can further assume that outside of $N$ the integral $\int_\Omega c_\varepsilon(\cdot, t)^2$ converges to $\int_\Omega c(\cdot, t)^2$ as $\varepsilon = \varepsilon_j \searrow 0$ because of \Cref{lemma:subsequence_extraction} without loss of generality.
Combining this with (\ref{eq:c_lower_bound_prep}), uniform $L^\infty$ boundedness of the family $(c_\varepsilon)_{\varepsilon \in (0,1)}$ from \Cref{lemma:basic_props} and the $L^1$ convergence property from \Cref{lemma:l1_convergence} then yields that
\begin{align*}
\int_0^T\int_\Omega |\nabla c|^2 &\geq -\frac{1}{2} \int_\Omega c^2(\cdot, T) + \frac{1}{2} \int_\Omega c_0^2 - \int_0^T \int_\Omega ncf(c) \\
&=\lim_{\varepsilon=\varepsilon_j \searrow 0} \left\{ -\frac{1}{2} \int_\Omega c_\varepsilon^2(\cdot, T) + \frac{1}{2} \int_\Omega c_0^2 - \int_0^T \int_\Omega n_\varepsilon c_\varepsilon f(c_\varepsilon) \right\} =\lim_{\varepsilon=\varepsilon_j \searrow 0} \int_0^T \int_\Omega |\nabla c_\varepsilon|^2
\end{align*}
for all $T \in (0,\infty)\setminus N$. This is exactly the needed lower bound and therefore completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem 1.1}
Having now prepared all the necessary tools, we will prove the central theorem of this paper:
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem 1.1]
We use the triple of limit functions $(n,c,u)$ found in \Cref{lemma:subsequence_extraction}
as candidates for our generalized solution in the sense of \Cref{definition:weak_solution}. We have already established some of the properties needed for \Cref{definition:weak_solution} in \Cref{lemma:subsequence_extraction}, \Cref{lemma:grad_u_convergence} and therefore now only need to show that (\ref{wsol:regularity}),
(\ref{wsol:mass_perservation}), (\ref{wsol:ln_n_inequality}) and (\ref{wsol:u_equality}) also hold.
The mass preservation property (\ref{wsol:mass_perservation}) follows directly from our $L^1$ convergence result in \Cref{lemma:l1_convergence} and the mass preservation property of the approximate solutions seen in \Cref{lemma:basic_props}.
This together with \Cref{lemma:l1_convergence} then further ensures that $n$ is of the appropriate regularity for (\ref{wsol:regularity}), while the remaining regularity properties for $c$ and $u$ are provided by the convergence properties in \Cref{lemma:subsequence_extraction}, the uniform $L^\infty$ bound for the sequence $(c_{\varepsilon_j})_{j\in\mathbb{N}}$ in \Cref{lemma:basic_props} and the uniform $L^2$ bound for the sequence $(u_{\varepsilon_j})_{j\in\mathbb{N}}$ in \Cref{lemma:basic_u_bounds}.
\\[0.5em]
It is further easy to see that the approximate solutions satisfy both (\ref{wsol:ln_n_inequality}) and
(\ref{wsol:u_equality}) by partial integration and use of the boundary conditions in (\ref{approx_system}). We therefore only need to further argue that these properties survive the necessary limit process. For most terms in the integral equality (\ref{wsol:u_equality}) concerning $u$, this is fairly straightforward to show using the convergence properties established in \Cref{lemma:subsequence_extraction}, but we nonetheless give the full argument for at least the newly introduced term (compared to the Stokes case) as an example. This is especially pertinent as we needed to establish stronger convergence properties for $u$ to handle this term compared to \cite{WinklerStokesCase}, namely strong $L^2$ as opposed to weak $L^2$ convergence.
\\[0.5em]
We first fix a $\varphi \in C^\infty_0(\Omega\times[0,\infty);\mathbb{R}^2)$. Then there exists $T > 0$ such that
\[
\text{supp}(\varphi) \subseteq \Omega\times[0,T].
\]
We now observe that
\begin{align*}
&\left|\,\int_0^\infty\int_\Omega (u_\varepsilon \otimes u_\varepsilon)\cdot \nabla \varphi - \int_0^\infty\int_\Omega (u \otimes u)\cdot \nabla \varphi \,\right| \\
&\leq \|\nabla \varphi\|_{L^{\infty}(\Omega)}\left[\;\int_0^T\int_\Omega |u_\varepsilon - u||u_\varepsilon| + \int_0^T\int_\Omega |u| |u_\varepsilon - u| \;\right] \\
&\leq \|\nabla \varphi\|_{L^{\infty}(\Omega)}\left[ \;\|u_\varepsilon - u\|_{L^{2}(\Omega\times(0,T))}\|u_\varepsilon\|_{L^{2}(\Omega\times(0,T))} + \|u\|_{L^{2}(\Omega\times(0,T))} \|u_\varepsilon - u\|_{L^{2}(\Omega\times(0,T))}\; \right]
\end{align*}
for all $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$, which ensures that
\begin{equation*}
\int_0^\infty\int_\Omega (u_\varepsilon \otimes u_\varepsilon)\cdot \nabla \varphi \rightarrow \int_0^\infty\int_\Omega (u \otimes u) \cdot \nabla \varphi \stext{ as } \varepsilon = \varepsilon_j \searrow 0
\end{equation*}
because of the $L_\mathrm{loc}^2(\Omega\times[0,\infty))$ convergence of the sequence $(u_{\varepsilon_j})_{j\in\mathbb{N}}$ towards $u$.
\\[0.5em]
As it has been pretty thoroughly discussed in the proof of Theorem 1.1 of Reference \cite{WinklerStokesCase} that (\ref{wsol:ln_n_inequality}) similarly survives a corresponding limit process given similar convergence properties as proven here, we will not go into further depth regarding this point and refer the reader to the reference.
\end{proof}
\section*{Acknowledgement} The author acknowledges support of the \emph{Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft} in the context of the project \emph{Emergence of structures and advantages in cross-diffusion systems}, project number 411007140.
|
\section{Introduction}
The notion of \emph{epimorphism} exists in any category $\mathcal C$: a morphism $X\to Y$ is an epimorphism
if for any object $Z$ of $\mathcal C$ the induced map of sets $\Hom_{\mathcal C}(Y,Z)\to\Hom_{\mathcal C}(X,Z)$ is injective. Assuming the existence of pushouts in $\mathcal C$, this is equivalent to requiring that the codiagonal map $Y*_XY\to Y$ is an isomorphism cf. for example \cite[Proposition 2.1]{Mur} where this and other easy equivalent reformulations are given. Epimorphisms of sets or groups are just surjections, however already for rings the situation is more interesting e.g. the inclusion $\mathbb Z\to \mathbb Q$ (or any localization of rings) is an epimorphism.
The tensor product $B\otimes_A B$ realises the pushout $B*_A B$ for commutative rings. On the other hand, in the category of (not necessarily commutative) rings, $B\otimes_A B$ is not a pushout, as it is not even a ring in general. However it is still true that $A\to B$ is an epimorphism if and only if the multiplication map $B\otimes_A B\to B$ is an isomorphism \cite[Proposition 4.1.1]{Coh}.
If $\mathcal C$ is a category with an additional structure allowing one to do homotopy theory in it (such as the category of topological spaces or simplicial sets or, more generally, a closed model category) there is a similar notion of a \emph{homotopy epimorphism}: it is a map $X\to Y$ such that $Y*^{\Le}_XY\to Y$ is an isomorphism in the \emph{homotopy category} of $\mathcal C$ where $Y*^{\Le}_XY$ stands for a \emph{homotopy pushout}. It is known \cite{Rap} that homotopy epimorphisms of connected topological spaces are precisely \emph{acyclic maps}, i.e. maps whose homotopy fibres have zero reduced integral homology groups.
We investigate the notion of homotopy epimorphism in the category of differential graded (dg) algebras, possibly noncommutative. It is known \cite[Proposition 3.17]{BCL} that \emph{derived localizations} of dg algebras are homotopy epimorphisms. On the other hand, derived localizations are also \emph{homological epimorphisms}, i.e. maps $A\to B$ such that
the multiplication map $B\otimes^{\Le}_AB\to B$ is a quasi-isomorphism. The property of being a homological epimorphism has many nice implications for the induced functors on derived categories and it is natural to ask (especially having in mind the corresponding non-homotopy result) whether homotopy and homological epimorphisms are the same thing. Our first main result is that this is, indeed, true.
Next, we consider topological applications. Given a connected space $X$ we denote its based loop space by $GX$; then its chain complex $C_*(GX,\mathbf{k})$ (simplicial or singular) with coefficients in a commutative ring $\mathbf{k}$ is a dg $\mathbf{k}$-algebra. Our second main result is a characterization of $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic maps $f:X\to Y$ as those maps for which the map of dg algebras $C_*(GX,\mathbf{k}),\to C_*(GY,\mathbf{k})$ is a homological epimorphism. Equivalently, $f$ is acyclic if an only if it induces a Verdier localization of the triangulated categories of cohomologically locally constant sheaves (also known as infinity local systems) on $X$ and $Y$ .
Finally, we consider, for a given connected space $X$, its $p$-plus-construction $X^+_p$; then the canonical map $X\to X^+$ is a universal $\mathbb{F}_p$-acyclic map out of $X$ where $\mathbb{F}_p$ is the field with $p$ elements. We show that if $X$ is such that $\pi_1(X)$ has a perfect subgroup of finite index, then the map $C_*(GX,\mathbb{F}_p)\to C_*(GX^+_p,\mathbb{F}_p)$ admits a purely algebraic description as a certain Bousfield localization of the category of dg $C_*(GX,\mathbb{F}_p)$-modules. Note that $H_0(GX,\mathbb{F}_p)\cong \mathbb{F}_p[\pi_1(X)]$, the $\mathbb{F}_p$--group ring of $\pi_1(X)$. In the case when $\pi_1(X)$ is \emph{finite} we show that the dg algebra $C_*(GX^+_p,\mathbb{F}_p)$ is (quasi-isomorphic to) the derived localization of $C_*(GX,\mathbf{k})$ at a certain idempotent of $\mathbb{F}_p[\pi_1(X)]$. In the case $X$ has no higher homotopy groups, i.e. is the classifying space of a finite group, this is essentially equivalent to the main result \cite{Ben} (which, however, was formulated without invoking derived localizaton).
\subsection{Notation and conventions} We work in the category of $\mathbb Z$-graded (dg) modules over a fixed commutative ground ring $\mathbf{k}$; an object in this category is a pair $(V,d_V)$ where $V$ is a graded $\mathbf{k}$-module and $d_V$ is a differential on it; it will always be assumed to be of homological type (so it lowers the degree of a homogeneous element). Unmarked tensor products and homomorphisms will be understood to be taken over $\mathbf{k}$; we will abbreviate `differential graded' to `dg'. The \emph{suspension} of a graded vector space $V$ is the graded vector space $\Sigma V$ so that $(\Sigma V)_i=V_{i+1}$. Quasi-isomorphisms and isomorphisms will be denoted by $\simeq$ and $\cong$ respectively.
A dg algebra is an associative monoid in the dg category of dg vector spaces with respect to the standard monoidal structure given by the tensor product. Given a map $A\to B$ of dg algebras (not necessarily central) we will refer to $B$ as a dg $A$-algebra. A dg vector space $V$ is a (left) dg module over a dg algebra $A$ if it is supplied with a dg map $A\otimes V\to V$ satisfying the usual conditions of associativity and unitality; a right dg module is defined similarly.
The categories of dg algebras and dg modules over a dg algebra admit structures of closed model categories; cf. \cite{BCL} for an overview. We will denote by $\DGA_{\mathbf{k}}$ the category of dg $\mathbf{k}$-algebras and for a dg algebra $A$ we write $D(A)$ for its derived category. Recall that objects of $D(A)$ are cofibrant left dg $A$-modules and morphisms are chain homotopy classes of dg module maps. For a dg algebra $A$, a left dg $A$-module $M$ and a right dg $A$-module $N$ there is defined their tensor product $N\otimes_A M$ and their \emph{derived} tensor product $N\otimes^{\Le}_AM$. The latter is defined as either $N^\prime\otimes_A M$ or $N\otimes_A M^\prime$ where $M^\prime$ and $N^\prime$ are cofibrant replacements of $M$ and $N$ respectively. Similarly for two left (or right) dg $A$-modules $M,N$ their derived hom $\RHom_A(M,N)$ is defined as $\Hom(M^\prime,N)$ where $M^\prime$ is a cofibrant replacement of $M$.
The category of reduced simplicial sets will be denoted by $\SSet_*$ and the category of simplicial groups -- by $\SGp$. By `a space' we mean `a simplicial set', nevertheless all the results in the paper are of homotopy invariant nature and so they make sense and are valid for topological spaces by the well known correspondence between topological spaces and simplicial sets.
\section{Derived free products of dg algebras}
Let $A,B$ and $C$ be graded algebras with $A$ being flat over $\mathbf{k}$. In this case we can form the free product $B*_A C$, this is again a graded algebra satisfying an appropriate universal property; if $A, B$ and $C$ are dg algebras, then so is $B*_A C$. The derived version $B*^{\Le}_AC$ is described in \cite[Section 2]{BCL}. This is a homotopy pushout in the closed model category of dg algebras and can be defined concretely as $B^\prime *_AC^\prime$ where $B^\prime$ and $C^\prime$ are $A$-cofibrant replacements of $A$-algebras $B$ and $C$ respectively.
For an $A$-algebra $B$ we denote by $\overline{B}$ the cokernel of the unit map $A\to B$; it is clearly a dg $A$-bimodule. Then we have the following important technical result.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:filtration}
Let $A$ be a dg algebra and $B,C$ be dg $A$-algebras. Assume that the unit maps $A\to B$ and $A\to C$ are cofibrations of left $A$-modules. Then $B*_AC$ has a natural filtration by dg $A$-bimodules $0=F_0\subset B=F_1\subset F_2\subset\ldots$ with $ \bigcup_n F_n=B*_AC$ and $F_nF_k\subset F_{n+k}$
and such that
\begin{align}\label{eq:filtration}
F_{2n+1}/F_{2n}\cong B\otimes_A(\overline{C}\otimes_A\overline{B})^{\otimes_{A}n};\\
F_{2n+2}/F_{2n+1}\cong B\otimes_A(\overline{C}\otimes_A\overline{B})^{\otimes_{A}n}\otimes_A\overline{C}
\end{align}
for $n\geq 0$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $F_{2n}, F_{2n+1}\subset B*_AC$ be spanned by the monomials $b_1c_1\ldots b_nc_n$ and $b_1c_1\ldots b_nc_n b_{n+1}$ with $b_i\in B$ and $c_i\in C$ respectively. It is clear that this filtration consists of dg $A$-bimodules, is exhaustive and multiplicative. Since $A\to B$ and $A\to C$ are cofibrations of left dg $A$-modules, it follows that $\overline{B}$ and $\overline{C}$ are cofibrant as left $A$-modules, in particular they are $A$-flat, after forgetting the differential. Now the required conclusion on the associated graded quotients follows from \cite[Theorem 4.6]{Coh1}, cf. also \cite[page 206]{Coh} for a simpler argument in the case when $C$ and $B$ are \emph{free} as left $A$-modules.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}\label{rem:weaker}
In fact, the conclusion of Lemma \ref{lem:filtration} holds under the weaker assumptions that $A\to B$ and $A\to C$ are injections and $\overline{B},\overline{C}$ are flat left $A$-modules since this is what is required for the application of \cite[Theorem 4.6]{Coh1}. Moreover, modifying the filtration so that its components are spanned by monomials \emph{ending} with an element in $B$ rather than beginning with one, one obtains a similar conclusion under the assumption that $\overline{B},\overline{C}$ are flat \emph{right} $A$-modules.
\end{rem}
\begin{cor}\label{cor:derivedfree} Let $A,B, C$ be as in Lemma \ref{lem:filtration}. Then there is quasi-isomorphism of dg algebras $B*_AC\simeq B*^{\Le}_AC$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Let $B^\prime, C^\prime$ be $A$-cofibrant replacements of $B$ and $C$ respectively. Then we have a map $$f:B*^{\Le}_AC:=B^\prime *_AC^\prime\to B*_AC.$$
Consider the filtrations on $B*_AC$ and $B^\prime *_AC^\prime$ described in Lemma \ref{lem:filtration}. Then the map $f$ induces a map on the associated graded to these filtrations and, since $\overline{B}, \overline{B^\prime}, \overline{C}, \overline{C^\prime}$ are cofibrant as left $A$-modules, we conclude that the $E_1$-terms of the corresponding spectral sequences are isomorphic and the desired conclusion follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem} It is natural to ask whether the conclusion of Corollary \ref{cor:derivedfree} holds under weaker conditions
than $A$-cofibrancy of $B$ and $C$, cf. Remark \ref{rem:weaker}. Assuming that the unit maps $A\to B$ and $A\to C$ are injections and that $\overline{B}$ and $\overline{C}$ are flat as left $A$ modules (disregarding the differential) allows to identify the associated graded of the appropriate filtration of $B*_AC$. However in order to ensure that the iterated tensor product of $\overline{B}$ and $\overline{C}$ and $B$ computes the \emph{derived} tensor product, one has to assume, in addition, that $\overline{B}$ and $\overline{C}$ are \emph{homotopically flat} as left dg $A$-modules. Recall that a left dg $A$-module $M$ is called homotopically flat if for any right $A$-module $N$ it holds that $N\otimes^{\Le}_A M\simeq N\otimes_A M$; e.g. any cofibrant module is homotopically flat. Thus, $B*_AC$ computes the derived free product if the unit maps $A\to B, A\to C$ are injections and $\overline{B},\overline{C}$ are flat left $A$-modules as well as homotopically flat left $A$-modules (such dg modules are called \emph{semi-flat}, cf. for example \cite{CH} regarding this nomenclature).
Of course, `left' can be replaced with `right' in the above discussion, cf. Remark \ref{rem:weaker}. In particular, the conclusion of Corollary \ref{cor:derivedfree} holds under the assumption that the unit maps $A\to B$ and $A\to C$ are cofibrations of \emph{right} dg $A$-modules.
\end{rem}
\section{Modules of relative differentials for dg algebras}
In this section we recall the construction of the modules of relative differentials for dg algebras. The treatment of \cite{Coh} extends to the dg case in an obvious manner.
\begin{defi}
For a dg $A$-algebra $B$ the module of relative differentials $\Omega_{A}(B)$ is the kernel of the multiplication map:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:redif}
\Omega_A(B)\to B\otimes_AB\to B.
\end{equation}
Thus, $\Omega_A(B)$ is a dg $B$-bimodule. If $A\to B^\prime$ is an $A$-cofibrant replacement of the $A$-algebra $B$, we define the derived module of relative differentials $\Omega_A^{\Le}(B):=\Omega_{A}(B^\prime)$. Thus, $\Omega^{\Le}_A(B)$ is well defined as an object in the homotopy category of dg $B$-bimodules.
\end{defi}
Suppose that $f:A\to B$ is a cofibration of left dg $A$-modules. The short exact sequence (\ref{eq:redif}) is split as in the category of left dg $B$-modules by a map $B\to B\otimes_AB$; $b\mapsto b\otimes 1$. The cokernel of the latter map is isomorphic as a left dg $B$-module to $B\otimes_A \bar{B}$ (recall that $\bar{B}$ is the cokernel of $f$). It follows that $B\otimes_A\overline{B}$ can be identified with $\Omega_A(B)$ as a left dg $B$-module.
The formation of the module of relative differentials behaves well with respect to free products:
\begin{lem}\label{lem:differential}
Let $A,B$ and $C$ be dg algebras. \begin{enumerate}\item There is an isomorphism of dg $B*_AC$-bimodules:
\[
\Omega_{A}(B*_AC)\cong \big((B*_AC)\otimes_B\Omega_A(B)\otimes_B (B*_AC)\big)\oplus \big((B*_AC)\otimes_C\Omega_A(C)\otimes_C (B*_AC)\big).
\]
\item
The maps $\Omega_A(B)\to \Omega_{A}(B*_AC)$ and $\Omega_A(C)\to \Omega_{A}(B*_AC)$ induced by the canonical maps
$B\to B*_AC$ and $C\to B*_AC$ are the compositions
\[
\Omega_A(B)\xrightarrow{1\otimes\operatorname{id}\otimes 1} (B*_AC)\otimes_B\Omega_A(B)\otimes_B (B*_AC)\hookrightarrow \Omega_{A}(B*_AC)
\]
and
\[
\Omega_A(C)\xrightarrow{1\otimes\operatorname{id}\otimes 1}(B*_AC)\otimes_B\Omega_A(C)\otimes_C (B*_AC)\hookrightarrow \Omega_{A}(B*_AC)
\] \end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Part (1) of the statement above is \cite[Theorem 5.8.8]{Coh}. Unraveling the proof in op. cit. yields (2).
\end{proof}
\section{Equivalence of homotopy and homology epimorphisms}
We will now introduce the notions of homotopy and homological epimorphisms for dg algebras and show that they are equivalent.
\begin{defi}
Let $f:A\to B$ be a map of dg algebras making $B$ into a dg $A$-bimodule.\begin{enumerate}
\item $f$ is said to be a \emph{homological epimorphism} if the multiplication map $B\otimes^{\Le}_AB\to B$ is a quasi-isomorphism.
\item $f$ is said to be a \emph{homotopy epimorphism} if the codiagonal map $B*^{\Le}_AB\to B$ is a quasi-isomorphism.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defi}
\begin{rem}Homotopy epimorphism can be defined in any closed model category. The notion of a homological epimorphism is more restrictive as it requires the structure of a closed model category (or something similar) on modules over monoids in a given closed model category. It would be interesting to investigate whether the equivalence between homological and homotopy epimorphism is a general categorical phenomenon (rather than special to dg algebras).
Homological epimorphisms of dg algebras were studied in \cite{Pauk}. Their exceptionally good property is that they induce smashing localization functors on the level of derived categories (indeed they are characterized by this property).
\end{rem}
We have the following characterization of homological epimorphisms, whose proof is a straightforward consequence of definitions.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:acyclicdiff}
A map $A\to B$ is a homological epimorphism if an only if $\Omega^{\Le}_A(B)$ is acyclic.
\end{lem}
\begin{flushright} \ensuremath{\square
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:main}
A dg algebra map $A\to B$ is a homological epimorphism if and only if it is a homotopy epimorphism.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Without loss of generality we can assume that $A\to B$ is a cofibration of dg algebras; then $B*_AB\simeq B*^{\Le}_AB$. Suppose that $A\to B$ is a homological epimorphism. It suffices to show that the map $\operatorname{id}*1:B\cong B*_AA\to B*_AB$ is a quasi-isomorphism. Considering the filtration $\{F_n\}$ on $B*_AB$ constructed in Lemma \ref{lem:filtration} and taking into account that $B\otimes_A \overline{B}\simeq 0$ since $A\to B$ is a homological epimorphism, we conclude that the associated graded quotients $F_n/F_{n-1}$ are acyclic for $n>0$ and so $\operatorname{id}*1:B\to B*_AB$ is indeed a quasi-isomorphism.
Conversely, suppose that $A\to B$ is a homotopy epimorphism; we will show that $\Omega^{\Le}_A(B)\simeq \Omega_A(B)$ is acyclic. We have the following quasi-isomorphisms of $B$-bimodules:
\begin{align*}
\Omega_A(B)&\simeq \Omega_A(B*_AB)\\
&\simeq\big(B*_AB\otimes_B\Omega_A(B)\otimes_B B*_AB\big)\oplus \big(B*_AB\otimes_B\Omega_A(B)\otimes_B B*_AB\big)\\
&\simeq \Omega_A(B)\oplus\Omega_A(B).
\end{align*}
Here the second quasi-isomorphism follows from Lemma \ref{lem:differential} (1) and the third -- since $B*_AB\simeq B$ and taking into account that $B*_AB$ is cofibrant both as a left and right $B$-module. By Lemma \ref{lem:differential} (2) the map $B\xrightarrow{\operatorname{id}*1} B*_AB$ (that is a quasi-isomorphism) induces a quasi-isomorphism
$\Omega_A(B)\simeq \Omega_A(B)\oplus\Omega_A(B)$ that is also the inclusion into the left direct summand. This is only possible if $\Omega_A(B)\simeq 0$ as required.\end{proof}
\section{$\mathbf{k}$-acyclic maps}
Recall that there is a left Quillen functor $G:\SSet_*\mapsto\SGp$ that is part of a Quillen equivalence between the categories of reduced simplicial sets and simplicial groups, cf. \cite{GoJ}. We will also consider the left Quillen functor $C_*:\SSet_*\mapsto \DGA_{\mathbf{k}}$ associating to a simplicial group $H$ its normalized simplicial chain complex supplied with the Pontrjagin product $C_*(H,\mathbf{k})\otimes C_*(H,\mathbf{k})\to C_*(H,\mathbf{k})$ induced by the simplicial group operation $H\times H\to H$.
Interpreted topologically, the composite functor $C_*\circ G:\SSet_*\to\DGA_{\mathbf{k}}$ associates to a reduced simplicial set $X$ a dg algebra that is quasi-isomorphic to the chain algebra on the loop space of $|X|$, the geometric realization of $X$. An obvious modification allows one to consider it as a functor from the homotopy category of connected (not necessarily reduced) spaces.
\begin{defi}
A map between connected spaces is $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic if its homotopy fibre $F$ is $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic: $H_n(F,\mathbf{k})=0, n>0$ and $H_0(F,\mathbf{k})=\mathbf{k}$.
\end{defi}
\begin{rem}
It is customary to call $\mathbb Z$-acyclic maps simply acyclic.
\end{rem}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:acyclicmap}
Let $f:X\to Y$ be a map between connected spaces. Then $f$ is $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic and induces an isomorphism $\pi_1(X)\cong \pi_1(Y)$ if and only if the induced map of dg algebras $C_*(GX, \mathbf{k})\to C_*(GY, \mathbf{k})$ is a quasi-isomorphism.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose first that $X$ and $Y$ are both simply-connected. Let $f$ be $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic. It follows by considering the Serre spectral sequence of $f$ that the dg coalgebras $C_*(X,\mathbf{k})$ and $ C_*(Y,\mathbf{k})$ are quasi-isomorphic. Then the spectral sequences associated with cobar-constructions
of the chain coalgebras $C_*(X,\mathbf{k})$ and $ C_*(Y,\mathbf{k})$ converge strongly to $H_*(GX, \mathbf{k})$ and $H_*(GY, \mathbf{k})$ respectively (this is where simple connectivity is needed) and it follows that the dg algebras $C(GX, \mathbf{k})$ and $C_*(GY, \mathbf{k})$ are indeed quasi-isomorphic.
Conversely, if the map of dg algebras $C_*(GX, \mathbf{k})\to C_*(GY, \mathbf{k})$ is a quasi-isomorphism then the bar-construction spectral sequence
implies that $f:X\to Y$ induces an isomorphism on $\mathbf{k}$-homology and thus, again by simple connectivity and the Serre spectral sequence of $f$, it is a $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic map. The desired statement is therefore proved in the simply-connected case.
If $X$ and $Y$ are not simply-connected, denote by $\overline{X}$ and $\overline{Y}$ their universal covers and note that the condition that $f:X\to Y$ induces an isomorphism on fundamental groups implies that there is a homotopy pullback diagram of spaces:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pullback}
\xymatrix{\overline{X}\ar^{\overline{f}}[r]\ar[d]&\overline{Y}\ar[d]\\
X\ar^f[r]&Y
}
\end{equation}
where the map $\overline{f}$ is induced by $f$. Then the homotopy fibre of $\overline{f}$ is $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic and since $\overline{X},\overline{Y}$ are simply-connected we obtain by the argument above that the dg algebras $C_*(G\overline {X},\mathbf{k})$ and $C_*(G\overline {Y},\mathbf{k})$ are quasi-isomorphic. But clearly there is a homotopy fibre sequence of simplicial groups
\begin{equation}\label{eq:fibre1}
G\overline{X}\to GX\to GB\pi_1(X)\simeq \pi_1(X)
\end{equation}
and similarly
\begin{equation}\label{eq:fibre2}
G\overline{Y}\to GX\to GB\pi_1(Y)\simeq \pi_1(Y)
\end{equation}
where $B\pi_1(X), B\pi_1(Y)$ are classifying spaces of $\pi_1(X)$ and $\pi_1(Y)$ respectively. It follows that the maps of dg algebras $C_*(G\overline{X},\mathbf{k})\to C_*(GX, \mathbf{k})$ and $C_*(G\overline{Y},\mathbf{k})\to C_*(GY, \mathbf{k})$ induce homology isomorphisms in positive degrees and therefore the map $C_*(GX,\mathbf{k})\to C_*(GY, \mathbf{k})$
also has this property. Finally, $H_0(GX,\mathbf{k})\cong \mathbf{k}[\pi_1(X)]\to \mathbf{k}[\pi_1(Y)]\cong H_0(GY, \mathbf{k})$ is also an isomorphism and so the dg algebras $C_*(GX,\mathbf{k})$ and $ C_*(GY, \mathbf{k})$ are indeed quasi-isomorphic as claimed.
Conversely, suppose that the induced map $C_*(GX,\mathbf{k})\to C_*(GY, \mathbf{k})$ is a quasi-isomorphism. In particular it gives an isomorphism $H_0(GX,\mathbf{k})\cong\mathbf{k}[\pi_1(X)]\to \mathbf{k}[\pi_1(Y)]\cong H_0(GY,\mathbf{k})$ which implies that $f$ induces an isomorphism $\pi_1(X)\to \pi_1(Y)$. Again, we conclude that diagram (\ref{eq:pullback}) is a homotopy pullback. Similarly we conclude from (\ref{eq:fibre1}) and (\ref{eq:fibre2}) that the dg algebras $C_*(G\overline{X},\mathbf{k})$ and $C_*(G\overline{Y},\mathbf{k})$ are quasi-isomorphic and therefore (because of simple-connectivity of $\overline{X}$ and $\overline{Y})$, the map $\overline{f}$ is a $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic map. Therefore, by \ref{eq:pullback} $f$ is also a $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic map.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
If $\mathbf{k}=\mathbb Z$ then Lemma \ref{lem:acyclicmap} implies that a map $X\to Y$ between connected spaces is a weak equivalence if and only if the induced map $C_*(GX, \mathbb Z)\to C_*(GY, \mathbb Z)$ is a quasi-isomorphism. Surprisingly, this simple and fundamental fact appears to have been noticed only recently, cf. \cite{CHL,RWZ}.
\end{rem}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:acyclic}
Let $f:X\to Y$ be a map between two connected spaces. Then the following are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $f$ is a $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic map.
\item The induced map of dg algebras $C_*(GX,\mathbf{k})\to C_*(GY,\mathbf{k})$ is a homotopy epimorphism.
\item The induced map of dg algebras $C_*(GX,\mathbf{k})\to C_*(GY,\mathbf{k})$ is a homological epimorphism.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
In light of Theorem \ref{thm:main} it suffices to prove the equivalence of (1) and (2). Without loss of generality we assume that $X$ and $Y$ are reduced (as opposed to merely connected) simplicial sets. The functor $X\mapsto C_*(GX,\mathbf{k})$ is a composition of two left Quillen functors and thus, is itself left Quillen and so it preserves homotopy pushouts. It follows that there is a quasi-isomorphism of dg algebras \[C_*(G(Y*^{\Le}_XY),\mathbf{k})\simeq C_*(GY,\mathbf{k})*^{\Le}_{C_*(GX,\mathbf{k})}C_*(GY,\mathbf{k}).\]
Let $f:X\to Y$ be a $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic map. Then the map $Y\to Y*^{\Le}_XY$ mapping $Y$ to the first (or second) wedge component of $Y*^{\Le}_XY$ is likewise $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic and, moreover, by the van Kampen theorem, induces an isomorphism on the fundamental groups. By Lemma \ref{lem:acyclicmap} the corresponding map $C_*(GY,\mathbf{k})\to C_*(G(Y*^{\Le}_XY),\mathbf{k})\simeq C_*(GY,\mathbf{k})*^{\Le}_{C_*(GX,\mathbf{k})}C_*(GY,\mathbf{k})$ is a quasi-isomorphism, so $C_*(GX,\mathbf{k})\to C_*(GY,\mathbf{k})$ is a homotopy epimorphism. This chain of implications is clearly reversible and so we obtain the desired if and only if statement.
\end{proof}
Let $\mathbf{k}$ be a field. It is known \cite{Hol} that for a connected simplicial set $X$ the derived category $D_{\mathbf{k}}(|X|)$ of cohomologically locally constant sheaves of $\mathbf{k}$-modules on $|X|$, the topological realization of $X$ (also known as infinity local systems on $|X|$) is equivalent to $D(C_*(GX,\mathbf{k}))$, the derived category of the chain algebra on the based loop space of $X$. This leads to the following result.
\begin{cor}
A map $f:X\to Y$ of connected spaces is $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic if an only if the inverse image functor $f^{-1}:D_{\mathbf{k}}(|Y|)\to D_{\mathbf{k}}(|X|)$ is fully faithful.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
By the correspondence between cohomologically locally constant sheaves and modules on the chain algebra of based loop spaces mentioned above, the functor $f^{-1}:D_{\mathbf{k}}(|Y|)\to D_{\mathbf{k}}(|X|)$ is fully faithful if an only if the restriction functor $D(C_*(GY,\mathbf{k}))\to D(C_*(GX,\mathbf{k}))$ is fully faithful. The latter is equivalent by \cite[Theorem 3.9 (6)]{Pauk} to the map $C_*(GY,\mathbf{k}))\to C_*(GX,\mathbf{k})$ being a homological epimorphism which is, by Theorem \ref{thm:acyclic}, is equivalent to $f:X\to Y$ being a $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic map.
\end{proof}
\section{Plus-construction and derived localization}
\subsection{Recollection on plus-construction, localization and completion of spaces} A $\mathbf{k}$-plus-construction (called the \emph{partial $\mathbf{k}$-completion} in \cite{BK}) of a connected space $X$ is a space $X^+_{\mathbf{k}}$ supplied with a map $X\to X^+_{\mathbf{k}}$ that is $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic and is terminal among
homotopy classes of $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic maps out of $X$. The space $X^+_{\mathbf{k}}$ is \emph{local} with respect to $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic spaces,
i.e. if $Y$ is $\mathbf{k}$-acyclic, then any basepointed map $Y\to X^+_{\mathbf{k}}$ is homotopic to the constant map; and the map $X\to X^+_{\mathbf{k}}$ is initial among homotopy classes of maps from $X$ into local spaces.
A closely related notion is that of a \emph{localization} with respect to the homology theory $H\mathbf{k}$; for a space $X$ its $H\mathbf{k}$ localization is a space $L_{H\mathbf{k}}X$ supplied with a map $X\to L_{H\mathbf{k}}X$ inducing an isomorphism in homology with coefficients in $\mathbf{k}$ and terminal among homotopy classes of such maps (note that $H\mathbf{k}$ localization is called \emph{semi-$\mathbf{k}$-completion} in \cite{BK}). The space $L_{H\mathbf{k}}X$ is \emph{local} with respect to
$H\mathbf{k}$-homology equivalences i.e. if $f:Y\to Z$ is an $H\mathbf{k}$-homology equivalence then the induced map on homotopy classes
$[Z,L_{H\mathbf{k}}X]\to [Y,L_{H\mathbf{k}}X]$ is an isomorphism. Furthermore, the map $X\to L_{H\mathbf{k}}X$ is initial among homotopy classes of maps from $X$ into $L_{H\mathbf{k}}$-local spaces. The space $L_{H\mathbf{k}}X$ is `farther away' from $X$ than $X^+_{\mathbf{k}}$ in the sense that the map $X\to L_{H\mathbf{k}}X$ always factors through $X^+_{\mathbf{k}}$; in favourable cases $X^+_{\mathbf{k}}\simeq L_{H\mathbf{k}}X$.
Finally, there is a notion of a $\mathbf{k}$-completion $X\to X_\mathbf{k}^{\wedge}$; the latter map always factors through $L_{H\mathbf{k}}$. Often we have $L_{H\mathbf{k}}X\simeq X_{\mathbf{k}}^{\wedge}$, in this case $X$ is called \emph{${\mathbf{k}}$-good}.
From now on, we will assume that $\mathbf{k}=\mathbb{F}_p$, although all arguments and statements below are valid for an arbitrary field of characteristic $p$. We will write $X^+_p, X_p$ and $X^{\wedge}_p$ for $X^+_{\mathbb{F}_p}, L_{H\mathbb{F}_p}X$ and $X^{\wedge}_{\mathbb{F}_p}$ respectively.
There is a class of spaces $X$ for which $X^+_p$ is particularly well-behaved. Recall that
a group $G$ is \emph{$p$-perfect} if $H_1(G,\mathbb{F}_p)=0$. The maximal $p$-perfect subgroup of $G$ will be denoted by $\Pe(G)$; it is normal in $G$ and the quotient $G/\Pe(G)$ is $p$-\emph{hypoabelian}, i.e. it does not have nontrivial $p$-perfect subgroups.
\begin{defi}
A group $G$ is \emph{$p$-reasonable} if $G$ contains a $p$-perfect subgroup of finite index (equivalently, $G/\Pe(G)$ is a finite $p$-group).
A connected space $X$ is $p$-reasonable if $\pi_1(X)$ is.
\end{defi}
\begin{rem}
Clearly if $G$ is $p$-reasonable then the augmentation ideal in the group ring $\mathbb{F}_p[G/\Pe(G)]$ is nilpotent.
Conversely, if $\mathbb{F}_p[G/\Pe(G)]$ has this property then $G/\Pe(G)$ is a finite $p$-group by \cite{Connell} and therefore $G$ is $p$-reasonable.
\end{rem}
\begin{prop}\label{prop:reasonable}
Let $X$ be $p$-reasonable. Then:
\begin{enumerate}\item $X$ is $p$-good (so that $X^{\wedge}_p\simeq X_p)$.
\item $\pi_1(X^{\wedge}_p)\cong \pi_1(X)/\Pe(\pi_1(X))$.
\item There is a weak equivalence $X_p\simeq X^+_p$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Parts (1) and (2) of the required statement are proved \cite[Part III, Proposition 1.11]{AKO} and similar arguments also prove (3). Namely, consider the canonical map $f:X\to B[\pi_1(X)/\Pe(\pi_1(X)]$ induced by the quotient map $\pi_1(X)\to \pi_1(X)/\Pe(\pi_1(X))$ and recall from \cite[Chapter VII, 6.2]{BK} that $X^+_p$ is constructed as a fibrewise completion of the map $f$ (converted into a fibration). Denoting the homotopy fibre of $f$ by $F$ we have therefore a homotopy fibre sequence of spaces
\begin{equation}\label{eq:fibresequence}
F^{\wedge}_p\to X^+_p\to B[\pi_1(X)/\Pe(\pi_1(X)].
\end{equation}
Now apply the functor of $p$-completion to the homotopy fibre sequence $F\to X\to B[\pi_1(X)/\Pe(\pi_1(X))]$. We obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:fibresequence'} F^{\wedge}_p\to X^{\wedge}_p\to B[\pi_1(X)/\Pe(\pi_1(X)]^{\wedge}_p
\end{equation} and this is also a homotopy fibre sequence by the $p$-mod Fibre Lemma of \cite[Chapter II, 5.1]{BK} and taking into account that the $p$-group $\pi_1(X)/\Pe(\pi_1(X))$ acts nilpotently on $\tilde{H}_*(F,\mathbb{F}_p)$.
There is a map from (\ref{eq:fibresequence}) to (\ref{eq:fibresequence'}) that is a weak equivalence on end terms (since $B[\pi_1(X)/\Pe(\pi_1(X))]$ is already $p$-complete) and it follows that it is a weak equivalence on the middle terms as required.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Derived localization of dg algebras} Let $A$ be a dg algebra and $s\in H_0(A)$ be a zero-dimensional cycle in $A$. In this situation one can construct \cite{BCL} another dg algebra $L_sA$ together with a dg algebra map $f:A\to L_s(A)$ such that $f(s)$ is invertible in $H_0(L_sA)$ and initial among the homotopy classes of maps out of $A$ with this property.
Moreover, the map $A\to L_sA$ can be interpreted as the Bousfield localization of $A$ as a (left) dg module over itself with respect to the map $r_s:A\to A; r_s(a)=as, a\in A$. It is also the \emph{nullification} of $A$ with respect to $A/s$, the cofibre of $r_s$, cf. \cite[4.10 and Proposition 4.11]{DG} regarding this result and terminology. There is a homotopy fibre sequence of left dg $A$-modules
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cellsequence}
L^sA\to A\to L_sA
\end{equation}
where $L^sA$ is the $s$-colocalization of $A$ (also known as $A/s$-cellularization and denoted by $\operatorname{Cell}_{A/s}(A)$ in \cite{DG}). This is a kind of a dualizing complex for left dg $A$ modules relative to $A/s$ and it has a nice interpretation in terms of classical homological algebra, cf. \cite[Section 4]{DG}:
\[
L^s(A)\simeq {\RHom}_{A}(A/s,A)\otimes^{\Le}_{\REnd_A(A/s,A/s)}A/s.
\]
The following example taken from \cite[Subsection 4.1]{DG} is instructive.
\begin{example}
Let $A=\mathbb{Z}$, the integers and $s=p$ so $A/s\cong \mathbb{Z}/p$, the cyclic group of prime order $p$. Then $L_p\mathbb{Z}\simeq \mathbb{Z}[\frac{1}{p}]$, and from (\ref{eq:cellsequence}) we obtain $L^p(\mathbb{Z})\simeq\Sigma^{-1}\big(\mathbb{Z}[\frac{1}{p}]/\mathbb{Z}\big)=:\Sigma^{-1}\mathbb{Z}/p^{\infty}$.
\end{example}
Assume that $s=e$ is an idempotent in $H_0(A)$; then $L_eA$ is quasi-isomorphic as a left $A$-module to the Bousfield localization of $A$ with respect to the localizing subcategory generated by the left dg $A$-module $A(1-e)$ (since $A(1-e)$ and $A/e\simeq A(1-e)\oplus \Sigma A(1-e)$ generate the same localizing subcategory). Therefore, by \cite{DG} there is a quasi-isomorphism of left dg $A$-modules:
\begin{align}\label{eq:cellularization}\begin{split}
L^e(A)\simeq& {\RHom}_{A}(A(1-e),A)\otimes^{\Le}_{\REnd_A(A(1-e),A(1-e))}A(1-e)\\ \simeq& A(1-e)\otimes^{\Le}_{(1-e)A(1-e)}(1-e)A.
\end{split}
\end{align}
The $A$-bimodule $I:=A(1-e)\otimes^{\Le}_{(1-e)A(1-e)}(1-e)A$ can be viewed as a `derived two-sided ideal' generated by the idempotent $1-e$ in $A$ in the sense that the homotopy cofibre $A/I$ (`derived quotient') of $A$ by $I$ is quasi-isomorphic to the derived localization $L_eA$. This resembles quotienting out by a two-sided ideal generated by an idempotent in a nonderived context.
\subsection{Algebraic description of the loop space of a $p$-plus-construction}Let $X$ be a connected space; below we will write $GX^+_p$ and $GX^{\wedge}_p$ for $G(X^+_p)$ and $G(X^{\wedge}_p)$ respectively. It follows from Theorem \ref{thm:acyclic} that the map of dg algebras $C_*(GX, \mathbb{F}_p)\to C_*(GX^+_p,\mathbb{F}_p)$ is a homology epimorphism and so, it is natural to ask for an algebraic description of this map. We will give such a description for a $p$-reasonable space; the result is particularly pleasant when $\pi_1(X)$ is a finite group.
Set $A:=C_*(GX,\mathbb{F}_p)$. There is a canonical map $C_*(GX,\mathbb{F}_p)\to H_0(GX,\mathbb{F}_p)\cong \mathbb{F}_p[\pi_1(X)]$ in the homotopy category of dg $\mathbb{F}_p$-algebras, and, since $\mathbb{F}_p[\pi_1(X)]$ is augmented, so is $C_*(GX,\mathbb{F}_p)$. Consider the homology functor $H\mathbb{F}_p:M\mapsto \mathbb{F}_p\otimes_A^{\Le}M$
on the category of dg $A$-modules. The notation $H\mathbb{F}_p$ is designed to invoke an analogy with the homology functor in the stable homotopy category given by smashing with the mod-$p$ Eilenberg MacLane spectrum (in fact, this is not merely an analogy since the category of dg algebras is Quillen equivalent to the category of algebras over the integral Eilenberg-MacLane spectrum $H\mathbb{Z}$, cf. \cite{Shipley}). We will denote by $\BL{M}$ the Bousfield localization of an $A$-module $M$ with respect
to this homology functor. Thus, we have a canonical map $M\to \BL{M}$ that is an
$H\mathbb{F}_p$-equivalence (i.e. induces a quasi-isomorphism upon applying $H{\mathbb{F}_p}$) and such that $\BL{M}$ is $H\mathbb{F}_p$-local (i.e. it does not admit homotopy nontrivial maps from $H\mathbb{F}_p$-acyclic modules).
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:localizationkernel} Let $X$ be a connected space. Then:\begin{enumerate}
\item If $X$ is $p$-reasonable then $C_*(GX^+_p,\mathbb{F}_p)$ is quasi-isomorphic to
$\BL{C_*(GX,\mathbb{F}_p)}$ and the canonical map
$C_*(GX,\mathbb{F}_p)\to C(GX^+_p,\mathbb{F}_p)$
is the $H\mathbb{F}_p$ localization map on the category of left dg $C_*(GX,\mathbb{F}_p)$-modules.
\item If $\pi_1(X)$ is a finite group then there exists an idempotent $e$ in $\mathbb{F}_p[\pi_1(X)]$ such that the dg algebra $C_*(GX^+_p,\mathbb{F}_p)$ is quasi-isomorphic to the derived localization $L_eC_*(GX,\mathbb{F}_p)$ and $C_*(GX,\mathbb{F}_p)\to C_*(GX^+_p,\mathbb{F}_p)$ is the $e$-localization map.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $X$ be $p$-reasonable, $A:=C_*(GX,\mathbb{F}_p)$ and $LA:=C_*(GX^+_p,\mathbb{F}_p)$. To show that $LA\simeq \BL{A}$ we need to show that \begin{enumerate}
\item[(a)]
the map $A\to LA$ is an $H\mathbb{F}_p$-equivalence and\item[(b)]
that $LA$ is $H\mathbb{F}_p$-local.
\end{enumerate}
Denote by $M$ the homotopy fibre of $A\to LA$; then $M\otimes^{\Le}_A LA\simeq 0$ and so
\[
\mathbb{F}_p\otimes^{\Le}_AM\simeq \mathbb{F}_p\otimes^{\Le}_ALA\otimes_{LA}^{\Le}M\simeq 0,
\]
which implies (a). Next, note that any dg $A$-module whose $A$-action is through the augmentation map $A\to \mathbb{F}_p$, is $H\mathbb{F}_p$-local. Indeed if $Y$ is such an $A$-module and $N$ is $H\mathbb{F}_p$-acyclic (i.e. $\mathbb{F}_p\otimes^{\Le}_AN\simeq 0$) then
\[
{\RHom}_{A}(N,Y)\simeq{\RHom}_{\mathbb{F}_p}(\mathbb{F}_p\otimes^{\Le}_AN,Y)\simeq 0.
\]
Since $X$ is $p$-reasonable, $H_0(LA)\cong\mathbb{F}_p[\pi_1(X^+_p)]$ is the $\mathbb{F}_p$-group ring of a finite $p$-group and is, thus, a local $\mathbb{F}_p$-algebra with a finite-dimensional nilpotent maximal ideal. Any dg $H_0(LA)$-module has a finite filtration induced by the powers of the maximal ideal in $H_0(LA)$ with associated graded quotients being $\mathbb{F}_p$-modules, which implies that any such module is $H\mathbb{F}_p$-local. The dg $A$-module $LA$ can be represented as a homotopy inverse limit of its Postnikov tower $\{LA[n],n=0,1,\ldots\}$ (so that $LA[n]$ has the same homology as $LA$ up to and including degree $n$ and zero in higher degrees). The homotopy cofibres $LA[n]/LA[n+1]$ are isomorphic as objects in $D(A)$ to dg $H_0(LA)$-modules and thus, are $H\mathbb{F}_p$-local. This implies that $LA$ is $H\mathbb{F}_p$-local and part (1) is therefore proved.
For part (2) let $e$ be a primitive idempotent
of $\mathbb{F}_p[\pi_1(X)]$ which acts as the identity on the trivial module of $\mathbb{F}_p[\pi_1(X)]$ and by 0 on other
simple modules; it is unique up to conjugation by a unit of $\mathbb{F}_p[\pi_1(X)]$. Then the localization map $f:A\to L_eA$ is easily seen to be the $H\mathbb{F}_p$-localization so the statement follows by part (1). Indeed, the homotopy fibre $A^e$ of $f$ has the property that $L_eA^e\simeq 0$ but then \begin{align*}\mathbb{F}_p\otimes^{\Le}_AA^e&\simeq \mathbb{F}_p\otimes^{\Le}_AL_eA\otimes_{A}A^e\\
&\simeq \mathbb{F}_p\otimes_A^{\Le} L_eA^e\simeq 0\end{align*} so $A^e$ is $H\mathbb{F}_p$-acyclic and $f$ is an $H\mathbb{F}_p$-local equivalence. Also $H_0(L_eA)$ is a local ring with residue field $\mathbb{F}_p$ so $L_eA$ is $H\mathbb{F}_p$-local.
\end{proof}
The following is a straightforward consequence of Theorem \ref{thm:localizationkernel} (1).
\begin{cor}\label{cor:Fploc}
Let $X$ be a $p$-reasonable space. The homotopy epimorphism of dg algebras $C_*(GX,\mathbb{F}_p)\to C_*(GX^{\wedge}_p,\mathbb{F}_p)$ induces a smashing localization functor on the derived categories \[D(C_*(GX,\mathbb{F}_p))\to D(C_*(GX^{\wedge}_p,\mathbb{F}_p))\] that coincides with $H\mathbb{F}_p$-localization on the \emph{perfect} subcategory of $ D(C_*(GX^{\wedge}_p,\mathbb{F}_p))$
\end{cor}
\begin{flushright} \ensuremath{\square
\begin{rem}
Note that the $H\mathbb{F}_p$-localization functor on the full derived category of $C_*(GX,\mathbb{F}_p)$ is not necessarily smashing, even if it is so on the perfect subcategory.
\end{rem}
\begin{cor}\label{cor:benson}
Let $X$ be a connected space with $\pi_1(X)$ finite and denote by $e$ an idempotent in $\mathbb{F}_p[\pi_1(X)]$ acting as the identity on the trivial $\pi_1(X)$-module and zero on other simple $\pi_1(X)$-modules. Then there is a homotopy cofibre sequence of dg $C_*(GX, \mathbb{F}_p)$-modules
\[
C_*(GX, \mathbb{F}_p)(1-e)\otimes^{\Le}_{(1-e)C_*(GX, \mathbb{F}_p)(1-e)}(1-e)C_*(GX, \mathbb{F}_p)\to C_*(GX, \mathbb{F}_p)\to C_*(GX^+_p, \mathbb{F}_p)
\]
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
This follows directly from Theorem \ref{thm:localizationkernel} (2), taking into account (\ref{eq:cellsequence}) and (\ref{eq:cellularization}).
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
Let us consider the case $X=BH$ where $H$ is a finite group; the homotopy theory of the loop space on $BH^{\wedge}_p\simeq BH^+_p$ has been studied extensively, see the review paper \cite{CoL} and the more recent \cite{Ben}. From Corollary \ref{cor:benson} we obtain a homotopy fibre sequence
\begin{equation}\label{eq:torsequence}
\mathbb{F}_p[H](1-e)\otimes^{\Le}_{(1-e)\mathbb{F}_p[H](1-e)}(1-e)\mathbb{F}_p[H]\to \mathbb{F}_p[H]\to C_*(G(BH^+_p), \mathbb{F}_p).
\end{equation}
Next, taking the homology long exact sequence of (\ref{eq:torsequence}) we obtain, for $n>1$:
\[
H_n(G(BH^+_p),\mathbb{F}_p)\cong {\Tor}_{n-1}^{(1-e)\mathbb{F}_p[H](1-e)}\big(\mathbb{F}_p[H](1-e),(1-e)\mathbb{F}_p[H]\big)
\]
while for $n=1$ we have an exact sequence
\[
0\to H_1(G(BH^+_p),\mathbb{F}_p)\to
\mathbb{F}_p[H](1-e)\otimes_{(1-e)\mathbb{F}_p[H](1-e)}(1-e)\mathbb{F}_p[H]\to
\mathbb{F}_p[H]\to
\mathbb{F}_p[H/\Pe(H)]\to 0
\]
which is the main result of \cite{Ben} obtained by different methods.
\end{rem}
Since the localization functor $L:D(C_*(GX, \mathbb{F}_p))\to D(C_*(GX^+_p, \mathbb{F}_p))$ is always smashing, it makes sense to ask whether it is \emph{finite}, i.e. whether the localizing subcategory $\Ker(L)\subseteq D(C_*(GX, \mathbb{F}_p))$ is compactly generated. Theorem \ref{thm:localizationkernel} (2) tells us that it is the case when $\pi_1(X)$ is finite (indeed in this case it is even a derived localization at a single element). It turns out that $\Ker L$ may not be compactly generated, even when $X$ is a classifying space of an abelian group. To see that, let us note first the following useful derived analogue of Nakayama's lemma; here $\Perf(A)$ stands for the perfect derived category of a ring $A$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:nakayama} Let $A$ be an ordinary ring and let $S=A/J$ be the quotient by its Jacobson radical $J$. Then the functor $S\otimes^{\Le}_A-:\Perf(A)\to\Perf(S)$ has the zero kernel.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
This is \cite[Lemma 5.3]{Kra}.
\end{proof}
\begin{example}
Let $G$ be a locally finite $p$-group; then $\mathbb{F}_p[G]$ is local by \cite{Nik} and so, its augmentation ideal coincides with the Jacobson radical. Assume additionally, that $G$ is divisible; e.g. $G=\mathbb{Z}/p^{\infty}\cong\bigcup_{n=1}^\infty \mathbb{Z}/p^{n}$. It follows from divisibility of $G$ that $H_1(G,\mathbb{F}_p)=0$ and so, $G$ is $p$-perfect. So, by Theorem \ref{thm:localizationkernel} (1) we have the smashing localization functor $L:D(\mathbb{F}_p[G])\to D(L_{H\mathbb{F}_p}\mathbb{F}_p[G])$; moreover $L$ coincides with the $H\mathbb{F}_p$-localization when restricted to perfect dg $\mathbb{F}_p[G]$-modules by Corollary \ref{cor:Fploc}. Thus, a perfect dg $\mathbb{F}_p[G]$-module $M$ is in $\Ker L$ if and only if $H_*(\mathbb{F}_p\otimes^{\Le}_{ \mathbb{F}_p[G]}M)=0$ and by Lemma \ref{lem:nakayama}, $M\simeq 0$.
\end{example}
\begin{rem}
The above example is a modification of Keller's counterexample to the Telescope Conjecture \cite{Kel}.
\end{rem}
\begin{example}
Let $p,q$ be prime numbers such that $q$ divides $p-1$. Then $\mathbb{Z}/q$ acts faithfully on $\mathbb{Z}/p$ and we can form the semidirect product
$\mathbb{Z}/p\rtimes\mathbb{Z}/q$, clearly it is $p$-perfect. Let $X:=B(\mathbb{Z}/p\rtimes\mathbb{Z}/q)$ An easy calculation with the Serre-Hochschild spectral sequence associated with the normal subgroup $\mathbb{Z}/p$ of $\mathbb{Z}/p\rtimes\mathbb{Z}/q$ shows that there is an isomorphism of graded algebras \[H^*(X^+_p,\mathbb{F}_p)\cong H^*(\mathbb{Z}/p\rtimes\mathbb{Z}/q, \mathbb{F}_p)\cong \mathbb{F}_p[x^\prime, y^\prime]\] with $x^\prime,y^\prime$ situated in cohomological degrees $2q-1$ and $2q$ respectively. Since $X^+_p$ is simply-connected, this implies that its lowest homotopy group is $\pi_{2q-1}X^+_p\cong \mathbb{Z}/p$. It follows that there exists a homotopy fibre sequence
\[
(S^{2q-1})^{\wedge}_p\xrightarrow{j} (S^{2q-1})^{\wedge}_p\rightarrow X^+_p
\]
where $j$ is the self-map of the $p$-completed $2q-1$-sphere $(S^{2q-1})^{\wedge}_p$ of degree $2q-1$ (this argument is presented in \cite[Chapter VII, Proposition 4.4]{BK} for $p=3,q=2$). Thus, $GX^+_p$ is the homotopy fibre of $j$, in particular the latter is a loop space. This is a well-known fact and it is also known that this loop space structure is unique, \cite[Corollary 1.2]{BL}.
Now let $p>3$ or $q>2$. The homology of $GX^+_p$ can be computed with the help of the cobar spectral sequence whose $E_2$ term is
$\operatorname{Ext}_{H^*(X^+_p,\mathbb{F}_p)}(\mathbb{F}_p,\mathbb{F}_p)\cong \mathbb{F}_p[x,y]$ with $|x|=2q-2$ and $|y|=2q-1$. Taking into account the Hopf algebra structure on this spectral sequence with $x,y$ primitive, we conclude that it collapses and there is an isomorphism of graded algebras
$H_*(GX^+_p,\mathbb{F}_p)\cong \mathbb{F}_p[x,y]$. Note that the dg algebra $C_*(GX^+_p,\mathbb{F}_p)$ is \emph{not} formal
i.e. it is not quasi-isomorphic to its homology. Indeed, if it were, then $C^*(X^+_p,\mathbb{F}_p)$ would likewise be formal and quasi-isomorphic to $H^*(X^+_p,\mathbb{F}_p)\cong\mathbb{F}_p[x^\prime, y^\prime]$, however such a result is incompatible with the minimal model of $C^*(\mathbb{Z}/p,\mathbb{F}_p)$ computed in \cite{Mad}.
The case $p=3,q=3$ requires a separate treatment since the Hopf algebra structure on the cobar spectral sequence for $GX^+_p$ is insufficient for deducing the multiplicative structure on $H_*(GX^+_p,\mathbb{F}_p)$. Note also that in this case $X\cong BS_3$, the classifying space of the symmetric group on three letters; an idempotent in $\mathbb{F}_3[S_3]$ figuring in the formulation of Theorem \ref{thm:localizationkernel} can be found explicitly; some possible choices are $-(12)-1, -(13)-1$ and $-(23)-1$. Let $e$ be any one of these. Then the dg algebra $L_e\mathbb{F}_3[S_3]\simeq C_*(GX^+_3,\mathbb{F}_3)$ is formal and quasi-isomorphic to the graded algebra (with zero differential) generated over $\mathbb{F}_3$ by two indeterminates $x,y$ with $|x|=2$ and $|y|=3$ subject to the relation $xy=yx$ and $x^3=y^2$ (note that this is \emph{not} a graded commutative algebra, although its associated graded with respect to the powers of the maximal ideal $(x,y)$ is isomorphic to the graded commutative polynomial algebra $\mathbb{F}_3[x,y]$).
To obtain this result, we will realise $\BL{\mathbb{F}_3[S_3]}$ as a `squeezed resolution', following Benson \cite{Ben}.
Let $\alpha:Ae \to A(1-e)$ and $\beta:A(1-e)\to Ae$ be nonzero homomorphisms; both are unique up to multiplication by a nonzero scalar. Then the dg $A$-module $P=(P_i,d_i)$ given by
$$
P_i = \begin{cases} A(1-e) & \text{if } i>0 \\ Ae & \text{if } i=0 \\ 0 & \text{if } i<0 \end{cases},
\qquad
d_i = \begin{cases} \alpha\circ\beta & \text{if } i>1 \\ \beta & \text{if } i=1 \\ 0 & \text{if } i<1 \end{cases}
$$
is a left $\mathbb{F}_3$-squeezed resolution for $S_3$, in the sense of \cite[Definition 3.2]{Ben}. The chain maps $z(n):P\to\Sigma^{-n} P$
given by
$$
z(n)_i = \begin{cases} \Sigma^{-n} & \text{if } i>0 \\ \Sigma^{-n}\circ\alpha & \text{if } i=0 \\ 0 & \text{if } i<n \end{cases}
$$
for $n\geq 2$, together with the identity map on $P$, descend to a basis of $\Hom^\ast_{D(A)}(P,P)\cong \Hom^\ast_{D(A)}(A,P)\cong H(P)$.
Since
$z(m)\circ z(n)= z(m+n)$ for all $m,n\geq 2$, as is easily verified, it follows that
$L_e\mathbb{F}_3[S_3]\simeq \RHom^{\ast}_A(P,P)$ is quasi-isomorphic to the subalgebra generated by $z(2)$ and $z(3)$, which is a graded algebra with the claimed presentation.
\begin{rem}
Some examples of computation of $H_*(GX^+_p,\mathbb{F}_p)$ for $X$ a classifying space of a finite group are presented in \cite[Section 13C]{BGS}, in particular
when this finite group is $\mathbb{Z}/p\rtimes \mathbb{Z}/q$. The special case $p=3,q=2$ was not noticed in op. cit.
\end{rem}
\end{example}
|
\section{Introduction}
The incompressible Euler equation describes the behavior of homogeneous, inviscid and volume-preserving fluids,
\begin{align*}
\begin{cases}
\partial_t u + (u\cdot \nabla )u +\nabla p =0 &\quad(x,t)\in\mathbb{R}^n \times \mathbb{R}\\
\div u =0\\
u|_{t=0} = u_0.
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
Two unknowns $u$ and $p$ present the fluid velocity and pressure, respectively. For simplicity, we often work in the vorticity formulation for the Euler. In particular, the vorticity $\om = -\partial_2 u_1 + \partial_1 u_2$ in the two-dimensional space solves \begin{align}\label{Euler.eq}
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \om + (u\cdot \nabla )\om =0 &\quad(x,t)\in\mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}\\
u = \nabla^\perp \psi, \quad \De \psi = \om\\
\om|_{t=0} = \om_0, \tag{E}
\end{cases}
\end{align}
where $\nabla^\perp = (-\partial_2,\partial_1)$. Then, the velocity $u$ can be recovered from the vorticity $\om$ by the Biot-Savart law,
\[
u(x,t) = \text{p.v. }\frac 1{2\pi} \int \frac{(x-y)^\perp}{|x-y|^2} \om(y,t) dy,
\]
where $x^\perp = (x_1,x_2)^\perp = (-x_2,x_1)$.
In the past decades, the local well-posedness of the Euler equations has been well established for solutions with suitable regularity. For example, based on the standard energy method,
the local well-posedness holds in the Sobolev spaces $W^{s,p}(\mathbb{R}^n)$, $s>\frac np+1$, $s\geq 1$, \cite{Majda, CF88}. In the solution spaces with threshold regularity, however, the well-posedness of the Euler equation has been a long-standing open problem. To tackle this, many efforts have been made. One way of obtaining the well-posedness is to work on a relatively ``regular" solution space among the borderline spaces, in the sense that the velocity in such solution spaces is under control in the Lipschitz space. Then, the local well-posedness follows from the usual energy method. Indeed, the Euler equation in $\mathbb{R}^n$, $n\geq 2$, is known to be well-posed local-in-time in the critical Besov spaces $B^{\frac np+1}_{p,1}(\mathbb{R}^n)$ for $1<p\le \infty$, see \cite{Vishik98, Vishik99, Chae04, PP04}. However, the borderline Sobolev space $H^{\frac n2+1}(\mathbb{R}^n)$ is not included in these critical Besov spaces. In fact, the Lipschitz norm of the velocity in the critical Sobolev space is out of control because the Sobolev embedding barely fails.
To get better understanding of the behavior of the Euler flows in the critical Sobolev space, regularized Euler equations are introduced, see \cite{CCW11, CW12}.
In \cite{CW12}, Chae and Wu study the logarithmically regularized 2D Euler equations,
\begin{align}\label{main.eq}\tag{LE}
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \om + (u\cdot \nabla) \om =0, &(x,t)\in \mathbb{R}^2\times\mathbb{R} \\
u = \nabla^{\perp}\psi, \quad \Delta \psi = T\om, \\
\om|_{t=0} = \om_0,
\end{cases}
\end{align}
with the Fourier multiplier $T(|\nabla|)$ satisfying
\EQ{\label{int.con}
\int_1^\infty \frac{T^2(r)}{r} dr <+\infty.
}
Such operator $T$ regularizes the velocity in the Euler vorticity equation \eqref{Euler.eq} at the level of logarithm of the Laplacian. The particular integrability assumption \eqref{int.con} on $T$ is imposed to guarantee the local well-posedness of the regularized model in the critical Sobolev space.
As typical examples of $T$ satisfying \eqref{int.con}, we have
\EQ{\label{T.operator}
\widehat{T_{\ga}\om}(k) = \ln^{-\ga}(e+|k|^2)\hat{\om}(k),
\quad
\widehat{T_{\ga}\om}(k) = \ln^{-\ga}(e+|k|) \widehat{\om}(k), \quad\forall k\in \mathbb{R}^2.
}
for $\ga>\frac 12$.
In this paper, we restrict our attention to these two typical cases in the extended region of $\ga$, $\ga>0$. From now on, we use the abbreviation \eqref{main.eq} only when $T=T_\ga$. Conventionally, the multiplier $T_\ga$ with $\ga=0$ is considered as the identity operator. In other words, \eqref{main.eq} with $\ga =0$ corresponds to the 2D Euler vorticity equation.
The global well-posedness result of the 2D Euler vorticity equation (the case $\ga=0$ in \eqref{main.eq}) in the subcritical spaces $W^{s,p}(\mathbb{R}^2)\cap \dot{H}^{-1}(\mathbb{R}^2)$, $p>\frac 2s$ can be extended to that of \eqref{main.eq} for $\ga\geq 0$ (See \cite{CW12}). It follows from the usual energy method which requires two key estimates: commutator estimates and Sobolev inequalities. The critical\ space is determined by the Sobolev embedding
\[
\norm{\nabla u}_\infty = \norm{D\nabla^\perp\De^{-1}T_\ga \om }_\infty {\ \lesssim \ } \norm{\om}_{W^{s,p}(\mathbb{R}^2)}, \quad p>\frac 2s.
\]
In \cite{CW12}, the regularized velocity $u=\nabla^\perp \De^{-1}T_\ga \om$ leads to the local well-posedness of \eqref{main.eq} even in the critical space $H^1(\mathbb{R}^2)\cap \dot{H}^{-1}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ for $\ga>\frac 12$. Then, for $\ga\geq \frac 32$, the global lifespan of the local-in-time solutions is obtained by Dong and Li \cite{Dong2015}. On the other hand, the \textit{strong ill-posedness} of 2D Euler equation ($\ga=0$) in the borderline space $H^1(\mathbb{R}^2)\cap \dot{H}^{-1}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ is established by Bourgain and Li \cite{BL15}. Later, Elgindi and Jeong \cite{Elgindi2017} prove the ill-posedness for some special initial data on the torus $\mathbb{T}^2$ with a different approach based on Kiselev-\v{S}ver{\'a}k \cite{KS14}). However, the well-posedness of the regularized model \eqref{main.eq} in the intermediate regime $0<\ga \le \frac 12$ still remains open.
In this paper, we prove that the logarithmically regularized 2D Euler equations \eqref{main.eq} for $0< \ga\le \frac 12$ are strongly ill-posed in the critical Sobolev space $H^1(\mathbb{R}^2)\cap \dot{H}^{-1}(\mathbb{R}^2)$. The ill-posedness in the strong sense is defined as in \cite{BL15}. Namely, for any given compactly supported smooth initial data, an arbitrarily small perturbation in the borderline space can be always found such that the perturbed solution leaves the borderline space instantaneously. Our result closes the gap between $\ga=0$ (ill-posed) and $\ga>\frac 12$ (well-posed) and give complete answers to well/ill-posedness questions of logarithmically regularized 2D Euler equations. Furthermore, it says that even for the regularized 2D Euler equation, the strong ill-posedness holds in the same critical space of the Euler.
We consider two types of perturbations: one has the non-compact support and the other is compactly supported.
\begin{theorem}[Non-compact case]\label{thm.noncpt}
Let $0<\ga\leq \frac 12$ and $a\in C_c^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$. Then, for any $\ep>0$, we can find a small perturbation $\zeta\in C^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ in the sense of
\[
\norm{\zeta}_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{R}^2)}+\norm{\zeta}_{L^1(\mathbb{R}^2)}+ \norm{\zeta}_{L^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)} <\ep
\]
such that for the perturbed initial data from $a$, we have a unique classical solution $\om$ to \eqref{main.eq}
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \om + u\cdot \nabla \om =0, &(x,t)\in \mathbb{R}^2 \times (0,1]\\
u = \nabla^{\perp}\psi, \quad \Delta \psi = T_{\ga}\om, \\
\om|_{t=0} = a+\zeta,
\end{cases}
\]
satisfying $\om(\cdot,t)\in C^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ for $0\leq t\leq 1$ and $\om\in C([0,1];L^1(\mathbb{R}^2)\cap L^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2))$, but the solution $\om$ leaves the critical Sobolev space instantaneously. i.e., for each $0< T\leq 1$,
\EQ{\label{infty.critical}
\norm{\om}_{L^{\infty}([0,T];\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{R}^2))} = +\infty.
}
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
The strong ill-posedness requires that the perturbed solution doesn't exist in the critical space at any positive time. On the other hand, to identify the perturbed solution, we need its unique existence in some space. \end{remark}
\begin{remark} \label{infty.critical.d} The perturbed solution achieves \eqref{infty.critical} in the sense that there exists a sequence of disjoint sets $Q_n = [t_s^n,t_e^n]\times O_n$ on which $\norm{\om_n}_{L^\infty_t\dot{H}^1(Q_n)} >n $, where $t_s^n<t_e^n$, $\lim_{n \to \infty} t_e^n=0$, and $O_n$ is an open bounded set in $\mathbb{R}^2$.
\end{remark}
\begin{theorem}[Compact case]\label{thm.cpt}
Let $0<\ga \leq \frac 12$ and $a\in C_c^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ which is odd in $x_2$. Then, for any $\ep>0$, we can find a small perturbation $\zeta\in C_c(\mathbb{R}^2)$ in the sense of
\[
\norm{\zeta}_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{R}^2)}+ \norm{\zeta}_{L^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)}
+\norm{\zeta}_{L^1(\mathbb{R}^2)} + \norm{\zeta}_{\dot{H}^{-1}(\mathbb{R}^2)}
<\ep
\]
such that for the perturbed initial data from $a$, we have a unique solution $\om:\mathbb{R}^2\times [0,1]\to \mathbb{R}$ in $C([0,1];C_c(\mathbb{R}^2))$ to \eqref{main.eq}
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \om + u\cdot \nabla \om =0, &(x,t)\in \mathbb{R}^2 \times (0,1]\\
u = \nabla^{\perp}\psi, \quad \Delta \psi = T_{\ga}\om, \\
\om|_{t=0} = a+\zeta,
\end{cases}
\]
satisfying $L^{\infty}$-norm preservation, but the solution $\om$ leaves the critical Sobolev space instantaneously.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark} The perturbed solution in Theorem \ref{thm.cpt} leaves the critical space in the sense of \eqref{infty.critical} and Remark \ref{infty.critical.d}. By its construction, it has a local regularity enough to be well-defined in $L^\infty_t \dot{H}^1(Q_n)$ for each $n\in \mathbb{N}$.
\end{remark}
The proof follows the outline of the strong ill-posedness scheme for the 2D Euler equations, developed in \cite{BL15}.
It consists of three steps: creation of large Lagrangian deformation, local inflation of the critical norm, and patching argument. The first two steps are for the local construction of the perturbation $\zeta$. We first construct a family of initial data whose corresponding deformation matrix $D\phi(\cdot,t)$ get larger in $L^\infty$ space at shorter time $t$. Then, we upgrade each initial data so that the corresponding solution has larger critical norm in shorter time. In the last step, we sequentially patch the initial data in the family in a way of minimizing the interaction between them. This makes the solution for the patched initial data, called the global solution, locally behaves like the local solutions and hence have the critical norm inflation property.
Difficulties first arise in the local construction of the perturbation. The velocity $u=\nabla^{\perp}\De^{-1}T_{\ga}\om$ in \eqref{main.eq} is more regular than the one in the Euler but the critical space remains same. This makes it more difficult for local solutions to be inflated in the critical norm. Furthermore, one of the main ingredients of getting the larger Lagrangian deformation is missing--- an explicit forms of the kernels of $D\nabla^\perp \De^{-1}T_\ga$. To solve these issues, we find essentially sharp pointwise lower bounds of the kernel. What's more, we construct local initial data having increasingly higher frequencies. Along these lines, the desired local construction can be achieved. Then, the successful construction of \textit{non-compactly supported} perturbation follows as in \cite{BL15}, placing local solutions far from each other. However, for a \textit{compactly supported} perturbation, the genuine difficulty moves to the patching process of local solutions. The increasingly higher frequencies of local initial data are likely to intensify interaction between local solutions. Moreover, in order to have a compact support, the local solutions must be placed at an infinitesimal distance from each other eventually. This enhances the interaction further. In a worse case, the active interaction can make high frequencies of local solutions canceled out, so the norm inflation of local solutions can be destroyed after patching. On the other hand, increasingly higher frequencies of local solutions most likely help to create the norm inflation. In order to see what really happens, a sharp control of the propagation of the current local initial data is required under the presence of the previously chosen ones. This can be done based on a keen analysis of the non-local operators. As a result, it can be shown that the existing local solution does not destroy the norm inflation of the current local solution in a very short time. This approach is different from the one in \cite{BL15} based on the perturbation argument, and makes the behaviour of the solution more clear.
The outline of the paper is as follows. Based on the creation of large Lagrangian deformation (Section \ref{sec.lld}), local critical norm inflation (Section \ref{sec.norm.infl}), and patching argument (Section \ref{sec.patching}), we get the proof of Theorem \ref{thm.noncpt} in Section \ref{sec.non.comp}. Then, the compact case (Theorem \ref{thm.cpt}) follows in Section \ref{sec.comp}.
\section{Notations}\label{sec.not}
\begin{itemize}
\item
For a point $x\in \mathbb{R}^2$ and a positive real number $R$, $B(x,R)$ is the Euclidean ball defined by
\[
B(x,R) = \{y\in \mathbb{R}^2: |x-y|<R\}.
\]
For a set $A\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ and a positive real number $R$, a generalized ball $B(A,R)$ means
\[
B(A,R) = \{y\in \mathbb{R}^2: |x-y|<R \text{ for some } x\in A\}.
\]
Obviously, when $A$ is a single point set, $A=\{x\}$, we have $B(A,R)=B(x,R)$.
\item For given two sets $A$ and $B$ in $\mathbb{R}^2 $, the distance between two sets is denoted by
\[
\dist(A,B) :=\inf\{|x-y|: x\in A \text{ and } y\in B\}.
\]
\item For any function $f$ on $\mathbb{R}^2$, we denote the Fourier transform of $f$ by
\[
\hat{f}(k) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^2} f(x)e^{-ik\cdot x} dx, \quad k\in \mathbb{R}^2,
\]
and its inverse Fourier transform by
\[
\check{f}(x) =\frac 1{(2\pi)^2} \int_{\mathbb{R}^2} \hat{f}(k)e^{ik\cdot x} dk.
\]
\item For any $1\leq p\leq \infty$, $\norm{\cdot}_{L^p(\mathbb{R}^2)}$ is the usual Lebesgue norm in $\mathbb{R}^2$ with its abbreviation $\norm{\cdot}_p$. For any $m\in \mathbb{N}$ and $1\leq p\leq \infty$, $\norm{\cdot}_{W^{m,p}(\mathbb{R}^2)}$ denotes the usual Sobolev norm in $\mathbb{R}^2$. In the case of $p=2$, we use $H^m(\mathbb{R}^2)= W^{m,2}(\mathbb{R}^2)$. The homogeneous Sobolev norm is defined by
\[
\norm{f}_{\dot{H}^s(\mathbb{R}^2)} = \left(\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}|k|^{2s}|\hat{f}(k)|^2 dk\right)^{\frac 12}, \quad\forall s\in \mathbb{R},
\]
which includes the definition of $\dot{H}^{-1}(\mathbb{R}^2)$-norm. We omit $(\mathbb{R}^2)$ in the expression of Sobolev norms, when the domain of a function is obvious.
\item Given two comparable quantities $X$ and $Y$, the inequality $X\lesssim Y$ stands for $X\leq C Y$ for some positive constant $C$. In a similar way, $X\gtrsim Y$ denotes $X\geq C Y$ for some $C>0$. We write $ X \sim Y$ when both $X\lesssim Y$ and $Y\lesssim X$ hold. When the constants $C$ in the inequalities depend on some quantities $Z_1$, $\cdots$, $Z_n$, we use $\lesssim_{Z_1,\cdots,Z_n}$, $\gtrsim_{Z_1,\cdots,Z_n}$, and $\sim_{Z_1,\cdots,Z_n}$. On the other hand, we say $X \ll Y$ if $X\le \ep Y$ for some sufficiently small $\ep>0$. Similarly, $X\gg Y$ is defined.
\end{itemize}
Since we prove the strong ill-posedness of \eqref{main.eq} for each $0<\ga\le \frac 12$, we omit the dependence of $\ga$ below if it is not needed. Also, without mentioning, we assume $0<\ga\le \frac 12$.
\section{Large Lagrangian deformation}\label{sec.lld}
In this section, we find a family of initial data which has large Lagrangian deformation property. As we mentioned, one of the main ingredients is finding a sharp pointwise estimate of the kernel of the operator $-\partial_{12}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}$ from below. We consider the case $T_{\ga}(|\nabla|)=\ln^{-\ga}(e-\Delta)$ first.
\begin{lemma}\label{estimate.K}
Let $\ga>0$ and $K_{12}$ be the kernel of the Fourier multiplier $-\partial_{12} \Delta^{-1} \ln^{-\ga}(e-\Delta)$. Then, for any $x = (x_1 ,x_2)\in \mathbb{R}^2$, $x_1 > 0$, $x_2 > 0$, we have
\EQ{\label{estimate.K.ineq}
K_{12}(x_1,x_2)\geq \frac {C x_1x_2}{|x|^4}
\ln^{-\ga}\left(e+\frac 1{|x|}\right)e^{-|x|^2}
}
for some positive constant $C$ depending only on $\ga$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Using the equalities
\EQN{
\int_0^{\infty}e^{-|k|^2s}|k|^2 ds &=1, \quad\text{ for }k\neq 0,\\
\frac 1{\Ga(\ga)}\int_0^{\infty} e^{-at} t^{\ga} \frac{dt}t &= a^{-\ga}, \quad\text{ for }a> 0,
}
the Fourier transform of $K_{12}$ can be written as
\EQ{\label{pre.int.form}
\widehat{K_{12}}(k)
&=-\frac{k_1k_2}{|k|^2}\ln^{-\ga}(e+|k|^2)
=\int_0^{\infty} e^{-|k|^2 s} (-k_1k_2)\ln^{-\ga}(e+|k|^2) ds\\
&=\int_0^{\infty}\frac 1{\Ga(\ga)}\int_0^{\infty} (e+|k|^2)^{-t} e^{-|k|^2 s} (-k_1k_2) t^{\ga} \frac{dt}{t} ds\\
&=\frac 1{\Ga(\ga)}
\int_0^{\infty}\frac 1{\Ga(t)}
\int_0^{\infty}e^{-e\be}\int_0^{\infty}(-k_1k_2)e^{-|k|^2(\be+s)} ds \be^t \frac{d\be}{\be}t^{\ga} \frac {dt}t, \qquad \forall k\neq 0.
}
Taking the inverse Fourier transform, the kernel $K_{12}(x)$, for any $x\neq 0$, can be expressed as an integral form:
\EQN{
K_{12}(x)
&=
\frac 1{\Ga(\ga)} \int_0^{\infty} \frac 1{\Ga(t)}\int_0^{\infty} e^{-e\be}\left( \int_0^{\infty} \partial_{12} (e^{(s+\be)\Delta }\delta_0)(x) ds\right)
\be^t \frac{d\be}{\be}
t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t \\
&\sim_{\ga} x_1 x_2
\int_0^{\infty} \frac 1{\Ga(t)}\int_0^{\infty} e^{-e\be}\left( \int_0^{\infty} \frac 1{(s+\be)^3} e^{-\frac{|x|^2}{4(s+\be)}}ds \right)
\be^t \frac{d\be}{\be}
t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t \\
&=\frac{x_1 x_2}{|x|^4}
\int_0^{\infty} \frac {|x|^{2t}}{\Ga(t)} \int_0^{\infty} e^{-e|x|^2\tilde\be}
\left(\int_0^{\infty}\frac 1{(\tilde s+\tilde\be)^3} e^{-\frac{1}{4(\tilde s+\tilde\be)}}d\tilde s\right)
\tilde\be^t \frac{d\tilde\be}{\tilde\be}
t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t,
}
where $e^{t\De}\delta_0$ is the usual heat kernel.
The last equality easily follows from the change of variables $\be = |x|^2 \tilde \be$ and $ s= |x|^2 \tilde s$.
Then, the integral in $\tilde s$ can be computed as
\EQ{\label{simplify.K}
\int_0^{\infty}\frac 1{(\tilde s+\tilde\be)^3} e^{-\frac{1}{4(\tilde s+\tilde\be)}}d\tilde s
&=\int_{\tilde \be}^{\infty}\frac 1{\tau^3} e^{-\frac{1}{4\tau}}d\tau
=\int_{\tilde \be}^{\infty}\frac 1{\tau} (4 e^{-\frac{1}{4\tau}})'d\tau\\
&=\frac 4{\tau} e^{-\frac{1}{4\tau}}\bigg|^{\infty}_{\tilde\be}
+\int_{\tilde \be}^{\infty}\frac 4{\tau^2} e^{-\frac{1}{4\tau}}d\tau\\
&=16\left(1-e^{-\frac{1}{4\tilde\be}}-\frac 1{4\tilde\be} e^{-\frac{1}{4\tilde\be}}\right),
}
so that we simplify the integral form as
\[
K_{12}(x)\sim_{\ga}
\frac{x_1 x_2}{|x|^4}
\int_0^{\infty} \frac {|x|^{2t}}{\Ga(t)} \int_0^{\infty} e^{-e|x|^2\tilde\be}
\left(1-e^{-\frac{1}{4\tilde\be}}-\frac 1{4\tilde\be} e^{-\frac{1}{4\tilde\be}}\right)
\tilde\be^t \frac{d\tilde\be}{\tilde\be}
t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t,
\quad\forall x\neq 0.
\]
Now, for each $x=(x_1,x_2)$ with $x_1>0$ and $x_2>0$, we find the lower bound of the kernel. Indeed, the desired lower bound \eqref{estimate.K.ineq} follows from
\EQN{
\int_0^{\infty} &\frac {|x|^{2t}}{\Ga(t)} \int_0^{\infty} e^{-e|x|^2\tilde\be}
\left(1-e^{-\frac{1}{4\tilde\be}}-\frac 1{4\tilde\be} e^{-\frac{1}{4\tilde\be}}\right)
\tilde\be^t \frac{d\tilde\be}{\tilde\be}
t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t\\
&\gtrsim e^{-|x|^2}\int_0^1 \frac{|x|^{2t}}{\Ga(t)}\int_0^{\frac 1{e}}
\tilde\be^{t} \frac{d\tilde\be}{\tilde\be}
t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t\\
&\gtrsim e^{-|x|^2}
\int_0^1 \frac{|x|^{2t}}{t\Ga(t)} t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t
\gtrsim e^{-|x|^2}
\int_0^1 |x|^{2t} t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t \\
&\gtrsim_{\ga} \ln^{-\ga}\left(e+\frac 1{|x|}\right)e^{-|x|^2}.
}
\end{proof}
Now, we consider the case of $T_{\ga}(|\nabla|)=\ln^{-\ga}(e+|\nabla|)$. To express the corresponding kernel as an integral form, we need the following identity.
\begin{lemma}\label{subo}(Subordination identity) For any $r\geq 0$, we have
\[
e^{-r} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}} \int_0^{\infty} e^{-\tau} e^{-\frac{r^2}{4\tau}} \tau^{-\frac 12} d\tau.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By using Fourier transform, it is easy to see
\[
e^{-r} = \frac 1{\pi}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\frac 1{1+\th^2}e^{i\th r} d\th, \quad\forall r\geq 0.
\]
Since we can write
\[
\frac 1{1+\th^2} = \int_0^{\infty}e^{-\tau}e^{-\tau \th^2 } d\tau,
\]
the result follows from interchanging the $d\th-d\tau$ integral.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{estimate.tdK}
Let $\ga>0$ and $\tilde K_{12}$ be the kernel of the multiplier $-\partial_{12} \Delta^{-1} \ln^{-\ga}(e+|\nabla|)$. Then, for any $x = (x_1 ,x_2)\in \mathbb{R}^2$, $x_1 > 0$, $x_2 > 0$, we have
\EQ{\label{estimate.tdK.ineq}
\tilde K_{12}(x_1,x_2)\geq \frac {Cx_1x_2}{|x|^4}
\ln^{-\ga}\left(e+\frac 1{|x|}\right)e^{-|x|^2}
}
for some positive constant $C$ depending only on $\ga>0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
As we did in Lemma \ref{estimate.K}, the Fourier transform of $\tilde K_{12}$ can be expressed as follows:
\EQ{\label{pre.int.form2}
\widehat{{\tilde K}_{12}}(k)
&=-\frac {k_1k_2}{|k|^2}\ln^{-\ga}(e+|k|)\\
&= \frac 1{\Ga(\ga)} \int_0^{\infty}\frac 1{\Ga(t)} \int_0^{\infty} e^{-e\be} \int_0^{\infty}(-k_1k_2)e^{-k|\be|}e^{-|k|^2s} ds \be^t \frac{d\be}{\be} t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t, \quad\forall k\neq 0.
}
Using the identity in Lemma \ref{subo}, for $\be \geq 0$ we have
\EQ{\label{suboo}
e^{-|k|\be} = \frac 1{\sqrt{\pi}} \int_0^{\infty} e^{-\tau}e^{-\frac {|k|^2\be^2}{4\tau}}\tau^{-\frac 12}d\tau,
}
so that the kernel can be written as an integral form: for any $x\neq 0$,
\EQN{
\tilde K_{12}(x)
&=
\frac 1{\sqrt{\pi}\Ga(\ga)} \int_0^{\infty} \frac 1{\Ga(t)}\int_0^{\infty} e^{-e\be}
\int_0^{\infty}
\int_0^{\infty} e^{-\tau} (\partial_{12} e^{\left(\frac{\be^2}{4\tau}+s\right)\Delta}\delta_0)(x) \tau^{-\frac 12} d\tau ds
\be^t \frac{d\be}{\be}
t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t\\
&\sim_{\ga} x_1x_2
\int_0^{\infty} \frac 1{\Ga(t)}
\int_0^{\infty} e^{-e\be}
\int_0^{\infty} e^{-\tau}
\int_0^{\infty}
\frac 1{\left(\frac{\be^2}{4\tau}+s\right)^3}e^{-\frac{|x|^2}{4\left(\frac{\be^2}{4\tau}+s\right)}}
ds \tau^{-\frac 12}d\tau
\be^t \frac{d\be}{\be}
t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t\\
&= \frac{x_1x_2}{|x|^4}
\int_0^{\infty} \frac {|x|^t}{\Ga(t)}
\int_0^{\infty} e^{-e|x|\tilde\be}
\int_0^{\infty} e^{-\tau}
\int_0^{\infty}
\frac 1{\left(\frac{\tilde\be^2}{4\tau}+\tilde s\right)^3}
e^{-\frac{1}{4\left(\frac{\tilde\be^2}{4\tau}+\tilde s\right)}}
d\tilde s \tau^{-\frac 12}d\tau
\tilde\be^t \frac{d\tilde\be}{\tilde\be}
t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t.
}
In the last equality, we do the change of variables $\be = |x|\tilde\be$ and $ s= |x|^2 \tilde s$.
The integral in $\tilde s$ can be simplified as
\EQ{\label{simplify.tdK}
\int_0^{\infty}
\frac 1{\left(\frac{\tilde\be^2}{4\tau}+\tilde s\right)^3}
e^{-\frac{1}{4\left(\frac{\tilde\be^2}{4\tau}+\tilde s\right)}}
d\tilde s
&=16
\left(1-e^{-\frac{\tau}{\tilde\be^2}}-\frac{\tau}{\tilde\be^2} e^{-\frac{\tau}{\tilde\be^2}}\right),
}
and the integral form also becomes simple,
\[
\tilde K_{12}(x)
\sim_{\ga}
\frac{x_1x_2}{|x|^4}
\int_0^{\infty} \frac {|x|^t}{\Ga(t)}
\int_0^{\infty} e^{-e|x|\tilde\be}
\left( \int_0^{\infty} e^{-\tau}
(1-e^{-\frac{\tau}{\tilde\be^2}}-\frac{\tau}{\tilde\be^2} e^{-\frac{\tau}{\tilde\be^2}}) \tau^{-\frac 12}d\tau\right)
\tilde\be^t \frac{d\tilde\be}{\tilde\be}
t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t.
\]
To get a lower bound, we first consider the integral in $\tau$ and $\tilde\be$:
\EQN{
\int_0^{\infty} e^{-e|x|\tilde\be}
&\left( \int_0^{\infty} e^{-\tau}
(1-e^{-\frac{\tau}{\tilde\be^2}}-\frac{\tau}{\tilde\be^2} e^{-\frac{\tau}{\tilde\be^2}}) \tau^{-\frac 12}d\tau\right)
\tilde\be^t \frac{d\tilde\be}{\tilde\be}\\
&\gtrsim
\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\tau}e^{-\sqrt{e\tau}|x|}
\left(\int_0^{\sqrt{\frac{\tau}{e}}} \tilde\be^t \frac{d\tilde\be}{\tilde\be}\right)
\tau^{-\frac 12}d\tau\\
&\geq \frac 1{t\sqrt{e}^t}e^{-\frac{|x|}{e}} \int_0^{\frac 1{e^3}}e^{-\tau}
{\tau}^{\frac{t-1}2}d\tau
\gtrsim \frac 1{t(t+1)e^{2t}}e^{-\frac{|x|}{e}}, \quad\forall x\neq 0, t>0.
}
Then, for each $x=(x_1,x_2)\in\mathbb{R}^2$ with $x_1>0$ and $x_2>0$, the desired lower bound \eqref{estimate.tdK.ineq} of the kernel follows from
\EQN{
\int_0^{\infty} \frac {|x|^{t}}{\Ga(t)}
\int_0^{\infty} &e^{-e|x|\tilde\be}
\left( \int_0^{\infty} e^{-\tau}
(1-e^{-\frac{\tau}{\tilde\be^2}}-\frac{\tau}{\tilde\be^2} e^{-\frac{\tau}{\tilde\be^2}}) \tau^{-\frac 12}d\tau\right)
\tilde\be^t \frac{d\tilde\be}{\tilde\be}
t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t\\
&\gtrsim e^{-\frac{|x|}{e}}\int_0^{1} \frac {|x|^{t}}{t\Ga(t)}
\frac 1{(t+1)e^{2t}}
t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t
\gtrsim_\gamma \ln^{-\ga}\left(e+\frac{1}{|x|}\right)e^{-|x|^2}.
}
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} By Lemma \ref{estimate.K} and Lemma \ref{estimate.tdK}, we can see that the kernels of $-\partial_{12}\De^{-1}T_\ga$ for both $T_\ga = \ln^{-\ga}(e-\De)$ and $T_\ga = \ln^{-\ga}(e + |\nabla|)$ have the same lower bound. Therefore, we use the combined notations $T_\ga$ and its kernel $K$ for both cases from now on.
\end{remark}
\medskip
Now, we are ready to estimate Lagrangian deformation.
\begin{proposition}\label{large.lagrangian}
Let $\ga>0$. Suppose that a function $g\in C_c^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ satisfies the following conditions.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item $g$ is odd in $x_1$ and $x_2$.
\item $g(x_1,x_2)\geq 0$ on $\{x_1\geq 0, x_2\geq 0\}$.
\item
\[
G\equiv \int_{x_1>0, x_2>0} g(x)\frac{x_1 x_2}{|x|^{4}} \ln^{-\ga}\left(e+\frac 1{|x|}\right) e^{-|x|^4} dx >0.
\]
\end{enumerate}
Let $\phi$ be the characteristic line defined by
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \phi(x,t) = \nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om (\phi(x,t), t)\\
\phi(x,0) = x,
\end{cases}
\]
where $\om$ is a smooth solution to \eqref{main.eq} for the initial data $\om_0=g$.
Then, the Lagrangian deformation $D\phi$ satisfies
\EQ{\label{large.lagrangian1}
\int_0^t e^{-\norm{D\phi(\cdot,\tau)}_{\infty}^4} d\tau
\leq \frac 1{CG} \ln(1+ CGt), \quad \forall t\geq 0
}
for some positive constant $C=C(\ga)$.
In particular, we have
\EQ{\label{large.lagrangian2}
\max_{0\leq \tau\leq t}\norm{D\phi(\cdot,\tau)}_{\infty}
\geq \ln^{\frac 14}\left(\frac{CGt}{\ln(1+CGt)}\right),
\quad \forall t>0.
}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Using the parity of $g$, it can be easily checked that $\om$ is odd in $x_1$ and $x_2$, and hence $\phi(x,t)=(\phi_1(x_1,x_2,t),\phi_2(x_1,x_2,t))$ satisfies
\begin{align}
\phi_1(0,x_2,t)&\equiv 0,\quad \phi_2(x_1,0,t)\equiv 0 \label{phi.par} \qquad \forall x_1\in \mathbb{R}, x_2\in \mathbb{R} ,\\
&\phi(0,t)\equiv 0. \nonumber
\end{align}
Also, the Frechet derivative $[Du(0,t)]_{ij}=\partial_j u_i(0,t)$ of $u=\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om$ at $x=0$ takes the form
\[
Du(0,t)=
\begin{pmatrix}
\la(t) & 0\\
0 & -\la(t)
\end{pmatrix},
\]
where $\la(t)=-\partial_{12}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}w(0,t)$. Then, this implies
\[
(D\phi)(0,t) =
\begin{pmatrix}
\exp\left(\int_0^t \la(\tau) d\tau\right) & 0\\
0 & \exp\left(-\int_0^t \la(\tau) d\tau\right)
\end{pmatrix}.
\]
On the other hand, by \eqref{phi.par} and the sign preservation property of $\phi_1$ and $\phi_2$, we obtain for any $x_1\geq 0$, $x_2\geq 0$, and $t\geq 0$,
\EQ{\label{phi.x}
\frac 1{\norm{D\phi(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}} \phi_1(x_1,x_2,t)
&\leq x_1
\leq \phi_1(x_1,x_2,t)\norm{D\phi(\cdot,t)}_{\infty},\\
\frac 1{\norm{D\phi(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}} \phi_2(x_1,x_2,t)
&\leq x_2
\leq \phi_2(x_1,x_2,t)\norm{D\phi(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}.
}
Thus, for any $x_1>0$, $x_2>0$, and $t\geq 0$,
\EQN{
\frac{\phi_1\phi_2}{\phi_1^2+\phi_2^2}
=\frac 1{\frac{\phi_1}{\phi_2}+\frac{\phi_2}{\phi_1}}
\geq \frac 1{\norm{D\phi}_{\infty}^2}\frac{x_1x_2}{|x|^2}.
}
Recall that we denote the kernel of the operator $-\partial_{12}\De^{-1}T_\ga$ by $K$.
By Lemma \ref{estimate.K} and Lemma \ref{estimate.tdK}, for any $x=(x_1,x_2)$ with $x_1>0$ and $x_2>0$, and $t\geq 0$,
\EQN{
K(\phi(x,t))
&\gtrsim_{\ga} \left(\frac{\phi_1\phi_2}{|\phi|^2}\right) \frac 1{|\phi|^2} \ln^{-\ga}\left(e+\frac 1{|\phi|}\right) e^{-|\phi|^2}\\
&\gtrsim \frac 1{\norm{D\phi}_{\infty}^{4}}\frac{x_1x_2}{|x|^{4}}
\ln^{-\ga}\left(e+\frac{\norm{D\phi}_{\infty}}{|x|}\right) e^{-\norm{D\phi}_{\infty}^2|x|^2}\\
&\gtrsim \frac 1{\norm{D\phi}_{\infty}^{4}}\frac{x_1x_2}{|x|^{4}}
\ln^{-\ga}\left(e+\frac{1}{|x|}\right)\left(1+
\ln\left(1+\norm{D\phi}_{\infty}\right) \right)^{-\ga}
e^{-\frac 14\norm{D\phi}_{\infty}^4} e^{-|x|^4}\\
&\gtrsim_{\ga} e^{- \norm{D\phi(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}^4}\frac{x_1x_2}{|x|^{4}}
\ln^{-\ga}\left(e+\frac{1}{|x|}\right)
e^{-|x|^4}.
}
Now, we estimate $\la(t)$ from below
\EQN{
\la(t)
&=\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} K(y)w(y,t) dy=4\int_{y_1>0, y_2>0} K(y)w(y,t) dy\\
&= 4\int_{x_1>0, x_2>0} K(\phi(x,t)) g(x) dx\\
&\gtrsim_{\ga} e^{-\norm{D\phi(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}^4}
\int_{x_1>0, x_2>0} g(x) \frac{x_1x_2}{|x|^{4}}
\ln^{-\ga}\left(e+\frac{1}{|x|}\right)
e^{-|x|^4} dx\\
&= e^{-\norm{D\phi(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}^4} G.
}
Then, since
\[
\norm{D\phi(\cdot,t)}_{\infty} \geq |D\phi(0,t)| \geq \exp\left(\int_0^t\la(\tau) d\tau\right), \quad\forall t\geq 0
\]
where $|\cdot|$ is the usual matrix norm,
we have a positive constant $C>0$ depending only on $\ga$ such that
\[
\norm{D\phi(\cdot,t)}_{\infty} \geq \exp\left(\frac 1{4}CG \int_0^t e^{-\norm{D\phi(\tau)}_{\infty}^4} d\tau \right), \quad\forall t\geq 0.
\]
This implies that
\EQN{
\frac{d}{dt} \exp\left(CG \int_0^t e^{- \norm{D\phi(\tau)}_{\infty}^4} d\tau\right)
&=\exp\left(CG \int_0^t e^{- \norm{D\phi(\tau)}_{\infty}^4} d\tau\right)
CG e^{- \norm{D\phi(t)}_{\infty}^4}\\
&\leq CG \norm{D\phi(\tau)}_{\infty}^4 e^{- \norm{D\phi(\tau)}_{\infty}^4}
\leq CG.
}
Therefore, we obtain
\[
\exp\left(CG \int_0^t e^{- \norm{D\phi(\tau)}_{\infty}^4} d\tau\right)
\leq 1+CGt.
\]
The inequalities \eqref{large.lagrangian1} and \eqref{large.lagrangian2} then follows easily.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{rist.lld} By a slight modification of the proof, we can restrict the region where the large Lagrangian deformation occurs;
\EQ{
\max_{0\leq \tau\leq t}\norm{D\phi(\cdot,\tau)}_{L^\infty(B(0,R))}
\geq \ln^{\frac 14}\left(\frac{CGt}{\ln(1+CGt)}\right),
\quad \forall 0< t\leq 1,
}
if $R>0$ satisfies
\[
\supp(g)\subset B(0,R) \quad\text{and}\quad
\phi^{-1}(B_g,t)\subset B(0,R)
\]
for all $0\leq t\leq 1$,
where $B_g=B(0,R_g)$ is the smallest ball containing $\bigcup_{0\leq t\leq 1}\supp(\om(\cdot,t))$. Indeed, if $x$ is in $\supp(g)$, then $\phi(x,t)\subset \supp(\om(\cdot,t))$ and $|\phi(x,t)|\leq R_g$ when $0\le t\leq 1$. This implies that for $0\leq t\leq 1$
\[
\norm{D(\phi^{-1})(\cdot,t)}_{L^\infty(B_g)}
=\norm{(D\phi)^{-1}(\phi^{-1}(\cdot,t),t)}_{L^\infty(B_g)}
\le \norm{D\phi(\cdot,t)}_{L^\infty(B(0,R))}.
\]
In the inequality, we use $|\det(D\phi(\cdot,t))|=1$ for any $t\geq 0$. Then, a modification of \eqref{phi.x} holds; for $x=(x_1,x_2)\in \supp(g)$, $x_1\geq 0$, $x_2\geq 0$, and $0\leq t\leq 1$, we have
\EQN{
\frac 1{\norm{D\phi(\cdot,t)}_{L^\infty(B(0,R))}} \phi_1(x_1,x_2,t)
&\leq x_1
\leq \phi_1(x_1,x_2,t)\norm{D\phi(\cdot,t)}_{L^\infty(B(0,R))},\\
\frac 1{\norm{D\phi(\cdot,t)}_{L^\infty(B(0,R))}} \phi_2(x_1,x_2,t)
&\leq x_2
\leq \phi_2(x_1,x_2,t)\norm{D\phi(\cdot,t)}_{L^\infty(B(0,R))}.
}
The rest of the proof is almost identical.
\end{remark}
\section{Local critical Sobolev norm inflation}\label{sec.norm.infl}
In this section, we show that the inflation of the critical Sobolev norm can be induced from the largeness of Lagrangian deformation. Then, based on this, we construct a family of local solutions whose critical norm gets larger in a shorter time, while the critical norm of initial data gets smaller.
We first recall Lemma 4.1 in \cite{BL15}.
\begin{lemma}\label{perb.char}
Suppose $u=u(x,t)$ and $v=v(x,t)$ are smooth vector fields on $\mathbb{R}^2\times \mathbb{R}$. Let $\phi:\mathbb{R}^2\times \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}^2$ and $\tilde\phi:\mathbb{R}^2\times \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}^2$ be the solutions to
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \phi(x,t) = u(\phi(x,t),t)\\
\phi(x,0) = x
\end{cases}
\]
and
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \tilde\phi(x,t) = u(\tilde\phi(x,t),t)+v(\tilde\phi(x,t),t)\\
\tilde\phi(x,0) = x.
\end{cases}
\]
Then, we have positive constants $C$ and $C_1$ satisfying
\EQN{
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}&(\norm{(\tilde\phi-\phi)(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}
+\norm{(D\tilde\phi-D\phi)(\cdot,t)}_{\infty})\\
&\leq C \max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{v(\cdot,t)}_{W^{1,\infty}}\cdot\exp\bke{C_1\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{Dv(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}},
}
where $C$ depends on $\norm{D^2u(\cdot,t)}_{L^{\infty}([0,1]\times\mathbb{R}^2)}$ and $\norm{Du(\cdot,t)}_{L^{\infty}([0,1]\times\mathbb{R}^2)}$, and $C_1$ is an absolute constant.
\end{lemma}
The following is the main proposition in this section.
\begin{proposition}\label{H1.norm.inflation.prop} Suppose that $\om$ is a smooth solution to \eqref{main.eq} with the initial data $\om_0$ and its velocity $u=-\nabla^{\perp}\De^{-1}T_\ga\om$, $\ga>0$, and satisfies the following properties.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item $\norm{\om_0}_{\infty}+\norm{\om_0}_1+\norm{\om_0}_{\dot{H}^{-1}}<\infty.$
\item There exists $R_0>0$ such that
\[
\supp(\om_0)\subset B(0,R_0)
\]
and the characteristic line $\phi$, i.e., the solution to
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t\phi(x,t)=u(\phi(x,t),t) &\mathbb{R}^2\times(0,\infty)\\
\phi(x,0) = x &\mathbb{R}^2,
\end{cases}
\]
satisfies
\EQ{\label{lld.M}
\norm{(D\phi)(\cdot,t_0)}_{L^\infty(B(0,R_0))}>L
}
for some $0<t_0\leq 1$ and $L> 8^9\cdot 10^6$.
\end{enumerate}
Then, we can construct a new smooth solution $\tilde \om$ to \eqref{main.eq} for a new initial data $\tilde \om_0$ which satisfies the following conditions.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item The size of the new initial data is controlled by that of the original one,
\begin{align}
\norm{\tilde\om_0}_{\dot{H}^{-1}} &\leq 2\norm{\om_0}_{\dot{ H}^{-1}}\label{IC.negative.norm}\\
\norm{\tilde\om_0}_1 \leq 2\norm{\om_0}_1&,\quad
\norm{\tilde\om_0}_{\infty} \leq 2\norm{\om_0}_{\infty},\label{IC.lp.norm}\\
\norm{\tilde\om_0}_{\dot{H}^1}&\leq \norm{\om_0}_{\dot{H}^1} + L^{-\frac 12}.\label{IC.critical.norm}
\end{align}
\item The new initial data is compactly supported,
\EQ{\label{cpt.supp.tdom0}
\supp(\tilde\om_0)\subset B(0,R_0).
}
\item A large Lagrangian deformation at $t_0$ induces $\dot{H}^1$-norm inflation:
\EQ{\label{H1.inflation}
\norm{\tilde\om(\cdot,t_0)}_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{R}^2)} >L^{\frac 13}.
}
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\textit{Proof of the Proposition. }
\noindent\texttt{Sketch of the idea.}
Let $\tilde\phi$ be the characteristic line corresponding to the new smooth solution $\tilde\om$. Then, it solves
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t\tilde\phi(x,t)=\tilde u(\tilde \phi(x,t),t) &\mathbb{R}^2\times(0,\infty)\\
\tilde\phi(x,0) = x &\mathbb{R}^2,
\end{cases}
\]
where $\tilde u=\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\tilde\om$. Since $\tilde \om(\tilde\phi(x,t),t)=\tilde\om_0(x)$, we can write $\dot{H}^1$-norm of $\tilde\om$ as
\EQ{\label{expressim.H1}
\norm{\nabla\tilde\om(\cdot,t)}_{2}^2
=\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} |\nabla\tilde\om_0(x)\cdot(\nabla^{\perp}\tilde\phi_2)(x,t)|^2 dx
+\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} |\nabla\tilde\om_0(x)\cdot(\nabla^{\perp}\tilde\phi_1)(x,t)|^2 dx.
}
By Lemma \ref{perb.char}, if we choose a new initial data $\tilde \om_0$ to make $\norm{u-\tilde u}_{W^{1,\infty}}$ small, $\norm{D\phi-D\tilde\phi}_{\infty}$ also gets small. It follows that the main part in the right hand side of \eqref{expressim.H1} is the one in which $\tilde\phi$ is replaced by $\phi$.
Then, we can produce the $\dot{H}^1$-norm inflation of $\tilde \om$ at $t_0$ from the largeness of Lagrangian deformation $D\phi$ in \eqref{lld.M} sense. Indeed, we construct the desired new initial data by adding a perturbation, localized at the point where the large Lagrangian deformation occurs, to the original initial data.
\bigskip
\noindent\texttt{Step 1.} Construction of the new initial data $\tilde\om_0$.
Assume
\[
\norm{\nabla \om(\cdot, t_0)}_{2}\leq L^{\frac 13}.
\]
Otherwise, $\tilde\om_0 =\om_0$ completes the proof.
By the assumption \eqref{lld.M} and the smoothness of $\phi$, we can find $x_L=(x_L^1,x_L^2)$, $x_L^1x_L^2 \neq 0$, in $B(0,R_0)$ such that one of the entries of $D\phi(x_L,t_0)$, say $\partial_2\phi_2(x_L,t_0)$, satisfies
\[
|\partial_2\phi_2(x_L,t_0)|>L.
\]
If we further use the continuity of $D\phi$, we can choose sufficiently small $\delta>0$ satisfying $\delta\ll \min(x_L^1, x_L^2)$, $B(x_L,\delta)\subset B(0,R_0)$, and
\[
|\partial_2\phi_2(x,t_0)|>L, \qquad\forall |x-x_L|<\delta.
\]
Choose $\Psi$ be a smooth radial bump function which is compactly supported on the unit ball $B(0,1)$ and satisfies $\Psi\equiv 1$ on $B(0,\frac 12)$ and $0\leq \Psi\leq 1$. Set $\Psi_\delta = \frac 1{\delta}\Psi(\frac {x-x_L}{\delta})$. By the choice of $x_L$ and $\delta$, we note that the support of $\Psi_\delta$ lies on one of the four quadrants. Now, let $b$ be the odd extension of $\Psi_\delta$ in both variables. Then, we define the new initial data $\tilde\om_0$, adding a perturbation
\[
\eta_0(x) = \tilde\om_0(x) -\om_0(x) = \frac 1{20k\sqrt L}\cos (kx_1) b(x),
\]
to the original one $\om_0$ where $k$ will be chosen later sufficiently large. We can easily see that the perturbation $\eta_0$ is odd in both variables.
\bigskip
\noindent\texttt{Step 2.} Check the required conditions on $\tilde \om$.
By its construction, the support of $\eta_0$ is contained in $B(0,R_0)$, so that \eqref{cpt.supp.tdom0} holds.
To get \eqref{IC.negative.norm} and \eqref{IC.lp.norm}, we estimate the corresponding Sobolev norms of $\eta_0$,
\EQN{
\norm{\eta_0}_1 &\leq \frac 1{20k\sqrt L}\norm{b}_1\qquad
\norm{\eta_0}_{\infty} \leq \frac 1{20k\sqrt L}\norm{b}_{\infty}\\
&\norm{\eta_0}_{\dot{H}^{-1}}\lesssim
\norm{\widehat{x\eta_0}}_{\infty} + \norm{\eta_0}_2\lesssim \frac 1k,
}
where the estimate for the negative Sobolev norm follows from the parity of $\eta_0$. For sufficiently large $k$, both \eqref{IC.negative.norm} and \eqref{IC.lp.norm} hold true.
Finally, \eqref{IC.critical.norm} follows from
\[
\norm{b}_2 \leq 4\norm{\Psi_\delta}_2 = 4\norm{\Psi}_2<4\sqrt{\pi},
\]
and
\[
\norm{\nabla\eta_0}_{2}
\leq \frac 1{20k\sqrt{L}}\bke{k\norm{b}_2 + \norm{\nabla b}_2} \leq \frac 1{\sqrt L},
\]
provided that $k$ is sufficiently large.
Now, consider the $\dot{H}^1$-norm inflation of the new solution $\tilde\om$. As we mentioned, we first show that the perturbation in Lagrangian deformation is small. For this purpose, we consider the perturbation of velocity in $W^{1,\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$.
Since we have
\EQ{\label{pert.vel}
\norm{\nabla (\tilde u-u)}_{\infty}
\lesssim_{\ga}(\norm{\nabla \tilde\om}_4+\norm{\nabla \om}_4)^{\frac 23}\norm{\tilde\om-\om}_2^{\frac 13},
}
it is enough to consider the terms on the right hand side. The terms $\norm{\nabla \tilde\om}_4$ and $\norm{\nabla \om}_4$ are estimated by the usual energy method. From the equation for $\tilde\om$, we have
\EQ{\label{eq.14}
\frac{d}{dt} \norm{\nabla \tilde\om}_4^4 \leq 4\norm{\nabla \tilde u}_{\infty}\norm{\nabla\tilde\om}_4^4.
}
By the log-type interpolation inequality,
\EQN{
\norm{\nabla \tilde u(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}
&\lesssim 1+ \norm{\tilde\om_0}_{\infty}\log (10+\norm{\tilde\om_0}_{2}+\norm{\nabla \tilde\om(\cdot,t)}_4^4),
}
we obtain
\EQ{\label{bdd.14}
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{\nabla \tilde\om(\cdot,t)}_{4}\leq C,
}
for some constant $C=C(\norm{\nabla \tilde\om_0}_4,\norm{\tilde\om_0}_{2})$. Note that we can choose an upper bound $C$ which is independent of $k$. Similarly, we have
\EQ{\label{bdd.14.td}
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{\nabla \om(\cdot,t)}_{4}\leq C
}
for some positive constant $C$ independent of $k$.
On the other hand, from the equations for $\tilde\om$ and $\om$, we get the equation for $\eta=\om-\tilde\om$,
\[
\partial_t \eta + \nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\eta \cdot \nabla\om
+\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\tilde\om \cdot \nabla \eta =0.
\]
Taking $\int \cdot \eta dx$ on both side, $\eta$ satisfies
\EQN{
\frac 12\frac{d}{dt}\norm{\eta(\cdot,t)}_2^2
&\leq \norm{\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\eta}_{4}
\norm{\nabla\om}_4\norm{\eta}_2
\lesssim \norm{\nabla\om}_4\norm{\eta}_2^2.
}
Here, the last inequality follows from Hardy-Littlewood Sobolev inequality and the compactness of the support of $\eta$. By Gr\"{o}nwall inequality, we obtain
\EQ{\label{est.eta.2}
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{\eta(\cdot,t)}_2
\lesssim \norm{\eta_0}_2
\lesssim \frac 1k.
}
Combining with \eqref{pert.vel}, \eqref{bdd.14}, and \eqref{bdd.14.td}, the perturbation of $u$ can be estimated by
\[
\norm{\nabla(\tilde u- u)}_{\infty} \lesssim {k^{-\frac 13}}.
\]
Finally, by Gagliardo-Nirenberg interpolation inequality, for any $0\leq t\leq 1$, we have
\[
\norm{(\tilde u - u)(\cdot,t)}_{\infty} \lesssim \norm{\nabla(\tilde u- u)}_{\infty}^{\frac 13}\norm{\tilde u - u}_4^{\frac 23}
\lesssim {k^{-\frac 19}} \norm{\eta}_{2}^{\frac 23}\lesssim k^{-\frac 79}.
\]
Therefore, Lemma \ref{perb.char} gives the desired estimate for the perturbation of Lagrangian deformation,
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}(\norm{(\tilde\phi-\phi)(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}
+\norm{(D\tilde\phi-D\phi)(\cdot,t)}_{\infty})
\lesssim k^{-\frac 13}.
\]
Now, we are ready to get $\dot{H}^1$-norm inflation.
Recall \eqref{expressim.H1} and we further estimate its right hand side as follows.
\EQ{\label{H1.norm.inflation.proof}
\norm{\nabla\tilde\om(\cdot,t_0)}_{2}^2
\geq& \int_{\mathbb{R}^2} |\nabla\tilde\om_0(x)\cdot(\nabla^{\perp}\tilde\phi_2)(x,t_0)|^2 dx\\
\geq& \ \frac 12\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} |\nabla\tilde\om_0(x)\cdot(\nabla^{\perp}\phi_2)(x,t_0)|^2 dx-O(k^{-\frac 23})\\
\geq& \ \frac 14 \int_{\mathbb{R}^2} |\nabla\eta_0(x)\cdot(\nabla^{\perp}\phi_2)(x,t_0)|^2 dx\\
&-\frac 12\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} |\nabla\om_0(x)\cdot(\nabla^{\perp}\phi_2)(x,t_0)|^2 dx-O(k^{-\frac 23}).
}
By the assumption on $\om$, we have
\[
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} |\nabla\om_0(x)\cdot(\nabla^{\perp}\phi_2)(x,t_0)|^2 dx
\leq \norm{\nabla \om(\cdot,t_0)}_2^2 \leq L^{\frac 23}.
\]
On the other hand, by the construction of the perturbation $\eta_0$, we obtain
\EQN{
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} |\nabla\eta_0(x)\cdot(\nabla^{\perp}\phi_2)(x,t_0)|^2 dx
&\geq \frac 1{800L}\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} |\sin(kx_1)b(x)\partial_2\phi_2(x,t_0)|^2 dx-O(k^{-2})\\
&\geq \frac {L}{800 }\frac 1{\delta^2}\int_{|x-x_L|<\frac 12\delta} |\sin(kx_1)|^2 dx-O(k^{-2})\\
&\geq \frac{1}{2^6\cdot 10^2}L -O(k^{-1}).
}
Therefore, we get the desired norm inflation
\[
\norm{\nabla \tilde\om(\cdot,t_0)}_2^2 \geq \frac {1}{2^8\cdot 10^2}L -\frac 12 L^{\frac 23} -O(k^{-\frac 23})
> L^{\frac 23}
\]
provided that $L>8^9\cdot 10^6$ and $k$ is sufficiently large. In other words, \eqref{H1.inflation} is obtained.
\hfill$\square$
\begin{remark}\label{local.sol.family} Based on Proposition \ref{large.lagrangian} and Proposition \ref{H1.norm.inflation.prop}, we can construct a family of initial data having $\dot{H}^1$-norm inflation.
Choose a nonzero radial bump function $\varphi\in C_c^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ satisfying $0\leq \varphi\leq 1$, $\varphi\equiv 1$ on $B(0,\frac 12)$, and $\supp(\varphi)\subset B(0,1)$. Then, we define $\rho\in C_c^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ by
\EQ{\label{defn.rho}
\rho(x)=\rho(x_1,x_2)=\sum_{a_1,a_2=\pm 1} a_1a_2\varphi\left(\frac{x_1-a_1,x_2-a_2}{2^{-100}}\right).
}
Clearly, the function $\rho$ is odd in both variables, and
\[
\int_{x_1>0, x_2>0} \rho(x)\frac{x_1 x_2}{|x|^{4}}e^{-|x|^4} dx>0.
\]
Now, for each $0<\ga\leq \frac 12$, define $g_A\in C_c^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ by
\EQ{\label{defn.gA}
g_A(x)
=
\begin{cases}
C_A\sum_{a_A\leq j < b_A}\frac 1{j^{\ga}}\rho(2^j x), &0<\ga<\frac 12\\[10pt]
C_A\sum_{\ln A\leq j < A+\ln A} \frac 1{\sqrt j} \rho(2^j x), &\ga=\frac 12
\end{cases}
}
where $C_A=\frac 1{\sqrt{\ln A}}\frac 1{\ln\ln A}$, $a_A=A^{\frac 1{1-2\ga}}$, and $b_A=(A+\ln A)^{\frac 1{1-2\ga}}$. Note that the summations in \eqref{defn.gA} are over integer $j$ in the range.
First, $g_A$ satisfies all assumptions in Proposition \ref{large.lagrangian}. Obviously, $g_A$ is an odd function in $x_1$ and $x_2$, and $g_A(x_1,x_2)\geq 0$ for $x_1\geq 0$ and $x_2\geq 0$. Using disjoint supports of $\rho(2^j \cdot)$, $j\in \mathbb{N}$, we have for $A\geq e^2$,
\EQ{\label{estimate.B}
G_A&=\int_{x_1>0, x_2>0} g_A(x)\frac{x_1 x_2}{|x|^{4}} \ln^{-\ga}\left(e+\frac 1{|x|}\right) e^{-|x|^4} dx\\
&=
C_A\sum_{j}\frac 1{j^{\ga}}
\int_{x_1>0, x_2>0} \rho(2^j x)\frac{x_1 x_2}{|x|^{4}} \ln^{-\ga}\left(e+\frac 1{|x|}\right) e^{-|x|^4} dx\\
&=
C_A\sum_{j }\frac 1{j^{\ga}}
\int_{\substack{x_1>0, x_2>0\\x\in \supp(\rho)}} \rho(x)\frac{x_1 x_2}{|x|^{4}} \ln^{-\ga}\left(e+\frac {2^j}{|x|}\right) e^{-\frac{|x|^4}{2^{4j}}} dx\\
&\geq
C_A\sum_{j }\frac 1{j^{2\ga}} \left(
\int_{x_1>0, x_2>0} \rho(x)\frac{x_1 x_2}{|x|^{4}}
e^{-|x|^4} dx\right)>0.
}
Here, the range of summation over $j$ depends on $\ga$, which follows to the one in \eqref{defn.gA}.
Since for $A\gg 1$, we have
\EQN{
\sum_{j}\frac 1{j^{2\ga}}
&\sim
\begin{cases}
\int_{a_A}^{b_A} \frac 1{x^{2\ga}} dx = \frac 1{1-2\ga} (b_A^{{1-2\ga}}-a_A^{1-2\ga})= \frac 1{1-2\ga} \ln A, &0<\ga<\frac 12\\[10pt]
\int_{\ln A}^{A+\ln A} \frac 1{x} dx = \ln(A+\ln A) - \ln\ln A, &\ga =\frac 12
\end{cases}\\
&\sim_{\ga} \ln A,
}
$G_A$ has a lower bound
\EQN{
G_A \gtrsim_{\ga} \frac{\sqrt{\ln A}}{\ln\ln A}.
}
Then, by Proposition \ref{large.lagrangian}, for any $A$ with $A\geq A_0$ for some $A_0=A_0(\ga)$, we can find $t_A \in \left(0, \frac 1{\ln\ln A}\right]$ such that the characteristic line $\phi_A$ corresponding to each initial data $g_A$ has a large Lagrangian deformation
\EQ{\label{lld.gA}
\norm{D\phi_A(\cdot,t_A)}_{L^\infty(B(0,\frac12))}>\ln^{\frac 14}\ln\ln\ln A.
}
Now, we induce critical norm inflation from large Lagrangian deformation. Observe that all assumptions in Proposition \ref{H1.norm.inflation.prop} hold for $\om_0=g_A$, $t_0=t_A$, $L=\ln^{\frac 14}\ln\ln\ln A$, and $R_0=1$, provided that $A$ is sufficiently large. Indeed, using
\[
|\phi_A(x,t)-x|\leq \int_0^t |\partial_s\phi_A(x,s)| ds
\leq \norm{\nabla^\perp\De^{-1}T_\ga (g_A\circ\phi_A^{-1})}_{L^\infty_{x,t}} t
{\ \lesssim \ } \norm{g_A}_1^{\frac 12}\norm{g_A}_\infty^\frac 12 t
\]
for all $x\in \mathbb{R}^2$ and $ t\geq 0$,
we have $\phi^{-1}(B_{g_A},t)\subset B(0,1)$ for sufficiently large $A$, where $B_{g_A}$ is defined as in Remark \ref{rist.lld}.
In what follows, we have a desired family $\{\tilde g_A\}$ of a new initial data which has the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item $\tilde g_A$ gets small as $A$ goes to infinity in the following sense:
\EQ{\label{ini.tdgA}
&\norm{\tilde g_A}_{1}\leq 2\norm{g_A}_1\lesssim \frac{1}{A^{\ln 4}},\\
&\norm{\tilde g_A}_{\infty}\leq 2\norm{g_A}_{\infty}\leq \frac{2}{\sqrt{\ln A}}\\
\norm{\nabla \tilde g_A}_{2} \leq \norm{\nabla g_A}_{2} &+ \ln^{-\frac 18}\ln\ln\ln A
\leq \frac{C_{\ga}}{\ln\ln A}+ \ln^{-\frac 18}\ln\ln\ln A
}
where $C_{\ga}$ is independent of $A$.
\item $\supp(\tilde g_A)\subset B(0,1)$.
\item The smooth solution $\tilde\om_A$ to \eqref{main.eq} for the initial data $\tilde g_A$ has local critical norm inflation:
\[
\norm{\nabla\tilde\om_A(\cdot,t_A)}_2 >\ln^{\frac 1{12}}\ln\ln\ln A.
\]
\end{enumerate}
\end{remark}
\section{Patching argument}\label{sec.patching}
In this section, we introduce useful lemmas and a proposition for the construction of the desired global solution from local ones. For the non-compactly supported case, our strategy is using a huge distance between local solutions so that they barely interact to each other. This leads the global solution to locally behave like local solutions. The following proposition describes this in detail.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop.patching.noncompact}
Let $\{\om_{j0}\}\subset C_c^{\infty}(B(0,1))$ be a sequence of functions satisfying
\EQ{\label{initial.data.M}
\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}(\norm{\om_{j0}}_{H^1}^2+\norm{\om_{j0}}_1) + \sup_j \norm{\om_{j0}}_{\infty}\leq M
}
for some $M>1$.
For each $\ga>0$, let $C_0$ be an absolute constant such that
\[
\norm{\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}f}_{\infty}\leq C_0(\norm{f}_1+\norm{f}_{\infty}).
\]
Then, we can find a sequence $\{x_j\}$ of centers with $|x_j-x_k|\gg 1$ for $j\neq k$ such that there exists a unique classical solution $\om$ to \eqref{main.eq} for the initial data
\[
\om_0(x) = \sum_{j=1}^{\infty} \om_{j0}(x-x_j) \in L^1\cap L^{\infty}\cap H^1\cap C^{\infty}
\]
such that the following hold.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item For any $0\leq t\leq 1$, $\om(\cdot,t)$ is supported in the union of disjoint balls:
\EQ{\label{supp.om.dis}
\supp(\om(\cdot,t))\subset \bigcup_{j=1}^{\infty}B(x_j, 3C_0M).
}
\item For each $0\leq t\leq 1$, $\om(\cdot,t)\in C^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$, and $\om\in C([0,1];L^1(\mathbb{R}^2)\cap L^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2))$.
\item For any $\ep>0$, we can find a sufficiently large integer $j_0=j_0(\ep)$ so that for $j\geq j_0$, we have
\EQ{\label{local.behavior.prop}
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\om-\om_j)(\cdot,t)}_{H^2(B(x_j,3C_0M))} <\ep,
}
where a local solution $\om_j$ solves \eqref{main.eq} for the initial data
\[
\om_j|_{t=0} = \om_{j0}(\cdot-x_j).
\]
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
Before we prove this proposition, we consider some preliminary lemmas.
\begin{lemma}\label{simple.patching}
Suppose that $f\in H^k\cap L^1$ for some $k\geq 2$ and $g\in H^2\cap L^1$ satisfy
\begin{gather}
\norm{f}_1 + \norm{g}_1 + \sup(\norm{f}_{\infty},\norm{g}_{\infty}) \leq M <\infty, \nonumber\\
\dist(\supp(f), \supp(g)) \geq 100 C_0M >0 \label{dist.fg}
\end{gather}
for some constant $M>1$, and the Lebesgue measure of the support of $f$ is bounded by some positive constant $M_1$.
Then, the solution $\om$ to
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t\om + u\cdot \nabla\om =0 &\mathbb{R}^2 \times (0,1]\\
u= \nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om\\
\om|_{t=0} = f+g
\end{cases}
\]
has the following properties.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item The solution $\om$ can be decomposed as
$\om = \om_f+\om_g$ such that
\begin{align}
\om_f|_{t=0} = f&, \quad \om_g|_{t=0}=g \nonumber\\
\supp(\om_f(\cdot,t))&\subset B(\supp(f), 2C_0M), \label{condition.decomp.f}\\
\supp(\om_g(\cdot,t))&\subset B(\supp(g), 2C_0M), \label{condition.decomp.g}\\
\dist(\supp(\om_f(\cdot,t)), &\supp(\om_g(\cdot,t))) \geq 90 C_0M, \quad\forall 0\leq t\leq 1, \label{condition.decomp.fg}
\end{align}
where $C_0$ is defined as in Proposition \ref{prop.patching.noncompact}.
\item The Sobolev norms of $\om_f$ can be estimated by
\EQ{\label{bdd.Hk}
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1} \norm{\om_f(\cdot,t)}_{H^k} \leq C
}
for some constant $C=C(\norm{f}_{H^k},k,M, M_1)$ independent of $\norm{g}_{H^k}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Define $\om_f$ and $\om_g$ by the solutions to
\EQ{\label{eqn.omf}
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \om_f + u\cdot \nabla \om_f =0 \\
\om_f|_{t=0} = f
\end{cases}
}
and
\EQ{\label{eqn.omg}
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \om_g + u\cdot \nabla \om_g =0 \\
\om_g|_{t=0} = g.
\end{cases}
}
Let $\phi$ be the characteristic line which solves
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t\phi(x,t) = u(\phi(x,t),t)\\
\phi(x,0) =x.
\end{cases}
\]
Then, the equations \eqref{eqn.omf} and \eqref{eqn.omg} can be written as
\[
\om_f(\phi(x,t),t)=f(x),\quad\text{and}\quad \om_g(\phi(x,t),t)=g(x).
\]
From these forms, it follows that for $1\leq p \leq \infty$
\[
\norm{\om_f(\cdot,t)}_p = \norm{f}_p, \quad\text{and}\quad
\norm{\om_g(\cdot,t)}_p = \norm{g}_p, \quad
\forall 0\leq t\leq 1,
\]
and
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{u(\cdot,t)}_{\infty} \leq C_0M.
\]
Since we have
\[
|\phi(x,t)-x| \leq \int_0^t |\partial_s \phi(x,s)| ds \leq \max_{0\leq s\leq 1}\norm{u(\cdot,s)}_{\infty}t\leq C_0Mt,
\]
\eqref{condition.decomp.f} and \eqref{condition.decomp.g} easily follows from
\EQN{
&\supp(\om_f(\cdot,t))\subset \phi(\supp(f), t)\subset B(\supp(f), 2C_0M), \\
&\supp(\om_g(\cdot,t))\subset \phi(\supp(g), t)\subset B(\supp(g), 2C_0M),
\quad \forall0\leq t\leq 1.
}
Using the assumption \eqref{dist.fg} additionally, the triangle inequality implies
\EQ{\label{dist.om.fg}
\dist(\supp(\om_f(\cdot,t)), \supp(\om_g(\cdot,t))) \geq 90 C_0M, \quad\forall 0\leq t\leq 1.
}
In other words, \eqref{condition.decomp.fg} is obtained.
To control the Sobolev norm of $\om_f$, we first estimate $\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_g$ when $0\leq t\leq 1$ and $x\in \supp(\om_f(\cdot,t))$.
Since the supports of $\om_f(\cdot,t)$ and $\om_g(\cdot,t)$ are apart from each other for $0\leq t\leq 1$ (see \eqref{dist.om.fg}), we have for $0\leq t\leq 1$ and $x\in \supp(\om_f(\cdot,t))$,
\EQ{\label{remainder.velocity}
\left|\partial^{\al}\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_g(x,t)\right|
&=\left|\int_{|y-x|\geq 90C_0M} \partial^{\al}H(x-y)\om_g(y) dy\right|\\
&\leq \norm{\partial^{\al}H}_{L^{\infty}(|z|\geq 90C_0M)} \norm{g}_1,
}
where $H$ is the kernel of the Fourier multiplier $\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}$. By Lemma \ref{ker.H.lem}, for any multi-index $\al$ with $|\al|\ge 0$, $H$ satisfies
\[
|\partial^{\al}H(z)| \lesssim_{\al,\ga} \frac1{|z|^{|\al|+1}}, \quad\forall z\neq 0
\]
and therefore
\EQ{\label{est.ug.lemma1}
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}
\max_{x\in\supp(\om_f(\cdot,t))}|\partial^{\al}\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_g(x,t)|
\lesssim_{\al,\ga} 1.
}
To get \eqref{bdd.Hk}, we use the energy method. We consider the Sobolev norm $W^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ for $2<p\leq +\infty$ first. From the equation \eqref{eqn.omf} for $\om_f$, we have
\EQ{\label{energy.est.p}
\frac 1p\frac{d}{dt} \norm{\nabla\om_f}_p^p
\leq (\norm{D\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_f}_{\infty}
+\norm{D\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_g}_{L^\infty(\supp(\om_f(\cdot,t)))})\norm{\nabla\om_f}_p^p
}
By log-type interpolation inequality together with $L^p$-norm preservation of $\om_f$,
\[
\norm{D\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_f(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}\lesssim_{p} 1+\norm{f}_{\infty}\log(10 + \norm{f}_2 + \norm{\nabla\om_f(\cdot,t)}_p^p),
\quad\forall 0\leq t\leq 1.
\]
Combining with \eqref{est.ug.lemma1} and \eqref{energy.est.p}, this implies
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{\om_f(\cdot,t)}_{W^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^2)}\leq C(\norm{f}_{W^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^2)}, p,M).
\]
We now estimate in $H^k(\mathbb{R}^2)$, $k\geq 2$. By the commutator estimate in \cite[Theorem 1.9]{Li16}, for $J=(1-\Delta)^{\frac 12}$, we get
\EQN{
\frac{d}{dt} \norm{J^k \om_f}_2
\leq& \ \norm{[J^k,\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_f\cdot \nabla]\om_f}_2
+\norm{[J^k,\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_g\cdot \nabla]\om_f}_2\\
\lesssim& \ \norm{J^{k-1}D\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_f}_{3}\norm{\nabla\om_f}_{6}
+\norm{D\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_f}_{\infty}\norm{J^k\om_f}_2\\
&+\max_{|\al|\leq k}\max_{0\leq t\leq 1} \norm{D^{\al}\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_g(\cdot,t)}_{L^{\infty}(\supp(\om_f(\cdot,t)))}\norm{J^k\om_f}_2 \\
\leq& \ C\norm{J^k\om_f}_2,
}
where the constant in the last inequality depends on $\norm{f}_{H^2}$, $M$, $M_1$, and $k$.
Therefore, by Gr\"{o}nwall inequality, we obtain \eqref{bdd.Hk}.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{simple.patching.2}
Suppose that $f$ is in $H^3(\mathbb{R}^2)\cap L^1(\mathbb{R}^2)$ with ${\operatorname{Leb}}(\supp(f))\leq M_1$ for some $M_1$, $g$ is in $H^2(\mathbb{R}^2)\cap L^1(\mathbb{R}^2)$, and they satisfy
\EQN{
\norm{f}_1 + \norm{g}_1 + \sup(\norm{f}_{\infty},\norm{g}_{\infty})\leq M
}
for some $M>1$.
Let $\om$ and $\tilde\om$ be solutions to \eqref{main.eq} for the initial data $f+g$ and $f$, respectively.
Then, for each $\ep>0$, we can find sufficiently large $R=R(\ep, \norm{f}_{H^3}, M,M_1)>0$ such that if
\EQ{\label{dist.ass}
\dist(\supp(f),\supp(g))\geq R,
}
then $\om$ can be decomposed as $\om = \om_f + \om_g$ such that $\om_f$ and $\om_g$ satisfy \eqref{condition.decomp.f}-\eqref{condition.decomp.fg} and
\EQ{\label{local.behavior}
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\om_f-\tilde\om)(\cdot,t)}_{H^2}<\ep.
}
\end{lemma}
\begin{remark} Similar to \eqref{condition.decomp.f} and \eqref{condition.decomp.g}, we have
\EQ{\label{supp.tdom}
\supp(\tilde\om(\cdot,t)) \subset B(\supp(f), 2C_0M),
\quad\forall 0\le t\le 1,
}
where $C_0$ is defined as in Proposition \ref{prop.patching.noncompact}. It follows from $\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{\tilde u(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}\leq C_0M$ for $\tilde u = \nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\tilde\om$.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
We use the same decomposition $\om=\om_f+\om_g$ in Lemma \ref{simple.patching}. Then, we have \eqref{condition.decomp.f} and \eqref{condition.decomp.g}. Furthermore, \eqref{condition.decomp.fg} is also obtained, provided that $R\geq 100C_0M$. In fact, using \eqref{dist.ass}, we have
\EQ{\label{dist.supp.omfg}
\dist(\supp(\om_f(\cdot,t),\supp(\om_g(\cdot,t))))\geq R-10C_0 M\geq \frac 12 R, \quad \forall 0\leq t\le 1
}
for sufficiently large $R$.
To get \eqref{local.behavior}, we recall the equation for $\om_f$,
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \om_f + u \cdot \nabla \om_f =0\\
\om_f |_{t=0} = f.
\end{cases}
\]
By Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality,
\EQ{\label{est.H2}
\norm{(\om_f-\tilde\om)(\cdot,t)}_{H^2}
&\lesssim (\norm{\om_f(\cdot,t)}_{H^3}+\norm{\tilde\om(\cdot,t)}_{H^3})^{\frac 23} \norm{(\om_f-\tilde\om)(\cdot,t)}_{2}^{\frac 13}.
}
By Lemma \ref{simple.patching}, we obtained
\EQ{\label{bdd.H3.omf}
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{\om_f(\cdot,t)}_{H^3}\leq C(\norm{f}_{H^3}, M, M_1).
}
Also, by the usual energy method, we also have a similar inequality for $\tilde\om$
\EQ{\label{bdd.H3.tdom}
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{\tilde\om(\cdot,t)}_{H^3}\leq C(\norm{f}_{H^3}, M, M_1).
}
Therefore, it is enough to consider $\norm{\eta(\cdot,t)}_2$ for $\eta=\om_f-\tilde\om$.
The equation for $\eta$ is
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t\eta + \nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\tilde\om\cdot\nabla\eta + \nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\eta \cdot\nabla \om_f + \nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_g \cdot \nabla\om_f=0\\
\eta|_{t=0}=0.
\end{cases}
\]
Taking $\int\cdot\eta dx$ on both side of the first equation and using \eqref{bdd.H3.omf}, we get
\EQN{
\frac{d}{dt}\norm{\eta(\cdot,t)}_2
&\leq \norm{\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\eta \cdot\nabla \om_f}_2
+\norm{\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_g \cdot \nabla\om_f}_2\\
&\lesssim_{M_1} \norm{\eta}_2\norm{\nabla \om_f}_6 + \norm{\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_g}_{L^{\infty}(\supp(\om_f(\cdot,t)))}\norm{\nabla \om_f}_2\\
&\leq C(\norm{\eta}_2+ \norm{\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_g}_{L^{\infty}(\supp(\om_f(\cdot,t)))}),
}
for some positive constant $C$ depending on $\norm{f}_{H^3}$, $M$, and $M_1$. Then by Gr\"{o}nwall inequality, we have
\EQ{\label{est.eta}
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{\eta(\cdot,t)}_2 \leq C(\norm{f}_{H^3}, M, M_1)
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}
\norm{\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_g}_{L^{\infty}(\supp(\om_f(\cdot,t)))}.
}
Using Lemma \ref{ker.H.lem} and \eqref{dist.supp.omfg}, we have for any $0\leq t\leq 1$ and $x\in \supp(\om_f(\cdot,t))$,
\EQ{\label{est.ug}
|\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_g(x,t)|&=|H\ast\om_g(x,t)|\\
&\lesssim \int_{|x-y|\geq \frac 12 R} \frac 1{|x-y|} |\om_g(y,t)| dy
\lesssim R^{-1}\norm{g}_1\leq MR^{-1}.
}
Finally, combining \eqref{est.H2}-\eqref{est.ug}, we can find $R=R(\ep,\norm{f}_{H^3}, M,M_1)>100C_0M$ sufficiently large such that
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\om_f-\tilde\om)(\cdot,t)}_{H^2}
\leq C(\norm{f}_{H^3}, M,M_1)R^{-\frac 13}<\ep.
\]
\end{proof}
Now we are ready to prove the proposition.
\noindent\textit{Proof of Proposition \ref{prop.patching.noncompact}.}
Let $\om_{\leq n}$, $n\in \mathbb{N}$, be a smooth solution to
\EQ{\label{defn.wn}
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \om_{\le n} +\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}\om_{\le n}\cdot \nabla\om_{\le n} =0,\\
\om_{\le n}|_{t=0}= \sum_{k=1}^n \om_{k0}(x-x_{k}).
\end{cases}.
}
Our strategy is to construct a sequence $\{x_k\}_{k\in \mathbb{N}}$ of centers such that the following hold.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item\label{i} For each $j\in \mathbb{N}$, $\{\om_{\leq n}\}$ is Cauchy in $C([0,1];H^2(B(x_j,3C_0M)))$.
\item \label{ii} For any $n\in \mathbb{N}$,
\[\label{disj.supp.wn}
\supp(\om_{\leq n}(\cdot,t))\subset \bigcup_{j=1}^{\infty}B(x_j, 3C_0M).
\]
\item\label{iii} For any $n\in \mathbb{N}$ and $1\leq j\leq n$,
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\om_{\leq n}-\om_j)(\cdot,t)}_{H^2(B(x_j,3C_0M))} <\frac 1{2^{j+1}}.
\]
\end{enumerate}
Then, the limit solution of $\{\om_{\leq n}\}$ becomes the desired one $\om$.
\bigskip
\noindent\texttt{Step 1} Construction of the sequence $\{x_k\}_{k \in \mathbb{N}}$.
For each $j\in \mathbb{N}$, apply Lemma \ref{simple.patching.2} for $f=\om_{j0}$ and $\ep=\frac 1{2^{j+1}}$. Then, we can find $R_j>0$ such that for any $h\in H^2\cap L^1$ with
\EQ{\label{h.ini}
\norm{\om_{j0}}_1 &+\norm{h}_1 +\sup(\norm{\om_{j0}}_{\infty},\norm{h}_{\infty}) \leq M,\\
&\dist(\supp(\om_{j0}), \supp(h))\geq R_j,
}
where $M$ is given in \eqref{initial.data.M}, the solutions $\om$ and $\tilde\om_j$ to \eqref{main.eq} for the initial data $\om_{j0}+h$ and $\om_{j0}$, respectively, satisfy
\EQ{\label{h.conclusion}
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\om-\tilde\om_j)(\cdot,t)}_{H^2(B(0,3C_0M))}<\frac 1{2^{j+1}},
}
and
\EQ{\label{supp.h}
\supp(\om(\cdot,t))\subset B(0,3C_0M) \cup B(\supp(h), 2C_0M).
}
Here, \eqref{supp.h} is an easy consequence of \eqref{condition.decomp.f} and \eqref{condition.decomp.g}.
We find $\{x_n\}$ inductively. Indeed, we can relax the conditions on $\{x_n\}$ as follows; for any $n\geq 2$ in $\mathbb{N}$ with $x_1=0$,
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item\label{choice.x1.claim}
$x_n$ is located at a far distance from previously chosen points
\EQN{
|x_n-x_l|>\sum_{i=1}^n R_i + 10C_0M + 2^n, \quad\forall 1\leq j< n,
}
\item\label{choice.x2.claim}
A smooth solution $\om_{\leq n}$ to \eqref{defn.wn} satisfies
\EQN{
\supp(\om_{\leq n}(\cdot,t))\subset \bigcup_{j=1}^n B(x_j,3C_0M), \quad \forall 0\leq t\leq 1.
}
\item\label{choice.x3.claim}
Denoting $B(x_j, 3C_0M)$ by $B_j$,
\EQN{
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\om_{\leq n}-\om_{\leq n-1})(\cdot,t)}_{H^2(\bigcup_{j=1}^{n-1} B_j)}<\frac 1{2^n}.
}
\end{enumerate}
Then, the requirements \eqref{i} and $\eqref{ii}$ easily follow from \eqref{choice.x3.claim} and \eqref{choice.x2.claim}, respectively. We can also check that \eqref{choice.x1.claim} implies \eqref{iii}. For each $n\in \mathbb{N}$ and $1\leq j\leq n$, plug
\EQ{\label{given.h}
h(x)=\sum_{\substack{k=1\\k\neq j}}^{n}\om_{k0}(x-x_k+x_j)
}
into \eqref{h.ini}. We can easily see that \eqref{h.ini} holds true
\EQN{
\norm{\om_{j0}}_1 +\norm{h}_1 +\sup(\norm{\om_{j0}}_{\infty},\norm{h}_{\infty})
\leq \sum_{k=1}^n\norm{\om_{k0}}_1 +\sup_{1\leq k\leq n}\norm{\om_{k0}}_{\infty}
\leq M,
}
and
\EQN{
\dist(\supp(\om_{j0}), \supp(h))
&=\dist(\supp(\om_{j0}(\cdot-x_j)), \supp(h(\cdot-x_j)))\\
&\geq \inf_{\substack{1\leq k\leq n\\k\neq j}}\dist(B(x_j,1), B(x_k,1))\\
&\geq \inf_{\substack{1\leq k\leq n\\k\neq j}}
|x_j-x_k|-2
\geq R_j.
}
Therefore, using the translation invariant property of \eqref{main.eq}, we have
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{\om_{\leq n}(\cdot+x_j,t)-\tilde\om_j(\cdot,t)}_{H^2(B(0,3C_0M))}
<\frac 1{2^{j+1}},
\]
which follows \eqref{iii}.
Now, we choose $\{x_j\}$ satisfying \eqref{choice.x1.claim}-\eqref{choice.x3.claim} by induction. At the end of each inductive step, we also find $\tilde R_n\geq \tilde R_{n-1}$ satisfying the following condition
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]\setcounter{enumi}{3}
\item \label{condi.tdR}
For any $g\in H^2\cap L^1$ with
\EQ{\label{condition.for.g}
&\norm{\sum_{j=1}^n\om_{j0}(\cdot-x_j)}_1 +\norm{g}_1 +\sup\left(\norm{\sum_{j=1}^n \om_{j0}(\cdot-x_j)}_{\infty},\norm{g}_{\infty}\right) \leq M,\\
&\dist\left(\supp\left(\sum_{j=1}^n \om_{j0}(\cdot-x_j)\right), \supp(g)\right)\geq \tilde R_{n},
}
the solution $\om$ to \eqref{main.eq} for the initial data $\sum_{j=1}^n \om_{j0}(x-x_j)+g$ satisfies
\[
\supp(\om(\cdot,t)) \subset \left(\bigcup_{j=1}^n B_j\right) \bigcup B(\supp(g),2C_0M),
\quad\forall 0\leq t\leq 1
\]
and
\EQ{\label{conv.H2}
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\om-\om_{\leq n})(\cdot,t)}_{H^2(\bigcup_{k=1}^n B_k)}<\frac 1{2^{n+1}}.
}
\end{enumerate}
Set $x_1=0$ and $\tilde R_1 =R_1$. We first choose $x_2$ satisfying
\[
|x_2-x_1| > \sum_{i=1}^{2} R_i + 10C_0M+ 2^{2} +\tilde R_{1}.
\]
Clearly, \eqref{choice.x1.claim} for $n=2$ is obtained. Also, $j=1$ and $h=w_{20}(x-x_2)$ satisfies \eqref{h.ini}, which implies \eqref{choice.x2.claim}-\eqref{choice.x3.claim} for $n=2$. Here, we use $\om_{\leq 1}=\om_1=\tilde \om_1$.
The choice of $\tilde R_2\geq \tilde R_1 = R_1$ satisfying \eqref{condi.tdR} for $n=2$ follows from Lemma \ref{simple.patching.2}; apply it to $f=\om_{\leq 2}|_{t=0}$ and $\ep=\frac 1{2^3}$.
Assume that $\{x_j\}_{j=1}^n$ and $\tilde R_{n}$ are given and satisfy \eqref{choice.x1.claim}-\eqref{condi.tdR}.
Then, we pick $x_{n+1}$ such that
\[
|x_{n+1}-x_j|> \sum_{i=1}^{n+1} R_i + 10C_0M+ 2^{n+1} +\tilde R_{n} ,
\quad\forall j=1,\cdots,n.
\]
which follows \eqref{choice.x1.claim}. To achieve \eqref{choice.x2.claim} and \eqref{choice.x3.claim} for $n+1$, we observe that $g=\om_{(n+1)0}(x-x_{n+1})$ satisfies \eqref{condition.for.g},
\EQN{
\norm{\sum_{j=1}^n\om_{j0}(\cdot-x_j)}_1 +\norm{g}_1 &+\sup\left(\norm{\sum_{j=1}^n \om_{j0}(\cdot-x_j)}_{\infty},\norm{g}_{\infty}\right) \\
&\leq \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\norm{\om_{j0}}_1
+\sup_j\norm{\om_{j0}}_{\infty}
\leq M
}
and
\EQN{
\dist\left(\supp\left(\sum_{j=1}^n \om_{j0}(x-x_j)\right), \supp(g)\right)
&\geq \inf_{1\leq j\leq n}\dist(B(x_j,1), B(x_{n+1},1))\\
&\geq \inf_{1\leq j\leq n}|x_{n+1}-x_j| - 2
\geq \tilde R_{n}.
}
Then by \eqref{condi.tdR} for $n$, the conditions \eqref{choice.x2.claim} and \eqref{choice.x3.claim} for $n+1$ hold; we have
\[
\supp(\om_{\leq n+1}(\cdot,t))
\subset \bke{\bigcup_{j=1}^{n}B_j }\cup B(x_{n+1}, 2C_0M +1)
\subset \bigcup_{j=1}^{n+1}B_j
\]
and
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1} \norm{(\om_{\leq n+1} - \om_{\leq n})(\cdot,t)}_{H^2(\bigcup_{k=1}^{n}B_k)} <\frac 1{2^{n+1}}.
\]
Applying again Lemma \ref{simple.patching.2} for $f=\om_{\leq n+1}|_{t=0}= \sum_{j=1}^{n+1} \om_{j0}(x-x_j)$ and $\ep=\frac 1{2^{n+2}}$, we can find $\tilde R_{n+1}\geq \tilde R_n$ satisfying \eqref{condi.tdR}. Therefore, we have \eqref{choice.x1.claim}-\eqref{condi.tdR} at $(n+1)$th step, so that they hold true for any $n\geq 2$.
\bigskip
\noindent\texttt{Step 2.} Check the required conditions.
By the condition \eqref{i}, $\{\om_{\leq n}\}$ is Cauchy in $C([0,1];H^2(B(x_j, 3C_0M)))$ for each $j\in \mathbb{N}$. On the other hand, by Lemma \ref{simple.patching}, for each $j\in \mathbb{N}$ and $k\geq 2$, $\{\om_{\leq n}\}$ is uniformly bounded in $C([0,1];H^k(B(x_j, 3C_0M)))$, so that $\{\om_{\leq n}\}$ is Cauchy even in $C([0,1];H^k(B(x_j, 3C_0M)))$. This implies that for each $0\leq t\leq 1$, we have a pointwise limit solution
\[
\om(x,t) =
\begin{cases}
\lim_{n\to\infty}\om_{\leq n}(x,t) &x\in \bigcup_{j=1}^{\infty}B(x_j,3C_0M)\\
0 &\text{otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\]
Obviously, $\om(\cdot,t)\in C^{\infty}$ and $\om$ satisfies \eqref{supp.om.dis} and \eqref{local.behavior.prop} by the conditions \eqref{ii} and \eqref{iii}. Furthermore, $\om\in C([0,1];L^1(\mathbb{R}^2)\cap L^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2))$. This is because for any $0\leq t\leq 1$, we have
\EQN{
\norm{\om(\cdot,t)}_{1}
&=\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\norm{\om(\cdot,t)}_{L^1(B_j)}
=\sum_{j=1}^{\infty} \lim_{n\to\infty}\norm{\om_{\leq n}(\cdot,t)}_{L^1(B_j)}
=\sum_{j=1}^{\infty} \norm{\om_{j0}}_{1}
= \norm{\om_0}_1
}
and
\EQN{
\norm{\om(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}
&=\sup_j\norm{\om(\cdot,t)}_{L^{\infty}(B_j)}
=\sup_j\lim_{n\to\infty}\norm{\om_{\leq n}(\cdot,t)}_{L^{\infty}(B_j)}\\
&=\sup_j\norm{\om_{j0}}_{\infty}=\norm{\om_0}_{\infty}.
}
Finally, we prove that the limit solution $\om$ is the unique classical solution to \eqref{main.eq} for the initial data
\[
\om|_{t=0}(x) = \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\om_{j0}(x-x_j).
\]
We first show that the limit solution $\om$ solves \eqref{main.eq} in the sense of
\begin{align}
\om(x,t) = \om_0(x) &- \int_0^t (\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om\cdot\nabla\om)(x,s) ds,
\quad\forall (x,t)\in \mathbb{R}^2\times (0,1).
\label{main.eq.inte}
\end{align}
At $t=0$, it is apparent that the limit solution is same with $\om_0$. Since $\om_{\leq n}$ solves \eqref{main.eq.inte} with $\om_0 = \sum_{j=1}^{n}\om_{j0}(\cdot-x_j)$ for any $n\in \mathbb{N}$, it is enough to prove the uniform convergence $\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_{\leq n}\to \nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om$ on each $B(x_j,3C_0M)\times [0,1]$, $j\in \mathbb{N}$.
For notational simplicity, we suppress the dependence on the variable $t$, if it's not needed. Fix $j\in \mathbb{N}$. For $n>j$ and $x\in B(x_j,3C_0M)=B_j$, we have
\EQN{
|(\Delta^{-1}\nabla^{\perp}T_{\ga}(\om_{\leq n}-\om)(x)|
&\leq \int |H(x-y)||(\om_{\leq n}-\om)(y)| dy\\
&=\left(\sum_{\substack{m=1\\m\neq j}}^{n}\int_{B_m}+\int_{B_j}+\sum_{l=n+1}^{\infty}\int_{B_l}\right) |H(x-y)||(\om_{\leq n}-\om)(y)| dy\\
&=I_1^n + I_2^n +I_3^n.
}
By the choice of the centers, we have for any $x\in B_j$ and $y\in B_m$, $m\neq j$,
\[
|x-y|\geq |x_j-x_m|-6C_0M \geq 2^{\max(j,m)}.
\]
This implies that $I_1^n$ converges to 0, as $n$ goes to infinity; for $x\in B_j$,
\EQN{
I_1^n&\lesssim \sum^{n}_{\substack{m=1\\m\neq j}}\int_{B_m} \frac 1{|x-y|}|(\om_{\leq n}-\om)(y,t)| dy
\leq \sum_{m=1}^{n}2^{-m}\norm{(\om_{\leq n}-\om)(\cdot,t)}_{L^1(B_m)}\\
&\lesssim\sum_{m=1}^{n}2^{-m}\norm{\om_{\leq n}-\om}_{C([0,1];L^{\infty}(B_m))} \to 0, \quad\text{ as } n\to \infty.
}
In a similar way, $I_3^n$ approaches to 0, as $n$ goes to infinity;
\[
I_3^n \lesssim \sum_{l=n+1}^{\infty}\int_{B_l} \frac 1{|x-y|}|\om(y)| dy\\
\leq \sum_{l=n+1}^{\infty}2^{-l}\norm{\om_0}_{1} \to 0, \quad\text{ as } n\to \infty.
\]
Finally, since $|x-y|\leq |x-x_j|+|y-x_j|\leq 6C_0M$, we obtain
\[
I_2^n\lesssim_{M}
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\om_{\leq n}-\om)(\cdot,t)}_{L^{\infty}(B_j)} \to 0, \quad\text{as }n\to \infty.
\]
Therefore, we get the uniform convergence of $\nabla^\perp \De^{-1}T_\ga \om_{\le n}$ and hence $\om$ solves $\eqref{main.eq}$ in the sense of \eqref{main.eq.inte}. Using the equation, we can improve the regularity of the solution in time, so that $\om$ is a classical solution to \eqref{main.eq}.
For the uniqueness of the classical solution, let $\bar{\om}$ be another classical solution to \eqref{main.eq} for the same initial data. Note that the statement in Lemma \ref{simple.patching.2} holds also for a classical solution $\om$ for initial data $f+g$ where $g\in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2)\cap L^1(\mathbb{R}^2)$.
Then, in the same way of obtaining \eqref{conv.H2}, we have
\EQN{
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\om-\om_{\leq n})(\cdot,t)}_{H^2(\cup_{j=1}^n B_j)} <\frac 1{2^n}\\
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\bar\om-\om_{\leq n})(\cdot,t)}_{H^2(\cup_{j=1}^n B_j)} <\frac 1{2^n}.
}
This follows from that $g=\sum_{j=n+1}^{\infty}\om_{j0}(\cdot-x_j)$ satisfies \eqref{condition.for.g} for the same $M$, $f$, and $\ep$ in the construction of $\tilde R_{n+1}$.
Therefore, we have $\om=\bar\om$. In other words, the uniqueness of the classical solution holds.
This completes the proof.
\hfill$\square$
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm.noncpt}}\label{sec.non.comp}
In this section, combining the results obtained in the previous sections, we finally construct a non-compactly supported perturbation for the strong ill-posedness of \eqref{main.eq} in the critical Sobolev space.
\
\noindent\textit{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm.noncpt}.} Recall the family of initial data $\tilde g_A$ in Remark \ref{local.sol.family}. By its construction, for fixed $0<\ga\leq \frac 12$ and $0<\ep<1$, we can find a sequence $\{A_j\}$ such that for any $j\in \mathbb{N}$, $\zeta_j = \tilde g_{A_j}$ satisfies $\supp(\zeta_j)\subset B(0,1)$ and
\EQ{\label{xi.smallness}
\norm{\zeta_j}_1 + \norm{\zeta_j}_{\infty}+\norm{\nabla \zeta_j}_{2}<\frac {\ep}{2^j},
}
and the smooth solution $\tilde\om_j$ to \eqref{main.eq} with initial data $\zeta_j$ achieves
\EQ{\label{largeness.omj}
\norm{\nabla \tilde\om_j(\cdot,t_j)}_2 > j
}
for some $t_j$ which converges to $0$ as $j\to \infty$.
Since the solution to \eqref{main.eq} is translation-invariant, in the case of $\supp(a)\subset B(0,1)$ up to translation, we can apply Proposition \ref{prop.patching.noncompact} to $\om_{10}=a$ and $\om_{j0}=\zeta_j$ for $j\geq 2$. Then, we have a sequence $\{x_j\}_{j\in \mathbb{N}}$ of centers with $x_1=0$ such that for the initial data
\[
\om_0(x) = a(x-x_1) + \sum_{j=2}^{\infty}\zeta_{j}(x-x_j) =: a(x)+\zeta(x)
\]
we have a unique classical solution $\om$ to \eqref{main.eq} and the solution satisfies $\om(\cdot,t)\in C^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ for any $0\leq t\leq 1$, $\om\in C([0,1];L^1(\mathbb{R}^2)\cap L^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2))$, and
\EQ{\label{om.close.omj}
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\om-\om_j)(\cdot,t)}_{H^2(B(x_j,3C_0M))}<1
}
for sufficiently large $j$. Here, $\om_j$ is a smooth solution to \eqref{main.eq} for the initial data $\zeta_j(x-x_j)$, $C_0$ is the constant defined in Proposition \ref{prop.patching.noncompact}, and $M>1$ is a bound of the initial data in the sense of
\[
1+\norm{a}_{H^1}^2+\norm{a}_1 +\norm{a}_{\infty} +\norm{\zeta}_{H^1}^2+\norm{\zeta}_1+\norm{\zeta}_{\infty}\leq M.
\]
Note that $\om_j$ for any $j\in \mathbb{N}$ satisfies
\[
\supp(\om_j)\subset B(x_j,3C_0M),\quad
\om_j(x,t)=\tilde\om_j(x-x_j,t).
\]
It is easy to see that $\zeta \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2)$ because of $\zeta_j \in C_c^\infty(B(0,1))$ and $|x_j-x_k|\gg 1$ for $j\neq k$.
By \eqref{xi.smallness}, we also get
\[
\norm{\zeta}_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{R}^2)}+\norm{\zeta}_1 +\norm{\zeta}_{\infty}
\leq \sum_{j=2}^{\infty} \norm{\nabla\zeta_j}_{2}+\norm{\zeta_j}_1 +\norm{\zeta_j}_{\infty}<\ep.
\]
On the other hand, \eqref{largeness.omj}, \eqref{om.close.omj}, and $\supp(\om_j(\cdot,t))\subset B(x_j,3C_0M)$, $0\leq t\leq 1$, implies that
\EQN{
\norm{\om(\cdot,t_j)}_{\dot{H}^1(B(x_j,3C_0M))}
&\geq \norm{\om_j(\cdot,t_j)}_{\dot{H}^1(B(x_j,3C_0M))} -\norm{(\om-\om_j)(\cdot,t_j)}_{\dot{H}^1(B(x_j,3C_0M))}\\
&\geq \norm{\tilde\om_j(\cdot,t_j)}_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{R}^2)} - \max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\om-\om_j)(\cdot,t)}_{\dot{H}^1(B(x_j,3C_0M))}\\
&> j - 1.
}
Therefore, the constructed perturbation $\zeta$ satisfies all requirements in Theorem \ref{thm.noncpt}. If $\supp(a)\not\subset B(0,1)$ up to translation, we slightly modify the proof of the Proposition and obtain the same conclusion.
\hfill$\square$
\section{The compact case}\label{sec.comp}
In this section, we prove Theorem \ref{thm.cpt}, the compact case. Unlike the non-compact case, a large distance between local solutions cannot be used in order to minimize their interactions and make a global solution locally behave like local ones. For this reason, we adopt a different scheme; use the smallness in $L^1$-norm of the tail part of a global solution.
The following proposition describes a simple scenario of patching.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop.cpt}
Suppose that $f\in C_c^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ satisfies
\EQ{\label{prop.f}
\supp(f)&\subset \{(x_1,x_2)\in \mathbb{R}^2: x_1\leq -2R_0\} \quad\text{ for some }R_0>0,\\
&f(x_1,x_2) = -f(x_1,-x_2) \qquad\qquad\forall (x_1,x_2)\in \mathbb{R}^2.
}
Then, for any $0<\ep_0<\frac{R_0}{100}$, we can find $\delta=\delta(f,\ep_0,R_0)>0$, $t_0=t_0(f,\ep_0,R_0)\in (0,\ep_0)$, and $g=g(f,\ep_0,R_0)\in C_c^{\infty}(B(0,\ep_0))$ such that the following holds.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item $g$ satisfies
\EQN{
&\norm{g}_{\dot{H}^1} + \norm{g}_{\infty}+ \norm{g}_1 + \norm{g}_{\dot{H}^{-1}} < \ep_0\\
&g(x_1,x_2) = -g(x_1,-x_2), \qquad\forall (x_1,x_2)\in \mathbb{R}^2.
}
\item For any given $h\in C_c^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ with
\EQ{\label{condi.h}
\supp(h)\subset \{(x_1,x_2):x_1\geq R_0\},\quad
\norm{h}_1 +\norm{h}_{\infty}\leq \delta,
}
the smooth solution $\om$ to \eqref{main.eq} for the initial data $\om|_{t=0}= f+g+h$ has a decomposition
\[
\om = \om_f+\om_g+\om_h,\quad \text{ on }\mathbb{R}^2\times [0,t_0]
\]
such that
\EQ{\label{supp.omfgh}
\supp(\om_f(\cdot,t))&\subset B(\supp(f),\frac 18R_0),\\
\supp(\om_g(\cdot,t))&\subset B(0,\ep_0+\frac 18R_0),\\
\supp(\om_h(\cdot,t))&\subset B(\supp(h), \frac 18R_0), \quad\forall 0\leq t\leq t_0
}
and
\EQ{\label{norm.inflation.omg}
\norm{\om_g(\cdot,t_0)}_{\dot{H}^1}&>\frac 1{\ep_0}.
}
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
To prove this proposition, we need some preliminary lemmas. The first lemma is about the finite time propagation.
\begin{lemma}\label{supp.sol.lemma} Let $\Omega$ be a smooth solution to
\EQ{\label{eqn.W.BE}
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \Omega+\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\Omega \cdot \nabla \Omega + \left(B+ E-C\right) \cdot\nabla \Omega=0\\
C(t) = (-\partial_2\De^{-1}T_{\ga}\Omega(0,0,t),\ 0)^\intercal \\
\Omega|_{t=0} = \Omega_0
\end{cases}
}
where $B$, $E$, and $\Omega_0$ are smooth functions satisfying
\begin{itemize}
\item
\[
\norm{\Omega_0}_\infty \leq B_0, \quad \text{for some } B_0>0,
\]
\EQ{\label{supp.in.bR}
\supp(\Omega_0)\subset B(0,R),\quad \text{for some } R>0,
}
\item $B$ and $E$ are divergence-free
\[
\nabla \cdot B = \nabla \cdot E =0.
\]
\item For some positive numbers $B_1$ and $B_2$,
\[
|B(y,t)|\leq B_1|y|, \quad |E(y,t)|\leq B_2 |y|^2, \quad\forall (y,t)\in \mathbb{R}^2\times [0,1].
\]
\end{itemize}
Then, we can find $R_0>0$ and $0<t_0<1$ both depending only on $B_0$, $B_1$ and $B_2$ such that if $0<R\leq R_0$,
a characteristic line $\Phi$ which solves
\EQ{\label{eq.Phi.BE}
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \Phi(y,t)
= (\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\Omega+B+E-C)(\Phi(y,t),t)\\
\Phi(y,0) = y
\end{cases}
}
satisfies
\[
|\Phi(y,t)|\le 2R, \quad\forall |y|\le R, \ t\in [0,t_0].
\]
In particular, the solution $\Omega$ satisfies
\[
\supp(\Omega(\cdot,t))\subset B(0,2R), \quad\forall 0\leq t\leq t_0.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
From \eqref{eq.Phi.BE}, we obtain
\EQ{\label{eq.abs.Phi}
\partial_t |\Phi(y,t)|\leq 2\norm{\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\Omega}_{\infty} + B_1|\Phi(y,t)| + B_2|\Phi(y,t)|^2.
}
By using $L^p$-norm preservation and \eqref{supp.in.bR}, we have
\[
\norm{\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\Omega}_{\infty}
\lesssim\norm{\Omega}_1^{\frac 12}\norm{\Omega}_{\infty}^{\frac 12}
\lesssim R\norm{\Omega_0}_{\infty}\leq RB_0.
\]
Combining with \eqref{eq.abs.Phi}, we can find $t_0>0$ and $R_0>0$ such that if $0<R\leq R_0$,
\[
|\Phi(y,t)|\leq 2R, \quad\forall |y|\le R, \ t\in [0,t_0].
\]
Furthermore, using the characteristic, \eqref{eqn.W.BE} can be written as $\Omega(\Phi(y,t),t)=\Omega_0(y)$, so that
\[
\supp(\Omega(\cdot,t))\subset \Phi(\supp(\Omega_0),t).
\]
Then, it easily follows that $\supp(\Omega(\cdot,t))\subset B(0,2R)$ for any $0\leq t\leq t_0$.
\end{proof}
\bigskip
Recall the definition of $g_A$ in \eqref{defn.gA}. This family of initial data was used in order to create large Lagrangian deformation. Now, we redefine $g_A$ when $\ga = \frac 12$ by
\EQ{\label{defn.gA12}
g_A (x)= \frac 1{\ln\ln\ln A}\frac 1{\sqrt{\ln\ln A}}\sum_{A\leq j<A\ln A} \frac 1{\sqrt{j}}\rho(2^j x),
}
where $\rho$ is given as in \eqref{defn.rho}.
In the case of $0<\ga<\frac 12$, we use the same $g_A$ in \eqref{defn.gA}.
Then, $g_A$ satisfies
\begin{itemize}
\item $\supp(g_A)\subset B(0,2\cdot 2^{-A})$.
\item
\[
\norm{g_A}_1 {\ \lesssim \ } 2^{-2A}, \quad
\norm{g_A}_\infty {\ \lesssim \ } \frac 1{A^\ga}, \quad
\norm{g_A}_{\dot{H}^{-1}}{\ \lesssim \ } 2^{-A}, \quad
\norm{\nabla g_A}_2 {\ \lesssim \ } \frac 1{\ln\ln\ln A}.
\]
\item
\[
\int_{z_1>0,z_2>0}\frac{1}{|z|^2} \ln^{-\ga}\left(e + \frac 1{|z|}\right) e^{-|z|^4} g_A(z)dz
\gtrsim \frac {\sqrt{\ln\ln A}}{\ln\ln\ln A}.
\]
\end{itemize}
\medskip
From this newly redefined family $\{g_A\}$, we extract a sequence of local initial data and sequentially patch them to the given initial data $a$, given in the statement of Theorem \ref{thm.cpt}. Here, this patched one becomes a desired perturbed initial data. To this end, the next two lemmas confirm that the large Lagrangian deformation created by a current initial data will not be destroyed even in the presence of the previously chosen ones. In the first lemma, we estimate $\mathcal{R}_{ii}T_\ga (g_A\circ\phi_A)= \De^{-1}\partial_{ii}T_\ga (g_A\circ\phi_A)$ in $L^\infty$-norm, which is a key ingredient of Lemma \ref{lld.cpt}. The proof can be obtained by a slight modification of the one for Lemma 3.2 in \cite{BL15}.
\begin{lemma}\label{small.reisz.lem} Let $\{g_A\}$ be a family of functions defined as in \eqref{defn.gA} for $0<\ga<\frac 12$ and \eqref{defn.gA12} for $\ga=\frac 12$.
Suppose that $\phi_A=(\phi_A^1,\phi_A^2):\mathbb{R}^2 \to \mathbb{R}^2$ is a bi-Lipschitz function such that
\begin{itemize}
\item $\phi_A(0)=0$.
\item $\phi_A^1(y_1,-y_2) = \phi_A^1 (y_1,y_2) $ and $\phi_A^2(y_1,-y_2) = -\phi_A^2 (y_1,y_2)$.
\item For some integer $m_A \ge 1$,
\EQ{\label{defm.norm}
\norm{D\phi_A}_{L^\infty(|y|\leq 4\cdot 2^{-A})} \leq 2^{m_A}, \quad \norm{D(\phi_A^{-1})}_{L^\infty(|y|\leq 2\cdot 2^{-A})} \leq 2^{m_A}.
}
\item $|\det(D\phi_A)| = |\det(D(\phi_A^{-1}))| =1$.
\item If $|\phi_A(y)|\leq 2\cdot 2^{-A}$, then $|y|\leq 4\cdot 2^{-A}$.
\end{itemize}
Then, we have
\EQ{\label{small.Riesz}
\norm{\mathcal{R}_{11}T_\ga (g_A\circ\phi_A)}_\infty +\norm{\mathcal{R}_{22}T_\ga (g_A\circ\phi_A)}_\infty \lesssim_{\ga} \frac {2^{m_A}}{\sqrt{\ln\ln A}}.
}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall the definition of $g_A$,
\EQN{
g_A(y)
=
\begin{cases}
C_A\sum_{a_A\leq j < b_A}\frac 1{j^{\ga}}\rho(2^j y), &0<\ga<\frac 12\\[10pt]
\frac 1{\ln\ln\ln A}\frac 1{\sqrt{\ln\ln A}}\sum_{A\leq j<A\ln A} \frac 1{\sqrt{j}}\rho(2^j y), &\ga=\frac 12
\end{cases}
}
where $C_A=\frac 1{\sqrt{\ln A}}\frac 1{\ln\ln A}$, $a_A=A^{\frac 1{1-2\ga}}$, and $b_A=(A+\ln A)^{\frac 1{1-2\ga}}$. Here, $\rho$ is an odd function in both variables and satisfies $\frac 12\leq |x|\leq 2$ for $x\in \supp(\rho)$. (See \eqref{defn.rho})
\medskip
We first consider $\mathcal{R}_{ii}T_\ga (\rho_j\circ \phi_A)$ for $j\geq A$, where $\rho_j =\rho(2^j\cdot)$. For the convenience, we drop the index $A$ in $g_A$, $\phi_A$ and $m_A$ below. Denote the kernel for the operator $\mathcal{R}_{ii}T_\ga$ by $K_{ii}$ for $i=1,2$ and fix $y\in \mathbb{R}^2\setminus\{0\}$ with $|y|\sim 2^{-l}$ for some $l$. Note that the kernel $K_{ii}$, $i=1,2$, can be obtained by taking a weak derivative to the kernel $H_1$ and $H_2$ of $\nabla^\perp\De^{-1} \ln^{-\ga}(e-|\nabla|)$ and $\nabla^\perp\De^{-1} \ln^{-\ga}(e-\De)$, respectively, which are given in \eqref{H1} and \eqref{H2}. Then, we can easily see from \eqref{est.H} that
$|K_{ii}(y)|{\ \lesssim \ } \frac 1{|y|^2}$ for $y\neq 0$.
\bigskip
\noindent\textbf{Case 1.} $2^j \ll 2^{l-m}$.
By the assumption on $\phi$, for $x$ with $|\phi(x)|\leq 2\cdot 2^{-A}$, we have $|x|\leq 4\cdot 2^{-A}$. Then, using $\phi(0)=0$ and \eqref{defm.norm}, $x$ with $2^{-j-1}\leq |\phi(x)|\leq 2^{-j+1}$ satisfies
\EQ{\label{y-z}
2^{-j+m}\gtrsim |x| \gtrsim 2^{-j-m}.
}
Therefore, if $y$ and $z$ satisfy $\phi(y-z)\in \supp(\rho_j)$, we have
$2^{-j-1}\leq |\phi(y-z)|\leq 2^{-j+1}$ and hence $2^{-l}\ll 2^{-j-m}{\ \lesssim \ } |y-z| {\ \lesssim \ } 2^{-j+m} $. Combining with $|y|\sim 2^{-l}$, for such $y$ and $z$, we get
\[
2^{-j-m}{\ \lesssim \ } |z| {\ \lesssim \ } 2^{-j+m}.
\]
Now, we estimate $\mathcal{R}_{ii}T_\ga (\rho_j\circ \phi)$ for $i=1,2$.
\EQN{
|\mathcal{R}_{ii}T_\ga (\rho_j\circ\phi)(y) |
&= \left|\int (\rho_j\circ\phi)(y-z) K_{ii}(z)dy\right|\\
&\le \int_{2^{-j-m}\lesssim |z| \lesssim 2^{-j+m}}
|(\rho_j\circ\phi)(y-z)-(\rho_j\circ\phi)(-z)| |K_{ii}(z)| dy\\
&{\ \lesssim \ } |y|\norm{\nabla (\rho_j\circ\phi)}_\infty
\int_{2^{-j-m}\lesssim |z| \lesssim 2^{-j+m}} \frac 1{|z|^2} dz\\
&{\ \lesssim \ } 2^{-l + m + j} m.
}
In the first inequality, we use $\phi(y-z)\in \supp(\rho_j)$ and
\[
\mathcal{R}_{ii}T_\ga (\rho_j\circ\phi)(0)
=\int_{c\leq |z|\leq C} (\rho_j\circ\phi)(-z) K_{ii}(z) dz =0
\]
for any arbitrary constants $0<c<C<+\infty$.
This is because $\phi^1$ and $K_{ii}$ for $i=1,2$ are even in $z_2$, while $\phi^2$, and $\rho$ are odd in $z_2$.
\medskip
\noindent\textbf{Case 2.} $2^j \gg 2^{l+m}$
By \eqref{y-z} with $2^{-l}\gg 2^{-j + m}$, we have $|z|\sim 2^{-l}$ when $\phi(y-z) \in \supp(\rho_j)$ and $|y|\sim 2^{-l}$. This implies that for $i=1,2$
\[
|\mathcal{R}_{ii}T_\ga (\rho_j\circ\phi)(y) |
\le \norm{K_{ii}}_{L^\infty(|y|\sim 2^{-l})} \norm{\rho_j\circ \phi}_1
{\ \lesssim \ } 4^{l-j} .
\]
\medskip
\noindent\textbf{Case 3.} $ 2^{l-m}{\ \lesssim \ } 2^j {\ \lesssim \ } 2^{l+m}$
\[
\norm{\mathcal{R}_{ii}T_\ga (\rho_j\circ \phi)}_\infty
{\ \lesssim \ } \norm{\rho_j\circ \phi}_2^\frac12 \norm{\nabla (\rho_j\circ \phi)}_\infty^\frac12
{\ \lesssim \ } \norm{\rho_j}_2^\frac12 \norm{\nabla \rho_j}_\infty^\frac12 2^{\frac{m}2}
{\ \lesssim \ } 2^{\frac{m}2}.
\]
\medskip
Combining all the cases, we have
\[
\sum_j \norm{\mathcal{R}_{ii}T_\ga (\rho_j\circ \phi)}_\infty
{\ \lesssim \ } 2^{\frac{m}2} m + m {\ \lesssim \ } 2^{\frac{m}2} m, \quad i =1,2.
\]
Then, \eqref{small.Riesz} easily follows.
\end{proof}
In the following lemma, $f$ represents the previously chosen initial data together with the given one.
Then, it says that we can always find a current initial data in the family $\{g_A\}$ such that the deformation matrix for the patched initial data can still be large as desired. In other words, the current initial data still creates the large Lagrangian deformation even in the presence of the previously chosen one.
\begin{lemma}\label{lld.cpt}
Suppose that $f$ satisfies \eqref{prop.f}. Let $\om$ be a smooth solution to
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \om+\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om \cdot \nabla \om =0\\
\om|_{t=0} = f+ g_A.
\end{cases}
\]
Then, a characteristic line $\phi$ which solves
\EQ{\label{eq.Phi.12}
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \phi(x,t) = \nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om(\phi(x,t),t)\\
\phi(x,0)=x
\end{cases}
}
satisfies
\EQ{\label{lld.cpt.ineq.12}
\max_{0\leq t\leq \frac 1{\ln\ln\ln A}}\norm{D\phi(\cdot,t)}_{L^\infty(B(0,10\cdot 2^{-A}))}>\ln^{\frac 14}\ln\ln\ln A
}
for sufficiently large $A$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that \eqref{lld.cpt.ineq.12} doesn't hold true. i.e.,
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq \frac 1{\ln\ln\ln A}}\norm{D\phi(\cdot,t)}_{L^\infty(|x|\leq 10\cdot 2^{-A})}\leq \ln^{\frac 14}\ln\ln\ln A.
\]
First, we decompose the solution $\om$ into $\om_f$ and $\om_g$, where $\om_g$ solves
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \om_g+\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_g \cdot \nabla \om_g+\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_f \cdot \nabla \om_g =0\\
\om_g|_{t=0} = g_A.
\end{cases}
\]
Since both $f$ and $g_A$ are odd in $x_2$, so are $\om$ and $\om_g$. Also, we have
\[
\phi_1(x_1,-x_2,t) = \phi_1(x_1,x_2,t), \quad
\phi_2(x_1,-x_2,t) = -\phi_2(x_1,x_2,t)
\]
and therefore $\phi_2(x_1,0,t)=0$ for any $x_1\in \mathbb{R}$ and $t\geq 0$. Let $a(t)=\phi_1(0,0,t)$. Then, it satisfies
\[
\begin{cases}
a'(t) = -\partial_2\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om(a(t),0,t)\\
a(0) = 0.
\end{cases}
\]
Similar to \eqref{condition.decomp.f}-\eqref{condition.decomp.fg}, we can easily see that the supports of $\om_f$ and $\om_g$ are apart from each other for a short time. Indeed, on $[0,t_A]$, $t_A = \frac 1{\ln\ln\ln A}$,
\EQN{
\supp(\om_f(\cdot,t))&\subset B\bke{\supp(f), \frac 18 R_0}\subset\left\{x_1\leq -\frac{15}8 R_0\right\},\\
\supp(\om_g(\cdot,t))&\subset B\bke{\supp(g_A), \frac 18 R_0}\subset B\bke{0,\frac 14 R_0},
}
provided that $A$ is sufficiently large. It follows that $\nabla^{\perp}\De^{-1}T_\ga \om_f$ is smooth and has Sobolev norm bounds on $B(0, \frac 14 R_0)\times [0,t_A]$, where the bounds depend only on $f$ and $R_0$. Therefore, we can expand it at the point $(a(t),0)$, which is in $B(0, \frac 18 R_0)$ for $0\leq t\leq t_A$, to get
\EQN{
\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_f(a(t)+y_1,y_2,t)
&=\begin{pmatrix}
a'(t)+\partial_{2}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_g(a(t),0,t)\\
0
\end{pmatrix}
+b(t)
\begin{pmatrix}
-y_1 \\ y_2
\end{pmatrix}
+E(y,t)
}
for any $(a(t)+y_1,y_2,t)\in B(0,\frac 14 R_0)\times [0,t_A]$. Here, $b(t) = \partial_{12}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_f(a(t),0,t)$ has a bound $|b(t)|\leq B_1$ for some $B_1=B_1(R_0,f)$ and a divergence-free vector $E$ can be chosen
satisfying
\[
|E(y,t)|\leq B_2|y|^2, \quad
|DE(y,t)|\leq B_2|y|, \quad
|D^2E(y,t)|\leq B_2, \quad\forall y\in \mathbb{R}^2,
\]
for some $B_2=B_2(R_0,f)$. In the expansion, we use the oddness of $\om_f$ in $x_2$ and
\[
\partial_1\De^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_f (a(t),0,t)
= \partial_{11}\De^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_f (a(t),0,t)
= \partial_{22}\De^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_f (a(t),0,t) =0.
\]
We do the change of variables $(x_1,x_2,t) = (a(t)+y_1,y_2,t)$ and denote the solution in a new coordinate system $(y,t)$ by $\Omega(y,t)= \om_g(a(t)+y_1,y_2,t) = \om_g(x_1,x_2,t)$. Then, the equation for $\Omega$ on $\mathbb{R}^2\times[0,t_A]$ can be written as
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \Omega+\left(\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\Omega + B + E -C\right) \cdot\nabla \Omega =0\\
\Omega|_{t=0} = g_A,
\end{cases}
\]
where $B$ and $C$ are
\[
B=b\begin{pmatrix}
-y_1\\ y_2
\end{pmatrix},
\quad
C=\begin{pmatrix}
-\partial_2\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\Omega(0,0,t) \\ 0
\end{pmatrix}.
\]
Also, we let $\Phi$ be a characteristic in a new coordinate, which solves
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \Phi(y,t) = \left(\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga} \Omega
+B
+E
-C\right)(\Phi(y,t),t)
\\
\Phi(y,0) = y.
\end{cases}
\]
\medskip
From now on, without mentioning, we only consider $t\in [0,t_A]$.
We can easily check that $\phi^{-1}(x,t) = \Phi^{-1}(y,t)$ and $\Phi^{-1}(0,t) = \phi^{-1}(a(t),0,t) = 0$. Furthermore, $\Phi^{-1}$ satisfies
\[
\Phi_1^{-1}(y_1,y_2,t)=\Phi_1^{-1}(y_1,-y_2,t), \quad
\Phi_2^{-1}(y_1,y_2,t)=-\Phi_2^{-1}(y_1,-y_2,t).
\]
By Lemma \ref{supp.sol.lemma}, on the other hand, we have
\[
|\Phi(y,t)|\le 4\cdot 2^{-A}, \quad\forall |y|\leq 2\cdot 2^{-A},
\]
for sufficiently large $A$. Also, if $|y|\le 4\cdot 2^{-A}$ and $t_A$ is sufficiently small, by finite speed propagation, $|\phi^{-1}(a(t)+y_1,y_2,t)|\leq 10\cdot 2^{-A}$. It follows that
\EQ{\label{bdd.deform.mt}
\max_{0\leq t\leq t_A}\norm{D\Phi(\cdot,t)}_{L^\infty(|y|\le 2\cdot 2^{-A})}&\le
\max_{0\leq t\leq t_A}\norm{D(\Phi^{-1})(\cdot,t)}_{L^\infty(|y|\le 4\cdot 2^{-A})}\\
&\le \max_{0\leq t\leq t_A}\norm{D\phi(\cdot,t)}_{L^\infty(|x|\le 10\cdot 2^{-A})}\\
&\le \ln^{\frac 14}\ln\ln\ln A = M_A.
}
Indeed, $(D\Phi(x,t))^{-1}=D(\Phi^{-1})(\Phi(x,t))$ and $(D\phi(x,t))^{-1}=D(\phi^{-1})(\phi(x,t))$ are used in the first and second inequalities, respectively.
Then, by Lemma \ref{small.reisz.lem} with $\phi=\Phi^{-1}$, we have
\EQ{\label{small.Riesz1}
\sup_{0\leq t \leq t_A}\norm{\mathcal{R}_{11}T_\ga \Omega(\cdot,t)}_\infty +\norm{\mathcal{R}_{22}T_\ga \Omega(\cdot,t)}_\infty \leq \frac {C_\ga M_A}{\sqrt{\ln\ln A}}
}
for $\mathcal{R}_{ij}\om = \De^{-1}\partial_{ij}\om$ and for some constant $C_\ga>0$ depending only on $\ga$.
Now, we find a lower bound of $D\Phi$ which makes a contradiction to \eqref{bdd.deform.mt}.
From the equation for $\Phi$, we get
\EQ{\label{eqn.Dphi.12}
\begin{cases}
\partial_t D\Phi(y,t) = \left(D\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga} \Omega
+b\begin{pmatrix}
-1 & 0\\ 0 & 1
\end{pmatrix}
+DE\right)(\Phi(y,t),t)D\Phi(y,t)
\\
D\Phi(y,0) = I,
\end{cases}
}
and the derivative of the velocity can be rewritten as
\EQN{
D\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}&T_{\ga} \Omega
+b\begin{pmatrix}
-1 & 0\\ 0 & 1
\end{pmatrix}
+DE\\
&=\begin{pmatrix}
-\mathcal{R}_{12}T_{\ga} \Omega-b & 0\\
0 & \mathcal{R}_{12}T_{\ga} \Omega + b
\end{pmatrix}
+ \begin{pmatrix}
0 & -\mathcal{R}_{22}T_{\ga} \Omega \\
\mathcal{R}_{11}T_{\ga} \Omega & 0
\end{pmatrix}
+ DE\\
&=\begin{pmatrix}
-\mathcal{R}_{12}T_{\ga} \Omega -b & 0\\
0 & \mathcal{R}_{12}T_{\ga} \Omega + b
\end{pmatrix}
+P.
}
By Gr\"{o}nwall's inequality, we have
\EQ{\label{dphi.gr}
D\Phi&(y,t)
= \exp \begin{pmatrix}
\int_0^t\la (y,s)-b(s)ds & 0\\
0 &\int_0^t -\la (y,s) + b(s) ds
\end{pmatrix}\\
&+
\int_0^t \exp \begin{pmatrix}
\int_\tau^t\la (y,s)-b(s)ds & 0\\
0 &\int_\tau^t -\la (y,s) + b(s) ds
\end{pmatrix}
P(\Phi(y,\tau),\tau) D\Phi(y,\tau) d\tau
}
where $\la(y,t) =-\mathcal{R}_{12}T_{\ga} \Omega(\Phi(y,t),t)$.
Since $|\Phi(y,t)|\le 4\cdot 2^{-A}$ for $|y|\le 2\cdot 2^{-A}$, $A\gg 1$, we have $|DE(\Phi(y,t),t)|{\ \lesssim \ } B_2 2^{-A}$. Combining \eqref{dphi.gr} with \eqref{bdd.deform.mt} and \eqref{small.Riesz1}, we obtain for $|y|\leq 2\cdot 2^{-A}$,
\[
\exp\left|\int_0^t\la (y,s)-b(s)ds\right|
\leq M_A + \frac{C_\gamma M_A^2}{\sqrt{\ln\ln A}}\max_{0\leq \tau\leq t}\exp\left(2\left|\int_0^\tau\la (y,s)-b(s)ds\right|\right).
\]
Then, by the continuation argument, we get
\[
\exp\left|\int_0^t\la (y,s)-b(s)ds\right| \leq 2M_A
\]
for sufficiently large $A$, so that we can consider the second term in \eqref{dphi.gr} as an error term.
\medskip
The remaining analysis is similar to the proof of Proposition \ref{large.lagrangian}.
Using $\Phi(0,t)=0$, it follows that for $|y|\le 2\cdot 2^{-A}$
\EQ{\label{approx.Phi.12}
\Phi(&y,t)
= \Phi(y,t) - \Phi(0,t) = \int_0^1 \frac {\partial}{\partial \th} [\Phi(\th y,t)] d\th
= \left(\int_0^1 D\Phi(\th y,t) d\th \right) y\\
=& \left(y_1\int_0^1\exp \left( \int_0^t\la (\th y,s)-b(s)ds\right)d\th ,
y_2\int_0^1\exp \left( -\int_0^t\la (\th y,s)-b(s)ds\right)d\th \right) + e
}
where
\[
|e(y,t)|\lesssim_{\ga} \frac{M_A^4}{\sqrt{\ln\ln A}}|y|.
\]
Since $\frac 1{M_A} \gg \frac{M_A^4}{\sqrt{\ln\ln A}}$ if $A\gg 1$ and $y_1\sim y_2$ for $y=(y_1,y_2)\in \supp(g_A)$, it follows that for sufficiently large $A$, $\Phi$ has a sign preserving property;
\[
\Phi_1(y,t)>0, \quad \Phi_2(y,t)>0, \qquad y\in \supp(g_A)\cap
\{ y_1>0, y_2>0\}
\]
\[
\Phi_1(y,t)<0, \quad \Phi_2(y,t)>0, \qquad y\in \supp(g_A)\cap
\{ y_1<0, y_2>0\}
\]
Based on this, we get
\EQN{
\la(0,t) &= -\mathcal{R}_{12}T_\ga \Omega(\Phi(0,t),t) = -\mathcal{R}_{12}T_\ga \Omega(0,t)\\
&= \int_{\mathbb{R}^2} K(-z,t)\Omega(z,t) dz
= 2\int_{z_2>0} K(z,t)\Omega(z,t) dz
=2\int_{z_2>0} K(\Phi(z,t),t)g_A(z) dz\\
&\geq \int_{z_1>0,z_2>0} K(\Phi(z,t),t)g_A(z) dz
}
where $K$ is the kernel of the operator $-\partial_{12}\De^{-1}T_{\ga}$. The fourth equality follows from the parity of $K$ and $\Omega$ in $z_2$.
The last inequality follows from the positiveness of the integrand on $\{z_1<0, z_2>0\}$.
Note that if $z\in \supp(g_A)\cap \{z_1>0,z_2>0\}$, we have
\[
\frac 12 <\frac{z_1}{z_2}< 2
\]
and hence by \eqref{approx.Phi.12}
\[
\frac 1{10M_A^2} <\frac {\Phi_1(z,t)}{\Phi_2(z,t)} <10 M_A^2.
\]
Also, we have $\frac{|z|}{M_A}\leq |\Phi(z,t)|\leq M_A |z|$ for $z\in \supp(g_A)$.
Then, by Lemma \ref{estimate.K} and Lemma \ref{estimate.tdK}, we get
\EQN{
\int_{z_1>0,z_2>0} &K(\Phi(z,t),t)g_A(z) dz\\
&\gtrsim_\ga \int_{z_1>0,z_2>0}\frac{\Phi_1(z,t)\Phi_2(z,t)}{|\Phi(z,t)|^4} \ln^{-\ga}\left(e + \frac 1{|\Phi(z,t)|}\right) e^{-|\Phi(z,t)|^2} g_A(z)dz \\
&\geq \frac 1{M_A^2}\int_{z_1>0,z_2>0}
\frac{1}{\frac{\Phi_1(z,t)}{\Phi_2(z,t)}+\frac{\Phi_2(z,t)}{\Phi_1(z,t)}}\cdot \frac{1}{|z|^2} \ln^{-\ga}\left(e + \frac {M_A}{|z|}\right) e^{-M_A^2|z|^2} g_A(z)dz \\
&\gtrsim \frac {e^{\frac 34M_A^4}}{M_A^4(1+\ln(1+M_A))^{\ga}}e^{-M_A^4} \int_{z_1>0,z_2>0}\frac{1}{|z|^2} \ln^{-\ga}\left(e + \frac 1{|z|}\right) e^{-|z|^4} g_A(z)dz\\
&\gtrsim e^{-M_A^4} \int_{z_1>0,z_2>0}\frac{1}{|z|^2} \ln^{-\ga}\left(e + \frac 1{|z|}\right) e^{-|z|^4} g_A(z)dz \\
&\gtrsim_{\ga} \frac {\sqrt{\ln\ln A}}{\ln\ln\ln A} e^{-M_A^4}
= \frac {\sqrt{\ln\ln A}}{(\ln\ln\ln A)^2},
}
provided that $A\gg 1$. Therefore, we get
\EQN{
\max_{0\leq t\leq t_A}\norm{D\Phi(\cdot, t)}_{L^\infty(|y|\le 2\cdot 2^{-A})}
&\geq \max_{0\leq t\leq t_A}|D\Phi(0,t)| \\
&\geq \exp\left(\left(\frac {C_{\ga}\sqrt{\ln\ln A}}{(\ln\ln\ln A)^2}-B_1\right)\frac 1{\ln\ln\ln A}\right) - 1,
}
which makes a contradiction to \eqref{bdd.deform.mt}
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq t_A}\norm{D\Phi(\cdot, t)}_{L^\infty(|y|\le 2\cdot 2^{-A})}
\leq \ln^{\frac 14}\ln\ln\ln A
\]
for sufficiently large $A$.
\end{proof}
Now, we give a proof of the main proposition.
\noindent\textit{Proof of Proposition \ref{prop.cpt}.}
\noindent\texttt{Step 1.} Critical norm inflation of a local solution.
By Lemma \ref{lld.cpt}, we can create a large Lagrangian deformation \eqref{lld.cpt.ineq.12} at the presence of $f$ satisfying \eqref{prop.f}.
Then, similar to Proposition \ref{H1.norm.inflation.prop}, we can find a perturbed initial data $\tilde g_A\in C_c^{\infty}(|x|{\ \lesssim \ } 2^{-A})$ from $g_A$ such that it satisfies
\EQN{
\tilde g_A(x_1,x_2) &= -\tilde g_A(x_1,-x_2),\\
\norm{\tilde g_A}_{\dot{H}^1}+ \norm{\tilde g_A}_\infty + \norm{\tilde g_A}_1 &+ \norm{\tilde g_A}_{\dot{H}^{-1}} {\ \lesssim \ } \ln^{-\frac 18}\ln\ln\ln A,
}
and the smooth solution $\tilde\om^{(A)}$ to
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial\tilde\om^{(A)} + \nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\tilde\om^{(A)} \cdot \nabla \tilde\om^{(A)} =0\\
\tilde\om^{(A)}|_{t=0} = f+ \tilde g_A
\end{cases}
\]
has a decomposition $\tilde\om^{(A)} = \tilde\om^{(A)}_f+ \tilde\om^{(A)}_{\tilde g}$ where $\tilde\om^{(A)}_g$ satisfies
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq \frac 1{\ln\ln\ln A}}\norm{\nabla \tilde\om^{(A)}_g(\cdot,t)}_{2}
\geq \ln^{\frac 1{12}}\ln\ln\ln A,
\]
for sufficiently large $A$. Indeed, $\tilde\om^{(A)}_g$ solves
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial\tilde\om^{(A)}_g + \nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\tilde\om^{(A)} \cdot \nabla \tilde\om^{(A)}_g =0\\
\tilde\om^{(A)}_g|_{t=0} = \tilde g_A.
\end{cases}
\]
Then, we construct $g$ by choosing $A_0=A_0(\ep_0)\gg 1$ such that $g=\tilde g_{A_0}\in C_c^\infty(B(0,\ep_0))$ and $\tilde\om_g=\tilde\om^{(A_0)}_g$ satisfies
\[
\norm{g}_{\dot{H}^1} + \norm{g}_\infty + \norm{g}_1+ \norm{g}_{\dot{H}^{-1}} <\ep_0,
\]
and
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq \frac 1{\ln\ln\ln A_0}}\norm{\nabla \tilde\om_{g}(\cdot,t)}_{2}
>\frac 2{\ep_0}.
\]
In particular, we can find $0<t_0\leq \frac 1{\ln\ln\ln A_0}< \ep_0$ such that
\EQ{\label{norm.inflation.Omg}
\norm{\nabla \tilde\om_{g}(\cdot,t_0)}_{2}
>\frac 2{\ep_0}.
}
\bigskip
\noindent\texttt{Step 2.} Patch a function $h$.
Suppose that $h$ satisfies \eqref{condi.h} and $\de<1$. Let $\om$ be a solution to
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \om +\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om\cdot \nabla\om = 0\\
\om|_{t=0} = f + g+ h.
\end{cases}
\]
We decompose $\om = \om_f+\om_g +\om_h$ where $\om_f$ and $\om_g$ are defined as solutions to
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \om_f +\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om\cdot \nabla\om_f = 0\\
\om|_{t=0} = f
\end{cases}
\]
and
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \om_g+\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om\cdot \nabla\om_g = 0\\
\om|_{t=0} = g,
\end{cases}
\]
respectively. Since
\[
\norm{\nabla^{\perp}\De^{-1}T_\ga \om}_\infty
{\ \lesssim \ } \norm{\om}_1 + \norm{\om}_\infty
= \norm{\om|_{t=0}}_1 + \norm{\om|_{t=0}}_\infty
{\ \lesssim \ } 1 + \norm{f}_1 + \norm{f}_\infty,
\]
similar to \eqref{condition.decomp.f} and \eqref{condition.decomp.g}, we can easily check $\om_f$, $\om_g$ and $\om_h$ satisfies \eqref{supp.omfgh}, provided that $t_0$ is sufficiently small. If necessary, we can adjust the choice of $A_0$ to make $t_0$ small enough.
Now, recall \eqref{est.ug}. By the assumption \eqref{condi.h} on $h$ and \eqref{supp.omfgh}, we have
\[
\norm{\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om_h(\cdot,t)}_{L^{\infty}(B(\supp(f),\frac 18R_0)\cup B(0,\ep_0+\frac 18R_0))} \lesssim_{R_0} \norm{h}_1 \leq \delta
\]
for any $0\leq t\leq t_0$.
Then, by the same arguments in Lemma \ref{simple.patching.2}, we get
\[
\norm{(\om_g-\tilde\om_g)(\cdot,t_0)}_{H^2}
\leq \max_{0\leq t\leq t_0}\norm{((\om_f+\om_g)-\tilde\om)(\cdot,t)}_{H^2}
\leq C(\norm{f}_{H^3},R_0,\supp(f)) \de
\leq \frac 1{\ep_0},
\]
provided that $\delta\in (0,1)$ is sufficiently small.
Combining with \eqref{norm.inflation.Omg}, we obtain the desired inflation \eqref{norm.inflation.omg}.
\hfill$\square$
Before we prove Theorem \ref{thm.cpt}, we need the following lemma for the uniqueness.
\begin{lemma}\label{cpt.uniq}
Suppose that $f\in C_c^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ with the compact support in $B(0,R)$ for some $R>0$ and $g\in L^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)\cap \dot{H}^{-1}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ with $\norm{g}_{\infty}\leq M$ for some $M>0$. Let $\tilde \om$ be a smooth solution to
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \tilde\om + \nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\tilde\om\cdot\nabla\tilde\om =0\\
\tilde\om|_{t=0} = f
\end{cases}
\]
and $\om$ be a weak solution in $C([0,1];L^{1}(\mathbb{R}^2)\cap L^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2))$ to
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t \om + \nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om\cdot\nabla\om =0\\
\om|_{t=0} = f+g
\end{cases}
\]
satisfying $L^\infty$-norm preservation
\[
\norm{\om(\cdot,t)}_{\infty} = \norm{f+g}_{\infty}, \quad\forall 0\leq t\leq 1.
\]
Then, for any $\ep>0$, we can find a constant $\delta=\delta(\ep,f, M)>0$ such that if $\norm{g}_{\dot{H}^{-1}}<\delta$,
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\om-\tilde\om)(\cdot,t)}_{\dot{H}^{-1}(\mathbb{R}^2)}<\ep.
\]
Furthermore, under the additional assumption $g\in C_c^{\infty}(B(0,R))$, we have $\tilde\delta=\tilde\delta(\ep,R,f)>0$ such that if $\norm{g}_{\infty}<\tilde\delta$,
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\om-\tilde\om)(\cdot,t)}_{L^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)}<\ep.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The equation for $\eta = \om-\tilde\om$ is
\[
\begin{cases}
\partial_t\eta + \nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\eta \cdot \nabla \om + \nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\tilde\om \cdot \nabla \eta =0\\
\eta|_{t=0} = g.
\end{cases}
\]
Taking $\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}\cdot\La^{-2}\eta dx$, $\La = (-\Delta)^{\frac 12}$, on both side of the equation, we have
\EQN{
\frac 12 \frac{d}{dt} \norm{\eta}_{\dot{H}^{-1}(\mathbb{R}^2)}^2
&\leq \left|\int \om (\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\eta \cdot \nabla) \La^{-2}\eta dx\right|
+\left|\int \eta (\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\tilde\om \cdot \nabla)\La^{-2}\eta dx\right|\\
&\leq \norm{\om}_{\infty}\norm{\eta}_{\dot{H}^{-1}(\mathbb{R}^2)}^2
+\norm{\La^{-1}\eta}_2\norm{[\La,\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\tilde\om\cdot \nabla] \La^{-2}\eta}_2\\
&\lesssim (\norm{f}_{\infty}+\norm{g}_{\infty}
+\norm{D\nabla^\perp\De^{-1}T_{\ga}\tilde\om}_{\infty})\norm{\eta}_{\dot{H}^{-1}}^2.
}
Here, the second inequality follows from
\[
\int \La^{-1}\eta (\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\tilde\om\cdot \nabla)\La^{-1}\eta dx
=
\frac 12\int (\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\tilde\om\cdot \nabla)|\La^{-1}\eta|^2 dx
=0
\]
and the third one from the commutator estimate
\[
\norm{\La(lm)-l(\La m)}_2
\lesssim \norm{Dl}_{\infty}\norm{m}_2.
\]
By Gr\"{o}nwall inequality, we have
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{\eta(\cdot,t)}_{\dot{H}^{-1}(\mathbb{R}^2)}
\leq \norm{g}_{\dot{H}^{-1}(\mathbb{R}^2)}\exp(C(\norm{f}_{\infty}
+\norm{f}_{W^{1,4}(\mathbb{R}^2)}+M)).
\]
Therefore, for given $\ep>0$, we can find the desired $\delta=\delta(\ep, f,M)$.
Now, we further assume that $g$ is in $C_c^{\infty}(B(0,R))$. Then, the weak solution $\om$ becomes a smooth solution. The equation for $\eta$ can be rewritten as
\[
\partial_t \eta + \nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\om \cdot \nabla \eta +\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\eta \cdot \nabla \tilde\om =0,
\]
so that we have
\EQ{\label{est.eta.infty}
\norm{\eta(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}\leq \norm{g}_{\infty} + \int_0^t \norm{(\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\eta)(\cdot,s)}_{\infty}\norm{\nabla \tilde\om(\cdot,s)}_{\infty} ds.
}
By the usual energy estimate, we have
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{\nabla\tilde\om(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}\lesssim_f 1.
\]
Using $f,g\in C_c^\infty(B(0,R))$ and Lebesgue measure preservation of the supports $\om$ and $\tilde \om$,
\EQN{
\norm{(\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\eta)(\cdot,s)}_{\infty}
&\lesssim
\norm{\eta(\cdot,t)}_1^{\frac 12}\norm{\eta(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}^{\frac 12}\\
&\leq
(|\supp(\om(\cdot,0))| + |\supp(\tilde \om(\cdot,0))|)^\frac12 \norm{\eta(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}
\lesssim R \norm{\eta(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}.
}
Then, combining with \eqref{est.eta.infty} and using Gr\"{o}nwall inequality, we have
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{\eta(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}
\leq C(R,f)\norm{g}_{\infty}.
\]
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\bigskip
Finally, we find the compactly supported perturbation in our main theorem.
\
\noindent\textit{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm.cpt}.}
Fix $0<\ep<\frac 1{200}$. Without loss of generality, we may assume the support of the given initial data lies on $\{x=(x_1,x_2): x_1\leq -1\}\cap B(0,\bar{R})$ for some $\bar{R}\geq 10$. (Otherwise, using translation invariant property of the solution, we apply the proof for a suitably translated initial data in $x_1$ direction. Note that the translated one is still odd in $x_2$.) Let $\{x_n=(x_n^1,0)\}$ be a sequence of centres with
\[
x_1^1 = 0, \qquad x_n^1 = \sum_{j=1}^{n-1} \frac 1{2^j} \quad\text{for } n\geq 2.
\]
Now, we construct sequences $\{\zeta_n\}_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\subset C_c^{\infty}(B(0,2^{-(n+1)}))$, $\{(\delta_n,\tilde\delta_n, t_n)\}_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\subset \mathbb{R}_+^3$ such that for any $n\in \mathbb{N}$,
\begin{itemize}
\item $\zeta_n$ is odd in $x_2$ and satisfies
\EQN{
\norm{\zeta_n} \equiv
\norm{\zeta_n}_{\dot{H}^1}+\norm{\zeta_n}_{\infty}&+\norm{\zeta_n}_1+\norm{\zeta_n}_{\dot{H}^{-1}} <\min\left(\frac {\ep}{2^n},\frac{\delta_{n-1}}{2^{n-1}},\frac{\tilde\delta_{n-1}}{2^{n-1}}\right),
}
where $\delta_0=\tilde\delta_0 = 1$.
\item for any $h\in C_c^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ with
\EQ{\label{condition.h}
\supp(h)&\subset \{x=(x_1,x_2):x_1\geq \frac 1{2^{n+1}}\}\\
&\norm{h}_1 +\norm{h}_{\infty}\leq \delta_n,
}
a smooth solution $\om$ to \eqref{main.eq} for the initial data
\[
\om|_{t=0}(x) = a(x+x_n)+\sum_{j=1}^{n-1}\zeta_j(x-x_j+x_n) + \zeta_n(x) + h(x)
\]
has a decomposition
\[
\om = \om_{\leq n-1} + \om_n + \om_h
\]
such that the supports of $\om_{\leq n-1}$, $\om_n$, and $\om_h$ are disjoint for $t\in [0,t_n]$, and
\[
\norm{\om_n(\cdot,t_n)}_{\dot{H}^1}>2^n.
\]
\item $\{\delta_n\}$ and $\{\tilde\delta_n\}$ are decreasing sequences. Also, $t_n$ converges to $0$.
\item for any $g$ satisfying $\norm{g}_{\infty}\leq 1$ and $\norm{g}_{\dot{H}^{-1}}\leq \tilde\delta_n$,
\EQ{\label{neg.sob.uniq}
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\tilde\om-\tilde\om_{\leq n})(\cdot,t)}_{\dot{H}^{-1}}<\frac 1{2^n}.
}
where $\tilde\om\in C([0,1];L^1(\mathbb{R}^2)\cap L^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2))$ is a weak solution having $L^{\infty}$-norm preservation and $\tilde\om_{\leq n}$ is a smooth solution to \eqref{main.eq} for initial data
\EQ{\label{ini.td.w}
\tilde\om|_{t=0}(x) = a(x) + \sum_{j=1}^{n}\zeta_j(x-x_j) + g,
\quad \tilde\om_{\leq n} |_{t=0} = a(x) + \sum_{j=1}^{n}\zeta_j(x-x_j).
}
Furthermore, if $g \in C_c^{\infty}(B(0,\bar{R}))$ with $\norm{g}_{\infty}\leq \tilde\delta_n$, we have
\EQN{
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\tilde\om-\tilde\om_{\leq n})(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}<\frac 1{2^n}.
}
\end{itemize}
The construction is based on induction. First, we choose $\zeta_1$, and $(\delta_1,\tilde\delta_1,t_1)$. By Proposition \ref{prop.cpt} with
\[
f = a(x)=a(x+x_1), \quad R_0 = \frac 14, \quad \ep_0 = \frac{\ep}{2},
\]
there exist an smooth function $\zeta_1$ odd in $x_2$ and compactly supported in $B(0,\frac 14)$, and positive constants $0<\delta_1<\delta_0$ and $0<t_1<\frac 12$ which satisfy the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item \[
\norm{\zeta_1}<\frac{\ep}{2}
\]
\item If $h\in C_c^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ satisfies
\EQN{
\supp(h)&\subset\{x=(x_1,x_2)\in \mathbb{R}^2: x_1 \geq \frac 14 \},\\
&\norm{h}_1+\norm{h}_{\infty}\leq \delta_1,
}
a smooth solution $\om$ to \eqref{main.eq} for the initial data
\[
\om|_{t=0} = a(x)+\zeta_1(x)+ h(x)
\]
has a decomposition
\[
\om = \om_{a} + \om_1 + \om_h, \quad\text{ on }\mathbb{R}^2\times[0,t_1]
\]
such that the supports of $\om_a$, $\om_1$, and $\om_h$ are disjoint for $t\in [0,t_1]$ and
\[
\norm{\om_1(\cdot,t_1)}_{\dot{H}^1}>2.
\]
\end{itemize}
Then, we apply Lemma \ref{cpt.uniq} for $f=a+\zeta_1$, $R=\bar{R}$, $M=1$, and $\ep=\frac 12$, so that obtain $0<\tilde\delta_1\leq \tilde\delta_0$ such that if $\norm{g}_{\infty}\leq 1$, and $\norm{g}_{\dot{H}^{-1}}\leq \tilde\delta_1$, then we have
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\tilde\om-\tilde\om_{\leq 1})(\cdot,t)}_{\dot{H}^{-1}(\mathbb{R}^2)}<\frac 12,
\]
where $\tilde\om$ and $\tilde\om_{\leq 1}$ are solutions to \eqref{main.eq} for the initial data
\[
\tilde\om|_{t=0} = a + \zeta_1 + g, \quad \tilde\om_{\leq 1}|_{t=0} = a+\zeta_1.
\]
Furthermore, if $g\in C_c^{\infty}(B(0,\bar{R}))$ satisfies $\norm{g}_{\infty}\leq \tilde\delta_1$, then we have
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\tilde\om-\tilde\om_{\leq 1})(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}<\frac 12,
\]
Therefore, we obtain the desired $\zeta_1$ and $(\delta_1,\tilde\delta_1,t_1)$.
Assume that we have $\{\zeta_j\}_{j=1}^n$ and $\{(\de_j,\tilde\de_j,t_j)\}_{j=1}^n$ satisfying all conditions above. Then, applying Proposition \ref{prop.cpt} for
\[
f=a(x+x_{n+1})+\sum_{j=1}^{n}\zeta_j(x-x_j+x_{n+1}), \quad
R_0=\frac 1{2^{n+2}}, \quad
\ep_0=\min\left(\frac {\ep}{2^{n+1}},\frac{\delta_n}{2^n} ,\frac{\tilde\delta_n}{2^n} \right),
\]
we can find $\zeta_{n+1}\in C_c^{\infty}(B(0,2^{-(n+2)}))$ odd in $x_2$, and $0<\delta_{n+1}\leq \delta_n$ and $0<t_{n+1}<\frac {1}{2^{n+1}}$ such that
\begin{itemize}
\item \[
\norm{\zeta_{n+1}}
<\min\left(\frac {\ep}{2^{n+1}},\frac{\delta_n}{2^n} ,\frac{\tilde\delta_n}{2^n} \right).
\]
\item for any $h\in C_c^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ with
\EQN{
\supp(h)&\subset \{x=(x_1,x_2):x_1\geq \frac 1{2^{n+2}}\}\\
&\norm{h}_1 +\norm{h}_{\infty}\leq \delta_{n+1},
}
the smooth solution $\om$ to \eqref{main.eq} for the initial data
\[
\om|_{t=0}(x) = a(x+x_{n+1})+\sum_{j=1}^{n}\zeta_j(x-x_j+x_{n+1}) + \zeta_{n+1}(x) + h(x)
\]
has a decomposition
\[
\om = \om_{\leq n} + \om_{n+1} + \om_h, \quad \text{ on }\mathbb{R}^2\times[0,t_{n+1}]
\]
such that the supports of $\om_{\leq n}$, $\om_{n+1}$, and $\om_h$ are disjoint for $t\in [0,t_{n+1}]$, and
\[
\norm{\om_{n+1}(\cdot,t_{n+1})}_{\dot{H}^1}> {2^{n+1}}.
\]
\end{itemize}
Once we obtain $\zeta_{n+1}$, applying Lemma \ref{cpt.uniq} for $f(x) = a(x) + \sum_{j=1}^{n+1} \zeta_j(x-x_j)$, $R=\bar{R}$, $M=1$, and $\ep={2^{-(n+1)}}$, we can find $0<\tilde\delta_{n+1}\leq \tilde\delta_n$ such that for any $g$ with $\norm{g}_{\infty}\leq 1$ and $\norm{g}_{\dot{H}^{-1}}\leq \tilde\delta_{n+1}$, we have
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\tilde\om-\tilde\om_{\leq n+1})(\cdot,t)}_{\infty} <\frac 1{2^{n+1}},
\]
where $\tilde\om$ and $\tilde\om_{\leq n+1}$ solves \eqref{main.eq} for the initial data
\[
\tilde\om|_{t=0} = a+ \sum_{j=1}^{n+1} \zeta_j(\cdot-x_j)+g, \quad
\tilde\om_{\leq n+1}|_{t=0} = a+\sum_{j=1}^{n+1} \zeta_j(\cdot-x_j).
\]
If $g$ further satisfies $g\in C_c^{\infty}(B(0,\bar{R}))$ and $\norm{g}_{\infty}\leq \tilde\delta_{n+1}$, we get
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\tilde\om-\tilde\om_{\leq n+1})(\cdot,t)}_{\infty} <\frac 1{2^{n+1}}.
\]
Therefore, by the induction argument, we obtain the desired sequences $\{\zeta_n\}$, $\{(\delta_n,\tilde\delta_n, t_n)\}$.
Now, we set the perturbation as
\[
\zeta(x) = \sum_{j=1}^{\infty} \zeta_j(x-x_j).
\]
Obviously, the perturbation satisfies
\[
\norm{\zeta}_{\dot{H}^1}+\norm{\zeta}_{\infty}+\norm{\zeta}_1+\norm{\zeta}_{\dot{H}^{-1}}
=\norm{\zeta}\leq \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\norm{\zeta_j}< \ep.
\]
Since $\zeta_{n+1}(\cdot-x_{n+1})\in C_c^{\infty}(B(0,\bar{R}))$ and $\norm{\zeta_{n+1}}_{\infty}\leq \norm{\zeta_{n+1}}\leq \tilde\delta_n$, we plug $g=\zeta_{n+1}(\cdot-x_{n+1})$ into \eqref{ini.td.w}
to get
\EQ{\label{cauchy.cc}
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\tilde\om_{\leq n+1}-\tilde\om_{\leq n})(\cdot,t)}_{\infty}<\frac 1{2^{n}}.
}
Indeed, for any $n\in \mathbb{N}$, $\zeta_{n}(\cdot-x_{n})\in C_c^{\infty}(B(0,\bar{R}))$, and by finite speed propagation we have $\tilde\om_{\le n} \in C([0,1]\times\overline{B(0,R_*)})$ for some finite number $R_*$. Then, \eqref{cauchy.cc} implies that $\{\tilde\om_{\leq n}\}$ is Cauchy in $C([0,1]\times \overline{B(0,R_*)})$, and hence we have its limit $\om\in C([0,1];C_c(\mathbb{R}^2))$. On the other hand, since $L^\infty$-norm of $\tilde\om_{\leq n}$ is preserved for any $n\in \mathbb{N}$, so is that of $\om$.
Now, we check that $\om$ is the unique weak solution in $C([0,1];L^1(\mathbb{R}^2)\cap L^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2))$ to the equation \eqref{main.eq} for the initial data
\EQ{\label{ic}
\om|_{t=0} = a + \zeta,
}
having $L^\infty$-norm preservation. Since $\tilde\om_{\leq n}$ is smooth solution to \eqref{main.eq}, it satisfies for any $\ph\in C^1([0,1];C_c^1(\mathbb{R}^2))$ and $n\in \mathbb{N}$,
\[
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} \tilde\om_{\leq n}(x,1)\ph(x,1) dx =
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} \tilde\om_{\leq n}(x,0)\ph(x,0) dx
+\int_0^1\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}(\partial_s\ph+\nabla^{\perp}\Delta^{-1}T_{\ga}\tilde\om_{\leq n}\cdot\nabla\ph)\tilde\om_{\leq n} dxds.
\]
Sending $n$ to infinity, $\om$ solves \eqref{main.eq} in a weak sense. Then the uniqueness follows from \eqref{neg.sob.uniq}. Indeed, for any weak solution $\bar{\om}\in C^1([0,1];L^1(\mathbb{R}^2)\cap L^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2))$ to \eqref{main.eq} for the same initial data with $\om$ having $L^\infty$-norm preservation, we have
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{\bar{\om}-\tilde\om_{\leq n}(\cdot,t)}_{\dot{H}^{-1}(\mathbb{R}^2)}<\frac1{2^n},
\]
for sufficiently large $n$. Here, we use $\sup_{j}\norm{\zeta_j}_{\infty}\leq 1$ and
\[
\sum_{j=n+1}^{\infty}\norm{\zeta_j(\cdot-x_j)}_{\dot{H}^{-1}(\mathbb{R}^2)}
<\sum_{j=n+1}^{\infty}\frac{\tilde\delta_{j-1}}{2^{j-1}}
\leq \tilde \delta_n \sum_{j=n+1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{2^{j-1}}\leq \tilde\delta_n.
\]
Therefore, if the weak solution is not unique, i.e., $\bar\om\neq \om$, then it makes a contradiction to
\[
\max_{0\leq t\leq 1}\norm{(\bar{\om}-\om)(\cdot,t)}_{\dot{H}^{-1}(\mathbb{R}^2)}<\frac1{2^{n-1}}, \quad\forall n\in \mathbb{N}.
\]
Therefore, we obtain the uniqueness.
Finally, since $h=\sum_{j=n+1}^{\infty}\zeta_j(x-x_j+x_n)$ satisfies the conditions \eqref{condition.h}, we have
\EQ{\label{this}
\norm{\om(\cdot,t_n)}_{\dot{H}^1}\geq \norm{\om_n(\cdot,t_n)}_{\dot{H}^1}> 2^n.
}
Indeed, in Proposition \ref{prop.cpt}, the assumption $h\in C_c^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ can be dropped if we have
a unique weak solution $\om\in C([0,1];L^1(\mathbb{R}^2)\cap L^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2))$ to \eqref{main.eq} with initial data $\om|_{t=0}=f+g+h$. This leads to \eqref{this}.
Using the continuity of $\norm{\om_n(\cdot,t)}_{H^1}$, we have short time interval $[t_n^l,t_n^r]$, $t_n^l\leq t_n\leq t_n^r$ such that $t_n^r$ converges to $0$ and
\[
\norm{\om(\cdot,t)}_{\dot{H}^1}> n, \quad\forall t_n^l\leq t\leq t_n^r.
\]
This implies the desired critical Sobolev norm inflation.
\hfill$\square$
\section{Appendix}
In this section, we provide proofs of some inequalities for self-containedness.
\subsection{Kernel for the velocity}
In this section, we estimate the kernel $H$ in the velocity $u= \nabla^\perp \De^{-1} T_\ga\om = H\ast \om$.
\begin{lemma}\label{ker.H.lem} Let $\ga>0$ and $H$ is the kernel of the multiplier $\nabla^\perp\Delta^{-1}T_\ga$, where $T_\ga$ is either
\[
T_\ga = \ln^{-\ga}(e-\Delta), \quad\text{or}\quad
T_\ga = \ln^{-\ga}(e+|\nabla|).
\]
Then, for each $\al$ with $|\al|\geq 0$, we have
\EQ{\label{est.H}
|\partial^\al H(x)|\lesssim_{\al}\frac 1{|x|^{|\al|+1}}, \qquad\forall x\neq 0.
}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By a similar argument in Lemma
\ref{estimate.K} and Lemma \ref{estimate.tdK}, we have an explicit expression of the kernel $H^2$ of the multiplier $\nabla^\perp \De^{-1}\ln^{-\ga}(e-\De)$,
\begin{align}\label{H2}
H^2(x)=
\frac{C}{\Ga(\ga)}\frac{x^\perp}{|x|^2}\int_0^{\infty}\frac 1{\Ga(t)}\int_0^{\infty}e^{-e\be}(1-e^{-\frac {|x|^2}{4\be}})\be^t \frac{d\be}{\be} t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t =: \frac{x^\perp}{|x|^2} H_r^2(x)
\end{align}
where $x^\perp = (-x_2,x_1)$ for some absolute constant $C>0$.
Also, the kernel $H^1$ of the multiplier $\nabla^\perp \De^{-1}\ln^{-\ga}(e+|\nabla|)$ is
\EQ{\label{H1}
H^1(x)
&=
\frac{\tilde C}{\Ga(\ga)}\frac{x^\perp}{|x|^2}\int_0^{\infty}\frac {1}{\Ga(t)} \int_0^{\infty}e^{-\tau}
\int_0^{\infty} e^{-e\be}\left(1 -e^{-\frac{\tau|x|^2}{{\be^2}}}\right) \be^t \frac{d\be}{\be}\tau^{-\frac 12}d\tau t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t,\\
&=: \frac{x^\perp}{|x|^2} H_r^1(x)
}
for some constant $\tilde C>0$.
Using $|t^ne^{-t}|\leq C(n)$ for any $t\geq 0$, we have for each $|\al|\geq 0$,
\[
|\partial^{\al}(1-e^{-\frac{|x|^2}{4\be}})|\lesssim_{\al} \frac {1}{|x|^{|\al|}}\qquad\forall x\neq 0, \ \be>0,
\]
where the constant in the inequality is independent of $\be$.
Since
\[
\frac 1{\Ga(\ga)}\int_0^{\infty}\frac {1}{\Ga(t)}\int_0^{\infty}e^{-e\be}\be^{t} \frac{d \be}{\be} t^{\ga}\frac{dt}{t}= \frac 1{\Ga(\ga)}\int_0^{\infty}e^{-t} t^{\ga}\frac {dt}t = 1,
\]
we can easily get
\[
|\partial^\al H_r^2(x)| \lesssim_\al \frac 1{|x|^{|\al |}}.
\]
On the other hand, we have
\EQN{
\frac 1{\Ga(\ga)}\int_0^{\infty}\frac {1}{\Ga(t)} \int_0^{\infty}e^{-\tau}
\int_0^{\infty} e^{-e\be} \be^t \frac{d\be}{\be}\tau^{-\frac 12}d\tau t^{\ga}\frac{dt}t
&=\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\tau}\tau^{-\frac 12}d\tau
\lesssim 1.
}
Therefore, we also obtain
\[
|\partial^\al H_r^1(x)| \lesssim_\al \frac 1{|x|^{|\al |}}.
\]
Finally, since for each $|\al|\geq 0$, we have
\[
\left|\partial^{\al}\left(\frac{x_i}{|x|^2}\right)\right|\lesssim_{\al} \frac 1{|x|^{|\al|+1}}, \qquad \forall x\neq 0,
\]
the desired estimate \eqref{est.H} follows easily.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Operator norm of $T_\ga$ on $L^p$ }
In this section, we show that $T_\ga$ is bounded in $L^p$ with its operator norm $\norm{T_\ga}_{L^p\to L^p}=1$.
\begin{lemma}\label{operator.T} Let $\ga>0$ and $f\in C_c^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^2)$. For any $1\leq p\leq \infty$, we have
\[
\norm{T_{\ga}f}_p\leq\norm{f}_p.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Let $K_{\ga}$ be the kernel for $T_{\ga}$. In other words, $T_{\ga}f = K_{\ga}\ast f$. Then, by Young's inequality, it is enough to show that $\norm{K_\ga}_1=1$. First, consider $T_{\ga} = \ln^{-\ga}(e-\Delta)$. Since we have
\EQN{
\ln^{-\ga}(e+|\xi|^2)
=\frac 1{\Ga(\ga)}\int_0^{\infty}\frac 1{\Ga(t)}\int_0^\infty e^{-e\be} e^{-|\xi|^2 \be}\be^t \frac{d\be}{\be} t^{\ga} \frac{dt}t,
}
we take the inverse Fourier transform to get the corresponding kernel
\EQN{
K_{\ga}(x)
=\frac 1{\Ga(\ga)}\int_0^{\infty}\frac 1{\Ga(t)}\int_0^\infty e^{-e\be} e^{\be\Delta }\delta_0(x)\be^t \frac{d\be}{\be} t^{\ga} \frac{dt}t.
}
Therefore using $\norm{e^{\be\Delta }\delta_0}_1 =1$, we can easily get $\norm{K_{\ga}}_1=1$. Here, $e^{t\De}\delta_0$ is the usual heat kernel.
Similarly, when $T_{\ga} = \ln^{-\ga}(e+|\nabla|)$, the integral expression of the kernel is
\EQN{
K_{\ga}(x)
=\frac 1{\Ga(\ga)}\int_0^{\infty}\frac 1{\Ga(t)}\int_0^\infty e^{-e\be} \frac 1{\sqrt{\pi}}\int_0^\infty e^{-\tau}e^{\frac{\be}{4\tau}\Delta }\delta_0(x)\tau^{-\frac 12}d\tau \be^t \frac{d\be}{\be} t^{\ga} \frac{dt}t,
}
and hence again $\norm{e^{\frac{\be}{4\tau}\Delta }\delta_0}_1=1$ implies $\norm{K_{\ga}}_1=1$.
\end{proof}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The research of the author was partially supported by NSERC grant 261356-13 (Canada).
|
\section{Introduction}
Complex networks \replaced{are}{has been} a \replaced{popular topic that has}{hot research and} attracted researchers' attention in many fields \cite{MAJHI2019100Chimera}\deleted{,} because \replaced{they}{it} can be used as a detailed model for many real-world complex systems \replaced{such as}{, like} brain network\added{s} \cite{small2012Gallos}, message network\added{s} \cite{Xu2017Optimal,Wang2017Model}, human lives \cite{Helbing2015Saving}\added{,} and social systems \cite{SHEIKHAHMADI2017517marketing,SHEIKHAHMADI2017517online}. \replaced{Many}{In recent years, many} structural properties of complex networks are affected by some special nodes, \replaced{e.g., the}{like} scale-free \cite{Matthew2014Perc}, self-similarity \cite{Rosenberg2017Maximal}\added{,} and \deleted{the} fractal \cite{wb2019} \replaced{properties}{property} of complex network\added{s} \cite{Rosenberg2017Minimal}. In order to measure networks' properties effectively, many studies have been \replaced{conducted}{launched} to find these nodes with special properties, \replaced{e.g.,}{for example,} finding the most similar node \cite{wentao2019similar}, identifying influential nodes \cite{Zareie2018hierarchical,SHEIKHAHMADI2015833Improving}, \added{and} predicting potential links \cite{XIE201937}. \replaced{In particular}{Particularly}, \deleted{the} nodes with \added{the ability to be} high\added{ly} influential \deleted{ability} in complex network\added{s have} gradually attracted researchers' attention\deleted{,} because they have \replaced{a greater}{more critical} influence on \replaced{the networks' properties}{networks' property} and structure than most other nodes, \replaced{as demonstrated for}{like} predicting \added{a} time series by \added{a} visibility graph \cite{Fan2019timeseries}, predicting \added{a} link by similar nodes \cite{BU201941}, detecting \replaced{communities}{community} in social networks \cite{XIE201975}, measuring \added{the} network complexity \cite{Zhang2019Groups}, \added{and} dividing \added{the} network structure \cite{YANG2019121259method,yang2019network}.
In general, each network has a specific node importance ranking, and different identification methods consider different \replaced{structural}{structure} properties \replaced{of}{in} the network, which would give different ranking lists. \replaced{Many}{A lot of} centrality measures have been proposed to identify influential nodes\added{,} and they can be divided into three categories\cite{L2016Vital}\replaced{:}{, including} neighborhood-based\deleted{centralities}, path-based\deleted{centralities}, and iterative\added{-}refinement centralities. These centralities have many classical measures\deleted{,} such as \added{the} \replaced{degree centrality}{Degree Centrality} (DC) \cite{Newman2003Newman}, \replaced{betweenness centrality}{Betweenness Centrality} (BC) \cite{Newman2003Newman}, \replaced{closeness centrality}{Closeness Centrality} (CC) \cite{Freeman1979Centrality}, and \replaced{eigenvector centrality}{Eigenvector Centrality} (EC) \cite{Freeman1979Centrality}\replaced{. In addition to}{, and some} new \deleted{centrality} measures\deleted{,} \replaced{such as the}{like} H-index \replaced{centrality}{Centrality} \cite{Zareie2019Centrality}, \added{those in} optimal percolation theory \cite{Ferraro2018Finding}\replaced{ and}{,} evidence theory \cite{MO2019121538evidence}, \added{the technique for order preference by similarity to the ideal solution (TOPSIS)} \cite{Zareie2018TOPSIS}\added{,} and other measures \cite{Zareie2019neighborhood,wang2018amodified,ZAREIE2019217interest}. These centrality measures have been applied in various fields\deleted{,} such as game theory \cite{wang2016statistical}, human cooperation \cite{Matja2017Statistical}, evolutionary games \cite{PERC2010109Coevolutionary}, \replaced{relevant website ranking}{ranking relevant websites} \cite{Zhang2019impact}, and \replaced{node}{affecting nodes'} synchronization \cite{Feng2018Synchronization,XING2019113}. However, these classical centrality measures have \replaced{limitations}{their own shortcomings and limitations}. For example, \added{the} DC only concentrates on \deleted{the} local information \replaced{and does not consider}{but lacks the consideration of} global information. \added{The} BC and CC \deleted{would} focus on \deleted{the} global information\added{,} but \replaced{their}{the} high computational complexity limits their application \replaced{to}{on} large-scale complex networks. \added{The} EC cannot be used in asymmetric networks, which \replaced{reduces}{would reduce} its application. Recently, some new centrality measures have been proposed. For instance, Zareie \emph{et al.} ranked \deleted{the} influential nodes \replaced{using the}{based} entropy \cite{Zareie2017Influential}. Deng \emph{et al.} proposed \added{a} local dimension to identify vital nodes \cite{Pu2014Identifying}. Makse \emph{et al.} traced \added{the} real information flow in social networks to find influential spreaders \cite{Teng2016Collective}.
\replaced{The entropy}{Entropy} is a useful tool \replaced{for measuring}{to measure} the information of \added{a} complex network\replaced{; hence,}{so} it has been \replaced{widely}{wildly} used \replaced{in many applications}{in many aspects in the network}, \added{e.g., evaluations of the} vulnerability \deleted{evaluating} \cite{wentao2018evaluating}, \added{presentation of the} dimension \deleted{presentation} \cite{Rosenberg2017Non,Pedrycz2003Fuzzy}, dilemma experiments \cite{Collective2012Gallos}, data fusion \cite{Song2019divergence,Gao2019generalizationn}, entanglement measures \cite{yang2018network}, and evidence theory \cite{Jiang2019Znetwork,liu2019new}. In addition, the structure of \replaced{a complex network}{complex networks}, such as \added{the} nodes and links, can be seen as probability sets. Therefore, the structural properties can be effectively explored by \added{the} entropy, which provides a new approach to address \replaced{problems}{the problem} in the network, including \added{the identification of} important nodes \deleted{identification}.
In this paper, a new centrality measure is proposed to identify \deleted{the} influential nodes \replaced{on the basis of the}{based on} local information dimensionality. \replaced{The}{This} proposed method considers the information in boxes through \added{the} Shannon entropy, which is more reasonable than classical measures. \replaced{In contrast to}{Different from} previous methods, the scale of locality \replaced{of the}{in this} proposed method \replaced{increases}{would grow} from \replaced{one}{1} to half of the maximum value of the shortest distance, which can consider the \replaced{quasilocal}{quasi-local} information and reduce the computational complexity. Nodes with \added{a} higher local information dimensionality are more influential in the complex network, which is \added{the} same as classical measures. \replaced{To}{In order to} show the effectiveness and reasonability of \replaced{the}{this} proposed method, six real-world complex networks are \replaced{considered}{used in this paper}, and five existing centrality measures are applied as comparison methods. \replaced{Further}{Fuethermore}, \replaced{a susceptible--infected}{Susceptible-Infected} (SI) model and Kendall's tau coefficient \cite{L2016Vital} are used to show the superiority of \replaced{the}{this} proposed method and the relationship between different methods.
The \deleted{organization of the} rest of this paper is \added{organized} as follows. Section 2 introduces some \replaced{existing}{exiting} centrality measures and concepts about complex networks. \replaced{The}{This} proposed local information dimensionality is \replaced{discussed}{proposed} in Section 3. \replaced{S}{Meanwhile, s}ome numerical experiments are \replaced{presented}{simulated} \added{in Section 4} to illustrate the effectiveness and reasonability of \replaced{the}{this} proposed method \deleted{in Section 4}. The conclusion\added{s} \replaced{are discussed}{is conducted} in Section 5.
\section{Preliminaries}
\subsection{\replaced{S}{The s}hortest distance between any two nodes in complex networks}
In a given complex network \emph{$G(N,V)$}, \emph{$N$} is the set of nodes, and \emph{$V$} is the set of edges. The adjacency matrix of the network can be obtained \replaced{from}{by} the topological \replaced{properties}{property} of network (the relationship\added{s} between \added{the} nodes and \added{the} edges)\replaced{. Then,}{, then} the shortest distance matrix can be obtained when the shortest distances between any two nodes are calculated by the Dijkstra algorithm. The adjacency matrix and shortest distance matrix are \added{the} known information of complex networks\deleted{,} and are solved in advance to facilitate later application. The shortest distance \emph{${\omega _{ij}}$} between node \emph{$i$} and node \emph{$j$} is defined as follows\replaced{:}{,}
\begin{equation}\label{equ_dis_min}
{\omega _{ij}} = \min ({e_{i{k_1}}} + {e_{{k_1}{k_2}}} + \cdots + {e_{{k_m}j}})
\end{equation}
where \emph{${k_1},{k_2}, \cdots ,{k_m}$} \replaced{are the}{is} node IDs and \emph{${e_{{k_1}{k_2}}}$} is the edge between two nodes. \emph{${e_{{k_1}{k_2}}} = 1$} \replaced{indicates that}{represents} there is an edge between two nodes, and \emph{${e_{{k_1}{k_2}}} = 0$} is the opposite. \replaced{Thus,}{So} the shortest \added{path} length \deleted{of path} between node \emph{$i$} and node \emph{$j$} is \replaced{denoted by}{represented as} \emph{${\omega _{ij}}$}, and the maximum value of the shortest distance from node \emph{$i$} is \deleted{shown below,}
\begin{equation}\label{equ_max_value_dis}
{\kappa _i} = \mathop {\max }\limits_{j \in N,j \ne i} ({\omega _{ij}})
\end{equation}
The maximum value of the shortest distance \emph{${\kappa _i}$} is the scale of locality around node \emph{$i$}, and it is different for different nodes.
\subsection{Centrality measures}
Some existing measures are introduced in this section \replaced{such as the BC, CC, DC, EC, and local dimension (LD).}{, like Betweenness Centrality (BC), Closeness Centrality (CC), Degree Centrality (DC), Eigenvector Centrality (EC), Local dimension (LD).}
\begin{definition}
Betweenness Centrality (BC) \cite{Newman2003Newman}. The \replaced{BC}{Betweenness Centrality} of node \emph{$i$} is denoted \replaced{by}{as} \emph{${C_B}(i)$} and defined as follows\replaced{:}{,}
\begin{equation}\label{equ_BC}
{C_B}(i) = \sum\limits_{s,t \ne i} {\frac{{{g_{st}}(i)}}{{{g_{st}}}}}
\end{equation}
where \emph{${{g_{st}}}$} is the number of shortest paths between node \emph{$s$} and node \emph{$t$}\deleted{,} and \emph{${{g_{st}}(i)}$} is the number of shortest paths between node \emph{$s$} and node \emph{$t$} \replaced{that pass}{which go} through node \emph{$i$}.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
Closeness Centrality (CC) \cite{Freeman1979Centrality}. The \replaced{CC}{Closeness Centrality} of node \emph{$i$} is denoted \replaced{by}{as} \emph{${C_C}(i)$} and defined as follows\replaced{:}{,}
\begin{equation}\label{equ_CC}
{C_C}(i) = {\left( {\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{\left| N \right|} {{\omega _{ij}}} } \right)^{ - 1}}
\end{equation}
where \emph{${\omega _{ij}}$} is the shortest distance from node \emph{$i$} \replaced{to}{and} node \emph{$j$} \replaced{that}{which} can be obtained by Eq. (\ref{equ_dis_min})\deleted{,} and \emph{$\left| N \right|$} is the number of nodes.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
Degree Centrality (DC) \cite{Newman2003Newman}. The \replaced{DC}{Degree Centrality} of node \emph{$i$} is denoted \replaced{by}{as} \emph{${C_D}(i)$} and defined as follows\replaced{:}{,}
\begin{equation}\label{equ_DC}
{C_D}(i) = \sum\limits_{j = 1}^{\left| N \right|} {{e_{ij}}}
\end{equation}
where \emph{${{e_{ij}}}$} \replaced{is}{shows} the edge between node \emph{$i$} and \emph{$j$}\deleted{, and \emph{$\left| N \right|$} is the number of nodes.}. In fact, the \replaced{DC}{Degree Centrality} means the number of edges connected with the selected node.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
Eigenvector Centrality (EC) \cite{Freeman1979Centrality}. \emph{$A$} is a similarity matrix whose size is \emph{$\left| N \right| \times \left| N \right|$}. The \replaced{EC}{Eigenvector Centrality} \emph{${x_i}$} of node \emph{$i$} is the \emph{$i$}th entry in the normalized eigenvector \replaced{that}{which} belongs to \emph{$A$}, and it is defined as follows\replaced{:}{,}
\begin{equation}\label{equ_EC}
Ax = \lambda x,{x_i} = u\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{\left| N \right|} {{a_{ij}}{x_j}}
\end{equation}
where \emph{$\lambda$} is the largest eigenvalue of \emph{$A$}, \deleted{and} \emph{$u = 1/\lambda $}, \deleted{\emph{$\left| N \right|$} is the number of nodes,} \added{and} \emph{${x_i}$} is the sum of \added{the} similarity scores of the nodes \replaced{that}{which} are connected with node \emph{$i$}.
\end{definition}
The \replaced{LD}{local dimension} \cite{Pu2014Identifying} of node \emph{$i$} is introduced in Section 2.3.
\subsection{Local dimension}
To explore the local structural properties of complex networks, Silva \emph{et al.} proposed the \replaced{LD}{local dimension} of complex networks. \replaced{A}{The} power-law distribution has been \replaced{proven}{proved} to exist in theoretical networks with special properties \replaced{such as}{like} small-world \replaced{properties and}{, but also in} many real-world networks. Because the topological scale from each central node is different, the \replaced{LD}{local dimension} \replaced{changes}{would change} with the selection of the central node. \deleted{Then,} Pu \emph{et al.} \cite{Pu2014Identifying} modified \replaced{the LD}{local dimension} to identify the vital nodes in complex networks. For a radius \emph{$r$}\replaced{, it has been found that}{and} the number of nodes \emph{${N_i}(r)$} whose shortest distance from \added{the} central node \added{is} less than \emph{$r$} follows \replaced{the}{a} power law\deleted{, and it is shown as follows,}
\begin{equation}\label{equ_power_law}
{N_i}(r) \sim {r^{{D_i}}}
\end{equation}
It can be easily found that the \replaced{LD}{local dimension} \emph{${D_i}$} of node \emph{$i$} can be obtained \replaced{from}{by} the slope of \replaced{a log--log plot}{double logarithmic curves}, and it is \replaced{expressed}{shown} as follow\replaced{s:}{,}
\begin{equation}\label{equ_local_dimen}
{D_i} = \frac{d}{{d\ln r}}\ln {N_i}(r)
\end{equation}
where \emph{$d$} is the symbol of derivative. The radius \emph{$r$} \replaced{increases}{would grow} from \replaced{one}{1} to the maximum value of the shortest distance \emph{${\kappa_i}$} from node \emph{$i$}, and the derivative of Eq. (\ref{equ_local_dimen}) \replaced{is expressed as follows}{can be shown below} because of the discrete properties \cite{Ben2004Complex} \replaced{of}{in} complex networks\replaced{:}{,}
\begin{equation}\label{equ_local_dimen_deri_1}
{D_i} = \frac{r}{{{N_i}(r)}}\frac{d}{{dr}}{N_i}(r)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{equ_local_dimen_deri_2}
{D_i} = r\frac{{{n_i}(r)}}{{{N_i}(r)}}
\end{equation}
where \emph{${{n_i}(r)}$} is the number of nodes whose shortest distance from \added{the} central node equal\added{s} \emph{$r$}. When a central node is chosen, the \deleted{locality} scale \added{of locality} of the central node \replaced{can}{would} be determined, and the \replaced{LD}{local dimension} of \added{the} central node can be obtained \replaced{from}{by} the slope of \replaced{a log--log plot}{double logarithmic curves} (\emph{$\ln {N_i}(r)$} vs. \emph{$\ln r$}). Lastly, the importance of \added{a} node can be determined by the order of the \replaced{LD}{local dimension}. \replaced{In contrast to}{Different from} the previous method\added{s}, \replaced{a}{the} node with a lower \replaced{LD is}{local dimension would be} more influential in the network.
\section{\replaced{P}{The p}roposed method}
\replaced{Many}{Lots of} centrality measures have been proposed to identify the influential nodes in \deleted{the} complex network\added{s}. Different methods consider different \replaced{structural}{structure} information in the network and \deleted{they would} have their own advantages and limitations. Because most \deleted{of the} previous methods concentrate on the global \deleted{structure} or local structure, the \replaced{quasilocal}{quasi-local} structure around the selected node cannot be \added{effectively} recognized\deleted{effectively}. In this paper, a new method is proposed to identify vital nodes \replaced{on the basis of}{based on} the local information dimensionality (LID) of each node in \added{a} complex network. \replaced{The}{This} proposed method \replaced{considers}{would consider} the \replaced{quasilocal}{quasi-local} information around each node and reduce\added{s} the computational complexity. The \replaced{practicality}{practicability} and effectiveness of \replaced{the}{this} proposed method \replaced{are demonstrated}{can be shown} \replaced{with experiments comparing}{from comparison experiments in} some real-world complex networks in Section 4. \replaced{A}{The} flowchart \replaced{for}{to} \replaced{obtaining}{obtain} the \replaced{LID}{local information dimension} of one selected node is shown in Fig. \ref{fig_flow chart}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=15cm]{flowchart.eps}\\
\caption{\textbf{\replaced{F}{The f}lowchart of \replaced{the}{this} proposed method.} The main step \added{is} to calculate \replaced{the}{one node's} local information dimensionality \emph{${D_{I\_i}}$} \added{of one node} from the structure of \added{a} complex network.}
\label{fig_flow chart}
\end{figure}
In this section, the \replaced{LID}{local information dimension} of \added{a} complex network is proposed. The number of nodes in each box \replaced{is}{would be} considered \replaced{using the}{by} Shannon entropy in \replaced{the}{this} proposed method, which is more reasonable. \replaced{Similar to the LD}{The same as local dimension} \emph{${D_i}$}, the \replaced{LID}{local information dimension} \emph{${D_{I\_i}}$} also considers the \replaced{structural}{structure} properties around node \emph{$i$} in complex networks, and it is defined as follows\replaced{:}{,}
\begin{equation}\label{equ_LID}
{D_{I\_i}} = - \frac{d}{{d\ln l}}{I_i}(l)
\end{equation}
where \emph{$d$} is the symbol of derivative, \emph{$l$} is the size of the box\deleted{,} and \emph{${I_i}(l)$} \replaced{is}{represents} the information in the box whose central node is node \emph{$i$} with size \emph{$l$}. \replaced{In contrast to the classical LD}{Different from the classical local dimension}, the information \emph{${I_i}(l)$} in the selected box is considered \replaced{using the}{by} Shannon entropy to describe the number of nodes in the box. In addition, the \added{rule that governs the growth of the size of the} box \deleted{size growth rule} is different from the classical definition. The size of \added{the} box \emph{$l$} \replaced{grows}{would grow} from \replaced{one}{1} to \deleted{the} half of the maximum value of the shortest distance from \added{the} central node \emph{${\kappa _i}$}, \added{i.e.,} \emph{$ceil({\kappa _i}/2)$}. The change \replaced{in the size of the}{of} box \deleted{size} means \added{that the} LID \replaced{focuses}{would focus} on the \replaced{quasilocal}{quasi-local} structure around the central node and \replaced{reduces the}{reduce} computational complexity. The information \emph{${I_i}(l)$} in each box is determined by the number of nodes in the box, and the number of \deleted{the} selected nodes is considered \replaced{using the}{by} Shannon entropy. Thus, the information \replaced{in the}{of} box can \replaced{indicate}{show} the node's properties more \replaced{reasonably}{reasonable}, and it is \deleted{detailed} defined as follows\replaced{:}{,}
\begin{equation}\label{equ_I_i}
{I_i}(l) = - {p_i}(l)\ln {p_i}(l)
\end{equation}
where \emph{${p_i}(l)$} is the probability \replaced{that}{of} information \replaced{is contained}{containing} in \replaced{a}{the} box whose central node is \emph{$i$} for a given box size \emph{$l$}, which is the ratio of the number of nodes in the box\added{, \emph{${{n_i}(l)}$},} to the \replaced{total}{whole} number \added{of nodes} in the complex network\added{, \emph{$N$},} and can be obtained as follows\replaced{:}{,}
\begin{equation}\label{equ_p_i}
{p_i}(l) = \frac{{{n_i}(l)}}{N}
\end{equation}
\deleted{where \emph{${{n_i}(l)}$} is the number of nodes within the box whose size equals to \emph{$l$}, and \emph{$N$} is the whole number of nodes in the complex network.} Thus, \replaced{the LID}{this proposed local information dimension shown} in Eq. (\ref{equ_LID}) can be rewritten as follows\replaced{:}{,}
\begin{equation}\label{equ_LID_new}
{D_{I\_i}} = - \frac{d}{{d\ln l}}\left( { - \frac{{{n_i}(l)}}{N}\ln \frac{{{n_i}(l)}}{N}} \right)
\end{equation}
\replaced{From}{It can be obtained from} Eq. (\ref{equ_LID_new})\replaced{,}{that} the information \replaced{in the}{of} box\added{,} \emph{${I_i}(l)$}\added{,} around the central node \emph{$i$} is obtained from the number of nodes in the box by \added{the} Shannon entropy. The \replaced{LID}{locla information dimension} \emph{${D_{I\_i}}$} of \added{the} selected node \emph{$i$} is obtained \replaced{from}{by} the slope of the \deleted{fitting} line \added{fitting the relationship} between \emph{${I_i}(l)$} and \emph{${\ln l}$}. Because of \added{the} network\replaced{'s}{s'} discrete nature \cite{Ben2004Complex}, the \added{expression with the} derivative \deleted{expression} in Eq. (\ref{equ_LID_new}) can be rewritten \replaced{as}{below,}
\begin{equation}\label{equ_LID_derivative}
\begin{array}{l}
{D_{I\_i}} = - \frac{d}{{d\ln l}}\left( { - {p_i}(l)\ln {p_i}(l)} \right)\\
{\rm{ }} = \frac{l}{{1 + \ln {p_i}(l)}}\frac{d}{{dl}}{p_i}(l)\\
{\rm{ }} \approx \frac{l}{{1 + \ln \frac{{{n_i}(l)}}{N}}}\frac{{{N_i}(l)}}{N}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where \emph{${{N_i}(l)}$} is the number of nodes whose shortest distance from \added{the} central node \emph{$i$} equals \replaced{the}{to} box size \emph{$l$} (\emph{${\omega _{ij}} = l$})\deleted{,} and \emph{${{n_i}(l)}$} is the number of nodes whose shortest distance from \added{the} central node \emph{$i$} is less than the box size \emph{$l$} (\emph{${\omega _{ij}} \le l$}).
In \replaced{the}{this} proposed method, the scale of locality \emph{${r_{\max }}$} \replaced{changes}{would change} with the central nodes, which is defined as the half of the maximum value of the shortest distance from \added{the} central node \emph{${\kappa_i}$}, i.e.\added{,} \emph{${r_{\max }} = ceil({\kappa_i}/2)$}. The box size \emph{$l$} \replaced{increases}{would increase} from \replaced{one}{1} to the scale of locality \emph{${r_{\max }}$}. The information in each box (\added{the} number of nodes in the box) \replaced{is}{would be} considered \replaced{using the}{by} Shannon entropy. The \replaced{LID}{local information dimension} of each node can be obtained \replaced{from}{by} the slope of \added{the} box information \emph{${I_i}(l)$} and the logarithm of the box size \emph{${\ln l}$}. \replaced{Owing}{Due} to the \replaced{properties}{property} of the \replaced{LID}{local information dimension}, \replaced{the}{this} proposed method \replaced{considers}{would consider} the information in the box more \replaced{reasonably}{reasonable} and \replaced{reduces}{reduce} the computational complexity.
\section{Experimental study}
\replaced{To}{In order to} show the effectiveness of \replaced{the}{this} proposed method, six real-world complex networks and five \replaced{comparison}{comparing} measures are used \deleted{in this section}. These six complex networks are \added{the} USAir network, Jazz network, Karate network, Political blogs network, Facebook network, and \replaced{(High Energy Physics - Theory) collaboration network from arXiv}{Collaboration network of Arxiv high energy physics theory respectively}, which can be downloaded from \deleted{(}$http://vlado.fmf.uni-lj.si/pub/networks/data/$\deleted{)} and \deleted{(}$http://snap.stanford.edu/data/$\deleted{)}. In addition, the collaboration network is chosen as the largest connected subgraph from \added{the} original network data. These five comparison measures (\added{the} BC, CC, DC, EC, \added{and} LD) \replaced{were}{have been} introduced in Section 2. The structural properties of these six networks are \replaced{listed}{shown} in Table \ref{table_Property}. $\left| N \right|$ and $\left| V \right|$ \replaced{are}{represent} the numbers of nodes and edges\deleted{,} respectively\replaced{;}{,} $<k>$ and ${{k_{max}}}$ \replaced{are}{mean} the average and maximum value of \added{the} degree\added{of centrality, respectively; and} $<\omega>$ and ${{\omega_{max}}}$ \replaced{are}{mean} the average and maximum value of the shortest distance in the network\added{, respectively}. Five \deleted{kinds of} experiments are implemented \deleted{in this section}, including listing the top-10 node IDs to compare the difference\added{s} \replaced{in the}{about} top-10 node results obtained by different measures\replaced{,}{;} \replaced{the propagation}{propagating} based on \added{the} SI model to show the superior \replaced{infection}{infectious} ability of \added{the} nodes obtained by \added{the} LID\replaced{, the}{;} \added{the} relationship graph and Kendall's tau coefficient to show the similarity of the node rankings obtained by different measures and \added{the} SI model\replaced{, and the}{;} running time\added{s} of different measures to show \replaced{the}{this} proposed method's low computational complexity.
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\centering
\caption{\textbf{\replaced{Topological properties of r}{R}eal-world network\replaced{s}{ topological properties}.}}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
\hline
Network & $\left| N \right|$ & $\left| V \right|$ & $<k>$ & ${{k_{max}}}$ & $<\omega>$ & ${{\omega_{max}}}$ \\
\hline
USAir & 332 & 2126 & 12.8072 & 139 & 2.7381 & 6\\
Jazz & 198 & 5484 & 27.6970 & 100 & 2.2350 & 6\\
Karate & 34 & 78 & 4.5882 & 17 & 2.4082 & 5 \\
Political blogs &1222 &19021 & 27.3552 & 351 & 2.7375 & 8 \\
Facebook &4039 &88234 & 43.6910 &1045 & 3.6925 & 8\\
Collaboration &8368 &24827 & 5.7459 & 65 & 5.9454 & 18\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table_Property}
\end{table}
\subsection{Top-10 nodes}
First\added{ly}, the top-10 nodes in six real-world complex networks are identified by \added{the} LID and five other \deleted{exiting} centrality measures, and the results are \replaced{listed}{shown} in Table \ref{table_top_10}. \replaced{The}{These} nodes \replaced{in}{with} color \replaced{for the}{in} five existing measures \deleted{show that they} are the same top-10 nodes \replaced{identified by the}{in} LID. Because of \added{the} different consideration of information in the network, different centrality measures \added{could} give different \added{lists of} top-10 node\added{s} \deleted{lists}. Thus, the numbers of same nodes \replaced{for}{between} different measures can show the similarity of information considered by different methods, and \replaced{the identification of more nodes by the}{more nodes in} LID\added{,} which also appear in the results of other measures\added{,} can \replaced{increase its}{bring more} credibility \deleted{to LID}. These unique nodes \replaced{identified by the}{in} LID may \replaced{indicate}{have} \deleted{an} important change\added{s} \replaced{in}{to} the propagation process. \replaced{From}{Observing from} Table \ref{table_top_10}, \deleted{in USAir network,} the \added{same node with the} most influence\deleted{r} \added{in the USAir network is} \deleted{node} obtained by \added{the} six different methods \replaced{---}{are the same, and it is}node 118. The top-10 nodes obtained by \added{the} LID \replaced{are}{is} the same as \added{those obtained by the} CC, and \deleted{there are also} eight and seven \added{of the} same nodes \added{are obtained} between \added{the} LID and \added{the} DC \replaced{and}{,} EC\added{,} respectively. The number\added{s} of \added{the} same top-10 nodes obtained by \added{the} BC, LD\added{,} and LID are less than \added{those of} other methods\added{,} which are \replaced{six}{only six nodes}. The result\added{s} \replaced{for the}{in} USAir network show that most of \added{the} top-10 nodes \replaced{obtained by the}{in} other measures \replaced{are obtained by the}{appear in} LID, which \replaced{indicates its}{shows the} similarity and credibility\deleted{ of this proposed method}.
\replaced{For the}{In} Jazz network, the number of same top-10 nodes between \added{the} LID and \added{the} other measures is relatively small. There are only five same top-10 nodes \replaced{among the}{between} CC, DC, EC\added{,} and LID\replaced{;}{,} \replaced{the BC and LD}{other methods (BC, LD)} only have \replaced{three}{3} and \replaced{four of the}{4} same nodes\added{, respectively,} \replaced{as the}{with} LID\deleted{respectively}. The difference\added{s} \replaced{in the}{of} top-10 nodes between \added{the} LID and \added{the} other measures are \replaced{large}{big}, but \replaced{the}{these} unique nodes in \added{the} LID \deleted{would} have a \replaced{significant}{big} influence on the propagation process\added{,} which can show \replaced{the}{these nodes'} importance \added{of these nodes} in complex networks. \replaced{A}{The} detailed comparison \replaced{is}{would be} carried out \replaced{with}{in} the experiments below.
\replaced{The}{Observing from the} \added{list of} top-10 nodes \replaced{of the}{list of} Karate network in Table \ref{table_top_10}, \deleted{the top-10 nodes list} is exactly the same using \added{the} LID and CC (\replaced{this}{This} result is the same as the result \replaced{for the}{in} USAir network). \replaced{Many of the}{There are also many} same top-10 nodes \replaced{are observed for the}{in} DC, EC\added{,} and LID, \replaced{which}{and both of them} have \added{the} same \replaced{nine}{9} nodes, \replaced{thereby indicating}{which can show} the similarity between them. The number\added{s} of same top-10 nodes between \added{the} LID and \replaced{the BC and LD}{other methods (BC, LD)} \replaced{are seven and five,}{is 7, 5} respectively.
\replaced{For the}{In} Political blogs network, the number\added{s} of same top-10 nodes \replaced{between the}{obtained by} LID and \added{the} CC, DC, \added{and} LD are 9, 9, \added{and} 10 respectively, which are \replaced{larger}{bigger} than the number\added{s} of same top-10 nodes obtained by \added{the} BC (\replaced{seven}{7 same nodes}) and EC (\replaced{five}{5 same nodes}).
\replaced{For the}{The, in} Facebook network, the \replaced{largest}{biggest} number of same top-10 nodes \added{as the LID} is \added{obtained for the} CC (\replaced{seven}{7 same nodes}), which demonstrates the similarity of information considered by these two measures in this network. The results \replaced{for the}{in} BC, DC, \added{and} LD are \replaced{five, four, and four,}{a little less, and is 5, 4, 4} respectively. \replaced{However}{But}, there are \replaced{no}{not the} same top-10 nodes between \added{the} EC and \added{the} LID, which \replaced{indicates that there is}{shows} a \replaced{large}{huge} difference between these two measures.
Lastly, \replaced{for}{in} the \replaced{largest}{biggest} network \replaced{---the collaboration}{named as Collaboration} network, the number of same top-10 nodes between \added{the} CC, LD\added{,} and LID \replaced{is}{are} five, which \replaced{is larger}{are relatively bigger} than \added{those for} other methods\deleted{' results}. \added{The number of same top-10 nodes between the LID and the} BC and EC \replaced{are significantly different:}{give big different results from LID, and they are} \replaced{one and zero,}{1, 0} respectively.
Thus, these centrality measures \replaced{consider the}{would have different consideration of} information in this network \replaced{differently}{,} and give different \added{lists of} top-10 nodes \deleted{lists}. \added{The} DC has four \added{of the} same top-10 nodes \replaced{as the}{with} LID, which is better than \added{the} BC and EC. \replaced{From}{Obtained from} Table \ref{table_top_10} and \replaced{the discussion above}{above discussion}, \added{the} CC and DC are two \deleted{similar} measures \replaced{similar to the}{with} LID\deleted{,} because they can \replaced{obtain}{get} closer \replaced{rankings}{ranks} than other methods. \added{The} BC and EC have different performance in these networks\replaced{;}{,} some networks have similar \replaced{rankings,}{ranks} and some are \replaced{different}{opposite}. The reason why \added{there are} no same top-10 nodes between \added{the} EC and \added{the} LID is the influence of \added{the} network scale. \added{The} EC does not have \deleted{a} good performance in large-scale network\added{s} because of its complete\added{ly} different \added{list of} top-10 node\added{s} \replaced{from}{list with} other methods. In conclusion, \replaced{the LID}{this proposed method (LID)} \replaced{exhibits}{has a close} performance \replaced{closer to}{the} existing measures \replaced{for}{on} identifying top-10 nodes\replaced{.}{,} \replaced{A}{and} more detail\added{ed} comparison \added{with} experiments \replaced{is}{are} \replaced{discussed}{illustrated} below. Because \replaced{the}{this} proposed method is modified from \added{the} LD\deleted{,} and it focuses on \replaced{a}{the} node's influence from different distances, the \deleted{main comparison measures are chosen as} LD (the most related method) and CC (the same consideration factor) \added{are chosen for comparison} in the experiments below.
\begin{table*}[!htbp]
\scriptsize
\centering
\caption{\textbf{\deleted{The} \replaced{T}{t}op-10 nodes ranked by different centrality methods in six real-world complex networks.} \replaced{A}{The} node \replaced{in}{with} color \replaced{indicates}{shows} that \replaced{it}{this node} also exists in the top-10 list \replaced{obtained by the}{of} LID. The \replaced{similarities in the}{similarity of} top-10 nodes between different measures and \added{the} LID are \replaced{provided}{shown}.}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccccccccccccc}
\toprule
\multirow{2}{*}{Rank} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{USAir network} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{Jazz network} \\
\cmidrule(r){2-7} \cmidrule(r){8-13} \cmidrule(r){14-19}
& BC & CC & DC & EC & LD & LID & BC & CC & DC & EC & LD & LID \\
\midrule
1 &\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{118} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{118} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{118} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{118} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{118} & 118
& \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{136} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{136} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{136} & 60 & 60 & 136 \\
2 & 8 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{261} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{261} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{261} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{261} & 67
& 60 & 60 & 60 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{132} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{136} & 168\\
3 &\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{261} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{67} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{255} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{255} & 152 & 261
& \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{153} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{168} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{132} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{136} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{132} &70\\
4 &\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{47} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{255} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{182} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{182} & 230 & 201
& 5 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{70} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{168} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{168} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{83} &122\\
5 &\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{201} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{201} & 152 & 152 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{255} & 47
& 149 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{83} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{70} & 108 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{168} &178\\
6 &\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{67} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{182} & 230 & 230 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{182} & 255
& 189 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{132} & 108 & 99 & 99 &83\\
7 & 313 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{47} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{166} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{112} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{112} & 166
& 167 & 194 & 99 & 131 & 108 &18\\
8 & 13 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{248} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{67} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{67} & 147 & 248
& 96 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{122} & 158 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{70} & 158 &153\\
9 &\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{182} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{166} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{112} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{166} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{166} & 182
& 115 & 174 & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{83} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{83} & 194 &118\\
10 & 152 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{112} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{201} & 147 & 293 & 112
& \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{83} & 158 & 7 & 194 & 7 &132\\
\bottomrule
\multirow{2}{*}{Rank} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{Karate network} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{Political blogs network} \\
\cmidrule(r){2-7} \cmidrule(r){8-13} \cmidrule(r){14-19}
& BC & CC & DC & EC & LD & LID & BC & CC & DC & EC & LD & LID \\
\midrule
1 & \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{1} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{1} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{34} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{34} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{34} & 32
& \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{12} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{28} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{12} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{12} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{12} & 12 \\
2 & \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{3} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{3} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{1} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{1} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{1} & 3
& \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{304}& \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{12} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{28} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{14} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{28} & 28 \\
3 & \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{34} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{34} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{33} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{3} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{33} & 14
& \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{94} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{16} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{304}& \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{16} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{304}& 16 \\
4 & \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{33} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{32} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{3} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{33} & 24 & 9
& \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{28} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{14} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{14} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{67} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{14} & 14 \\
5 & \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{32} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{33} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{2} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{2} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{3} & 20
& 145 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{36} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{16} & 52 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{16} & 304 \\
6 & 6 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{14} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{32} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{9} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{2} & 33
& \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{6} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{67} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{94} & 18 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{94} & 94 \\
7 & \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{2} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{9} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{4} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{14} & 30 & 1
& \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{16} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{94} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{6} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{28} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{6} & 67 \\
8 & 28 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{20} & 24 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{4} & 6 & 2
& 300 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{35} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{67} & 47 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{67} & 36 \\
9 & 24 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{2} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{14} & \textcolor[rgb]{0.3,0.3,0.8}{32} & 7 & 34
& 163 & 145 & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{35} & 73 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{35} & 35 \\
10 & \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{9} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{4} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{9} & 31 & 28 & 4
& \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{35} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{304}& 145 & 9 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{36} & 6 \\
\bottomrule
\multirow{2}{*}{Rank} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{Facebook network} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{Collaboration network} \\
\cmidrule(r){2-7} \cmidrule(r){8-13} \cmidrule(r){14-19}
& BC & CC & DC & EC & LD & LID & BC & CC & DC & EC & LD & LID \\
\midrule
1 & \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{107} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{107} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{107} & 801 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{107} & 107
& 3814 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{2448} & 187 & 4809 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{1763} & 2448 \\
2 & \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{1684} & 58 & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{1684} & 692 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{1684} & 1684
& \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{2448} & 3814 & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{2448} & 2058 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{2448} & 6325 \\
3 & 3437 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{428} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{1912} & 775 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{1912} & 1912
& 5489 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{7814} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{7935} & 814 & 5024 & 4772 \\
4 & \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{1912} & 563 & 3437 & 749 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{4039} & 483
& 5380 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{7773} & 3814 & 6107 & 8313 & 6570 \\
5 & \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{4039} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{1684} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{4039} & 841 & 3437 & 348
& 187 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{3097} & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{2049} & 6219 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{7935} & 7773 \\
6 & 58 & 171 & 2543 & 699 & 2543 & 414
& 1546 & 6301 & 7413 & 6010 & 4523 & 7814 \\
7 & 1085 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{348} & 2347 & 788 & 2347 & 4039
& 1231 & 1499 & 2944 & 777 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{2049} & 7935 \\
8 & 698 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{483} & 1888 & 743 & 2266 & 428
& 8301 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{7935} & 6095 & 6516 & 7413 & 3097 \\
9 & 567 & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{414} & 1800 & 750 & 1941 & 376
& 1805 & 4173 & 5489 & 5020 & 6017 & 2049 \\
10 & \textcolor[rgb]{0,0,1}{428} & \textcolor[rgb]{1,0,0}{376} & 1663 & 802 & 1985 & 475
& 2944 & 5380 & \textcolor[rgb]{0,1,0}{7773} & 4670 & \textcolor[rgb]{0.8,0.3,0.3}{7773} & 1763 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{table_top_10}
\end{table*}
\subsection{SI model}
\replaced{Detailed}{Then, detail} experiments \replaced{were}{should be} carried out to show which measure is more effective and reasonable. In \added{the} SI method, each node has two states: infected \deleted{state} and susceptible \deleted{state}. Some \deleted{initial} nodes \replaced{were initially}{would be} selected as infected nodes. \replaced{A}{The} susceptible node \replaced{becomes}{would be} infected by these \deleted{infected nodes into the infected state}, and \added{it} can no longer return to the susceptible state. \replaced{Additionally}{In addition}, \replaced{the state of each node}{every nodes' state} can only be affected by \replaced{its}{their} neighbor\added{ing} nodes with \added{a} probability $\lambda$. In this \replaced{study}{section}, \added{the} SI model is applied to measure the infection ability of some selected initial nodes\added{,} which is positively correlated with \replaced{the degree of importance of a node}{nodes' importance degree}. The top\added{-}10 nodes obtained by different methods are used as \added{the} initial \replaced{infected}{infectious} node\added{s}, and the rest of nodes are defined as susceptible nodes. \replaced{Every}{In each} time \emph{$t$}, infected nodes have \replaced{a spread}{spreading} rate \emph{$\lambda = {(1/2)^\beta }$} \replaced{for}{to} infect\added{ing} their neighbor\added{ing} susceptible nodes, and the total number\added{s} of infected \deleted{nodes} and susceptible nodes \replaced{are equal to}{equals to} the number of nodes $\left| N \right|$ in complex networks. $\beta$ has different settings for \added{the} different scales of \added{the} networks. After \added{infection at time} \emph{$t$} \deleted{time infection}, the initial nodes with \added{a} higher \replaced{infection}{infectious} ability \deleted{would} cause \replaced{a greater}{more} number of infected nodes in the network\added{,} which can \replaced{indicate}{show} the importance of these nodes. The number of infected nodes \emph{$F(t)$} \replaced{at}{in} some specific time \emph{$t$} is chosen as an indicator to measure the \replaced{infection}{infectious} ability of \added{the} initial \replaced{infected}{infection} nodes. \replaced{A higher}{More} number of infected nodes \replaced{indicates that the infection}{is, the stronger the infectious} ability of the initial nodes \replaced{is stronger}{are,} and \replaced{that}{more importance of} the initial nodes are \added{more important}.
\added{The LD} and CC are selected as comparison methods \deleted{in this section} because of their consideration of information. The \replaced{LID}{proposed method} \replaced{is}{would be} compared with \added{the} CC and LD by \added{the} SI model \replaced{described as follows}{which satisfies the description below}. First\deleted{ly}, the initial \replaced{infected}{infection} nodes are chosen as \added{the} top\added{-}10 nodes obtained by different methods\deleted{,} and \deleted{the detail lists} are \replaced{listed}{shown} in Table \ref{table_top_10}. Then, the infection process \replaced{lasts}{would last} for \added{a time} \emph{$t$}\deleted{time}, and the number of infected nodes \emph{$F(t)$} \replaced{is}{would be} recorded. Lastly, every experiment \replaced{is carried out independently and is}{would be} repeated 50 times \deleted{independently} with \emph{$\beta = 3$}\replaced{. T}{, and t}he results \replaced{are}{would be} the average of 50 experiments\added{,} which are shown in Fig. \ref{fig_SI_CC} and Fig. \ref{fig_SI_LD}.
\replaced{From}{Observing from} Fig. \ref{fig_SI_CC}, the number of infected nodes \emph{$F(t)$} increases with \added{the} transmission time\deleted{,} and \added{eventually} reaches \added{a} stable value\deleted{finally}. Because the \added{lists of} top\added{-}10 nodes \deleted{lists} obtained by \added{the} CC \replaced{for the}{in} USAir \deleted{network} and Karate network\added{s} are the same \replaced{as that for the}{with} LID, the \replaced{other}{rest of} four networks \replaced{are}{is} used in SI model to compare \added{the} LID and CC. In \added{the} Jazz network, \added{the} LID is slightly better than \added{the} CC, which can be seen \replaced{for \emph{$t$}~=~5--20}{from time \emph{$t$} 5 to 20}. In \added{the} Political blogs network, because \added{the} CC has \replaced{nine of the}{9} same top\added{-}10 nodes \replaced{as the}{with} LID, the \deleted{only} one different node is chosen as \added{the} initial infected node\deleted{s} to simulate \added{the} SI model to show the performance \added{difference} between \added{the} LID and \added{the} CC. The performance of \added{the} LID is better than \added{that of the} CC, \replaced{as}{which can be} observed from the early \replaced{time period}{term} in \added{the} SI model. In \added{the} Facebook network, \added{the} LID is clearly superior to \added{the} CC. \emph{$F(t)$} \replaced{for the}{in} LID is \replaced{larger}{bigger} than \added{that for the} CC \replaced{over}{in} the \replaced{entire}{whole} transmission process, and \added{the} LID reaches \added{a} stable value earlier than \added{the} CC. In \replaced{the collaboration}{Collaboration} network, \added{the} LID has \added{a} slightly lower \emph{$F(t)$} in the early \replaced{time period}{term}, but it keeps up with the growth of \added{the} CC after \replaced{$t=30$}{30 times}. The \deleted{comparison} results \replaced{comparing}{between} the LD and LID \replaced{are}{is} shown in Fig. \ref{fig_SI_LD}. In \added{the} USAir network, \added{the} LID has \added{a} stronger spreading ability than \added{the} LD\deleted{,} because the \deleted{infected} number of \added{infected} nodes obtained by \added{the} LID is \replaced{larger}{bigger} than \added{that of the} LD in the \replaced{middle time period}{medium term}. \replaced{Moreover, the}{And} LID is clearly \deleted{more} superior \replaced{to the}{than} LD \replaced{over the entire}{in whole} progress\added{ion of the} \deleted{in} Jazz network. In \added{the} Karate network, \added{the} LID is obviously better than \added{the} LD for the average number of infected nodes\deleted{,} and \deleted{it is} significantly more stable. In \replaced{the collaboration}{Collaboration} network, \added{the} LD \replaced{has a}{shows} similar effectiveness \replaced{as the}{with} LID\deleted{,} because the\added{ir} curves \deleted{of them are} almost overlap\deleted{ping}. Overall\deleted{ speaking}, \added{the superiority of the LID is obvious in most of the SI experiments from the} \replaced{observations of}{Observing} \emph{$F(t)$} in the comparison between \added{the} CC, LD, and LID \replaced{for}{in} different networks\deleted{, the superiority of LID is obvious in most of SI experiments, }\added{.} \replaced{In}{and in} some cases\added{, the} LID has \deleted{a} similar performance \replaced{as that of}{with} other existing methods\added{,} which only \replaced{have}{has} a slight advantage.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\mbox{
\subfigure[Jazz network]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{Jazz_CC_3_30_30.eps}} \quad
\subfigure[Political blogs network]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{Poli_CC_3_20_40.eps}}
}
\mbox{
\subfigure[Facebook network]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{FB_CC_3_10_40.eps}} \quad
\subfigure[Collaboration network]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{CA_CC_3_5_40.eps}}
}
\caption{\textbf{\replaced{N}{The n}umber of infected nodes \replaced{for}{with} different initial nodes (\replaced{top}{Top}-10 nodes) obtained by \added{the} LID and CC in four networks.} The \replaced{infection}{infectious} ability of \added{the} top-10 nodes \replaced{for the}{in} LID and CC \replaced{is}{are} compared in this figure, and \added{a} higher \added{number of} infected nodes \emph{$F(t)$} \replaced{indicates that the initial nodes have a}{shows} higher \replaced{infection}{infectious} ability\deleted{ of initial nodes}. The results are obtained \replaced{from}{by} 50 independent experiments \replaced{with}{when} $\beta = 3$.}
\label{fig_SI_CC}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\mbox{
\subfigure[USAir network]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{USAir_LD_3_40_40.eps}} \quad
\subfigure[Jazz network]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{Jazz_LD_3_30_30.eps}}
}
\mbox{
\subfigure[Karate network]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{Karate_LD_3_40_40.eps}} \quad
\subfigure[Collaboration network]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{CA_LD_3_5_40.eps}}
}
\caption{\textbf{\replaced{N}{The n}umber of infected nodes \replaced{for}{with} different initial nodes (\replaced{top}{Top}-10 nodes) obtained by \added{the} LID and LD in four networks.} The \replaced{infection}{infectious} ability of \added{the} top-10 nodes \replaced{for the}{in} LID and LD \replaced{is}{are} compared in this figure, and \added{a} higher \added{number of} infected nodes \emph{$F(t)$} \replaced{indicates that the initial nodes have a}{shows} higher \replaced{infection}{infectious} ability\deleted{ of initial nodes}. The results are obtained \replaced{from}{by} 50 independent experiments \replaced{with}{when} $\beta = 3$.}
\label{fig_SI_LD}
\end{figure}
\subsection{\replaced{R}{The r}elationship\added{s} between different measures}
\replaced{T}{Next, t}o find the relationship between the values obtained by different measures, \replaced{a}{the} relationship graph between different methods is \replaced{presented}{shown in this subsection}. The \deleted{comparison methods are chosen as} DC and LD \added{are chosen for comparison}\deleted{in this subsection}. In the relationship graph, each point represents one node in \added{a} complex network\replaced{.}{s,} \replaced{The}{the} value\added{s} \replaced{along}{of} the horizontal \replaced{and vertical axes}{axis} represent\deleted{s} the LID value of each node\replaced{ and}{,} the \deleted{value of the vertical axis represents the comparison methods (DC or LD)}\added{DC or LD} value of each node, \added{respectively.} \replaced{The}{and the corresponding} color of \added{a} point represents the \replaced{infection}{infectious} ability of \added{the} selected node \replaced{over}{in} 10 \added{time} steps ($F(10)$) when $\lambda = 0.05$ in \added{the} SI model (obtained by 100 independent experiments). When \replaced{a}{the} node \replaced{has a}{with} large LID \replaced{and}{value has} large \replaced{DC or LD}{comparison method's value}, these two methods \deleted{would} have a positive correlation\replaced{;}{,} \replaced{a negative correlation is obtained when a node has a large LID and a small DC or LD}{a negative correlation is the opposite}. The detail\added{ed} results are shown in Fig. \ref{fig_corre_DC} and Fig\added{.} \ref{fig_corre_LD}.
\replaced{From}{Observaing from} the correlation between \added{the} DC and \added{the} LID in Fig. \ref{fig_corre_DC}, the node\added{s} with large LID\added{s} have large DC\added{s}, which means \added{that the} DC is positively correlated with \added{the} LID. \replaced{Owing}{Due} to the \replaced{properties}{property} of \added{the} DC, there \replaced{are many}{would be lots of} nodes with same degree \added{of} centrality\added{,} which can be seen \replaced{in}{from} the figure. Thus, \added{the} LID has an obvious change\added{,} but \added{the change in the} DC\deleted{'s change} is relatively small in the early \replaced{time period}{term}, which demonstrates that \replaced{the important nodes cannot be effectively identified with the small DC}{the nodes' importance with a small DC value cannot be effectively identified.} \replaced{Moreover,}{This is also because} there are \replaced{many}{lots of} nodes with \added{a} small degree \added{of centrality}, which follows the scale-free feature of complex networks. \replaced{Therefore,}{So} this phenomenon shows the superiority of \added{the} LID.
\replaced{From}{In the correlation between LID and LD in} Fig\added{.} \ref{fig_corre_LD}, the relationship between \added{the} LID and \added{the} LD \replaced{has a}{is the} negative correlation\replaced{;}{,} that is, nodes with \added{a} high $F(10)$ have \added{a} high LID but \deleted{have} \added{a} low LD. This is because of the features \cite{Pu2014Identifying} of \replaced{the LD}{local dimension} (\replaced{a node with greater importance has a smaller LD}{the more important the node, the smaller the local dimension}). The relation between \added{the} LID and \added{the} LD is \replaced{similar to}{like} a linear relation\added{,} which \replaced{indicates that}{represents} they would give similar rank lists.
In conclusion, \replaced{the}{this} proposed method is the same as classical measures\replaced{;}{,} \replaced{a larger}{the bigger} value \replaced{for a}{of} measure \replaced{indicates a}{represents the} stronger \replaced{infection}{infectious} ability. \added{The} LID can \replaced{achieve}{keep owning} stable correlative performance with other centrality measures in different real-world complex network\added{s}. In addition, \added{the} LID can \added{more effectively} identify the nodes' importance with \added{a} small degree \added{of centrality}\deleted{more effectively}.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\mbox{
\subfigure[USAir network]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{USAir_LID_DC.eps}} \quad
\subfigure[Karate network]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{Karate_LID_DC.eps}}
}
\mbox{
\subfigure[Political blogs network]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{Poli_LID_DC.eps}} \quad
\subfigure[Collaboration network]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{CA_LID_DC.eps}}
}
\caption{\textbf{\replaced{R}{The r}elationship between \added{the} LID and \added{the} DC \replaced{for a}{when} spreading rate $\lambda = 0.05$ in four networks.} Each point represents one node in the network, and the color of \added{a} point represents the number of \deleted{infected} nodes \emph{$F(t)$} \added{infected} with \added{the} selected initial node at $t = 10$, which is obtained \replaced{from}{by} 100 independent experiments. The color and \added{the change in the} value \deleted{change} of \added{the} points show the correlation between \added{the} DC, \added{the} LID, and \added{the} SI model, and the \replaced{monotonic}{monotonous} changes show the similarity between these measures in the general trend.}
\label{fig_corre_DC}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\mbox{
\subfigure[USAir network]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{USAir_LID_LD.eps}} \quad
\subfigure[Karate network]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{Karate_LID_LD.eps}}
}
\mbox{
\subfigure[Political blogs network]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{Poli_LID_LD.eps}} \quad
\subfigure[Collaboration network]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{CA_LID_LD.eps}}
}
\caption{\textbf{\replaced{R}{The r}elationship between \added{the} LID and \added{the} LD \replaced{for a}{when} spreading rate $\lambda = 0.05$ in four networks.} Each point represents one node in the network, and the color of \added{a} point represents the number of \deleted{infected} nodes \emph{$F(t)$} \added{infected} with \added{the} selected initial node at $t = 10$, which is obtained \replaced{from}{by} 100 independent experiments. The color and \added{the change in the} value \deleted{change} of \added{the} points show the correlation between \added{the} LD, \added{the} LID, and \added{the} SI model, and the \replaced{monotonic}{monotonous} changes show the similarity between these measures in the general trend.}
\label{fig_corre_LD}
\end{figure}
\subsection{\deleted{The}Kendall's tau coefficient}
Kendall's tau coefficient \cite{L2016Vital} has been applied to measure the correlation between \added{the} centrality measures and \added{the} \replaced{infection}{infectious} ability measured by \added{the} SI model \cite{L2016Vital}. Kendall's tau coefficient can measure the correlation between two different variables, and \added{a} higher Kendall'\added{s} tau coefficient \replaced{indicates that}{shows} these two variables are more similar\added{,} which can \replaced{obtain a}{get} more effective result.
The definition of Kendall's tau coefficient \replaced{is as follows}{is shown below}. \replaced{For}{There are} two random variables $A$ and $B$, \deleted{and} their \emph{$i$}th combination is \added{denoted by} $({A_i},{B_i})$. When ${A_i} > {A_j}$ and ${B_i} > {B_j}$ or ${A_i} < {A_j}$ and ${B_i} < {B_j}$ \added{simultaneously} occur\deleted{at the same time}, $({A_i},{B_i})$ and $({A_j},{B_j})$ \replaced{are}{would be} considered concordant. $({A_i},{B_i})$ and $({A_j},{B_j})$ \replaced{are}{would be} considered discordant when ${A_i} > {A_j}$ and ${B_i} < {B_j}$ or ${A_i} < {A_j}$ and ${B_i} > {B_j}$ \added{simultaneously} occur \deleted{at rge same time}. In addition, when ${A_i} = {A_j}$ and ${B_i} = {B_j}$, $({A_i},{B_i})$ and $({A_j},{B_j})$ \replaced{are}{would be} considered neither discordant nor concordant. \replaced{Therefore,}{So the} Kendall's tau coefficient $\tau $ is defined as follows\replaced{:}{,}
\begin{equation}\label{equ_kendall}
\tau = \frac{{{n_c} - {n_d}}}{{0.5n(n - 1)}}
\end{equation}
where ${{n_c}}$ \deleted{is the number of concordant combinations} and ${{n_d}}$ \replaced{are}{is} the number\added{s} of \added{concordant and} discordant combinations, \added{respectively, and} $n$ is the number of combinations in the sequence. \emph{$\tau = 1$} \replaced{indicates that}{demonstrates} the \deleted{nodes' importance ranking} list \added{ranking the nodes' importance} obtained by different methods is the same as \added{the list ranking} the \replaced{infection}{infectious} ability \deleted{ranking list} obtained by \added{the} SI model\replaced{;}{,} \emph{$\tau = 0$} \replaced{is the opposite case}{means that these lists are completely different}.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\mbox{
\subfigure[USAir]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{kendall_USAir.eps}} \quad
\subfigure[Jazz]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{kendall_jazz.eps}}
}
\mbox{
\subfigure[Karate]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{kendall_karate.eps}} \quad
\subfigure[Political blogs]{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{kendall_poli.eps}}
}
\caption{\textbf{\deleted{The}Kendall\added{'s tau} coefficient \emph{$\tau $} \added{between the infection ability} obtained by \added{the} SI model and \added{the} LID \replaced{and}{,} LD \replaced{for}{respectively in} four networks.} The \replaced{infection}{infectious} ability of each node is obtained by \added{the} SI model \replaced{from}{in} 100 independent experiments. \replaced{A}{The} higher \deleted{Kendall coefficient} \emph{$\tau $} \replaced{means that a}{represents this } method is more similar \replaced{to the}{with} SI model \replaced{given a}{with the} change \replaced{in the}{of} infection probability \emph{$\lambda$}.}
\label{fig_kendall}
\end{figure}
\deleted{In this section, the }Kendall's tau coefficient $\tau $ between \added{the} LID \added{and LD} and \replaced{the infection}{infectious} ability is compared. The \replaced{infection}{infectious} ability of each node is represented by the number of infected nodes in 10 steps ($F(10)$) \replaced{of the}{in} SI model. \replaced{Additionally}{In addition}, different cases are considered in this experiment. The spreading rate $\lambda$ in \added{the} SI model is \replaced{varied}{considered to} from 0.01 to 0.1 to examine \deleted{the coefficient} $\tau $\deleted{between centrality measure and infectious ability at different spreading rates}. The infection process is \added{independently} repeated 100 times\added{,} \deleted{independently} and \emph{$\tau$} is obtained by averaging. \replaced{A}{The} larger \deleted{the independently} $\tau $ \deleted{is,} \added{indicates that the relationship between the infection ability and the centrality measure is more relevant}
\replaced{The results for}{The} Kendall's tau coefficient $\tau $ \replaced{for}{between LID, LD and infectious ability in} four real-world complex networks are shown in Fig. \ref{fig_kendall}. \replaced{For the}{In} USAir network, \deleted{it can be observed that }\emph{$\tau$} does not have an obvious \replaced{relationship}{rule to change} with the change \replaced{in}{of} $\lambda$, and the difference between \emph{$\tau$} is relative\added{ly} small. In addition, \emph{$\tau$} \replaced{for the}{of} LID is always \replaced{larger}{bigger} than \emph{$\tau$} \replaced{for the}{of} LD, which \replaced{indicates}{represents} the superiority of \replaced{the}{this} proposed method. \replaced{For the}{In} Jazz network, \emph{$\tau$} \replaced{for the}{of} LID is \replaced{larger}{bigger} than \emph{$\tau$} of \added{the} LD when $\lambda$ increases from 0.01 to 0.08\replaced{;}{,} then, \emph{$\tau$} of \added{the} LD \replaced{rapidly increases}{would have a rapid growth} after $\lambda = 0.08$\replaced{, indicating}{which represents} that \emph{$\tau$} of \added{the} LD
\replaced{is larger}{would be bigger} than \emph{$\tau$} of \added{the} LID when $\lambda = 0.09, 0.1$. \replaced{Hence, the}{So this proposed method} performance\deleted{s} \added{of the proposed method is} better \deleted{in} most of the time. \added{The values of} \emph{$\tau$} \replaced{for the}{in} Karate \deleted{network} and Political blogs network\added{s} \replaced{exhibit a}{are a} downward trend. \replaced{For the}{In} Karate network, \emph{$\tau$} of \added{the} LID is much \replaced{larger}{bigger} than \emph{$\tau$} of \added{the} LD, \replaced{indicating that the}{which represents this} proposed method outperforms \added{the} LD. \replaced{For the}{In} Political blogs network, the \replaced{difference in the values of}{different between} $\tau$ \added{for the LID and LD} is small\added{,} but \emph{$\tau$} of \added{the} LID is always \replaced{larger}{bigger} than \emph{$\tau$} of \added{the} LD, which shows the superiority of \added{the} LID. In conclusion, \deleted{the coeffieient }$\tau $ between \added{the} LID and \added{the} \replaced{infection}{infectious} ability is \replaced{larger}{lager} than \deleted{the coefficient} $\tau $ between \added{the} LD and \replaced{the infection}{infectious} ability in most cases. This means \added{that} the result\added{s} obtained by \replaced{the}{this} proposed method \replaced{are}{is} more \replaced{relevant}{related} \replaced{to the}{with} classical \replaced{infection}{infectious} ability, and \added{the} LID can \replaced{maintain}{keep} relatively stable correlative performance than \added{the} LD in most \deleted{of} real-world complex networks. Thus, \replaced{the}{this} proposed method is more effective \replaced{for}{to} identify\added{ing} influencers from this perspective.
\subsection{\replaced{T}{The t}ime consumption}
\replaced{The}{Lastly, the} time consumption of different measures \replaced{for}{in} different networks is \replaced{presented}{recorded in this subsection}. \replaced{All}{We conduct all of these} centrality measures \replaced{were calculated using}{by} MATLAB 2016a on a \added{personal computer} (PC) \added{equipped} with an \replaced{Intel Core}{Inter (R) Core (TM)} i7-5500U \added{central processing unit} (CPU) \added{operating at} 2.40 GHz \deleted{CPU} and 8 GB \added{of random access memory} (RAM). The method with \added{a} lower running time has \added{a} lower computational complexity. The running times of these measures are \replaced{listed}{shown} in Table \ref{table_time}. \replaced{Based on}{Observing from} the result\added{s}, \added{the} DC has the lowest computational complexity\deleted{, whether} on large-\deleted{scale} or small-scale networks. In contrast, \added{the} BC \replaced{has}{runs} the \replaced{highest running}{longest} time and far exceeds \added{those of the} other methods. \replaced{The}{In the rest of the other methods} running time of \added{the} LID is \replaced{approximately}{mostly} half of \added{that of the} LD\deleted{,} and \deleted{in some cases the running time is} less than half \added{in some cases}. This is because \added{the} LID considers the information of nodes (\replaced{quasilocal}{quasi-local} information) whose distance from the central node is less than half of the maximum value of \added{the} shortest distance, but \added{the} LD considers all of the nodes in the network. The running time of \added{the} EC is small \replaced{for}{in} small-scale network\added{s,} but it \replaced{rapidly increases for}{grows fast in} large-scale network\added{s} (\added{as} seen from the comparison with \added{the} LD). \replaced{Additionally}{In addition}, the running time of \added{the} EC is 2\replaced{--}{ to }10 times \added{that of the} LID, which means \added{that the} LID has \added{a} relatively low computational complexity. The reason why the running time of \added{the} CC is smaller than \added{that of the} LID is that \added{the} CC only needs to sum the shortest distance from the central node to other nodes. In conclusion, \added{the} LID \replaced{has a}{runs at a} lower \added{running} time than most other methods\added{,} \replaced{implying that}{which means} the LID reduces the computational complexity.
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\centering
\caption{\textbf{Running time\added{s (in seconds)} of different centrality measures \replaced{for}{in} different real-world network\added{s}.\deleted{(Seconds)}}}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
\hline
Network & Time(BC) & Time(CC) & Time(DC) & Time(EC) & Time(LD) & Time(LID)\\
\hline
USAir & 31.7043 & 0.0033 & 0.0007 & 0.0171 & 0.0201 & 0.0122 \\
Jazz & 11.1378 & 0.0016 & 0.0006 & 0.0086 & 0.0199 & 0.0058 \\
Karate & 0.1748 & 0.0004 & 0.0003 & 0.0009 & 0.0017 & 0.0006 \\
Political blogs & 611.2053 & 0.0435 & 0.0056 & 0.4676 & 0.2551 & 0.1252 \\
Facebook & 18635.5697 & 0.4985 & 0.0478 & 14.3498 & 2.9104 & 1.2109 \\
Collaboration & 291827.8567 & 4.3902 & 0.2290 & 193.3321 & 23.7418 & 11.5581 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\label{table_time}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, the influencers in complex networks are identified by the \replaced{LID}{local information dimension}. The size of the box covering the central node grows from \replaced{one}{1} to \emph{$ceil({d_i}/2)$}, and the number of nodes within the box is considered \replaced{using the}{by} Shannon entropy\added{,} which can measure the information in the box. Then, the \replaced{LID}{local information dimension} of the central node can be obtained by the correlation between the box information and the size of box. Finally, the \deleted{influential} ability of nodes \added{to influence others} can be ordered \replaced{according to}{by} the value of \added{the} LID. Because of the \added{rule governing the increase in the size of the} box\deleted{size growing rule}, \replaced{the}{this} proposed method considers the \replaced{quasilocal}{quasi-local} information around the central node and reduces the computational complexity. \replaced{Compared}{Comparing} with \replaced{existing}{some exiting} measures \replaced{for}{in} real-world networks, \replaced{the}{this} proposed method is more effective and reasonable, and \replaced{experimental}{the} results \deleted{of the experiments show the} \added{demonstrate its} superiority\deleted{of this method}.
However, \replaced{it can}{this proposed method is still potential to} be improved. One inevitable problem is how to identify \deleted{two spreaders' influential} \added{the} ability \added{of two spreaders to influence others} when they have equal \replaced{LIDs}{value of local information dimension} \emph{${D_{I\_i}}$} (or other measures' results). In future research, the information in the box can be considered \replaced{to be}{into} \replaced{multiscale,}{multi-scale} which can achieve adequate consideration of information, and a better result can be obtained. Therefore, the framework of \added{the} dimension-based approach would be significantly improved \replaced{for}{to} identify\added{ing} \deleted{the} influencers in complex networks.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The authors greatly appreciate the \replaced{reviewers'}{reviews'} suggestions and \deleted{the}editor's encouragement. \replaced{This}{The} work is partially supported by \added{the} National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 61973332, 61573290, \added{and} 61503237).
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section*{Appendix: Chaos for the map $ \varphi $} \label{AFChaos}
Consider the Euclidean space $ \mathbb{R}^n $, and let $ F $ be the unit $ n $-dimensional cube described by (\ref{nDCubeSet}). Define the diameter of a set $ A $ in $ F $ by $ \mathrm{diam}(A) = \sup \{ d(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y}) : \textbf{x}, \textbf{y} \in A \} $. It is easy to see that the diameter of each $ n $-dimensional sub-cube $ F_{i_1 i_2 ... i_k} $ approaches zero as $ k $ approaches infinity (diagonal property), and moreover, for arbitrary $ i $ there exists $ j \neq i $ such that $ d \big( F_i \, , \, F_j \big) \geq \frac{\sqrt{n}}{4} $ (separation properties).
In \cite{AkhmetUnpredictable,AkhmetPoincare} the definitions of unpredictable point and Poincar\`{e} chaos were introduced. This time, we will consider the generator map $ \varphi $ to satisfy the definitions and make conclusion that there exists an unpredictable point in $ F $ and the cube is a closure of the trajectory of the point. Moreover, we directly prove that the dynamics is sensitive. Thus, the following assertion is valid.
\begin{theorem} \label{Thm1}
The generator $ \varphi $ possesses Poincar\`{e} chaos and the cube is a quasi-minimal set for the dynamics.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
To prove that $ \varphi $ is topologically transitive, we utilize the diagonal property to show the existence of an element $ l= F_{i_1 i_2 ... i_k ...} $ of $ F $ such that for any subset $ F_{i_1 i_2 ... i_q} $ there exists a sufficiently large integer $ p $ so that $ \varphi^p(l) \in F_{i_1 i_2 ... i_q} $. This is true since we can construct the sequence $ i_1 i_2 ... i_k ... $ such that it contains all sequences of the type $ i_1 i_2 ... i_q $ as blocks.
For sensitivity, fix a point $ \mathcal{F}_{i_1 i_2 ... } \in \mathcal{F} $ and an arbitrary positive number $ \varepsilon $. Due to the diagonal property, and for a sufficiently large $ k $, the distance between $ \mathcal{F}_{i_1 i_2 ... i_k i_{k+1} ...} $ and $ \mathcal{F}_{i_1 i_2 ... i_k j_{k+1} j_{k+2} ...} $ is less than $ \varepsilon $ provided that $ i_{k+1} \neq j_{k+1} $. Since the separation property is valid, there exist an integer $ p $, larger than $ k $, such that $ \mathcal{F}_{i_{p+1} i_{p+2} ...} $ and $ \mathcal{F}_{j_{p+1} j_{p+2} ...} $ are at a distance $ \varepsilon_0 $ apart. This proves the sensitivity.
The proof of unpredictability is based on the verification of Lemma 3.1 in \cite{AkhmetPoincare} adopted to the chaos generating map. In a similar way for determining the element $ l $, the Lemma consists of constructing a sequence $ i_1^* i_2^* ... i_k^* ... $ to define an unpredictable point $ l^*= F_{i_1^* i_2^* ... i_k^* ...} \in F $ which satisfies Definition 2.1 in \cite{AkhmetUnpredictable}. Moreover, it can be shown that the trajectory $ \varphi(l^*) $ is dense in $ F $. This is why the cube is a quasi-minimal set and the dynamics is Poincar\`{e} chaotic.
\end{proof}
Now, let us show that the periodic points are dense in $ F $. A point $ F_{i_1 i_2 i_3 ...} \in F $ is periodic with period $ p $ if its index consists of endless repetitions of a block of $ p $ terms. Fix a member $ F_{i_1 i_2 ... i_k ... } $ of $ F $ and a positive number $ \varepsilon $. Find a natural number $ p $ such that $ \mathrm{diam}(F_{i_1 i_2 ... i_p}) < \varepsilon $ and choose a $ p $-periodic element $ F_{i_1 i_2 ... i_p i_1 i_2 ... i_p ...} $ of $ F_{i_1 i_2 ... i_p} $. It is clear that the periodic point is an $ \varepsilon $-approximation for the considered member. Thus, the map $ \varphi $ possesses the three ingredients of Devaney chaos, namely density of periodic points, transitivity and sensitivity \cite{Devaney}.
In addition to the Poincar\`{e} and Devaney chaos, it can be shown that the Li-Yorke chaos also takes place in the dynamics of the map $ \varphi $. The proof is similar to that of Theorem 6.35 in \cite{Chen} for the shift map defined on the space of symbolic sequences.
\end{document}
|
\section{Background}
\label{}
\vspace{-12pt}
Probabilistic models with DNNs are usually found in the literature under the name of \textit{deep generative models} or \textit{Bayesian deep learning}
\citep{salakhutdinov2015learning}. The former focuses on density estimation using DNNs, while the latter focuses on treating the parameters of
a DNN as random variables to capture the model uncertainty. See \cite{masegosa2019probabilistic} for a recent review of all these models.
Along these lines, new software tools have appeared to deal with probabilistic models containing DNNs
\cite{cabanas2019inferpy,tran2018simple,bingham2019pyro}. These tools usually fall under
the umbrella term \textit{probabilistic programming languages} (PPLs)
\citep{ghahramani2015probabilistic}, and provide support for methods for reasoning about complex
probabilistic models. Some examples are TFP \citep{tran2018simple}, Pyro \citep{bingham2019pyro}, etc.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{}
\vspace{-10pt}
InferPy can now represent probabilistic models containing DNNs using a simple and compact API. As most of the inference details are hidden, this package can be used for users without a strong probabilistic background
\section{Illustrative Example}
\vspace{-12pt}
For illustrating the usage of InferPy, we will consider a variational autoencoder (VAE) \cite{doersch2016tutorial}, as it is one of the most widely used probabilistic models containing deep NNs.
In a VAE, every object has a unknown latent representation (a code), modeled with a multivariate Gaussian (a distribution over possible codes). This latent representation gives rise to a multivariate Gaussian distribution over the observed representation (the decoded observation of this object) by passing the latent representation through a NN called the \textit{decoder}. This part of the model is defined in Fig.~\ref{fig:code_pmodel} (lines 1 to 8) and the creation of an instance (line 9), which is an object of class \texttt{inf.models.probmodel}. A probabilistic model in InferPy is defined as a function with the decorator \texttt{@inf.probmodel}. Following the statistical inference terminology, we refer to this part of the model as the $p$ model.
Random variables are objects of class \texttt{inf.models.RandomVariable}. Variables
composing a probabilistic model are those instantiated during the execution of its decorated function. The \texttt{with inf.datamodel()} syntaxis is used to indicate the InferPy variables contained within this construct are replicated for every data sample. Every replicated variable is conditionally independent given the previous random variables (if any) defined outside this \texttt{with} statement\footnote{In contrast to other libraries, the number of replications will be automatically calculated just before the inference.}. This construct enormously simplify the code of the model.
\begin{figure}[h!bt]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.97]{vae_code.pdf}
\vspace{-10pt}
\caption{p-model and decoder}
\label{fig:code_pmodel}
\vspace{0pt}
\end{figure}
The \textit{encoder} part of a VAE defines the inference part of the model: given the observed representation of an object we need to find the posterior probability over possible latent representations (codes) of this object, in the form a multivarate Gaussian. In a VAE, this inference part is defined using an \textit{amortized variational inference} \cite{zhang2018advances, masegosa2019probabilistic} scheme, which relies on an \textit{encoder network}. Following the variational inference terminology, we call this part of the model as the $q$ model. As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:code_qmodel}, this part is similarly defined with the same decorator. The correspondence between the variables in the \textit{decoder} part and the \textit{encoder} part of the model is done by the argument \texttt{name}, i.e., they should be the same. For the NNs definition, standard Keras code can be used. However, in case of Bayesian NNs (e.g., \texttt{tfp.layers.DenseFlipout} defines a \textit{Bayesian layer}), the \texttt{Sequential} model provided by InferPy must be used. This provides a Bayesian treatment of the \textit{decoder network}.
\begin{figure}[h!bt]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.97]{qvae_code.pdf}
\vspace{-10pt}
\caption{q-model and encoder}
\label{fig:code_qmodel}
\vspace{0pt}
\end{figure}
A minimal example using (stochastic) variational inference \cite{zhang2018advances, masegosa2019probabilistic} as a learning engine is given in Fig.~\ref{fig:code_post}. Even though the learning algorithm can be further configured, in this case, an object of class \texttt{inf.inference.SVI} is created with the q-model, the \texttt{epochs} (number of iterations) and \texttt{batch\_size} as input arguments. The optimization starts when the method \texttt{fit()} is invoked.
Finally, we might sample from the posterior of \texttt{z} (latent representation) or from the posterior predictive (generating new samples).
\begin{figure}[h!bt]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.97]{post_code.pdf}
\vspace{-10pt}
\caption{Inference from the posterior distributions}
\label{fig:code_post}
\vspace{0pt}
\end{figure}
The analogous TFP code for this model is far more complex. This can be found in the online documentation (see Tab. \ref{tab:exe} and \ref{tab:src}), together with other examples and a complete user manual.
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
\vspace{-12pt}
Advances in variational methods \cite{zhang2018advances}
have made possible the development of a new formalism, namely \textit{deep probabilistic modeling} \cite{masegosa2019probabilistic}, which combines probabilistic models within deep neural networks (DNNs) to capture complex non-linear relationships among random variables. The release of multiple libraries for deep probabilistic modeling \cite{tran2018simple,bingham2019pyro} are greatly expanding the adoption of these powerful probabilistic modeling techniques.
However, these libraries
are usually difficult to use, especially when defining distributions containing NNs, which requires dealing with multidimensional matrices (i.e. tensors).
This paper presents a new version of InferPy as a high-level Python API for probabilistic modeling with DNNs with a strong focus on ease of use. (A major released of the code has been performed: from 0.2.x to 1.2.x.)
The main differences with the previous version \cite{cabanas2019inferpy} are the following ones.
Models can now contain DNNs to model non-linear relationships among random variables. The API has been significantly changed to make it compatible with the use of DNNs. Inferpy relies now on Tensorflow Probability (TFP) \cite{tran2018simple} (Inferpy's previous version relied on Edward \cite{tran2016edward}, which is deprecated).
\section*{Acknowledgements}
\label{}
\vspace{-16pt}
Authors have been jointly supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities and by the FEDER under the projects TIN2015-74368-JIN, and TIN2016-77902-C3-3-P.
\vspace{-20pt}
\bibliographystyle{elsarticle-num}
\section{Software Framework }
\vspace{-13pt}
The main features of InferPy are:
(i) Its simple API allows easy prototyping of probabilistic models including DNNs;
(ii) Unlike TFP, it is not required to have a strong background in the inference methods available (Variational Inference
\cite{zhang2018advances, masegosa2019probabilistic}
and Monte Carlo methods \cite{brooks2011handbook}) as many details are hidden to the user;
(iii) InferPy runs seamlessly on CPUs and GPUs.
InferPy can be seen as an upper layer for working with TFP. Thus, models that can be defined in InferPy are those that can be defined using TFP.
InferPy is distributed as open-software (Apache-2.0) using Pypi and its source code is available at GitHub (see Tab. \ref{tab:exe} and \ref{tab:src}).
|
\section{List of Acronyms and Abbreviations}\label{app:acronym}
\acronym{1FGL}{First \Fermic\xspace-LAT Source Catalog}
\acronym{2FGL}{Second \Fermic\xspace-LAT Source Catalog}
\acronym{3FGL}{Third \Fermic\xspace-LAT Source Catalog}
\acronym{AGN}{Active Galactic Nucleus}
\acronym{ALP}{Axion-Like Particle}
\acronym{APS}{Angular Power Spectrum}
\acronym{CMB}{Cosmic Microwave Background}
\acronym{DES}{Dark Energy Survey}
\acronym{DM}{Dark Matter}
\acronym{dSph}{Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxy}
\acronym{EBL}{Extragalactic Background Light}
\acronym{EGB}{Extragalactic Gamma-ray Background}
\acronym{EFT}{Effective Field Theory}
\acronym{FSRQ}{Flat-Spectrum Radio Quasar}
\acronym{GRB}{Gamma-Ray Burst}
\acronym{IACT}{Imaging Atmospheric Cerenkov Telescope}
\acronym{ICM}{Intra-Cluster Medium}
\acronym{IGRB}{Isotropic Gamma-Ray Background}
\acronym{IRF}{Instrument Response Function}
\acronym{LAT}{Large Area Telescope}
\acronym{LHC}{Large Hadron Collider}
\acronym{LMC}{Large Magellanic Cloud}
\acronym{l.o.s.}{line-of-sight}
\acronym{LSS}{Large-Scale Structure}
\acronym{MAGN}{Misaligned AGN}
\acronym{PBH}{Primordial Black Hole}
\acronym{pNGB}{pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone Boson}
\acronym{ROI}{Region of Interest}
\acronym{SDSS}{Sloan Digital Sky Survey}
\acronym{SFG}{Star-Forming Galaxy}
\acronym{SMC}{Small Magellanic Cloud}
\acronym{WIMP}{Weakly Interacting Massive Particle}
\section{Astrophysical Backgrounds for Dark Matter Searches}
\label{sec:backgrounds}
All DM searches using the LAT must contend with backgrounds from
a variety of astrophysical sources as well as instrumental backgrounds.
(Details about the LAT instrument and data are provided in App.~\ref{sec:lat}.)
The effect of the different backgrounds depends on the location and
size of the DM search target as well as on the methodology of the
particular search technique. In this section we summarize
five major astrophysical backgrounds for DM searches. Simulated all-sky maps
for 15~years of data for each background type are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:backgrounds}.
(See App.~\ref{app:method_monte_carlo} for simulation details.)
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_3a} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_3b}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_3c} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_3d}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_3e}
\end{center}
\caption{Counts maps of all \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace with reconstructed energy above
1\unit{GeV} for 15~years of simulated data for
the \evtclass{P8R2\_SOURCE} event class. The maps are shown in a Hammer-Aitoff projection in Galactic coordinates with
$1\unit{^{\circ}} \times 1\unit{^{\circ}}$ pixels. The individual maps show cataloged sources
(\S\ref{sec:point_sources}, top), the diffuse Galactic emissions (\S\ref{sec:bkg_galactic_diffuse}, middle left),
unresolved Galactic sources (\S\ref{sec:bkg_galactic_sources}, middle right) isotropic background emission
(\S\ref{sec:bkg_isotropic} and \S\ref{sec:bkg_instrumental}, bottom left), and unresolved
extragalactic sources (\S\ref{sec:bkg_isotropic}, bottom right).
The maps have the same gray scale to facilitate comparisons.}
\label{fig:backgrounds}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Cataloged Sources}
\label{sec:point_sources}
The third \FermiLATc\xspace source catalog (3FGL, \cite{2015ApJS..218...23A})
was constructed based on the analysis of the first four years of LAT data, and contains more than
3000 individual
sources. Of those, more than 2000 are associated with multi-wavelength
counterparts of known \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emitting source classes. Although
follow-up studies on the earlier 1FGL~\cite{2010ApJS..188..405A} and
2FGL~\cite{2012ApJS..199...31N} catalogs found plausible
associations for \ensuremath{ {\sim}\,} 80\% of the sources in those catalogs~\cite{2015ApJS..217....2M}, the
1010 unassociated sources in the 3FGL catalog could conceivably
include signals from DM subhalos (see \S\ref{sec:dm_unid}).
For analyses of DM targets that have spatial extents of less than a few degrees,
we typically include all of the cataloged sources in the ROI
in the baseline model (i.e., DM-free null hypothesis) and allow the spectral
parameters (including overall flux normalizations) of the nearest sources to vary when fitting for the DM targets.
This avoids incorrectly setting limits that exclude DM signals that were
mis-attributed as already-known sources. If a DM target were placed at the position
of a cataloged source, the two would be at least partially degenerate in the likelihood fitting
and any limits on the DM cross section would consequently worsen since some or all of the flux from the target location was potentially attributable to DM. Allowing the spectral parameters of sources to
vary also helps to account for any variability in the source,
particularly if an analysis uses a different integration time from the
catalog analysis.
For searches for DM signals from large regions
of the sky, e.g., in a spectral line search (\S\ref{sec:dm_lines},
\newText{see also, e.g., Refs.~\cite{Weniger:2012tx,2013PhRvD..88h2002A,2015PhRvD..91l2002A}}), or
for \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace from WIMPs at cosmological distances (\S\ref{sec:dm_cosmo},
\newText{see also, e.g., Refs.~\cite{2012PhRvD..85h3007A,Xia:2015wka}})
we typically choose to mask regions around the brightest cataloged
sources. This is done to reduce the background
and increase the signal-to-noise of the analysis, and to simplify the
analysis by avoiding the need to re-optimize the spectral parameters of
thousands of sources.
Therefore, when estimating the sensitivity for a DM search, depending
on the analysis considered, we either include the cataloged sources
in the background model or account for the reduced search area
(and reduced signal) from masking parts of the sky.
The 4FGL catalog now under development will be based on seven years of
LAT data and is projected to include more than 4000 \mbox{$\gamma$ ray}\xspace sources. For
sources at a given flux level, the deepening exposure of the LAT
observations also results in more precise localization of sources,
consequently increasing the power to classify sources based on
associations with counterparts at other wavelengths. This helps to increase
the numbers of classified sources for population studies.
The remaining unassociated sources also become `cleaner' targets in
searches for undiscovered dark satellites of the Milky Way (\S\ref{sec:dm_unid}).
The collected emission from sources that are too faint to be
detected individually will contribute to both the Galactic (\S\ref{sec:bkg_galactic_sources}) and
isotropic background (\S\ref{sec:bkg_isotropic}). After
detailed accounting for the detection efficiencies, the intrinsic flux
distributions $dN/dS$ of sources of a given class are essential for
population studies that dissect these backgrounds.
\subsection{Diffuse Emission from the Milky Way}
\label{sec:bkg_galactic_diffuse}
Diffuse emission, i.e., emission not associated with discrete
sources, accounts for the majority of the \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace detected by
the LAT. Diffuse \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emission can be categorized as
Galactic, associated with the Milky Way, or extragalactic, which has a nearly isotropic distribution over the
sky. An unresolved source component may constitute less than 10\% of the
Galactic diffuse emission~\cite{2015ApJS..218...23A}, Therefore, the majority is due to interactions of
high-energy cosmic rays with interstellar gas and radiation fields in
the Milky Way. The production processes are inelastic collisions of
cosmic-ray nuclei with nuclei in the interstellar medium, which produce \mbox{$\gamma$-rays}\xspace
mainly through production and decay of neutral mesons like $\pi^{0}$,
bremsstrahlung of cosmic-ray electrons and positrons off gas nuclei,
and inverse-Compton scattering of cosmic-ray electrons and positrons
off interstellar photons from radio to optical/UV. Predicting the
intensities of interstellar \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emission requires knowing
the densities of cosmic rays, interstellar gas, and radiation fields
everywhere in the Milky Way. In practice, we use realistic, but
simplified, models of these quantities. Details of the modeling
procedure are provided in App.~\ref{app:galactic_diffuse_model}.
Detailed studies comparing models of the diffuse Galactic
emission~\cite{2012ApJ...750....3A} to LAT data have found that the models are fairly accurate,
with typical residuals of 10\% or better over much of the sky.
This is compatible with, and in some cases somewhat better than, estimates of the uncertainties of the
modeling procedures (that are closer to 20 to 30\% for the local
emissions alone, see Ref.~\cite{2011A&A...531A..37D}). However, as mentioned
above, large-scale residuals associated with specific structures and source populations
do exist, and in some parts of the sky and for some energy ranges the observed Galactic diffuse emission
can exceed the modeling predictions by 100\% or more.
Similarly, the intensity
of the Galactic diffuse emission, and hence its contribution to the background
in particular analyses, varies significantly across the sky (see Fig.~\ref{fig:backgrounds}, middle left).
Therefore, treatment of the uncertainties arising from the model of the Galactic diffuse emission
depends on the search target. In searches targeting discrete sources at
high Galactic latitudes (such as known Milky Way satellites, see \S\ref{sec:dm_satellites}),
the Galactic diffuse emission was found to be faint enough that the systematic uncertainties of the model can be neglected~\cite[e.g.,][]{2015PhRvL.115w1301A}. For searches targeting larger regions
of the sky away from the Galactic plane it is often sufficient to use a small set
of representative Galactic diffuse emission models to quantify the uncertainties arising from the
the Galactic fore- and backgrounds~\cite{2015ApJ...799...86A}. Finally, searches targeting the Galactic center and
inner Galactic halo must contend with very large backgrounds with large uncertainties, and
typically either mask the Galactic plane (e.g., Ref.~\cite{2012ApJ...761...91A}), perform detailed studies
of the uncertainties (e.g., Ref.~\cite{2015JCAP...03..038C}), undertake detailed fitting of the
Galactic diffuse emission and point sources (e.g., Ref.~\cite{2015arXiv151102938T}) or do some of all of these.
In the context of developing a new model of the Galactic diffuse
emission to support Pass 8 analyses of seven-year and longer data
sets, we are investigating ways to increase the accuracy and reduce
the systematic uncertainty of the model. These include incorporating
higher-resolution surveys of the interstellar gas in the Galactic
plane that became available recently~(e.g., \cite{GASS_HI,2016A&A...585A..41W}),
improving the derivation
of gas distributions along lines of sight toward the inner Galaxy
using recently published analyses of the distribution of interstellar
dust in the Galactic plane based on reddening of stars, refining
the evaluation of the dark neutral medium using {\it Planck} microwave
data, and of course iterating the fitting with deep searches for point
sources in the Pass 8 data. Each of these is expected to increase the
accuracy of the modeling in the challenging directions near the Galactic plane.
\subsection{Unresolved Galactic Source Populations}
\label{sec:bkg_galactic_sources}
Although unresolved Galactic sources make a relatively small
contribution to the total \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace luminosity of the Milky Way, their distribution is unlikely to follow the dust
and gas that dominate the diffuse Galactic \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace distributions. The
template fitting procedure used to generate the model of diffuse Galactic
emission does have some freedom to absorb contributions from unresolved sources, but
exactly how much is difficult to predict as it depends on the correlation between
the morphology of the distribution of unresolved sources and the templates used to model the diffuse Galactic
\mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emission. Furthermore, as can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:detection_map},
the flux threshold for the detection of a point source depends strongly on the diffuse Galactic
background. The LAT sensitivity is also slightly better near the
celestial poles, as those regions have the largest exposure.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\columnwidth]{./Figure_4}
\end{center}
\caption{Map of the source detection threshold flux above 1\unit{GeV} (in $\unit{cm}^{-2}\unit{s}^{-1}$) for a point
source with a power-law spectrum and a spectral index $\Gamma = 2.2$. The map is in
Hammer-Aitoff projection in Galactic coordinates and is derived for the first four years of LAT observations.
\label{fig:detection_map}}
\end{figure}
The population of unresolved Galactic sources was studied in detail in
\S~6 of the 3FGL catalog paper~\cite{2015ApJS..218...23A}.
A mock catalog (with ten times the number of expected Galactic \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace sources)
was produced for that work. We have simulated populations of both detected and undetected
Galactic sources by applying thresholding using the map shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:detection_map}.
Fig.~\ref{fig:galactic_source_flux} shows the simulated
source counts as a function of integral photon flux above 1\unit{GeV} for both detected and undetected
Galactic sources, illustrating that the total simulated distribution of
sources is well modeled by the sum of the simulated undetected sources
and the 3FGL catalog of detected sources. (We applied the thresholding in energy flux,
rather than photon flux, to reduce the dependence on the spectral index of the source.)
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{./Figure_5}
\end{center}
\caption{Integral photon flux above 1\unit{GeV} for Galactic sources. The
black line shows the total simulated distribution, the blue points
show the simulated sources below the detection threshold for the
3FGL catalog and the red points show the distribution of 3FGL
sources. Finally, the magenta points show the sum of the simulated
distribution below the detection threshold and the 3FGL catalog
sources.
\label{fig:galactic_source_flux}}
\end{figure}
The unresolved Galactic sources are not an important background for
most LAT searches. Search targets typically are at
high Galactic latitudes (such as the dwarf galaxies,
\S\ref{sec:dm_satellites}), and often low Galactic latitude regions are masked.
The exception is searches targeting the Galactic center, where
unresolved Galactic sources are potentially
a very challenging background (see \S\ref{sec:dm_milky_way}).
Pulsars pose a particular challenge, as their \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace spectra are
similar to the expected DM signal for some parts of the parameter
space we are searching, e.g., $\sim 50\unit{GeV}$ ($20\unit{GeV}$) DM annihilating to
$b$-quarks ($\tau$-leptons)~\cite{2010ApJ...722.1939M,2013MNRAS.436.2461M,2013PhRvD..88h3009H,2015arXiv150402477O,2015JCAP...02..023P,2015JCAP...06..043C}.
\subsection{Isotropic Background and Extragalactic Source Populations}
\label{sec:bkg_isotropic}
The isotropic gamma-ray background (IGRB) comprises all extragalactic
emissions too faint or too diffuse to be resolved in a given survey,
as well as any residual Galactic foregrounds that are approximately
isotropic (see, e.g.,~\cite{Fornasa:2015qua} for a recent
review). In contrast, the extragalactic \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace background (EGB)
includes the IGRB as well as the emission from resolved extragalactic point sources.
Population studies of the source classes contributing to the
EGB have shown that known \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emitting source classes can
account for most of it~\cite{Ajello:2015mfa}. This can be seen in
Fig.~\ref{fig:igrb_contributions} (see also \S\ref{sec:dm_cosmo}).
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{./Figure_6}
\end{center}
\caption{EGB (i.e. IGRB plus resolved extragalactic
sources) as measured by the LAT in \cite{2015ApJ...799...86A} (red
points with error bars). The yellow band indicates the sum of
contributions for unresolved sources of different types (blazars,
star-forming galaxies and radio galaxies). The lower inset shows
the ratio of this summed contribution to the EGB measurement,
as well as the uncertainty due to the foreground emission models.
This figure appeared as Fig.~3 of Ref.~\cite{Ajello:2015mfa}; additional details
are available there; reproduced by permission of the AAS.
\label{fig:igrb_contributions}}
\end{figure}
The distinction between a truly isotropic background and one composed primarily of
unresolved sources is potentially very important for projecting search
sensitivities. This is because the nature of the statistical
fluctuations is quite different in the two cases. In the former case
the background is characterized by Poisson fluctuations in the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace
counts, while in the latter it is characterized by Poisson fluctuations in the
number of sub-threshold sources overlapping the search target. Since
the sub-threshold sources are generally not modeled, the distribution in the null-hypothesis case
will have more high test-statistic ($TS$, defined as twice the
different in log-likelihood between the null hypothesis and the
best-fit model) values than would be expected for truly isotropic
backgrounds. An example of this can be seen in studies of the $TS$
distribution of random fields in flight data as compared to {\em
all-sky photon simulations} shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:null_compare}.
Interestingly, although the fraction of high-$TS$ trials does increase
because of the unresolved source background, the median expected upper limits
are not affected. This is because the large majority of randomly
selected positions do not overlap with any \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace from unresolved sources.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{./Figure_7}
\end{center}
\caption{Distribution of $TS$ values obtained when testing for the existence of
a point-like source with a spectrum characteristic of DM annihilation. The dotted line shows the expected asymptotic
distribution for the null hypothesis (a $\chi^2$-distribution with 1 degree
of freedom). The gray band shows the distribution obtained
from simulations without unresolved sources, while the red and blue
bands show the distributions obtained from random locations in the
sky, when the background model used in the analysis included the
2FGL (red) and 3FGL (blue) catalog sources. This figure appeared as
Fig.~5 of Ref.~\cite{2015PhRvL.115w1301A},
additional details are available there, reproduced by permission of
the APS and the authors.
\label{fig:null_compare}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Residual Charged-Particle Backgrounds}
\label{sec:bkg_instrumental}
A final component of the background is the residual charged particles that contaminate
the LAT \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace sample.
In this context we define \emph{particle backgrounds} as all events that are
classified as \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace in a given LAT event class but originate from
cosmic rays or the interactions of cosmic rays in the Earth's atmosphere. Therefore, the
particle backgrounds include both charged and neutral particles---including
secondary \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace.
Models of the particle background fluxes incident on the LAT are described in detail in
Ref.~\cite{2004ApJ...614.1113M}. Discussion of the calibration of the particle background
contamination in the high-purity event classes, i.e., the event selections used for single source, source
population and diffuse emission analyses (\evtclass{SOURCE} class and cleaner) can be found
in Ref.~\cite{2012ApJS..203....4A}. Details of the residual charged particle contamination for
Pass 8 event classes can be found in Ref.~\cite{2013arXiv1303.3514A}.
For the studies described in this paper it is sufficient to note that the
residual charged particle backgrounds are treated as part of the isotropic \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace template, and that
the isotropic templates used for data analysis were derived from fits to the flight data.
Estimates of the residual charged particle contamination for the various
Pass~8 event classes are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:bkg_levels_pass_8}. The
contamination of the \evtclass{P8R2\_ULTRACLEAN} event classes is at or
below the IGRB level for all energy $> 100\unit{MeV}$.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{./Figure_8}
\end{center}
\caption{Comparison of the residual charged-particle background contamination
for the \evtclass{P8R2\_SOURCE} and
\evtclass{P8R2\_ULTRACLEAN} event classes with the average
brightness of the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace sky at intermediate and high
latitudes and the estimated IGRB.
\label{fig:bkg_levels_pass_8}}
\end{figure}
The simplest approach for dealing with residual charged particle backgrounds is to choose
an event class with low enough levels of residual charged particles that they
may safely be neglected. This is possible for most of the analyses described in
this paper, the exceptions being those targeting large fractions (or all)
of the sky, as even for the cleanest event class, the integrated contributions
from residual charged particle backgrounds can become important. Specifically, searches for
spectral lines (\S\ref{sec:dm_lines}) and large-scale, cosmological DM
signatures (\S\ref{sec:dm_cosmo}) must consider this background component.
\section{Discussion}\label{sec:discussion}
Here we review the projected limits for the different search targets
(\S\ref{sec:disc_summary_limits}), and consider the results
in the context of other indirect-detection DM searches (\S\ref{sec:disc_other_efforts})
as well as direct-detection and collider-production searches
(\S\ref{sec:disc_indirect}). This discussion will be focused on
WIMP searches, as the results for Axions and ALPs are summarized
in Fig.~\ref{fig:alps} and \S\ref{sec:dm_axion_targets}.
\subsection{Summary of Projected Limits}
\label{sec:disc_summary_limits}
With the categories of limiting factors presented in
\S\ref{sec:dm_limiting_factors} in mind, we can broadly categorize the
search targets as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item{Searches targeting objects with substantial astrophysical backgrounds,
such as the Galactic center, large Galaxy clusters, and the LMC are
systematics limited up to high energies (e.g., $\ensuremath{m_\chi}\xspace \lesssim 10\unit{TeV}$
for the Galactic center, $\ensuremath{m_\chi}\xspace \lesssim 1\unit{TeV}$ for the LMC).}
\item{Searches for spectral lines from the Galactic halo benefit from
additional discriminating power in the spectral domain, but are still
systematics limited at low energies (e.g., $\ensuremath{m_\chi}\xspace \lesssim 100\unit{GeV}$ for
the R16 ROI optimized for the Einasto profile).}
\item{Searches targeting relatively small objects at high Galactic latitudes,
in particular the dSphs, are background limited at lower energies, and signal
limited at higher energies. For the combined analysis of
dSphs the cross-over point comes at $\ensuremath{m_\chi}\xspace \sim 500\unit{GeV}$ $(100\unit{GeV})$ for the
\ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace (\ensuremath{\tau^+\tau^-}\xspace) channel.}
\item{Although the precision of the measurement of the IGRB is systematics
limited, statistical analyses of the IGRB, such as fluctuation analysis or
cross-correlation analysis, are, for the most part still signal limited in
much of the LAT energy range. This is because above a few GeV the combined
brightness of the isotropic and Galactic diffuse backgrounds is low enough that on average
less than a single background \mbox{$\gamma$ ray}\xspace is expected within the LAT
angular resolution.}
\item{Some searches are limited by our understanding of a source population. This
could be a population of background sources, such as the various AGN classes
in analyses of the EGB. Or it could be the signal population, such as in
the search for the dark satellites among the unassociated cataloged sources.
Although the source sensitivity generally scales as $\sqrt{t}$, because of
the typically steeply falling distribution of fluxes,
$dN/dS \propto S^{3/2}$, the sensitivity of these searches scales as
$\sim t^{3/4}$.}
\end{enumerate}
In short, the most notable benefits from additional data taking
come from the improved sensitivity to signals from dSphs for higher
DM masses $(\ensuremath{m_\chi}\xspace \gtrsim 100\unit{GeV})$, from the improved sensitivity
of statistical methods of disentangling contributions to the IGRB by
virtue of the continued improvement in the point-source sensitivity,
and from increased sensitivity to a population of dark satellites
whose number rises quickly at decreasing flux thresholds.
Furthermore, searches targeting the dSphs have \newText{smaller} modeling
uncertainties and \newText{more} robust determinations of the astrophysical
$J$~factors than searches targeting other objects. Additionally these searches
have among the best sensitivities across much of the LAT energy band. Overall these
considerations suggest that, looking forward, searches targeting
the dSphs will continue to have the best sensitivity.
This can clearly be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:limit_sample_proj}.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_27a}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_27b}
\end{center}
\caption{Comparison of projected LAT limits for 10~years (left) and 15~years (right)
of data for the search methods described in \S\ref{sec:dm_targets}.
Favored contours for several Galactic center analyses are also
included for comparison.\label{fig:limit_sample_proj}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Relation to Other Indirect-Detection Efforts }
\label{sec:disc_other_efforts}
Several other kinds of experiments can undertake indirect-detection searches for DM:
(a) instruments
that are sensitive to GeV-to-TeV cosmic rays, (b) imaging atmospheric
Cerenkov telescopes (IACTs), (c) water Cerenkov telescopes, (d) cosmic-ray
air shower arrays, (e) neutrino telescopes, and (f) instruments
sensitive to fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background (CMB).
Of these, cosmic-ray detectors, IACTs, and the {\it Planck} measurements of the CMB are all
capable of probing WIMP annihilation at or near the thermal relic
cross section in some mass ranges. In this section we compare the sensitivity of
DM searches using LAT data with results from these
other instruments.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:gce_iact_limits} we show the most sensitive
limits projected for searches using LAT data and compare them
with other indirect-detection limits derived from IACTs and {\it Planck}.
The sensitivity of future IACTs, and in particular the Cerenkov
Telescope Array (CTA), are somewhat uncertain, owing to
uncertainties of the instrument performance and the effects of
astrophysical backgrounds. We show projections that include the
effects of conservatively estimated systematic
uncertainties~\cite{2015JCAP...03..055S}, as well as projections made with
smaller systematic uncertainty and updated instrument performance
estimates~\cite{2015arXiv150904123L}.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_28a}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_28b}
\end{center}
\caption{Comparison of projected dSph stacking limits with current and
future IACT limits from CTA for the \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace (left) and \ensuremath{\tau^+\tau^-}\xspace (right) channels. The dashed black curve
shows the expected limit from the analysis of the artificially expanded target described in
\S\ref{sec:dm_satellites_projections} for the 15-year data set. IACT limits are in red and
taken from~\cite{2015arXiv150904123L,2015JCAP...03..055S}. The limits derived from the
{\it Planck} data \cite{2015arXiv150201589P} are in gray. Finally, favored contours
for several Galactic-center analyses are included for comparison.\label{fig:gce_iact_limits}}
\end{figure}
In principle, fluxes of cosmic-ray anti-particles (in particular
positrons, anti-protons, and also possibly anti-deuterons or
anti-helium) could be a signature
of DM interactions. Although anti-particles can be produced in
astrophysical accelerators, the fluxes and spectra expected from such
accelerators are quite different from the expectations for DM interactions.
However, comparing results from cosmic-ray measurements from instruments such as PAMELA and AMS-02
with results from \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace data is complicated as the constraints on
the DM annihilation are dominated by systematic modeling
uncertainties. As an example, the measurement of the
ratio of anti-protons to protons, $\Phi(\bar{p})/\Phi(p)$, could in
principle be used to probe cross sections below the thermal relic
level. In practice, however, the constraints based on cosmic-ray
data have large modeling uncertainties and
are quite model dependent (see Figs.~\ref{fig:cosmic_ray_errors}
and~\ref{fig:cosmic_ray_limits}).
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.50\columnwidth]{./Figure_29}
\end{center}
\caption{Combined total uncertainty on the predicted
secondary $\bar{p}/p$ ratio, superimposed on the PAMELA~\cite{2010PhRvL.105l1101A}
and AMS-02~\cite{AMS_Talks,2015PhRvL.114q1103A} data. This figure
appeared as Fig.~2 of Ref.~\cite{2015JCAP...09..023G}; additional details about the
uncertainty bands may be found in that work; reproduced under the
Creative Commons attribution license.
\label{fig:cosmic_ray_errors}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.50\columnwidth]{./Figure_30}
\end{center}
\caption{Comparison of three sets of WIMP annihilation cross-section limits derived from the
AMS-02 data for $\Phi(\bar{p})/\Phi(p)$, but with different assumptions regarding the comic-ray
behavior.\cite{2015JCAP...09..023G,2015JCAP...03..021H,2015PhRvD..92e5027J}
Favored contours for several Galactic center analyses are included for comparison.
\label{fig:cosmic_ray_limits}}
\end{figure}
Similarly, the ratio of positron to electron fluxes has been
measured by the LAT~\cite{2012PhRvL.108a1103A},
AMS-02~\cite{Aguilar:2013qda,Accardo:2014lma}
and PAMELA~\cite{2013PhRvL.111h1102A} and
is potentially sensitive to DM interactions. The observed positron
to electron flux ratio rises steadily from \ensuremath{ {\sim}\,} 5\% at 1\unit{GeV} to
\ensuremath{ {\sim}\,} 15\% above 100\unit{GeV}, suggesting the injection of high-energy positrons into the
interstellar medium. Similarly to the situation with anti-protons,
the interpretation of the rising positron fraction and implied constraints on
DM annihilation are dominated by systematic modeling
uncertainties, see, e.g., Refs~\cite{2009PhRvD..79b1302S,2013ApJ...772...18L,2013PhRvD..88b3013C,{2014PhRvD..89f3539I}} for
discussion of the interpretation of the positron excess.
In summary, the LAT data, and in particular the analysis of the dSphs
provide the best current constraints on the indirect detection of WIMP
annihilation over a wide range of masses and channels, \ensuremath{ {\sim}\,} 15\unit{GeV} to 1.6\unit{TeV}
(\ensuremath{ {\sim}\,} 10 to 400 \unit{GeV}) for the \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace (\ensuremath{\tau^+\tau^-}\xspace) channel.
Furthermore, the constraints will continue to improve with additional
data taking.
No instruments currently under development will improve markedly on the
LAT sensitivity to \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace in the 1\unit{GeV} to 50\unit{GeV} energy band that
effectively sets the sensitivity to WIMP annihilation in the \ensuremath{ {\sim}\,}
10\unit{GeV} to 500\unit{GeV} mass range. For 15~years of LAT data taking
and estimates of the CTA sensitivity that include systematic uncertainties,
we project that the LAT would set the deepest constraints on \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace
up between 300 and 700\unit{GeV} (between 80 and 120\unit{GeV}) in the \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace (\ensuremath{\tau^+\tau^-}\xspace) channel
for the foreseeable future.
\subsection{Role of Indirect-Detection Searches for Dark Matter }
\label{sec:disc_indirect}
Indirect-detection, direct-detection, and production (i.e., collider) searches for DM have different advantages.
The complementarity between the methods
has been reviewed in a number of recent works~\cite[e.g.,][]{2013arXiv1310.8621A,2013arXiv1311.0299G,2015PDU.....7...16B}.
As discussed in \S\ref{sec:dm_theory}, indirect-detection searches
measure the rate of DM annihilation (or decay) into Standard Model particles.
When combined with estimates of the DM density, these observations can be used
to estimate or constrain the DM annihilation cross-section averaged over the velocity distribution,
\ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace, (or decay lifetime,
$\tau_{\chi}$).
Direct-detection searches measure the rate of scattering of DM particles with
Standard Model target particles, typically by measuring the recoil of nuclei
(although some experiments are also sensitive to electron
recoil, e.g., ~\cite{2015arXiv150707747T,2015arXiv150707748T}).
With knowledge of the scattering target, and estimates of the DM density
and velocity distribution, these measurements can be used to estimate or
constrain the scattering cross-section of DM particles with Standard Model
particles, $\sigma_{{\rm SM},\chi}$. Direct-detection searches are
typically $10^3$ to $10^4$ times more sensitive to spin-independent
couplings (where the DM particle coherently interacts with the
entire nucleus) than to spin-dependent couplings
(where the DM particle effectively scatters off a single unpaired nucleon).
Collider searches look for the missing energy and momentum
carried away by stable DM particles that were produced in the collisions,
but escape the detector volume without interacting.
Because stable DM particles are not seen in the detectors, most searches at colliders
do not directly measure the cross-section to produce the DM particles by
colliding Standard Model particles, $\sigma_{\rm SM SM \to \chi\chi}$, but rather the cross-section
to produce heavier exotic particles that then cascade down to stable DM final state
particles before reaching the detector, $\sigma_{\rm SM \to exotic}$.
Additionally, the flux of ultra high-energy neutrinos from the
Sun is sensitive to the DM-proton scattering cross-section (also $\sigma_{{\rm SM},\chi}$, which determines
the rate at which DM is captured by the Sun). For values of
DM annihilation cross-sections near $\ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace = 3 \times 10^{-26}
\unit{cm}^3\unit{s}^{-1}$ the DM capture rate would be in equilibrium
with the DM annihilation rate. The density of DM in the sun
would be dependent on \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace, but the observable neutrino flux
would not. The limits on the spin-dependent scattering cross-sections
inferred from limits on ultra high-energy neutrino fluxes from the sun
are competitive with the best direct-detection measurements~\cite{2015PhRvL.114n1301C,2015APh....62...12A,2016JCAP...04..022A}.
There is broad consensus that the three approaches probe
different and complementary regions of the DM parameter
space~\cite{2013arXiv1310.8621A,2013arXiv1311.0299G,2015PDU.....7...16B}.
Because they measure very different
observables, direct comparisons between them depend on
a number of assumptions about the nature of DM particles
and their interactions. These kinds of comparisons are most
often presented in the $m_\chi$, $\sigma_{{\rm SM},\chi}$ space, which is most
appropriate for discussing direct-detection results.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:dm_complemetarity} we present a comparison
in $m_\chi$, \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace space using a representative set of assumptions
to convert the direct-detection and collider observables into
constraints on \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_31a}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_31b}
\end{center}
\caption{Comparison of best current (left) and projected (right)
indirect-detection, direct-detection (spin-dependent) and collider-production limits
on \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace in the \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace channel. Conversion of direct-detection and collider limits to the \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace
scale is based on the assumption of four particle contact interactions for the production/annihilation of DM. As noted in the text, this
assumption is {\em quite uncertain} (potentially by orders of
magnitude) and the comparisons shown here should be considered
schematic. The current IACT limits are taken from Ref.~\cite{2015arXiv150904123L}.
Following Ref.~\cite{2013arXiv1310.8621A}, the
direct-detection limits are taken from Ref.~\cite{COUPP}, and the projection was
made using the expected LZ sensitivity. The collider-production limits are
taken from Refs.~\cite{2013JHEP...04..075A,2012JHEP...09..094C},
and the projection was made for $300\unit{fb}^{-1}$ of data at 13\unit{TeV} \cite{2010PhRvD..82k6010G}.
\label{fig:dm_complemetarity}}
\end{figure}
Conversions from $\sigma_{{\rm SM},\chi}$ and $\sigma_{\rm SM \to exotic}$ to \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace (i.e., direct-detection and collider
results to indirect detection results respectively) require assumptions
about the particle interactions. In Fig.~\ref{fig:dm_complemetarity} we show results
derived using an Effective Field Theory (EFT) framework developed for the
Community Summer Study (Snowmass) 2013 by the Cosmic Frontier Working Groups~\cite{2015PDU.....7...16B}.
The EFT framework is a simple and fairly model independent assumption; however, it
implies that the dark matter interacts with the Standard Model via a four-particle contact interaction.
The interaction particle mass must be much larger than the transfer of momentum of the physical process of interest.
Additional details on the representative operators and the model parameter space can also be found
in~\cite{2010PhRvD..82k6010G, 2011PhLB..695..185G}.
In the context of searches for particle DM, we summarize key points regarding indirect detection.
\begin{itemize}
\item{Indirect-detection searches look for DM where it has already been determined to exist, i.e.,
in large-scale astrophysical objects. A discovery of a new particle at the LHC would require follow-on
studies of astrophysical data to confirm that it does in fact account
for the observed properties of DM. Furthermore, if the mass and cross-section of the DM
particle were to be measured at the LHC, indirect searches
could be used to directly measure
the distribution of the DM particle in astrophysical objects. The results
from indirect-detection experiments, given a potential candidate from direct-detection
experiments, would measure
the distribution in the cosmos.}
\item{The canonical thermal relic cross-section of $\ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace \sim
3\times10^{-26}$ cm$^3$ s$^{-1}$ applies to an entire class of DM particle
candidates.
Testing for signals at that cross section tests the entire class of
models that predict such candidates.}
\item{Indirect-detection searches
generally have better sensitivity for high DM particle masses,
(see, e.g., Fig.~\ref{fig:dm_complemetarity}).
Compared to collider searches, which must use the beam energy to produce
exotic particles that then decay to DM particles, indirect-detection searches
target final state particles with masses $\sim 0.1 m_{\chi}$ from the interactions of
already existing DM particles. Similarly, direct-detection searches lose sensitivity
when the mass of the DM particle is larger than the mass of the target nuclei.}
\item{Indirect-detection searches have the additional benefit that, in the
event of a detection, they measure the mass of the DM
candidate. If the DM mass is large, an indirect-detection
measurement could determine the energy reach needed for the next collider, or
influence the choice of the best nuclear target for direct detection.}
\item{LHC limits on new physics do not translate directly to limits on \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace
(Fig.~\ref{fig:dm_complemetarity}). Inferred cross-section limits
vary by orders of magnitude depending on assumptions about
the coupling and the mediator of the DM annihilations.
For example, unless a specific model is imposed (e.g., Supersymmetry), the
collider limits are based on an effective field theory. This requires the total
energy of the event to be much lighter than the mediator for the field theory
to be valid ~\cite{2010JHEP...09..037B}.}
\item{Relative to direct-detection and collider searches, indirect-detection searches
generally have better sensitivity for DM particles coupling to leptons.
Direct-detection searches are typically more sensitive to nuclear
recoil than electron recoil (though see, e.g.,
\cite{2015arXiv150707747T,2015arXiv150707748T}),
and the highest-energy lepton collider (LEP2) had a maximum center of mass energy of $\sim$200 GeV. }
\item{Direct and indirect searches probe complementary DM interactions
with the Standard Model. In some models, the scattering cross
section is velocity suppressed while the annihilation cross
section is not, making indirect searches more
sensitive for those models~\cite{2011PhLB..695..185G}.}
\end{itemize}
\section{Search Strategies, Status, and Projections for Dark Matter
Detection with the LAT}
\label{sec:dm_targets}
In this section we describe astrophysical objects that are the primary
targets for searching for signals from DM annihilation. We first present
an overview of the various WIMP search targets and results; then for
each target we summarize the status of current searches, and project
how the sensitivity will improve with continued LAT data taking.
Finally we discuss searches for axion or ALP DM and how the sensitivity of
those searches will improve with additional LAT data.
\subsection{Dark Matter WIMP Search Targets}
\label{sec:dm_summary}
Tab.~\ref{tab:dm_targets} summarizes the targets for WIMP searches.
The differences between the targets are
pronounced enough to warrant significant modifications in the search
techniques, as discussed earlier in this section. For example,
searches targeting known dark-matter dominated Milky Way satellites
(\S\ref{sec:dm_satellites_status}) are very similar to blind searches
for point-like emission performed when creating catalogs of \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace
point sources such as the 3FGL; on the other hand, extracting a
isotropic signal from DM halos of galaxies at cosmological distances (\S\ref{sec:dm_cosmo})
requires very detailed modeling of both the Galactic foreground
emission and the contributions of unresolved sources.
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline \hline
Target & Distance (\unit{kpc}) & $J$~factor~($\unit{GeV}^2\unit{cm}^{-5}$) & Angular Extent $(^\circ)$ \\ \hline
Galactic center / halo (\S\ref{sec:dm_milky_way}) & 8.5 & $3\times10^{22}$ to $5\times10^{23}$ & $>10$ \\
Known Milky Way satellites (\S\ref{sec:dm_satellites}) & $25$ to $300$ & $3\times10^{17}$ to $3\times10^{19}$ & $<0.5$ \\
Dark satellites (\S\ref{sec:dm_unid}) & \newText{up to $300$} & up to $3\times10^{19}$ & $<0.5$ \\
Galaxy Clusters (\S\ref{sec:dm_clusters}) & $ > 5\times10^{4}$ & up
to $1 \times 10^{18}$ & up to $\sim 3$ \\
Cosmological DM (\S\ref{sec:dm_cosmo}) & $> 10^{6}$ & - & Isotropic \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Summary table of DM search targets discussed in this paper.\label{tab:dm_targets}}
\end{table}
\subsection{Current WIMP Search Sensitivity }
\label{sec:dm_current_summary}
We show a subset of published results for various DM targets
for the \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace channel in Fig.~\ref{fig:limit_summary}. For each target,
we selected recent results that used moderate assumptions, i.e., neither
the most conservative nor the most optimistic cases.
Because of differences in the datasets, DM profiles, and background
modeling, these results should be taken as representative and absolute
comparisons should be interpreted with caution. Details about the
scenarios considered (e.g., the DM distribution) for each of the
targets are provided in Tab.~\ref{tab:target_summary}.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.80\columnwidth]{./Figure_9}
\end{center}
\caption{Comparison of representative published limits (curves) and best-fit
regions (ellipses) for the \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace channel found using LAT data for several DM
targets. References and details about the scenario selected as the
representative limit or best-fit values for each DM target are
provided in Tab.~\ref{tab:target_summary}.
\label{fig:limit_summary}}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline \hline
Target & Ref. & Scenario & Other Refs. \\ \hline
Galactic halo~\S\ref{sec:dm_milky_way} & \cite{2012ApJ...761...91A} &
NFW profile ``constrained free source fits'' 3~$\sigma$ ULs & - \\
Galactic center (limits)~\S\ref{sec:dm_milky_way} & \cite{2013JCAP...10..029G} & NFW profile, 3~$\sigma$ ULs & - \\
Galactic center (best-fits)~\S\ref{sec:dm_milky_way} &
\cite{2014arXiv1402.6703D,2015PhRvD..91f3003C,2014PhRvD..90b3526A,2013PhRvD..88h3521G,2016PhRvD..93h3514A,2016JCAP...04..030H}
& gNFW profile with $\gamma \sim 1.2$ & \cite{2011PhLB..697..412H,2015PhRvD..91l3010Z} \\
dSphs~\S\ref{sec:dm_satellites} & \cite{2015PhRvL.115w1301A} & NFW profile & \cite{2015ApJ...809L...4D, 2015PhRvD..91h3535G, 2012ApJ...747..121A, 2012APh....37...26M, 2011PhRvL.107x1303G, 2011PhRvL.107x1302A, 2010ApJ...712..147A,2016PhRvD..93d3518L,2013JCAP...03..018S} \\
Unid. Satellites~\S\ref{sec:dm_unid} & \cite{2015JCAP...12..035B} &
95\% CL ULs & \cite{2010ApJ...718..899A,2011PhRvD..83b3518P,2012PhRvD..86d3504B,2012ApJ...747..121A,2014PhRvD..89a6014B} \\
Galaxy clusters~\S\ref{sec:dm_clusters} & \cite{Ackermann:2015aa} &
Virgo, ``DM-I'' conservative boost model &
\cite{2010JCAP...05..025A,Huang2011,2012ApJ...757..123A,2012JCAP...07..017A,2012JCAP...01..042H,2014MNRAS.441.2309P,Ackermann:2015ab,2016arXiv160206527L} \\
Isotropic~\S\ref{sec:dm_cosmo} & \cite{Ajello:2015mfa} & 2~$\sigma$ ULs &
\cite{Ando:2015qda,2015PhRvD..91l3001D,2015JCAP...09..008T} \\
Cross-correlation~\S\ref{sec:dm_cosmo} & \cite{2015ApJS..221...29C} &
``annLOW, ALLGeV'', 95\% CL ULs &
\cite{Xia:2011ax,
Cuoco:2007sh, Ando:2009nk, Ando:2014aoa, Fornengo:2014cya,
Camera:2014rja, Xia:2015wka, Regis:2015zka,
Ando:2013xwa, Shirasaki:2014noa, Camera:2012cj} \\
Ang. Power Spectrum~\S\ref{sec:dm_cosmo} & \cite{Gomez-Vargas:2014yla}
& ``Galactic + Extragal HIGH DM'' &
\cite{DiMauro:2014wha, Campbell:2014mpa,
Calore:2014hna, Fornengo:2013rga, Campbell:2013rua, Inoue:2013vza,
Chang:2013ada, Gomez-Vargas:2014yla, Ando:2013ff, Ripken:2012db,
Harding:2012gk, Cuoco:2012yf, Ando:2005xg,
Ando:2006cr,Fornasa:2012gu} \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The works referenced here for the various DM targets are the
representative results shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:limit_summary}.
The scenarios given in quotation marks appear as they were named in the original
reference to distinguish them from other scenarios presented in the same papers.
For details about the exact parametrization of the various DM signals as well
as the modeling of astrophysical backgrounds the reader is referred to the
original references.
\label{tab:target_summary}}
\end{table}
\subsection{Limiting Factors in Search Sensitivity }
\label{sec:dm_limiting_factors}
To understand the benefits of additional data taking for DM searches
we consider three cases. Because
of the rapidly falling power-law backgrounds, individual
search targets might fall under different cases at low and high energies.
\begin{enumerate}
\item{{\em Searches that are or will be systematics limited:} for these we
cannot expect to improve the sensitivity dramatically. We do
expect that the sensitivity will improve as our knowledge of the
\mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace sky and the astrophysical backgrounds improve, but these
improvements are likely to be incremental.}
\item{{\em Searches that are background limited:} here we can expect
the sensitivity to improve as $\sqrt{t}$. As the
mission continues, the relative gain in sensitivity from these
searches is moderate. Doubling the current data set would result in a
good, but not overwhelming, $\sim 40\%$ improvement in sensitivity
for these searches.}
\item{{\em Searches that are signal limited:} here we can expect the
the sensitivity to improve proportionately with time. These are
the searches that constitute the strongest case for continued data
taking.}
\end{enumerate}
For many of the targets that we will discuss, the searches are for a small
signal against a large background. For those cases the largest
and most problematic systematic uncertainties come for mis-modeling the
background in a way that would induce a fake signal or mask a real
signal. Typically such uncertainties will scale roughly linearly
with the background. We have developed and applied a technique
for DM searches with significant systematic uncertainties,
namely calculating the ``effective background'' \ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace (i.e., the
background weighted by how strongly it overlaps with the signal) for
the search~\cite{2013PhRvD..88h2002A,2015PhRvD..91j2001B,2014JCAP...10..023A}.
We estimate systematic uncertainties by positing that they can be
expressed as a fraction of $b_{\rm eff}$, i.e., $f = n_{\rm sig} / b_{\rm eff}$
and measuring the observed signal in control regions, where no DM signal should be
present. This effective background methodology is discussed in
more detail in App.~\ref{app:method_effective_background} and in
Refs~\cite{1995ApJ...447L..25B,1996ApJ...462..563N,1998ApJ...502...48K,2010MNRAS.402...21N}.
The statistical uncertainties on the number of counts assigned to a
signal arising from fluctuation in the background are expected to be
roughly $\delta \ensuremath{n_{\mathrm{sig}}}\xspace = \ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace^{1/2}$. To include the
effect of systematic uncertainties we estimate the total uncertainty
of the signal as a fraction of the effective background added in
quadrature with the statistical uncertainty: $\delta \ensuremath{n_{\mathrm{sig}}}\xspace= \ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{syst}}}\xspace
\ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace \oplus \ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace^{1/2}$. The value of \ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{syst}}}\xspace depends on the
analysis (and ranges from 0.015~\cite{2014JCAP...10..023A} to
0.05~\cite{2015PhRvD..91j2001B})
and for each analysis we estimate it with the judicious use of control
samples in the flight data.
Given the observed range of \ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{syst}}}\xspace, we can roughly state that
we expect searches to be systematics limited when $\ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace \gtrsim 2000
\unit{ph}$, background limited when $2000 \unit{ph} \gtrsim \ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace
\gtrsim 50 \unit{ph}$ and signal limited when $\ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace \lesssim 50 \unit{ph}$.
The ranges are shown in comparison with values of \ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace as a
function of \ensuremath{m_\chi}\xspace for the \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace channel in Fig.~\ref{fig:beff_targets}
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.50\columnwidth]{./Figure_10}
\end{center}
\caption{Effective background for six years of \evtclass{P8R2\_SOURCE}
data, as a function of \ensuremath{m_\chi}\xspace for the \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace channel, for four DM search targets with different
angular scales and astrophysical backgrounds: the Galactic center
(\S\ref{sec:dm_milky_way}) the Large and Small Magellanic clouds
(\S\ref{sec:dm_satellites}) and the Segue~I dwarf galaxy.
Also shown are the approximate cross-over levels between
different search sensitivity limiting factors.
\label{fig:beff_targets}}
\end{figure}
\newText{The main difference when considering DM decay, as opposed to annihilation,
is that \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emission is less concentrated spatially since it scales as the
DM density $\rho$ instead of $\rho^2$. This will change the relative
powers of different search targets, reducing the impact of very high densities
in the cores of DM halos. In terms of the scaling behavior
with additional data, targets that are larger than
the LAT angular resolution (such as the Galactic Halo or local clusters of galaxies)
will have larger \ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace. Conversely, targets smaller
than the LAT angular resolution, such as the dSphs or unidentified satellites
will have the same \ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace, and hence the same scaling behavior.}
\subsection{The Milky Way Galactic Halo}
\label{sec:dm_milky_way}
The halo of our own Milky Way is
by far the brightest potential source of LAT-detectable \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace
from DM particle interactions. However, as we discussed in
\S\ref{sec:backgrounds}, DM searches targeting the Milky Way
halo must contend with large backgrounds from
standard astrophysical processes in the Milky Way.
Although N-body simulations lead to the expectation that DM halos of galaxies
exhibit some degree of triaxiality and sub-structure
(see~\cite{2010MNRAS.402...21N} and references therein), the
Milky Way's DM distribution is generally assumed to be approximately
spherically symmetric, with the density a
function of only the distance from the Galactic center, $r$. As
discussed above, in this paper we consider
a generalized NFW profile for the radial density profile of the DM (Eq.~\ref{eq:gNFW}).
When considering the Milky Way, we adopt a
scale radius of $r_{\rm rms} = 20\unit{kpc}$, and select $\rho_{0}$ such that
the local DM density (at $8.5\unit{kpc}$ from the Galactic center)
is $0.4\unit{GeV}\unit{cm}^{-3}$, consistent with dynamical
constraints~\cite[e.g.,][]{2013JCAP...07..016N,2012PASJ...64...75S,2010A&A...509A..25W}.
Note, however, that the actual DM density profile in the
inner galaxy~\cite[e.g.,][]{2015NatPh..11..245I,2015arXiv150307501D,2015JCAP...12..001P},
and the local density~\cite[e.g.,][]{2012MNRAS.425.1445G,2011BAAA...54..289M,2012ApJ...751...30M,2012ApJ...756...89B,2015RMxAC..46..105M}
are the subjects of vigorous debate.
DM-only simulations generally favor inner slopes
near the canonical NFW value ($\gamma =
1$)~\cite{2009MNRAS.398L..21S,2008MNRAS.391.1685S},
although baryonic effects are expected to have a non-negligible
impact on the DM distribution within the inner $\sim 10\unit{kpc}$
of the Milky Way~\cite{2006ApJ...644..687C,2006PhRvD..74l3522G,2010MNRAS.406..922T,2011arXiv1108.5736G}.
The magnitude of such effects, however, is currently uncertain.
With this in mind, we consider different DM radial profiles when estimating
the sensitivity of searches for DM signals from the Galactic halo.
The radial profiles of both the density and the integrated $J$~factors
for several density profiles were shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:gc_radial} in \S\ref{sec:dm_signal}.
\subsubsection{Galactic Halo: Status of Current Searches}
\label{sec:dm_milky_way_current}
Several groups have reported an excess of \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace in the
1--10\unit{GeV} energy range from the region of the Galactic center
with respect to expectations based on cataloged point sources
and detailed models predicting the Galactic diffuse \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace
emission (see, e.g.,~\cite{2011PhLB..697..412H,2014PhRvD..90b3526A,2014arXiv1402.6703D}).
Although the existence and spatial extension of the excess have
been found to be robust against uncertainties of modeling the
Galactic diffuse \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emission, the measured spectrum
of the excess has been shown to depend strongly on the Galactic diffuse
emission model~\cite{2015PhRvD..91f3003C,2015arXiv151102938T,2015arXiv151102938T,2015PhRvD..91l3010Z,2016JCAP...04..030H}. Fig.~\ref{fig:lat_gc_spectra} shows
four different fitted spectra that are extracted with for different
representative Galactic diffuse emission models.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.50\columnwidth]{./Figure_11}
\end{center}
\caption{Spectrum of the Galactic center excess in the inner
$15\unit{^{\circ}}\times15\unit{^{\circ}}$ region obtained with four different models
of the Galactic diffuse emission compared with spectra obtained
from other published analyses based on still-different models of the Galactic diffuse emission. This figure is from Ref.~\cite{2015arXiv151102938T} (reproduced by permission of the AAS); see that reference for
additional details about the Galactic emission diffuse models and
fitting.
\label{fig:lat_gc_spectra}}
\end{figure}
The bright, structured and relatively uncertain astrophysical
fore/backgrounds toward the Galactic center complicate the
interpretation of the excess. Some authors have
argued that the excess is consistent with DM, and that other interpretations
are disfavored~\cite[e.g.,][]{2013PhRvD..88h3009H,2015JCAP...06..043C,2014PhRvD..90b3526A}.
Others have pointed out that the spectrum of the excess is very similar
to spectra observed from pulsars and argued that the excess is more
likely attributable to a large population of either young
pulsars~\cite{2015arXiv150402477O} or older millisecond
pulsars~\cite{2012PhRvD..86h3511A,2013MNRAS.436.2461M,2014JHEAp...3....1Y,2015JCAP...02..023P,Bartels:2015aea,Lee:2015fea}
near the Galactic center. In particular, several analyses of the
spatial fluctuations of the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emission within the Galactic center excess found that they are more consistent
with arising from a population of unresolved sources (such as
pulsars) than from a smooth distribution (as might be
expected for DM)~\cite{2015JCAP...02..023P,Bartels:2015aea,Lee:2015fea}.
To summarize, in the LAT energy band, the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace spectrum
expected from a population of pulsars is very similar to the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace
spectrum expected from 50\unit{GeV} DM annihilating to \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace,
and additional data, either relating to the spatial distribution
of the signal, observations in other energy bands, or \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace observations
of other targets are required to clarify the interpretation of the
excess.
The morphology of the excess has also been studied
in detail and found to be consistent with spherical symmetry,
in particular an NFW profile with an inner slope of $\gamma = 1.2$~\cite{2014arXiv1402.6703D,2015PhRvD..91f3003C,2014PhRvD..90b3526A}.
Refs.~\cite{2016MNRAS.455.4442S,2015JCAP...12..053C} compared this to N-body simulations
of Milky Way-like structures and found it to be broadly consistent
with expectations, though somewhat more peaked than the simulations in
the innermost \ensuremath{ {\sim}\,} 2\unit{^{\circ}}, see Fig.~\ref{fig:lat_gc_radial}.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{./Figure_12}
\end{center}
\caption{Measurements of the radial profile of the Galactic center
excess (markers and bands) compared with predictions of
hydrodynamical and N-body simulations
of Milky Way-like structures (red lines). This figure is from
Ref.~\cite{2016MNRAS.455.4442S} (reproduced by permission of the AAS); see that reference for additional details.
\label{fig:lat_gc_radial}}
\end{figure}
Finally, the best-fit cross-section and mass range for a DM interpretation of the Galactic center
excess is in mild tension with the current limits from a joint
analysis of several Milky Way satellite dwarf galaxies (see
\S\ref{sec:dm_satellites}).
\subsubsection{Galactic Halo: Sensitivity Projections}
\label{sec:dm_milky_way_projections}
Although the DM signal from the Galactic center would be much larger
than for any other target, the astrophysical backgrounds are also
very large and imperfectly known toward the Galactic center.
Furthermore, it is important to distinguish between measuring an
excess with respect to models of \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emission from predicted
cosmic-ray populations interacting with estimated dust, gas and radiation
field, and being able to interpret that excess as a clear signal of DM.
Accordingly, we can expect systematic uncertainties in modeling the Galactic fore/background to significantly limit the sensitivity of searches for DM signals
from the Galactic center. Furthermore, as described above, a
population of unresolved pulsars in the inner Galaxy would be a
difficult-to-reduce background for the best-fit DM models.
Therefore, in projecting the search sensitivity we account for such
systematic limitations. The \ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace (in counts)
for several radial profiles are shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:gc_bkg_eff}.\footnote{Fig.~\ref{fig:gc_bkg_eff} was made
using the ``binned model map simulations'' for the
diffuse Galactic and isotropic background components,
together with the ``all-sky photon simulations'' of the
cataloged point sources as described in App.~\ref{app:method_monte_carlo}.}
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_13a}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_13b}
\end{center}
\caption{Estimated \ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace for several DM radial profiles,
for a $60\unit{^{\circ}} \times 60\unit{^{\circ}}$ area centered on the
Galactic center for 15~years of \evtclass{P8R2\_SOURCE} data.
The plot shows the total integrated \ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace for annihilations to \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace as a
function of the WIMP mass, \ensuremath{m_\chi}\xspace.
The left-hand plot includes all Galactic latitudes $|b| < 30\unit{^{\circ}}$, the right-hand plot excludes
the Galactic plane ($|b| < 2\unit{^{\circ}}$).
\label{fig:gc_bkg_eff}}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig:gc_limits_nfw} shows the expected upper-limit bands
for the statistical errors-only case as well as for indicative values
of \ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{syst}}}\xspace (0.01 and 0.1).
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_14a}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_14b}
\end{center}
\caption{Projected limits for 15~years of \evtclass{P8R2\_SOURCE}
data, for annihilations to \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace as a function of
the WIMP mass, \ensuremath{m_\chi}\xspace, when various levels of systematic
uncertainty are included. The extrema of the
color bands give the projected limits for the NFW and gNFW
with $\gamma = 1.2$ radial profiles for a given level of systematic
uncertainty. The left plot includes all Galactic latitudes $|b| <
30\unit{^{\circ}}$, the right plot excludes the Galactic plane ($|b| < 2\unit{^{\circ}}$).
The ellipses and cross indicate the best-fit region obtained
if the Galactic center excess is interpreted as a DM signal.
\label{fig:gc_limits_nfw}}
\end{figure}
Fits for DM-like excesses in a scan of positions along the Galactic plane but away from
the Galactic center (i.e., where one does not expect signals from DM)
find several other locations along the plane with putative signals
similar in size to the Galactic center excess (see, e.g., Fig. 11 of
~\cite{2015JCAP...03..038C}). From a scan along the Galactic plane in
$10\unit{^{\circ}}$ steps with 6 years of \evtclass{P8R2\_CLEAN} data we estimate
that the systematic uncertainties are of the order of $\ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{syst}}}\xspace =
0.02$, though they depend somewhat on energy and can reach $\ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{syst}}}\xspace
\sim 0.06$. The fore/backgrounds are much brighter
within a few degrees of the Galactic plane, and some authors
(e.g.,~\cite{2014arXiv1402.6703D,2015JCAP...03..038C,2015PhRvD..91f3003C})
have chosen to mask the plane and confine the analysis to $|b| > 2\unit{^{\circ}}$, reducing
both the signal and the systematic uncertainties of the
fore/background modeling.
It is difficult to estimate how our understanding and modeling of the
fore/backgrounds will evolve, or our ability to rule out other
contributors such as pulsars. However, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:gc_limits_nfw}, even
if the modeling uncertainties can be reduced to \newText{$\ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{syst}}}\xspace = 0.01$}
the interpretation of the nature of the Galactic center excess will be
limited by systematic uncertainties of the background modeling.
Thus, we believe that definitively confirming or ruling out a DM
interpretation of the Galactic center excess will require inputs from
searches of other DM targets \newText{or from other multi-wavelength data.
In particular, if the Galactic center excess is due to unresolved emission from
pulsars, then additional LAT data should resolve some of those
sources robustly and provide targets for dedicated radio pulsation searches.
If fact, arguments against pulsar interpretations
have relied on the non-observation
of many pulsars in the Galactic center region in the LAT data~\cite{2015JCAP...06..043C,2013PhRvD..88h3009H,2014arXiv1407.5583C}.}
\subsection{Known Satellites of the Milky Way}
\label{sec:dm_satellites}
Many DM subhalos have been
discovered from optical surveys and follow-up spectroscopy as dark-matter-dominated dwarf
spheroidal galaxies (dSphs) residing within the DM halo of our own Galaxy.
The known dSphs have dynamical masses ranging from $\sim 10^{5}$ to $10^{8}\Msolar$
and stellar half-light radii between 0.02 and 0.7\unit{kpc}~\cite{2012AJ....144....4M}.
The known dSphs are identified as collections of old, metal-poor
stars, kinematic analyses of which reveals a binding DM halo up
to a thousand times more massive than the stars themselves. Multi-wavelength
observations show that the objects contain little besides stars and
DM~\cite{Mateo:1998wg,Grcevich:2009gt,Spekkens:2014}.
Without the requisite gas or cosmic-ray content, dSphs have no conventional
mechanism for producing \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace. This means that any DM signal
originating from dSphs must contend only with the diffuse \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace
background. As dSphs are primarily found far from the Galactic plane, the
background intensity is often low and spectrally featureless.
Fitting the NFW density profile to the stellar velocity dispersions observed
in the nearest dSphs yields $J$~factors on the order of $10^{19}
\unit{GeV}^{2}\unit{cm}^{-5}$. These values are \newText{fairly} robust; they are insensitive
to both the shape of the inner density profile and the level of
substructure within the dSph. \newText{However, for particular dSphs
different authors
have found a range of estimated $J$~factors
that are larger than the quoted uncertainties of the individual
studies, suggesting that the measurements are potentially impacted by
systematic biases (see,
e.g.,~\cite{2004PhRvD..69l3501E,2012PhRvD..86b3528C,2015ApJ...808L..36B,2016arXiv160307721U}).}
Although each individual $J$~factor is smaller than that of the
Galactic center, kinematically determined $J$~factors are known for 19 dSphs, so far.
The predicted annihilation signal from the population of dSphs is
commensurately higher, and analyzing dSphs as a group results in
sensitivity competitive with other targets. \newText{Furthermore,
systematic disagreements of uncertainties of the $J$~factors are peculiar
to individual dSphs, rather than systematic across the set of dSphs.
Decreasing the $J$~factor of a single dSph, or increasing the uncertainty
of that $J$~factor, will lessen the impact of that dSph on the joint
analysis, but will not greatly affect the overall result. The effect
of the uncertainties in $J$~factors in a joint likelihood analysis
was studied in detail in Ref.~\cite{2015PhRvL.115w1301A} (see in
particular Fig.~7), and the overall limits changed by less that 40\%
for all of the scenarios considered.}
\subsubsection{Known Satellites: Current Status}
\label{sec:dm_satellites_status}
Since early in the \Fermic\xspace mission, dSph analyses have provided cutting-edge
constraints on \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace~\cite{2010JCAP...01..031S,2010ApJ...712..147A,
2011PhRvL.107x1302A,2011PhRvL.107x1303G,2012APh....37...26M,2013JCAP...03..018S}. Upper
limits using the new Pass~8 data set are some of the most constraining to date,
ruling out WIMPs with masses below 100\unit{GeV} that annihilate through quark or $\tau$-lepton
channels at the thermal relic cross section~\cite{2015PhRvL.115w1301A}.
These limits are in mild tension with the masses and cross-sections best-fit for DM
interpretations of the Galactic center excess (\S\ref{sec:dm_milky_way}),
and provide an essential cross-check for those claims.
In addition to the accumulation of \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace data, dSph searches for DM are now
benefiting from a rapid increase in the number of known dSphs.
Until recently, ultra-faint dSphs (those with luminosities $\lesssim 5\times 10^{4} \Lsolar$)
had only been discovered by the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS), which
primarily covered the northern hemisphere~\cite{York:2000}.
Over the past two years, the Dark Energy Survey
(DES)~\cite{Abbott:2005bi} has begun to explore the
southern hemisphere, discovering 17 new dSph candidates~\cite{Bechtol:2015wya,Koposov:2015cua,Kim:2015c,2015ApJ...813..109D}.
Over roughly the same time period, the PanSTARRS survey
\cite{Kaiser:2002zz} contributed
an additional 3 dSph candidates~\cite{Laevens:2015a,2015ApJ...813...44L}.
Two more candidates were also discovered in other optical surveys.
If all of these are confirmed as dSphs with spectroscopic data, these surveys will have
more than doubled the size of the ultra-faint dSph population.
Indeed, Ref.~{\cite{DESY2_DSPHS} consider 28 kinematically confirmed dSphs
galaxies, 13 candidates that are likely to be dSphs (based on their
optical properties), and 4 systems that may be either dSphs or globular
clusters. The initial DES discoveries were promptly
investigated for \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emission~\cite{2015ApJ...808L..36B,2015ApJ...809L...4D,2016PhRvD..93d3518L},
and yield results consistent with the previous studies of dSphs. A projection of
combined dSph sensitivity, including the future accumulation of
both data and targets is discussed in \S\ref{sec:dm_satellites_projections}.
Finally, searches have also targeted other DM-rich
Milky Way satellites and structures, including the Large Magellanic
Cloud (LMC,~\cite{2015PhRvD..91j2001B}), the Small Magellanic Cloud
(SMC,~\cite{2016PhRvD..93f2004C}) and the Smith high-velocity cloud~\cite{2014ApJ...790...24D}).
However, these targets are spatially
extended, and in the cases of the LMC and SMC have significant astrophysical \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace
emission. Therefore
these searches
are
limited by the systematic uncertainties of the background modeling.
\subsubsection{Known Satellites: Sensitivity Projections}
\label{sec:dm_satellites_projections}
In the light of the active DES and PanSTARRS large-area optical
surveys and the upcoming LSST survey \cite{Ivezic:2008fe},
any projection of future dSph DM search sensitivity must include an
estimate of an expanded set of targets.
After two years (out of five) of operation,
DES has contributed several new likely dSph candidates~\cite{Bechtol:2015wya,Koposov:2015cua,Kim:2015c,2015ApJ...813..109D},
including a few that have already been
confirmed as dSphs with spectroscopic followups~\cite{2015ApJ...808L..36B,2015ApJ...809L...4D}.
\newText{Predictions about the number and
$J$~factor distribution of undiscovered dSphs
are very uncertain. In particular, the faint end of the dwarf
galaxy luminosity function, the structural properties (and DM distributions)
of the smallest satellites, and the radial distribution of
subhalos that would host dSphs are not well known.}
\newText{The SDSS survey covered roughly 1/3 of the sky and
discovered 15 ultra-faint dSphs; DES, PanSTARRS, and in particular
LSST, will cover complementary regions of the sky to
significantly great depth. Combining the distribution of optical luminosities of
known dSphs with} N-body DM simulations and the expanded depth
and sky coverage of the new surveys, we can anticipate 25 to 40 total dSphs to be
discovered by DES, and possibly hundreds by
LSST~\cite{2008ApJ...688..277T,2014ApJ...795L..13H},
\newText{however many of these dSphs would be more distant and
have correspondingly smaller $J$~factors. Even so, LSST is still
likely to contribute many dSphs with
$J$~factors above $10^{19}$ GeV$^{-2}$ cm$^{-5}$, and is also
likely to contribute at least some dSphs with larger $J$~factors than
any discovered by DES~\cite{2015PhRvD..91f3515H}.}
\newText{In practice, the distribution of $J$ factors for the DES dSphs
has been similar to previously discovered dSphs, in spite of the
greater depth of the DES survey. This could reflect that the
dwarf galaxy luminosity function continues below the faintest objects
discovered by SDSS, or it could simply be that the DES survey region
has an excess of dSphs, because of the influence of the nearby
Magellanic clouds.}
We will take 60 total dSphs as a conservative estimate of the
total number of dSphs that can be used as targets for LAT
searches, \newText{i.e., having $J$~factors that are large enough and
well determined enough to contribute the sensitivity of a joint analysis.}
As an all-sky monitor, the LAT has already, and will continue
to, observe the new targets for the duration of its lifetime. All
that is required to incorporate them into a joint analysis are
locations and $J$~factors and their uncertainties. To project the increased
sensitivity that will result, we simulated \newText{200} realizations of our entire search using the
``ROI-specific photon simulations'' and ``Binned model map
simulations'' described in App.~\ref{app:method_monte_carlo} but
duplicated our target set\footnote{The targets were placed at random locations and with
$J$~factors (and $J$~factor uncertainties) sampled from the posterior distribution.} up to three
times to reach 60 in total.
The effect of additional targets on the search sensitivity is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:dsph_projected_targets}.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_15a}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_15b}
\end{center}
\caption{Projected upper limits on the WIMP annihilation cross section
from the joint analysis of dSphs as a function of the size of the
dSph sample on the assumption of 6- (left) and 15-year (right) data sets
with \evtclass{P8R2\_SOURCE} data. The solid black curve shows the observed
limit from the analysis of 15 known dSphs with 6 years of \evtclass{P8R2\_SOURCE} data~\cite{2015PhRvL.115w1301A}.
Projections correspond to the median expected limit for the given number of dSphs and observation period
\newText{from 200 \newText simulated realizations of the entire search (see text for details).}
\label{fig:dsph_projected_targets}}
\end{figure}
We also examined how the expected sensitivity scales with time
for different masses and annihilation channels.
Fig.~\ref{fig:dsph_limit_scaling} shows the mean of the ratio of expected
limits for all of the simulated dSphs. Because of the softer
spectrum in the \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace channel, the improvement in that channel
is close to the expectation for a background-limited search (i.e., it
scales as $\sqrt{t}$) for low masses, improves with increasing mass,
but does not reach the linear scaling we would expect for a purely
signal limited search. On the other hand, in the harder
\ensuremath{\tau^+\tau^-}\xspace channel, the scaling behavior transitions from the
background limited to signal limited cases around 100\unit{GeV}.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_16a}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_16b}
\end{center}
\caption{Ratio of the median expected upper limits on the WIMP annihilation cross section
for 10~years of LAT data relative to 6~years (left) and 15~years relative to 6~years (right) for the
\ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace and \ensuremath{\tau^+\tau^-}\xspace annihilation channels. The upper and
lower horizontal lines are the expectations for the purely
background limited (sensitivity scales as $\sqrt{t}$) and purely
signal limited (sensitivity scales linearly with $t$) cases.
We use the results for the projected sample of 60 dSphs (see
Fig.~\ref{fig:dsph_projected_targets}) for these comparisons.
\label{fig:dsph_limit_scaling}}
\end{figure}
The slope of the projected upper limit curve
near 100\unit{GeV} is close to one (\ensuremath{ {\sim}\,} 1.1 to 1.2 ) $\unit{cm}^3
\unit{s}^{-1} / \unit{GeV}$. The mass
for which the thermal relic cross section will be excluded
scales as the inverse of the slope times the improvement on the limits on
\ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace. This results in considerable extension of the mass range
with limits at or below the
thermal relic cross section with additional data, up to
$> 400\unit{GeV}$ ($ > 200\unit{GeV}$) in the \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace (\ensuremath{\tau^+\tau^-}\xspace)
channel with 60~dSphs and 15~years of data, see Fig.\ref{fig:dsph_limit_scaling_relic}.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_17a}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_17b}
\end{center}
\caption{Left: ratio of the median expected upper limits on the WIMP annihilation cross section
from 6 years of LAT data as a function of time for 10\unit{GeV}, 100\unit{GeV} and 1\unit{TeV} for the
\ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace and \ensuremath{\tau^+\tau^-}\xspace channels. Right:
upper extent of the mass range over which the thermal relic cross section can be excluded, as a function of
observation time, for the \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace and \ensuremath{\tau^+\tau^-}\xspace channels.
We use the results for the projected sample of 60 dSphs (see
Fig.~\ref{fig:dsph_projected_targets}) for these comparisons.
\label{fig:dsph_limit_scaling_relic}}
\end{figure}
Finally, given that optical surveys will be discovering new targets for
years to come, we consider the possibility that they
discover a dSph that is near enough and massive enough that
it would be clearly observable by the LAT for plausible DM annihilation cross-sections.
The $J$~factors of known dSphs scale approximately with the square
of distance, i.e., the dSphs would have similar
$J$ factors (within about $0.4$~dex) if they were all at the same
distance: $J \sim 10^{18.3} \unit{GeV}^2\unit{cm}^{-5} \times ( d / 100\unit{kpc} )$.
For a 100\unit{GeV} DM particle annihilating to \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace at the
thermal relic cross section we currently could expect a 5$\sigma$ significance
detection of any dSphs following that $J$~factor scaling relation
within \ensuremath{ {\sim}\,} 8\unit{kpc} and located away from the Galactic plane.
That corresponds to a ``discovery'' volume of $\sim
2100\unit{kpc}^{3}$. With 15 years of data that volume would at
least double to $\sim 4200\unit{kpc}^{3}$. For higher masses and in the
harder \ensuremath{\tau^+\tau^-}\xspace channel the volume would increase
by a factor of four.
\subsection{Undiscovered Satellites of the Milky Way}
\label{sec:dm_unid}
Current simulations of Milky Way-sized halos~\cite{2009Sci...325..970K,2008MNRAS.391.1685S}
predict the existence of tens of thousands of Galactic DM subhalos.
The most massive of these subhalos are expected to host the known
dSphs, while the stellar/baryonic component of smaller subhalos may
be negligible. In fact, some of these subhalos may completely lack
any astrophysical counterparts~\cite{2012ApJ...749...75S}. Indeed, this leaves the
exciting possibility that \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace from DM annihilation in these
as {\it dark satellites} may be the only way to detect them. Given the
typical masses and distances of dark satellites, they may represent
excellent targets for DM searches in \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace,
e.g.,~\cite{2005MNRAS.364..367D,2012JCAP...11..050Z,2014PhRvD..89a6014B,2012ApJ...747..121A,2010ApJ...718..899A,2011PhRvD..83b3518P,2012PhRvD..86d3504B}.
Since the LAT surveys the entire \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace sky
with unprecedented sensitivity, it is an ideal instrument for
the discovery of new source classes. In fact,
$\sim 1/3$ of the sources in the 3FGL catalog
lack firm associations with known counterparts at other
wavelengths~\cite{2015ApJS..218...23A}. Some fraction of the
unassociated \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace source population may be composed of dark
satellites. By comparing the predictions of N-body cosmological simulations
with the observed number of unassociated sources, it is possible
to place firm constraints on the DM annihilation cross section.
Additionally, if a population of candidate dark satellites is
found in \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace observations, the findings could be used to target deep
optical searches for hyper-faint dwarf galaxies.
\subsubsection{Undiscovered Satellites: Current Status}
\label{sec:dm_unid_status}
Several diagnostics have been explored to distinguish a
potential population of dark satellites from more conventional astrophysical sources in \mbox{$\gamma$-rays}\xspace:
\begin{enumerate}
\item{ \newText{{\it Multi-wavelength associations and identified sources:} Dark satellites are
not expected to emit in other wavelengths, so cataloged sources with
such associations are excluded. Likewise, the detection of pulsations,
typically either in \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace or radio data, can rule out sources as potential
dark satellite.}}
\item{ {\it Temporal variability:} Dark satellites are expected to be
steady sources. This distinguishes them from background blazars,
which can vary on minute-to-month time scales.}
\item{ {\it Spatial distribution:} Dark satellites are expected to be
nearly isotropically distributed on the sky. Thus, selecting sources
at high Galactic latitudes can increase the contrast with respect to
a population of Galactic sources, such as young pulsars.}
\item{ {\it Spatial extension:} Nearby dark satellites may have
spatial extensions that are measurable in \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace. This is unlikely for
astrophysical sources at high Galactic latitudes, which are
primarily either blazars or millisecond pulsars~\cite{2016arXiv160207303B}.
\newText{When considering DM decay, as opposed to annihilation,
the expected extension can be even larger, making spatial
extension a stronger discriminant.}}
\item{ {\it Spectral character:} In some cases, further restrictive
cuts have been applied, motivated by some of the spectral properties
expected from dark satellites (e.g., hard power-law indices,
spectral features, detection above 10 GeV, etc.). A population of
dark satellites should have a common spectral shape.}
\end{enumerate}
Current simulations of Milky Way-sized halos (e.g., Via
Lactea~II~\cite{2009Sci...325..970K} or Aquarius~\cite{2008MNRAS.391.1685S})
are unable to simulate the subhalo hierarchy below a mass $\sim 10^5\msun$,
while the theoretical minimum DM halo mass can be as low as
$10^{-6}\msun$~\cite{Profumo:2004qt,Bringmann:2009vf,Cornell:2013rza}. Thus,
extrapolations to lower masses are required to assess the contribution of nearby, low-mass subhalos
to the potentially detectable dark satellites.
Understanding the number and distribution of DM subhalos is an
important step toward their potential discovery. Previous work has begun to address
this issue, e.g.,~\cite{2010ApJ...718..899A,2011PhRvD..83b3518P,2012PhRvD..86d3504B}.
The authors of Refs.~\cite{2012JCAP...11..050Z,2014PhRvD..89a6014B}
concluded from a search for DM subhalos in the 2FGL catalog~\cite{2012ApJS..199...31N}
that none of the unidentified sources in the catalog is
a clear DM candidate. Ref.~\cite{2014PhRvD..89a6014B} found that
although many faint sources could not be ruled out as DM
candidates, among sources with integral fluxes above 1\unit{GeV},
$\Phi_\text{1~GeV} > 10^{-9}\unit{cm}^{-2}\unit{s}^{-1}$ (that is, the brightest ones) all but a handful
could be ruled out as DM candidates for almost any
combination of annihilation channel and \ensuremath{m_\chi}\xspace. They used this
finding in combination with results from the Aquarius simulation on
subhalo abundance and internal structure to demonstrate that this
technique could be used to obtain competitive limits on \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace.
The systematic uncertainties associated with
modeling the subhalo population (e.g., different internal structure
models, mass functions, radial distributions, sub-substructure) have
not been deeply explored. For example, an updated analysis using the 3FGL catalog
and a more conservative model to describe the dark satellites'
structural properties obtained a factor \ensuremath{ {\sim}\,} 4 weaker upper
limits on \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace~\cite{2015JCAP...12..035B}, and in
fact identified a set of unassociated catalog sources that is
consistent with a DM-interpretation of the Galactic center excess
(e.g., \roughly50\unit{GeV} DM annihilation to \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace).
\newText{The identification and association of cataloged sources continues
after the production of the catalog. In particular, many unassociated
LAT sources have been identified as pulsars from radio observations
(see e.g.,~\cite{2013ApJS..208...17A} and references therein) and others have been associated with blazars
using data from the {\it WISE} mission and optical spectroscopy~\cite{2015ApJS..217....2M}.}
\subsubsection{Undiscovered Satellites: Sensitivity Projections}
\label{sec:dm_unid_projections}
An extended LAT mission will benefit the search for dark satellites
in the following ways:
\begin{enumerate}
\item{Setting a fainter threshold for source detection. A lower source
detection threshold increases the number of faint dark satellites
that could be detected as unassociated sources.}
\item{Providing better localization of sources, which effectively
lowers the threshold for source association. The source association
procedure assesses the chance false association rate, which scales
with the area of the source localization region. Improving
the localization reduces this area and hence the chance
false association rate, allowing for more associations at a given
probability threshold (see, e.g., \S~5 of
\cite{{2015ApJS..218...23A}} for a discussion of the source
association procedure).}
\item{Providing better spectral characterization of unassociated
sources, thus setting a fainter threshold at which
highly curved DM-like spectra and power-law
spectra can be distinguished.}
\item{Providing greater sensitivity to spatial extension of
unassociated sources.}
\item{Providing a longer baseline for detecting temporal
variability. Temporal variability can be used to associate sources
to background blazars, reducing the number of unassociated
sources}
\end{enumerate}
To project the sensitivity for dark satellite searches, we have
performed a study based on Refs.~\cite{2014PhRvD..89a6014B} and
\cite{2015JCAP...12..035B}, which examine the unassociated sources
for potential DM candidates. To do this we started with all of
the sources in each of the LAT published point source catalogs and
applied a few simple criteria:
\begin{enumerate}
\item{We excluded all associated sources.}
\item{We excluded all sources within $20\unit{^{\circ}}$ of the Galactic plane. This
criterion was applied because the source detection threshold is much higher in
the plane than at higher Galactic latitudes.}
\item{We excluded variable sources; specifically we exclude sources with a variability
index $h > 80$, following~\cite{2014PhRvD..89a6014B}.}
\item{Finally, we excluded high-significance sources, i.e.,
those that were detected with $TS > 100$; the better
characterization of these sources makes it much easier to
identify multi-wavelength counterparts and to
distinguish astrophysical sources from potential
dark satellites.}
\end{enumerate}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:catalog_assoc} we show that each of the LAT source
catalogs has an ``exclusion threshold'' above which very few (i.e.,
$N_{\rm cand} \lesssim 20$)
catalog sources pass the above criteria to be viable dark satellite
candidates. The right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:catalog_assoc} also indicates that
for a given $N_{\rm cand}$ the effective threshold scales
roughly as $\sqrt{t}$.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_18a}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_18b}
\end{center}
\caption{Left: number of potential DM candidate sources
in the 1FGL (1 year of LAT data~\cite{2010ApJS..188..405A}), 2FGL (2 years of data~\cite{2012ApJS..199...31N}) and 3FGL
(4 years of data~\cite{2015ApJS..218...23A}) catalogs. Right: time-progression of the
threshold above which all but $N_{\rm cand}$ sources have been excluded as
potential DM candidates.
\label{fig:catalog_assoc}}
\end{figure}
We can then use estimates of the expected flux distribution of dark
satellites from N-body simulations of Galactic structure. Following
Refs.~\cite{2015JCAP...12..035B} we have adopted the relationship
for $N_{\rm cand}$ with integral flux above 1~GeV, $I_{\rm
1 GeV}$, greater than a threshold sensitivity S:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:dNdS_unid}
N(S) = \left( \frac{S_0}{S}\right)^{1.5} \frac{\ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace}{\ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace_{0}},
\end{equation}
\noindent where the scaling factors are $S_0 = 9.83\times10^{13} \unit{ph}
\unit{cm}^{-2} \unit{s}^{-1}$ and $\ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace_0 = 6.23\times10^{-27} \unit{cm}^3 \unit{s}^{-1}$.
Using the relationship from Eq.~\ref{eq:dNdS_unid} we can project the
95\% CL upper limits by solving for the value of \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace for which
$N_{\rm cand} > 3$ but no candidates are observed.
The results are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:unid_limits}. We expect this search
to be sensitive to annihilation at the thermal relic cross section
for masses up to 100\unit{GeV} in the \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace channel.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_19}
\end{center}
\caption{Projected upper limits derived from considering the expected
number of dark satellite candidates $N_{\rm cand}$ in LAT sources
catalogs as a function of \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace. The extrapolations to 10 and
15~years are based on an assumed $\sqrt{t}$ scaling of exclusion
threshold for $N_{\rm cand} < 1$ of the 3FGL shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:catalog_assoc}.
\label{fig:unid_limits}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Galaxy Clusters}
\label{sec:dm_clusters}
The study of DM in galaxy clusters has a long history, dating
back to the first evidence of DM found by F. Zwicky \cite{Zwicky:1933gu}. The systematic uncertainty
in the determination of DM density profiles and $J$~factors in
clusters is similar in many ways to the case of dSphs discussed
above. The dominant uncertainty in the $J$~factors for clusters arises
from two orthogonal astrophysical considerations. First,
the empirically-measured cluster mass profiles, which
are derived from a combination of X-ray temperature profiles and gas
kinematics, e.g.,~\cite{1986RvMP...58....1S}, are uncertain.
Second, the predicted
\mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace luminosity that arises from the contribution of DM
substructure in the clusters is also uncertain. The role of DM substructure (or
subhalos) for the total DM annihilation flux can be conveniently
expressed in terms of a boost factor $b$.
Determining values for $b$ requires
assumptions on the relative abundance of subhalos and of
their structural properties.
These assumptions are usually inspired by the results from
N-body cosmological simulations. However, even the highest-resolution
current simulations fail to resolve the whole subhalo
hierarchy. For cluster-sized simulations,
this mass resolution limit is
$\sim10^{8}\msun$~\cite{Gao:2012aa,2016MNRAS.tmp...66H},
as compared to the smallest subhalos, which may have masses as low as
$10^{-6}\msun$ \cite{Profumo:2004qt,Bringmann:2009vf,Cornell:2013rza},
Estimates of the boost to the DM annihilation
signal due to subhalos is thus dependent on extrapolations over
several orders of magnitude \cite{Sanchez-Conde:2014aa}.
Another challenge to searching for \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace from DM interactions
in galaxy clusters is that clusters are believed to host
relativistic particle populations, most notably cosmic-ray electrons,
but possibly protons as well \cite{2014IJMPD..2330007B}. As such,
\mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace may arise from astrophysical processes in
the intra-cluster medium (ICM).
\subsubsection{Galaxy Clusters: Current Status}
\label{sec:dm_clusters_status}
Historically, X-ray observations have been pivotal for the selection
of cluster samples. More specifically, the HIFLUCGS
catalog~\cite{Reiprich:2002aa} has been the basis for several recent
analyses. The catalog contains a complete flux-limited sample of the
brightest X-ray clusters at low redshift $z\leq0.2$.
In most cases, the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace analyses have considered either a subset of
the most nearby, most massive clusters (e.g., Coma, Fornax or the Virgo
cluster~\cite{2010JCAP...05..025A,Huang2011,2012ApJ...757..123A,2012JCAP...07..017A,2012JCAP...01..042H,2014MNRAS.441.2309P,Ackermann:2015ab})
or targeted entire samples~\cite{Ackermann2010b,2016arXiv160206527L}. The Perseus cluster is
another well-motivated target but due to the presence of two
bright Active Galactic Nuclei (AGN) in the cluster along with its proximity to the Galactic
plane, this target is probably better suited for Cerenkov
telescopes~\cite{Aleksic:2010aa,Aleksic:2012aa}.
At present no cluster-wide emission has been detected in
\mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace.\footnote{This is with the exception of a reported excess
from Virgo~\cite{Han2012,Macias-Ramirez2012,Ackermann:2015aa}.
However, the recent analysis in \cite{Ackermann:2015aa} indicated that
this excess is likely associated with unmodeled Galactic diffuse
emission and/or a combination of weak point sources.}
In sample studies, a stacking analysis is often used to reach a
greater sensitivity~\cite{Reimer:2003aa,Huang2011,2012JCAP...07..017A,2013A&A...560A..64H,Ackermann:2014aa,Prokhorov:2014aa,2016arXiv160206527L}.
For example, joint likelihood fitting of the sample may provide a factor of 2--3 improvement with respect to the case for which only the cluster with the
highest $J$~factor was used in the analysis~\cite{Huang2011,Zimmer:2011aa}.
One challenge when analyzing nearby galaxy clusters is
that both their predicted non-thermal and DM-induced
\mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emissions are expected to be spatially extended (up to
\roughly3\unit{^{\circ}} if the nearest cluster, Virgo, is excluded.\footnote{The Virgo cluster has a
spatial extent of \roughly14\unit{^{\circ}} and analyzing the surrounding
region in the sky presents a number of
challenges~\cite{Ackermann:2015aa}.})
At the same time clusters host AGN. While
significant point-like flux can be expected from the central AGN in a
cluster, searches have only yielded upper
limits~\cite{2013MNRAS.429.2069D,Prokhorov:2014aa}.
A sub-threshold AGN residing in a cluster would
manifest itself as diffuse \mbox{$\gamma$ ray}\xspace emission with characteristics similar
to that expected from the ICM (e.g., a power-law spectrum with
$\Gamma=2.3$ or softer). This would result in an additional foreground
emission, predominantly toward the center of the cluster, where the
DM emission also peaks. However, the DM annihilation flux profile is
expected to be shallower and more extended than the non-thermal
emission profile once DM substructures are taken into
account~\cite{2011JCAP...12..011S}. Hence, the cluster outskirts may
be an attractive possibility for DM searches.
\subsubsection{Galaxy Clusters: Sensitivity Projections}
\label{sec:dm_clusters_projections}
For our sensitivity projections we consider a set of 32 clusters,
chosen from the HIFLUCGS catalog, maximizing the total $J$~factor of all
targets and minimizing potential overlap between nearby
clusters.\footnote{In our analysis we also consider each of the 106
HIFLUGCS clusters as an isolated system. Given the broad point-spread function
at the lowest energies, overlaps may occur between neighboring targets, which
would introduce a potential bias in a joint
analysis~\cite{Ackermann:2014aa}.}
Spatially, each cluster is modeled under the assumption of an NFW DM density
profile. We include DM subhalos down to $10^{-6}\msun$. For the
description of the subhalos (and consequently of the subhalo boost,
$b$), we follow the recent work~\cite{Sanchez-Conde:2014aa}, which predicts a
flattening of the halo concentration parameter for the smallest halo
masses, and consequently, moderate $b\sim$ 30--40 for galaxy clusters. We adopt
the same approach as for the dSphs (see Section
\ref{sec:dm_satellites_projections}), and use the ``ROI-specific
photon simulations'' described in App.~\ref{app:method_monte_carlo}.
Fig.~\ref{fig:cluster_predictions} shows the effect of continued data
taking on the upper limits to the DM annihilation cross section.
These projections were made by rescaling the projected sensitivity
calculated in Ref.~\cite{Ackermann:2014aa} by the $\sqrt{t}$
and accounting for the improved sensitivity with Pass~8 data.
Overall, the limits improve by a factor $\ensuremath{ {\sim}\,} 2$ over
the whole WIMP mass range considered.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.50\columnwidth]{./Figure_20}
\end{center}
\caption{Projected upper limits on the WIMP annihilation cross
section from a joint analysis of 32 nearby galaxy clusters as a function
of DM mass for DM annihilating into \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace. The colored dashed lines
correspond to rescaling of the obtained median sensitivity from an
analysis of blank fields using Pass~7REP data~\cite{Zimmer:2015aa},
while the black dashed line corresponds to the expected median sensitivity
based on simulations of the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace sky. The limits obtained from the Virgo galaxy cluster in \cite{Ackermann:2015aa}
are also shown for comparison.
\label{fig:cluster_predictions}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Cosmological WIMP Searches}
\label{sec:dm_cosmo}
The discussion above has focused on DM annihilation in the Milky Way,
Milky Way satellites and galaxy clusters. Searches for DM signals in \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace data are
also sensitive to the accumulated emission from DM
annihilation in all the DM halos that have formed in the
Universe~\cite{Fornasa:2015qua}. Though this emission is
``unresolved'', it can be modeled given a mass function for
DM halos and a description of the DM halo structural properties. The
latter is usually made by assuming a universal form for the DM
density profile, e.g., NFW~\cite{1996ApJ...462..563N} or
Einasto~\cite{Einasto:1965} (see also App.~\ref{app:dark_matter_profiles}). As for the halo mass function, in
principle, it could be deduced from the observed
luminosity function of galaxies. However, this method is hindered
by the current uncertainties in the mapping of galaxy luminosity to
DM halo mass. A more robust understanding of the DM halo mass
function and its redshift evolution comes from N-body cosmological
simulations~\cite{Jenkins:2000bv,Springel:2005nw}. Two of the
largest-volume cosmological simulations to date, e.g., provide
a statistically-complete sample of DM halos down to a maximum circular
velocity of about 50 km/s, or a mass of approximately
$10^9\Msolar$~\cite{2009MNRAS.398.1150B,2011ApJ...740..102K}.
Based on these and previous N-body simulation results, different
functional forms for the halo mass function and its redshift
dependence have been proposed in recent years,
e.g.,~\cite{Sheth:2001dp,Tinker:2008ff}.
The integrated DM annihilation signal from all halos at
all cosmic epochs can then be predicted by combining the information
on the halo mass function and the DM density profile of individual halos.
\subsubsection{Searches for Contributions to the IGRB Spectrum: Current Status}
\label{sec:dm_isotropic}
\label{sec:dm_cosmo_status}
A possible way to find cosmological DM signatures is by searching for
features in the IGRB spectrum~\cite{2015JCAP...09..008T,2012PhRvD..85b3004C,2015PhRvD..91l3001D,2010JCAP...11..041A,2010JCAP...04..014A,Ando:2015qda}.
The statistics are good but this method is nonetheless limited by the
large systematic uncertainties on the reconstructed IGRB related to the
uncertainty of the Galactic diffuse emission (which is a strong foreground to
the IGRB). At present these dominate the statistical uncertainties
over the entire energy range (see Fig.7 in Ref.~\cite{2015ApJ...799...86A} and
Appendix A in Ref.~\cite{2015JCAP...09..008T}).
Known astrophysical source populations contributing to the IGRB typically can be modeled
starting from the resolved component of the population present in the
EGB, or from observations at other wavelengths (radio, IR, X-ray). From these models, blazars,
star-forming galaxies, and radio galaxies are found to be the main
contributors, and altogether can make up the total of the measured
IGRB intensity although with large
uncertainties~\cite{Ajello:2015mfa}. DM constraints then can be obtained
by comparing the expected cosmological DM signal with the IGRB
residual spectrum after subtracting the expected astrophysical
contribution, e.g.~\cite{Ajello:2015mfa, 2015JCAP...09..008T, Ando:2015qda, 2015PhRvD..91l3001D}.
Interestingly, studying the contributions to the IGRB can also shed
light on an entirely different class of DM candidate: evaporating
primordial black-holes (PBHs, see~\cite{2010PhRvD..81j4019C} for a review).
The strongest limits on the density of PBHs, in the mass range from $10^{14}$ to $10^{16}$\,g, come from studies of
diffuse \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emission~\cite{1998PhR...307..141C,2003PhLB..551..218B,2010PhRvD..81j4019C}.
\subsubsection{Searches for Contributions to the IGRB Spectrum: Sensitivity Projections}
\label{sec:dm_cosmo_projections}
Currently, the dominant uncertainties in the derivation of DM limits
from the IGRB energy spectrum are from the large uncertainties
associated with the modeling of the Galactic
foregrounds~\cite{2015JCAP...09..008T}.
Thus,
any IGRB-based DM sensitivity projections
will largely depend on how these foregrounds will be understood in
the future. However, it is difficult to predict how knowledge of the
Galactic diffuse emission will improve in the next few years. For this
reason, we considered two scenarios, for which the systematic
uncertainties from modeling the Galactic diffuse emission
are reduced to 50\% and 10\% of their current value.
On the other hand, as explained in \S\ref{sec:dm_cosmo_status}, the majority of the IGRB
flux arises from the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emission of unresolved AGN and star-forming
galaxies. Thus, the projected sensitivity of the LAT to
extragalactic DM will also depend on the uncertainties in the
contribution of (unresolved) point sources to the IGRB. We discuss
in detail the evolution of these uncertainties in App.~\ref{app:method_egb_sensitivity}.
Fig.~\ref{fig:EGBlimts} shows the projected upper limits on the
DM annihilation cross-section in the \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace annihilation channel,
evaluated using the same method that was employed
in~\cite{Ajello:2015mfa}. The estimates and uncertainties of the contributions of different
source populations to the IGRB after 15 years of data (``optimized
astro'' in the figure) are described in
App.~\ref{app:method_egb_sensitivity}.
We have assumed a reduction of a factor 2
for the size of the statistical errors in the IGRB measurement, based
on what is expected from both this larger data set and from the increased
LAT acceptance in Pass~8 (see App.~\ref{sec:lat} for details). In addition, two cases are shown
in Fig.~\ref{fig:EGBlimts}, corresponding to different assumptions
on the future evolution of the systematic errors: a first case
in which they will be reduced by a factor 2 with respect to their
current values (blue dashed line), and a second, more optimistic
case in which a very good control on the systematics has been achieved
down to a value of 10\% of the present level (red dot-dashed
line). For both cases we have the same level of theoretical
uncertainties on the strength of the DM annihilation signal
(represented by the red shaded region in Fig.~\ref{fig:EGBlimts}) as
the one derived in \cite{2015JCAP...09..008T} for the current DM
limits. This is conservative, as future N-body cosmological
simulations with higher particle resolution should help in lowering
the main source of these uncertainties, namely the structural
properties of low-mass DM halos and subhalos and the exact
slope of the subhalo mass function (see, e.g.,
\cite{Ishiyama:2014uoa,2016MNRAS.tmp...66H} for recent
and promising developments). It is however difficult to estimate the
evolution of these uncertainties at the moment.
In both cases, it can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:EGBlimts} that there is
significant improvement of the current DM limits (solid line)
over the whole WIMP mass range considered. The improvement is
about a factor 2 for the case in which the systematics errors are
half of the current ones, and ranges between a factor $\ensuremath{ {\sim}\,} 2$ to 5
for the case of having systematics reduced down to 10\% the present
values, depending on the WIMP mass. Also, as expected, reducing
the systematics uncertainties has a larger impact on the DM sensitivity
at low WIMP masses, while increased statistics primarily improves
the sensitivity at higher masses.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.50\columnwidth]{./Figure_21}
\end{center}
\caption{Projected upper limits on the WIMP annihilation cross section
derived from the IGRB energy spectrum after 15 years of data taking,
compared to the most recent limits derived in~\cite{Ajello:2015mfa}
using 50 months of data (thin solid line). The dashed blue and red dotted curves
correspond to cases in which the systematic uncertainties are
reduced by factors of 2 and 10, respectively,
relative to their values in the 50-month analysis. In both cases,
the statistical uncertainties have been reduced by a factor of 2 (see
text for details). The shaded red area corresponds to the uncertainties from the modeling of the
cosmological DM annihilation signal (see~\cite{2015JCAP...09..008T}).
\label{fig:EGBlimts}}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{IGRB anisotropies and Cross-Correlation Measurements: Current Status}
\label{sec:dm_anisotropy}
\label{sec:dm_cosmo_aps_status}
Integrating the IGRB over the entire sky results in a large
loss of information. More information can be recovered and exploited by
investigating the anisotropy properties of the measured IGRB.
Three measures of anisotropy currently are being studied:
i) the auto-correlation or angular power spectrum (APS) of the IGRB~\cite{2012PhRvD..85h3007A,
DiMauro:2014wha, Campbell:2014mpa, Gomez-Vargas:2014yla,
Calore:2014hna, Fornengo:2013rga, Campbell:2013rua, Inoue:2013vza,
Chang:2013ada, Gomez-Vargas:2014yla, Ando:2013ff, Ripken:2012db,
Harding:2012gk, Cuoco:2012yf, Ando:2005xg,
Ando:2006cr,Fornasa:2012gu},
ii) the cross-correlation with Large Scale Structure (LSS) tracers
(galaxy catalogs and lensing surveys)~\cite{Xia:2011ax,
Cuoco:2007sh, Ando:2009nk, Ando:2014aoa, Fornengo:2014cya,
Camera:2014rja, Xia:2015wka, Regis:2015zka,2015ApJS..221...29C,
Ando:2013xwa, Shirasaki:2014noa, Camera:2012cj},
and iii) pixel fluctuations (also referred to as one-point
statistics)~\cite{Malyshev:2011zi, Lee:2014mza, Feyereisen:2015cea,
Lee:2015fea, Lee:2008fm, Dodelson:2009ih, Bartels:2015aea}.
Relative to spectral analyses, auto-correlation analyses possess the
advantage that the background is dominated by astrophysical point sources just
below the detection threshold.
Thus, masking/removing newly detected point sources greatly
reduces the astrophysical background and enhances the DM
sensitivity. For example, the anisotropy of the high-latitude
\mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace sky is reduced by about \emph{four} orders of magnitude
when the 3FGL sources are masked with respect to the case in
which they are not. In comparison, the intensity of the IGRB when
masking the 3FGL sources is reduced by only 20--30\% over most
of the energy range (it can be 50--80\% above 100 GeV).
Clearly, using a deeper point-source catalog available with
many years of data taking can substantially improve the sensitivity
to DM via auto-correlation. The auto-correlation of the IGRB was first measured
in~\cite{2012PhRvD..85h3007A} using 2 years of LAT data.
Constraints on DM were derived in~\cite{Gomez-Vargas:2014yla,
Ando:2013ff, Fornasa:2012gu}.
As with the IGRB energy spectrum (\S\ref{sec:dm_cosmo_projections}), these constraints
account for the expected contributions
from astrophysical sources and their uncertainties.
The expected astrophysical contribution to the
APS is dominated by blazars at all energies. In comparison, the expected contribution
of blazars to the IGRB energy spectrum is sub-dominant below
50~\unit{GeV}~\cite{Cuoco:2012yf, DiMauro:2014wha}.
The LAT has measured the APS of the diffuse emission at Galactic latitudes
$|b| > 30\unit{^{\circ}}$ using approximately 2 years of
data~\cite{2012PhRvD..85h3007A}. The APS,
denoted as $C_P(E)$, has been measured in four energy bins
spanning 1 to 50 GeV and, at multipoles $l \geq 155$, an angular
power above the photon noise level is detected in all energy
bins. Since the measured angular
power is approximately constant at all multipoles, the origin of
the APS is attributed to the contribution of one or more un-clustered
point-source populations. Ref.~\cite{DiMauro:2014wha} finds that
measured values of $C_P$ are compatible with the anisotropy from
Radio Loud AGN, namely blazars and mis-aligned AGN (MAGN).
Cross correlations with LSS provide a fundamental advance with
respect to the study of the IGRB spectrum only. They, in fact, give
access to the redshift dimension, which is integrated
out in the energy spectrum and thus cannot be used in an
analysis of LAT data by itself.
LSS tracers come with redshift information, and a positive correlation
with a given tracer is equivalent to isolating the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace
emission coming from the redshift range spanned by the tracer itself in the IGRB.
Moreover, since different tracers/catalogs are available,
each covering a different redshift range, using them in conjunction
effectively allows \emph{redshift tomography} of the
IGRB, i.e., splitting the emission according to the different redshift
ranges where such emission originated. In particular, for DM
searches it is useful to isolate the low-redshift part of the IGRB ($z
\lesssim 0.5$) where the DM signal peaks, as opposed to standard astrophysical
components, which typically peak at $z\sim1$.
Constraints on DM from the cross-correlation are stronger than those
from the energy spectrum since the DM signal then can be
compared with the low-$z$ IGRB (where the DM signal peaks) as
opposed to the whole $z$-integrated IGRB.
The cross-correlation signal is weak and has been detected only
slightly above $3\sigma$ very recently~\cite{Xia:2015wka} using
5~years of LAT data. Thus, such cross-correlation studies
will greatly benefit from additional data taking. By performing
accurate measurements of the cross correlation at different redshifts,
distinguishing DM-induced emission from the other astrophysical
contributors will be easier owing to the peculiar $z$-dependence of the LSS.
The measured correlations have been used in~\cite{Regis:2015zka}
to derive conservative constraints on DM neglecting any possible astrophysical
contribution, and in~\cite{2015ApJS..221...29C} to infer more aggressive
constraints by fitting a multi-component model with both DM and
astrophysical sources. When adopting the same DM annihilation boost
factor from DM substructures, the constraints from cross-correlation
studies are about a factor of 10 stronger than those derived from
the IGRB energy spectrum.
Finally, one-point statistics measurements are also sensitive to DM. These DM signatures
in the IGRB have been investigated theoretically
in~\cite{Feyereisen:2015cea, Lee:2008fm, Dodelson:2009ih}
but so far there have been no DM searches using 1-point
statistics with LAT data (see however~\cite{Malyshev:2011zi} for a non-DM oriented
work using 11 months of LAT data between 1 and 300 GeV).
However, as discussed in \S\ref{sec:dm_milky_way_current}, this method has also been
applied the Galactic center region to test whether the Galactic center
excess can be better fitted by a smooth component or as a
collection of confused/unresolved point sources~\cite{Lee:2015fea,Bartels:2015aea}.
\newText{These studies have typically started with a low-background
event sample (e.g., \irf{P7REP\_CLEAN}) and then masked both the
Galactic plane and some or all of the cataloged sources to increase the
signal-to-noise ratio. For example, Ref.~\cite{Xia:2015wka}
used \irf{P7REP\_CLEAN} data for $|b| > 30^{\circ}$, then
masked $1^{\circ}$ radius disks around all 3FGL catalog sources, and increased the disk radius
to $2^{\circ}$ degrees below 1\unit{GeV} around the 500 brightest cataloged
sources (see \S~3 of that paper for additional details on the
data selection).}
\subsubsection{IGRB Anisotropies and Cross-Correlation Measurements: Sensitivity Projections}
\label{sec:dm_cosmo_aps_projections}
Rather than deriving projections for each of the methods described in
\S\ref{sec:dm_cosmo_aps_status}, we will consider the specific case
of the APS analysis. We expect the sensitivity of the pixel
fluctuations to scale similarly with time. The sensitivity of the
cross-correlation with LSS tracers depends critically on the
details of forthcoming catalogs of LSS tracers, which are difficult to
predict.
Following the work in \cite{Fornasa:2012gu,Gomez-Vargas:2013cna},
we consider in App.~\ref{app:method_aps_sensitivity} two cases for
the properties of extragalactic DM halos and subhalos: the LOW case,
where halos are relatively poor in subhalos, and the HIGH case, that
imply large subhalo boosts to the DM annihilation cosmological signal.
The constraints for these scenarios are shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:Cp15years_limits}.
According to our sensitivity estimates, 15 years of data improve the
current results (which use 2 years of data \irf{P7\_CLEAN}) by about a factor of 2 to
3 for the two DM substructure models considered. This prediction
suggests that DM searches based on APS measurements are background
limited and scale roughly as $\sqrt{t}$. \newText{(The increased
statistics from using Pass 8 data account for 10--20\%
of the improvement.)}
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_22a}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_22b}
\end{center}
\caption{95\% CL limits on the DM annihilation cross section
considering two different scenarios for extragalactic DM halos
and their substructures (HIGH on left, LOW on right);
see~\cite{Gomez-Vargas:2013cna} for further details. The limits
from 2 years of data are shown for the four different energy bins
adopted in the analysis of APS data (cyan, blue, orange, and
green) and for a convolution of them (solid brown line). The
projections for the same energy bins and their convolution is
also shown for 15 years of data.}
\label{fig:Cp15years_limits}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Spectral Lines}
\label{sec:dm_lines}
In many DM models, pairs of DM particles can annihilate into a \mbox{$\gamma$ ray}\xspace
and a second particle ($X$), e.g., $\gamma \gamma$,
$\gamma Z$, or $\gamma H$. Since DM is strongly constrained
to be electrically neutral, it has no direct coupling to photons.
Thus the process $\chi \chi \rightarrow \gamma X$ occurs only
through higher-order loops, resulting in a branching fraction that
is only $\sim{10^{-4}}-{10^{-1}}$~\cite{Bergstrom:1997fh,Matsumoto:2005ui,Ferrer:2006hy,Gustafsson:2007pc,Profumo:2008yg}.
If a DM particle annihilates to $\gamma X$ the photons are
monochromatic in the rest frame with rest-frame energy
\begin{equation}\label{eq:LineEn}
E_{\gamma} = \ensuremath{m_\chi}\xspace \left( 1-\frac{m^2_{X}}{4m^2_{\chi}} \right).
\end{equation}
This would result in a line-like feature in the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace spectrum.
Possible evidence of such a line-like feature at 130\unit{GeV} strongly correlated with the Galactic center region was reported~\cite{Bringmann:2012vr,Weniger:2012tx,Tempel:2012ey,Su:2012ft},
and also seen in nearby galaxy clusters~\cite{2013EPJC...73.2578H},
and unassociated LAT sources~\cite{Su:2012zg,Hektor:2012jc}.
The feature was not seen in the vicinity of nearby dwarf
galaxies~\cite{GeringerSameth:2012sr}. However such a signal
is expected to be much fainter than in the Galactic center. Potential
instrumental effects and a similar feature detected in the bright
\mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emission from cosmic-ray interactions in Earth's upper
atmosphere (the Limb) have also been
discussed~\cite{Whiteson:2012hr,2013EPJC...73.2578H,Finkbeiner:2012ez}.
A systematic investigation of the spatial morphology of the 130\unit{GeV}
feature and other line-like features in the Galactic plane is
presented in~\cite{2013PDU.....2...90B}.
\subsubsection{Spectral Lines: Current Status}
\label{sec:dm_lines_status}
Since these reports, the LAT Collaboration has searched for
spectral lines using both the Pass~7REP~\cite{2013arXiv1304.5456B} and
Pass~8~\cite{2013arXiv1303.3514A} data sets and found that the original putative signal
has faded to less than one standard deviation significance ($ < 1\sigma$) once the
trials factors associated with scanning in DM particles mass from
1\unit{GeV} to 500\unit{GeV} and for several different \newText{ROIs}
associated with different DM radial profiles, which are shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:line_ROIs}.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.80\columnwidth]{./Figure_23}
\end{center}
\caption{Counts map for six years of \evtclass{P8R2\_CLEAN} data
binned in $1\unit{^{\circ}}\times1\unit{^{\circ}}$ spatial bins plotted in
Galactic coordinates in Hammer-Aitoff
projection. The energy range is 1 to 750\unit{GeV}. Also shown are the outlines of
the ROIs used in Ref.~\cite{2015PhRvD..91l2002A}. The Galactic plane
region with longitude greater than $6\unit{^{\circ}}$ from the Galactic center and
latitude smaller than $5\unit{^{\circ}}$ is removed from all signal ROIs.
The R3, R16, R41, and R90 ROIs are optimized for the gNFW ($\gamma=1.3$), NFW, Einasto, and Isothermal
profiles, respectively. \newText{Refs.~\cite{Bringmann:2012vr,Weniger:2012tx}
used somewhat different ROIs that were created by selecting a
set of pixels with the largest expected signal-to-noise given the
observed data and a similar set of DM density profiles; however
the difference in ROIs does not significantly alter the results.}
This figure is from Ref.~\cite{2015PhRvD..91l2002A} (reproduced by permission of the APS and the authors).
\label{fig:line_ROIs}}
\end{figure}
It is important to note that almost all of the fitting for spectral lines
has been performed in the energy domain only. That is to say,
the fitting used the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace spectrum averaged over each of the ROIs,
rather than simultaneously fitting spatial and spectral templates.
This method greatly reduced the systematic uncertainties associated
with modeling the astrophysical backgrounds, as we need only consider
the potential biases in modeling the background with relatively simple
spectral form rather than all of the potential biases from modeling
the complicated spatial distribution of the Galactic diffuse emission.
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:fractional_signal_lines}, by scanning
control regions including the Galactic plane away from the Galactic
center, the Vela pulsar and the Earth's limb, we have found
that that the systematic uncertainties are at the level of
$f_{\rm syst} \sim 0.015$
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_24a}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_24b}
\end{center}
\caption{ Fractional signals (\ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{sig}}}\xspace) in a scan of the Galactic plane.
(Left) dots show observed \ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{sig}}}\xspace in 31 $10\unit{^{\circ}}\times10\unit{^{\circ}}$ boxes along the Galactic
plane. The solid red line is the average of the statistical
uncertainties of the individual boxes. The blue dashed line
is the value we chose to characterize \ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{syst}}}\xspace modeling biases. (Right)
The same, but with values of \ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{sig}}}\xspace from the Vela pulsar and Earth Limb
control samples added and the Galactic plane points shown in gray.
These figures are from Ref.~\cite{2015PhRvD..91l2002A} (reproduced by permission of the APS
and the authors); see that reference for additional details.
\label{fig:fractional_signal_lines}}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Spectral Lines: Sensitivity Projections}
\label{sec:dm_lines_projections}
To project the effect of additional data on searches for spectral lines, we use
largely the same methodology as for the DM searches targeting the
Galactic center and halo (\S\ref{sec:dm_milky_way}). The main
difference is that instead of calculating the effective background by
summing over pixels and energy bins, here we only sum over the energy
bins. We model the background with a simple spectral form (typically
the product of a power law and the exposure as a function of energy),
model the signal with the LAT's energy dispersion function (which has
a resolution of $\Delta E/E < 0.10$ from 1\unit{GeV} to 500\unit{GeV}), use
narrow energy bins (typically $0.01$~dex, or $\Delta E/E = 0.023$),
and assign $\ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{syst}}}\xspace = 0.015$.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.50\columnwidth]{./Figure_25}
\end{center}
\caption{ Projected upper limits in signal counts for 15~years of LAT
data for three different ROIs. Dashed lines show projected limits from statistical uncertainties
only, while the solid lines show projected limits including both statistical
and systematic uncertainties, with the level of systematic uncertainty
assigned at $\ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{syst}}}\xspace = 1.5\%$ of the effective background. See text for details.
\label{fig:lines_limit_projections}}
\end{figure}
From the projections shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:lines_limit_projections}
it is clear that searches for spectral lines are systematics limited up
to \roughly100\unit{GeV} (\roughly10\unit{GeV}) for the R41 (R3)
region, and background limited up to hundreds of \unit{GeV} (i.e., the
expected upper limit is $> 10\unit{ph}$).
\subsection{Axions and Axion-Like Particles}
\label{sec:dm_axion_targets}
Axions and ALPs may be detected through either their decay to photons
or through spectral signatures in high-energy sources induced by photon-ALP oscillations.
Heavy axions decaying into \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace would be very similar to
decaying DM and could potentially be constrained with observations of
the IGRB (see \S\ref{sec:dm_cosmo}).\footnote{However, these
heavy axions cannot constitute the DM since their lifetime is too short.
ALPs in this mass range, on the other hand, could constitute all of the
DM, if additional degrees of freedom above the electro-weak scale at
high energies are assumed~\cite{2012JCAP...02..032C}.
Otherwise, the ALPs would exceed the critical density of the Universe.}
Decaying light axions and ALPs could be detected at \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace energies
if they are produced relativistically. This is the case in the
production, e.g., through nucleon-nucleon Bremsstrahlung in the
interiors of neutron stars~\cite{PhysRevD.93.045019}.
A second approach is to search for signatures of photon-ALP oscillation
in the spectra of \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace sources. For \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace propagating
through a magnetic field $B_{\mu\mathrm{G}} = B / \mu\mathrm{G}$
and a plasma with plasma frequency $\omega_\mathrm{neV} = \omega /
\mathrm{neV}$, the oscillation probability between photons and ALPs
is maximal and independent of energy between $E_\mathrm{crit} \lesssim E \lesssim E_\mathrm{max}$,
where~\cite[e.g.][]{2007PhRvL..99w1102H,bassan2010}
\begin{eqnarray}
E_\mathrm{crit} &=& 2.5\,\mathrm{GeV}\,\frac{|m_\mathrm{neV}^2 - \omega^2_\mathrm{neV}|}{g_{11} B_{\mu\mathrm{G}}},
\label{eq:Ecritaxions} \\
E_\mathrm{max} &=& 2.12\times10^6\,\mathrm{GeV}\,g_{11}B_{\mu\mathrm{G}}^{-1},
\label{eq:Emaxaxions}
\end{eqnarray}
for ALP masses $m_\mathrm{neV} = m_a / \mathrm{neV}$ and photon-ALP
coupling $g_{11} = g_{a\gamma} / 10^{-11}\,\mathrm{GeV}^{-1}$.~\footnote{In
these equations, we have neglected a possible photon dispersion
term~\cite{dobrynina2015}, since it will not be relevant for the energies and magnetic fields
considered in the following.}
The magnetic field strengths in galaxies and clusters of galaxies are
found to be of the order of the $mG$ and $\mu\mathrm{G}$, respectively~\cite[e.g.][]{govoni2004}.
For the intergalactic medium, the field strength is constrained to be
$B\lesssim 10^{-9}\,\mathrm{G}$ \cite[e.g.][]{widrow2002}.
Thus, from these numbers and
Eqs.~\ref{eq:Ecritaxions}--\ref{eq:Emaxaxions}, it is evident
that for \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace propagating in the magnetic fields of galaxies, galaxy
clusters and the intergalactic medium, only an oscillation into light
ALPs is possible (i.e., $m_a \lesssim \mu\mathrm{eV}$) whereas the
conversion probability to axions is vanishingly small.
The photon-ALP oscillations could manifest themselves in two ways
in the spectra of \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace sources:
\begin{enumerate}
\item{Above $E_\mathrm{crit}$, up to 50\,\% of the photons of an
initially un-polarized pure photon beam
can convert into ALPs, leading to a decrease of the source photon flux.
Depending on the (often turbulent) ambient magnetic field, this
decrease is accompanied by chaotic oscillations (irregularities)
in the energy spectrum~\cite{ostman2005,wouters2012,Wouters:2013hua}. These
spectral irregularities are not time dependent; thus, for each
target, a particular, stable-in-time spectral pattern is expected.}
\item{ALPs could enhance the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace fluxes from cosmological
objects that are otherwise attenuated in interaction with
photons of the extragalactic background light (EBL)~\cite[e.g.][]{meyer2013,Simet:2007sa,2007PhRvD..76l1301D,sanchezconde2009,2011JCAP...11..020D}.
The EBL spans from UV to far-infrared and is
composed of the integrated starlight emitted over the entire
history of the Universe and starlight absorbed and re-emitted
by dust in galaxies (e.g.,~\cite{hauser2001}). A fraction of the
photons converting to ALPs during propagation could lead to a
secondary component in the spectrum at high energies given that
the ALPs can reconvert into \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace before reaching Earth.}
\end{enumerate}
Photon-ALP oscillations could also be used to search for a \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace
signal from core-collapse supernovae \cite{1996PhLB..383..439B,1996PhRvL..77.2372G,payez2015}.
Axions and ALPs would be produced in such explosions in a burst
lasting several seconds, similar to the production of neutrinos.
ALPs produced in such a way could subsequently convert into
\mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace in the magnetic field of the Milky Way. On the other hand,
\mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace produced in the dense core of the supernovae would not escape to
the surface, and the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emission is expected to be delayed with
respect to the neutrino emission. Thus, the observation of a pulse
of \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace coincident with the expected neutrino signal from a
Galactic supernova would be evidence for the existence of ALPs.
\subsubsection{Axions and ALPs: Current Status}
\label{sec:axions_status}
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = 1\linewidth]{./Figure_26}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:alps}Current status of the limits imposed on the
ALP parameter space by different experiments and targets.
Limits derived with LAT observations are shown as \newText{dark red}
(NGC\,1275 in the Perseus galaxy cluster~\cite{ajello:2016zue}) and gray hatched
(neutron stars~\cite{PhysRevD.93.045019}) regions. Limits from other
experiments are shown in red. The parameter space where ALPs
could explain a low \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace opacity is shown in light blue.
The parameter space where ALPs could explain \newText{hints for} a low \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace
opacity are shown in \newText{blue}. \newText{Sensitivity estimates for
future laboratory experiments are shown in green.}
The QCD axion line is shown in yellow. ALP parameters below
the dashed line could account for all the DM. See
Refs.~\cite{2013arXiv1311.0029E,meyer2014cta} and references therein.}
\end{figure}
The current limits on the ALP parameters are summarized in
Fig.~\ref{fig:alps} (red shaded regions). The search for \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace from
axion or ALP decays produced in neutron star interiors lead
to the limits labeled ``ALPs from NS'' (gray hatched region, assuming
the model-dependent factor $\mathcal{N} = 1$)~\cite{PhysRevD.93.045019}.
The analysis used five years of Pass~7REP LAT
data and combined the results of four nearby neutron stars which are not
observed at \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace energies. The limits constrain the QCD axion
mass (black line and yellow band in Fig.~\ref{fig:alps}) to be below $7.9\times10^{-2}\unit{eV}$.
It should be noted that these limits not only depend on the axion
and ALP coupling to photons but also on the axion and ALP production
through nucleon-nucleon Bremsstrahlung.
Limits depending only on the coupling between ALPs and photons were
derived by searching for spectral irregularities around $E_\mathrm{crit}$
in the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace spectrum of the radio galaxy NGC\,1275~\cite{ajello:2016zue}.
In total, six years of Pass~8 data were analyzed. NGC\,1275 is the most
viable source for such searches as it is (a) a bright \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace
emitter leading to high signal-to-noise ratio and a well determined
spectrum and (b) it is located at the center of the cool-core Perseus
galaxy cluster. Such galaxy clusters have strong magnetic fields of
the order of tens of $\mu$G at their centers~\cite[e.g.][]{govoni2004}.
The limits are the strongest reported so far in the mass range
$0.5\,\mathrm{neV} \lesssim m_a \lesssim 20\,\mathrm{neV}$ and surpass
the sensitivity of the planned laboratory experiment ALPS~II~\cite{alpsII}
in that mass range. Together with the bounds from the non-observation
of a Gamma-Ray Burst (GRB) from the SN\,1987A~\cite{payez2015} and the non-observations
of irregularities with the H.E.S.S. Cerenkov telescopes in the
spectrum of the blazar PKS\,2155$-$304~\cite{hess2013:alps} (see also~\cite{2015ApJ...813L..34D}),
ALPs are now almost ruled out as a viable solution for the (now questioned) reported
evidence of a reduced opacity of the Universe to \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace~\cite{meyer2013}
(blue shaded region in Fig.~\ref{fig:alps}). However, the limits do
not yet constrain models where ALPs could account for all the DM,
indicated by the dashed line labeled $\theta_1\mathcal{N} = 1$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:alps}.
\subsubsection{Axions and ALPs: Sensitivity Projections}
\label{sec:axions_projections}
The flux limits derived from the observation of neutron stars
in~\cite{PhysRevD.93.045019} depend on the precision of the measurement
of the astrophysical backgrounds and are therefore expected
to improve with $\sqrt{t}$, similarly to
the dSphs for lower WIMP masses.
On the whole, the LAT sensitivity to ALPs from the measurement of
distortions of the spectrum of NGC\,1275 appears to be systematics
limited. The major, dominant uncertainties in the limits derived from the spectrum of NGC\,1275 in~\cite{ajello:2016zue}
stem from the unknown magnetic field structure in the Perseus galaxy
cluster over large spatial scales.
Future radio observations with the Square Kilometer Array will provide a wealth
of rotation measures~\cite{gaensler2004}.
These will improve understanding of the strength and morphology
of the cluster magnetic field~\cite{bonafede2015}, and thus lower the uncertainties.
On the other hand, the bounds on low-mass ALPs ($m_a \lesssim
1\,\mathrm{neV}$) could be significantly improved if a Galactic
supernova occurred during the operational lifetime of the LAT: its
sensitivity is superior to that of the Gamma-Ray Spectrometer of
the {\it Solar Maximum Mission} that was used to derive the current bounds
from the non-detection of \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace from SN\,1987A (light-red
shaded region labeled ``SN \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace burst'' in
Fig.~\ref{fig:alps}).
Future LAT observations of distant AGNs could also provide an
additional step forward to testing ALPs as a possible solution to the
suggested reduced opacity of the Universe to \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace
\cite{2011PhRvD..84j5030D,2011JCAP...11..020D,meyer2013,2014JETPL.100..355R}.
In particular,
a careful statistical study of those \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace suffering from the strongest
EBL attenuation should shed light on the role of ALPs as possible
``boosters'' of the cosmological \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace flux received at Earth. The
LAT is the ideal instrument not only because of its point-source
sensitivity, which enables observation of high-redshift AGNs up
to very high energies, but very especially thanks to its continuous
scanning of the entire \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace sky. Indeed, any violent and transient
cosmological phenomena (such as \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace flares from blazars or GRBs)
that could be potentially used for these opacity studies will very
likely be observed by the LAT (consequently enhancing the chances to
detect some of the few photons expected at the highest optical
depths). Note that this is less likely for Cerenkov telescopes
given their much narrower fields of view and reduced duty cycles.
\section{Dark Matter and Dark Matter Particle Candidates}
\label{sec:dm_theory}
Overwhelming evidence indicates that the observed structure of the Universe
cannot be explained by the Standard Model of particle
physics alone. In particular, measurements of galactic rotation curves~\cite[e.g.,][]{Rubin:1980zd}
and galaxy cluster dynamics~\cite[e.g.,][]{Zwicky:1933gu}, precision measurements of the
cosmic microwave background~\cite[e.g.,][]{Ade:2013zuv,2015arXiv150201589P}, observations of the primordial
abundances of heavy isotopes produced by Big Bang nucleosynthesis~\cite[e.g.,][]{Olive:2003iq},
and other lines of evidence all point to a substantial fraction of
the Universe's energy density being in a form of matter
without significant interaction with the Standard Model particles.
Numerical simulations of large-scale
structure also support this conclusion; such simulations require
non-relativistic DM in order to be consistent with
observations~\cite[e.g.,][and references therein]{2012AnP...524..507F}.
From the observational evidence, we infer that DM interacts gravitationally,
is non-relativistic (i.e., ``cold'') during the formation of large-scale structure~\cite[e.g.,][]{Ade:2013zuv,2015arXiv150201589P},
and does not have large scattering cross sections
with either itself~\cite[e.g.,][]{Markevitch:2003at} or Standard Model particles~\cite[e.g.,][]{Akerib:2013tjd}.
No particle in the Standard Model meets the requirements.
We have no other solid experimental or theoretical understanding of the
fundamental nature of DM.
In the standard cosmology, because DM is cold, its distribution is structured over
a wide range of mass scales. Small, dense DM clumps
form first and later merge to form larger structures.
Each of these structures, such as the DM {\it halo} in which the Milky Way resides,
retains a population of less massive {\it subhalos}. In this report we
consider searches that target DM halos and subhalos at distance scales
from \unit{kpc} (e.g., \S\ref{sec:dm_milky_way}) to \unit{Gpc} (\S\ref{sec:dm_cosmo}).
Many particles have been posited as DM candidates. Here we
focus in particular on weakly interactive massive particles (WIMPs) and
axions or ALPs, as these are well-motivated
candidates that may leave detectable signatures in the LAT data.
\subsection{Weakly Interacting Massive Particles}
\label{sec:dm_wimps}
A heavy ($\ensuremath{m_\chi}\xspace \gtrsim 1$\unit{GeV}) particle with a finite
annihilation cross section into Standard Model particles
would be theoretically well motivated as DM.
The canonical example of such DM is a non-relativistic thermal
relic that froze out of equilibrium with the particle bath
in the early Universe. While significant annihilation would cease during
freeze-out, if the DM pair annihilation is due to an $s$-wave process and
therefore velocity independent, low rates of annihilation would
continue to the present day.
Such a DM particle could yield the measured DM energy
density today, $\Omega h^2 = 0.1199\pm 0.0027$~\cite{Ade:2013zuv,2015arXiv150201589P}, provided the
annihilation cross section averaged over the velocity distribution is near
$\ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace \sim 3\times 10^{-26}$~cm$^3$~s$^{-1}$~\cite{2012PhRvD..86b3506S}\footnote{Unless
the $s$-wave amplitude is $\lesssim 10$ times smaller than the $p$-wave amplitude,
the current annihilation rate should be within an order of magnitude of the
required rate for thermal relic DM~\cite{2010PhRvD..82i5007C}.}.
This can be realized in models with supersymmetry~\cite[e.g.,][]{2015PhR...555....1B,2012AnP...524..479B},
though other models can also work~\cite[e.g.,][]{Feng:2008ya}.
However, relatively simple modifications of the canonical thermal relic theory
can result in present-day annihilation cross sections that differ by orders
of magnitude from the standard assumption of
$\ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace \sim 3\times 10^{-26}$~cm$^3$~s$^{-1}$~\cite{ArkaniHamed:2008qn}.
Furthermore, in some theoretical frameworks, the DM particles
may decay with lifetimes that are large compared to the age
of the Universe, at rates that may be observable
(see~\cite{2013IJMPA..2830040I}
for a recent review).
Therefore in our searches we do not presuppose anything about the
intensity of the expected DM signals.
The end products of such DM annihilation can be searched for as signals
correlated with astrophysical objects known to have large DM content.
Because \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace are not deflected by magnetic fields, regions where
DM is densest are directions with the greatest intensity
of \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace from DM annihilations.
However, these signals must be measured relative to backgrounds from products of Standard Model
astrophysical processes (\S\ref{sec:backgrounds}).
Final states including \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace are a generic expectation of
DM annihilation and can result from many different annihilation
channels. Two-body final states (with one or both a photon)
produce \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace that have a characteristic line spectrum (see \S\ref{sec:dm_lines}).
DM may also convert into pairs (or a larger multiplicity) of quarks,
leptons, gluons, or $SU(2)_L$ gauge bosons,
all of which will decay or hadronize, resulting in a continuum
spectrum of \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace and other stable particles (see \S\ref{sec:dm_spectrum}).
The LAT is also able to measure spectra of electrons~\cite{2009PhRvL.102r1101A,2010PhRvD..82i2004A,2010PhRvD..82i2003A},
positrons~\cite{2012PhRvL.108a1103A}, and other cosmic rays, but we
will not discuss sensitivity projections for those measurements in this report.
\subsubsection{Characterizing a WIMP Signal in the Gamma-Ray Sky}
\label{sec:dm_signal}
The \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace flux from DM annihilation (or decay) depends
on the product of factors related to the particle physics
and the spatial distribution of the DM.
\newText{We do not know the mass and annihilation (or decay) channels of DM particles.
However, if DM annihilates into a pair of Standard Model particles other than
neutrinos, be they gauge bosons, quarks, or charged leptons, then (with the exception of the stable particles
such as $e^{\pm}$), those particles must decay or hadronize. This leads to a cascade of Standard Model
particles, decaying down to electrons, protons, their anti-partners, and a
large multiplicity of photons with \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace energies. Photons are also
emitted as final-state radiation from charged particles, including \ensuremath{e^+e^-}\xspace
pairs. Finally, secondary \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace can be emitted as the final state
particles propagate from the interaction point by
such processes as inverse-Compton scattering (from $e^{\pm}$ interactions
with radiation fields) or pion production (from hadronic interactions
with interstellar gas and dust).}
The differential flux of
\newText{prompt} \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace from DM annihilation within a solid
angle $\Delta \Omega$ is typically expressed as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:general_flux}
\frac{d\phi(\Delta \Omega)}{dE_\gamma} = \left( \frac{x \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace}{8\pi}\frac{dN_\gamma}{dE_\gamma}\frac{1}{\ensuremath{m_\chi}\xspace^2}\right) \left( \int_{\Delta\Omega} d\Omega \frac{dJ_{\rm ann}}{d\Omega} \right).
\end{equation}
\noindent where $x=1$ if DM is its own antiparticle and $x=1/2$
if it is not (in this paper we will assume that $x=1$), \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace is
the velocity-averaged annihilation cross section, $\ensuremath{m_\chi}\xspace$ is the WIMP mass,
and $dN_\gamma/dE_\gamma$ is the differential spectrum of \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace from
annihilation of a pair of DM particles (see
\S\ref{sec:dm_spectrum}). \newText{Eq.~\ref{eq:general_flux}
does not include the secondary \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace, which can modify both the
spectrum and spatial distribution of the emission.}
The ``$J$~factor'' depends on the details of the spatial distribution of the DM:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:J_factor}
\frac{dJ_{\rm ann}}{d\Omega} = \int_\text{l.o.s.}\!\!\!\!\!
d\ell \rho(\vec{\ell})^2
\end{equation}
\noindent The integration is performed along the line of sight, and $\rho(\vec{\ell})$
is the density of the DM particles~\cite{Ullio:2002pj}. For DM decay (as opposed to annihilation)
the factor of $\left( \frac{x \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace}{8\pi}\frac{1}{\ensuremath{m_\chi}\xspace^2}\right)$
becomes $\left( \frac{1}{4\pi}\frac{1}{\tau \ensuremath{m_\chi}\xspace}\right)$, where
$\tau$ is the lifetime of the DM particle, and $\frac{dJ_{\rm dec}}{d\Omega} = \int_\text{l.o.s.}\!\!\!\!\!
d\ell \rho(\vec{\ell})$. As we are concerned primarily with exploring the
case for additional data-taking with the LAT in this paper
we will focus on DM annihilation for concreteness. However,
\newText{as we will discuss in \S\ref{sec:dm_targets}}
our estimates of the scaling of the detection sensitivity would
be very similar for the case of DM decay.
The $J$~factor is an astrophysical quantity that is target dependent. Finding an
astronomical object that maximizes this quantity is a key step in
designing a sensitive search for indirect signals of DM. (It is also important
to consider the astrophysical backgrounds associated with potential
targets, see \S\ref{sec:backgrounds}.)
Typically the total $J$~factor integrated over the
solid angle of a region of interest (ROI, $\Delta\Omega$) is quoted for a given target:
\begin{equation}
J(\Delta\Omega) \equiv \int_{\Delta\Omega} d\Omega \int_\text{l.o.s.} d\ell ~\rho^2_\chi(\vec{\ell}\,).
\end{equation}
Note that $J$
depends implicitly
on the distance to the DM target. The density profiles
of DM halos must be determined
from a combination of observation and simulation, and depend
on the search target.
As an example, the densities and resulting integrated $J$~factors for various potential DM density profiles
for the Milky Way are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:gc_radial}.
For this comparison we adopted a
scale radius of $r_s = 20\unit{kpc}$, and selected $\rho_0$ such that
the local DM density (at $8.5\unit{kpc}$ from the Galactic center)
is $0.4\unit{GeV}\unit{cm}^{-3}$ \newText{(see,
e.g.,~\cite{2010JCAP...08..004C,2012ApJ...756...89B,2015JCAP...12..001P})}.
The parameters were chosen to be consistent with dynamical
constraints~\cite[e.g.,][]{2013JCAP...07..016N,2012PASJ...64...75S,2010A&A...509A..25W}.
Details for the various radial profile models are given in App.~\ref{app:dark_matter_profiles}.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_1a}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_1b}
\end{center}
\caption{The density as a function of Galactocentric radius (left) and
the integrated $J$~factor as a function of angular separation from the
Galactic center for several widely considered radial profiles of the DM halo of the Milky Way.
\label{fig:gc_radial}}
\end{figure}
\newText{With the exception of annihilation to leptons in relatively dense environments, such
as near the Galactic center~\cite{Buch:2015iya,Kaplinghat:2015gha, Lacroix:2015wfx, 2013JCAP...10..029G},
secondary processes are sub-dominant for \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emission and we will not consider them
in this paper. (See, however, \S\ref{sec:disc_other_efforts} for discussion
of constraints on lepton-dominated channels from cosmic-ray and
radio observations.)}
\subsubsection{Spectrum of Gamma Rays from WIMP Interactions}
\label{sec:dm_spectrum}
Fig.~\ref{fig:annihilation_spectra} shows the prompt-emission
spectra, $dN_\gamma/dE_\gamma$, per pair annihilation, for a variety of
channels and DM masses~\cite{Jeltema:2008hf}. We typically
present results for the \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace channel in this report. Similar results
apply to other channels, but in some cases we
highlight how the results depend on the channel considered,
in particular for the \ensuremath{\tau^+\tau^-}\xspace channel, for which $dN_\gamma/dE_\gamma$
peaks at higher energies.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_2a}\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_2b}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_2c}\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_2d}
\end{center}
\caption{Spectra, $dN_\gamma/dE_\gamma$, of \newText{prompt} \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace per DM pair annihilation for different
annihilation channels and DM masses. (Upper left) Annihilation spectra of
200\unit{GeV} DM into various annihilation channels. Annihilation
spectra into \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace (upper right), \ensuremath{\tau^+\tau^-}\xspace (lower left), and $W^+W^-$
(lower right) for a range of DM masses.
See Ref.~\cite{Jeltema:2008hf} and
App.~\ref{app:dark_matter_spectra}
for details of the calculation of these spectra. \newText{These
spectra do not include secondary emission of \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace, which
will enhance the emission at lower energies in the leptonic
channels and can be important in dense environments.}
\label{fig:annihilation_spectra}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Axions and Axion-Like Particles}
\label{sec:dm_axions}
Alternative classes of DM candidates include axions and ALPs.
Axions were originally considered to be pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone bosons (pNGBs)
that arise when an additional symmetry of the standard-model Lagrangian
is spontaneously broken~\cite{weinberg1978,wilczek1978}.
This additional shift symmetry was introduced to solve the strong CP problem
in quantum chromodynamics~\cite{1977PhRvL..38.1440P}.
The axion mass $m_a$ is inversely proportional
to the breaking scale $f_a$ of the additional symmetry, $m_a \sim
0.6\unit{meV} (10^{10}\unit{GeV} / f_a)$~\cite{jaeckel2010}.
For ALPs, which are commonly predicted in string theories~\cite[e.g.][]{witten1984,ringwald2014review}, these two parameters are independent.
If produced non-thermally in the early Universe via the so-called misalignment mechanism, the coherent oscillations of the pNGB field
can act as cold DM~\cite{Abbott:1982af,preskill1983,1983PhLB..120..137D,marsh2011,arias2012}.
Axions and ALPs can be detected through their coupling to photons described by the Lagrangian~\cite[e.g.][]{raffelt1988},
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{a\gamma} = -\frac{1}{4}g_{a\gamma}F_{\mu\nu}\tilde{F}^{\mu\nu} a,
\end{equation}
where $F_{\mu\nu}$ ($\tilde{F}_{\mu\nu}$) is the (dual) electromagnetic field tensor, $a$ the pNGB field strength,
and $g_{a\gamma}$ the coupling constant to photons.
The coupling is related to the symmetry breaking scale via
\begin{equation}
g_{a\gamma} = \frac{\alpha}{2\pi}\frac{\mathcal N}{f_a},
\end{equation}
with the fine-structure constant $\alpha$ and a model-dependent factor $\mathcal N$, usually assumed to be of the order one.
As a consequence of two-photon coupling,
ALPs and axions can be detected either through their decay
to photons (as a \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace flux associated with objects
with extreme magnetic fields, such as neutron stars)
or an oscillation to photons in external magnetic fields
(as irregularities in the spectra of \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace sources).
The pNGB lifetime for photon decay in vacuum is given by~\cite{preskill1983}
\begin{equation}
\tau_{a\gamma} = \frac{64\pi}{m_a^3g_{a\gamma}^2} = 1.3\times10^{27}\,\mathrm{s}\left(\frac{g_{a\gamma}}{10^{-11}\unit{GeV}^{-1}}\right)^{-2}
\left(\frac{m_a}{\unit{eV}} \right)^{-3}.
\end{equation}
For axions and ALPs to be cold DM, we require that they are sufficiently stable, i.e., $\tau_{a\gamma}$ must be larger
than the age of the Universe $\sim 13.7\,\mathrm{Gyr}$.
A further requirement is that the pNGB field should have
started to oscillate no later than when the expanding early Universe reached matter-radiation equality.
Also, we require that mass not receive any further radiative corrections, so that the energy density $\Omega_a$ is
diluted with the expanding Universe.
For an axion or ALP making up a fraction $\Omega_a / \Omega$ of the total DM,
these requirements lead to an upper limit on the photon coupling in terms of the mass~\cite{arias2012},
\begin{equation}
\frac{g_{a\gamma}}{10^{-11}\,\unit{GeV}^{-1}} \lesssim 2.20\times10^3 \theta_1 \mathcal{N} \sqrt{\frac{m_a}{\unit{eV}}} \sqrt{\frac{\Omega}{\Omega_a}},
\end{equation}
where $\theta_1$ is the initial misalignment angle of the pNGB field.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The \textit{Fermi} LAT Collaboration acknowledges generous ongoing support
from a number of agencies and institutes that have supported both the
development and the operation of the LAT as well as scientific data analysis.
These include the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the
Department of Energy in the United States, the Commissariat \`a l'Energie Atomique
and the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique / Institut National de Physique
Nucl\'eaire et de Physique des Particules in France, the Agenzia Spaziale Italiana
and the Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare in Italy, the Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), High Energy Accelerator Research
Organization (KEK) and Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) in Japan, and
the K.~A.~Wallenberg Foundation, the Swedish Research Council and the
Swedish National Space Board in Sweden.
Additional support for science analysis during the operations phase is
gratefully acknowledged from the Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica in
Italy and the Centre National d'\'Etudes Spatiales in France.
\newText{Brandon Anderson and Manuel Meyer have been supported by
a grant of the Knut and Alice Wallenberg foundation, PI : Jan Conrad.
Miguel S\'anchez-Cond is a Wenner-Gren Fellow and acknowledges the
support of the Wenner-Gren Foundations to develop his research.}
We thank Daniel Hooper and Bridget Bertoni for useful
discussions about projecting the sensitivity for searches targeting
potential dark satellites among the LAT unassociated sources.
We thank Leslie Rosenberg and Gray Rybka for providing the
contours from the ADMX axion search used in preparing Fig.~\ref{fig:alps}.
We thank Tim Tait and William Shepherd for their discussions on
dark matter complementarity with direct-detection experiments and collider searches.
We thank David Williams and Emmanuel Moulin for discussions on the
CTA sensitivity and for providing data used in Fig.~\ref{fig:gce_iact_limits}.
Finally, we thank Francesca Calore and Matthieu Schaller for preparing
Fig.~\ref{fig:lat_gc_radial} based on Fig.~4 in~{\cite{2016MNRAS.455.4442S}.
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Since its launch in June 2008, the \Fermic\xspace~{\it Gamma-ray Space Telescope}
(\Fermic\xspace) has surveyed the high-energy sky from
20\unit{MeV} to above 300\unit{GeV} with its main instrument,
the Large Area Telescope (LAT)~\cite{Atwood:2009ez}.
The LAT has opened new experimental windows into physics beyond the Standard Model.
In this report we consider one
such window, the indirect search for dark matter via observations of high-energy \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace.
Annihilation or decay of massive dark matter (DM) particles could produce \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace, and
the coupling of light axions or axion-like particles (ALPs) to photons in a magnetic field would alter the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace spectra of distant sources. For these reasons, \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace observations could provide compelling indirect evidence for particle DM.
Analyses of LAT data have provided
hints of a potential signal of DM annihilation from the Galactic
center~\cite[e.g.,][]{2011PhLB..697..412H,2014PhRvD..90b3526A,2014arXiv1402.6703D}
(and see \S\ref{sec:dm_milky_way_current}) and in observations of other regions have set the strongest
constraints on DM annihilation cross sections~\cite{2015PhRvL.115w1301A}.
Several comprehensive and detailed reviews of the
particle physics and particle astrophysics related to DM
searches with the LAT and other instruments have been published
recently---see, e.g.,
\cite{2010ARA&A..48..495F,2011ARA&A..49..155P,2015JETP..121.1104C},
expanding on earlier summaries, e.g.,
\cite{2005PhR...405..279B}. In this paper we will
focus in particular on the details that are relevant for
understanding the sensitivity of indirect DM searches with the LAT data
and quantifying the expected sensitivity gains with additional data taking.
This paper is organized as follows. In \S\ref{sec:dm_theory} we
summarize the phenomenology of DM searches in \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace data.
In \S\ref{sec:backgrounds} we describe the astrophysical backgrounds
for these searches, and discuss both the statistical and systematic
uncertainties arising from those backgrounds.
In \S\ref{sec:dm_targets} we present the primary astrophysical
targets for DM searches with the LAT, providing the status of current
searches and estimates of the sensitivity for DM searches projecting
to 10 and 15~years of data taking. In \S\ref{sec:discussion} we
examine the projected search sensitivities and compare them
with indirect DM searches based on observations at other energies and
of cosmic rays and neutrinos. We also compare them with current and
projected constraints on DM derived from underground detector searches (``direct-detection'' DM
searches) and from searches for new physics at the Large Hadron
Collider (LHC, ``production'' searches). We then summarize our
findings and present the expected sensitivity reach for DM searches with the continuing
\Fermic\xspace mission \S\ref{sec:summary}. Finally, we provide technical details in
several appendices.
\section{The \FermiLATc\xspace and LAT Data}
\label{sec:lat}
The LAT is a pair-conversion telescope that converts \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace
to $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs that are tracked in the instrument. The data
analysis is event-based; individual pair conversion events are reconstructed and
their energies and directions are estimated from the reconstructed data.
Rates of charged-particle backgrounds exceed the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace rates by
factors of up to $10^4$, requiring powerful event selection criteria
to obtain relatively pure \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace samples.
The LAT consists of three detector subsystems: a
tracker/converter to promote pair conversion and measure the
directions of the resulting particles, a calorimeter composed of 8.6
radiation lengths of CsI(Tl) scintillation crystals that provides an
energy resolution of $\Delta E / E \sim 10\%$ at 100\unit{GeV}, and an
anti-coincidence detector of plastic scintillator tiles that
surrounds the tracker and is key in charged-particle background rejection.
The tracker comprises 18 $x$-$y$ layers of silicon-strip detectors;
the front 12 layers are interleaved with thin (3\% radiation
length) tungsten converter foils and the next four layers are interleaved with
thick (18\% radiation length) foils, and the final two layers have no converter foils.
Detailed descriptions of the LAT and of its performance can
be found elsewhere~\cite{Atwood:2009ez,2012ApJS..203....4A}.
Iterations of the LAT event reconstruction and classification algorithms
have been grouped into so called ``Passes''. A number of iterations occurred
before launch and were informed by simulations and beam test data of prototypes.
For the first three years of the \Fermic\xspace mission, data were processed with the last pre-launch versions
(``Pass 6'').
Since then, the data have been reprocessed three times.
The first was with ``Pass~7''~\cite{2012ApJS..203....4A}, which
consists of the same event reconstruction algorithms,
but updated event classification criteria to account for knowledge
gained about the LAT performance and charged-particle backgrounds
since launch. The second reprocessing, designated ``Pass~7
Reprocessed'' or ``Pass~7Rep'', used almost exactly the same
algorithms as Pass~7 but incorporated updated calibration
constants. The most recent reprocessing has been with
``Pass~8'', which included entirely new reconstruction algorithms that were
designed to account for effects observed in on-orbit data that had not
been anticipated in simulations and affected the performance of the
LAT, in particular the pile-up of out-of-time signals into event readouts~\cite{2013arXiv1303.3514A}.
Pass~8 also included new reconstruction algorithms that had not been
fully implemented prior to launch, such as improved pattern
recognition in all three sub-systems~\cite{2013arXiv1303.3514A}, and
improvements to the energy fitting algorithm
that push the upper edge of the LAT energy range up to 3\unit{TeV}~\cite{2012JPhCS.404a2033B}.
Each reprocessing has included all of the data from the entire mission
to date. The LAT Collaboration released the
entire \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace data sets, and corresponding analysis files (see below), for each,
to present a single, coherent, data set.
Each Pass of the algorithms implements several different event selection criteria that
are optimized for different types of analyses. For Pass~8, the LAT Collaboration
redeveloped the nested event selections that provide varying levels of cosmic-ray
background rejection~\cite{2013arXiv1303.3514A}. The nomenclature convention
for the various event selections is to provide the Pass version and the name of
the event selection criteria (e.g., \evtclass{P8R2\_SOURCE}).
Associated with each event selection are instrument response functions (IRFs)
that parametrize the LAT performance. As our understanding of the
instrument improves, from time to time the LAT Collaboration updates
the IRFs for the various event selections. The IRF names indicate
the analysis Pass they are associated with, as well as a version number
(e.g., \irf{P8R2\_SOURCE\_V6}). More details about the event reconstruction, event
selection criteria, and IRFs can be found in Refs.~\cite{2012ApJS..203....4A} and~\cite{2013arXiv1303.3514A}.
\footnote{Performance details for each of the iterations of the event reconstruction and classification
algorithms used since launch are available at
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/exp/glast/groups/canda/lat\_Performance.htm}
At the time of writing, the most recent published versions of many LAT analyses were
performed with approximately six years of data, running from 2008 August to 2014 August.
Throughout this paper we will specify both the Pass version and data interval used for
the LAT results we discuss. Most of the current results presented in this paper
were obtained with either the Pass~7 Rep or Pass~8 data sets. Unless
stated otherwise, all of projections that we present were made with
simulations of the Pass~8 data using the corresponding IRFs.
\section{Dark Matter Density Profiles}
\label{app:dark_matter_profiles}
In the studies described in this paper we used several models of the spatial
distribution of the DM. A generalized Navarro-Frenk-White (gNFW) profile~\cite{1998ApJ...502...48K},
given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gNFW}
\rho(r) = \frac{\rho_0}{(r/r_s)^{\gamma}(1+r/r_s)^{3-\gamma}}
\end{equation}
models adiabatic contraction in the core of the
distribution, i.e., within the scale radius $r_s$.
Typical values of $\gamma$ for the gNFW profile are in the range 1.0 to 1.4.
The $\gamma = 1$ case gives the canonical NFW
profile~\cite{1996ApJ...462..563N}.
The Einasto profile~\cite{2010MNRAS.402...21N} is defined as:
\begin{equation}
\rho(r) = \rho_0 \exp\{ -(2/\alpha)[(r/r_s)^\alpha - 1]\},
\end{equation}
(we typically set $\alpha = 0.17$), and is similar to gNFW profiles.
The Burkert profile~\cite{1995ApJ...447L..25B} is defined as
\begin{equation}
\rho(r) = \frac{\rho_0}{[r/r_s + 1][(r/r_s)^2 + 1]},
\end{equation}
and is much flatter inside the scale radius, and is similar
to a cored, isothermal profile given by
\begin{equation}
\rho(r) = \frac{\rho_0}{1+(r/r_s)^2}.
\end{equation}
For practicality, we typically terminate the profile at some distance $r_{\rm max}$ that
is several times larger than $r_s$. The values of $(r_s,r_{\rm max},\rho_0)$ depend
on the target in question. For the Milky Way halo we set $\rho_0$
such that the local DM density (at $8.5\unit{kpc}$ from the Galactic Center)
is $0.4\unit{GeV}\unit{cm}^{-3}$.
\section{Calculating Gamma-ray Spectra from WIMP Annihilation}
\label{app:dark_matter_spectra}
Owing to the cascade of particles produced as unstable DM annihilation
products decay or hadronize, the \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace from DM annihilation in
most channels do not feature a sharp line at $E_\gamma = \ensuremath{m_\chi}\xspace$, but rather a continuous
spectrum with characteristic energies significantly lower than the DM
mass. Indeed, most indirect searches for DM do not involve searches for \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace spectral
lines from
DM annihilating directly into \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace, but rather consider the DM annihilation channels:
\begin{equation}
\chi\chi \to s\bar{s},~\ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace,~t\bar{t},~gg,~W^-W^+,~\ensuremath{e^+e^-}\xspace,~\ensuremath{\mu^+\mu^-}\xspace,~\mbox{and}~\ensuremath{\tau^+\tau^-}\xspace. \label{eq:channels}
\end{equation}
Annihilation into pairs of $u$ or $d$ quarks produces a similar spectrum
as annihilation into gluon pairs, $c\bar{c}$ is similar to $s\bar{s}$,
and $ZZ$ to $W^-W^+$, so bounds on such channels can be extrapolated approximately
from the subset of channels we analyze in detail. Channels of DM annihilating
to massive particles are open only above the mass threshold, i.e., when the DM particle
mass is equal to that of the heavy Standard Model particle in the final state.
In our searches we typically scan over DM masses between 5\unit{GeV} and 10\unit{TeV}, though the range
depends somewhat on the search target (e.g., for spectral lines we
have scanned from 100\unit{MeV} to 500\unit{GeV}).
For each final state, we calculate the spectrum of \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace
per annihilation as a function of DM mass (i.e., $dN_\gamma/dE_\gamma$)
using the {\tt DMFIT} software package~\cite{Jeltema:2008hf}.
We note that this formulation does not yet include electroweak
corrections~\cite{2007PhRvD..76f3516K,2002PhRvL..89q1802B,2009PhRvD..80l3533K,2010PhRvD..82d3512C,Ciafaloni:2010ti}.
The electroweak corrections are expected to be important (assuming s-wave annihilation) when the DM mass is heavier than 1\unit{TeV},
and for this mass range would alter the spectra substantially for the $W^+W^-$, \ensuremath{e^+e^-}\xspace, \ensuremath{\mu^+\mu^-}\xspace and \ensuremath{\tau^+\tau^-}\xspace
channels, increasing the number of expected \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace per DM annihilation
below \ensuremath{ {\sim}\,} 10\unit{GeV}~\cite{Ciafaloni:2010ti,Cirelli:2010xx}. However, the bounds on DM annihilation fluxes in
the high-mass regime come primarily from the highest-energy \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace, which are statistics-limited. Even for 10\unit{TeV} dark
matter masses in the most-affected channels, including the electroweak corrections
improves the limits on \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace by $\lesssim 20$\%
for typical analyses \newText(see e.g., \cite{Cirelli:2010xx,Buch:2015iya,2015PhRvD..91j2001B})}.
\input{lat.tex}
\section{Monte Carlo Simulations}
\label{app:method_monte_carlo}
We performed three types of Monte Carlo simulations to make the data
realizations we used to project the expected sensitivity of the DM
searches described in this paper. In practice all three types of simulations
give results that agree to better than a few percent and to well within the analysis
uncertainties. The choice of simulation method is primarily dictated by
convenience and technical details such as available computer processing time
and data storage.
\begin{enumerate}
\item{{\em All-sky photon simulations}: we used the {\tt
gtobssim}\footnote{See, e.g., http://fermi.gsfc.nasa.gov/ssc/data/analysis/scitools/obssim\_tutorial.html
for more details about the {\tt gtobssim} tool.} tool to
simulate a total of 15 years of LAT data taking over
the entire sky. The {\tt gtobssim} tool generates individual \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace from each source
in the model, applies accept-reject sampling to simulate the instrumental acceptance,
and finally convolves each \mbox{$\gamma$ ray}\xspace with parametrized representations of the
LAT spatial and spectral resolution. We simulated data for most of the
DM targets described in \S\ref{sec:dm_targets}, as well as for models of all of the
astrophysical backgrounds described in \S\ref{sec:backgrounds}.}
\item{{\em ROI-specific photon simulations}: we also used the {\tt
gtobssim} tool to simulate a total of 15 years of \FermiLATc\xspace data for much
smaller regions covering specific targets, such as the individual
dwarf spheroidal galaxies. These simulations included the
``baseline'' astrophysical background model described in
\S\ref{sec:backgrounds}, and in some cases also included the
specific model of the unresolved source populations.}
\item{{\em Binned model map simulations}: we used the {\tt
gtmodel} tool to make predicted counts maps (i.e., maps of
the expected number of photons in each pixel) of small
regions of the sky. We then simulated Poisson fluctuations with respect
to the predicted counts maps. These simulations generally included only
the ``baseline'' astrophysical background model described in \S\ref{sec:backgrounds}.}
\end{enumerate}
\section{Modeling the Galactic Diffuse Emission}
\label{app:galactic_diffuse_model}
The construction of the Galactic diffuse emission model used for
these projections is described in considerably more detail in
Ref.~\cite{2016ApJS..223...26A}. Here we will briefly summarize some
key points, and discuss the uncertainties that most directly affect
DM searches.
Determination of the distribution of interstellar gas relies mostly on the 21-cm line
of atomic hydrogen, which traces neutral atomic hydrogen, and on the 2.6-mm
line of carbon monoxide, which is a surrogate tracer of neutral
molecular hydrogen. The Doppler shifts of the lines due to the motion of gas
around the center of the Galaxy enables building quasi three-dimensional
models of the gas distribution~\cite[e.g.,][App.~B]{2012ApJ...750....3A}. This method suffers from limitations
due to pile up along the line of sight of many structures, internal velocity dispersions of gas clouds,
systematic deviations from circular motion about the Galactic center, and from
kinematic ambiguity (for each velocity there are two possible
positions) for the region of the Galaxy within the orbit of the solar system.
For directions within about $10\unit{^{\circ}}$ longitude of the Galactic center or anti-center,
the Doppler shifts due to Galactic rotation are smaller than the internal velocity
dispersions and the distribution of gas cannot be determined via this method.
Additional interstellar gas components are the dark neutral medium,
neutral gas that is not traced properly by the combination of the
21-cm and CO lines, and ionized gas. The dark neutral medium can be
traced by infrared emission from interstellar dust grains, since they
are sufficiently well mixed with neutral
gas~\cite{2015A&A...582A..31A,2005Sci...307.1292G}.
Thermal emission from dust, however, does not provide information on the location along the
line of sight of the emitting gas. The distribution of ionized gas can
be evaluated approximately using tracers like dispersion measures of pulsar
emission, radio recombination lines (observations are available only
in limited regions of the sky), and free-free emission in the
microwave band (which does not carry distance information).
Target radiation fields span wavelengths from radio to
optical/UV. Aside from the CMB, the radiation
field is often estimated using numerical codes to calculate the
radiation transfer of stellar radiation~\cite[e.g.,][App.~C]{2012ApJ...750....3A}. The distribution of
optical/UV light is taken from simplified yet realistic models of the
stellar populations in the Milky Way informed by observations. From these stellar
radiation fields, combined with models of the dust distribution and properties in the Milky Way (built
similarly to gas models described above), the numerical codes are used to derive the spectrum and
spatial distribution of the
reprocessed light in the IR domain.
The distribution of cosmic rays for the purpose of modeling
interstellar \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emission has been determined mainly with two
complementary strategies. On one hand, it can be calculated using
numerical codes that solve the cosmic-ray transport equations given a
distribution of sources, injection spectra and transport parameters
that are informed by direct cosmic-ray measurements and observations
of their putative sources at various wavelengths~\cite{2012ApJ...750....3A}. On the other hand,
it is reasonable to assume that variations in the cosmic-ray nuclei
spectra are mild on the characteristic scale of interstellar gas complexes
due to the moderate energy losses in propagation, so that the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emission
from their mutual interactions can be assumed to be proportional to
gas column densities derived as discussed above, and appropriately
split into regions along the line of sight using the Doppler shift information~\cite{2010ApJ...710..133A,2016ApJS..223...26A}.
An unexpected facet of Galactic interstellar emission that was
highlighted by the LAT data is the presence of localized enhancements
of cosmic-ray densities; i.e., of diffuse \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emission on top
of the large-scale, relatively smooth distributions of cosmic rays in the Milky Way that are evaluated by
the propagation codes or by the fit of gas templates to LAT data.
The most important example is the {\it Fermi} bubbles, two lobe-like structures
seen on opposite sides of the Galactic center and extending up to
Galactic latitudes $\sim 50^{\circ}$~\cite{2010ApJ...724.1044S,2013A&A...554A.139P,2008ApJ...680.1222D}.
Other excesses were seen along the Galactic
plane, for example one that was characterized as a cocoon of freshly-accelerated
cosmic rays in the cavities of the interstellar medium in the
massive-star forming region of Cygnus X~\cite{2011Sci...334.1103A}. Such excesses are not
completely understood yet; thus their modeling is only purely
phenomenological based on the LAT data themselves.
\section{Likelihood Formalism and Effective Background}
\label{app:method_effective_background}
In LAT analysis we typically optimize our models to maximize the
binned Poisson likelihood, defined as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:binned_likelihood}
\mathcal{L}({\boldsymbol \mu},{\boldsymbol \theta} | \mathcal{D}) = \prod_{k}
\frac{\lambda_{k}^{n_{k}}e^{-\lambda_{k}}}{n_{k}!},
\end{equation}
which depends on the \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace data $\mathcal{D}$, signal
parameters ${\boldsymbol \mu}$, and nuisance ({\it i.e.}, background)
parameters ${\boldsymbol \theta}$. The number of observed counts in
each energy and spatial bin, indexed by $k$, depends on the data
$n_{k}(\mathcal{D})$, while the model-predicted counts depend on
the input parameters $\lambda_{k}({\boldsymbol \mu},{\boldsymbol
\theta})$. The likelihood function includes information about the
observed counts, instrument response, exposure and model components.
The nuisance parameters are the scaling coefficients and spectral
parameters of the astrophysical backgrounds discussed in \S\ref{sec:backgrounds}.
When projecting the performance of future searches it is important to
consider both statistical and systematic uncertainties. It is also
important to distinguish between a search parameter space that is
background limited (i.e., where the sensitivity is dominated by
either statistical or systematic uncertainties of the astrophysical
backgrounds) from parameter space that is signal limited (i.e.,
where the sensitivity is dominated by the small expected signals).
A useful concept that addresses both these considerations is the
``effective background'', i.e., the background that is correlated with the signal,
or is, so to say, ``under'' the signal.
For a binned analysis, given normalized models of the signal and
background components: $P_{{\rm sig,}i}({\bf \mu})$
and $P_{{\rm bkg,}i}({\bf \theta})$,
we can estimate the effective background by calculating the likelihood
fit covariance matrix element for the signal size ({\it e.g.},
starting from Eq.~28 in Ref.~\cite{2011EPJC...71.1554C}) in the approximation
that the background is much larger than the signal, giving:
\begin{equation}
\ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace = \frac{N}{ \left( \sum_{k}\frac{P_{{\rm sig,}k}^{2}({\bf \mu})}{P_{{\rm bkg,}k}({\bf \theta})} \right) - 1},\label{eq:beff}
\end{equation}
where the summation runs over all pixels in the ROI and all the
energy bins and $N$ is the total number of events in the ROI and energy range.
This definition has a few useful properties. First, if the only free
parameters in the fit are the overall normalizations of the signal and
background components, then in the limit that the signal is much
smaller than the background the statistical uncertainty on the number
of signal counts will be $\delta \ensuremath{n_{\mathrm{sig}}}\xspace \simeq \sqrt{\ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace}$.
Second, if the signal and background models are totally degenerate
($P_{{\rm sig,}k}({\bf \mu}) = P_{{\rm bkg,}k}({\bf \theta})$ for all
$k$), then the term in the summation will be equal to 1 and \ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace
will diverge, indicating that we have little power to
distinguish signal from background. If this were the case, the
statistical errors for the likelihood fit would be extremely large,
corresponding to an upper limit on the cross section sufficient
to generate all of the observed events through DM
annihilation. Finally, if the signal and background models differ
significantly the term in the summation will be much greater than
1 and \ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace will be proportionally less than $N$. That is, the
statistical uncertainty on the signal will correspond to an effective
background that is much less than the total number of background
events in the ROI. The LAT Collaboration
has found empirically that by quantifying the systematic uncertainties
of the astrophysical background modeling as a percentage
of \ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace, we are often able to account for those uncertainties in
the likelihood fitting procedure and include them in DM
constraints.
In the best-case scenario, where the background is well modeled,
the expected uncertainty of the number is signal events is simply $\delta \ensuremath{n_{\mathrm{sig}}}\xspace = \ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace^{1/2}$.
We can then define the ratio of the signal to the
effective background as \ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{sig}}}\xspace, and the estimate of the
statistical uncertainty $\delta \ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{stat}}}\xspace$ in terms of the effective background:
\begin{align}
\ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{sig}}}\xspace = & \frac{\ensuremath{n_{\mathrm{sig}}}\xspace}{\ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace}, \label{eq:fsig} \\
\delta \ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{stat}}}\xspace = & \frac{\delta \ensuremath{n_{\mathrm{sig}}}\xspace}{\ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace} \simeq \ensuremath{b_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace^{-1/2} \label{eq:fstat}.
\end{align}
\noindent Using the exposure, $J$ factor, and the per-annihilation \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace spectra
we can convert from $\delta \ensuremath{n_{\mathrm{sig}}}\xspace$ to the uncertainty on the
thermally averaged annihilation cross section $\delta \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace$.
Furthermore, when the number of background events is large and
well into the Gaussian regime, we can estimate the median
upper limits ($1.645 \delta \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace$), the 68\% containment band
($0.925 \delta \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace$ to $2.645 \delta \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace$) and the 95\%
containment band ($0.590 \delta \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace$ to $3.645 \delta \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace$)
in terms of $\delta \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace$.
In practical terms, we note that in many cases systematic biases
could either induce a fake signal or mask a true signal much
larger than the expected statistical uncertainties.
From the width of the distribution of \ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{sig}}}\xspace for the trials in
control regions, where we do not expect to detect any signal,
we can estimate the total (statistical + systematic) uncertainty.
When $\ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{stat}}}\xspace < \ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{sig}}}\xspace$, the total error is dominated by
systematic uncertainties. When our fitting procedure allows for
negative signals (such as in the searches for spectral lines) we can
take a simple measure of the width such as the root-mean-square of the
distribution. However, in many cases our fitting procedure only allows for
positive signals and approximately half of the trials have $\ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{sig}}}\xspace =
0$. In those cases we assign as our estimate of the systematic
error the difference (taken in quadrature) of the $1\sigma$
(84\% CL) enclosure of the total error estimate and the statistical
error estimate from the control region:
\begin{equation}
\delta \ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{syst}}}\xspace^2 = \ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{sig}}}\xspace^2(84\%) - \delta \ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{stat}}}\xspace^2(84\%).
\label{eq:fsyst}
\end{equation}
\section{Projecting the Uncertainty of Contributions to the
Extragalactic Gamma-Ray Background}
\label{app:method_egb_sensitivity}
We have estimated the point source sensitivity map for 15~years of
observations by following the procedure described in the 2FGL
catalog~\cite{2012ApJS..199...31N}.
A four year sensitivity map is shown in \S\ref{fig:detection_map}.
For 15~years of data, the average high latitude ($|b|>20\unit{^{\circ}}$) integrated energy flux
detection threshold for a source with a photon index of $\Gamma = 2.2$
is $\sim 1.1\times10^{-9}\unit{ph}\unit{cm}^{-2}\unit{s}^{-1}$ ($>$100 MeV).
We have modeled the intrinsic source count distribution of blazars (i.e.,
distribution of the true fluxes), $dN/dS$, where
$S$ is the photon flux for $E>100$ MeV, of the 1FGL
catalog~\cite{2010ApJ...720..435A} as a broken power law with a flux
break at $7\times10^{-8}\unit{ph}\unit{cm}^{-2}\unit{s}^{-1}$ and a slope above
(below) the break equal to 2.63 (1.64). We modeled the fluxes
of the individual blazars with single power laws with index $\Gamma$.
Given this flux distribution the predicted number of detected blazars
with 15~years of data is about 3300.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:fluxindexdistr} we show the distributions of $S^2 dN/dS$
and photon index, $dN/d\Gamma$, for this sample of simulated blazars.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_32a}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_32b}
\end{center}
\caption{Left: Flux distribution of simulated blazars using the
intrinsic $dN/dS$ of the 1FGL catalog~\cite{2010ApJ...720..435A}
(blue points) together with a fit (black solid line) and the
$1\sigma$ uncertainty band (cyan). Right: photon index
distribution of simulated blazars from the observed distribution of
sources in the 3FGL catalog~\cite{2015ApJ...810...14A}. The
black curve is the best-fit Gaussian distribution, with an average of
2.23 and a standard deviation of 0.33.}
\label{fig:fluxindexdistr}
\end{figure}
We can then estimate the contribution of blazars, which
are the most numerous source population in \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace catalogs
(see, e.g., \cite{2015ApJ...810...14A}), to the EGB.
Specifically, for each source (indexed by
$i$), the flux $S_i$ and index $\Gamma_i$ are sampled from the
distributions shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:fluxindexdistr} and the
energy spectrum $dN/dE_i$ is derived from the definition
of the of photon flux ($S=\int dN/dE dE$). Finally,
we sum of all of the simulated spectra and average over the solid
angle, $|b|>20^{\circ}$, to obtain the contribution of blazars to the
EGB. The result for blazars is displayed in the left-hand panel
of Fig.~\ref{fig:astrocontr} where their average contribution to the
EGB is 65\% with an uncertainty of about 10\%.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_33a}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{./Figure_33b}
\end{center}
\caption{Left: contribution of blazars (cyan band), MAGN (green
band) and SFGs (gray band) to the {\it Fermi}-LAT EGB data (black
points). The total best fit of the summed contributions from
AGN (blazars and MAGN) and SFG is depicted with
a solid red line, with the orange uncertainties given by the orange band.
Right: fraction of the AGN plus SFG contribution
relative to the EGB (black points) together with the
statistical EGB errors (cyan band).}
\label{fig:astrocontr}
\end{figure}
We have followed the same procedure to estimate the uncertainty
for the MAGN contribution to the EGB. We used the same intrinsic source
count distribution, but rescaling the number of sources
with a factor of $1/50$, to match the ratio of MAGN to blazars
observed in the 3FGL catalog. We predict a total of
$\sim$70 MAGN detectable in 15 years and we predict an uncertainty
of the order of 30\% for the contribution of this source population to the EGB.
We consider the same level of uncertainty to apply to the contribution of
Star-Forming Galaxies (SFG) as well.
The contribution of blazars, MAGN, and SFG populations to the EGB are
shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:astrocontr} (left panel). The total
\mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emission from these source populations is consistent with
the EGB measurement derived with 50 months of
data~\cite{2015ApJ...799...86A} (see right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:astrocontr}).
The uncertainties of the contributions of MAGN and SFG are a factor of
$\sim$4 smaller than the uncertainties of their contributions from the
analyses of the current LAT
catalog~\cite{Ajello:2015mfa,2015PhRvD..91l3001D}
due to the increased number of detected sources with 15 years of data.
\section{Projecting the Sensitivity of the Angular Power Spectrum Analysis}
\label{app:method_aps_sensitivity}
In order predict to the sensitivity of the LAT to DM
signals in the APS we have used the same formalism as
in Ref.~\cite{DiMauro:2014wha}. That work considered the APS
produced by the unresolved flux of populations of unclustered point
sources, which is given by:
\begin{equation}
\label{Cpdef}
C_{\rm P}(E_0 \leq E \leq E_1) = \int_{\Gamma_{\rm min}}^{\Gamma_{\rm max}} d\Gamma \int^{S_{\rm t}(\Gamma)}_0 S^2 \frac{d^2N}{dS d\Gamma} dS,
\end{equation}
where $S$ is the photon flux of the source integrated in the range $E_0 \leq E \leq E_1$,
$S_{\rm t}(\Gamma)$ denotes the flux detection threshold as a function
of $\Gamma$ and $d^2N/(dSd\Gamma)$ is
the differential number of sources per unit flux $S$, unit photon index $\Gamma$ and unit solid angle.
We take $S_{\rm t}(\Gamma)$ to be constant in $\Gamma$
because we restrict the analysis to energies $ > 1\unit{GeV}$
where the bias for the source detection with respect to the photon
index is small. We evaluate $S_{\rm t}(\Gamma)$ as the average value of the
point source sensitivity for 15 years of exposure at
$|b|>30^{\circ}$ and $E>1\unit{GeV}$: $S_{\rm t} \approx 1\times10^{-10}\unit{ph}\unit{cm}^{-2}\unit{s}^{-1}$.
Using this model we have derived the $C_P(E)$ in the same energy
bins as in Ref.~\cite{2012PhRvD..85h3007A}.
The results are displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:Cp15years}.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.50\columnwidth]{./Figure_34}
\end{center}
\caption{Angular power $C_P(E)$ for MAGN (red long-dashed points),
LISP (blue short-dashed), HSP (green dotted), FSRQ (yellow dot-dashed),
and the total anisotropy (violet solid) from
all the radio-loud AGNs. The data are a rescaled version, with a
factor 1/5, of the measured APS in Ref.~\cite{2012PhRvD..85h3007A} (black solid points).}
\label{fig:Cp15years}
\end{figure}
With 15 years of data the threshold flux is lower by about a
factor of 5 with respect to the threshold from two years of data,
therefore the APS from unresolved AGN is also lower.
However, different source populations have different intrinsic flux distribution,
resulting in different scaling behaviors for $C_P(E)$.
The $C_P(E)$ for MAGN, for example, decreases by about a factor of
3, while for Flat Spectrum Radio Quasars (FSRQ) it decreases by a factor of 7.
MAGN and low-intermediate synchrotron peak BL Lac objects
(LISP) have steeper source count distributions, below the flux threshold,
than High-Synchrotron Peak BL Lacertae objects (HSP) and FSRQ.
Therefore, with lower flux thresholds the angular power for unresolved
MAGN and LISP are reduced by a smaller factor
than for HSP and FSRQ sources. Since the $C_P(E)$
of astrophysical sources are lower we have rescaled the LAT data
by a factor of 1/5 in Fig.~\ref{fig:Cp15years} so as to
match the theoretical predictions from AGN.
We used the results shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Cp15years}
to project the LAT sensitivity to a DM contribution of
extragalactic subhalos in the case of a \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace annihilation channel.
We used the APS data in four energy bins~\cite{2012PhRvD..85h3007A}
independently, and derived $95\%$ CL limits on \ensuremath{\langle \sigma v \rangle}\xspace by requiring that the
sum of the DM-induced intensity APS averaged in the multipole range $155 < l < 204$
and our prediction for the Radio Loud AGN contribution to $C_P$ not exceed the
measured $C_P$ in the $155 < l < 504$ multipole range plus 1.64 times the uncertainty.
We show the projected limits for each energy bin as well as the envelope produced by
the limits for all four energy bins in Fig.~\ref{fig:Cp15years_limits} in S\ref{sec:dm_cosmo_aps_projections}.
\section{Summary}\label{sec:summary}
In this paper we have examined current strategies for
searching for DM signals in the LAT data, presenting
existing search results and projecting how their sensitivities
will improve with additional LAT data.
Although many LAT search targets are becoming systematics- or background-limited with the several years
of LAT data already obtained, the most promising targets are still
signal limited in much of the LAT energy range and
for these cases the LAT sensitivity scales as better than $\sqrt{t}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item{The most promising target, the dSphs
(\S\ref{sec:dm_satellites_status}), are signal-limited
above \ensuremath{ {\sim}\,} 500\unit{GeV} (\ensuremath{ {\sim}\,} 100\unit{GeV}) in the \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace
(\ensuremath{\tau^+\tau^-}\xspace) channel. Furthermore, the searches targeting
the dSphs have already set the most constraining limits on DM
signals. Thus we are in the fortunate situation that the best
target will also provide the most improvement as additional data
are analyzed.}
\begin{enumerate}
\item{Ongoing and planned deep, optical surveys are expected to discover numerous
additional dSphs in the coming years, possibly by the hundreds once LSST is operational.}
\item{With 15 years of data the LAT sensitivity for the dSph search would allow
excluding the thermal relic cross section for masses up to
$> 400\unit{GeV}$ ($> 200\unit{GeV}$) in the \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace (\ensuremath{\tau^+\tau^-}\xspace) channels.}
\item{Projections also indicate that with 15 years of data the sensitivity
for the dSphs would reach below $2\times 10^{-27} \unit{cm}^3\unit{s}^{-1}$
for masses around 50\unit{GeV} in the \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace channel,
allowing the DM interpretation of the
Galactic center excess to be confirmed or refuted.}
\item{With 15 years of data the volume over which
the LAT would be able to detect 100\unit{GeV} DM annihilation to \ensuremath{b\bar{b}}\xspace
from a typical dwarf galaxy at $5\sigma$ significance would approximately double
from $\sim 2100\unit{kpc}^3$ presently to $> 4200\unit{kpc}^3$.}
\end{enumerate}
\item{The second approach for which the LAT sensitivity will continue to improve faster
than $\sqrt{t}$ is in constraining the population of the highest
$J$ factor Galactic DM subhalos (\S\ref{sec:dm_unid}). Although
the source detection sensitivity will improve
only as $\sqrt{t}$, combined with an estimated $J$~factor distribution
that scales as $dN/dJ \propto J^{-3/2}$, the sensitivity to
Galactic DM subhalos scales as $t^{3/4}$.}
\item{The third approach for which the LAT is, in effect, signal limited is in
characterizing the populations of sources that are
currently below the detection threshold. By reducing the uncertainties on estimates of the
contributions of unresolved sources to the EGB, and thus
reducing the uncertainty on what fraction of the EGB can
be accounted for from the known \mbox{$\gamma$-ray}\xspace emitting source populations,
limits on cosmological DM annihilation will tighten accordingly.
We estimate that both the fraction of the EGB not attributable to
detected sources and the uncertainties of the total contribution
of known source classes will decrease as $t^{3/4}$ or better.}
\item{A fourth search strategy for which the LAT results are largely signal limited is the measurement of the
attenuation of emission from high-energy AGN. Observation of
even a few \mbox{$\gamma$ rays}\xspace from these sources with energies above the optical depth limit for $\gamma\gamma$ attenuation on the EBL could be
evidence of photon-axion oscillations.}
\item{A fifth approach for which the LAT is purely signal limited is in the observation
of spectacular transient phenomena (such as Galactic supernovae, or bright, ultra-distant GRBs)
that can also be used to search for signals from photon-axion oscillations.}
\end{enumerate}
Indirect detection is the only approach that searches for DM
in the astrophysical targets where it is known to exist.
The LAT is uniquely exploring an important range of cross-section-WIMP
mass space, with a cross section sensitivity that is commensurate with
constraining theories, or indirectly detecting dark matter at theoretically
motivated cross sections. The advances expected with continued LAT
data taking will be significant and will not be superseded
by another experiment in the foreseeable future. Furthermore, the variety of search
strategies possible with LAT data allows consistency cross checks, which are important, e.g., for
interpreting the GeV excess near the Galactic center.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:int}
The survival of an organism is influenced by both biotic (competition for resources, predator-prey interactions) and abiotic (light, precipitation, availability of resources) factors. Since these factors are space-time dependent, all types of organisms have to choose their dispersal strategies: If they disperse they can arrive in locations with different environmental conditions while if they do not disperse they face the temporal fluctuations of the local environmental conditions. The dispersion strategy impacts key attributes of a population including its spatial distribution and temporal fluctuations in its abundance. Individuals selecting more favorable habitats are more likely to survive or reproduce. When population densities increase in these habitats, organisms may prosper by selecting habitats that were previously unused.
There have been numerous studies of the interplay between dispersal and environmental heterogeneity and how this influences population growth; see \cite{H83, GH02, S04, RRB05, S10, CCL12, DR12, ERSS13} and references therein.
The mathematical analysis for stochastic models with density-dependent feedbacks is less explored. In the setting of discrete-space discrete-time models there have been thorough studies by \cite{BS09, S10, SBA11}. Continuous-space discrete-time population models that disperse and experience uncorrelated, environmental stochasticity have been studied by \cite{HTW88, HTW88b, HTW90}. They show that the leading Lyapunov exponent $ r$ of the linearization of the system around the extinction state almost determines the persistence and extinction of the population. For continuous-space continuous-time population models \cite{MS04} study the dynamics of random Kolmogorov type PDE models in bounded domains. Once again, it is shown that the leading Lyapunov exponent $ r$ of the linarization around the trivial equilibrium $0$ almost determines when the population goes extinct and when it persists. In the current paper we explore the question of persistence and extinction when the population dynamics is given by a system of stochastic differential equations. In our setting, even though our methods and techniques are very different from those used by \cite{HTW88,MS04}, we still make use of the system linearized around the extinction state. The Lyapunov exponent of this linearized system plays a key role throughout our arguments.
\cite{ERSS13} studied a linear stochastic model that describes the dynamics of populations that continuously experience uncertainty in time and space. Their work has
shed some light on key issues from population biology. Their results
provide fundamental insights into ``ideal free'' movement in the face of uncertainty, the evolution of dispersal rates, the single
large or several small (SLOSS) debate in conservation biology, and the persistence of coupled sink populations.
In this paper,
we propose a
density-dependent model of stochastic population growth
that captures the interactions between dispersal and environmental heterogeneity and complements the work of
\cite{ERSS13}. We then present a rigorous and comprehensive study of the proposed model based on stochastic analysis.
The dynamics of a population in nature is stochastic. This is due to \textit{environmental stochasticity} - the fluctuations of the environment make the growth rates random. One of the simplest models for a population living in a single patch is
\begin{equation}\label{e:U2}
d U(t) = U(t)(a-b U(t))dt + \sigma U(t)dW(t), t\geq 0,
\end{equation}
where $U(t)$ is the population abundance at time $t$, $a$ is the mean per-capita growth rate, $b>0$ is the strength of intraspecific competition, $\sigma^2$ is the infinitesimal variance of fluctuations in the per-capita growth rate and $(W(t))_{t\geq 0}$ is a standard Brownian motion. The long-term behavior of \eqref{e:U2} is determined by the \textit{stochastic growth rate} $a-\frac{\sigma^2}{2}$ in the following way
(see \cite{EHS15, DP84}):
\begin{itemize}
\item If $a-\frac{\sigma^2}{2}>0$ and $ U(0)=u>0$, then $(U(t))_{t\geq 0}$ converges weakly to its unique invariant probability measure $\rho$ on $(0,\infty)$.
\item If $a-\frac{\sigma^2}{2}<0$ and $ U(0)=u>0$, then $\lim_{t\to \infty} U(t)=0$ almost surely.
\item If $a-\frac{\sigma^2}{2}=0$ and $ U(0)=u>0$, then $\liminf_{t\to \infty} U(t)=0$ almost surely, $\limsup_{t\to \infty} U(t)=\infty$ almost surely, and $\lim_{t\to \infty}\frac{1}{t}\int_0^tU(s)\,ds=0$ almost surely.
\end{itemize}
Organisms are always affected by temporal heterogeneities, but they are subject to spatial heterogeneities only when they disperse. Population growth is influenced by spatial heterogeneity through the way organisms respond to environmental signals (see \cite{H83, CC91, C00, SLS09}). There have been several analytic studies that contributed to a better understanding of the separate effects of spatial and temporal heterogeneities on population dynamics. However, few theoretical studies have considered the combined effects of spatio-temporal heterogeneities, dispersal, and density-dependence for discretely structured populations with continuous-time dynamics.
As seen in both the continuous (\cite{ERSS13}) and the discrete (\cite{PL98}) settings, the extinction risk of a population is greatly affected by the spatio-temporal correlation between the environment in the different patches.
For example, if spatial correlations are weak, one can show that populations coupled via dispersal can survive even though every patch, on its own, would go extinct (see \cite{ERSS13, JY98, HQ89}).
Various species usually exhibit spatial synchrony. Ecologists are interested in this pattern as it can lead to the extinction of rare species. Possible causes for synchrony are dispersal and spatial correlations in the environment (see \cite{L93, K00, LKB04}). Consequently, it makes sense to look at stochastic patch models coupled by dispersion for which the environmental noise of the different patches can be strongly correlated.
We do this by extending the setting of \cite{ERSS13}
by allowing the environmental noise driving the system
to be degenerate.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{sec:mod}, we introduce our model for a population living in a patchy environment. It takes into account the dispersal between different patches and density-dependent feedback. The temporal fluctuations of the environmental conditions of the various patches are modeled by Brownian motions that are correlated.
We start by considering the relative abundances of the different patches in a low density approximation. We show that these relative abundances converge in distribution to their unique invariant probability measure
asymptotically as time goes to infinity. Using this invariant probability measure we derive an expression for $ r$, the stochastic growth rate (Lyapunov exponent) in the absence of competition. We show that this $ r$ is key in analyzing the long-term behavior of the populations. In Appendix \ref{sec:+} we show that if $ r>0$ then the abundances converge weakly, polynomially fast, to their unique invariant probability measure on $(0,\infty)^n$. In Appendix \ref{sec:general-}, we show that if $ r<0$ then all the population abundances go extinct asymptotically, at an exponential rate
(with exponential constant $ r$). Appendix \ref{sec:degenerate} is dedicated to the case when the noise driving our system is degenerate (that is, the dimension of the noise is lower than the number of patches). In Appendix \ref{s:robust}, we show that $ r$ depends continuously on the coefficients of our model and that persistence is robust - that is, small perturbations of the model do not make a persistent system become extinct. We provide some numerical examples and possible generalizations in Section \ref{s:discussion}.
\section{Model and Results}\label{sec:mod}
We study a population with overlapping generations, which live in a spatio-temporally heterogeneous environment
consisting of $n$ distinct patches. The growth rate of each patch is determined by both deterministic and stochastic environmental inputs. We denote by $X_i(t)$ the population abundance at time $t\geq 0$ of the $i$th patch and write $\mathbf{X}(t)=(X_1(t),\dots,X_n(t))$ for the vector of population abundances. Following \cite{ERSS13}, it is appropriate to model $\mathbf{X}(t)$ as a Markov process with the following properties when $0\leq \Delta t\ll 1$:
\begin{itemize}
\item the conditional mean is
\[\mathbb{E} \left[X_i(t+\Delta t) -X_i(t)~|~X_i(t)=x_i\right]\approx \left[a_ix_i - x_ib_i(x_i) + \sum_{j\neq i} \left(x_jD_{ji}-x_iD_{ij}\right)\right]\Delta t,
\]
where $a_i\in\mathbb{R}$ is the per-capita growth rate in the $i$th patch, $b_i(x_i)$ is the per-capita strength of intraspecific competition in patch $i$ when the abundance of the patch is $x_i$, and $D_{ij}\geq 0$ is the dispersal rate from patch $i$ to patch $j$;
\item the conditional covariance is
\[
\mathrm{Cov}\left[X_i(t+\Delta t) - X_i(t), X_j(t+\Delta t) - X_j(t)~|~\mathbf{X}= \mathbf{x} \right]\approx\sigma_{ij}x_ix_j\Delta t
\]
for some covariance matrix $\Sigma=(\sigma_{ij})$.
\end{itemize}
The difference between our model and the one from \cite{ERSS13} is that we added density-dependent feedback through the $x_ib_i(x_i)$ terms.
We work on a complete probability space $(\Omega,\mathcal{F},\{\mathcal{F}_t\}_{t\geq0},\mathbb{P})$ with filtration $\{\mathcal{F}_t\}_{t\geq 0}$ satisfying the usual
conditions. We consider the system
\begin{equation}\label{e4.0}
d X_i(t)=\left(X_i(t)\left(a_i-b_i(X_i(t))\right)+\sum_{j=1}^n D_{ji}X_j(t)\right)dt+X_i(t)dE_i(t), \, i=1,\dots,n,
\end{equation}
where $D_{ij}\geq0$ for $j\ne i$ is the per-capita rate at which the population in patch $i$ disperses to patch $j$, $D_{ii}=-\sum_{j\ne i} D_{ij}$ is the total per-capita immigration rate out of patch $i$, $\mathbf{E}(t)=(E_1(t),\dots, E_n(t))^T=\Gamma^\top\mathbf{B}(t)$, $\Gamma$ is a $n\times n$ matrix such that
$\Gamma^\top\Gamma=\Sigma=(\sigma_{ij})_{n\times n}$
and $\mathbf{B}(t)=(B_1(t),\dots, B_n(t))$ is a vector of independent standard Brownian motions adapted to the filtration $\{\mathcal{F}_t\}_{t\geq 0}$.
Throughout the paper, we
work with the following assumption regarding the growth of the instraspecific
competition rates.
\begin{asp}\label{a:competition} {\rm
For each $i=1,\dots,n$ the function $b_i:\mathbb{R}_+\mapsto\mathbb{R}$ is locally Lipschitz and vanishing at $0$. Furthermore, there are $M_b>0$, $\gamma_b>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{e:b}
\dfrac{\sum_{i=1}^n x_i(b_i(x_i)-a_i)}{\sum_{i=1}^n x_i}>\gamma_b\text{ for any } x_i\geq0, i=1,\dots,n \text{ satisfying } \sum_{i=1}^n x_i\geq M_b
\end{equation} }
\end{asp}
\begin{rmk} {\rm
Note that if we set $x_j=x\geq M_b$ and $x_i=0, i\neq j$, we get from \eqref{e:b} that
\[
b_j(x) - a_j > \gamma_b, \,x\geq M_b, j=1,\dots,n.
\]
}\end{rmk}
\begin{rmk}
{\rm Note that condition \eqref{e:b} is biologically reasonable because it holds if the $b_i$'s are sufficiently
large for large $x_i$'s. We
provide some simple scenarios
when Assumption \ref{a:competition} is satisfied.
\begin{itemize}
\item[a)] Suppose $b_i:[0,\infty)\to [0,\infty), i=1,\dots, n$ are locally Lipschitz and vanishing at $0$. Assume that there exist $\gamma_b>0, \tilde M_b>0$ such that
\[
\inf_{x\in [\tilde M_b,\infty)} b_i(x) - a_i-\gamma_b>0,~ i =1,\dots,n
\]
It is easy to show that Assumption \ref{a:competition} holds.
\item[b)] Particular cases of (a) are for example, any $b_i:\mathbb{R}_+\mapsto \mathbb{R}$ that are locally Lipschitz, vanishing at $0$
such that $\lim_{x\to \infty} b_i(x)=\infty$.
\item[c)] One natural choice for the competition functions, which is widely used throughout the literature,
is $b_i(x)=\kappa_i x, x\in (0,\infty)$ for some $\kappa_i> 0$. In this case the competition terms become $-x_ib(x_i) = - \kappa_i x_i^2$.
\end{itemize}
}\end{rmk}
\begin{rmk}
{\rm
Note that if we have the SDE
\begin{equation}\label{e4.0g}
d X_i(t)=\left(X_i(t)f_i(X_i(t))+\sum_{j=1}^n D_{ji}X_j(t)\right)dt+X_i(t)dE_i(t), \, i=1,\dots,n
,\end{equation}
where $f_i$ are locally Lipschitz this can always be rewritten in the form \eqref{e4.0} with
\[
a_i := f_i(0) \,\text{ and }\, b_i(x) := f_i(0) - f_i(x),\, \,i=1,\dots,n.
\]
Therefore, our setting is in fact
very general and incorporates both nonlinear growth rates and nonlinear competition terms.
The drift $\tilde f(\mathbf{x})=(\tilde f_1(\mathbf{x}),\dots,\tilde f_n(\mathbf{x}))$ where $\tilde f_i(\mathbf{x})=x_i(a_i-b_i(x_i))+\sum_{j=1}^n D_{ji}X_j(t)$
is sometimes said to be \textit{cooperative}. This is
because $f_i(\mathbf{x})\leq f_i(\mathbf{y})$ if $(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})\in \mathbb{R}^n_+$ such that $x_i=y_i, x_j\leq y_j$ for $j\ne i$.
A distinctive property of \textit{cooperative systems}
is that comparison arguments are generally satisfied.
We refer to \cite{IG} for more details.}
\end{rmk}
\begin{rmk}
If the dispersal matrix $(D_{ij})$ has a normalized dominant
left eigenvector $\alpha=(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_n)$ then one can show that the system
\[
d X_i(t)=\left(X_i(t)\left(a_i-b_iX_i(t)\right)+\delta \sum_{j=1}^n D_{ji}X_j(t)\right)dt+X_i(t)dE_i(t), \, i=1,\dots,n,
\]
converges as $\delta\to\infty$ to a system $(\tilde X_1(t),\dots,\tilde X_n(t))$ for which
\[
\tilde X_i(t)=\alpha_i \tilde X(t),\, t\geq 0, \, i=1,\dots,n,
\]
where $\tilde X(t)=\tilde X_1(t)+\dots + \tilde X_n(t)$ and $\tilde X$ is an autonomous Markov process that satisfies the SDE
\[
d\tilde X(t) = \tilde X(t) \sum_{i=1}^n \alpha_i(a_i-b_i\alpha_i\tilde X(t))\,dt + \tilde X(t)\sum_{i=1}^n\alpha_i\,dE_i(t).
\]
As such, our system is a general version of the system treated in \cite{EHS15}. One can recover the system from \cite{EHS15} as an infinite dispersion limit of ours.
\end{rmk}
We
denote
by $\mathbf{X}^{\mathbf{x}}(t)$ the solution of \eqref{e4.0} started at $\mathbf{X}(0)= \mathbf{x}\in \mathbb{R}^n_+$. Following \cite{ERSS13}, we call
matrices $D$ with zero row sums and non-negative off-diagonal entries \textit{dispersal matrices}. If $D$ is a dispersal matrix,
then it is a generator of
a continuous-time Markov chain.
Define $P_t:=\exp(tD), t\geq 0$. Then $P_t, t\geq 0$ is a matrix with non-negative entries that gives the transition probabilities of a Markov chain: The $(i,j)$th entry of $P_t$ gives the proportion of the population that was initially in patch $i$ at time $0$ but has dispersed to patch $j$ at time $t$ and $D$ is the generator of this Markov chain.
If one wants to include mortality induced
because of dispersal, one can add cemetery patches in which dispersing individuals enter and experience a killing rate before moving to their final destination.
Our model is a density-dependent generalization of the one by \cite{ERSS13}. We are able to prove that the linearization of the density-dependent model fully determines the non-linear density-dependent behavior,
a fact which was conjectured by \cite{ERSS13}. Furthermore, we prove stronger convergence results and thus extend the work of \cite{ERSS13}. Analogous results for discrete-time versions of
the model have been studied by \cite{BS09} for discrete-space and by \cite{HTW88, HTW88b} for continuous-space.
We will work under the following assumptions.
\begin{asp}\label{a:dispersion} {\rm
The dispersal matrix $D$ is \textit{irreducible}.
}\end{asp}
\begin{asp}\label{a:nonsingular} {\rm
The covariance matrix $\Sigma$ is non-singular.
}\end{asp}
Assumption \ref{a:dispersion} is equivalent to forcing the entries of the matrix $P_t=\exp(tD)$ to be strictly positive for all $t>0$. This means that it is possible for the population to disperse between any two patches. We can always reduce our problem to this setting by working with the maximal irreducible subsets of patches.
Assumption \ref{a:nonsingular} says that our randomness is non-degenerate, and thus truly $n$-dimensional. We show in Appendix \ref{sec:degenerate} how to get the desired results when Assumption \ref{a:nonsingular} does not hold.
Throughout the paper we set $\mathbb{R}^n_+:=[0,\infty)^n$ and $\mathbb{R}_+^{n,\circ}:=(0,\infty)^n$. We define the total abundance of our population at time $t\geq 0$ via
$S(t):=\sum_{i=1}^n X_i(t)$ and
let $Y_i(t):=\frac{X_i(t)}{S(t)}$ be the proportion of the total population that is in patch $i$ at time $t\geq0$. Set $\mathbf{Y}(t)=(Y_1(t),\dots, Y_n(t))$.
An application of It\^o's lemma to \eqref{e4.0} yields
\begin{equation}\label{e4.1}
\begin{split}
dY_i(t)=&Y_i(t)\left(a_i-\sum_{j=1}^na_jY_j(t)-b_i(S(t)Y_i(t))+\sum_{j=1}^nY_j(t)b_j(S(t)Y_j(t))\right)dt+\sum_{j=1}^{n}D_{ji}Y_j(t)dt\\
&+Y_i(t)\left(\sum_{j,k=1}^n\sigma_{kj}Y_k(t)Y_j(t))-\sum_{j=1}^n\sigma_{ij}Y_j(t)\right)dt +Y_i(t)\left[dE_i(t)-\sum_{j=1}^n Y_j(t)dE_j(t)\right]\\
dS(t)=&S(t)\left(\sum_{i=1}^n(a_iY_i(t)-Y_i(t)b_i(S(t)Y_i(t)))\right)dt+S(t)\sum_{i=1}^nY_i(t)dE_i(t)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We can rewrite \eqref{e4.1} in the following compact equation for $(\mathbf{Y}(t), S(t))$ where $\mathbf{b}(\mathbf{x})=(b_1(x_1),\dots, b_n(x_n))$.
\begin{equation}\label{eq.bys}
\begin{split}
d\mathbf{Y}(t)=&\left({\rm diag}(\mathbf{Y}(t))-\mathbf{Y}(t)\mathbf{Y}^\top(t)\right)\Gamma^\top d\mathbf{B}(t)\\
&+\mathbf{D}^\top\mathbf{Y}(t)dt+\left({\rm diag}(\mathbf{Y}(t))-\mathbf{Y}(t)\mathbf{Y}^\top(t)\right)(\mathbf{a}-\Sigma \mathbf{Y}(t)-\mathbf{b}(S(t)\mathbf{Y}(t)))dt\\
dS(t)=&S(t)\left[\mathbf{a}-{\mathbf{b}(S(t)\mathbf{Y}(t))}\right]^\top\mathbf{Y}(t)dt+S(t){\mathbf{Y}(t)}^\top \Gamma^\top d\mathbf{B}(t),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{Y}(t)$ lies in the simplex $\Delta:=\{(y_1,\dots,y_n)\in\mathbb{R}^{n}_+: y_1+\dots+y_n=1\}$.
Let $\Delta^{\circ}=\{(y_1,\dots,y_n)\in\mathbb{R}^{n,\circ}_+: y_1+\dots+y_n=1\}$ be the interior of $\Delta$.
Consider equation \eqref{eq.bys} on the boundary $((\mathbf{y},s): \mathbf{y}\in\Delta, s=0)$ (that is, we set $S(t)\equiv 0$ in the equation for $\mathbf{Y}(t)$). We have
the following system
\begin{equation}\label{eq.by}
\begin{split}
d\tilde\mathbf{Y}(t)=&\left({\rm diag}(\tilde\mathbf{Y}(t))-\tilde\mathbf{Y}(t)\tilde\mathbf{Y}^\top(t)\right)\Gamma^\top d\mathbf{B}(t)\\
&+\mathbf{D}^\top\tilde\mathbf{Y}(t)dt+\left({\rm diag}(\tilde\mathbf{Y}(t))-\tilde\mathbf{Y}(t)\tilde\mathbf{Y}^\top(t)\right)(\mathbf{a}-\Sigma \tilde\mathbf{Y}(t))dt
\end{split}
\end{equation}
on the simplex $\Delta$.
We also introduce the linearized version of \eqref{e4.0}, where the competition terms $b_i(x_i)$ are all set to $0$,
\begin{equation}\label{e1.1c}
d\mathcal X_i(t)=\left(\mathcal X_i(t)a_i+\sum_{j=1}^n D_{ji}\mathcal X_j(t)\right)dt+\mathcal X_i(t)dE_i(t), \,\, i=1,\dots,n.
\end{equation}
and let $\mathcal{S}(t)=\sum_{i=1}^n\mathcal{X}_i(t)$ be the total population abundance, in the absence of competition. The processes $(\mathcal{X}_1(t),\dots,\mathcal{X}_n(t))$, $\tilde\mathbf{Y}(t)$ and $\mathcal{S}(t)$ have been studied by \cite{ERSS13}.
\cite[Proposition 3.1]{ERSS13} proved that the process $(\tilde\mathbf{Y}(t))_{t\geq 0}$ is an irreducible Markov process, which has the strong Feller property and admits a unique invariant probability measure $\nu^*$ on $\Delta$. Let $\tilde \mathbf{Y}(\infty)$ be a random variable on $\Delta$ with distribution $\nu$. We define
\begin{equation}\label{lambda}
r:=\int_{\Delta}\left(\mathbf{a}^\top{\bf y}-\frac12{\bf y}^\top\Sigma{\bf y}\right)\nu^*(d{\bf y})= \sum_{i}a_i\mathbb{E}\left[\tilde Y_i(\infty)\right] - \frac{1}{2} \mathbb{E}\left[\sum_{ij}\sigma_{ij}\tilde Y_i(\infty)\tilde Y_j(\infty)\right]
\end{equation}
\begin{rmk}{\rm
We note that $ r$ is the stochastic growth rate (or Lyapunov exponent) of the total population $\mathcal{S}(t)$ in the absence of competition. That is,
\[
\mathbb{P}\left\{\lim_{t\to \infty}\frac{\ln\mathcal{S}^{\mathbf{x}}(t)}{t} = r\right\} =1.
\]
The expression \eqref{lambda} for $ r$ coincides with the one derived by \cite{ERSS13}.
}\end{rmk}
We use
superscripts
to denote the starting points of our processes. For example $(\mathbf{Y}^{\mathbf{y}, s}(t), S^{\mathbf{y}, s}(t))$ denotes the solution of \eqref{e4.1} with $(\mathbf{Y}(0), S(0))=(\mathbf{y},s)\in \Delta\times (0,\infty)$. Fix $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^n_+$ and define the \textit{normalized occupation measures},
\begin{equation}\label{e:occupation}
\Pi^{(\mathbf{x})}_t(\cdot)=\dfrac1t\int_0^t\boldsymbol{1}_{\{\mathbf{X}^{\mathbf{x}}(u)\in\cdot\}}du.
\end{equation}
These random measures describe the distribution of the observed population dynamics up to time $t$. If we define the sets
\[
S_\eta:=\{\mathbf{x}=(x_1,\dots,x_n)\in\mathbb{R}^{n,\circ}_+: |x_i|\leq\eta~\text{for some}~i=1,\dots,n\},
\]
then $\Pi^{(\mathbf{x})}_t(S_\eta)$ is the fraction of the time in the interval $[0,t]$ that the total abundance of some patch is less than $\eta$ given that our population starts at $\mathbf{X}(0)=\mathbf{x}$.
\begin{deff}
One can define a distance on the space of probability measures living on the Borel measurable subsets of $\mathbb{R}_+^n$, that is on the space $(\mathbb{R}_+^n,\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}_+^n))$. This is done by defining $\|\cdot,\cdot\|_{\text{TV}}$, the \textit {total variation norm}, via
\[
\|\mu,\nu\|_{\text{TV}} := \sup_{A\in \mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}_+^n)} |\mu(A)-\nu(A)|.
\]
\end{deff}
\begin{thm}\label{t:survival}
Suppose that Assumptions \ref{a:dispersion} and \ref{a:nonsingular} hold and that $ r>0$.
The process $\mathbf{X}(t) = (X_1(t),\dots,X_n(t))_{t\geq 0}$ has a unique invariant probability measure $\pi$ on $\mathbb{R}^{n,\circ}_+$ that is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure and for any $q^*>0$,
\begin{equation}
\lim\limits_{t\to\infty} t^{q^*}\|P_\mathbf{X}(t, \mathbf{x}, \cdot)-\pi(\cdot)\|_{\text{TV}}=0, \;\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^{n,\circ}_+,
\end{equation}
and $P_\mathbf{X}(t,\mathbf{x},\cdot)$ is the transition probability of $(\mathbf{X}(t))_{t\geq 0}$. Moreover, for any initial value $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^{n}_+\setminus\{\mathbf{0}\}$ and any $\pi$-integrable function $f$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{slln}
\mathbb{P}\left\{\lim\limits_{T\to\infty}\dfrac1T\int_0^Tf\left(\mathbf{X}^{\mathbf{x}}(t)\right)dt=\int_{\mathbb{R}_+^{n,\circ}}f(\mathbf{u})\pi(d\mathbf{u})\right\}=1.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{rmk} {\rm
Theorem \ref{t:survival} is a direct consequence of Theorem \ref{thm2.2}, which
will be proved in Appendix \ref{sec:+}. As a corollary we get the following result.
}\end{rmk}
\begin{deff} {\rm
Following \cite{RS14}, we say
that
the model \eqref{e4.0} is stochastically persistent if for all $\varepsilon>0$, there exists $\eta>0$ such that with probability one,
\[
\Pi^{(\mathbf{x})}_t(S_\eta)\leq \varepsilon
\]
for $t$ sufficiently large and $\mathbf{x}\in S_\eta\setminus \{\mathbf{0}\}$.
}\end{deff}
\begin{cor}
If Assumptions \ref{a:dispersion} and \ref{a:nonsingular} hold, and $ r>0$, then the process $\mathbf{X}(t)$ is stochastically persistent.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem \ref{t:survival}, we have that for all $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^{n,\circ}_+$,
\[
\mathbb{P}\left\{\Pi^{(\mathbf{x})}_t \Rightarrow \pi ~\text{as}~t\to\infty\right\}=1.
\]
Since $\pi$ is supported on $\mathbb{R}^{n,\circ}_+$, we get the desired result.
\end{proof}
\textbf{Biological interpretation of Theorem \ref{t:survival}} \textit{The quantity $ r$ is the Lyapunov exponent or stochastic growth rate of the total population process $(\mathcal{S}(t))_{t\geq 0}$ in the absence of competition. This number describes the long-term growth rate of the population in the presence of a stochastic environment. According to \eqref{lambda} $ r$ can be written as the difference $\overline \mu - \frac{1}{2}\overline\sigma^2$ where}
\begin{itemize}
\item \textit{$\overline \mu$ is the average of per-capita growth rates with respect to the asymptotic distribution $\tilde \mathbf{Y}(\infty)$ of the population in the absence of competition.}
\item \textit{$\overline\sigma^2$ is the infinitesimal variance of the environmental stochasticity averaged according to the asymptotic distribution of the population in the absence of competition.}
\end{itemize}
\textit{We note by \eqref{lambda} that $ r$ depends on the dispersal matrix, the growth rates at $0$ and the covariance matrix of the environmental noise. As such, the stochastic growth rate can change due to the dispersal strategy or environmental fluctuations. }
\textit{When the stochastic growth rate of the population in absence of competition is strictly positive (i.e. $ r>0$) our population is persistent in a strong sense: for any starting point $(X_1(0),\dots,X_n(0)) = (x_1,\dots,x_n)\in \mathbb{R}_+^{n,\circ}$ the distribution of the population densities at time $t$ in the $n$ patches $(X_1(t)$, $\dots$, $X_n(t))$ converges as $t\to \infty$ to the unique probability measure $\pi$ that is supported on $\mathbb{R}_+^{n,\circ}$.}
\begin{deff}{\rm
We say the population of patch $i$ goes extinct if for all $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^{n}_+\setminus\{\mathbf{0}\}$
\[
\mathbb{P}\left\{\lim_{t\to\infty}X^\mathbf{x}_i(t)=0\right\}=1.
\]
We say the population goes extinct if the populations from all the patches go extinct, that is if for all $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^{n}_+\setminus\{\mathbf{0}\}$
\[
\mathbb{P}\left\{\lim_{t\to\infty}\mathbf{X}^\mathbf{x}(t)=\mathbf{0}\right\}=1.
\] }
\end{deff}
\begin{thm}\label{t:extinction}
Suppose that Assumptions \ref{a:dispersion} and \ref{a:nonsingular} hold and that $ r<0$.
Then for any $i=1,\dots,n$ and any $\mathbf{x} = (x_1,\dots,x_n)\in \mathbb{R}_+^{n}$,
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{P}\left\{\lim_{t\to\infty}\frac{\ln {X}_i^{\mathbf{x}}(t)}{t}= r\right\}=1.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\textbf{Biological interpretation of Theorem \ref{t:extinction}} \textit{If the stochastic growth rate of the population in the absence of competition is negative (i.e. $ r<0$) the population densities of the $n$ patches $(X_1(t),\dots,X_n(t))$ go extinct exponentially fast with rates $ r<0$ with probability $1$ for any starting point $(X_1(0),\dots,X_n(0))= (x_1,\dots,x_n)\in \mathbb{R}_+^{n}$.}
In Appendix \ref{sec:+}, we prove Theorem \ref{t:survival} while Theorem \ref{t:extinction} is proven in Appendix \ref{sec:general-}.
\subsection{Degenerate noise}
We
consider the evolution of the process $(\mathbf{X}(t))_{t\geq 0}$ given by \eqref{e4.0} when Assumption \ref{a:nonsingular} does not hold. If the covariance matrix $\Sigma=\Gamma^T\Gamma$ coming for the Brownian motions $\mathbf{E}(t)=(E_1(t),\dots, E_n(t))^T=\Gamma^\top\mathbf{B}(t)$ is singular, the environmental noise driving our SDEs has a lower dimension than the dimension $n$ of the underlying state space.
It becomes much more complex to
prove that our process is Feller and irreducible. In order to verify the Feller property, we have to verify the so-called H{\"o}rmander condition,
and
to verify the irreducibility, we have to investigate the controllability of a related
control system.
We are able to prove the following extinction and persistence results.
\begin{thm}\label{t:ext_deg}
Assume that $\tilde\mathbf{Y}(t)$ has a \textbf{unique} invariant probability measure $\nu^*$. Define $ r$ by \eqref{lambda}. Suppose that $ r<0$.
Then for any $i=1,\dots,n$ and any $\mathbf{x} = (x_1,\dots,x_n)\in \mathbb{R}_+^{n}$
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{P}\left\{\lim_{t\to\infty}\frac{\ln {X}_i^{\mathbf{x}}(t)}{t}= r\right\}=1.
\end{equation}
In particular, for any $i=1,\dots,n$ and any $\mathbf{x} = (x_1,\dots,x_n)\in \mathbb{R}_+^{n}$
\[
\mathbb{P}\left\{\lim_{t\to\infty}X^{\mathbf{x}}_i(t)=0\right\}=1.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{rmk}{\rm The extra assumption in this setting is that the Markov process describing the proportions of the populations of the patches evolving without competition, $\tilde\mathbf{Y}(t)$, has a unique invariant probability measure.
In fact, we conjecture that $\tilde\mathbf{Y}(t)$ always has a unique invariant probability measure.
We were able to prove this conjecture when $n=2$ -- see Remark \ref{r:lambda_2d} for details. }
\end{rmk}
\begin{thm}\label{t:pers_deg}
Assume that $\tilde\mathbf{Y}(t)$ has a \textbf{unique} invariant probability measure $\nu^*$. Define $ r$ by \eqref{lambda}. Suppose that Assumption \ref{a:dispersion} holds and that $ r>0$.
Assume further that there is a sufficiently large $T>0$ such that the Markov chain $(\mathbf{Y}(kT),S(kT))_{k\in\mathbb{N}}$ it is irreducible and aperiodic, and
that every compact set in $\Delta^\circ\times(0,\infty)$ is petite for this Markov chain.
The process $\mathbf{X}(t) = (X_1(t),\dots,X_n(t))_{t\geq 0}$ has a unique invariant probability measure $\pi$ on $\mathbb{R}^{n,\circ}_+$ that is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure and for any $q^*>0$,
\begin{equation}
\lim\limits_{t\to\infty} t^{q^*}\|P_\mathbf{X}(t, \mathbf{x}, \cdot)-\pi(\cdot)\|_{\text{TV}}=0, \;\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^{n,\circ}_+,
\end{equation}
where $\|\cdot,\cdot\|_{\text{TV}}$ is the total variation norm and $P_\mathbf{X}(t,\mathbf{x},\cdot)$ is the transition probability of $(\mathbf{X}(t))_{t\geq 0}$. Moreover, for any initial value $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^{n}_+\setminus\{\mathbf{0}\}$ and any $\pi$-integrable function $f$, we have
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{P}\left\{\lim\limits_{T\to\infty}\dfrac1T\int_0^Tf\left(\mathbf{X}^{\mathbf{x}}(t)\right)dt=\int_{\mathbb{R}_+^{n,\circ}}f(\mathbf{u})\pi(d\mathbf{u})\right\}=1.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{rmk}{\rm We require as before that $\tilde\mathbf{Y}(t)$ has a unique invariant probability measure. Furthermore, we require that there exists some time $T>0$ such that if we observe the process $(\mathbf{Y}(t),S(t))$ at the fixed times $T, 2T,3T,\dots, kT,\dots$ it is irreducible (loosely speaking this means that the process can visit any state) and aperiodic (returns to a given state occur at irregular times). }
\end{rmk}
\subsection{Case study: $n=2$}
Note that the two Theorems above have some extra assumptions. We exhibit how one can get these conditions explicitly as functions of the various parameters of the model. For the sake of a clean exposition we chose to fully treat the case when $n=2$ and $b_i(x)=b_ix,x\geq0, i=1,2$ for some $b_1,b_2>0$ (each specific case would have to be studied separately as the computations change in each setting).
As a result, \eqref{e4.0} becomes
\begin{equation*}
\begin{cases}
dX_1(t)=\big(X_1(t)(a_1-b_1 X_1(t))-\alpha X_1(t)+\beta X_2(t)\big)dt+\sigma_1X_1(t)dB(t) \\
dX_2(t)=\big(X_2(t)(a_2-b_2 X_2(t))+\alpha X_1(t)-\beta X_2(t)\big)dt+\sigma_2X_2(t)dB(t),
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
where $\sigma_1$, $\sigma_2$ are non-zero constants and $(B(t))_{t\geq 0}$ is a one dimensional Brownian motion.
The Lyapunov exponent can now be expressed as (see Remark \ref{r:lambda_2d})
\begin{equation}\label{e:lambda_ours}
r = a_2-\frac{\sigma_2^2}{2} + (a_1-a_2+\sigma_2^2)\int_0^1 y\rho_1^*(y)\,dy - \frac{(\sigma_1-\sigma_2)^2}{2}\int_0^1 y^2\rho_1^*(y)\,dy
\end{equation}
where $\rho_1^*$ is given in \eqref{e-rho*} later.
If $\sigma_1=\sigma_2=:\sigma$, one has (see Remark \ref{r:lambda_2d})
\begin{equation}\label{e:lambda_2}
r =
a_2-\dfrac{\sigma^2}2+(a_1-a_2+\sigma^2)y^\star.
\end{equation}
\begin{thm}\label{t:extinction_degenerate_2}
Define $ r$ by \eqref{e:lambda_ours} if $\sigma_1\ne\sigma_2$ and by \eqref{e:lambda_2} if $\sigma_1=\sigma_2=\sigma$. If $ r<0$ then for any $i=1,2$ and any $\mathbf{x} = (x_1,x_2)\in \mathbb{R}_+^{2}$
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{P}\left\{\lim_{t\to\infty}\frac{\ln {X}_i^{\mathbf{x}}(t)}{t}= r\right\}=1.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{thm}\label{t:survival_degenerate_2}
Suppose that $\sigma_1\neq \sigma_2$ or $\beta+(b_2/b_1)( a_1-a_2-\alpha+\beta)-\alpha (b_2/b_1)^2\ne 0$.
Define $ r$ as in Theorem \ref{t:extinction_degenerate_2}. If $ r>0$ then the conclusion of Theorem \ref{t:pers_deg} holds.
\end{thm}
\begin{rmk}
{\rm
Once again the parameter $ r$ tells us when the population goes extinct and when it persists.
To obtain the conclusion of Theorem \ref{t:pers_deg} when $ r>0$, we need
$\sigma_1\neq \sigma_2$ or $\beta+(b_2/b_1)( a_1-a_2-\alpha+\beta)-\alpha (b_2/b_1)^2\ne 0.$
The condition $\sigma_1\neq \sigma_2$ tells us that the noise must at least differ through its variance. If $\sigma_1= \sigma_2$ then we require
\[
a_1+\beta \frac{b_1+b_2}{b_2} \neq a_2+\alpha \frac{b_1+b_2}{b_1}.
\]
The term $\beta \frac{b_1+b_2}{b_2}$ measures the dispersion rate of individuals from patch $2$ to patch $1$ averaged by the inverse relative competition strength of patch $2$. In particular, if $b_1=b_2$ we have that
\[
2(\beta-\alpha) \neq a_2 - a_1,
\]
that is twice the difference of the dispersal rates cannot equal the difference of the growth rates.
The dynamics of the system is very different if these conditions do not hold (see Section \ref{s:n=2_deg_noHorm} and Theorem \ref{t:survival_degenerate_1d}).}
\end{rmk}
\begin{thm}\label{t:survival_degenerate_1d}
Suppose that $\sigma_1= \sigma_2=\sigma, b_1=b_2$ and $2(\beta-\alpha) = a_2 - a_1$. In this setting one can show that the stochastic growth rate is given by $ r=a_1-\alpha+\beta-\frac{\sigma^2}2$. Assume that $(X_1(0),X_2(0))=\mathbf{x}=(x_1,x_2)\in\mathbb{R}_+^{2,\circ}$ and let $U(t)$ be the solution to
\[
dU(t)=U(t)(a_1-\alpha+\beta-b U(t))\,dt+\sigma U(t)dB(t), U(0)=x_2.
\]
Then we get the following results
\begin{itemize}
\item [1)] If $x_1=x_2$ then $\mathbb{P}(X_1^\mathbf{x}(t)= X_2^\mathbf{x}(t)=U(t), t\geq 0)=1.$
\item [2)]If $x_1\neq x_2$ then $\mathbb{P}(X^\mathbf{x}_1(t)\neq X^\mathbf{x}_2(t), t\geq 0)=1.$
\item [3)]
If $ r<0$ then $X_1(t)$ and $X_2(t)$ converges to $0$ exponentially fast.
If $ r>0$ then $$\mathbb{P}\left\{\lim_{t\to\infty}\dfrac{X^\mathbf{x}_1(t)}{U^\mathbf{x}(t)}=\lim_{t\to\infty}\dfrac{X^\mathbf{x}_2(t)}{U^\mathbf{x}(t)}=1\right\}=1.$$
Thus, both $X_1(t)$ and $X_2(t)$ converge to a unique invariant probability measure $\rho$ on $(0,\infty)$,
which is the invariant probability measure of $U(t)$. The invariant probability measure of $ (X_1(t),X_2(t))_{t\geq 0}$ is concentrated on the one-dimensional manifold
$\{\mathbf{x}=(x_1,x_2)\in\mathbb{R}^{2,\circ}_+: x_1=x_2\}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{thm}
The proof of Theorem \ref{t:survival_degenerate_1d} is presented in Section \ref{s:n=2_deg_noHorm}.
\subsection{Robust persistence and extinction}
The model we work with is
an approximation of the real biological models. As a result, it is relevant to see if `close models' behave similarly to ours. This reduces to studying the robustness of our system. Consider the process
\begin{equation}\label{e:hatX}
d\widehat X_i=\widehat X_i\left(\widehat a_i-\widehat b_i(X_i)\right)dt +\widehat D_{ij}(\widehat\mathbf{X})\widehat X_idt+\widehat X_i\widehat \Gamma(\widehat\mathbf{X}) d\mathbf{B}(t)
\end{equation}
where $\widehat\mathbf{b}(\cdot), \widehat D(\cdot),\widehat\Gamma(\cdot)$ are locally Lipschitz functions
and
$\widehat D_{ij}(\mathbf{x})\geq0$ for all $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^n_+, i\ne j$ and $\widehat D_{ii}(\mathbf{x})=-\sum_{j\ne i} D_{ij}(\mathbf{x}).$
If there exists $\theta>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{robust}
\sup\limits_{\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^{n,\circ}_+}\left\{\|\mathbf{a}-\widehat \mathbf{a}\|, \|\mathbf{b}(\mathbf{x})-\widehat\mathbf{b}(\mathbf{x})\|, \|D-\widehat D(\mathbf{x})\|, \|\Gamma-\widehat\Gamma(\mathbf{x})\|\right\}<\theta,
\end{equation}
then we call $\widehat \mathbf{X}$ a \textit{$\theta$-perturbation} of $\mathbf{X}$.
\begin{thm}\label{probust2}
Suppose that the dynamics of $(\mathbf{X}(t))_{t\geq0}$ satisfy the assumptions of Theorem \ref{t:survival}. Then there exists $\theta>0$ such that any $\theta$-perturbation $(\widehat\mathbf{X}(t))_{t\geq0}$ of $(\mathbf{X}(t))_{t\geq0}$ is persistent.
Moreover, the process $(\widehat\mathbf{X}(t))_{t\geq0}$ has a unique invariant probability measure $\widehat\pi$ on $\mathbb{R}^{n,\circ}_+$ that is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure and for any $q^*>0$
\begin{equation*}
\lim\limits_{t\to\infty} t^{q^*}\|P_{\widehat\mathbf{X}}(t, \mathbf{x}, \cdot)-\widehat\pi(\cdot)\|_{\text{TV}}=0, \;\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^{n,\circ}_+,
\end{equation*}
where $P_{\widehat\mathbf{X}}(t, \mathbf{x}, \cdot)$ is the transition probability of $(\widehat\mathbf{X}(t))_{t\geq0}$.
\end{thm}
\textbf{Biological interpretation of Theorem \ref{probust2}} \textit{As long as the perturbation of our model is small, persistence does not change to extinction. Our model, even though it is only an approximation of reality, can provide relevant information regarding biological systems. Small enough changes in the growth rates, the competition rates, the dispersion matrix and the covariance matrix leave a persistent system unchanged.
}
\section{Theoretical and Numerical Examples}
This subsection is devoted to some theoretical and numerical examples. We choose the dimension to be $n=2$, so that we can compute the stochastic growth rate explicitly.
\begin{rmk}\label{r:lambda_2d}
{\rm If
an explicit expression for $ r$ is desirable, one needs to determine the first and second moments for the invariant probability measure $\nu^*$. One can show that $\rho^*$, the density of $\nu^*$ with respect to Lebesgue measure, satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{e:FP}
-\sum_{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial y_i}[ \mu_i(\mathbf{y})\rho^*(\mathbf{y})]+\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i,j}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial y_i \partial y_j}[ v_{ij}(\mathbf{y})\rho^*(\mathbf{y})]=0, ~\mathbf{y}\in\Delta,
\end{equation}
where $\mu_i(\mathbf{y})$ and $v_{i,j}(\mathbf{y})$ are the entries of
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\mu(\mathbf{y}) &= D^\top\mathbf{y} + \left({\rm diag}(\mathbf{y})-\mathbf{y}\by^\top\right)\left(\mathbf{a}-\Sigma \mathbf{y}\right),\\
v(\mathbf{y}) &= \left({\rm diag}(\mathbf{y})-\mathbf{y}\by^\top(t)\right)\Gamma^\top\Gamma \left({\rm diag}(\mathbf{y})-\mathbf{y}\by^\top(t)\right),
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
and $\rho^*$ is constrained by $\int_\Delta \rho^*(\mathbf{y})d\mathbf{y}=1$ with appropriate boundary conditions. The boundary conditions are usually found by characterizing the domain of the infinitesimal generator of the Feller diffusion process $\tilde \mathbf{Y}(t)$, which
is usually a very difficult problem.
However, following \cite{ERSS13},
in the case of two patches ($n=2$) and non-degenerate noise the problem is significantly easier.
Let $\Sigma={\rm diag}(\sigma_1^2,\sigma_2^2)$. The system becomes
\begin{equation}\label{n=2-nonde}
\begin{cases}
dX_1(t)=\big(X_1(t)(a_1-b X_1(t))-\alpha X_1(t)+\beta X_2(t)\big)dt+\sigma_1 X_1(t)dB_1(t) \\
dX_2(t)=\big(X_2(t)(a_2-b X_2(t))+\alpha X_1(t)-\beta tX_2(t)\big)dt+\sigma_2 X_2(t)dB_2(t).
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
It is easy to find the density $\rho_1^*$ of $\tilde Y_1(\infty)$ explicitly (by solving \eqref{e:FP}) and noting that $0,1$ are both entrance boundaries for the diffusion $\tilde Y_1(t)$).
Then
\[
\rho_1^*(x) = Cx^{\beta-\alpha_1}(1-x)^{-\beta-\alpha_2}\exp\left(-\frac{2}{\sigma_1^2+\sigma_2^2}\left(\frac{\beta}{x}+\frac{\alpha}{1-x}\right)\right), \,x\in (0,1)
\]
where $C>0$ is a normalization constant and
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\alpha_i&:= \frac{2\sigma_i^2}{\sigma_1^2+\sigma_2^2}, \,i=1,2\\
\beta&:= \frac{2}{\sigma_1^2+\sigma_2^2}(a_1-a_2+\beta-\alpha).
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
One can then get the following explicit expression for the Lyapunov exponent
\begin{equation}\label{e:lambda_evans}
r = a_2-\frac{\sigma_2^2}{2} + (a_1-a_2+\sigma_2^2)\int_0^1 y\rho_1^*(y)\,dy - \frac{\sigma_1^2+\sigma_2^2}{2}\int_0^1 y^2\rho_1^*(y)\,dy.
\end{equation}
Next, consider the degenerate case
\begin{equation}\label{e:SDE_twopatch}
\begin{cases}
dX_1(t)=\big(X_1(t)(a_1-b_1 X_1(t))-\alpha X_1(t)+\beta X_2(t)\big)dt+\sigma_1X_1(t)dB(t) \\
dX_2(t)=\big(X_2(t)(a_2-b_2 X_2(t))+\alpha X_1(t)-\beta X_2(t)\big)dt+\sigma_2X_2(t)dB(t),
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_1$, $\sigma_2$ are non-zero constants and $(B(t))_{t\geq 0}$ is a one dimensional Brownian motion.
Since $\tilde Y_1(t)+\tilde Y_2(t)=1$,
to find the invariant probability measure of $\tilde\mathbf{Y}(t)$,
we only need to find the invariant probability measure of $\tilde Y_1(t)$.
If $\sigma_2\ne\sigma_2$ we can find the invariant density $\rho_1^*$ of $\tilde Y_1(\infty)$ explicitly (by solving \eqref{e:FP}.
Then
\begin{equation}\label{e-rho*}
\rho_1^*(x) = Cx^{\widehat \beta-\widehat \alpha_1}(1-x)^{-\widehat\beta-\widehat \alpha_2}\exp\left(-\frac{2}{(\sigma_1-\sigma_2)^2}\left(\frac{\beta}{x}+\frac{\alpha}{1-x}\right)\right), \,x\in (0,1)
\end{equation}
where $C>0$ is a normalization constant and
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\widehat \alpha_1&:= \frac{-2\sigma_1}{(\sigma_1-\sigma_2)},\quad\widehat \alpha_2:= \frac{2\sigma_2}{(\sigma_1-\sigma_2)}, \\
\widehat \beta&:= \frac{2}{(\sigma_1-\sigma_2)^2}(a_1-a_2+\beta-\alpha).
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
The Lyapunov exponent can now be expressed as
\begin{equation*}
r = a_2-\frac{\sigma_2^2}{2} + (a_1-a_2+\sigma_2^2)\int_0^1 y\rho_1^*(y)\,dy - \frac{(\sigma_1-\sigma_2)^2}{2}\int_0^1 y^2\rho_1^*(y)\,dy.
\end{equation*}
We note that the structure of the stochastic growth rate $ r$ for non-degenerate noise \eqref{e:lambda_evans} and for degenerate noise \eqref{e:lambda_ours} with $\sigma_1\neq \sigma_2$ is the same. The only difference is that one needs to make the substitution $\sigma_1^2+\sigma_2^2\mapsto (\sigma_1-\sigma_2)^2$ and the changes in $\widehat\alpha_i$.
If $\sigma_1=\sigma_2=:\sigma$ the system \eqref{eq.by} for $\tilde \mathbf{Y}(t)=(\tilde Y_1(t), \tilde Y_2(t))$
can be written as
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
d\tilde Y_1(t)=&\Big(\tilde Y_1(t)(a_1-a_1\tilde Y_1(t)-a_2\tilde Y_2(t))-\alpha \tilde Y_1(t)+\beta \tilde Y_2(t)\Big)dt\\
&+\sigma^2\tilde Y_1(t)\Big[(\tilde Y_1(t)+\tilde Y_2(t))^2-(\tilde Y_1(t)+\tilde Y_2(t))^2\Big]dt
\\
d\tilde Y_1(t)=&\Big(\tilde Y_2(t)(a_2-a_1\tilde Y_1(t)-a_2\tilde Y_2(t))-\beta \tilde Y_2(t)+\alpha \tilde Y_1(t)\Big)dt\\
&+\sigma^2\tilde Y_2(t)\Big[(\tilde Y_1(t)+\tilde Y_2(t))^2-(\tilde Y_1(t)+\tilde Y_2(t))^2\Big]dt.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Using the fact that $\tilde Y_1(t)+\tilde Y_2(t)=1$ this reduces to
\begin{equation}\label{e3-ex4}
d\tilde Y_1(t)=\Big((a_1-a_2)[1-\tilde Y_1(t)]\tilde Y_1(t)+\beta-(\alpha+\beta)\tilde Y_1(t)]\Big)dt.
\end{equation}
The unique equilibrium of \ref{e3-ex4} in [0,1]
is the root $y^\star$ in [0,1] of
$(a_1-a_2)(1-y)y+\beta-(\alpha+\beta)y=0.$
Hence, the unique invariant probability measure of $\tilde\mathbf{Y}(t)$
in this case is the Dirac measure concentrated in $(y^\star,1-y^\star)$.
Thus
\begin{equation*}
r =
a_2-\dfrac{\sigma^2}2+(a_1-a_2+\sigma^2)y^\star.
\end{equation*}
}
\end{rmk}
\subsection{The degenerate case $\sigma_1=\sigma_2, \alpha=\beta$}\label{s:n=2_deg}
Consider the following system,
where $\alpha, \sigma,a_i, b_i, i=1,2$ are positive constants.
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
dX_1(t)=\big(X_1(t)(a_1-b_1 X_1(t))-\alpha X_1(t)+\alpha X_2(t)\big)dt+\sigma X_1(t)dB(t) \\
dX_2(t)=\big(X_2(t)(a_2-b_2 X_2(t))+\alpha X_1(t)-\alpha X_2(t)\big)dt+\sigma X_2(t)dB(t).
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Suppose that $a_1\ne a_2$ or that $b_1\ne b_2$.
This system is degenerate since
both equations are driven by a single Brownian motion.
In this case, the unique equilibrium of \eqref{e3-ex4} in [0,1]
is the root $y^\star$ in [0,1] of
$(a_1-a_2)(1-y)y+\alpha(1-2y)=0.$
Solving this quadratic equation, we have
$y^\star=\dfrac{a_1-a_2-2\alpha+\sqrt{(a_1-a_2)^2+4\alpha^2}}{2(a_1-a_2)}$ if $a_1\neq a_2$ and $y^\star=\frac{1}{2}$ if $a_1= a_2$.
It can be proved easily that
this equilibrium is asymptotically stable
and that
$\lim_{t\to\infty}\tilde Y_1(t)=y^\star$.
Thus, if $a_1\neq a_2$
$$
\begin{aligned}
r=&a_1y^\star+a_2(1-y^\star)-\dfrac{\sigma^2}2\\
=&a_2+\dfrac{a_1-a_2-2\alpha+\sqrt{(a_1-a_2)^2+4\alpha^2}}2-\dfrac{\sigma^2}2\\
=&\dfrac{a_1+a_2-2\alpha+\sqrt{(a_1-a_2)^2+4\alpha^2}}2-\dfrac{\sigma^2}2.
\end{aligned}
$$
As a result
\begin{equation}\label{e:lambda_22}
r =
\begin{cases}
\dfrac{a_1+a_2-2\alpha+\sqrt{(a_1-a_2)^2+4\alpha^2}}2-\dfrac{\sigma^2}2 &\text{if } a_1\neq a_2, b_1=b_2\\
a_1-\dfrac{\sigma^2}2&\text{if } a_1= a_2, b_1\neq b_2.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Note that if $a_1\ne a_2$ and $b_1=b_2$
\[
\alpha+(b_2/b_1)( a_1-a_2)-\alpha (b_2/b_1)^2 = a_1-a_2\ne 0
\]
and that if $a_1= a_2$ and $b_1\neq b_2$
\[
\alpha+(b_2/b_1)( a_1-a_2)-\alpha (b_2/b_1)^2 =\alpha\left(1-b_2/b_1\right)\ne 0.
\]
Therefore, the assumptions of Theorem \ref{t:survival_degenerate_2} hold.
If $ r<0$, by Theorem \ref{t:extinction_degenerate_2} the population goes extinct,
while if $ r>0$, the population persists by Theorem \ref{t:survival_degenerate_2}.
\subsection{The degenerate case when the conditions of Theorem \ref{t:survival_degenerate_2} are violated} \label{s:n=2_deg_noHorm}
We analyse the system
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
dX_1(t)=\big(X_1(t)(a_1-b X_1(t))-\alpha X_1(t)+\beta X_2(t)\big)dt+\sigma X_1(t)dB(t) \\
dX_2(t)=\big(X_2(t)(a_2-b X_2(t))+\alpha X_1(t)-\beta X_2(t)\big)dt+\sigma X_2(t)dB(t),
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
when $2(\beta-\alpha) = a_2 - a_1$. In this case $\sigma_1= \sigma_2=\sigma$,
\[
\beta+(b_2/b_1)( a_1-a_2-\alpha+\beta)-\alpha (b_2/b_1) =0
\]
and
$$ r=a_1-\alpha+\beta-\frac{\sigma^2}2.$$
If $ r<0$ then $\lim_{t\to\infty}X_1(t)=\lim_{t\to\infty}X_2(t)=0$ almost surely
as the result of Theorem \ref{t:extinction_degenerate_2}.
We focus on the case $ r>0$ and show that some of the results violate the conclusions of Theorem \ref{t:survival_degenerate_2}.
If we set $Z(t)=X_1(t)/X_2(t)$ then (see \eqref{e5.2})
\[
dZ(t)=\Big((1-Z(t))Z(t)X_2(t)+\beta+\widehat a_1 Z(t)-\alpha Z^2(t)\Big)dt.
\]
Noting that $\widehat a_1=a_1-a_2-\alpha+\beta=\alpha-\beta$ yields
\[
d(Z(t)-1)=\Big(-(Z(t)-1)Z(t)X_2(t)-(Z(t)-1)(\alpha Z(t)+\beta)\Big)dt.
\]
Assume $Z(0)\neq 1$ and without loss of generality suppose $Z(0)> 1$.
This implies
\begin{equation}\label{e-z-1}
Z(t)-1 = (Z(0)-1)\exp\left(-\int_0^t \left[Z(s)X_2(s)+(\alpha Z(s)+\beta)\right]\,ds\right).
\end{equation}
Since $Z(t)$ and $X_2(t)$ do not explode to $\pm \infty$ in finite time we can conclude that
if $Z(0)\ne 0$ then $Z(t)\ne 0$ for any $t\geq0$ with probability 1.
In other words,
if $\mathbf{x} = (x_1,x_2)\in \mathbb{R}_+^{2,\circ}$ with $x_1\neq x_2$ then
\[
\mathbb{P}(X^\mathbf{x}_1(t)= X^\mathbf{x}_2(t), t\geq 0)=0.
\]
One can further see from \eqref{e-z-1} that
$Z(t)-1$ tends to $0$ exponentially fast.
If $Z(0)=1$ let $X_1(0)=X_2(0)=x>0$. Similar arguments to the above show that
\[
\mathbb{P}(X^\mathbf{x}_1(t)\neq X^\mathbf{x}_2(t), t\geq 0)=0 .
\]
To gain more insight into the asymptotic properties of $(X_1(t),X_2(t))$,
we study
$$
\begin{aligned}
dX_2(t)=&X_2(t)\Big((\widehat a_2-b X_2(t))+\alpha Z(t)\Big)dt+\sigma X_2(t)dB(t)\\
=&X_2(t)\Big(a_1-\alpha+\beta-b X_2(t))+\alpha(Z(t)-1)\Big)dt+\sigma X_2(t)dB(t)
\end{aligned}
$$
We have from It\^o's formula that,
$$
\begin{aligned}
d \dfrac1{X_2(t)}=\left(b+(-a_1+\alpha-\beta+\sigma^2-\alpha(Z(t)-1))\dfrac1{X_2(t)}\right)dt-\sigma\dfrac1{X_2(t)} dB(t).
\end{aligned}
$$
By the variation-of constants formula (see \cite[Section 3.4]{MAO}),
we have
$$\dfrac1{X_2(t)}=\phi^{-1}(t)\left[\dfrac1{x_2}+b\int_0^t\phi(s)ds\right]$$
where
$$\phi(t):=\exp\left[ r t+\alpha\int_0^t(Z(s)-1)ds+\sigma B(t)\right].$$
Thus,
$$
X_2(t)=\dfrac{\phi(t)}{x_2^{-1}+b\int_0^t\phi(s)ds}.
$$
It is well-known that
$$
U(t):=\dfrac{e^{ r t+\sigma B(t)}}{x_2^{-1}+b\int_0^te^{ r s+\sigma B(s)}ds},
$$
is the solution to the stochastic logistic equation
\[
dU(t)=U(t)(a_1-\alpha+\beta-b U(t))\,dt+\sigma U(t)dB(t), U(0)=x_2.
\]
By the law of the iterated logarithm, almost surely
\begin{equation}\label{e-xx1}
\lim_{t\to\infty}\phi(t)=\lim_{t\to\infty}e^{ r t+\sigma B(t)}=\infty.
\end{equation}
We have
$$\dfrac{X_2(t)}{U(t)}=\dfrac{\exp\left(\alpha\int_0^t(Z(s)-1)ds\right)\left[x^{-1}_2+b\int_0^te^{ r t+\sigma B(t)}ds\right]}{x^{-1}_2+b\int_0^t\phi(s)ds}.
$$
In view of \eqref{e-xx1}, we can use L'hospital's rule
to obtain
\begin{equation}\label{e-xx2}
\begin{aligned}
\lim_{t\to\infty}\dfrac{X_2(t)}{U(t)}=&
\lim_{t\to\infty}\dfrac{\exp\left(\alpha\int_0^t(Z(s)-1)ds\right)e^{ r t+\sigma B(t)}}{\phi(t)}\\
&+\lim_{t\to\infty}\dfrac{\alpha(Z(t)-1)\exp\left(\alpha\int_0^t(Z(s)-1)ds\right)\left[x^{-1}_2+b\int_0^te^{ r t+\sigma B(t)}ds\right]}{b\phi(t)}\\
=&
1+\lim_{t\to\infty}\dfrac{\alpha(Z(t)-1)\left[x^{-1}_2+b\int_0^te^{ r t+\sigma B(t)}ds\right]}{be^{ r t+\sigma B(t)}}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
almost surely.
By the law of the iterated logarithm,
$\lim_{t\to\infty} \dfrac{e^{ r t+\sigma B(t)}}{e^{( r-\varepsilon)t}}=\infty$
and
$\lim_{t\to\infty} \dfrac{e^{ r t+\sigma B(t)}}{e^{( r+\varepsilon)t}}=0$
for any $\varepsilon>0$.
Applying this and \eqref{e-z-1} to \eqref{e-xx2},
it is easy to show that with probability $1$
$$\lim_{t\to\infty}\dfrac{X_2(t)}{U(t)}=1.$$
Since $\lim_{t\to\infty} Z(t)=1$ almost surely,
we also have $\lim_{t\to\infty}\dfrac{X_1(t)}{U(t)}=1$ almost surely.
Thus, the long term behavior of $X_1(t)$ and $X_2(t)$ is governed by the one-dimensional diffusion $U(t)$.
In particular,
both $X_1(t)$ and $X_2(t)$ converge to a unique invariant probability measure $\rho$ on $(0,\infty)$,
which is the invariant probability measure of $U(t)$.
In this case, the invariant probability measure of $\mathbf{X}(t) = (X_1(t),X_2(t))_{t\geq 0}$
is not absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure on $\mathbb{R}^{2,\circ}_+$.
Instead, the invariant probability measure
is concentrated on the one-dimensional manifold
$\{\mathbf{x}=(x_1,x_2)\in\mathbb{R}^{2,\circ}_+: x_1=x_2\}$.
\textbf{Biological interpretation} \textit{The stochastic growth rate in this degenerate setting is given by $ r=a_1-\alpha+\beta-\frac{\sigma^2}2$. We note that this term is equal to the stochastic growth rate of patch $1$, $a_1- \frac{\sigma^2}{2}$, to which we add $\beta$, the rate of dispersal from patch $1$ to patch $2$, and subtract $\alpha$, the rate of dispersal from patch $2$ to patch $1$. When
\[
a_1- \frac{\sigma^2}{2} > \alpha - \beta
\]
one has persistence, while when
\[
a_1- \frac{\sigma^2}{2} < \alpha - \beta
\]
one has extinction. In particular, if the patches on their own are sink patches so that $a_1- \frac{\sigma^2}{2}<0$ and $a_2- \frac{\sigma^2}{2}<0$ dispersion cannot lead to persistence since
\[
a_1- \frac{\sigma^2}{2} > \alpha - \beta ~\text{and}~a_2- \frac{\sigma^2}{2} > \beta - \alpha
\]
cannot hold simultaneously. The behavior of the system when $ r>0$ is different from the behavior in the non-degenerate setting of Theorem \ref{t:survival} or the degenerate setting of Theorem \ref{t:survival_degenerate_2}. Namely, if the patches start with equal populations then the patch abundances remain equal for all times and evolve according to the one-dimensional logistic diffusion $U(t)$. If the patches start with different population abundances then $X_1(t)$ and $X_2(t)$ are never equal but tend to each other asymptotically as $t\to\infty$. Furthermore, the long term behavior of $X_1(t)$ and $X_2(t)$ is once again determined by the logistic diffusion $U(t)$ as almost surely $\frac{X_i(t)}{U(t)}\to 1$ as $t\to\infty$. As such, if $ r>0$ we have persistence but the invariant measure the system converges to does not have $\mathbb{R}_+^{2,\circ}$ as its support anymore. Instead the invariant measure has the line $\{\mathbf{x}=(x_1,x_2)\in\mathbb{R}^{2,\circ}_+: x_1=x_2\}$ as its support.}
\begin{example}\label{ex:deg}
We discuss the case when $a_1\neq a_2$ and $ \sigma_1=\sigma_2$. The stochastic growth rate can be written by the analysis in the sections above as
\begin{equation}\label{e:rr}
r =
\begin{cases}
\dfrac{a_1+a_2-2\alpha+\sqrt{(a_1-a_2)^2+4\alpha^2}}2-\dfrac{\sigma^2}2 &\text{if } \alpha=\beta, b_1=b_2\\
a_1-\alpha+\beta-\frac{\sigma^2}{2}&\text{if } a_2-a_1=2(\beta-\alpha), b_1=b_2.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm, height=7cm]{rho.pdf}
\caption{
Consider \eqref{n=2-nonde} when $\alpha=\beta$ and the Brownian motions $B_1$ and $B_2$
are assumed to have correlation $\rho$.
The graphs show the stochastic growth rate $ r$ as a function of the dispersal rate $\alpha$ for different values of the correlation. Note that if $\rho=0$ we get the setting when the Brownian motions of the two patches are independent while when $\rho=1$ we get that one Brownian motion drives the dynamics of both patches. The parameters are $\alpha=\beta, a_1=3,a_2=4, \sigma_1^2=\sigma_2^2=7$.}\label{f_lambda}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Biological interpretation} \textit{In the case when $a_1=a_2$, $\sigma_1=\sigma_2$ and $b_1\neq b_2$ (so that the two patches only differ in their competition rates) the stochastic growth rate $ r$ does not depend on the dispersal rate $\alpha$. The system behaves just as a single-patch system with stochastic growth rate $a_1-\frac{\sigma^2}{2}$. In contrast to \cite[Example 1]{ERSS13} coupling two sink patches by dispersion cannot yield persistence.}
\textit{However, if the growth rates of the patches are different $a_1\neq a_2$ then the expression for $ r$ given in \eqref{e:rr} yields for $\alpha\gg |a_1-a_2|$ that $$ r \approx\dfrac{a_1+a_2}2-\dfrac{\sigma^2}2+\frac{(a_1-a_2)^2}{8\alpha}.$$ In particular
\[
\lim_{\alpha\to\infty} r(\alpha) = \dfrac{a_1+a_2}2-\dfrac{\sigma^2}2.
\]
We note that $ r$ is a decreasing function of the dispersal rate $\alpha$ for large values of $\alpha$ (also see Figure \ref{f_lambda}). This is different from the result of \cite[Example 1]{ERSS13} where $ r$ was shown to be an increasing function of $\alpha$. In contrast to the non-degenerate case, coupling patches by dispersal decreases the stochastic growth rate and as such makes persistence less likely. This highlights the negative effect of spatial correlations on population persistence and why one may no longer get the rescue effect. This is one of your main biological conclusions. Furthermore, we also recover that dispersal has a negative impact on the stochastic growth rate when there is spatial heterogeneity (i.e. $a_1\neq a_2$). This fact has a long history, going back to the work by \cite{K82}.}
\end{example}
\section{Discussion and Generalizations}\label{s:discussion}
For numerous models of population dynamics it is natural to assume that time is continuous. One reason for this is that often environmental conditions change continuously with time and therefore can naturally be described by continuous time models. There have been a few papers dedicated to the study of stochastic differential equation models of interacting, unstructured populations in stochastic environments (see \cite{BHS08, SBA11, EHS15}). These models however do not account for population structure or correlated environmental fluctuations.
Examples of structured populations can be found by looking at a population in which individuals can live in one of $n$ patches (e.g. fish swimming between basins of a lake or butterflies dispersing between meadows). Dispersion is viewed by many population biologists as an important mechanism for survival. Not only does dispersion allow individuals to escape unfavorable landscapes (due to environmental changes or lack of resources), it also facilitates populations to smooth out local spatio-temporal environmental changes. Patch models of dispersion have been studied extensively in the deterministic setting (see for example \cite{H83,CCL12}). In the stochastic setting, there have been results for discrete time and space by \cite{BS09}, for continuous time and discrete space by \cite{ERSS13} and for structured populations that evolve continuously both in time and space.
We analyze the dynamics of a population that is spread throughout $n$ patches, evolves in a stochastic environment (that can be spatially correlated), disperses among the patches and whose members compete with each other for resources. We characterize the long-term behavior of our system as a function of $ r$ - the growth rate in the absence of competition. The quantity $ r$ is also the Lyapunov exponent of a suitable linearization of the system around $0$. Our analysis shows that $ r<0$ implies extinction and $ r>0$ persistence. The limit case $ r=0$ cannot be analyzed in our framework. We expect that new methods have to be developed in order to tackle the $ r=0$ scenario.
Since mathematical models are always approximations of nature it is necessary to study how the persistence and extinction results change under small perturbations of the parameters of the models. The concept of robust persistence (or permanence) has been introduced by \cite{HS92}. They showed that for certain systems persistence holds even when one has small perturbations of the growth functions. There have been results on robust persistence in the deterministic setting for Kolmogorov systems by \cite{S00, GH03}. Recently, robust permanence for deterministic Kolmogorov equations with respect to perturbations in both the growth functions and the feedback dynamics has been analyzed by \cite{PS16}. In the stochastic differential equations setting results on robust persistence and extinction have been proven by \cite{SBA11, BHS08}. We prove analogous results in our framework where the populations are coupled by dispersal. For robust persistence we show in Appendix \ref{s:robust} that even with \textit{density-dependent}{ perturbations of the growth rates, dispersion matrix and environmental covariance matrix, if these perturbations are sufficiently small and if the unperturbed system is persistent then the perturbed system is also persistent. In the case of extinction we can prove robustness when there are small \textit{constant} perturbations of the growth rates, dispersal matrices and covariance matrices.}
In ecology there has been an increased interest in the spatial synchrony present in population dynamics. This refers to the changes in the time-dependent characteristics (i.e. abundances etc) of structured populations. One of the mechanisms which creates synchrony is the dependence of the population dynamics on a synchronous random environmental factor such as temperature or rainfall. The synchronizing effect of environmental stochasticity, or the so-called \textit{Moran effect}, has been observed in multiple population models. Usually this effect is the result of random but correlated weather effects acting on spatially structured populations. Following \cite{L93} one could argue that our world is a spatially correlated one. For many biotic and abiotic factors, like population density, temperature or growth rate, values at close locations are usually similar. For an in-depth analysis of spatial synchrony see \cite{K00, LKB04}.
Most stochastic differential models appearing in population dynamics treat only the case when the noise is non-degenerate (although see \cite{R03, DNDY16}). This simplifies the technical proofs significantly. However, from a biological point of view it is not clear that the noise should never be degenerate. For example if one models a system with multiple populations then all populations can be influenced by the same factors (a disease, changes in temperature and sunlight etc). Environmental factors can intrinsically create spatial correlations and as such it makes sense to study how these degenerate systems compare to the non-degenerate ones. In our setting the $n$ different patches could be strongly spatially correlated. Actually, in some cases it could be more realistic to have the same one-dimensional Brownian motion $(B_t)_{t\geq 0}$ driving the dynamics of all patches. We were able to find conditions under which the proofs from the non-degenerate case can be generalized to the degenerate setting. This is a first step towards a model that tries to explain the complex relationship between dispersal, stochastic environments and spatial correlations.
We fully analyze what happens if there are only two patches, $n=2$, and the noise is degenerate. Our results show unexpectedly, and in contrast to the non-degenerate results by \cite{ERSS13}, that coupling two sink patches cannot yield persistence. More generally, we show that the stochastic growth rate is a decreasing function of the dispersal rate. In specific instances of the degenerate setting, even when there is persistence, the invariant probability measure the system converges to does not have $\mathbb{R}_+^{2,\circ}$ as its support. Instead, the abundances of the two patches converge to an invariant probability measure supported on the line $\{\mathbf{x}=(x_1,x_2)\in\mathbb{R}^{2,\circ}_+: x_1=x_2\}$. These examples shows that degenerate noise is not just an added technicality - the results can be completely different from those in the non-degenerate setting. The negative effect of spatial correlations (including the fully degenerate case) has been studied in several papers for discrete-time models (see \cite{S10,HQ89, PL98, BPR02,RRB05}). The negative impact of dispersal on the stochastic growth rate $r$ when there is spatial heterogeneity (i.e. $a_1\neq a_2$) has a long history going back to the work of \cite{K82} on the \textit{Reduction Principle}. Following \cite{A12} the Reduction Principle can be stated as the widely exhibited phenomenon that mixing
reduces growth, and differential growth selects for reduced
mixing. The first use of this principle in the study of the evolution of dispersal can be found in \cite{H83}. The work of \cite{KLS06} provides an independent proof of the Reduction Principle and applications to nonlinear competing species in discrete-time, discrete-space models. In the case of continuous-time, discrete-space models (given by branching processes) a version of the Reduction Principle is analysed by \cite{SLS09}.
\subsection{$k$ species competing and dispersing in $n$ patches}
Real populations do not evolve in isolation and as a result much of ecology is concerned with
understanding the characteristics that allow two species to coexist, or one species to take over the
habitat of another. It is of fundamental importance to understand what will happen to an invading
species. Will it invade successfully or die out in the attempt? If it does invade, will it coexist
with the native population? Mathematical models for invasibility
have contributed significantly to
the understanding of the epidemiology of infectious disease outbreaks (\cite{cross05}) and ecological
processes (\cite{law96}; \cite{cas01}). There is widespread empirical evidence
that heterogeneity, arising from abiotic (precipitation, temperature, sunlight) or biotic (competition,
predation) factors, is important in determining invasibility (\cite{davies05}; \cite{pyvsek05}). However, few theoretical studies have investigated this;
see, e.g., \cite{SLS09}, \cite{schreiber11}, \cite{schreiber12}.
In this paper we have considered the dynamics of one population that disperses through $n$ patches. One possible generalization would be to look at $k$ populations $(\mathbf{X}^1,\dots,\mathbf{X}^k)$ that compete with each other for resources, have different dispersion strategies and possibly experience the environmental noise differently. Looking at such a model could shed light upon fundamental problems regarding invasions in spatio-temporally heterogeneous environments.
The extension of our results to competition models could lead to the development of a stochastic version of the treatment of the evolution of dispersal developed for patch models in the deterministic setting by \cite{H83} and \cite{CCL12}. In the current paper we have focused on how spatio-temporal variation influences the persistence and extinction of structured populations. In a follow-up paper we intend to look at the dispersal strategies in terms of \textit{evolutionarily stable strategies}
(ESS) which can be characterized by showing that a population having a dispersal strategy $(D_{ij})$ cannot be invaded by any other population having a different dispersal strategy $(\tilde D_{ij})$. The first thing to check would be whether this model has ESS and, if they exist, whether they are unique. One might even get that there are no ESS in our setting. For example, \cite{SL11} show that there exist no ESS for periodic non-linear models and instead one gets a coalition of strategies that act as an ESS.
We expect to be able to generalize the results of \cite{CCL12} to a stochastic setting using the methods from this paper.
{\bf Acknowledgments.} We thank Sebastian J. Schreiber and three anonymous referees for their detailed comments which helped improve this manuscript.
\bibliographystyle{plainnat}
|
\section{Electronic Submission}
\label{submission}
Submission to ICML 2016 will be entirely electronic, via a web site
(not email). Information about the submission process and \LaTeX\ templates
are available on the conference web site at:
\begin{center}
\textbf{\texttt{http://icml.cc/2016/}}
\end{center}
Send questions about submission and electronic templates to
\texttt{<EMAIL>}.
The guidelines below will be enforced for initial submissions and
camera-ready copies. Here is a brief summary:
\begin{itemize}
\item Submissions must be in PDF.
\item The maximum paper length is \textbf{8 pages excluding references and acknowledgements, and 10 pages
including references and acknowledgements} (pages 9 and 10 must contain only references and acknowledgements).
\item Do \textbf{not include author information or acknowledgements} in your initial
submission.
\item Your paper should be in \textbf{10 point Times font}.
\item Make sure your PDF file only uses Type-1 fonts.
\item Place figure captions {\em under} the figure (and omit titles from inside
the graphic file itself). Place table captions {\em over} the table.
\item References must include page numbers whenever possible and be as complete
as possible. Place multiple citations in chronological order.
\item Do not alter the style template; in particular, do not compress the paper
format by reducing the vertical spaces.
\item Keep your abstract brief and self-contained, one
paragraph and roughly 4--6 sentences. Gross violations will require correction at the camera-ready phase.
Title should have content words capitalized.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Submitting Papers}
{\bf Paper Deadline:} The deadline for paper submission to ICML 2016
is at \textbf{23:59 Universal Time (3:59 p.m.\ Pacific Standard Time) on February 5, 2016}.
If your full submission does not reach us by this time, it will
not be considered for publication. There is no separate abstract submission.
{\bf Anonymous Submission:} To facilitate blind review, no identifying
author information should appear on the title page or in the paper
itself. Section~\ref{author info} will explain the details of how to
format this.
{\bf Simultaneous Submission:} ICML will not accept any paper which,
at the time of submission, is under review for another conference or
has already been published. This policy also applies to papers that
overlap substantially in technical content with conference papers
under review or previously published. ICML submissions must not be
submitted to other conferences during ICML's review period. Authors
may submit to ICML substantially different versions of journal papers
that are currently under review by the journal, but not yet accepted
at the time of submission. Informal publications, such as technical
reports or papers in workshop proceedings which do not appear in
print, do not fall under these restrictions.
\medskip
To ensure our ability to print submissions, authors must provide their
manuscripts in \textbf{PDF} format. Furthermore, please make sure
that files contain only Type-1 fonts (e.g.,~using the program {\tt
pdffonts} in linux or using File/DocumentProperties/Fonts in
Acrobat). Other fonts (like Type-3) might come from graphics files
imported into the document.
Authors using \textbf{Word} must convert their document to PDF. Most
of the latest versions of Word have the facility to do this
automatically. Submissions will not be accepted in Word format or any
format other than PDF. Really. We're not joking. Don't send Word.
Those who use \textbf{\LaTeX} to format their accepted papers need to pay close
attention to the typefaces used. Specifically, when producing the PDF by first
converting the dvi output of \LaTeX\ to Postscript the default behavior is to
use non-scalable Type-3 PostScript bitmap fonts to represent the standard
\LaTeX\ fonts. The resulting document is difficult to read in electronic form;
the type appears fuzzy. To avoid this problem, dvips must be instructed to use
an alternative font map. This can be achieved with the following two commands:
{\footnotesize
\begin{verbatim}
dvips -Ppdf -tletter -G0 -o paper.ps paper.dvi
ps2pdf paper.ps
\end{verbatim}}
Note that it is a zero following the ``-G''. This tells dvips to use
the config.pdf file (and this file refers to a better font mapping).
A better alternative is to use the \textbf{pdflatex} program instead of
straight \LaTeX. This program avoids the Type-3 font problem, however you must
ensure that all of the fonts are embedded (use {\tt pdffonts}). If they are
not, you need to configure pdflatex to use a font map file that specifies that
the fonts be embedded. Also you should ensure that images are not downsampled
or otherwise compressed in a lossy way.
Note that the 2016 style files use the {\tt hyperref} package to
make clickable links in documents. If this causes problems for you,
add {\tt nohyperref} as one of the options to the {\tt icml2016}
usepackage statement.
\subsection{Reacting to Reviews}
We will continue the ICML tradition in which the authors are given the
option of providing a short reaction to the initial reviews. These
reactions will be taken into account in the discussion among the
reviewers and area chairs.
\subsection{Submitting Final Camera-Ready Copy}
The final versions of papers accepted for publication should follow the
same format and naming convention as initial submissions, except of
course that the normal author information (names and affiliations)
should be given. See Section~\ref{final author} for details of how to
format this.
The footnote, ``Preliminary work. Under review by the International
Conference on Machine Learning (ICML). Do not distribute.'' must be
modified to ``\textit{Proceedings of the
$\mathit{33}^{rd}$ International Conference on Machine Learning},
New York, NY, USA, 2016. JMLR: W\&CP volume 48.
Copyright 2016 by the author(s).''
For those using the \textbf{\LaTeX} style file, simply change
$\mathtt{\backslash usepackage\{icml2016\}}$ to
$$\mathtt{\backslash usepackage[accepted]\{icml2016\}}$$
\noindent
Authors using \textbf{Word} must edit the
footnote on the first page of the document themselves.
Camera-ready copies should have the title of the paper as running head
on each page except the first one. The running title consists of a
single line centered above a horizontal rule which is $1$ point thick.
The running head should be centered, bold and in $9$ point type. The
rule should be $10$ points above the main text. For those using the
\textbf{\LaTeX} style file, the original title is automatically set as running
head using the {\tt fancyhdr} package which is included in the ICML
2016 style file package. In case that the original title exceeds the
size restrictions, a shorter form can be supplied by using
\verb|\icmltitlerunning{...}|
just before $\mathtt{\backslash begin\{document\}}$.
Authors using \textbf{Word} must edit the header of the document themselves.
\section{Format of the Paper}
All submissions must follow the same format to ensure the printer can
reproduce them without problems and to let readers more easily find
the information that they desire.
\subsection{Length and Dimensions}
Papers must not exceed eight (8) pages, including all figures, tables,
and appendices, but excluding references and acknowledgements. When references and acknowledgements are included,
the paper must not exceed ten (10) pages.
Acknowledgements should be limited to grants and people who contributed to the paper.
Any submission that exceeds
this page limit or that diverges significantly from the format specified
herein will be rejected without review.
The text of the paper should be formatted in two columns, with an
overall width of 6.75 inches, height of 9.0 inches, and 0.25 inches
between the columns. The left margin should be 0.75 inches and the top
margin 1.0 inch (2.54~cm). The right and bottom margins will depend on
whether you print on US letter or A4 paper, but all final versions
must be produced for US letter size.
The paper body should be set in 10~point type with a vertical spacing
of 11~points. Please use Times typeface throughout the text.
\subsection{Title}
The paper title should be set in 14~point bold type and centered
between two horizontal rules that are 1~point thick, with 1.0~inch
between the top rule and the top edge of the page. Capitalize the
first letter of content words and put the rest of the title in lower
case.
\subsection{Author Information for Submission}
\label{author info}
To facilitate blind review, author information must not appear. If
you are using \LaTeX\/ and the \texttt{icml2016.sty} file, you may use
\verb+\icmlauthor{...}+ to specify authors. The author information
will simply not be printed until {\tt accepted} is an argument to the
style file. Submissions that include the author information will not
be reviewed.
\subsubsection{Self-Citations}
If your are citing published papers for which you are an author, refer
to yourself in the third person. In particular, do not use phrases
that reveal your identity (e.g., ``in previous work \cite{langley00}, we
have shown \ldots'').
Do not anonymize citations in the reference section by removing or
blacking out author names. The only exception are manuscripts that are
not yet published (e.g. under submission). If you choose to refer to
such unpublished manuscripts \cite{anonymous}, anonymized copies have
to be submitted
as Supplementary Material via CMT. However, keep in mind that an ICML
paper should be self contained and should contain sufficient detail
for the reviewers to evaluate the work. In particular, reviewers are
not required to look a the Supplementary Material when writing their
review.
\subsubsection{Camera-Ready Author Information}
\label{final author}
If a paper is accepted, a final camera-ready copy must be prepared.
For camera-ready papers, author information should start 0.3~inches
below the bottom rule surrounding the title. The authors' names should
appear in 10~point bold type, electronic mail addresses in 10~point
small capitals, and physical addresses in ordinary 10~point type.
Each author's name should be flush left, whereas the email address
should be flush right on the same line. The author's physical address
should appear flush left on the ensuing line, on a single line if
possible. If successive authors have the same affiliation, then give
their physical address only once.
A sample file (in PDF) with author names is included in the ICML2016
style file package.
\subsection{Abstract}
The paper abstract should begin in the left column, 0.4~inches below
the final address. The heading `Abstract' should be centered, bold,
and in 11~point type. The abstract body should use 10~point type, with
a vertical spacing of 11~points, and should be indented 0.25~inches
more than normal on left-hand and right-hand margins. Insert
0.4~inches of blank space after the body. Keep your abstract brief and
self-contained,
limiting it to one paragraph and roughly 4--6 sentences. Gross violations will require correction at the camera-ready phase.
\subsection{Partitioning the Text}
You should organize your paper into sections and paragraphs to help
readers place a structure on the material and understand its
contributions.
\subsubsection{Sections and Subsections}
Section headings should be numbered, flush left, and set in 11~pt bold
type with the content words capitalized. Leave 0.25~inches of space
before the heading and 0.15~inches after the heading.
Similarly, subsection headings should be numbered, flush left, and set
in 10~pt bold type with the content words capitalized. Leave
0.2~inches of space before the heading and 0.13~inches afterward.
Finally, subsubsection headings should be numbered, flush left, and
set in 10~pt small caps with the content words capitalized. Leave
0.18~inches of space before the heading and 0.1~inches after the
heading.
Please use no more than three levels of headings.
\subsubsection{Paragraphs and Footnotes}
Within each section or subsection, you should further partition the
paper into paragraphs. Do not indent the first line of a given
paragraph, but insert a blank line between succeeding ones.
You can use footnotes\footnote{For the sake of readability, footnotes
should be complete sentences.} to provide readers with additional
information about a topic without interrupting the flow of the paper.
Indicate footnotes with a number in the text where the point is most
relevant. Place the footnote in 9~point type at the bottom of the
column in which it appears. Precede the first footnote in a column
with a horizontal rule of 0.8~inches.\footnote{Multiple footnotes can
appear in each column, in the same order as they appear in the text,
but spread them across columns and pages if possible.}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\vskip 0.2in
\begin{center}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{icml_numpapers}}
\caption{Historical locations and number of accepted papers for International
Machine Learning Conferences (ICML 1993 -- ICML 2008) and
International Workshops on Machine Learning (ML 1988 -- ML
1992). At the time this figure was produced, the number of
accepted papers for ICML 2008 was unknown and instead estimated.}
\label{icml-historical}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.2in
\end{figure}
\subsection{Figures}
You may want to include figures in the paper to help readers visualize
your approach and your results. Such artwork should be centered,
legible, and separated from the text. Lines should be dark and at
least 0.5~points thick for purposes of reproduction, and text should
not appear on a gray background.
Label all distinct components of each figure. If the figure takes the
form of a graph, then give a name for each axis and include a legend
that briefly describes each curve. Do not include a title inside the
figure; instead, the caption should serve this function.
Number figures sequentially, placing the figure number and caption
{\it after\/} the graphics, with at least 0.1~inches of space before
the caption and 0.1~inches after it, as in
Figure~\ref{icml-historical}. The figure caption should be set in
9~point type and centered unless it runs two or more lines, in which
case it should be flush left. You may float figures to the top or
bottom of a column, and you may set wide figures across both columns
(use the environment {\tt figure*} in \LaTeX), but always place
two-column figures at the top or bottom of the page.
\subsection{Algorithms}
If you are using \LaTeX, please use the ``algorithm'' and ``algorithmic''
environments to format pseudocode. These require
the corresponding stylefiles, algorithm.sty and
algorithmic.sty, which are supplied with this package.
Algorithm~\ref{alg:example} shows an example.
\begin{algorithm}[tb]
\caption{Bubble Sort}
\label{alg:example}
\begin{algorithmic}
\STATE {\bfseries Input:} data $x_i$, size $m$
\REPEAT
\STATE Initialize $noChange = true$.
\FOR{$i=1$ {\bfseries to} $m-1$}
\IF{$x_i > x_{i+1}$}
\STATE Swap $x_i$ and $x_{i+1}$
\STATE $noChange = false$
\ENDIF
\ENDFOR
\UNTIL{$noChange$ is $true$}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Tables}
You may also want to include tables that summarize material. Like
figures, these should be centered, legible, and numbered consecutively.
However, place the title {\it above\/} the table with at least
0.1~inches of space before the title and the same after it, as in
Table~\ref{sample-table}. The table title should be set in 9~point
type and centered unless it runs two or more lines, in which case it
should be flush left.
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{Classification accuracies for naive Bayes and flexible
Bayes on various data sets.}
\label{sample-table}
\vskip 0.15in
\begin{center}
\begin{small}
\begin{sc}
\begin{tabular}{lcccr}
\hline
\abovespace\belowspace
Data set & Naive & Flexible & Better? \\
\hline
\abovespace
Breast & 95.9$\pm$ 0.2& 96.7$\pm$ 0.2& $\surd$ \\
Cleveland & 83.3$\pm$ 0.6& 80.0$\pm$ 0.6& $\times$\\
Glass2 & 61.9$\pm$ 1.4& 83.8$\pm$ 0.7& $\surd$ \\
Credit & 74.8$\pm$ 0.5& 78.3$\pm$ 0.6& \\
Horse & 73.3$\pm$ 0.9& 69.7$\pm$ 1.0& $\times$\\
Meta & 67.1$\pm$ 0.6& 76.5$\pm$ 0.5& $\surd$ \\
Pima & 75.1$\pm$ 0.6& 73.9$\pm$ 0.5& \\
\belowspace
Vehicle & 44.9$\pm$ 0.6& 61.5$\pm$ 0.4& $\surd$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{sc}
\end{small}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.1in
\end{table}
Tables contain textual material that can be typeset, as contrasted
with figures, which contain graphical material that must be drawn.
Specify the contents of each row and column in the table's topmost
row. Again, you may float tables to a column's top or bottom, and set
wide tables across both columns, but place two-column tables at the
top or bottom of the page.
\subsection{Citations and References}
Please use APA reference format regardless of your formatter
or word processor. If you rely on the \LaTeX\/ bibliographic
facility, use {\tt natbib.sty} and {\tt icml2016.bst}
included in the style-file package to obtain this format.
Citations within the text should include the authors' last names and
year. If the authors' names are included in the sentence, place only
the year in parentheses, for example when referencing Arthur Samuel's
pioneering work \yrcite{Samuel59}. Otherwise place the entire
reference in parentheses with the authors and year separated by a
comma \cite{Samuel59}. List multiple references separated by
semicolons \cite{kearns89,Samuel59,mitchell80}. Use the `et~al.'
construct only for citations with three or more authors or after
listing all authors to a publication in an earlier reference \cite{MachineLearningI}.
Authors should cite their own work in the third person
in the initial version of their paper submitted for blind review.
Please refer to Section~\ref{author info} for detailed instructions on how to
cite your own papers.
Use an unnumbered first-level section heading for the references, and
use a hanging indent style, with the first line of the reference flush
against the left margin and subsequent lines indented by 10 points.
The references at the end of this document give examples for journal
articles \cite{Samuel59}, conference publications \cite{langley00}, book chapters \cite{Newell81}, books \cite{DudaHart2nd}, edited volumes \cite{MachineLearningI},
technical reports \cite{mitchell80}, and dissertations \cite{kearns89}.
Alphabetize references by the surnames of the first authors, with
single author entries preceding multiple author entries. Order
references for the same authors by year of publication, with the
earliest first. Make sure that each reference includes all relevant
information (e.g., page numbers).
\subsection{Software and Data}
We strongly encourage the publication of software and data with the
camera-ready version of the paper whenever appropriate. This can be
done by including a URL in the camera-ready copy. However, do not
include URLs that reveal your institution or identity in your
submission for review. Instead, provide an anonymous URL or upload
the material as ``Supplementary Material'' into the CMT reviewing
system. Note that reviewers are not required to look a this material
when writing their review.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
\textbf{Do not} include acknowledgements in the initial version of
the paper submitted for blind review.
If a paper is accepted, the final camera-ready version can (and
probably should) include acknowledgements. In this case, please
place such acknowledgements in an unnumbered section at the
end of the paper. Typically, this will include thanks to reviewers
who gave useful comments, to colleagues who contributed to the ideas,
and to funding agencies and corporate sponsors that provided financial
support.
\nocite{langley00}
\section{Introduction}
As hardware and algorithms advance, neural network performance is constantly
improving for many machine learning tasks. This is particularly true in
applications where extremely large datasets are available to train models with
many parameters. Because big datasets provide results that (often
dramatically) outperform the prior state-of-the-art in many machine learning
tasks, researchers are willing to purchase specialized hardware such as GPUs,
and commit large amounts of time to training models and tuning
hyper-parameters.
Gradient-based training methods have several properties that contribute to this need for specialized hardware. First, while large amounts of data
can be shared amongst many cores, existing optimization methods suffer when
parallelized.
Second, training neural nets requires optimizing highly non-convex objectives
that exhibit saddle points, poor conditioning, and vanishing gradients, all
of which slow down gradient-based methods such as stochastic gradient descent,
conjugate gradients, and BFGS. Several mitigating approaches to avoiding this issue have been
introduced, including rectified linear units (ReLU)~\cite{nair2010rectified},
Long Short-Term Memory networks~\cite{hochreiter1997long}, RPROP \cite{riedmiller1993direct}, and others, but the
fundamental problem remains.
In this paper, we introduce a new method for training the parameters of neural
nets using the Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers (ADMM) and Bregman
iteration. This approach addresses several problems facing classical gradient
methods; the proposed method exhibits linear scaling when data is parallelized
across cores, and is robust to gradient saturation and poor conditioning. The
method decomposes network training into a sequence of sub-steps that are each
solved to global optimality. The scalability of the proposed method, combined
with the ability to avoid local minima by globally solving each substep, can
lead to dramatic speedups.
We begin in Section \ref{sec:background} by describing the mathematical
notation and context, and providing a discussion of several weaknesses of
gradient-based methods that we hope to address. Sections \ref{sec:min} and
\ref{sec:lagrange} introduce and describe the optimization approach, and
Sections \ref{sec:dist} and \ref{sec:implementation} describe in detail the
distributed implementation. Section \ref{sec:experiments} provides an
experimental comparison of the new approach with standard implementations of
several gradient-based methods on two problems of differing size and
difficulty. Finally, Section \ref{sec:discussion} contains a closing
discussion of the paper's contributions and the future work needed.
\section{Background and notation}
\label{sec:background}
Though there are many variations, a typical neural network consists of $L$
layers, each of which is defined by a linear operator $W_l,$ and a non-linear
neural activation function $h_l.$ Given a (column) vector of input
activations, $a_{l-1},$ a single layer computes and outputs the non-linear
function $a_l=h_l(W_la_{l-1}).$ A network is formed by layering these units
together in a nested fashion to compute a composite function; in the
3-layer case, for example, this would be
\aln{ \label{general}
f(a_0; W) = W_3( h_2(W_2 h_1(W_1a_0)))
}
where $W=\{W_l\}$ denotes the ensemble of weight matrices, and $a_0$ contains
input activations for every training sample (one sample per column). The
function $h_3$ is absent as it is common for the last layer to not have an
activation function.
Training the network is the task of tuning the weight matrices $W$ to match
the output activations $a_L$ to the targets $y$, given the inputs $a_0.$ Using a loss function
$\ell,$ the training problem can be posed as
\aln{ \label{originalMin}
\min_W \,\,\, \ell( f(a_0; W), y )
}
Note that in our notation, we have included all input activations for all
training data into the matrix/tensor $a_0.$ This notation benefits our
discussion of the proposed algorithm, which operates on all training data
simultaneously as a batch.
Also, in our formulation the tensor $W$ contains {\em linear operators}, but
not necessarily dense matrices. These linear operators can be convolutions
with an ensemble of filters, in which case \eqref{general} represents a
convolutional net.
Finally, the formulation used here assumes a feed-forward architecture.
However, our proposed methods can handle more complex network topologies (such
as recurrent networks) with little modification.
\subsection{What's wrong with backprop?}
Most networks are trained using stochastic gradient descent (SGD, i.e.
backpropagation) in which the gradient of the network loss function is
approximated using a small number of training samples, and then a descent step
is taken using this approximate gradient. Stochastic gradient methods work
extremely well in the serial setting, but lack scalability. Recent attempts
to scale SGD include Downpour, which runs SGD simultaneously on multiple
cores. This model averages parameters across cores using multiple
communication nodes that store copies of the model. A conceptually similar
approach is elastic averaging \cite{zhang2015deep}, in which different
processors simultaneously run SGD using a quadratic penalty term that prevents
different processes from drifting too far from the central average. These
methods have found success with modest numbers of processors, but fail to
maintain strong scaling for large numbers of cores. For example, for several
experiments reported in~\cite{dean12}, the Downpour distributed SGD method
runs slower with 1500 cores than with 500 cores.
The scalability of SGD is limited because it relies on a {\em large} number of
inexpensive minimization steps that each use a {\em small} amount of data.
Forming a noisy gradient from a small mini-batch requires very little
computation. The low cost of this step is an asset in the serial setting
where it enables the algorithm to move quickly, but disadvantageous in the
parallel setting where each step is too inexpensive to be split over multiple
processors. For this reason, SGD is ideally suited for computation on GPUs,
where multiple cores can simultaneously work on a small batch of data using a
shared memory space with virtually no communication overhead.
When parallelizing over CPUs, it is preferable to have methods that use a {\em
small} number of {\em expensive} minimization steps, preferably involving a
large number of data. The work required on each minimization step can then be
split across many worker nodes, and the latency of communication is amortized
over a large amount of computation. This approach has been suggested by
numerous authors who propose batch computation methods
\cite{ngiam2011optimization}, which compute exact gradients on each iteration
using the entire dataset, including conjugate gradients
\cite{towsey1995training,moller1993scaled}, BFGS, and Hessian-free
\cite{martens2011learning,sainath2013accelerating} methods.
Unfortunately, all gradient-based approaches, whether batched or stochastic,
also suffer from several other critical drawbacks. First, gradient-based methods suffer from the {\em vanishing gradients.}
During backpropagation, the derivative of shallow layers in a network are
formed using products of weight matrices and derivatives of non-linearities
from downstream layers. When the eigenvalues of the weight matrices are
small and the derivatives of non-linearities are nearly zero (as they often
are for sigmoid and ReLU non-linearities), multiplication by these terms
annihilates information. The resulting gradients in shallow layers contain
little information about the error
\cite{bengio1994learning,riedmiller1993direct,hochreiter1997long}.
Second, backprop has the potential to get stuck at local minima and saddle
points. While recent results suggest that local minimizers of SGD are close
to global minima \cite{choromanska2014loss}, in practice SGD often lingers
near saddle points where gradients are small \cite{dauphin2014identifying}.
Finally, backprop does not easily parallelize over layers, a significant
bottleneck when considering deep architectures. However, recent work on SGD
has successfully used model parallelism by using multiple replicas of the
entire network \cite{dean12}.
We propose a solution that helps alleviate these problems by separating the
objective function at each layer of a neural network into two terms: one term
measuring the relation between the weights and the input activations, and the
other term containing the nonlinear activation function. We then apply an
alternating direction method that addresses each term separately. The first
term allows the weights to be updated without the effects of vanishing
gradients. In the second step, we have a non-convex minimization problem that
can be solved \emph{globally} in closed-form. Also, the form of the
objective allows the weights of every layer to be updated
independently, enabling parallelization over layers.
This approach does not require any gradient steps at all. Rather, the problem
of training network parameters is reduced to a series of minimization
sub-problems using the alternating direction methods of multipliers. These
minimization sub-problems are solved globally in closed form.
\subsection{Related work}
Other works have applied least-squares based methods to neural networks. One notable example is the method of auxiliary coordinates (MAC) \cite{carreira2012distributed} which uses quadratic penalties to approximately enforce equality constraints. Unlike our method, MAC requires iterative solvers for sub-problems, whereas the method proposed here is designed so that all sub-problems have closed form solutions. Also unlike MAC, the method proposed here uses Lagrange multipliers to exactly enforce equality constraints, which we have found to be necessary for training deeper networks.
Another related approach is the expectation-maximization (EM) algorithm of \cite{patel2015drm}, which is derived from the Deep Rendering Model (DRM), a hierarchical generative model for natural images. They show that feedforward propagation in a deep convolutional net corresponds to inference on their proposed DRM. They derive a new EM learning algorithm for their proposed DRM that employs least-squares parameter updates that are conceptually similar to (but different from) the Parallel Weight Update proposed here (see Section~\ref{sec:dist}). However, there is currently no implementation nor any training results to compare against.
Note that our work is the first to consider alternating least squares as a method to distribute computation across a cluster, although the authors of \cite{carreira2012distributed} do consider implementations that are ``distributed'' in the sense of using multiple threads on a single machine via the Matlab matrix toolbox.
\section{Alternating minimization for neural networks}
\label{sec:min}
The idea behind our method is to decouple the weights from the nonlinear link
functions using a splitting technique. Rather than feeding the output of the
linear operator $W_l$ directly into the activation function $h_l,$ we store the
output of layer $l$ in a new variable $z_l = W_la_{l-1}.$ We also represent
the output of the link function as a vector of activations $a_l=h_l(z_l).$
We then wish to solve the following problem
\aln{ \splt{ \label{constrained}
\minimize_{\hspace{-3mm}\{W_l\},\{a_l\},\{z_l\}}\,\,& \ell(z_L, y) \\
\subjectto & z_l = W_la_{l-1}, \text{ for } l=1,2,\cdots L\\
& a_l=h_l(z_l) ,\text{ for } l=1,2,\cdots L-1.
}}
Observe that solving \eqref{constrained} is equivalent to solving
\eqref{originalMin}. Rather than try to solve \eqref{constrained} directly,
we relax the constraints by adding an $\ell_2$ penalty function to the
objective and attack the unconstrained problem
\aln{ \label{split}
&\minimize_{\hspace{-3mm}\{W_l\},\{a_l\},\{z_l\}}\,\, \ell(z_L, y) +
\beta_{L}\|z_{L} - W_{L}a_{L-1} \|^2 \nonumber\\ & \qquad+
\sum_{l=1}^{L-1}
\left[\gamma_l\| a_l-h_l(z_l) \|^2 + \beta_l\|z_l - W_la_{l-1} \|^2\right]
}
where $\{\gamma_l\}$ and $\{\beta_l\}$ are constants that control the weight
of each constraint. The formulation \eqref{split} only {\em approximately}
enforces the constraints in \eqref{constrained}. To obtain exact enforcement
of the constraints, we add a Lagrange multiplier term to \eqref{split}, which yields
\aln{ \label{bregman}
& \hspace{-3mm} \minimize_{\hspace{-1mm}\{W_l\},\{a_l\},\{z_l\}}\,\, \ell(z_L,
y) \\
& \hspace{7mm} + \la z_{L},\lambda \ra+ \beta_{L}\|z_{L} - W_{L}a_{L-1} \|^2 \nonumber \\
&\hspace{7mm} + \sum_{l=1}^{L-1} \left[\gamma_l\| a_l-h_l(z_l) \|^2 + \beta_l\|z_l
- W_la_{l-1} \|^2\right]. \nonumber
}
where $\lambda$ is a vector of Lagrange multipliers with the same dimensions
as $z_{L}.$ Note that in a classical ADMM formulation, a Lagrange
multiplier would be added for each constraint in \eqref{constrained}. The
formulation above corresponds more closely to Bregman iteration, which only
requires a Lagrange correction to be added to the objective term (and not the
constraint terms), rather than classical ADMM. We have found the Bregman
formulation to be far more stable than a full scale ADMM formulation. This
issue will be discussed in detail in Section \ref{sec:lagrange}.
The split formulation \eqref{split} is carefully designed to be easily
minimized using an alternating direction method in which each sub-step has
a simple closed-form solution. The alternating direction scheme proceeds by
updating one set of variables at a time -- either $\{W_l\},$ $\{a_l\},$ or
$\{z_l\}$ -- while holding the others constant. The simplicity of the
proposed scheme comes from the following observation: The minimization of
\eqref{split} with respect to both $\{W_l\}$ and $\{a_{l-1}\}$ is a simple
linear least-squares problem.
%
Only the minimization of \eqref{split} with respect $\{z_l\}$ is nonlinear.
However, there is no coupling between the entries of $\{z_l\},$ and so the
problem of minimizing for $\{z_l\}$ decomposes into solving a large number of
one-dimensional problems, one for each entry in $\{z_l\}.$ Because each
sub-problem has a simple form and only 1 variable, these problems can be solved
{\em globally} in closed form.
The full alternating direction method is listed in Algorithm~\ref{alg}. We discuss the details below.
\begin{algorithm}[tb]
\caption{ADMM for Neural Nets}
\label{alg}
\begin{algorithmic}
\STATE {\bfseries Input:} training features $\{a_0\},$ and labels $\{y\},$
\STATE {\bfseries Initialize:} allocate $\{a_l\}_{l=1}^{L=1},$ $\{z_l\}_{l=1}^L,$ and $\lambda$
\STATE\textbf{repeat}
\FOR{$l=1,2,\cdots,L-1$}
\STATE $W_l \gets z_l a_{l-1}^\dagger$
\STATE {\small $a_l \hspace{-1mm}\gets \hspace{-1mm}(\beta_{l+1} W_{l+1}^TW_{l+1}+\gamma_{l} I)^{-1} (\beta_{l+1}
W_{l+1}^Tz_{l+1} +\gamma_l h_l (z_l))$}
\STATE $z_l\gets\argmin_{z}\gamma_l\| a_l-h_l(z) \|^2 + \beta_l\|z_l - W_la_{l-1} \|^2$
\ENDFOR
\STATE $W_L \gets z_L a_{L-1}^\dagger$
\STATE $z_L\gets\argmin_{z} \ell(z,y) + \la z_{L},\lambda \ra+ \beta_L\|z - W_La_{l-1} \|^2$
\STATE $ \lambda \gets \lambda+ \beta_{L}(z_{L} - W_{L}a_{L-1})$
\STATE{\textbf{until} converged}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Minimization sub-steps}
In this section, we consider the updates for each variable in \eqref{bregman}. The algorithm proceeds by minimizing for $W_l,$ $a_l,$ and $z_l,$ and then updating the Lagrange multipliers $\lambda.$
\paragraph{\textbf{Weight update }} We first consider the minimization of
\eqref{split} with respect to $\{W_l\}.$
For each layer $l,$ the optimal solution minimizes $\|z_l - W_la_{l-1} \|^2.$
This is simply a least squares problem, and the solution is given by
$W_l \gets z_l a_{l-1}^\dagger$
where $a_{l-1}^\dagger$ represents the pseudoinverse of the (rectangular)
activation matrix $a_{l-1}.$
\paragraph{\textbf{Activations update }}
Minimization for $a_l$ is a simple least-squares problem similar to the weight update. However, in this case the matrix $a_l$ appears in two penalty terms in \eqref{split}, and so we must minimize
$\beta_l\|z_{l+1}-W_{l+1}a_l\|+\gamma_l\| a_l-h_l(z_l) \|^2$
for $a_l,$ holding all other variables fixed. The new value of $a_l$ is given by
\aln{\label{acts_update}
\hspace{-3mm} (\beta_{l+1} W_{l+1}^TW_{l+1}+\gamma_{l} I)^{-1} (\beta_{l+1}
W_{l+1}^Tz_{l+1} +\gamma_l h_l (z_l))
}
where $W_{l+1}^T$ is the adjoint (transpose) of $W_{l+1}.$
\paragraph{\textbf{Outputs update }} The update for $z_l$ requires minimizing
\aln{\label{outs_update}
\min_{z}\gamma_l\| a_l-h_l(z) \|^2 + \beta_l\|z - W_la_{l-1} \|^2.
}
This problem is non-convex and non-quadratic (because of the non-linear term
$h$). Fortunately, because the non-linearity $h$ works entry-wise on its
argument, the entries in $z_l$ are de-coupled.
Solving \eqref{outs_update} is particularly easy when $h$ is piecewise linear,
as it can be solved in closed form; common piecewise linear choices for $h$
include rectified linear units (ReLUs) and non-differentiable sigmoid
functions given by
$$
h_{relu}(x)=\begin{cases}
x, \text{ if } x>0\\
0, \text{ otherwise}
\end{cases} \hspace{-4mm},
h_{sig}(x)=\begin{cases}
1, \text{ if } x \ge 1\\
x, \text{ if } 0<x<1\\
0, \text{ otherwise}
\end{cases} \hspace{-4mm}.
$$
For such choices of $h,$ the minimizer of \eqref{outs_update} is easily
computed using simple if-then logic. For more sophistical choices of $h,$
including smooth sigmoid curves, the problem can be solved quickly with a
lookup table of pre-computed solutions because each 1-dimensional problem only
depends on two inputs.
\paragraph{\textbf{Lagrange multiplier update }}
After minimizing for $\{W_l\},$ $\{a_l\},$ and $\{z_l\},$ the Lagrange
multiplier update is given simply by
\aln{\label{lagrange}
\lambda \gets \lambda+ \beta_{L}(z_{L} - W_{L}a_{L-1}).
}
We discuss this update further in Section \ref{sec:lagrange}.
\section{Lagrange multiplier updates via method of multipliers and Bregman iteration}
\label{sec:lagrange}
The proposed method can be viewed as solving the constrained problem
\eqref{constrained} using Bregman iteration, which is closely related to ADMM.
The convergence of Bregman iteration is fairly well understood in the presence
of linear constraints \cite{yin2008bregman}. The convergence of ADMM is
fairly well understood for convex problems involving only two separate
variable blocks \cite{he2015non}. Convergence results also guarantee that a
local minima is obtained for two-block non-convex objectives under certain
smoothness assumptions \cite{nocedal2006numerical}.
Because the proposed scheme involves more than two coupled variable blocks and
a non-smooth penalty function, it lies outside the scope of known convergence
results for ADMM. In fact, when ADMM is applied to \eqref{constrained} in a
conventional way using separate Lagrange multiplier vectors for each
constraint, the method is highly unstable because of the de-stabilizing effect
of a large number of coupled, non-smooth, non-convex terms.
Fortunately, we will see below that the Bregman Lagrange update method
\eqref{lagrange} does not involve any non-smooth constraint terms, and
the resulting method seems to be extremely stable.
\subsection{Bregman interpretation}
Bregman iteration (also known as the method of multipliers) is a general framework for solving constrained optimization problems. Methods of this type have been used extensively in the sparse optimization literature \cite{yin2008bregman}. Consider the general problem of minimizing
\aln{ \label{simple_constrained}
\min_u J(u) \st Au=b
}
for some convex function $J$ and linear operator $A.$
Bregman iteration repeatedly solves
\aln{\label{breg_iter}
u^{k+1} \gets \min D_J(u,u^k) + \half \|Au-b\|^2
}
where $p\in \partial J (u^k)$ is a (sub-)gradient of $J$ at $u^k,$ and $D_J(u,u^k) = J(u)-J(u^k) - \la u-u^k, p\ra $ is the so-called Bregman distance. The iterative process \eqref{breg_iter} can be viewed as minimizing the objective $J$ subject to an inexact penalty that approximately obtains $Ax\approx b,$ and then adding a linear term to the objective to weaken it so that the quadratic penalty becomes more influential on the next iteration.
The Lagrange update described in Section \ref{sec:min} can be interpreted as
performing Bregman iteration to solve the problem \eqref{constrained}, where
$J(u) = \ell(z_L, y),$ and $A$ contains the constraints in
\eqref{constrained}. On each iteration, the outputs $z_{l}$ are updated
immediately before the Lagrange step is taken, and so $z_{l-1}$ satisfies the
optimality condition
$$0\in \partial_z \ell(z_{L}, y)+ \beta_{L}(z_{L} - W_{L}a_{L-1} )+ \lambda.$$
It follows that
$$ \lambda + \beta_{L}(z_{L} - W_{L}a_{L-1} ) \in -\partial_z \ell(z_{L},
y).$$
For this reason, the Lagrange update \eqref{lagrange} can be interpreted as updating the sub-gradient in the Bregman iterative method for solving \eqref{constrained}. The combination of the Bregman iterative update with an alternating minimization strategy makes the proposed algorithm an instance of the split Bregman method \cite{goldstein2009split}.
\subsection{Interpretation as method of multipliers}
In addition to the Bregman interpretation, the proposed method can also be viewed as an approximation to the method of multipliers, which solves constrained problems of the form
\aln{ \label{simple_constrained}
\min_u J(u) \st Au=b
}
for some convex function $J$ and (possibly non-linear) operator $A.$ In its most general form (which does not assume linear constraints) the method proceeds using the iterative updates
$$\css{
u^{k+1} & \gets \min J(u) + \la \lambda^k, A(u)-b\ra +\frac{\beta}{2} \|A(u)-b\|^2 \\
\lambda^{k+1}& \gets \lambda^k+\partial_u\{\frac{\beta}{2} \|A(u)-b\|^2\}
}$$
where $\lambda^k$ is a vector of Lagrange multipliers that is generally initialized to zero, and $\frac{\beta}{2} \|A(u)-b\|^2$ is a quadratic penalty term. After each minimization sub-problem, the gradient of the penalty term is added to the Lagrange multipliers. When the operator $A$ is linear, this update takes the form $\lambda^{k+1} \gets \lambda^k+\beta A^T (Au-b),$ which is the most common form of the method of multipliers.
Just like in the Bregman case, we now let $J(u) = \ell(z_{L}, y),$ and let
$A$ contain the constraints in \eqref{constrained}. After a minimization
pass, we must update the Lagrange multiplier vector. Assuming a good
minimizer has been achieved, the derivative of \eqref{bregman} should be
nearly zero. All variables {\em except} $z_{L}$ appear only in the
quadratic penalty, and so these derivatives should be negligibly small. The
only major contributor to the gradient of the penalty term is
$z_{L},$ which appears in both the loss function and the quadratic penalty.
The gradient of the penalty term with respect to $z_{L},$ is $ \beta_{L}(z_{L}
- W_{L}a_{L-1} ),$ which is exactly the proposed multiplier update.
When the objective is approximately minimized by alternately updating separate
blocks of variables (as in the proposed method), this becomes an instance of
the ADMM~\cite{boyd2011distributed}.
\section{Distributed implementation using data parallelism} \label{sec:dist}
The main advantage of the proposed alternating minimization method is its high
degree of scalability. In this section, we explain how the method is
distributed.
Consider distributing the algorithm across $N$ worker nodes. The ADMM method
is scaled using a data parallelization strategy, in which different nodes
store activations and outputs corresponding to different subsets of the
training data. For each layer, the activation matrix is broken into columns
subsets as $a_i = (a_1,a_2,\cdots, a_N).$ The output matrix $z_l$ and
Lagrange multipliers $\lambda$ decompose similarly.
The optimization sub-steps for updating $\{a_l\}$ and $\{z_l\}$ do not require
any communication and parallelize trivially. The weight matrix update
requires the computation of pseudo-inverses and products involving the
matrices $\{a_l\}$ and $\{z_l\}.$ This can be done effectively using {\em
transpose reduction} strategies that reduce the dimensionality of matrices
before they are transmitted to a central node.
\paragraph{\textbf{Parallel Weight update }} The weight update has the form $W_l \gets z_l a_l^\dagger,$ where $a_l^\dagger$ represents the pseudoinverse of the activation matrix $a_l.$ This pseudoinverse can be written $a_l^\dagger = a_l^T(a_la_l^T)^{-1}.$ Using this expansion, the W update decomposes across nodes as
$$W_l \gets \left( \sum_{n=1}^N z_l^n (a_l^n)^T \right) \left( \sum_{n=1}^N a_l^n(a_l^n)^T \right)^{-1}.$$
The individual products $z_l^n (a_l^n)^T$ and $a_l^n(a_l^n)^T$ are computed
separately on each node, and then summed across nodes using a single reduce
operation. Note that the width of $a_l^n$ equals the number of training
vectors that are stored on node $n,$ which is potentially very large for big
data sets. When the number of features (the number of rows in $a_l^n$) is
less than the number of training data (columns of $a_l^n$), we can exploit
transpose reduction when forming these products -- the product
$a_l^n(a_l^n)^T$ is much smaller than the matrix $a_l^n$ alone. This
dramatically reduces the quantity of data transmitted during the reduce
operation.
Once these products have been formed and reduced onto a central server, the central node computes the inverse of $a_la_l^T,$ updates $W_l,$ and then broadcasts the result to the worker nodes.
\paragraph{\textbf{Parallel Activations update }} The update \eqref{acts_update} trivially decomposes across workers, with each worker computing
$$ a_l^n \hspace{-.5mm}\gets \hspace{-.5mm}(\beta_{l+1} W_{l+1}^TW_{l+1}+\gamma I)^{-1}(\beta_{l+1}
W_{l+1}^Tz_{l+1}^n +\gamma_l h_l (z_l^n)).$$
Each server maintains a full representation of the entire weight matrix, and
can formulate its own local copy of the matrix inverse $(\beta_{l+1}
W_{l+1}^TW_{l+1}+\gamma I)^{-1}.$
\paragraph{\textbf{Parallel Outputs update }} Like the activations update, the update for $z_l$ trivially parallelizes and each worker node solves
\aln{\label{par_outs_update}
\min_{z_l^n}\gamma_l\| a_l^n-h_l(z_l^n) \|^2 + \beta_l\|z_l^n - W_la_{l-1}^n \|^2.
}
Each worker node simply computes $W_la_{l-1}^n$ using local data, and then
updates each of the (decoupled) entries in $z_l^n$ by solving a 1-dimensional
problem in closed form.
\paragraph{\textbf{Parallel Lagrange multiplier update }}
The Lagrange multiplier update also trivially splits across nodes, with worker $n$ computing
\aln{\label{lagrange}
\lambda^n \gets \lambda^n+ \beta_{L}(z_{L}^n - W_{L}a_{L-1}^n)
}
using only local data.
\section{Implementation details}
\label{sec:implementation}
Like many training methods for neural networks, the ADMM approach requires
several tips and tricks to get maximum performance. The convergence theory for
the method of multipliers requires a good minimizer to be computed before
updating the Lagrange multipliers. When the method is initialized with random
starting values, the initial iterates are generally far from optimal. For
this reason, we frequently ``warm start'' the ADMM method by running several
iterations without Lagrange multiplier updates.
The method potentially requires the user to choose a large number of
parameters $\{\gamma_i\}$ and $\{\beta_i\}.$ We choose $\gamma_i=10$ and
$\beta_i=1$ for all trials runs reported here, and we have found that this
choice works reliably for a wide range of problems and network architectures.
Note that in the classical ADMM method, convergence is guaranteed for any
choice of the quadratic penalty parameters.
We use training data with binary class labels, in which each output entry
$a_L$ is either 1 or 0. We use a separable loss function with a hinge
penalty of the form
$$\ell(z,a)= \css{
\max\{1-z,0\},\text{ when } a=1, \\
\max\{a,0\},\text{ when } a=0.
}$$
This loss function works well in practice, and yields minimization sub-problems that are easily solved in closed form.
Finally, our implementation simply initializes the activation matrices
$\{a_l\}$ and output matrices $\{z_l\}$ using i.i.d Gaussian random variables.
Because our method updates the weights before anything else, the weight
matrices do not require any initialization. The results presented here are
using Gaussian random variables with unit variance, and the results seem to be
fairly insensitive to the variance of this distribution. This seems to be
because the output updates are solved to global optimality on each iteration.
\section{Experiments}
\label{sec:experiments}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\vspace{-3mm}
\centering
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{svCoresVTime_log_1line}
\caption{\textbf{Time required for ADMM to reach 95\% test accuracy vs number of cores}. This problem was not large
enough to support parallelization over many cores, yet the advantages of
scaling are still apparent (note the x-axis has log scale).
In comparison, on the GPU, L-BFGS reached this threshold in 3.2
seconds, CG in 9.3 seconds, and SGD
in 8.2 seconds.}
\label{sfig:svScaling}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{street_timeVsAcc}
\caption{\textbf{Test set predictive accuracy as a function of time in
seconds} for ADMM on 2,496 cores (blue), in addition to GPU
implementations of conjugate gradients (green), SGD (red), and L-BFGS
(cyan).}
\label{sfig:svConverge}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\caption{
Street View House Numbers (subsection \ref{ssec:svhn})
\vspace{-3mm}}
\label{fig:scaling}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\vspace{-3mm}
\centering
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{higgsTimeVCores}
\caption{\textbf{Time required for ADMM to reach 64\% test accuracy when
parallelized over varying levels of cores}. L-BFGS on a GPU required 181
seconds, and conjugate gradients required 44 minutes. SGD never reached
64\% accuracy.}
\label{sfig:higgsScaling}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{higgs_accuracyVtime}
\caption{\textbf{Test set predictive accuracy as a function of time} for
ADMM on 7200 cores (blue), conjugate gradients (green), and SGD (red).
Note the x-axis is scaled logarithmically.}
\label{sfig:higgsConverge}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\vspace{-1mm}
\caption{Higgs (subsection \ref{ssec:higgs})}
\label{fig:converge}
\vspace{-3mm}
\end{figure*}
In this section, we present experimental results that compare the performance
of the ADMM method to other approaches, including SGD, conjugate gradients,
and L-BFGS on benchmark classification tasks. Comparisons are made across
multiple axes. First, we illustrate the scaling of the approach, by varying
the number of cores available and clocking the compute time necessary to meet
an accuracy threshold on the test set of the problem. Second, we show test
set classification accuracy as a function of time to compare the rate of
convergence of the optimization methods. Finally, we show these comparisons
on two different data sets, one small and relatively easy, and one large and
difficult.
The new ADMM approach was implemented in Python on a Cray XC30 supercomputer
with Ivy Bridge processors, and communication between cores performed via MPI.
SGD, conjugate gradients, and L-BFGS are run as implemented in the Torch optim
package on NVIDIA Tesla K40 GPUs. These methods underwent a thorough
hyperparameter grid search to identify the algorithm parameters that produced
the best results. In all cases, timings indicate only the time spent
optimizing, excluding time spent loading data and setting up the network.
Experiments were run on two datasets. The first is a subset of the Street
View House Numbers (SVHN) dataset~\cite{netzer2011reading}. Neural nets were
constructed to classify pictures of 0s from 2s using histogram of gradient
(HOG) features of the original dataset. Using the ``extra" dataset to train,
this meant 120,290 training datapoints of 648 features each. The testing set
contained 5,893 data points.
The second dataset is the far more difficult Higgs
dataset~\cite{baldi2014searching}, consisting of a training set of 10,500,000
datapoints of 28 features each, with each datapoint labelled as either a
signal process producing a Higgs boson or a background process which does not.
The testing set consists of 500,000 datapoints.
\subsection{SVHN}
\label{ssec:svhn}
First, we focus on the problem posed by the SVHN dataset. For this dataset,
we optimized a net with two hidden layers of 100 and 50 nodes and ReLU
activation functions. This is an easy problem (test accuracy rises quickly) that does not require a large volume of data
and is easily handled by gradient-based methods on a GPU. However, Figure
\ref{sfig:svScaling} demonstrates that ADMM exhibits linear scaling with
cores. Even though the implementations of the gradient-based methods enjoy
communication via shared memory on the GPU while ADMM required CPU-to-CPU
communication, strong scaling allows ADMM on CPU cores to compete with the
gradient-based methods on a GPU.
This is illustrated clearly in Figure \ref{sfig:svConverge}, which shows each
method's performance on the test set as a function of time. With 1,024
compute cores, on an average of 10 runs, ADMM was able to meet the 95\% test
set accuracy threshold in 13.3 seconds. After an extensive hyperparameter
search to find the settings which resulted in the fastest convergence, SGD
converged on average in 28.3 seconds, L-BFGS in 3.3 seconds, and conjugate
gradients in 10.1 seconds. Though the small dataset kept ADMM from taking
full advantage of its scalability, it was nonetheless sufficient to allow it
to be competitive with GPU implementations.
\subsection{Higgs}
\label{ssec:higgs}
For the much larger and more difficult Higgs dataset, we optimized a simple
network with ReLU activation functions and a hidden layer of 300 nodes, as
suggested in \cite{baldi2014searching}. The graph illustrates the amount of
time required to optimize the network to a test set prediction accuracy of
64\%; this parameter was chosen as all batch methods being tested reliably hit
this accuracy benchmark over numerous trials. As is clear from Figure
\ref{sfig:higgsScaling}, parallelizing over additional cores decreases the
time required dramatically, and again exhibits linear scaling.
In this much larger problem, the advantageous scaling allowed ADMM to reach
the 64\% benchmark much faster than the other approaches. Figure
\ref{sfig:higgsConverge} illustrates this clearly, with ADMM running on 7200
cores reaching this benchmark in 7.8 seconds. In comparison,
L-BFGS required 181 seconds, and conjugate gradients required 44
minutes.\footnote{It is worth noting that though L-BFGS required substantially
more time to reach 64\% than did ADMM, it was the only method to produce a
superior classifier, doing as well as 75\% accuracy on the test set.} In
seven hours of training, SGD never reached 64\% accuracy on the test set.
These results suggest that, for large and difficult problems, the strong
linear scaling of ADMM enables it to leverage large numbers of cores to
(dramatically) out-perform GPU implementations.
\section{Discussion \& Conclusion}
\label{sec:discussion}
We present a method for training neural networks without using gradient steps.
In addition to avoiding many difficulties of gradient methods (like saturation
and choice of learning rates), performance of the proposed method scales
linearly up to thousands of cores. This strong scaling enables the
proposed approach to out-perform other methods on problems involving extremely large datasets.
\subsection{Looking forward}
The experiments shown here represent a fairly narrow range of classification
problems and are not meant to demonstrate the absolute superiority of ADMM as a
training method. Rather, this study is meant to be a proof of concept
demonstrating that the caveats of gradient-based methods can be avoided using
alternative minimization schemes. Future work will explore the behavior of
alternating direction methods in broader contexts.
We are particularly interested in focusing future work on recurrent nets and
convolutional nets. Recurrent nets, which complicate standard
gradient methods \cite{jaeger2002tutorial,lukovsevivcius2012practical}, pose
no difficulty for ADMM schemes whatsoever because they decouple
layers using auxiliary variables. Convolutional
networks are also of interest because ADMM can, in principle, handle them very
efficiently. When the linear operators $\{W_l\}$ represent convolutions
rather than dense weight matrices, the least squares problems that arise in
the updates for $\{W_l\}$ and $\{a_l\}$ can be solved efficiently using fast
Fourier transforms.
Finally, there are avenues to explore to potentially improve
convergence speed. These include adding momentum terms
to the weight updates and studying different initialization schemes, both
of which are known to be important for gradient-based schemes \cite{sutskever2013importance}.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation (\#1535902), the
Office of Naval Research (\#N00014-15-1-2676 and \#N0001415WX01341), and the
DoD High Performance Computing Center.
|
\section{Introduction\label{sec:Introduction}}
\begin{comment}
Paragraph 1:
Establish a territory - importance of the subject, overview
Motivation. At a high level, what is the problem area you are working
in and why is it important? It is important to set the larger context
here. Why is the problem of interest and importance to the larger
community?
\end{comment}
Visual signals are one of the primary sources of information about
the surrounding environment for living and artificial beings. While
computers have already exceeded humans in terms of raw data processing,
they still do not match their ability to interact with and act in
complex, realistic 3D environments. Recent increase in computing power
(GPUs), and the advances in visual learning (i.e., machine learning
from visual information) have enabled a significant progress in this
area. This was possible thanks to the renaissance of neural networks,
and deep architectures in particular. Deep learning has been applied
to many supervised machine learning tasks and performed spectacularly
well especially in the field of image classification \cite{NIPS2012_4824}.
Recently, deep architectures have also been successfully employed
in the reinforcement learning domain to train human-level agents to
play a set of Atari 2600 games from raw pixel information \cite{mnih-dqn-2015}.
\begin{comment}
Paragraph 2:
What is the problem? Oppose an existing assumption, reveal a research
gap, formulate a research question
What is the specific problem considered in this paper? This paragraph
narrows down the topic area of the paper. In the first paragraph you
have established general context and importance. Here you establish
specific context and background.
\end{comment}
Thanks to high recognizability and an easy-to-use software toolkit,
Atari 2600 games have been widely adopted as a benchmark for visual
learning algorithms. Atari 2600 games have, however, several drawbacks
from the AI research perspective. First, they involve only 2D environments.
Second, the environments hardly resemble the world we live in. Third,
they are third-person perspective games, which does not match a real-world
mobile-robot scenario. Last but not least, although, for some Atari
2600 games, human players are still ahead of bots trained from scratch,
the best deep reinforcement learning algorithms are already ahead
on average. Therefore, there is a need for more challenging reinforcement
learning problems involving first-person-perspective and realistic
3D worlds.
\begin{comment}
Paragraph 3:
\char`\"{}In this paper, we show that ...\char`\"{}. This is the key
paragraph in the intro - you summarize, in one paragraph, what are
the main contributions of your paper given the context you have established
in paragraphs 1 and 2. What is the general approach taken? Why are
the specific results significant? This paragraph must be really really
good. If you can't \char`\"{}sell\char`\"{} your work at a high level
in a paragraph in the intro, then you are in trouble. As a reader
or reviewer, this is the paragraph that I always look for, and read
very carefully.
\end{comment}
In this paper, we propose a software platform, ViZDoom\footnote{\url{http://vizdoom.cs.put.edu.pl}},
for the machine (reinforcement) learning research from raw visual
information. The environment is based on Doom, the famous first-person
shooter (FPS) video game. It allows developing bots that play Doom
using only the screen buffer. The environment involves a 3D world
that is significantly more real-world-like than Atari 2600 games.
It also provides a relatively realistic physics model. An agent (bot)
in ViZDoom has to effectively perceive, interpret, and learn the 3D
world in order to make tactical and strategic decisions where to go
and how to act. The strength of the environment as an AI research
platform also lies in its customization capabilities. The platform
makes it easy to define custom scenarios which differ by maps, environment
elements, non-player characters, rewards, goals, and actions available
to the agent. It is also lightweight \textendash{} on modern computers,
one can play the game at nearly $7000$ frames per second (the real-time
in Doom involves $35$ frames per second) using a single CPU core,
which is of particular importance if learning is involved.
In order to demonstrate the usability of the platform, we perform
two ViZDoom experiments with deep Q-learning \cite{mnih-dqn-2015}.
The first one involves a somewhat limited 2D-like environment, for
which we try to find out the optimal rate at which agents should make
decisions. In the second experiment, the agent has to navigate a 3D
maze collecting some object and omitting the others. The results of
the experiments indicate that deep reinforcement learning is capable
of tackling first-person perspective 3D environments\footnote{Precisely speaking, Doom is pseudo-3D or 2.5D.}.
\begin{comment}
Paragraph 4 and 5:
Why is the problem important?
Why is the problem hard?
At a high level what are the differences in what you are doing, and
what others have done? Keep this at a high level, you can refer to
a future section where specific details and differences will be given.
But it is important for the reader to know at a high level, what is
new about this work compared to other work in the area.
\end{comment}
FPS games, especially the most popular ones such as Unreal Tournament
\cite{6314567,6922494}, Counter-Strike \cite{5035619} or Quake III
Arena \cite{el2007hybrid}, have already been used in AI research.
However, in these studies agents acted upon high-level information
like positions of walls, enemies, locations of items, etc., which
are usually inaccessible to human players. Supplying only raw visual
information might relieve researchers of the burden of providing AI
with high-level information and handcrafted features. We also hypothesize
that it could make the agents behave more believable \cite{karpov:believablebots12}.
So far, there has been no studies on reinforcement learning from visual
information obtained from FPS games.
To date, there have been no FPS-based environments that allow research
on agents relying exclusively on raw visual information. This could
be a serious factor impeding the progress of vision-based reinforcement
learning, since engaging in it requires a large amount of programming
work. Existence of a ready-to-use tool facilitates conducting experiments
and focusing on the goal of the research.
\section{Related Work\label{sec:Related-Work}}
\begin{comment}
Vision-based reinforcement learning
\end{comment}
One of the earliest works on visual-based reinforcement learning is
due to Asada et al. \cite{asada1994vision,asada1996purposive}, who
trained robots various elementary soccer-playing skills. Other works
in this area include teaching mobile robots with visual-based $Q$-learning
\cite{gaskett2000reinforcement}, learning policies with deep auto-encoders
and batch-mode algorithms \cite{lange2010deep}, neuroevolution for
a vision-based version of the mountain car problem \cite{cuccu2011intrinsically},
and compressed neuroevolution with recurrent neural networks for vision-based
car simulator \cite{koutnik2014evolving}. Recently, Mnih et al. have
shown a deep Q-learning method for learning Atari 2600 games from
visual input \cite{mnih-dqn-2015}.
\begin{comment}
First-person shorter games
\end{comment}
Different first-person shooter (FPS) video games have already been
used either as AI research platforms, or application domains. The
first academic work on AI in FPS games is due to Geisler \cite{geisler2002empirical}.
It concerned modeling player behavior in Soldier of Fortune 2. Cole
used genetic algorithms to tune bots in Counter Strike \cite{cole2004using}.
Dawes \cite{dawes2005towards} identified Unreal Tournament 2004 as
a potential AI research test-bed. El Rhalib studied weapon selection
in Quake III Arena \cite{el2007hybrid}. %
\begin{comment}
Reinforcement learning in FPS
\end{comment}
Smith devised a RETALIATE reinforcement learning algorithm for optimizing
team tactics in Unreal Tournament \cite{smith2007retaliate}. SARSA($\lambda$),
another reinforcement learning method, was the subject of research
in FPS games \cite{5672586,6314567}. Recently, continuous and reinforcement
learning techniques were applied to learn the behavior of tanks in
the game BZFlag \cite{smith2014continuous}.
As far as we are aware, to date, there have been no studies that employed
the genre-classical Doom FPS. Also, no previous study used raw visual
information to develop bots in first-person perspective games with
a notable exception of the Abel's et al. work on Minecraft \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/AbelADKS16}.
\section{ViZDoom Research Platform\label{sec:Platform}}
\subsection{Why Doom?}
Creating yet another 3D first-person perspective environment from
scratch solely for research purposes would be somewhat wasteful \cite{trenholme2008computer}.
Due to the popularity of the first-person shooter genre, we have decided
to use an existing game engine as the base for our environment. We
concluded that it has to meet the following requirements:
\begin{enumerate}
\item based on popular open-source 3D FPS game (ability to modify the code
and the publication freedom),
\item lightweight (portability and the ability to run multiple instances
on a single machine),
\item fast (the game engine should not be the learning bottleneck),
\item total control over the game's processing (so that the game can wait
for the bot decisions or the agent can learn by observing a human
playing),
\item customizable resolution and rendering parameters,
\item multiplayer games capabilities (agent vs. agent and agent vs. human),
\item easy-to-use tools to create custom scenarios,
\item ability to bind different programming languages (preferably written
in C++),
\item multi-platform.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}
\centering{}\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{figures/doom}
\caption{\label{fig:doom}Doom's first-person perspective.}
\end{figure}
In order to make the decision according to the above-listed criteria,
we have analyzed seven recognizable FPS games: Quake III Arena, Doom
3, Half-Life 2, Unreal Tournament 2004, Unreal Tournament and Cube.
Their comparison is shown in Table~\ref{tab:engines}. Some of the
features listed in the table are objective (e.g., `scripting') and
others are subjective (``code complexity''). Brand recognition was
estimated as the number (in millions) of Google results (as of 26.04.2016)
for phrases ``game \textless{}gamename\textgreater{}'', where \textless{}gamename\textgreater{}
was `doom', `quake', `half-life', `unreal tournament' or `cube'. The
game was considered as low-resolution capable if it was possible to
set the resolution to values smaller than $640\times480$.
\begin{table*}
\caption{\label{tab:engines}Overview of 3D FPS game engines considered.}
\centering{}%
\begin{tabular}{lcccc>{\centering}p{1.5cm}>{\centering}p{1.5cm}c}
\toprule
Features / Game & Doom & Doom 3 & Quake III: Arena & Half-Life 2 & Unreal Tournament 2004 & Unreal Tournament & Cube\tabularnewline
\midrule
Game Engine & ZDoom\cite{zdoom-wiki} & id tech 4 & ioquake3 & Source & Unreal Engine 2 & Unreal Engine 4 & Cube Engine \tabularnewline
Release year & 1993 & 2003 & 1999 & 2004 & 2004 & not yet & 2001 \tabularnewline
Open Source & \OK & \OK & \OK & & & \OK & \OK \tabularnewline
License & GPL & GPLv3 & GPLv2 & Proprietary & Proprietary & Custom & ZLIB \tabularnewline
Language & C++ & C++ & C & C++ & C++ & C++ & C++ \tabularnewline
\midrule
DirectX & & \OK & & \OK & & \OK & \tabularnewline
OpenGL & \OK\footnotemark & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK \tabularnewline
Software Render & \OK & & & & & & \tabularnewline
\midrule
Windows & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK \tabularnewline
Linux & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK \tabularnewline
Mac OS & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \tabularnewline
\midrule
Map editor & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK \tabularnewline
Screen buffer access & \OK & \OK & \OK & & & \OK & \OK \tabularnewline
Scripting & \OK & \OK & & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK \tabularnewline
Multiplayer mode & \OK & \OK & \OK & & \OK & \OK & \OK \tabularnewline
Small resolution & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK \tabularnewline
\midrule
Custom assets & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK \tabularnewline
Free original assets & & & & & & \OK & \OK \tabularnewline
\midrule
System requirements & Low & Medium & Low & Medium & Medium & High & Low\tabularnewline
Disk space & 40MB & 2GB & 70MB & 4,5GB & 6GB & \textgreater{}10GB & 35MB \tabularnewline
Code complexity & Medium & High & Medium & - & - & High & Low \tabularnewline
\midrule
Active community & \OK & \OK & \OK & \OK & & \OK & \tabularnewline
\midrule
Brand recognition & \multicolumn{2}{c}{31.5} & 16.8 & 18.7 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{1.0} & 0.1\tabularnewline
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
Some of the games had to be rejected right away in spite of high general
appeal. Unreal Tournament 2004 engine is only accessible by the Software
Development Kit and it lacks support for controlling the speed of
execution and direct screen buffer access. The game has not been prepared
to be heavily modified.
Similar problems are shared by Half-Life 2 despite the fact that the
Source engine is widely known for modding capabilities. It also lacks
direct multiplayer support. Although the Source engine itself offers
multiplayer support, it involves client-server architecture, which
makes synchronization and direct interaction with the engine problematic
(network communication).
\footnotetext{GZDoom, the ZDoom's fork, is OpenGL-based.}The client-server
architecture was also one the reasons for rejection of Quake III:
Arena. Quake III also does not offer any scripting capabilities, which
are essential to make a research environment versatile. The rejection
of Quake was a hard decision as it is a highly regarded and playable
game even nowadays but this could not outweigh the lack of scripting
support.
The latter problem does not concern Doom 3 but its high disk requirements
were considered as a drawback. Doom 3 had to be ignored also because
of its complexity, Windows-only tools, and OS-dependent rendering
mechanisms. Although its source code has been released, its community
is dispersed. As a result, there are several rarely updated versions
of its sources.
The community activity is also a problem in the case of Cube as its
last update was in August 2005. Nonetheless, the low complexity of
its code and the highly intuitive map editor would make it a great
choice if the engine was more popular.
Unreal Tournament, however popular, is not as recognizable as Doom
or Quake but it has been a primary research platform for FPS games
\cite{5586059,6046867}. It also has great capabilities. Despite its
active community and the availability of the source code, it was rejected
due to its high system requirements.
Doom (see Fig.~\ref{fig:doom}) met most of the requirements and
allowed to implement features that would be barely achievable in other
games, e.g., off-screen rendering and custom rewards. The game is
highly recognizable and runs on the three major operating systems.
It was also designed to work in $320\times240$ resolution and despite
the fact that modern implementations allow bigger resolutions, it
still utilizes low-resolution textures. Moreover, its source code
is easy-to-understand.
The unique feature of Doom is its software renderer. Because of that,
it could be run without the desktop environment (e.g., remotely in
a terminal) and accessing the screen buffer does not require transferring
it from the graphics card.
Technically, ViZDoom is based on the modernized, open-source version
of Doom's original engine \textemdash{} ZDoom, which is still actively
supported and developed.
\subsection{Application Programming Interface (API)\label{subsec:api}}
ViZDoom API is flexible and easy-to-use. It was designed with reinforcement
and apprenticeship learning in mind, and therefore, it provides full
control over the underlying Doom process. In particular, it allows
retrieving the game's screen buffer and make actions that correspond
to keyboard buttons (or their combinations) and mouse actions. Some
game state variables such as the player's health or ammunition are
available directly.
ViZDoom's API was written in C++. The API offers a myriad of configuration
options such as control modes and rendering options. In addition to
the C++ support, bindings for Python and Java have been provided.
The Python API example is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:PythonExample}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{pblock}
from vizdoom import *
from random import choice
from time import sleep, time
game = DoomGame()
game.load_config("../config/basic.cfg")
game.init()
# Sample actions. Entries correspond to buttons:
# MOVE_LEFT, MOVE_RIGHT, ATTACK
actions = [[True, False, False],
[False, True, False], [False, False, True]]
# Loop over 10 episodes.
for i in range(10):
game.new_episode()
while not game.is_episode_finished():
# Get the screen buffer and and game variables
s = game.get_state()
img = s.image_buffer
misc = s.game_variables
# Perform a random action:
action = choice(actions)
reward = game.make_action(action)
# Do something with the reward...
print("total reward:", game.get_total_reward())
\end{pblock}\caption{\label{fig:PythonExample}Python API example}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Features}
ViZDoom provides features that can be exploited in different kinds
of AI experiments. The main features include different control modes,
custom scenarios, access to the depth buffer and off-screen rendering
eliminating the need of using a graphical interface.
\subsubsection{Control modes}
ViZDoom implements four control modes: i) synchronous player, ii)
synchronous spectator, iii) asynchronous player, and iv) asynchronous
spectator.
In asynchronous modes, the game runs at constant $35$ frames per
second and if the agent reacts too slowly, it can miss some frames.
Conversely, if it makes a decision too quickly, it is blocked until
the next frame arrives from the engine. Thus, for reinforcement learning
research, more useful are the synchronous modes, in which the game
engine waits for the decision maker. This way, the learning system
can learn at its pace, and it is not limited by any temporal constraints.
Importantly, for experimental reproducibility and debugging purposes,
the synchronous modes run deterministically.
In the player modes, it is the agent who makes actions during the
game. In contrast, in the spectator modes, a human player is in control,
and the agent only observes the player's actions.
In addition, ViZDoom provides an asynchronous multiplayer mode, which
allows games involving up to eight players (human or bots) over a
network.
\subsubsection{Scenarios}
One of the most important features of ViZDoom is the ability to run
custom scenarios. This includes creating appropriate maps, programming
the environment mechanics (``when and how things happen''), defining
terminal conditions (e.g., ``killing a certain monster'', ``getting
to a certain place'', ``died''), and rewards (e.g., for ``killing
a monster'', ``getting hurt'', ``picking up an object''). This
mechanism opens endless experimentation possibilities. In particular,
it allows creating a scenario of a difficulty which is on par with
the capabilities of the assessed learning algorithms.
Creation of scenarios is possible thanks to easy-to-use software tools
developed by the Doom community. The two recommended free tools include
Doom Builder 2 and SLADE 3. Both are visual editors, which allow
defining custom maps and coding the game mechanics in Action Code
Script. They also enable to conveniently test a scenario without leaving
the editor.
ViZDoom comes with a few predefined scenarios. Two of them are described
in Section \ref{sec:Experiment}.
\subsubsection{Depth Buffer Access}
ViZDoom provides access to the renderer's depth buffer (see Fig.~\ref{fig:zbuffer}),
which may help an agent to understand the received visual information.
This feature gives an opportunity to test whether the learning algorithms
can autonomously learn the whereabouts of the objects in the environment.
The depth information can also be used to simulate the distance sensors
common in mobile robots.
\begin{figure}
\centering{}\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{figures/zbuffer}
\caption{\label{fig:zbuffer}ViZDoom allows depth buffer access.}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Off-Screen Rendering and Frame Skipping\label{subsec:Off-Screen-Skipping}}
To facilitate computationally heavy machine learning experiments,
we equipped ViZDoom with off-screen rendering and frame skipping features.
Off-screen rendering lessens the performance burden of actually showing
the game on the screen and makes it possible to run the experiments
on the servers (no graphical interface needed). Frame skipping, on
the other hand, allows omitting rendering selected frames at all.
Intuitively, an effective bot does not have to see every single frame.
We explore this issue experimentally in Section \ref{sec:Experiment}.
\subsection{ViZDoom's Performance}
The main factors affecting ViZDoom performance are the number of the
actors (like items and bots), the rendering resolution, and computing
the depth buffer. Fig.~\ref{fig:fps_test} shows how the number of
frames per second depends on these factors. The tests have been made
in the synchronous player mode on Linux running on Intel Core i7-4790k.
ViZDoom uses only a single CPU core.
The performance test shows that ViZDoom can render nearly $7000$
low-resolution frames per second. The rendering resolution proves
to be the most important factor influencing the processing speed.
In the case of low resolutions, the time needed to render one frame
is negligible compared to the backpropagation time of any reasonably
complex neural network.
\begin{figure}
\centering{}\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{figures/result_fps}
\caption{\label{fig:fps_test}ViZDoom performance. ``depth'' means generating
also the depth buffer.}
\end{figure}
\section{Experiments\label{sec:Experiment}}
\subsection{Basic Experiment}
The primary purpose of the experiment was to show that reinforcement
learning from the visual input is feasible in ViZDoom. Additionally,
the experiment investigates how the number of skipped frames (see
Section \ref{subsec:Off-Screen-Skipping}) influences the learning
process.
\begin{figure}
\centering{}\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{figures/basic}
\caption{\label{fig:basic}The basic scenario }
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Scenario}
This simple scenario takes place in a rectangular chamber (see Fig.~\ref{fig:basic}).
An agent is spawned in the center of the room's longer wall. A stationary
monster is spawned at a random position along the~opposite wall.
The agent can strafe left and right, or shoot. A single hit is enough
to kill the~monster. The episode ends when the monster is eliminated
or after $300$ frames, whatever comes first. The agent scores $101$
points for killing the monster, $-5$ for a missing shot, and, additionally,
$-1$ for each action. The scores motivate the learning agent to eliminate
the monster as quickly as possible, preferably with a single shot\footnote{See also \href{https://youtu.be/fKHw3wmT_uA}{https://youtu.be/fKHw3wmT\_{}uA}}.
\subsubsection{Deep Q-Learning\label{subsec:Deep-Q-Learning}}
The learning procedure is similar to the Deep Q-Learning introduced
for Atari 2600 \cite{mnih-dqn-2015}. The problem is modeled as a
Markov Decision Process and Q-learning \cite{watkins:mlj92} is used
to learn the policy. The action is selected by an $\epsilon$-greedy
policy with linear $\epsilon$ decay. The Q-function is approximated
with a convolutional neural network, which is trained with Stochastic
Gradient Decent. We also used experience replay but no target network
freezing (see \cite{mnih-dqn-2015}).
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{figures/net_diagram} \caption{\label{fig:network}Architecture of the convolutional neural network
used for the experiment.}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Experimental Setup}
\paragraph{Neural Network Architecture}
The network used in the experiment consists of two convolutional layers
with $32$ square filters, $7$ and $4$ pixels wide, respectively
(see Fig.~\ref{fig:network}). Each convolution layer is followed
by a max-pooling layer with max pooling of size $2$ and rectified
linear units for activation \cite{AISTATS2011_GlorotBB11}. Next,
there is a fully-connected layer with $800$ leaky rectified linear
units \cite{Maas2013} and an output layer with $8$ linear units
corresponding to the $8$ combinations of the $3$ available actions
(left, right and shot)%
\begin{comment}
Zastanawiajace jest to dlaczego w\l a\'{s}ciwie 8, skoro 3 by wystarczy\l y
- tak wiem Mnih tez tak robil// Nie do ko\'{n}ca 3 wystarcz\k{a} bo
mo\.{z}na i\'{s}\'{c} i strzela\'{c} wi\k{e}c w tym przypadku dopiero
7 jest wyczerpuj\k{a}ce. 8 jest bli\.{z}sze temu jak cz\l owiek gra
- wciskaj\k{a}c przyciski. W miedzyczasie robi\l em z 3 bo mniej akcji
mimo wszystko. To kwestia interpretacji wyjsc. Skoro mamy 8 kombinacji
akcji to 3 binarne wyjscia wystarczaja zeby je obsluzyc. /nie wiem
jak mo\.{z}na u\.{z}y\'{c} wyj\'{s}\'{c} binarnych je\'{s}li outputem
sieci jest Q. Ma Pan racje. Ale to ciekawe pytanie (badawcze), prawda?
Bo jesli mam 30 mozliwych akcji (vide octopus), to 2{*}30 przestaje
byc wesole.
\end{comment}
.
\paragraph{Game Settings}
A state was represented by the most recent frame, which was a $60\times45$
$3$-channel RGB image. The number of skipped frames is controlled
by the \emph{skipcount} parameter. We experimented with skipcounts\emph{
}of $0$-$7$, $10$, $15$, $20$, $25$, $30$, $35$ and $40$.
It is important to note that the agent repeats the last decision on
the skipped frames.
\paragraph{Learning Settings}
We arbitrarily set the discount factor $\gamma=0.99$, learning rate
$\alpha=0.01$, replay memory capacity to $10\,000$ elements and
mini-batch size to $40$. The initial $\epsilon=1.0$ starts to decay
after $100\,000$ learning steps, finishing the decay at $\epsilon=0.1$
at $200\,000$ learning steps.
Every agent learned for $600\,000$ steps, each one consisting of
performing an action, observing a transition, and updating the network.
To monitor the learning progress, $1000$ testing episodes were played
after each $5000$ learning steps. Final controllers were evaluated
on $10\,000$ episodes. The experiment was performed on Intel Core
i7-4790k 4GHz with GeForce GTX 970, which handled the neural network.
\subsubsection{Results}
Figure \ref{fig:skiprate_time} shows the learning dynamics for the
selected skipcounts. It demonstrates that although all the agents
improve over time, the skips influence the learning speed, its smoothness,
as well as the final performance. When the agent does not skip any
frames, the learning is the slowest. Generally, the larger the skipcount,
the faster and smoother the learning is. We have also observed that
the agents learning with higher skipcounts were less prone to irrational
behaviors like staying idle or going the direction opposite to the
monster, which results in lower variance on the plots. On the other
hand, too large skipcounts make the agent `clumsy' due to the lack
of fine-grained control, which results in suboptimal final scores.
The detailed results, shown in Table \ref{tab:SkiprateResults}, indicate
that the optimal skipcount for this scenario is $4$ (the ``native''
column). However, higher values (up to $10$) are close to this maximum.
We have also checked how robust to skipcounts the agents are. For
this purpose, we evaluated them using skipcounts different from ones
they had been trained with. Most of the agents performed worse than
with their ``native'' skipcounts. The least robust were the agents
trained with skipcounts less than $4$. Larger skipcounts resulted
in more robust agents. Interestingly, for skipcounts greater than
or equal to $30$, the agents score better on skipcounts lower than
the native ones. Our best agent that was trained with skipcount $4$
was also the best when executed with skipcount $0$.
It is also worth showing that increasing the skipcount influences
the total learning time only slightly. The learning takes longer primarily
due to the higher total overhead associated with episode restarts
since higher skipcounts result in a greater number of episodes.
To sum up, the skipcounts in the range of $4$-$10$ provide the best
balance between the learning speed and the final performance. The
results also indicate that it would be profitable to start learning
with high skipcounts to exploit the steepest learning curve and gradually
decrease it to fine-tune the performance.
\begin{figure}
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{figures/time_plot}
\par\end{centering}
\centering{}\caption{\label{fig:skiprate_time}Learning dynamics depending on the number
of skipped frames.}
\end{figure}
\selectlanguage{english}%
\begin{table}
\begin{centering}
\caption{\label{tab:SkiprateResults}\foreignlanguage{american}{Agents' final
performance in the function of the number of skipped frames (`native').
All the agents were also tested for skipcounts$\in\{0,10\}$.}}
\par\end{centering}
\centering{}\scalebox{0.7}{
\def1.2{1.2}
\sisetup{separate-uncertainty=true}
\begin{tabular}{
S[table-format=2.0]
S[table-format=2.1, table-figures-uncertainty=3, detect-weight]
S[table-format=2.1, table-figures-uncertainty=3, detect-weight]
S[table-format=2.1, table-figures-uncertainty=3, detect-weight]
S[table-format=6.0, detect-weight]
S[table-format=2.1, detect-weight]
}
\toprule
\multirow{2}{*}{skipcount} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{average score $\pm$ stdev} & \multirow{2}{*}{episodes} & \multirow{2}{*}{learning time [min]} \\
& {native} & {0} & {10} & & \\
\midrule
0 & 51.5\pm74.9 & 51.5\pm74.9 & 36\pm103.6 & 6961 & 91.1 \\
1 & 69\pm34.2 & 69.2\pm26.9 & 39.6\pm93.9 & 29378 & 93.1 \\
2 & 76.2\pm15.5 & 71.8\pm18.1 & 47.9\pm47.6 & 49308 & 91.5 \\
3 & 76.1\pm14.6 & 75.1\pm15 & 44.1\pm85.4 & 65871 & 93.4 \\
4 & \bfseries 82.2\pm9.4 & \bfseries 81.3\pm11 & 76.5\pm17.1 & 104796 & 93.9 \\
5 & 81.8\pm10.2 & 79\pm13.6 & 75.2\pm19.9 & 119217 & 92.5 \\
6 & 81.5\pm9.6 & 78.7\pm14.8 & 76.3\pm16.5 & 133952 & 92 \\
7 & 81.2\pm9.7 & 77.6\pm15.8 & 76.9\pm17.9 & 143833 & 95.2 \\
10 & 80.1\pm10.5 & 75\pm17.6 & \bfseries 80.1\pm10.5 & 171070 & 92.8 \\
15 & 74.6\pm14.5 & 71.2\pm16 & 73.5\pm19.2 & 185782 & 93.6 \\
20 & 74.2\pm15 & 73.3\pm14 & 71.4\pm20.7 & 240956 & 94.8 \\
25 & 73\pm17 & 73.6\pm15.5 & 71.4\pm20.8 & 272633 & 96.9 \\
30 & 61.4\pm31.9 & 69.7\pm19 & 68.9\pm24.2 & 265978 & 95.7 \\
35 & 60.2\pm32.2 & 69.5\pm16.6 & 65.7\pm26.1 & 299545 & 96.9 \\
40 & 56.2\pm39.7 & 68.4\pm19 & 68.2\pm22.8 & 308602 & 98.6 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
\selectlanguage{american}%
\subsection{Medikit Collecting Experiment}
The previous experiment was conducted on a simple scenario which was
closer to a 2D arcade game rather than a true 3D virtual world. That
is why we decided to test if similar deep reinforcement learning methods
would work in a more involved scenario requiring substantial spatial
reasoning.
\subsubsection{Scenario}
In this scenario, the agent is spawned in a random spot of a maze
with an acid surface, which slowly, but constantly, takes away the
agent's life (see Fig.~\ref{fig:superhealth}). To survive, the agent
needs to collect medikits and avoid blue vials with poison. Items
of both types appear in random places during the episode. The agent
is allowed to move (forward/backward), and turn (left/right). It scores
$1$ point for each tick, and it is punished by $-100$ points for
dying. Thus, it is motivated to survive as long as possible. To facilitate
learning, we also introduced shaping rewards of $100$ and $-100$
points for collecting a medikit and a vial, respectively. The shaping
rewards do not count to the final score but are used during the agent's
training helping it to `understand' its goal. Each episode ends after
$2100$ ticks ($1$ minute in real-time) or when the agent dies so
$2100$ is the maximum achievable score. Being idle results in scoring
$284$ points.
\begin{figure}
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{figures/superhealth}
\par\end{centering}
\caption{\label{fig:superhealth}Health gathering scenario}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Experimental Setup}
The learning procedure was the same as described in Section~\ref{subsec:Deep-Q-Learning}
with the difference that for updating the weights RMSProp \cite{Tieleman2012}
this time.
\paragraph{Neural Network Architecture}
The employed network is similar the one used in the previous experiment.
The differences are as follows. It involves three convolutional layers
with $32$ square filters $7$, $5$, and $3$ pixels wide, respectively.
The fully-connected layer uses $1024$ leaky rectified linear units
and the output layer $16$ linear units corresponding to each combination
of the $4$ available actions.
\paragraph{Game Settings}
The game's state was represented by a $120\times45$ $3$-channel
RGB image, health points and the current tick number (within the episode).
Additionally, a kind of memory was implemented by making the agent
use $4$ last states as the neural network's input. The nonvisual
inputs (health, ammo) were fed directly to the first fully-connected
layer. Skipcount of $10$ was used.
\paragraph{Learning Settings}
We set the discount factor $\gamma=1$, learning rate $\alpha=0.00001$,
replay memory capacity to $10\,000$ elements and mini-batch size
to $64$. The initial $\epsilon=1.0$ started to decay after $4\,000$
learning steps, finishing the decay at $\epsilon=0.1$ at $104\,000$
episodes.
The agent was set to learn for $1000\,000$ steps. To monitor the
learning progress, $200$ testing episodes were played after each
$5000$ learning steps. The whole learning process, including the
testing episodes, lasted $29$ hours.
\subsubsection{Results}
The learning dynamics is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:superhealth-dynamics}.
It can be observed that the agents fairly quickly learns to get the
perfect score from time to time. Its average score, however, improves
slowly reaching $1300$ at the end of the learning. The trend might,
however, suggest that some improvement is still possible given more
training time. The plots suggest that even at the end of learning,
the agent for some initial states fails to live more than a random
player.
It must, however, be noted that the scenario is not easy and even
from a human player, it requires a lot of focus. It is so because
the medikits are not abundant enough to allow the bots to waste much
time.
Watching the agent play\footnote{\href{https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=re6hkcTWVUY}{https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=re6hkcTWVUY}}
revealed that it had developed a policy consistent with our expectations.
It navigates towards medikits, actively, although not very deftly,
avoids the poison vials, and does not push against walls and corners.
It also backpedals after reaching a dead end or a poison vial. However,
it very often hesitates about choosing a direction, which results
in turning left and right alternately on the spot. This quirky behavior
is the most probable, direct cause of not fully satisfactory performance.
Interestingly, the learning dynamics consists of three sudden but
ephemeral drops in the average and best score. The reason for such
dynamics is unknown and it requires further research.
\begin{figure}
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{figures/superhealth_plot}
\par\end{centering}
\caption{\label{fig:superhealth-dynamics}Learning dynamics for health gathering
scenario.}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions\label{sec:Conclusions}}
ViZDoom is a Doom-based platform for research in vision-based reinforcement
learning. It is easy-to-use, highly flexible, multi-platform, lightweight,
and efficient. In contrast to the other popular visual learning environments
such as Atari 2600, ViZDoom provides a 3D, semi-realistic, first-person
perspective virtual world. ViZDoom's API gives the user full control
of the environment. Multiple modes of operation facilitate experimentation
with different learning paradigms such as reinforcement learning,
apprenticeship learning, learning by demonstration, and, even the
`ordinary', supervised learning. The strength and versatility of environment
lie in is customizability via the mechanism of scenarios, which can
be conveniently programmed with open-source tools.
We also demonstrated that visual reinforcement learning is possible
in the 3D virtual environment of ViZDoom by performing experiments
with deep Q-learning on two scenarios. The results of the simple move-and-shoot
scenario, indicate that the speed of the learning system highly depends
on the number of frames the agent is allowed to skip during the learning.
We have found out that it is profitable to skip from $4$ to $10$
frames. We used this knowledge in the second, more involved, scenario,
in which the agent had to navigate through a hostile maze and collect
some items and avoid the others. Although the agent was not able to
find a perfect strategy, it learned to navigate the maze surprisingly
well exhibiting evidence of a human-like behavior.
ViZDoom has recently reached a stable $1.0.1$ version and has a potential
to be extended in many interesting directions. First, we would like
to implement a synchronous multiplayer mode, which would be convenient
for self-learning in multiplayer settings. Second, bots are now deaf
thus, we plan to allow bots to access the sound buffer. Lastly, interesting,
supervised learning experiments (e.g., segmentation) could be conducted
if ViZDoom automatically labeled objects in the scene.
\section*{Acknowledgment }
This work has been supported in part by the Polish National Science
Centre grant no. DEC-2013/09/D/ST6/03932. M. Kempka acknowledges the
support of Ministry of Science and Higher Education grant no. 09/91/DSPB/0602.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{intro}
The local Universe shows a clear bimodality in the galaxy populations: galaxies in the colour--colour or colour--magnitude diagrams are located in two different regions: a well--defined red sequence and a blue cloud \citep[e.g.][]{baldry2004}. Using visual and spectra classifications, \cite{strateva2001} showed that the morphology of the two groups is different, the red sequence is dominated by early-type galaxies and the blue cloud by late-type galaxies. \cite{bell2004} found that this bimodality is observed at least out to $z \sim 1$. In addition, \cite{hogg2004} observed a segregation in colour depending on the environment out to similar redshifts. Red and blue galaxies are preferentially located in high- and low-density regions, respectively \citep[e.g.,][]{balogh2004,sanchez2008}.
We might expect that the formation of the red sequence depends on the mass of the galaxies and/or their environment. The bright end ($M_r \leq -20.0$) of the red sequence seems to be independent of environment \citep[e.g.,][]{hogg2004,depropris2013}, indicating that the reddening of bright galaxies is mainly related to internal processes. The tight red sequence observed for bright galaxies favours scenarios where cluster ellipticals constitute a passive and evolving population formed at high redshift \citep[$z \gtrsim$ 2 -- 3][]{ellis1997,gladders1998,stanford1998} or that massive ellipticals originate from the mergers of massive and metal-rich disc systems \citep{kauffmann1998,delucia2004a,delucia2004b}.
However, at faint magnitudes, the build-up of the red sequence is less clear. Several samples of clusters have observed no evolution of the luminous-to-faint (L/F) ratio with redshift up to $z \sim 1.5$ \citep[][]{lidman2004,andreon2008,crawford2009,depropris2013,andreon2014,cerulo2016}, while a large variation was reported by other studies \citep[][]{delucia2004a,delucia2007,tanaka2005,bildfell2012}.
The redshift variation of the red sequence suggests an evolution of the galaxies from the blue cloud to the red population, originating the so-called Butcher--Oemler effect \citep{butcher1984}. Several mechanisms have ben proposed in order to explain this evolution, in particular, either a combination of dry mergers and quenching of star formation \citep{bell2004,faber2007} or only a late quenching of star formation \citep{cimatti2006,scarlata2007}.
Previous studies on the red sequence evolution focused on galaxies brighter than $M_{r} \sim -19.0$. Deeper spectroscopic surveys are needed to study the physical processes involved in the formation and evolution of the red sequence at fainter magnitudes ($M_{r} > -18.0$). However, the study of clusters at $z \sim 1$ is challenging with present spectroscopic facilities. A possibility would be the analysis and comparison of nearby clusters in different dynamical states.
One of the largest and most massive structures in the Local Universe is the Hercules Supercluster, composed by Abell 2151 (the Hercules cluster and hereafter A\,2151), Abell 2147 and Abell 2152 \citep{chincarini1981,barmby1998}. A\,2151 is a nearby ($z = 0.0367$), irregular and spiral-rich cluster \citep[$\sim 50 $ per cent][]{giovanelli1985} with strong evidence of being in a merging phase and having a large fraction of blue galaxies \citep[e.g.][and references therein]{bird1995,huang1996,dickey1997,cedres2009}. Therefore, A\,2151 appears to be a young cluster, very similar to clusters at higher redshift, but in the nearby Universe, allowing deep spectroscopic observations of its central region down to $\sim M_r^* + 6$. We emphasize that this faint magnitude limit probes the dwarf galaxy population because it corresponds to a mass M$_* \sim 3.7\times10^8$\,M$_{\odot}$ for a red sequence member. Therefore, the young dynamical state, the variety of local densities, and the large fraction of blue galaxies make A\,2151 an ideal environment to study the build-up of the red sequence at faint magnitudes.
We will briefly discuss the data set in Section 2, we present the results in Section 3, and the discussion and conclusion in Section 4. Throughout this work, we use the cosmological parameters $H_0 = 75 \; \mathrm{km} \, \mathrm{s}^{-1} \mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}$, $\Omega _m = 0.3$ and $\Omega _{\Lambda} = 0.7$.
\section{The observational data of A\,2151}
\subsection{Deep AF2/WYFFOS spectroscopy}
Our parent photometric catalogue contains all galaxies brighter than $m_r = 20.5$ mag\footnote{The apparent magnitudes used here are the model SDSS-DR9 $r$-band magnitudes corrected for extinction.} from the SDSS-DR9 \citep[][]{ahn2012}, and within 45 arcmin from the cluster mass centre\footnote{$\alpha$ (J2000): $16^\text{h} \, 05^\text{m} \, 26^\text{s}$, $\delta$ (J2000): $17^{\circ} \, 44' \, 55"$.} \citep{sanchez2005}. We present the target selection in the colour--magnitude diagram (see Fig. \ref{cmd}). We select those galaxies bluer than $m_g -m_r \leq 1.0$, with apparent magnitude brighter than 20, and with no spectroscopic measurements available in literature. This colour cut should match the colour distribution of galaxies in the nearby Universe and minimize the background source contamination \citep[see][]{hogg2004,rines2008}.
We observed these objects during three nights plus 8 h of service time at the \textit{William Herschel Telescope} (\textit{WHT}) with the fibre spectrograph AutoFib2/WYFFOS using the R158B grism ($R\,=\,280$). The observations were designed to maximize the number of targets within 20 arcmin -- where the instrument response is optimal, eight pointings with $\sim 90$ galaxies each. We reached a signal to noise higher than 5 for the faintest galaxies with three exposures of 1800 s per pointing. We obtained 738 spectra and reduced them with the version 2.25 of the instrument pipeline \citep{dominguez2014}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{a2151_cmd_frac}
\caption{Lower panel: colour--magnitude diagram of the galaxies in the direction of A\,2151. Dark grey dots are the galaxies excluded from target with the colour-cut. Light grey dots are the target galaxies and black points are the velocities obtained. Red and blue symbols show red and blue cluster members, respectively. The solid line represents the red sequence of the cluster. Upper panel: spectroscopic completeness ($C$, green diamonds), red ($C_\text{red}$, red dots) and blue ($C_\text{blue}$, blue squares) spectroscopic completeness, and cluster member fraction ($f_\text{m}$, black triangles) as a function of $r$-band magnitude.}
\label{cmd}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Velocity and member catalogues}
We used the \textit{rvsao.xcsao} \textit{IRAF} task \citep{kurtz1992} to determine the recessional velocities of the observed galaxies. This task cross-correlates a template spectrum library \citep[in this work,][]{kennicutt1992} with the observed galaxy spectrum. For a full description of the task and the technique we refer the reader to \cite{kurtz1992}. We could determine 453 recessional velocities, the remaining spectra were too noisy to rely on the results of the cross-correlation. In fact, these data enabled us to determine that a mean surface brightness of 23 mag arcsec$^{-2}$ is the instrument limit for our observations. In general, the formal errors on the velocities provided by this task are smaller than the realistic uncertainties: we estimated reliable errors by comparing the results for the same objects observed in different pointings. The root mean square of the differences in measured velocities for the 57 objects with repeated observation is 175 km\,s$^{-1}$. We also had between 2 and 4 galaxies per pointing with spectroscopic information in SDSS-DR9. The differences between our measured velocities and SDSS-DR9 ones are always smaller than 100 km\,s$^{-1}$.
The redshifts from the literature (SDSS-DR9 and NED catalogues), together with our new data, result in a total number of 799 galaxy velocities within a radius of 0.94 Mpc from the cluster centre; 362 of them are new velocities with $-18.3 \leq M_r \leq -16.0$. Fig. \ref{cmd} presents the completeness of the spectroscopic data set defined as $C = N_z / N_\text{phot}$, with $N_z$ being the number of measured redshifts and $N_\text{phot}$ the number of photometric targets. $C$ is higher than 80\% for $M_r \lesssim -18.5$, and $\sim 30 \% $ at $M_r \sim -17$.
The cluster membership was determined with the caustic method \citep{diaferio1997,diaferio1999,serra2011}. This technique estimates the escape velocity and the mass profile of clusters in both the virial and infall regions, without any assumption of dynamical equilibrium. A by-product of this technique is the member identification. The members were identified by the binary tree, that gives an interloper contamination of only 3\% within $R_{200}$ \citep{serra2013}. We obtained $v_\text{c} = 10885$ km/s, $\sigma_\text{c}=704$ km/s and 360 members. Fig. \ref{caust} shows the line-of-sight velocity -- projected clustercentric distance plane of A\,2151, where the technique evaluates the caustic amplitudes and the radial mass profile. From this profile, we estimated $M_{200} = 4.00 \times10^{14}$\,M$_\odot$ and $R_{200} = 1.45 $ Mpc. The member fraction is presented in Fig. \ref{cmd} and is defined as $f_\text{m} = N_\text{m} / N_z$, being $N_\text{m}$ the number of members. This fraction strongly depends on the luminosity.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{a2151_caustic_memb_r_b}
\caption{Line-of-sight velocity -- projected clustercentric distance plane for the A2151 members (red dots) and the interlopers (black diamonds). The dot dimensions scale with the magnitude: bright (faint) -- big (small) dots. Blue circles identify blue members.}
\label{caust}
\end{figure}
\section{Results}
\subsection{The colour--magnitude diagram}
We performed a linear fit of the red sequence of A\,2151 using all the members brighter than $m_r = 17$ and with $(m_g -m_r) > 0.6$. The best fit is $(m_g -m_r)_\text{RS} = -0.022m_r + 1.132$ and $\sigma_\text{RS} = 0.053$. The galaxies with $(m_g -m_r)$ smaller or greater than $ (m_g -m_r)_\text{RS} - 3 \sigma_\text{RS}$ are blue and red galaxies, respectively. Fig. \ref{cmd} shows the two populations and the fitted red sequence. A tight red sequence is visible up to $M_r \sim -18.5$; the scatter increases at fainter magnitudes. In particular, only 36 \% of the galaxies fainter than $M_r =-18$ are classified as red.
The absence of red dwarfs\footnote{Galaxies are defined as dwarf or faint (F) if $M_r \geq -18$, and as bright or luminous (L) if $M_r \leq -20$.} is not an observational bias. In fact, we measured the recessional velocities of red galaxies, as a visual inspection of Fig. \ref{cmd} shows, but these galaxies result to be background objects. To better quantify the absence of any bias, we defined the red and blue completenesses, $C_i = N_{z,i} / N_{\text{phot},i}$ where $_i = _\text{\{red,blue\}}$ and the numbers of the two populations in the target sample are based on the definitions mentioned above. Using the red sequence of the cluster to separate the two populations is appropriate because we thus estimate the possible loss of red members of the cluster. As Fig. \ref{cmd} shows, the two fractions have similar trends to the global completeness, $C$, at the low-mass end. Therefore, the deficiency of red dwarfs in A\,2151 is real. Moreover, among the red dwarfs within 5 $\sigma_\text{c}$ from $v_\text{c}$, the caustic method only removes four galaxies from the member list which do not affect the results.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{a2151_accum_distr_func_dist_dw}
\caption{The cumulative distribution functions for the dwarf members ($M_r \geq -18$) of A\,2151. Grey solid lines are for the whole sample, red dashed lines for the red sample and blue dotted lines for the blue sample. The first panel from the left is for the clustercentric distance, the second for the distance of each galaxy to the nearest X-ray peak, the third for the local density and the fourth for the distance of each dwarf to the nearest bright galaxy ($M_r \leq -20$).}
\label{accum_dist}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Red and blue populations in Abell 2151}
To understand the deficiency of red dwarfs in A\,2151, we studied the dependence of the two populations, red and blue, on different variables. In particular, we used the clustercentric distance, the distance of each member to the nearest X-ray peak, the local density and the distance of each dwarf to the nearest bright galaxy. We consider the cluster centre provided by the caustic technique. This centre is only 80 kpc away from the mass centre estimated by \citet{sanchez2005}. We considered the four X-ray peaks analysed by \cite{bird1995} of the X-ray gas distribution measured by \textit{ROSAT}. We evaluated the local density of the galaxy distribution with the 2D-DEDICA algorithm by \cite{pisani1993}. The global cluster environment is related to the clustercentric distance and the distance to the nearest X-ray peaks, whereas the local environment is connected to the local density and the distance between dwarf and bright galaxies.
Fig. \ref{accum_dist} shows the cumulative distribution functions of the total, red and blue dwarf galaxies for the physical parameters mentioned above. A visual inspection suggests differences between the red and blue populations for all variables. In general, compared to blue galaxies, red dwarf galaxies are located closer to the cluster centre, to the X-ray peaks and to bright galaxies, and their local densities are larger. However, not all these differences are significant. The Kolmogorov--Smirnov test at $> 99$ per cent C.L. shows that the red and blue populations are statistically different only as far as the clustercentric and the X-ray peak distances are concerned. On the contrary, we can not exclude the same parent distribution when we consider the remaining two physical parameters. These results indicate that the distribution of the red and blue dwarfs are more sensitive to the global, rather than local, cluster properties.
\subsection{Comparison with Abell 85}
Fig. \ref{cmd_a2151_a85} presents the comparison between the red sequences of A\,2151 and Abell~85 (A\,85, hereafter), which is another nearby and massive cluster, with similar spectroscopic information \citep{agulli2014,agulli2016}. For A\,85, we have 460 spectroscopically confirmed members. In order to compare the samples, we calculated the absolute magnitude applying the \textit{K}--correction given by \cite{chilingarian2012}. Both red sequences have been fitted with the members in the same magnitude and colour ranges. The zero--point and the slope of the two best models are compatible within the errors. However, the faint end and the relative fraction of red and blue dwarfs are clearly different. Indeed, in A\,2151 the blue populations dominates at $M_r \geq -18$, while in A\,85 the fraction of red galaxies is larger in the full magnitude range.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{cmd_r_b_a85_a2151_cfr}
\caption{Upper panel: red (red circles) and blue (blue triangles) fractions for A\,2151 (solid symbols) and for A\,85 (open symbols). Lower panel: the colour--magnitude diagram of the two clusters with the same colour and symbol code as the upper panel. The straight lines represent the red sequence of A\,2151 (solid orange) and A\,85 (dashed green).}
\label{cmd_a2151_a85}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion and conclusion}
Several investigations find that the red-sequence slope is independent of the environment \citep[e.g.][]{delucia2004b,delucia2007,tanaka2005}. This result is confirmed by A\,2151 and A\,85 whose slopes are comparable, even if these two clusters have different dynamical state and local environment. Indeed, A\,2151 shows ongoing major merging events, has substructures and a complex X-ray map \citep[e.g.,][]{bird1995,huang1996,cedres2009}, while A\,85 appears to be almost virialized, with small substructures and a smoother X-ray map \citep[e.g.,][]{ramella2007,boue2008}. Although a direct comparison with other slopes presented in the literature is difficult due to the different filters and the possible biases, our result is in general agreement with many studies \citep[e.g.,][]{delucia2004b,delucia2007,tanaka2005,cerulo2016}.
A consequence of this red-sequence invariance is that the reddening of the bright galaxies is more likely due to internal causes at least earlier than redshift $\sim 1$, which is the redshift coverage of previous studies. The bright end also is independent of the definition of environment: in fact, the result for the bright galaxies we obtain here, where we compare two clusters in different dynamical states, is similar to the results of \cite{delucia2007} who separate massive and small clusters based on the velocity dispersion, and the results of \cite{tanaka2005} who used the local density to define field, groups and clusters.
The build-up of the faint part of the red sequence, instead, is less clear: for example, \cite{delucia2007} find a redshift evolution of the L/F ratio (the ratio between the numbers of bright to faint galaxies) that is not confirmed by \cite{andreon2008} and \cite{cerulo2016}. However, the magnitude limit of these spectroscopic studies is quite bright: generally is $M_r \leq -19$, that is one magnitude brighter than the usually assumed largest luminosity of dwarf galaxies ($M_r = -18$). The data set analysed here goes two magnitude fainter than the dwarf limit. The same limit applies to the sample of A\,85 used for the comparison. Our deeper limit makes the direct comparison with the literature results more difficult. By defining dwarf or faint the galaxies fainter than $M_r = -18$, we observe a large difference between the two clusters: the dwarf population of A\,85 is dominated by red galaxies, whereas the A\,2151 dwarf population is dominated by blue galaxies; this results is confirmed by the ratio L/F$= 0.46$ of the red population for A\,85 and L/F$=2.6$ for A\,2151. Because the main differences between these two clusters are their mass and dynamical state, our result suggests that the build-up of the faint end is related to these properties.
We find that the differences between the cumulative distribution functions of two global cluster parameters, the clustercentric and nearest X-ray peak distances of the individual galaxies, of the red and blue dwarf populations of A\,2151 are statistically significant. Our result suggests that either dwarf galaxies have not lived long enough in the cluster hostile environment or the environmental processes are not strong enough to remove the gas from the dwarfs and to transform them from active star forming faint galaxies to passive red dwarfs. This transformation has already started for those galaxies embedded within the peaks of the X-ray emission. Our findings agree with \cite{raichoor2014} who find that the faction of blue galaxies within a cluster only depends on the stellar mass of the galaxies and their clustercentric distances.
The luminosity function is a powerful observable to analyse the characteristics of different galaxy populations and the effect of the environment on them. A detailed analysis of the luminosity function of A\,2151 will be presented in a forthcoming paper (Agulli et al., in preparation).
In conclusion, we find that the slope and the zero--point of the red sequence appears to be well defined, unlike its trend at faint magnitudes, in agreement with the analysis of \cite{delucia2007}. Our comparison between A\,2151 and A\,85 presented here suggest a strong correlation between this behaviour and the dynamical and accretion histories of the clusters.
\section*{Acknowledgements.}
We acknowledge the anonymous referee for the useful comments that helped us to improve the Letter. We would like to acknowledge Ana Laura Serra and Heng Yu for the helpful discussion on the results from the caustic method. This work has been partially funded by the MINECO (grant AYA2013-43188-P). IA and AD acknowledge partial support from the INFN grant InDark. This research has made use of the Ninth Data Release of SDSS, and of the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The \textit{WHT} and its service programme are operated on the island of La Palma by the Isaac Newton Group in the Spanish Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos of the Instituto de Astrof\'isica de Canarias.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
The detection of an unidentified emission line near 3.5 keV in the stacked {\it XMM-Newton} observations of galaxy clusters and in the Perseus cluster has received significant attention from astrophysics and particle physics communities \citep[][Bu14a hereafter]{b14}. The detection was also reported in the outskirts of the Perseus cluster and the Andromeda galaxy observed with {\it XMM-Newton} \citep[][Bo14 hereafter]{bo14}, as well as in {\it Suzaku} observations of the Perseus cluster core \citep[][see, however, a nondetection by Tamura et al.\ 2015]{urban15, franse16}. An emission line at a consistent energy was detected in the {\it XMM-Newton} and {\it Chandra} observations of the Galactic center and in eight other individual clusters \citep{bo15,jp15,iakubovskyi15}.
Although the line was detected by several X-ray detectors in a variety of objects, the origin of the line is unclear. Bu14a has discussed potential astrophysical origin of this line, e.g., an emission line from the nearby weak atomic transitions of K {\sc xviii} and Ar {\sc xvii} dielectronic recombination (DR); they found that these lines have to be 10--20 times above the model prediction. \citet{jp15} and \citet{carlson15} suggested that a large fraction of cool gas with $T<1$ keV in cluster cores may produce lines from K {\sc xviii} stronger then those Bu14a allowed for. We commented in \citep[][hereafter Bu14b]{b14b} that ratios of the observed lines from other elements exclude significant quantities of such cool gas. Recently, \citet{gu15} suggested that charge exchange between Sulfur ions and neutral gas, a process not included in Bu14a, may produce excess near 3.5 keV. These as well as some other recent spatially-resolved studies are reviewed by \citet{franse16}.
A more exotic possibility that is interesting to consider is that the observed line is a signal from decaying dark matter particles \citep{abazajian14,horiuchi16}. In previous studies, they reported that the flux of the line is consistent across objects of different mass (Andromeda galaxy, stacked galaxy clusters, and Galactic center) when the mass scaling in decaying dark matter models are taken into account \citep[see][]{bo15}. Although it is challenging to test this hypothesis with the current CCD (100--120 eV) resolution X-ray telescopes, the radial distribution of the line in a well exposed galaxy cluster may provide further information on its origin. \citet{franse16} examined the flux distribution of the 3.5 keV line as a function of radius in the Perseus cluster. However, the observed line flux from the Perseus core ($r\leq1^{\prime}$) appears to be in tension with the detection from other objects, assuming the decaying dark matter model (Bu14a, Franse et al.\ 2016). \citet{franse16} found that the profile of the line is consistent with a dark matter origin as well as with an unknown astrophysical line. Recently, \citet{ru15} have analyzed a very deep {\it XMM-Newton} observation of the Draco dwarf galaxy. They found no line signal in the spectrum from the MOS detectors and a $2.3\sigma$-significant hint of a positive signal at the right energy in the independent PN spectrum, both findings consistent with the previous detections within uncertainties.
Bu14a have laid the framework for stacking X-ray observations at the rest frame and successfully applied their method to a large sample of {\it XMM-Newton} observations. In this work, we take a step further to search for the unidentified line in the stacked {\it Suzaku} observations of 47 galaxy clusters. This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 describes the data processing, and spectra stacking. In section 3 and 4 we provide our results and conclusions. All errors quoted throughout the paper correspond to 68\%(90\%) single-parameter confidence intervals; upper limits are at 90\% confidence, unless otherwise stated. Throughout our analysis we used a standard $\Lambda$CDM cosmology with $H_{0}$ =71 km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, $\Omega_{M}= 0.27$, and $\Omega_{\Lambda}= 0.73$. In this cosmology, 1$^{\prime}$ corresponds to $\sim$0.11 Mpc at redshift of 0.1.
\section{Sample Selection and Data Reduction}
\label{sec:analysis}
In an attempt to smooth the instrumental and background features related to the {\it Suzaku} XIS detectors, we select a sample of galaxy clusters based on the number of X-ray counts in their 2--10 keV band. To be able to smear the instrumental features by blue-shifting the spectra to the source frame, we select clusters covering a large redshift range of $0.01<z<0.45$. A significant number of on-axis X-ray observations of galaxy clusters have been performed by {\it Suzaku} since the launch in 2005. We selected observations with a minimum of 10,000 counts in z $<$ 0.2 per cluster, and 5,000 counts per cluster for clusters with redshifts $0.2 < z < 0.44$. The final sample includes 51 {\it Suzaku} X-ray observations of 47 galaxy clusters. The details of the observations are summarized in Table \ref{table:obs} together with the filtered exposure times. The filtering process is described below.
We note that the Perseus cluster, the X-ray brightest cluster, has the longest observations (1Ms) available in the {\it Suzaku} archive. However, to avoid the final stacked spectrum being dominated by this cluster we exclude it from our sample. The flux distribution of the 3.5 keV line out to the virial radius of the Perseus cluster has already been studied in great detail in \citet{franse16}.
The details of {\it Suzaku} data reduction are described in \citet{bu2016} and \citet{franse16}. Here, we provide a summary of the steps we follow in the data analysis. After the calibrated data is filtered from the background flares, source images in the 0.4--7.0 keV band are extracted from the filtered event files. These images are used to detect point sources within the {\it Suzaku} the field-of-view (FOV) using the CIAO's tool {\it wavdetect}. The detected point sources are excluded from the further analysis.
The source and particle background spectra are extracted from the filtered event file and filtered night-time Earth data using the FTOOL {\it xisnxbgen}. The spectra are extracted within the overdensity radius $R_{500}$\addtocounter{footnote}{-3},\footnote{The overdensity radius $R_{500}$ is defined as the radius within which the average matter density of the cluster is
500 times the critical density of the Universe at the cluster redshift.} if the estimated $R_{500}$ falls within FOV of XIS.
The overdensity radii ($R_{500}$) are calculated using the mass-temperature scaling relation for each cluster \citep{vikhlinin2009}. The temperatures used in these estimates are obtained from previously published results in the literature. For some of the nearby clusters $R_{500}$ is larger than the XIS FOV. For those we use the largest possible region (a circle with a radius of 8.3$^{\prime}$) that encompasses the cluster center while avoiding the detector edges. The extraction radii for the full sample are given in Table \ref{table:prop}. Redistribution matrix files (RMFs) and ancillary response files (ARFs) are constructed using the FTOOLs {\it xisarfgen} and {\it xisrmfgen}.
The particle induced background spectrum is subtracted from each source spectrum prior to fitting.
Following the same approach presented in Bu14, we first perform the spectral fitting in the Fe K-$\alpha$ band (5.5--7.5 keV rest frame) with a single temperature thermal model ({\it apec}) to determine the best-fit redshift of each cluster with the AtomDB version 2.0.2 \citep{smith01, foster12}. XSPEC v12.9.0 is used to perform the spectral fits \citep{arnaud96} with the extended $\chi^{2}$ statistics as an estimator of the goodness-of-fits. The spectral counts in each energy bin were sufficiently high to allow the use of the Gaussian statistics in this analysis \citep{protassov02}.
We combine front illuminated (FI) XIS0 and XIS3 data to increase the signal-to-noise, while the back illuminated (BI) XIS1 data are modeled independently due to the difference in energy responses. The best-fit redshifts ($z_{best}$) obtained from FI observations are given in Table \ref{table:obs}. The best-fit redshifts measured from BI observations are in good agreement with FI observations.
In order to detect a weak spectral feature such as the $\sim$3.5 keV line ($\sim1\%$ excess over the continuum), the detector and background artifacts must be eliminated from the high signal-to-noise stacked galaxy cluster spectrum. In order to accomplish this, we stacked the spectra of our selected 47 clusters at the source frame using the best-fit X-ray redshift of each observation determined above. The energies of the source and background X-ray events are rescaled to the source frame using the best-fit redshifts. The spectra within R$_{500}$ are extracted from these rescaled event and background files, before being stacked. The individual RMFs and ARFs are then remapped to the source frame. The weighting factors ($\omega_{cnts}$), given in Table \ref{table:prop}, for stacking RMFs and ARFs are calculated using the total counts in the fitting band (2--10 keV). The weighted and remapped ARFs and RMFs are combined using the FTOOLs {\it addarf} and {\it addrmf}, while {\it mathpha} is used to produce stacked source and background spectra. At the end of the stacking processes, we obtain a total of 5.4 Ms FI and 2.7 Ms BI galaxy cluster observations in the full sample. These count-weighted response files are used in modeling the continuum and the known plasma emission lines (see Section \ref{sec:results}).
\section{Results}
\label{sec:results}
As in B14a, We fit the background-subtracted stacked source spectra with line-free multi-temperature {\it apec} models to represent the continuum emission with high accuracy. Gaussian models are added to account for individual atomic lines in the 1.95 -- 6 keV energy band.
Our total model includes the following lines at their rest energies: Al \textsc{xiii} (2.05 keV), Si \textsc{xiv} (2.01 keV, 2.37 keV, and 2.51 keV), Si \textsc{xii} (2.18 keV, 2.29 keV, and 2.34 keV), S \textsc{xv} (2.46 keV, 2.88 keV, 3.03 keV), S \textsc{xvi} (2.62 keV), Ar \textsc{xvii} (triplet at 3.12 keV, 3.62 keV, 3.68 keV), Cl {\sc XVI} (2.79 keV), Cl {\sc xvii} (2.96 keV), Cl {\sc xvii} (3.51 keV), K \textsc{xviii} (triplet 3.47 keV, 3.49 kev and 3.51 keV), K \textsc{xix} (3.71 keV), Ca \textsc{xix} (complex at 3.86 keV, 3.90 keV, 4.58 keV), Ar \textsc{xviii} (3.31 keV, 3.93 keV), Ca \textsc{xx} (4.10 keV), Cr \textsc{xxiii} (5.69 keV).
%
{
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.25}
\begin{longtable*}{llllccccc}
\caption{On -Axis Galaxy Cluster Observations Performed by {\it Suzaku} \label{table:obs}}\\
\hline \hline\\
\multicolumn{1}{l}{\textbf{Cluster}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{ RA }} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{DEC}}& \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{ObsID }} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{ FI}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{ BI}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{$z_{best}$ }} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{ Sub-Sample }}\\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{ }} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{}}& \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{ }} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{ Exp}} &\multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{Exp }} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{ }}\\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{ }} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{}}& \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{ }} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{(ks)}} &\multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{(ks)}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{ }} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{ }}\\ \hline
\endfirsthead
\endfoot
\hline \hline
\endlastfoot
\hline\hline
\\
\input{table1.tex}\\
\hline\\
\multicolumn{8}{l}{%
\begin{minipage}{14.cm}%
Note: Columns are coordinates (RA, DEC), Suzaku observation ID, Exposure in front illuminated (XIS0+XIS3) and back illuminated (XIS1) observations, best-fit redshifts obtained from fits of Fe-K band of FI observations, and the category and subsample of the cluster determined based on the state of the core. NCC stands for the non-cool core sample, while CC stands for the cool-core sample. \\
\end{minipage}%
}\\
\end{longtable*}
}
\normalsize
After the first fit iteration the $\chi^2$ improvement for the inclusion of each of these lines is determined, and the lines that are detected with $<2\sigma$ are removed from the model. Additionally, a power-law model with an index of 1.41 and free normalization is added to the total model to account for the contribution of the cosmic X-ray background (CXB). We note that Galactic halo emission is negligible in this energy band, hence, it is not included in the model. The best-fit temperatures, normalizations of the {\it line-free apec} models, and the fluxes of S {\sc xv}, S {\sc xvi}, Ca {\sc xix}, and Ca {\sc xx} lines are given in Table \ref{table:meas}.
{
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\footnotesize
\caption{Measured and Estimated Model Parameters}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5}
\begin{tabular}{lcc|cc|cc}
\hline\hline\\
& Full & &Cool Core & & Non Cool-Core \\
& Sample & &Clusters & & Clusters \\
Parameters & FI & BI & FI & BI & FI & BI \\
\\\hline
\\
\input{table2.tex}
\\
\hline\hline
\\
\multicolumn{7}{l}{%
\begin{minipage}{16.cm}%
Note: Best-fit Temperature and Normalizations of \textit{line-free apec} Model in 1.95 $-$ 6 keV fit to the Stacked XIS FI/BI spectra for various samples. The line fluxes of the S \textsc{xv}, S \textsc{xvi}, Ar \textsc{xvii}, Ca \textsc{xix}, and Ca \textsc{xx} are at the rest energies 2.51 keV, 2.63 keV, 3.12 keV, 3.90 keV, and 4.11 keV. 90\% uncertainties are given. Lower panel show the estimated maximum fluxes of the atomic lines in 3--4 keV band (before they are multiplied by a factor of 3) including K \textsc{xviii} at 3.51 keV, Cl \textsc{xvii} at 3.521 keV, and Ar \textsc{xvii} DR line at 3.62 keV. The implied plasma temperatures are calculated based on S line ratios. $^{*}$ The temperatures and line fluxes for NCC sample are determined from Ca line ratio. \\
\end{minipage}%
}\\
\end{tabular}
\label{table:meas}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
}
It is crucial to accurately determine the fluxes of the nearby atomic lines of K {\sc xviii}, Cl {\sc xvii}, and Ar {\sc xvii} in order to be able to measure the flux of the unidentified line at 3.5 keV.
The line ratios of S \textsc{xv} at 2.46 keV to S \textsc{xvi} at 2.62 keV and Ca {\sc xix} at 3.9 keV to Ca {\sc xx} at 4.1 keV are good diagnostics tools for estimating plasma temperature, especially valuable for detecting the presence of cool gas (Bu14b). Following the same method presented in Bu14a, we determine the plasma temperature based on the measured fluxes of helium-like S {\sc xv} at 2.46 keV, hydrogen-like S {\sc xvi} at 2.63 keV, and helium-like Ca {\sc xix}, and hydrogen-like Ca {\sc xx} lines 3.90 keV, 4.11 keV from the spectral fits. However, the band where S {\sc xv} and S {\sc xvi} are located is crowded with strong Si {\sc xiv} lines. We therefore tie the fluxes of Si {\sc xiv} (2.01 keV: 2.37 keV: 2.51 keV) to each other with flux ratios of (21:3.5:1). The Si {\sc xiv} line ratios are estimated based on the AtomDB predictions for 3--5 keV plasma. The measured fluxes are given in the top panel of Table \ref{table:meas}.
The maximum fluxes of the K {\sc xviii} triplet (3.47 keV: 3.49 keV: 3.51 keV) with the ratios of (1: 0.5: 2.3) are then estimated using AtomDB as described in Bu14a. Cl {\sc xvii} Lyman-$\beta$ is also included in the fits and the flux was tied to 0.15 $\times$ that of the Lyman-$\alpha$ line at 2.96 keV. We note that Cl {\sc xvii} Lyman-$\alpha$ line is not detected significantly in any of our samples, therefore, Cl {\sc xvii} Lyman-$\beta$ line is removed from our model after the first fit iteration. The maximum flux of the Ar {\sc xvii} DR line flux at 3.62 keV is determined from the measured flux of Ar {\sc xvii} triplet line at 3.12 keV. The expected flux of the Ar {\sc xvii} DR line is $<1\%$ of the Ar {\sc xvii} triplet at 3.12 keV for 3--5 keV plasma. The estimated fluxes of nearby lines (K {\sc xviii} at 3.51 keV, Cl {\sc xvii} at 3.50 keV, and Ar {\sc xvii} DR at 3.62 keV) and plasma temperatures based on S and Ca line ratios are given in Table \ref{table:meas} bottom panel. As in Bu14a, the lower and upper limits of the fluxes of K {\sc xviii} complex, Cl {\sc xvii}, and Ar {\sc xvii} DR lines are set to 0.1 to 3 times of the maximum predicted fluxes (estimates shown in Table \ref{table:meas} are before the multiplication) to account for abundance variance between different ions.
\subsection{Full Sample}
\label{sec:fullsample}
A total of $5.06\times 10^{6}$ source counts in the 5.4 Ms FI observations and 2.9$\times 10^{6}$ source counts in the 2.7 Ms BI observations of the full sample are obtained in the 1.95 -- 6 keV energy band. The count-weighted redshift of this sample is $z\sim0.12$. After the first fit iteration with {\it line-free apec} and Gaussian models we obtain a good fit to the stacked FI observations with $\chi^{2}$ of 1032.3 for 1069 degrees-of-freedom (dof). The best-fit parameters of the model are given in Table \ref{table:meas}. The predicted plasma temperature indicated by the S \textsc{xv} to S \textsc{xv} line ratio is kT $\sim$ 3.1 keV for this sample.
To explore 3--4 keV band in the full sample (although the fit is preformed in a wider 2--6 keV band), we add an Gaussian with a fixed energy at 3.54 keV (the best-fit energy of the line detected in the {\it Suzaku} observations of the Perseus cluster). The line width is fixed to zero since we do not expect that the line width is resolved with CCD type detectors regardless of its origin. The {\it Suzaku} FI and BI detectors have energy resolution of 110--120 eV (similar energy resolution of EPIC detectors on {\it XMM-Newton}).
Here we explore the possible interpretation of the 3.54 keV line as a decay feature of dark matter particles, therefore we use the properly weighted response files to reflect the physical properties of each cluster and the stacked sample. We note that the proper X-ray counts-weighted response files are used in modeling the continuum and known atomic transitions as described in Section \ref{sec:analysis}.
{
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption{ Properties of Each Cluster in the Suzaku Sample}
\scriptsize
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccccc}
\hline
\\
\input{table3.tex}
\\
\hline\hline
\\
\multicolumn{12}{l}{%
\begin{minipage}{18.cm}%
Note: Columns (1) and (6) show the spectral extraction radius in Mpc, Columns (2) and (7) are the estimated projected dark matter masses in the spectral extraction radii $M_{DM}^{proj} (R_{ext})$, the projected dark matter mass per luminosity distance $M_{DM}^{proj}/D_{L}^{2}$ are given in columns (3) and (8), columns (4), (5), (9), and (10) show the weighting factors ($\omega_{cnt}$) calculated based on the total counts in the fitting band 2--6 keV and the weighting factors ($\omega_{dm}$) calculated based on the predicted dark matter flux. These factors are used in the stacking of ARFs and RMFs of each cluster in the sample. \\
\end{minipage}%
}\\
\end{tabular}
\label{table:prop}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
}
The contribution of each cluster to any flux due to dark matter decay in the stacked sample is related to
the mass of decaying dark matter particles within the FOV.
Following the same formulation laid out by Bu14a, the weight of each cluster in the full {\it Suzaku} sample
is;
\begin{equation}
\omega_{i,dm} = \frac{M_{i, DM}^{proj}(<R_{ext})(1+z_{i})}{4\pi D_{i,L}^{2}}\ \frac{e_{i}}{e_{tot}},
\label{eqn:weight}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $z_{i}$ is the redshift of the \textit{i}th cluster, and $e_{i}$ and $e_{tot}$
are the exposure time of the \textit{i}th cluster and the total exposure time of
the sample, $M_{DM}^{FOV}$ is the
projected dark matter mass within the spectral extraction region ($R_{ext}$,
which is either $R_{500}$ or $R_{FOV}$), and $D_{L}$ is the luminosity distance. We use
the the Navarro--Frenk--White (NFW) profile \citep{navarro1997} to determine the dark matter mass
within the field-of-view. The steps in these calculation are described in detail in B14a. The calculated weight of each cluster is given in Table \ref{table:prop} for each cluster in the full {\it Suzaku} sample.
Initially, we examine the 3--4 keV band of the stacked FI observations of the full sample. After the addition of the Gaussian model at 3.54 keV, the new best-fit $\chi^{2}$ becomes 1028.1 for 1068 dof. The change in the $\chi^{2}$ is 4.1 after the addition of a degree of freedom. The best-fit flux of the line is 1.0$_{-0.5}^{+0.5}\ (_{-0.9}^{+1.3}) \ \times\ 10^{-6}$ phts cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$. The change in the $\chi^{2}$ corresponds to a 2$\sigma$ detection for an additional degree of freedom in the stacked FI observations of the full sample. The stacked XIS FI spectrum of the full sample and the best-fit models before and after the Gaussian line is added are shown in Figure \ref{fig:spec} left panel.
For the BI observations of the full sample, the fit with {\it line-free apec} model and additional Gaussians for known atomic lines give a good-fit with $\chi^{2}$ of 1111.5 (1078 dof). The line is not detected at a statistically significant level in this spectrum. Additional Gaussian line at 3.54 keV improves the fit by $\Delta \chi^{2}$= 1.5 for an extra dof (the $\chi^{2}$ becomes 1109.9 for 1077 dof). The best-fit flux of the line is 9.1$^{+1.5}_{-7.3}\ (^{+2.2}_{-9.1})\ \times\ 10^{-7}$ phts cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$. The stacked XIS BI spectrum of the full sample and the best-fit models before and after the Gaussian line is added at 3.54 keV are shown in Figure \ref{fig:spec} right panel.
To test the decaying dark matter origin of the signal, we further investigate if the mixing angles indicated by these fluxes are consistent with the previous detections in the literature. The measured flux from a mass of dark matter within the FOV can be converted into the decay rate assuming dark matter particles decaying monochromatically with E$_{\gamma}$= m$_{s}$/2. The mixing angle for this decay is
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\rm {sin}^{2} (2\theta)= \frac{F_{DM}}{12.76\ \rm{cm^{-2}} \ s^{-1}}
\left( \frac{10^{14}\ M_{\odot}}{M_{DM}^{FOV}}\right) \\
\left( \frac{D_{L}}{100\ \rm{Mpc}}\right)^{2} \left( \frac{1}{1+z}\right)
\left( \frac{1\ \rm{keV}}{m_{s}}\right)^{4},
\end{split}
\label{eqn:mixangle}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $F_{DM}$ is the observed flux due to dark matter decay \citep{pal82} and is related to
the surface density or flux of decaying dark matter particles within the FOV;
\begin{equation}
F_{DM} = \frac{M_{DM}^{FOV} }{4\pi D_{L}^{2} } \frac{\Gamma_{\gamma}}{m_{s}} (1+z)\ \ \ \rm{photons\ cm^{-2}\ s^{-1}},
\label{eqn:dmflux}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\Gamma_{\gamma}$ and $m_{s}$ are the decay rate and dark matter particle mass, respectively.
{
\begin{table*}[]
\begin{center}
\caption{Measured Flux of the 3.5 keV Line in the Stacked {\it Suzaku} Clusters}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccc}
\hline\hline\\
& (1) &(2) &(3) &(4) &(5) &(6) &(7)\\
Sample & Inst. & Energy & Flux & $\chi^{2}$ & $\Delta \chi^{2}$ & $M_{DM}^{proj}/D_{L}^{2}$ & $\sin^{2}(2\theta)$\\
& & (keV) & ($10^{-6}$ phts cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$) & (dof) & (dof) & ($10^{10}$ M$_\odot/Mpc^{2}$) & (10$^{-11}$)\\
\\\hline
\\
\input{table4.tex}
\\
\hline\hline
\\
\multicolumn{8}{l}{%
\begin{minipage}{16.cm}%
Note: Columns (2) and (3) are the rest energy and flux of the unidentified line in the units of photons cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ at the 68\% (90\%) confidence level. Column (4) and (5) show the $\chi^{2}$ after the line is added to
the total model and change in the $\chi^{2}$ when an additional Gaussian component is added to the fit; column (6) is the weighted ratio of mass to distance squared of the samples, and column (7) shows the mixing angle limits measured in each sample. Reported constraining limits are at 90\% confidence. Energies are held fixed during the model fitting. \\
\end{minipage}%
}\\
\end{tabular}
\label{table:results}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
}
Using $\omega_{dm}$ and the projected dark matter masses given in Table \ref{table:prop}, we find that the weighted projected
dark matter mass per distance squared of the full {\it Suzaku} sample is $1.17\times 10^{10}$ M$_\odot/Mpc^{2}$. Using Equation \ref{eqn:mixangle}, one can calculate the mixing angle to be $\sin^{2}(2\theta)= 2.7_{-1.4}^{+1.4}\ (_{-2.3}^{+3.4})\times 10^{-11}$ for the full {\it Suzaku} FI sample for a particle mass of $m_s$ = 7.08 keV. The associated 90\% upper limit to the mixing angle is $\sin^{2}(2\theta)<6.1\times 10^{-11}$ in this sample.
To compare the consistency between XIS FI spectrum and the previously detected line flux in {\it XMM-Newton} observations (Bu14a), we scale the flux based on the signal from the larger cluster sample under the dark matter decay scenario. Figure \ref{fig:moslimit} shows the zoomed in 3.3--3.8 keV band of the stacked XIS full FI sample spectrum. The solid line marks the best-fit flux of the 3.54 keV line scaled from the Bu14a full sample flux with the 90\% uncertainties are marked with dashed lines. As the figure clearly shows the XIS FI observations are consistent with the {\it XMM-Newton} observations at a 90\% level.
The {\it Suzaku} BI observations of the full sample give a mixing angle measurement of $\sin^{2}(2\theta)=2.5_{-1.9}^{+0.4}\ (_{-2.4}^{+5.9}) \times 10^{-11}$ for the same weighted mass per distance squared. These are given in Table \ref{table:results}. The {\it Suzaku} full FI/BI sample measurements are consistent with each other. The mixing angle measured from the full {\it XMM-Newton} MOS/PN samples ($\sin^{2}(2\theta)=6.8^{+1.4}_{-1.4}\ (_{-3.0}^{+2.0})\times 10^{-11}$) are consistent at a 1$\sigma$ confidence level and the MOS observations of bright clusters (Coma+Ophiuchus+Centaurus; $\sin^{2}(2\theta)=1.8^{+0.44}_{-0.39}\ (_{-1.2}^{+1.2}) \times 10^{-10}$) are consistent at a $\sim2.7\sigma$ confidence level (see Bu14a). The core excised observations of the Perseus cluster ($2.3^{+0.7}_{-0.7}\ (_{-1.2}^{+1.2}) \times 10^{-10}$; see Bu14a) measurement is in tension with the present {\it Suzaku} sample result at a level of $\sim2.5\sigma$. Comparison of mixing angles measured from {\it Suzaku} samples with the previous detections and limits are shown in Figure \ref{fig:limits}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\hspace{-4mm}\includegraphics[width=18.cm, angle=0]{fig1.pdf}
\caption{3--4 keV band of the binned stacked {\it Suzaku} XIS FI (left panel) and XIS BI (right panel) spectra of the full sample. The figures show the energy band where the unidentified 3.5 keV line is detected by Bu14a. The Gaussian lines with maximum values of the flux normalizations of K {\sc xviii} and Ar {\sc xvii} DR are already included in the models. The 3.5 keV line is not significantly detected in either of these samples. The red and blue model lines in the top panels show the total model before and after a Gaussian line is added at 3.54 keV. Bottom panels show the residuals before (red) and after (blue) the Gaussian line is added.}
\label{fig:spec}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Cool-Core Clusters}
We now divide the full sample into two independent subsamples in order to investigate if the line flux correlates with the presence cool gas in the intra-cluster plasma. The clusters are divided into cool-core clusters (CC) and non cool-core clusters (NCC) based on previous identifications in the literature. If, indeed, the flux of the 3.5 keV line is stronger in the stacked cool-core cluster sample (i.e. if a correlation is observed between gas temperature and the flux), this would be a strong indication that the 3.5 keV line is astrophysical in origin. The classification of each cluster is given in Table \ref{table:obs}. For some of the clusters in the full sample (e.g., A2495, A2249, A272, RXC J2218.8-0258, MS 2216.0-0401, and A566) the X-ray studies with high angular resolution observatories, e.g. {\it Chandra} and {\it XMM-Newton}, are not available in the literature. Due to relatively large point-spread-function ($\sim2^\prime$ half-power diameter) of {\it Suzaku} mirrors, we cannot distinguish if these clusters have cool intra-cluster gas in their center. Hence we exclude these clusters from both subsamples.
We have performed the stacking process following the same approach outlined in Section \ref{sec:analysis} for the CC clusters.
A total of 3.1 Ms of good stacked FI and 1.5 Ms BI observations are obtained in this subsample. The weighted mean redshift of the subsample is 0.13. The stacked FI/BI observations of this subsample contain 52\% and 51\% of the total source counts of the full FI and BI observations.
We fit the stacked {\it Suzaku} FI spectra of the CC cluster as described in Section \ref{sec:results}. The best-fit temperatures, normalizations and the fluxes of S {\sc xv}, S {\sc xvi}, Ca {\sc xix}, and Ca {\sc xx} are given in Table \ref{table:meas}.
Cl Ly-$\alpha$ at 2.96 keV is not detected significantly in this spectrum, we therefore exclude Cl Ly-$\beta$ line at 3.51 keV in our fits. Overall we obtain a good-fit to the stacked CC spectrum with $\chi^{2}=$1130.0 (1068 dof).
Adding in an extra Gaussian model to the MOS spectrum at 3.54 keV does not improve the fit significantly ($\Delta\chi^{2}=1.68$) for an additional degrees-of-freedom and results in a non-detection. The 90\% upper limit on the flux of this line at 3.54 keV is $1.4\times 10^{-6}$ photons cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ from this spectrum. The upper limit on the flux can be translated to a mixing angle of $5.1\times 10^{-11}$ for a given projected dark matter mass per distance squared for the sample (1.06$\times 10^{10}$ M$_{sun}$/Mpc$^{2}$). The mixing angle indicated by the stacked FI observations of CC clusters
is consistent with the {\it Suzaku} full-sample and the previous {\it XMM-Newton} detections.
We note that the discrepancy observed in plasma temperatures between FI and BI observations of the cool-core clusters might be due to the difference in the response of the FI and BI sensors, or the power-law normalizations for CXB which were left free during the fits. We note that spectra of individual clusters are rescaled to their emitter frame before being stacked. Therefore, the stacked spectra do not contain any physical meaning after the blue-shifting and stacking processes. The main goal of this work is to model the continuum accurately to make the analysis sensitive to faint line detections. Therefore, the observed difference is not worrying in the context of this work. The crucial point is that the line ratios observed in FI and BI observations within each sample are consistent. The line ratios are used to determine the plasma temperature and fluxes faint lines in 2.5--4.1 keV band.
The overall fit to the stacked BI observations to CC clusters is acceptable with $\chi^{2}$ of 1142.85 for 1068 dof. Adding an extra Gaussian line at 3.54 keV
does not improve the fit significantly and results in a non-detection. The 90\% upper limit to the flux is $2.1\times 10^{-6}$ photons cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ from this spectrum; the upper limit on the mixing angle ($<6.1\times 10^{-11}$M$_{sun}$/Mpc$^{2}$) from this flux limit is consistent with the full-sample and FI detections.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\hspace{-4mm}\includegraphics[width=9.cm, angle=0]{fig2.pdf}
\caption{ Zoomed in {\it Suzaku} XIS FI spectrum of the stacked full sample. The solid red line shows the best-fit line flux scaled from the {\it XMM-Newton} MOS full sample detection ($4\times10^{-6}$ phot s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$) under the dark matter decay scenario. The dashed lines mark the 90\% confidence levels of the scaled flux.}
\label{fig:moslimit}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Non-Cool Core Clusters}
We now examine the FI and BI observations of the NCC clusters. A total of 2.2 Ms good FI and 1.1 Ms good BI observations are obtained for this sample.
The NCC cluster sample contain 46\% of the total FI source counts, 45\% of the total BI source counts of the full sample.
The redshift has a weighted mean value at 0.11 and the projected dark matter mass per distance squared is $1.19\times10^{10}$ M$_{sun}$/Mpc$^{2}$ of the NCC subsample.
To be able to estimate the fluxes of K {\sc xviii}, Cl {\sc xvii}, and Ar {\sc xvii} lines conservatively, we use Ca {\sc xix} and Ca {\sc xx} lines for this sample. Probing the 3--4 keV band the FI observations does not reveal significant residuals around 3.54 keV.
Indeed, the first fitting attempt (without an Gaussian model at 3.54 keV) is an overall good with $\chi^{2}$ of 1041.3 for 1076 dof. Addition of a Gaussian model improves the fit by $\Delta \chi^{2}$ of 6.56 for an extra dof. The best-fit flux of the line becomes 2.0$_{-0.7}^{+1.0}$ ($_{-1.2}^{+1.9}$) $\times10^{-6}$~photons cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$. The mixing angle corresponding to this flux is 5.3$_{-1.8}^{+2.6}\ (_{-3.1}^{+4.7})\times 10^{-11}$, which is consistent with the full sample. The 90\% upper limit to its flux is $3.9\times10^{-6}$ phts~cm~$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$ in the FI observations of the non-cool clusters with a mixing angle of $1.0\times 10^{-10}$.
Treating the stacked BI observations of the NCC clusters, we obtain an acceptable fit ($\chi^{2}$of 1159.4 with 1071 dof) without an additional Gaussian model at 3.54 keV. Adding an extra Gaussian component at 3.54 keV changes the goodness of the fit by $\Delta\chi^{2}$ of 0.51 ($\Delta dof=1$). The 90\% upper limits to the flux of the line is $5.4\times10^{-6}$~phts cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$, which corresponds to a mixing angle of $1.4\times 10^{-10}$ for this sample.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\hspace{-4mm}\includegraphics[width=9.cm, angle=0]{fig3.pdf}
\caption{A comparison of sterile neutrino mixing angle upper limits obtained from the stacked galaxy clusters observed with {\it Suzaku}. The results in the literature are also shown. The error bars and upper limits from this work and Bu14a results are 90\% confidence levels. The upper limits from the stacked Spheroidal galaxies \citep[][2$\sigma$]{malyshev14} and stacked galaxies \citep[][90\%]{anderson15} together with the detections in the Galactic Center \citep[][90\%]{bo15}, the Draco dwarf spheroidal \citep[][1$\sigma$]{ru15}, M31 (Bo14a, 1$\sigma$)
are shown. Anomalously high Perseus flux reported in Bu14a is clearly seen in the Figure. We note that the particle mass is not compared here.}
\label{fig:limits}
\end{figure}
\section{Summary}
\label{sec:intro}
Stacking X-ray spectra of galaxy clusters at different redshifts provides a sensitive tool to detect weak emission features. This method, tested on the {\it XMM-Newton} observations of 73 clusters (Bu14a), resulted in the detection of a very weak unidentified spectral line at $\sim3.5$~keV. In this work, we take a similar approach and stack {\it Suzaku} FI (XIS0, XIS3) and BI (XIS1) observations of 47 nearby ($0.01<z<$0.45) galaxy clusters to look for the unidentified emission line. Our {\it Suzaku} sample consists of 5.4 Ms of FI and 2.1 Ms of BI observations. The total source counts collected in this study is less than those of the stacked {\it XMM-Newton} observations by a factor of 1.8. The redshift span is slightly larger of the {\it Suzaku} full sample than the full {\it XMM-Newton} sample, leading to more effective smearing of the instrumental features. The redshift range of the {\it Suzaku} full sample corresponds to an energy difference of up to 1.44 keV at 3.5 keV, which is sufficient to smear out and eliminate the background or response features.
The stacked FI data for the full sample prefers an additional emission line at $E=3.54$ keV (the energy fixed at the best-fit value for the {\it Suzaku} line detection in Perseus Franse et al.\ (2016)), but only
at 2$\sigma$ confidence level with a flux of $1.0_{-0.5}^{+0.5}\ (_{-0.9}^{+1.3}) \ \times\ 10^{-6}$~phts~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$. The statistics of the dataset is insufficient to constrain the energy of this faint line. The line is not significantly detected in the BI observations, however an additional Gaussian model improves the fit by $\Delta\chi^{2}=1.5$ and has a flux of $9.1^{+1.5}_{-7.3}\ (^{+2.2}_{-9.1}) \ \times\ 10^{-6}$~phts~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$. The fluxes observed in FI and BI observations are in agreement with each other.
In an attempt to investigate a possible correlation of the flux of the unidentified line with cooler gas in the ICM, we divide the full sample into two subsamples; CC and NCC clusters. If a correlation is observed, it would be an indication that the unidentified line is astrophysical in origin. Atomic lines are more prominent in cool-core clusters where a significant amount of cooler gas with higher metal abundances resides in the core. However, we do not detect any significant spectral feature at 3.5 keV in the separate CC and NCC clusters. The FI observations of the NCC sample shows a weak 2.4$\sigma$ residual at 3.54 keV, with a flux of 5.3$_{-1.8}^{+2.6}\ (_{-3.1}^{+4.7})\times10^{-6}$~phts~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$. The upper limits derived from these samples are consistent with previous detections. We note that both CC and NCC subsamples contain fewer number of source counts compared to all of the {\it XMM-Newton} samples studied in Bu14a so the sensitivity of the presented {\it Suzaku} analysis is weaker. We also note that due to smaller FOV and lower effective area of the {\it Suzaku} XIS detectors compared to the {\it XMM-Newton} EPIC detectors, this analysis might be less sensitive to a weak signal from dark matter decay. The value of this analysis is in that it is independent and performed with a different instrument.
The upper limits provided by this work (full sample; $\sin^{2}(2\theta)=6.1\times 10^{-11}$) is in agreement with the detections in the combined M31, Galactic center observations ($\sin^{2}(2\theta)=5-7\times 10^{-11}$; see Boyarsky et al.\ 2015), and results from deep MOS ($\sin^{2}(2\theta)<5.8\times10^{-11}$) and PN ($\sin^{2}(2\theta)=1.8-8\times10^{-11}$) observations of the Draco galaxy \citep{ru15}. However, the line flux in the core of the Perseus cluster is in tension with the presented stacked {\it Suzaku} and {\it XMM-Newton} clusters and other detections \citep[Bu14a, ][]{franse16}. Studying the origin of the 3.5 keV line with CCD resolution observations of galaxy clusters and other astronomical objects appears to have reached its limit; the problem requires higher-resolution spectroscopy such as that expected from {\it Hitomi} (Astro-H).
\section{Acknowledgements}
Authors thank Keith Arnaud for providing help with response remapping and the anonymous referee for useful comments on the draft. Support for this work was provided by NASA through contract NNX14AF78G, NNX13AE77G, and NNX15AC76G. E. Miller, and M. Bautz acknowledge support from NASA grants NNX13AE77G and NNX15AC76G. A. Foster acknowledges NASA grant NNX15AE16G. Support for SWR was provided by the Chandra X-ray Center through NASA contract NAS8-03060 and the Smithsonian Institution.
|
\section{Introduction}
Although the fact that the properties of certain finite groups and the structure of
certain finite geometries/point-line incidence structures are tied very closely to each other has been known in the mathematics community for a relatively long time, it was only some ten years ago when this fact was also recognized by physicists. There exists, in
particular, a large family of groups relevant for quantum information theory where (non)commutativity of two
distinct elements can be expressed in the language of finite symplectic polar spaces and/or finite projective ring
lines. More recently, this link has also been employed to get deeper insights into the so-called black-hole-qubit
correspondence --- a still puzzling relation between the entropy of certain stringy black holes and the
entanglement properties of some small-level quantum systems. A concept that played a particular, yet rather implicit, role in the
latter context turned out to be that of the {\it Veldkamp space} of a point-line incidence structure \cite{buec}.
The relevance of the concept of Veldkamp space for (quantum) physics was first recognized in the context of the geometry of the generalized two-qubit Pauli group \cite{twoq}. It was demonstrated in detail that the corresponding Veldkamp space features three distinct
types of points, each having a distinguished physical meaning, namely: a maximum set of pairwise
non-commuting group elements, a set of six elements commuting with the given one, and a set of nine
elements forming the so-called Mermin-Peres `magic' square. An intriguing novelty, stemming from the structure of Veldkamp
lines, was the recognition of (uni- and tri-centric) triads and specific pentads of elements in addition to
the above-mentioned `classical' subsets. Based on these findings, Vrana and L\'evay \cite{vrle} were able to ascertain the structure of the Veldkamp space of the $N$-qubit Pauli group for an arbitrary $N$,
singling out appropriate point-line incidence structures within the associated symplectic polar spaces of rank $N$
and order two.
Quantum contextuality is another important aspect of quantum information theory where the notion of Veldkamp
space entered the game in an essential way. Employing the structure of the split Cayley hexagon of order two,
the smallest non-trivial generalized hexagon and a distinguished subgeometry of the symplectic polar space
$W(5,2)$ of the three-qubit Pauli group, two of the authors and their colleagues \cite{sppl} got an intriguing finite-geometric
insight into the nature of a couple of `magic' three-qubit configurations proposed by Waegell and Aravind \cite{waar}, as either of the two was found to be uniquely extendible into a
geometric hyperplane (i.\,e., a Veldkamp point) of the hexagon, this being of a very special type. Moreover, an automorphism of order
seven of the hexagon gave birth, for either of the two, to six more replicas, each having the same “magical”
nature as the parent one. As one of the most symmetric three-qubit `magic configurations is the so-called
Mermin pentagram, these observations prompted Planat and two of the authors \cite{psh} to have a closer look at automorphisms of the split Cayley hexagon of order two and find out that $W(5,2)$ contains
altogether 12\,096 copies of such a pentagram, this number being -- surprisingly -- equal to the order of the
automorphism group of the hexagon. In addition, the authors succeeded in singling out those types of points of
the Veldkamp space of the hexagon that contain pentagrams and observed that the number of Veldkamp points
of a given type times the number of pentagrams the particular Veldkamp point contains is almost always a
multiple of 12\,096.
In light of the above-given observations, it is not surprising that the split Cayley hexagon and its Veldkamp space also
occur in the context of the already mentioned black-hole-qubit correspondence. In particular, the
$PSL_2(7)$ subgroup of the automorphism group of the hexagon and its associated Coxeter subgeometry were
found to be intricately related to the $E_7$-symmetric black-hole entropy formula in string theory, given a prominent
role played by Veldkamp points that answer to Klein quadrics in the ambient projective space PG$(5,2)$
\cite{lsv}. On the other hand, the $E_6$-symmetric entropy formula
describing black holes and black strings in five dimensions is underlaid by the geometry of generalized quadrangle GQ$(2,4)$ and its Veldkamp space \cite{lsvp}; here, the two
pronounced truncations of the entropy formula with 15 and 11 charges correspond exactly to two distinct types of
Veldkamp points of GQ$(2,4)$ \cite{sglpv}.
Apart from these interesting physical applications, the notion of Veldkamp space
has also been successfully used in a couple of purely mathematical contexts. On the one hand \cite{shhpp}, it helped us to ascertain finer traits of the nested structure of Segre varieties that are $N$-fold direct product of projective lines of size three, $S_{(N)} \equiv$ PG$(1,2) \times$ PG$(1,2) \times \cdots \times$ PG$(1,2)$, for the cases $2 \leq N \leq 4$. In particular, given the fact that $S_{(N)} =$ PG$(1,2) \times S_{(N-1)}$, a powerful diagrammatical recipe was found that shows how to fully recover the properties of Veldkamp points (i.\,e. geometric hyperplanes) of $S_{(N)}$ once we know the types (and cardinalities thereof) of Veldkamp lines of $S_{(N-1)}$ \cite{grsa}. On the other hand
\cite{sahopr}, it led to a better understanding of an intriguing finite-geometrical underpinning of the multiplication tables of real Cayley-Dickson algebras $A_N$, for $3 \leq N \leq 6$, that admits generalization to any higher-dimensional $A_N$. The multiplication properties of imaginary units of the algebra $A_N$ are encoded in the structure of the projective space PG$(N-1,2)$ that is endowed with a refined structure stemming from particular properties of triples of imaginary units forming its lines.
The concept of Veldkamp space was here invoked to account for this refinement, with the relevant point-line incidence structure being a binomial $\left({N+1 \choose 2}_{N-1}, {N+1 \choose 3}_{3}\right)$-configuration, or, equivalently, a combinatorial Grassmannian of type $G_2(N+1)$.
The present paper offers another interesting set of examples illustrating the usefulness of the notion of Veldkamp space in a broader context.
Namely, we shall start with a sequence of extended Dynkin diagrams of type $\widetilde{D}_n$, $4 \leq n \leq 8$, then consider each diagram as a point-line incidence structure, next look at this structure through projective subspaces of its Veldkamp space in order, after appropriate labeling of the vertices of the diagrams by elements of two- (or three-)qubit Pauli groups, to recapture the well-known geometrical representations of these groups.
\section{Basic Concepts and Notation}
In this section we shall give a brief summary of basic concepts, symbols and notation employed in the sequel.
We start with a {\it point-line incidence structure} $\mathcal{C} = (\mathcal{P},\mathcal{L},I)$ where $\mathcal{P}$ and $\mathcal{L}$ are, respectively, sets of points and lines and where incidence $I \subseteq \mathcal{P} \times \mathcal{L}$ is a binary relation indicating which point-line pairs are incident (see, e.\,g., \cite{shult}). The dual of a point-line incidence structure is the structure with points
and lines exchanged, and with the reversed incidence relation. In what follows we shall encounter only specific point-line incidence structures where every line has just two points and any two distinct points are joined by at most one line.
The {\it order} of a point of $\mathcal{C}$ is the number of lines passing through it.
A {\it geometric hyperplane} of $\mathcal{C} = (\mathcal{P},\mathcal{L},I)$ is a proper subset of $\mathcal{P}$ such that a line from $\mathcal{C}$ either lies fully in the subset, or shares with it only one point.
If $\mathcal{C}$ possesses geometric hyperplanes, then one can define the {\it Veldkamp space} of $\mathcal{C}$ as follows \cite{buec}: (i) a point of the Veldkamp space (also called a Veldkamp point of $\mathcal{C}$) is a geometric hyperplane $H$ of $\mathcal{C}$
and (ii) a line of the Veldkamp space (also called a Veldkamp line of $\mathcal{C}$) is the collection $H'H''$ of all geometric hyperplanes $H$ of $\mathcal{C}$ such that $H' \cap H'' = H' \cap H = H'' \cap H$ or $H = H', H''$, where $H'$ and $H''$ are distinct geometric hyperplanes.
As Veldkamp lines of a $\mathcal{C}$ with all lines of size two are found to be of different cardinalities, we shall focus only on those subgeometries
of the corresponding Veldkamp space whose lines are all of size {\it three}, being of the form $\{H', H'', \overline{H' \Delta H''}\}$; here, the symbol $\Delta$ stands for the symmetric difference of the two geometric hyperplanes and an overbar denotes the complement of the object indicated.
Further, let $V(d+1,q)$, $d \geq 1$, denote a rank-$(d+1)$ vector space over the Galois field GF$(q)$, $q$ being a power of a prime. Associated with this vector space is a $d$-dimensional {\it projective space} over GF$(q)$, PG$(d,q)$, whose points, lines, planes,$\ldots$, hyperplanes are rank-one, rank-two, rank-three,$\ldots$, rank-$d$ subspaces of $V(d+1,q)$; for $q=2$, this projective space features
$2^{d+1} - 1$ points and $(2^{d+1} - 1)(2^{d} - 1)/3$ lines (see, e.\,g., \cite{hita}).
Given a PG$(2N-1,q)$ that is endowed with a non-degenerate symplectic form, the {\it symplectic polar space} $W(2N-1,q)$ in PG$(2N-1,q)$ is the space of all totally isotropic subspaces with respect to the non-degenerate symplectic form \cite{cam}, with its maximal totally isotropic subspaces, also
called {\it generators}, having dimension $N - 1$. For $q=2$ this
polar space contains $|$PG$(2N-1, 2)| = 2^{2N} - 1 = 4^{N} - 1$
points and $(2+1)(2^2+1)\cdots(2^N+1)$ generators.
Next, we need to mention generalized (complex) $N$-qubit Pauli groups (see, e.\,g., \cite{nc}), ${\cal P}_N$, generated by $N$-fold tensor products of the matrices
\begin{eqnarray*}
I = \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right),~
X = \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
0 & 1 \\
1 & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right),~
Y = \left(
\begin{array}{cr}
0 & -i \\
i & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right)
~{\rm and}~
Z = \left(
\begin{array}{cr}
1 & 0 \\
0 & -1 \\
\end{array}
\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Explicitly,
\begin{equation*}
{\cal P}_N = \{ i^{\alpha} A_1 \otimes A_2 \otimes\cdots\otimes A_N:~ A_k \in \{I, X, Y, Z \},~ k = 1, 2,\cdots,N,~\alpha \in \{0,1,2,3\} \}.
\end{equation*}
Here, we are only interested in their factor versions $\overline{{\cal P}}_N \equiv {\cal P}_N/{\cal Z}({\cal P}_N)$, where ${\cal Z}({\cal P}_N) = \{\pm I_{(1)} \otimes I_{(2)} \otimes \cdots \otimes I_{(N)}, \pm i I_{(1)} \otimes I_{(2)} \otimes \cdots \otimes I_{(N)}\}$. For a particular value of $N$, the $4^N - 1$ elements of $\overline{{\cal P}}_N \backslash \{I_{(1)} \otimes I_{(2)} \otimes \cdots \otimes I_{(N)}\}$ can bijectively be identified with the same number of points of
$W(2N-1, 2)$ in such a way that two commuting elements of the group will lie on the same totally isotropic line and a maximum set of mutually commuting elements corresponds to a generator of this symplectic space (see, e.\,g., \cite{sp}--\cite{th}).
Finally, we give a brief description of {\it Dynkin diagrams} (see, e.\,g., \cite{hump}). These were introduced in the theory of Lie groups/algebras to describe particular sets of elements in lattices possessing integer quadratic forms -- so-called root systems. A Dynkin diagram is a graphical representation of the matrix of inner products of these roots. Given a root systems and its basis $S$, the vertices/nodes of its Dynkin diagram are the roots of $S$ and two nodes are not connected if the corresponding roots are orthogonal. If two nodes are not orthogonal, they are connected by one, two or three edges according as the angle between the corresponding roots is $2 \pi/3$, $3 \pi/4$ or $5 \pi/6$, respectively. In addition, a Dynkin diagram also encodes the lengths of roots. That is done
by marking the edge connecting two vertices whose corresponding roots are of different
length with an arrow pointing to the shorter root. Given a simple Lie algebra with its highest root $\gamma$, an extended root system is obtained by adding $-\gamma$ to the set of simple roots, which leads to the notion the {\it extended} Dynkin diagram of the algebra in question. In what follows, we will not use much of the properties of Dynkin diagrams as we will only be dealing with a particularly simple type of extended Dynkin diagrams, namely $\widetilde{D}_n$ ($4 \leq n$), depicted in Figure \ref{extDn}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.5truecm]{extDn.eps}
\caption{An illustration of the extended Dynkin diagram of type $\widetilde{D}_n$, $4 \leq n$, with its vertices labeled by integers from 0 to $n$.}
\label{extDn}
\end{figure}
\section{Veldkamp Spaces of $\widetilde{D}_n$ and Two-Qubit Pauli Group}
$\widetilde{D}_n$, like any other graph, can be viewed/interpreted as a particular point-line incidence structure,
$\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_n)$, whose points and lines are, respectively, vertices and edges of $\widetilde{D}_n$; it thus features $n+1$ points and $n$ lines, where, for $5 \leq n$, four points are of order one, two of order three and the remaining $n-5$ points being of order two. Let us adopt this view and have a detailed look at properties of the Veldkamp space of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_n)$. We shall carry out this task step by step for $4 \leq n \leq 8$ in order to see how naturally the two-qubit (and, at the end, also three-qubit) Pauli group enters the stage.
\subsection{Case $n=4$}
As readily discerned from Figure \ref{extDn} restricted to $n=4$, $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_4)$ consists of five points (0, 1, \dots, 4) and four lines, namely
$\{0,2\}$, $\{1,2\}$, $\{2,3\}$ and $\{2,4\}$, and features altogether 16 different geometric hyperplanes as listed in Table 1 and portrayed in Figure \ref{extD4-fig2}. We see that each hyperplane except for the last one contains point 2; moreover, $H_{15}$ consists solely of this particular point and is thus contained in all preceding 14 hyperplanes. We further note that any other point of
$\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_4)$ is located in eight hyperplanes.
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{center}
\caption{The composition of 16 geometric hyperplanes $H_i$, $1\leq i \leq 16$, of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_4)$. The `+' symbol indicates which point of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_4)$ (i.\,e., which vertex of $\widetilde{D}_4$) lies in a given hyperplane; for example, hyperplane $H_{10}$ consists of points 0, 2 and 4.}
\vspace*{0.4cm}
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{||c|cccccccccccccccc||}
\hline \hline
&$H_1$&$H_2$&$H_3$&$H_4$&$H_5$&$H_6$&$H_7$&$H_8$&$H_9$&$H_{10}$&$H_{11}$&$H_{12}$&$H_{13}$&$H_{14}$&$H_{15}$&$H_{16}$ \\
\hline
~0~ & + & & & & & + & + & + & + & + & + & & & & & + \\
~1~ & & + & & & + & & + & + & & & + & & + & + & & + \\
~2~ & + & + & + & + & + & + & + & + & + & + & + & + & + & + & + & \\
~3~ & & & & + & + & + & + & & + & & & + & + & & & + \\
~4~ & & & + & & + & + & & + & & + & & + & & + & & + \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}%
}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5.5truecm]{extD4-fig2.eps}
\caption{A diagrammatical representation of geometric hyperplanes of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_4)$. Here, and in the sequel, a point of a hyperplane is represented by a filled circle and a line is drawn heavy if both of its points lie in a hyperplane.}
\label{extD4-fig2}
\end{figure}
From Table 1 (or Figure \ref{extD4-fig2}) one infers that the Veldkamp space of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_4)$ is endowed with 35 lines of size three, as given in Table 2. One sees that no such Veldkamp line contains $H_{16}$, the latter being thus regarded as an exceptional Veldkamp point of the geometry. It can readily be verified that the remaining 15 hyperplanes and all 35 Veldkamp lines form the projective space PG$(3,2)$. This is also illustrated in Figure \ref{extD4-fig3ab}, {\it left}, employing, after Polster \cite{pol},
a pictorial representation of PG$(3,2)$ built around the pentagonal model (frequenly called the `doily') of the symplectic polar space $W(3,2)$ whose 15 lines are illustrated by straight-line-segments (10 of them) and/or arcs of circles (5). The remaining 20 lines of PG$(3,2)$ fall into four distinct orbits under the displayed automorphism of order five; from each orbit only one representative line is shown, namely $\{H_1, H_4, H_{14}\}$, $\{H_2, H_3, H_9\}$, $\{H_5, H_8, H_{14}\}$ and $\{H_6, H_7, H_9\}$, since the remaining ones can be readily obtained by rotating the figure through 72 degrees around the center of the pentagon.
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{center}
\caption{The 35 three-point Veldkamp lines of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_4)$. As in Table 1, the `+' symbol indicates which geometric hyperplane of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_4)$ belongs to a given Veldkamp line.}
\vspace*{0.4cm}
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{||c|cccccccccccccccc||}
\hline \hline
&$H_1$&$H_2$&$H_3$&$H_4$&$H_5$&$H_6$&$H_7$&$H_8$&$H_9$&$H_{10}$&$H_{11}$&$H_{12}$&$H_{13}$&$H_{14}$&$H_{15}$&$H_{16}$ \\
\hline
~1~ & + & + & & & & & & & & & & + & & & & \\
~2~ & + & & + & & & & & & & & & & + & & & \\
~3~ & + & & & + & & & & & & & & & & + & & \\
~4~ & + & & & & + & & & & & & & & & & + & \\
~5~ & + & & & & & + & & & & & + & & & & & \\
~6~ & + & & & & & & + & & & + & & & & & & \\
~7~ & + & & & & & & & + & + & & & & & & & \\
~8~ & & + & + & & & & & & + & & & & & & & \\
~9~ & & + & & + & & & & & & + & & & & & & \\
~10~ & & + & & & + & & & & & & + & & & & & \\
~11~ & & + & & & & + & & & & & & & & & + & \\
~12~ & & + & & & & & + & & & & & & & + & & \\
~13~ & & + & & & & & & + & & & & & + & & & \\
~14~ & & & + & + & & & & & & & + & & & & & \\
~15~ & & & + & & + & & & & & + & & & & & & \\
~16~ & & & + & & & + & & & & & & & & + & & \\
~17~ & & & + & & & & + & & & & & & & & + & \\
~18~ & & & + & & & & & + & & & & + & & & & \\
~19~ & & & & + & + & & & & + & & & & & & & \\
~20~ & & & & + & & + & & & & & & & + & & & \\
~21~ & & & & + & & & + & & & & & + & & & & \\
~22~ & & & & + & & & & + & & & & & & & + & \\
~23~ & & & & & + & + & & & & & & + & & & & \\
~24~ & & & & & + & & + & & & & & & + & & & \\
~25~ & & & & & + & & & + & & & & & & + & & \\
~26~ & & & & & & + & + & & + & & & & & & & \\
~27~ & & & & & & + & & + & & + & & & & & & \\
~28~ & & & & & & & + & + & & & + & & & & & \\
~29~ & & & & & & & & & + & + & + & & & & & \\
~30~ & & & & & & & & & + & & & + & + & & & \\
~31~ & & & & & & & & & + & & & & & + & + & \\
~32~ & & & & & & & & & & + & & + & & + & & \\
~33~ & & & & & & & & & & + & & & + & & + & \\
~34~ & & & & & & & & & & & + & + & & & + & \\
~35~ & & & & & & & & & & & + & & + & + & & \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}%
}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[pth!]
\begin{center}
\caption{The 15 hyperplanes of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_4)$ are in a one-to-one correspondence with the 15 elements of $\overline{{\cal P}}_2$; note that the `exceptional' hyperplane $H_{16}$ corresponds to the same group element as $H_{15}$, because the two hyperlanes are complementary.}
\vspace*{0.4cm}
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{||c|ccccccccccccccc|c||}
\hline \hline
$\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_4)$
&$H_1$&$H_2$&$H_3$&$H_4$&$H_5$&$H_6$&$H_7$&$H_8$&$H_9$&$H_{10}$&$H_{11}$&$H_{12}$&$H_{13}$&$H_{14}$&$H_{15}$&$H_{16}$ \\
\hline
$\overline{{\cal P}}_2$
& $ZY$&$YZ$ &$YX$ &$XY$ &$XI$ &$IX$ &$IZ$ &$ZI$ &$IY$ &$ZX$ &$ZZ$ &$XX$ &$XZ$ &$YI$ &$YY$ &$YY$ \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}%
}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[pth!]
\centering
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=5.5truecm]{extD4-fig3a.eps}\hspace*{0.5cm}\includegraphics[width=5.5truecm]{extD4-fig3b.eps}}
\caption{A diagrammatical illustration of the fact that the point-line incidence structure encoded in Table 2 is isomorphic
to PG$(3,2)$ (left) and labeling the points of this space by the elements of the two-qubit Pauli group (right).}
\label{extD4-fig3ab}
\end{figure}
Let us now return back to our $\widetilde{D}_4$ and label its five vertices by five distinct elements of the two-qubit Pauli group,
$\overline{{\cal P}}_2$. One can take any five elements requiring only that their product equals $II$; this constraint is necessary to ensure that the induced labeling of the points the associated Veldkamp space has the property that the product of any three collinear elements is also equal to $II$. Given the symmetry of $\widetilde{D}_4$, one of the most natural choices is
($A \otimes B$ is shorthanded to $AB$ in the sequel)
$$0 \rightarrow XI,~ 1 \rightarrow IX,~ 2 \rightarrow YY,~ 3 \rightarrow ZI,~ 4 \rightarrow IZ. $$
Assume further that each hyperplane acquires the label that is the product of the group elements attached to the points it consists of; thus, for example, $H_1$, comprising points 0 and 2, will bear the label $(XI).(YY) = ZY$. Hence, we arrive at a {\it one-to-one} correspondence between the 15 Veldkamp points of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_4)$ and the 15 elements of $\overline{{\cal P}}_2$ as shown in Table 3. Even more interestingly, employing Table 2 one can check that not only is the product of three elements on each Veldkamp line equal to the identity element of the group, but -- as handy rendered by Figure \ref{extD4-fig3ab}, {\it right} -- the three elements that lie on a line of the selected copy\footnote{There are altogether 28 distinct copies of $W(3,2)$ contained in PG$(3,2)$.} of $W(3,2)$ our PG$(3,2)$ was built around pairwise commute.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12.0truecm]{extD5-fig2}
\caption{Geometric hyperplanes of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_5)$. }
\label{extD5-fig2}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{center}
\caption{A `double-six' of Veldkamp lines generated by hyperplanes of the first family.}
\vspace*{0.4cm}
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{||c|cccc|cccc|cccccc||}
\hline \hline
&$H_1$&$H_2$&$H_3$&$H_4$&$H_5$&$H_6$&$H_7$&$H_8$&$H_{13}$&$H_{14}$&$H_{15}$&$H_{16}$&$H_{20}$&$H_{21}$ \\
\hline
~1~ & + & + & & & & & & & & + & & & & \\
~2~ & + & & + & & & & & & & & & + & & \\
~3~ & + & & & + & & & & & & & & & + & \\
~4~ & & + & + & & & & & & & & & & + & \\
~5~ & & + & & + & & & & & & & & + & & \\
~6~ & & & + & + & & & & & & + & & & & \\
\hline
~7~ & & & & & + & + & & & + & & & & & \\
~8~ & & & & & + & & + & & & & + & & & \\
~9~ & & & & & + & & & + & & & & & & + \\
~10~ & & & & & & + & + & & & & & & & + \\
~11~ & & & & & & + & & + & & & + & & & \\
~12~ & & & & & & & + & + & + & & & & & \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}%
}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Case $n=5$}
$\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_5)$ contains six points (0, 1, \dots, 5) and five lines ($\{0,2\}$, $\{1,2\}$, $\{2,3\}$,
$\{3,4\}$, and $\{3,5\}$). Its 23 geometric hyperplanes, shown in Figure \ref{extD5-fig2}, can be split into two disjoint families, namely $\{H_1, H_2, \dots, H_8\}$ and $\{H_9, H_{10}, \dots, H_{23}\}$ according as they do not or do contain the line $\{2,3\}$, respectively. The former family can further be divided into two subfamilies, $\{H_1, H_2, H_3, H_4\}$ and $\{H_5, H_6, H_7, H_8\}$, depending on whether a hyperplane misses, respectively, point 2 or point 3.
These splittings have a deep geometrical meaning once we see all 47 three-point Veldkamp lines $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_5)$ is found to possess. Twelve of them are generated by hyperplanes of the first family and they are given in Table 4; the remaining 35 are defined by hyperplanes of the second family and their properties are summarized in Table 5.
As it is obvious from Table 4, the four hyperplanes of either subfamily define PG$(2,2)$, the Fano plane, with one line omitted; the latter being line $\{H_{14}, H_{16}, H_{20}\}$ for the first and $\{H_{13}, H_{15}, H_{21}\}$ for the second subfamily. Comparing Table 4 with Figure \ref{extD5-fig2} we see that the Veldkamp points of the first/second Fano plane are those seven hyperplanes that contain
$H_1$/$H_5$, and the two `missing' lines consist of those three hyperplanes that contain $H_{20}$/$H_{21}$. The 15 Veldkamp points (that are all geometric hyperplanes incorporating $H_{17}$, see Figure \ref{extD5-fig2}) and 35 Veldkamp lines of Table 5 define a projective space isomorphic to PG$(3,2)$; this space also contains two `missing' lines (marked in italics) of the above-described Fano planes. Summing up, the subgeometry of the Veldkamp space of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_5)$ with lines of size three comprises the projective space PG$(3,2)$ and a couple of disjoint Fano planes, each sharing a line with this PG$(3,2)$ -- as depicted in Figure \ref{extD5-fig4}. (It is also worth adding that in this case we have no exceptional Veldkamp point(s) since there is no geometric hyperplane lacking line
$\{2,3\}$.)
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{center}
\caption{The 35 Veldkamp lines generated by 15 hyperplanes of the second family.}
\vspace*{0.4cm}
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{||c|ccccccccccccccc||}
\hline \hline
&$H_9$&$H_{10}$&$H_{11}$&$H_{12}$&$H_{13}$&$H_{14}$&$H_{15}$&$H_{16}$&$H_{17}$&$H_{18}$&$H_{19}$&$H_{20}$&$H_{21}$&$H_{22}$&$H_{23}$ \\
\hline
~13~ & + & + & & & & & & & & & + & & & & \\
~14~ & + & & + & & & & & & & & & & + & & \\
~15~ & + & & & + & & & & & & & & & & & + \\
~16~ & + & & & & + & & & & + & & & & & & \\
~17~ & + & & & & & + & & & & + & & & & & \\
~18~ & + & & & & & & + & & & & & + & & & \\
~19~ & + & & & & & & & + & & & & & & + & \\
~20~ & & + & + & & & & & & & & & & & + & \\
~21~ & & + & & + & & & & & & & & + & & & \\
~22~ & & + & & & + & & & & & + & & & & & \\
~23~ & & + & & & & + & & & + & & & & & & \\
~24~ & & + & & & & & + & & & & & & & & + \\
~25~ & & + & & & & & & + & & & & & + & & \\
~26~ & & & + & + & & & & & & + & & & & & \\
~27~ & & & + & & + & & & & & & & + & & & \\
~28~ & & & + & & & + & & & & & & & & & + \\
~29~ & & & + & & & & + & & + & & & & & & \\
~30~ & & & + & & & & & + & & & + & & & & \\
~31~ & & & & + & + & & & & & & & & & + & \\
~32~ & & & & + & & + & & & & & & & + & & \\
~33~ & & & & + & & & + & & & & + & & & & \\
~34~ & & & & + & & & & + & + & & & & & & \\
~35~ & & & & & + & + & & & & & + & & & & \\
~{\it 36}~ & & & & & + & & + & & & & & & + & & \\
~37~ & & & & & + & & & + & & & & & & & + \\
~38~ & & & & & & + & + & & & & & & & + & \\
~{\it 39}~ & & & & & & + & & + & & & & + & & & \\
~40~ & & & & & & & + & + & & + & & & & & \\
~41~ & & & & & & & & & + & + & + & & & & \\
~42~ & & & & & & & & & + & & & + & + & & \\
~43~ & & & & & & & & & + & & & & & + & +\\
~44~ & & & & & & & & & & + & & + & & + & \\
~45~ & & & & & & & & & & + & & & + & & +\\
~46~ & & & & & & & & & & & + & + & & & + \\
~47~ & & & & & & & & & & & + & & + & + & \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}%
}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{center}
\caption{Labeling the Veldkamp points of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_5)$ by the elements of the two-qubit Pauli group.}
\vspace*{0.4cm}
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{||l|ccccccccccccccc||}
\hline \hline
$\overline{{\cal P}}_2$
& $XY$& $YX$ & $ZY$ & $YZ$ & $ZI$ & $IZ$ & $XI$ & $IX$ & $YY$ & $XX$ & $ZZ$ &$IY$ & $YI$ & $XZ$ & $ZX$ \\
\hline
PG$(3,2)$&$H_9$&$H_{10}$&$H_{11}$&$H_{12}$&$H_{13}$&$H_{14}$&$H_{15}$&$H_{16}$&$H_{17}$&$H_{18}$&$H_{19}$&$H_{20}$&$H_{21}$&$H_{22}$&$H_{23}$ \\
\hline
1st Fano & &$H_2$ & &$H_3$ & & & & &$H_1$ & & & &$H_4$ & & \\
2nd Fano &$H_6$& &$H_7$ & & & & & &$H_5$ & & &$H_8$ & & & \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}%
}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Next, pursuing the strategy of the preceding case, one labels six vertices of $\widetilde{D}_5$ by elements of the two-qubit Pauli group as
$$0 \rightarrow ZI,~ 1 \rightarrow XI,~ 2 \rightarrow YI,~ 3 \rightarrow IY,~ 4 \rightarrow IZ,~ 5 \rightarrow IX, $$
and, making use of Figure \ref{extD5-fig2}, gets a bijection between the elements of the group and the points of the PG$(3,2)$ in the form shown in Table 6; this table also shows which elements of the two-qubit Pauli group are ascribed to the remaining eight points of the two Fano planes. Figure \ref{extD5-fig4b} renders a pictorial representation of the information gathered in Table 6.
The bijection is of similar nature as the one of the $n=4$ case: that is, a line of the PG$(3,2)$ entails three group elements whose product is $II$, and a line of the distinguished copy of $W(3,2)$ gathers a triple of mutually commuting elements.
Yet, it also features an interesting novelty due to the fact that our PG$(3,2)$ has two distinguished lines that it shares with the two Fano planes. If we forget about the six group elements located on these two lines (highlighted by light shading in Figure \ref{extD5-fig4b}) we shall find that the remaining nine elements form within the $W(3,2)$ nothing but a $3 \times 3$ grid (or, what amounts to the same, a copy of the generalized quadrangle GQ$(2,1)$). Physical importance of this observation lies with the fact \cite{ps} that any such grid with the labeling inherited from that of its parent $W(3,2)$ represents the so-called Mermin-Peres magic square -- one of the simplest proofs of the (Bell-)Kochen-Specker theorem first proposed by Mermin \cite{mer} and Peres \cite{per}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10.0truecm]{extD5-fig4.eps}
\caption{A diagrammatic illustration of all projective subgeometries of the Veldkamp space of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_5)$. The central inset depicts those geometric hyperplanes each of which fully encodes all Veldkamp points of a particular subgeometry, namely of the PG$(3,2)$ ($H_{17}$, top), the two Fano planes ($H_1$ and $H_5$, middle) as well as of the two shared lines ($H_{20}$ and $H_{21}$, bottom).}
\label{extD5-fig4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[pth!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10.0truecm]{extD5-fig4b.eps}
\caption{A general view of the projective subgeometries of the Veldkamp space of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_5)$ in terms of the elements of the two-qubit Pauli group.}
\label{extD5-fig4b}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[pth!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12.0truecm]{extD6-fig2.eps}
\caption{Geometric hyperplanes of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_6)$; an ellipse marks the (single) exceptional hyperplane.}
\label{extD6-fig2}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Case $n=6$}
$\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_6)$, comprising seven points ($0, 1, \dots, 6$) and six lines ($\{0,2\}$, $\{1,2\}$, $\{2,3\}$,
$\{3,4\}$, $\{4,5\}$, and $\{4,6\}$), is found to possess 40 geometric hyperplanes -- all depicted in Figure \ref{extD6-fig2} -- and as many as 168 Veldkamp lines of size three. We shall not give an explicit list of the latter here, since Figure \ref{extD6-fig2} contains all the information we need to find all projective subgeometries of the corresponding Veldkamp space. A detailed inspection of this figure leads to the following observations. The smallest hyperplane, $H_{39}$, is contained in other 30 hyperplanes, which together yield 155 three-point Veldkamp lines and form the projective space isomorphic to PG$(4,2)$ (see Sect. 2); this projective space also contains a distinguished copy of PG$(3,2)$ that is defined by $H_{38}$ and the other 14 hyperplanes containing it. Then we have a pair of complementary Fano planes, one defined by seven hyperplanes containing $H_{17}$, the other by seven hyperplanes comprising $H_{21}$. Either of the two Fano planes shares a line with the distinguished copy of PG$(3,2)$ (and, hence, also with the parent PG$(4,2)$); it is the line defined by three hyperplanes containing $H_{36}$ in the former and $H_{31}$ in the latter case. This already accounts for $155 + (2 \times 6) = 167$ Veldkamp lines. The remaining Veldkamp line is $\{H_{20},H_{24},H_{37}\}$, the joint of the two Fano planes, which is the {\it only} size-three Veldkamp line passing through the exceptional Veldkamp point $H_{37}$. This hierarchy of projective spaces living within our Veldkamp space can be expressed in a succinct form as displayed in Figure \ref{extD6-fig3}, with its `simpler' parts being shown in full in Figure \ref{extD6-fig4}, {\it left}, and Figure \ref{extD6-fig5}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5.0truecm]{extD6-fig3.eps}
\caption{A symbolic structure of the Veldkamp space of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_6)$. Each projective space (starting with the
PG$(4,2)$ at the top and ending with the `exceptional' PG$(1,2)$ at the bottom) is represented by a single hyperplane, viz. the one that fully determines the remaining hyperplanes defining the space in question. Marked by ellipses are those spaces that are not properly contained in any other space.}
\label{extD6-fig3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[pth!]
\centering
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=6.0truecm]{extD6-fig4.eps}\hspace*{0.5cm}\includegraphics[width=6.0truecm]{extD6-fig4bc.eps}}
\caption{{\it Left:} The structure of the distinguished PG$(3,2)$; the two lines shown in bold are those shared with the two Fano planes, one in each. {\it Right:} The two different two-qubit labelings of the vertices of $\widetilde{D}_6$ lead to the identical labelings of the points of this space. As the labeling is the same as that of the $n=5$ case (see Figure \ref{extD5-fig4b}), removal of the highlighted elements leads to the same Mermin-Peres magic square as in the preceding case.}
\label{extD6-fig4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[pth!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12.0truecm]{extD6-fig5.eps}
\caption{The two Fano planes and the exceptional Veldkamp line interconnecting them. The lines that also belong to the distinguished PG$(3,2)$ are drawn in boldface. (As in Figure \ref{extD5-fig4}, the inset shows the representative hyperplanes for these projective geometries). }
\label{extD6-fig5}
\end{figure}
An interesting thing here happens when it comes to the relation with the two-qubit Pauli group, as we have now at our disposal two natural labelings of the vertices of $\widetilde{D}_6$, both featuring, unlike the previous two cases, also the identity element;
in particular,
$$0 \rightarrow ZI,~ 1 \rightarrow XI,~ 2 \rightarrow YI,~ 3 \rightarrow II,~ 4 \rightarrow IY,~ 5 \rightarrow IZ,~ 6 \rightarrow IX, $$
and
$$0 \rightarrow ZI,~ 1 \rightarrow XI,~ 2 \rightarrow II,~ 3 \rightarrow YY,~ 4 \rightarrow II,~ 5 \rightarrow IZ,~ 6 \rightarrow IX. $$
Although these two labelings give one and the same labeling of the points of the distinguished PG$(3,2)$, that portrayed in Figure \ref{extD6-fig4}, {\it right}, there is a substantial difference between them when the two interconnected Fano planes are concerned, as readily discerned from Figure \ref{extD6-fig5bc}; this difference is most pronounced for the exceptional Veldkamp line, as in the second case its three points acquire the same label, this being the identity element at that.
\begin{figure}[pth!]
\centering
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=5.0truecm]{extD6-fig5b.eps}\hspace*{.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=5.0truecm]{extD6-fig5c.eps}}
\caption{The pair of interconnected Fano planes in light of the two distinct two-qubit labelings. }
\label{extD6-fig5bc}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[pth!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8.0truecm]{extD7-fig2.eps}
\caption{Stratification of the Veldkamp space of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_7)$ in terms of projective spaces it contains.}
\label{extD7-fig2}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Case $n=7$}
Our description of this case will be rather brief, as there are no conceptual novelties when compared with the cases we have already addressed.
Eight points ($0, 1, \dots, 7$) and seven lines ($\{0,2\}$, $\{1,2\}$, $\{2,3\}$, $\{3,4\}$, $\{4,5\}$, $\{5,6\}$ and $\{5,7\}$) of
$\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_7)$ are found to accommodate 64 geometric hyperplanes and 332 Veldkamp lines of size three, whose hierarchical projective structure is shown in Figure \ref{extD7-fig2}.
As in the preceding subsection (see Figure \ref{extD6-fig3}) each hyperplane of Figure \ref{extD7-fig2} represents a PG$(d,2)$ whose dimension $d$ is one less than is the number of points that are not contained in the hyperplane (i.e., the number of empty circles).
Thus, from the 1st row of the figure one reads off that maximum projective (sub)spaces of the Veldkamp space of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_6)$ are two PG$(4,2)$s, referred simply as the left PG$(4,2)$ and the right PG$(4,2)$, which intersect in the distinguished PG$(3,2)$ (the 2nd row, the middle hyperplane). There are other two PG(3,2)s (let us also call them left and right) present here (the 2nd row, left and right hyperplanes). They are disjoint, but either of them shares a Fano plane with its PG(4,2) counterpart (namely the Fano plane represented by the respective hyperplane shown in the 3rd row), and a line with the distinguished PG$(3,2)$ (the lines represented by the respective hyperplane shown in the 4th row). Finally, there is an `exceptional' projective line that is, similarly to the $n=6$ case, the only Veldkamp line passing through the sole exceptional hyperplane (shown at the bottom of the figure). The analogy with the previous case is even deeper, since this exceptional Veldkamp line also joins the left PG$(3,2)$ with the right one -- as shown in Figure \ref{extD7-fig7} (compare with Figure \ref{extD6-fig5}). To decipher the content of the last figure, one has to say a few words on how the numbering of hyperplanes was done.
A hyperplane with a smaller number of points precedes a hyperplane with a larger number of points. If two hyperplanes have the same number of points, first goes that which contains a point labeled by the smallest integer. If also this point is the same in both hyperplanes, then first goes that featuring a point labeled by the second smallest integer, and so on. Here are shown a few hyperplanes\footnote{Note that, unlike the previous cases, our numbering starts here with `0'.}
$$H_0 = \{2,3,5\},$$
$$H_1 = \{2,4,5\},$$
$$H_2 = \{0,1,3,5\},$$
$$H_3 = \{0,2,3,5\},$$
$$H_4 = \{0,2,4,5\},$$
$$\vdots~~\vdots~~\vdots$$
$$H_{43} = \{0,1,3,4,6,7\},$$
$$\vdots~~\vdots~~\vdots$$
$$H_{62} = \{0,2,3,4,5,6,7\},$$
$$H_{63} = \{1,2,3,4,5,6,7\}.$$
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12.0truecm]{extD7-fig7.eps}
\caption{The left and right PG$(3,2)$s connected by the exceptional Veldkamp line. The seven points in either of these spaces that are numbered in boldface represent the Fano plane lying also in the corresponding PG$(4,2)$; the line of this Fano plane that also belongs to the distinguished PG(3,2) is drawn thick. (As before, the inset depicts the representative hyperplane for each of the projective spaces mentioned.)}
\label{extD7-fig7}
\end{figure}
Regarding a relation with the two-qubit Pauli group, we again see close parallels with the $n=6$ case. For not only do we have again two natural labellings of the vertices of $\widetilde{D}_7$,
$$0 \rightarrow ZI,~ 1 \rightarrow XI,~ 2 \rightarrow YI,~ 3 \rightarrow II,~ 4 \rightarrow II,~ 5 \rightarrow IY,~ 6 \rightarrow IZ,
~7 \rightarrow IX, $$
and
$$0 \rightarrow ZI,~ 1 \rightarrow XI,~ 2 \rightarrow II,~ 3 \rightarrow YI,~ 4 \rightarrow IY,~ 5 \rightarrow II,~ 6 \rightarrow IZ,
~7 \rightarrow IX, $$
but these also give identical labellings of the distinguished PG$(3,2)$, furnishing the same prominent copy of the Mermin-Peres magic square; in addition, as illustrated in Figure \ref{extD7-fig7bc}, the two labelings of the exceptional Veldkamp line are the same as those of its $n=6$ counterpart.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=6.5truecm]{extD7-fig7c.eps}\hspace*{0.5cm}\includegraphics[width=6.5truecm]{extD7-fig7b.eps}}
\caption{The interconnected left and right PG$(3,2)$s in terms of the two two-qubit labelings.}
\label{extD7-fig7bc}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Case $n=8$}
This is the last case to be dealt with in some detail. Using a computer, we have found that the Veldkamp space of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_8)$ has 105 points and 876 size-three lines, exhibiting projective layering as shown in Figure \ref{extD8-fig2}.
From the figure we find out that this Veldkamp space includes one PG$(5,2)$ (1st row) and one PG$(4,2)$ (2nd row), the two having the distinguished PG$(3,2)$ in common (3rd row, middle).
Next, we have here other four PG$(3,2)$s (3rd row, left- and right-hand side), forming two complementary pairs.
As before, there are two special, disjoint lines in the distinguished PG$(3,2)$, which the latter shares with either of PG$(3,2)$s in both complementary pairs. However, the most interesting object for us is here the Fano plane represented by the hyperplane depicted in the middle of the 4th row of Figure \ref{extD8-fig2}. This hyperplane, as well as the one whose only additional point is point 4, are two exceptional hyperplanes. The corresponding Fano plane, together with all the seven hyperplanes\footnote{The numbering of hyperplanes follows here the same scheme/procedure as adopted in the $n=7$ case.} that represent its points, are illustrated
in Figure \ref{extD8-fig5}, {\it left}. Here, the two exceptional hyperplanes are $H_{41}$ and $H_{80}$. They lie on the common Veldkamp line whose third point is $H_{100}$. Disregarding this point and all the three Veldkamp lines passing through it, we are left with a {\it natural} copy of the so-called {\it Pasch} configuration (thick lines) -- the unique point-line incidence geometry of six points and four lines, with two lines through a point and three points on a line \cite{pasch}.
\begin{figure}[pth!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10.0truecm]{extD8-fig2.eps}
\caption{Projective layering of the Veldkamp space of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_8)$.}
\label{extD8-fig2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[pth!]
\centering
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=7.0truecm]{extD8-fig5a.eps} \includegraphics[width=7.0truecm]{extD8-fig5b.eps}}
\caption{The explicit structure of the unique Fano plane whose two points are represented by the two exceptional hyperplanes of $\mathcal{C}(\widetilde{D}_8)$ and the associated three-qubit labelling of its points. The four heavy lines and the six points on them form a Pasch configuration.}
\label{extD8-fig5}
\end{figure}
This case is remarkable in that the most natural labeling of the (nine) vertices of $\widetilde{D}_8$ employs elements of the {\it three}-qubit Pauli group, in particular
$$0 \rightarrow XII,~ 1 \rightarrow ZII,~ 2 \rightarrow YII,~ 3 \rightarrow IXI,~ 4 \rightarrow IYI,~ 5 \rightarrow IZI,~ 6 \rightarrow IIY,~7 \rightarrow IIX,~8 \rightarrow IIZ.$$ It represents no difficulty to verify that this labelling yields a one-to-one correspondence between 63 elements of the three-qubit Pauli group and 63 points of the PG$(5,2)$.
Under this correspondence, our distinguished PG$(3,2)$, whose composition is depicted in
Figure \ref{extD8-fig3bc}, {\it left}, acquires the three-qubit lettering as shown in Figure \ref{extD8-fig3bc}, {\it right}.
One explicitly sees a bijection between 15 points of this PG$(3,2)$ and 15 elements of a two-qubit subgroup of the three-qubit Pauli group, the geometry of the subgroup encoded in the selected copy of $W(3,2)$ and a three-qubit version of the Mermin-Peres magic square.
An intringuing feature is also absence of the Pauli matrices $X$ and $Z$ in the three-qubit labels of the points of the `exceptional' Fano plane, as demonstrated by Figure \ref{extD8-fig5}, {\it right}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=6.0truecm]{extD8-fig3b.eps}\hspace*{0.5cm}\includegraphics[width=6.0truecm]{extD8-fig3c.eps}}
\caption{The hyperplane composition ({\it left}) and its three-qubit counterpart ({\it right}) of the distinguished PG$(3,2)$; points of the two special lines are highlighted in boldface and their corresponding group elements are shaded.}
\label{extD8-fig3bc}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
The aim of the paper was to provide both a finite geometer and a mathematical physicist with new examples of the relevance of the concept of Veldkamp space for their respective fields of research.
In the former case, to show how some well-known diagrams, namely extended Dynkin diagrams $\widetilde{D}_n$ ($4 \leq n$), are through Veldkamp spaces intricately related to interesting hierarchies of binary projective spaces.
In the latter case, to illustrate how the structure of the two-qubit (or three-qubit) Pauli group can naturally be invoked to fill up
such `Veldkamp' relations with interesting physical contents.
There are at least two promising ways for further explorations along the lines outlined in the preceding section. One way is to keep going to higher $n$ and focus, for example, on gradually increasing complexity of the hierarchy of projective spaces generated by exceptional geometric hyperplanes and how this complexity can be expressed in the language of multi-qubit Pauli groups. In this respect the next interesting cases are $n=10$ and $n=11$. In the former case, the `exceptional' PG$(3,2)$ occurs for the first time and it will be interesting to see how this space differs from the always-present distinguished one in terms of three-qubit labeling(s).
In the latter case, the most natural labeling of the vertices of the Dynkin diagram seems to be furnished by elements of the four-qubit Pauli group, whose symplectic polar space $W(7,2)$ features a number of physically relevant finite-geometrical structures (see, e.\,g., \cite{4qov}). The other way is to go back to the already addressed cases and, following the pioneering work of one of the authors \cite{gq42}, look at properties of those parts of Veldkamp spaces that are composed of lines having {\it more} than three points.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work was supported by the Slovak VEGA Grant Agency, Project 2/0003/16, as well as by the French Conseil R\'egional Research Project RECH-MOB15-000007. We are extremely grateful to J\'er\^ome Boulmier and Benoit Courtier for their computer assistance.
\vspace*{-.1cm}
|
\section{Introduction}
What is a market maker? In a nutshell, it is a liquidity provider. However, it is complex to give a precise definition because the exact role of market makers depends on the considered market. Furthermore, the very definition of a market maker has been blurred in recent years, because of the electronification of most markets and because of the emergence of high-frequency trading in many of them.\\
On most order-driven markets, such as many stock markets, there are nowadays several kinds of market makers. First, there are ``official'' market makers (actually, market making companies): these market makers have usually signed an agreement with a given exchange, or with a given company, for maintaining fair and orderly markets. The Designated Market Makers (DMM) on the NYSE, which succeeded the market specialists, are examples of such ``official'' market makers. They often have contractual obligations, such as participating to the opening and closing auctions and/or quoting with a reasonable bid-ask spread -- e.g.~the DMMs must quote at the National Best Bid and Offer (NBBO) a specified percentage of the time. In addition to these ``official'' market makers, other market participants in the stock markets, in particular some high-frequency traders, are often regarded as market makers (Menkveld calls them the new market makers in \cite{menkveld2013high}) because they are almost continuously present on both sides of the limit order books. They are acting as liquidity providers even though they have no obligation to do so: they just try to make money out of their high-frequency market making strategies. The electronification of most order-driven markets makes it possible for trading firms to act as liquidity providers, hence a blurring of the definition of ``market maker''.\\
On quote-driven markets, such as the corporate bond markets, the market makers are the dealers (these markets are often also called ``dealer markets''). These dealers provide liquidity to the other market participants (the ``clients'') by quoting bid and offer prices on a regular basis. However, their exact behavior depends on the considered market. On some markets, dealers' quotes are firm quotes, whereas on other markets the quotes are streamed only for information (and for a specific size/notional) and become binding when dealers answer specific requests.\\
In this paper, we consider that a market maker is somebody (or in fact an algorithm) who proposes prices at which he/she/it stands ready to buy or sell one or several assets. In particular, we do not consider any contractual constraint, and we assume that all quotes are firm quotes (for a given fixed size). The problem we consider is the determination of the optimal quotes a market maker should propose at the bid and the offer to make money while mitigating inventory risk.\\
This problem is a complex one from a quantitative viewpoint with both static and dynamic components. Market makers face indeed a classical static trade-off: high margin and low volume vs. low margin and high volume. A market maker who quotes a large spread (with no skew) trades rarely, but each transaction leads to a large Mark-to-Market (MtM) gain. Conversely, a market maker quoting a narrow spread (with no skew) trades often, but each transaction leads to a small MtM gain. In addition to this static trade-off, market makers face a dynamic problem: they must adapt their quotes dynamically to reduce their exposure to price changes. For instance, a single-asset market maker with a long inventory should price conservatively on the bid side and aggressively on the ask side, because he wants to reduce his probability to buy and increase his probability to sell. Symmetrically, if he has a short inventory, then he should price aggressively on the bid side and conservatively on the ask side.\\
Like in almost all the mathematical literature on market making, we consider the problem of a single market maker in a simplified way: (i) market prices\footnote{The exact nature of these market prices depends on the considered market. In the case of most order-driven markets (such as most stock markets), a market price may be a mid-price. It may also be a price based on the most recent transactions. In the case of the European corporate bond market, the Composite Bloomberg Bond Trader (CBBT) price is a composite price which may be regarded as a proxy for the market price of a bond. In the case of the US corporate bond market, a market price may also be built by using a mix between TRACE data (in spite of the lag) and the CBBT prices. In all cases, the market prices involved in the model should be regarded as reference prices.} are modeled by stochastic processes assumed to be exogenous to the market maker's behavior,\footnote{See \cite{cartea2015algorithmic} and \cite{gueant2013dealing} for models with adverse selection effects.} and (ii) the probability that the market maker buys (respectively sells) a security at the bid (respectively offer) price he quotes depends on the distance between the quoted price and the market price of that security -- this is the classical Avellaneda-Stoikov modeling framework -- see \cite{avellaneda2008high}. In particular, the competition between market makers is not explicitly modeled.\\
Since the publication of the seminal paper ``High-frequency trading in a limit order book'' by Avellaneda and Stoikov (see \cite{avellaneda2008high}), market making has been one of the important research topics in quantitative finance.\footnote{Market making has always been an important topic for economists -- see for instance the model of Grossman and Miller \cite{grossman1988liquidity}. However, the dynamic approaches proposed by mathematicians have shed a new light on market making and make it possible to build algorithms for replacing human market makers. The main (old) economic paper really related to the mathematical literature on market making is the paper \cite{ho1981optimal} by Ho and Stoll published in 1981 -- see also \cite{ho1983dynamics} by the same authors. It is noteworthy that this old paper by Ho and Stoll inspired Avellaneda and Stoikov when they wrote their seminal paper \cite{avellaneda2008high}.} Therefore many models have been proposed to address the problem faced by market makers. Gu\'eant \emph{et al.} considered in \cite{gueant2013dealing} a variant of the model proposed by Avellaneda and Stoikov and showed that the four-dimensional Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman (HJB) equation arising from the model could be simplified into a linear system of ordinary differential equations when a specific change of variables is used.\footnote{See also \cite{gueant2013general}.} The paper \cite{gueant2013dealing} also contains the Gu\'eant--Lehalle--Fernandez-Tapia formulas which are closed-form approximations of the optimal quotes of a single-asset market maker. These approximation formulas are used in practice by major banks in Europe and Asia for market making in (illiquid) quote-driven markets or for market making in some order-driven markets (in the specific case of a small tick size).\\
In the above papers, the objective function of the market maker is the expected CARA utility\footnote{CARA means Constant Absolute Risk Aversion. CARA utility functions are utility functions of the form $u(x) = - e^{-\gamma x}$ for $\gamma > 0$.} of his P\&L (sometimes with a penalty for the terminal inventory). Other models have been proposed in the literature with different objective functions. In their paper on market making with general price dynamics, Fodra and Labadie \cite{fodra2012} considered, in addition to the expected CARA utility case, the risk-neutral case and the risk-neutral case with a penalization on the terminal inventory. In a few papers, with various coauthors, and in their recent book \cite{cartea2015algorithmic} with Penalva, Cartea and Jaimungal considered as an objective function the expected value of the P\&L minus a running penalty on the inventory -- see for instance \cite{cartea2013robust}, \cite{cartea2013risk}, and \cite{cartea2014buy}.\\
The numerous researchers involved in market making modeling have also included many features in their models. Cartea and Jaimungal, with their coauthors, have proposed models with price impact, the possibility to consider short-term alpha, the existence of an adverse selection effect,\footnote{Adverse selection is also considered in \cite{gueant2013dealing}.} etc. Recently, new models have emerged to deal with ambiguity aversion: see for instance the paper \cite{cartea2013robust} by Cartea \emph{et al.} and the paper \cite{nystrom} by Nystr\"om et al. -- see also the PhD dissertation of Donnelly \cite{donnelly2014ambiguity}.\\
For strange reasons,\footnote{One reason is the interest for high-frequency trading. High-frequency trading is indeed often discussed for its influence on the price formation process of stocks. Another reason is that some market making models can be regarded as generalizations of optimal execution models built to solve problems coming from the cash-equity industry -- see for instance \cite{bayraktar2011liquidation}, \cite{gueant2012optimal} and \cite{huitema2012optimal}.} academic researchers have mainly focused on stock markets, which are certainly the least relevant markets to apply most of the models they have proposed.\footnote{Models \emph{\`a la} Avellaneda-Stoikov can hardly be applied to most stock markets for at least two reasons: (i)~the discrete nature of prices (especially in the case of stocks with a large tick size), and (ii) the fact that the very nature of the limit order books, which are queuing systems with priorities and volumes, is not taken into account. One of the only market making models really well suited to stocks is the model proposed by Guilbaud and Pham in \cite{guilbaud2013optimal} -- see also \cite{gueantbook} for a variant.} In this paper, we have instead in mind the case of a market maker in a quote-driven market, or in an order-driven market if the tick sizes of the securities are small.\\
The academic literature on market making is also mainly focused on the case of a market maker operating on a single asset. However, in practice, almost all market makers are in charge of a list of securities. For a market maker in charge of several correlated assets, applying an independent market making strategy to each asset is suboptimal in terms of risk management. It is therefore of the utmost importance to build a model accounting for the correlation structure of the security price moves, especially in the case of corporate bonds where there are often dozens of bonds issued by the same company (which are therefore highly correlated).\\
In this paper, we consider a modeling framework \emph{\`a la} Avellaneda-Stoikov with general intensity functions, instead of the exponential intensity functions of most models (see Section~2). We show that the four-variable HJB equation arising from the various optimization criteria used in the literature can be transformed into a simple system of ordinary differential equations (see Section 3). This somehow reconciles the different approaches used in the literature and enables to understand the subtle differences between the various criteria used in the literature. In particular it helps understanding what it means to be averse to price risk and to non-execution risk. We then show in Section 4 how to find closed-form approximations for the optimal quotes. These approximations generalize the Gu\'eant--Lehalle--Fernandez-Tapia formulas to the case of general intensity functions and to the case of the different optimization criteria used in the market making literature. In Section 5, we consider a problem that is very rarely dealt with in the academic literature in spite of its importance for practitioners: multi-asset market making. We show that many results obtained in the one-asset case can be generalized to our multi-asset market making model. In particular, we obtain for the first time in this paper closed-form approximations for the optimal quotes of a multi-asset market maker. This result is an important breakthrough for practitioners because most market makers are in charge of dozens of assets (or even hundreds of assets when the market maker is in fact an algorithm) and often reluctant to solve very large systems of nonlinear differential equations. In Section 6, we apply our findings to the case of two highly correlated credit indices: CDX.NA.IG (CDX North America Investment Grade) and CDX.NA.HY (CDX North America High Yield).\\
\section{Modeling framework and notations}
\subsection{Notations}
Let us fix a probability space $(\Omega, \mathcal{F}, \mathbb{P})$ equipped with a filtration $(\mathcal{F}_t)_{t\in \mathbb{R}_+}$ satisfying
the usual conditions. We assume that all stochastic processes are defined on $(\Omega, \mathcal{F},(\mathcal{F}_t)_{t\in \mathbb{R}_+}, \mathbb{P})$.\\
We consider in this section (and in the following two sections) a market maker in charge of a single asset. The reference price of this asset\footnote{There may not be a proper market price (see the above discussion), hence the wording ``reference price''.} is modeled by a process $(S_t)_t$ with the dynamics
\begin{equation}
\label{sec2:dS}
dS_t = \sigma dW_t,\quad S_0 \text{\; given},
\end{equation}
where $(W_t)_t$ is a standard Brownian motion adapted to the filtration $(\mathcal{F}_t)_{t\in \mathbb{R}_+}$.\\
This market maker proposes bid and ask quotes to buy and sell the asset. These bid and ask quotes are modeled by two stochastic processes, respectively denoted by $(S^b_t)_t$ and $(S^a_t)_t$.\\
Transactions occur at random times corresponding to the arrival times of agents willing to buy or sell the asset. The distribution of the trade times depends obviously on the liquidity of the asset, and on the bid and ask prices quoted by the market maker. We denote by $(N^b_t)_t$ and $(N^a_t)_t$ the two point processes modeling the number of transactions at the bid and at the ask, respectively. We assume that assets are traded $\Delta$ by $\Delta$, i.e., that the quantities traded do not vary across trades.\\
The inventory of the market maker, modeled by the process $(q_t)_t$, has therefore the dynamics
\begin{equation}
\label{sec2:dq}
dq_t = \Delta dN^b_t - \Delta dN^a_t, \quad q_0 \text{\; given.}
\end{equation}
We assume that the processes $(N^b_t)_t$ and $(N^a_t)_t$ are independent of the Brownian motion~$(W_t)_t$. We denote by $(\lambda_t^b)_t$ and $(\lambda_t^a)_t$ the intensity processes of $(N^b_t)_t$ and $(N^a_t)_t$, respectively. As in the classical Avellaneda-Stoikov model (see \cite{avellaneda2008high}), we assume that the intensity processes are functions of the difference between the reference price and the prices quoted by the market maker. In addition, we assume that the market maker stops proposing a bid (respectively ask) quote when his position is above (respectively below) a given threshold $Q$ (respectively $-Q$).\footnote{$Q$ is assumed to be a multiple of $\Delta$.} Formally, we assume that $(\lambda_t^b)_t$ and $(\lambda_t^a)_t$ verify
\begin{equation}
\label{sec2:intensity} \lambda_t^b = \Lambda^b(\delta_t^b)1_{q_{t-}<Q} \quad \text{and} \quad \lambda_t^a = \Lambda^a(\delta_t^a)1_{q_{t-}>-Q},
\end{equation} where $$\delta_t^b = S_t - S_t^b \quad \text{and} \quad \delta_t^a = S^a_t - S_t,$$
and where $\Lambda^b$ and $\Lambda^a$ are two functions satisfying the following hypotheses:\footnote{The first three hypotheses are natural. The fourth one is more technical. It ensures in particular that the functions $\pi^{b}: \delta \mapsto \delta \Lambda^{b}(\delta)$ and $\pi^{a}: \delta \mapsto \delta \Lambda^{a}(\delta)$, which are related to the instantaneous (expected) MtM PnL associated with each side, reach a maximum on $\mathbb{R}$ (in fact on $\mathbb{R}_+$). To see this (we focus on the bid side, but the proof is similar for the ask side), let us notice that
$${\pi^{b}}'(\delta) = 0 \iff \delta + \frac{\Lambda^{b}\left(\delta\right)}{{\Lambda^{b}}'\left(\delta\right)} = 0.$$
But $\upsilon^{b}: \delta \mapsto \delta + \frac{\Lambda^{b}\left(\delta\right)}{{\Lambda^{b}}'\left(\delta\right)}$ is a strictly increasing function with $$\inf_{\delta}{\upsilon^{b}}'(\delta) = 2 - \sup_{\delta} \frac{\Lambda^{b}\left(\delta\right) {\Lambda^{b}}''\left(\delta\right)}{\left({\Lambda^{b}}'\left(\delta\right)\right)^2} > 0.$$
Therefore, the equation $\upsilon^{b}(\delta) = 0$ has a unique solution and it corresponds to a unique maximizer for $\pi^{b}$.}
\begin{itemize}
\item $\Lambda^{b}$ and $\Lambda^{a}$ are twice continuously differentiable,
\item $\Lambda^{b}$ and $\Lambda^{a}$ are decreasing, with $\forall \delta \in \mathbb{R}$, ${\Lambda^{b}}'(\delta) <0$ and ${\Lambda^{a}}'(\delta) <0$,
\item $\lim_{\delta \to +\infty} \Lambda^{b}(\delta) = \lim_{\delta \to +\infty} \Lambda^{a}(\delta) = 0$,
\item $\sup_{\delta}\frac{\Lambda^{b}(\delta){\Lambda^{b}}''(\delta)}{\left({\Lambda^{b}}'(\delta)\right)^2} < 2 \quad \text{and} \quad \sup_{\delta} \frac{\Lambda^{a}(\delta){\Lambda^{a}}''(\delta)}{\left({\Lambda^{a}}'(\delta)\right)^2} < 2.$
\end{itemize}
Finally, the process $(X_t)_t$ models the market maker's cash account. Given our modeling framework, $(X_t)_t$ has the dynamics
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber dX_t &=& S^a_t \Delta dN^a_t - S^b_t \Delta dN^b_t\\
&=& (S_t + \delta^a_t) \Delta dN^a_t - (S_t -
\delta^b_t) \Delta dN^b_t. \label{sec2:dX}
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{The two classical optimization problems}
In the above paragraphs, we have defined the three processes at the heart of most market making models: the reference price process $(S_t)_t$, the inventory process $(q_t)_t$, and the cash process $(X_t)_t$. We now need to define the problem faced by the market maker. Following the model proposed by Avellaneda and Stoikov in \cite{avellaneda2008high}, one can consider, as in \cite{gueant2013dealing}, that the market maker maximizes the expected value of a CARA utility function (with risk aversion parameter $\gamma > 0$) applied to the MtM value of the portfolio at a given date $T$. This MtM value at time $T$ is basically $X_T + q_T S_T$, or $X_T + q_T S_T - \ell(|q_T|)$ if we add a liquidity premium for the remaining inventory (whatever its sign) -- $\ell$ is a nondecreasing and convex function from $\mathbb{R}_+$ to $\mathbb{R}_+$. In this general framework, the goal of the market maker is to maximize
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{E}\left[-\exp\left(-\gamma (X_T + q_T S_T - \ell(|q_T|)) \right)\right], \qquad \textbf{(Model A)}
\end{equation*}
over $(\delta_t^b)_t \in \mathcal{A}$ and $(\delta_t^a)_t \in \mathcal{A}$, where the set of admissible controls $\mathcal{A}$ is simply the set of predictable processes bounded from below.\\
Alternatively, one can consider that the market maker maximizes the expected value of the MtM value of the portfolio at date $T$, but that holding an inventory is penalized over the time interval $[0,T]$. This is typically what is done by Cartea, Jaimungal and their coauthors (see the recent book \cite{cartea2015algorithmic} for several examples). In that kind of model, the goal of the market maker is to maximize an expression of the form
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{E}\left[X_T + q_T S_T - \ell(|q_T|) - \frac 12 \gamma \sigma^2 \int_0^T q_t^2 dt \right], \qquad \textbf{(Model B)}
\end{equation*}
over $(\delta_t^b)_t \in \mathcal{A}$ and $(\delta_t^a)_t \in \mathcal{A}$.\\
\section{Towards a single system of ordinary differential equations for characterizing the optimal quotes}
Both Model A and Model B can be solved using the classical tools of stochastic optimal control. In particular, we show that, in both models, finding the value function (and the optimal bid and ask quotes) boils down to solving a tridiagonal system of ordinary differential equations (ODEs), and that the equations associated with Model A and Model B are part of the same family of ODEs.
\subsection{Dimensionality of the problem: a reduction from 4 to 2}
The HJB equation associated with Model A is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{sec3:HJBModelA}0= -\partial_t u(t,x,q,S) - \frac 12 \sigma^2 \partial^2_{SS} u(t,x,q,S)
\end{equation}
$$ - 1_{q<Q}\sup_{\delta^b}
\Lambda^b(\delta^b) \left[u(t,x-\Delta S+\Delta\delta^b,q+\Delta,S) - u(t,x,q,S) \right]$$
$$ - 1_{q>-Q} \sup_{\delta^a} \Lambda^a(\delta^a) \left[u(t,x+\Delta S+\Delta \delta^a,q-\Delta,S) -
u(t,x,q,S) \right],$$ for $q \in \mathcal{Q} = \lbrace -Q, -Q + \Delta, \ldots, Q-\Delta, Q \rbrace$, and $(t,S,x) \in [0,T]\times \mathbb{R}^2$, with the terminal condition \begin{equation}\label{sec3:HJBModelACT}u(T,x,q,S) = -\exp\left(-\gamma(x+qS - \ell(|q|))\right).\end{equation}
If one uses the ansatz
\begin{equation}\label{sec3:ansatzModelA}u(t,x,q,S) = -\exp\left(-\gamma(x+qS + \theta(t,q))\right),\end{equation}
then Eq.~(\ref{sec3:HJBModelA}) becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{sec3:thetaModelA}
0=-\partial_t \theta(t,q) + \frac{1}{2} \gamma \sigma^2 q^2
\end{equation}
$$- 1_{q<Q} \sup_{\delta^{b}} \frac{\Lambda^b(\delta^{b})}{\gamma}\left(1-\exp\left(-\gamma\left(\Delta \delta^{b} + \theta(t,q+\Delta) - \theta(t,q) \right)\right)\right)$$
$$- 1_{q>-Q} \sup_{\delta^{a}} \frac{\Lambda^a(\delta^{a})}{\gamma}\left(1-\exp\left(-\gamma \left(\Delta \delta^{a} + \theta(t,q-\Delta) - \theta(t,q) \right)\right)\right),
$$ for $q \in \mathcal{Q}$, and $t \in [0,T]$, and the terminal condition (\ref{sec3:HJBModelACT}) becomes $\theta(T,q) = -\ell(|q|)$.\\
The HJB equation associated with Model B is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{sec3:HJBModelB}0= -\partial_t u(t,x,q,S) + \frac 12 \gamma \sigma^2 q^2 - \frac 12 \sigma^2 \partial^2_{SS} u(t,x,q,S)
\end{equation}
$$ - 1_{q<Q}\sup_{\delta^b}
\Lambda^b(\delta^b) \left[u(t,x-\Delta S+\Delta\delta^b,q+\Delta,S) - u(t,x,q,S) \right]$$
$$ - 1_{q>-Q} \sup_{\delta^a} \Lambda^a(\delta^a) \left[u(t,x+\Delta S+\Delta \delta^a,q-\Delta,S) -
u(t,x,q,S) \right],$$ for $q \in \mathcal{Q}$, and $(t,S,x) \in [0,T]\times \mathbb{R}^2$, with the terminal condition \begin{equation}\label{sec3:HJBModelBCT}u(T,x,q,S) = x+qS - \ell(|q|).\end{equation}
If one uses the ansatz
\begin{equation}\label{sec3:ansatzModelA}u(t,x,q,S) = x+qS + \theta(t,q),\end{equation}
then Eq.~(\ref{sec3:HJBModelB}) becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{sec3:thetaModelB}
0=-\partial_t \theta(t,q) + \frac{1}{2} \gamma \sigma^2 q^2
\end{equation}
$$- 1_{q<Q} \sup_{\delta^{b}} \Lambda^b(\delta^{b})\left(\Delta \delta^{b} + \theta(t,q+\Delta) - \theta(t,q) \right)$$
$$- 1_{q>-Q} \sup_{\delta^{a}} \Lambda^a(\delta^{a})\left(\Delta \delta^{a} + \theta(t,q-\Delta) - \theta(t,q) \right),
$$ for $q \in \mathcal{Q}$, and $t \in [0,T]$, and the terminal condition (\ref{sec3:HJBModelBCT}) becomes $\theta(T,q) = -\ell(|q|)$.\\
Eqs.~(\ref{sec3:thetaModelA}) and (\ref{sec3:thetaModelB}) are in fact two systems of ODEs which belong to the same family. If we introduce for $\xi >0$ the functions
$$H^b_{\xi}(p) = \sup_{\delta} \frac{\Lambda^b(\delta)}{\xi}\left(1-\exp\left(-\xi\Delta \left(\delta - p \right)\right)\right)$$
and
$$H^a_{\xi}(p) = \sup_{\delta} \frac{\Lambda^a(\delta)}{\xi}\left(1-\exp\left(-\xi\Delta \left(\delta - p \right)\right)\right),$$
and the limit functions (for $\xi=0$) $$H^b_{0}(p) = \Delta \sup_{\delta} \Lambda^b(\delta)(\delta - p)$$ and $$H^a_{0}(p) = \Delta \sup_{\delta} \Lambda^a(\delta)(\delta - p),$$ then we can indeed consider the general equation
\begin{equation}
\label{sec3:thetagen}
0=-\partial_t \theta(t,q) + \frac{1}{2} \gamma \sigma^2 q^2
\end{equation}
$$- 1_{q<Q} H^b_{\xi}\left(\frac{\theta(t,q) - \theta(t,q+\Delta)}{\Delta}\right) - 1_{q>-Q} H^a_{\xi}\left(\frac{\theta(t,q) - \theta(t,q-\Delta)}{\Delta}\right),$$
for $q \in \mathcal{Q}$, and $t \in [0,T]$, with the terminal condition
\begin{equation}
\label{sec3:thetagenCT}
\theta(T,q) = -\ell(|q|).
\end{equation}
Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetaModelA}) corresponds to Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetagen}) for $\xi=\gamma$ while Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetaModelB}) corresponds to Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetagen}) for $\xi=0$.\\
\subsection{Existence and uniqueness of a solution $\theta$}
In the following paragraphs, we prove, for all $\xi \ge 0$, that there exists a unique solution $\theta$ to Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetagen}) with terminal condition (\ref{sec3:thetagenCT}).\\
Let us start with a lemma on $H^b_{\xi}$ and $H^a_{\xi}$.\\
\begin{Lemma}
\label{sec3:lemmaH}
$\forall \xi \ge 0$, $H^b_{\xi}$ and $H^a_{\xi}$ are two decreasing functions of class $C^2$.\\
The supremum in the definition of $H^b_{\xi}(p)$ is attained at a unique $\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p)$ characterized by
$$p=\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p) - \frac 1{\xi\Delta} \log\left(1 -\xi \Delta \frac{\Lambda^b\left(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p)\right)}{{\Lambda^b}'\left(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p)\right)}\right),\quad \textrm{if\;} \xi > 0,$$ and
$$p=\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p) + \frac{\Lambda^b\left(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p)\right)}{{\Lambda^b}'\left(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p)\right)}, \quad \textrm{if\;} \xi = 0,$$
or equivalently by
\begin{equation}
\label{sec3:deltab}
\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p) = {\Lambda^b}^{-1}\left(\xi H^b_{\xi}(p) - \frac{{H_{\xi}^b}'(p)}{\Delta}\right).
\end{equation}
Similarly, the supremum in the definition of $H^a_{\xi}(p)$ is attained at a unique $\tilde{\delta}^{a*}_\xi(p)$ characterized by
$$p=\tilde{\delta}^{a*}_\xi(p) - \frac 1{\xi\Delta} \log\left(1 -\xi \Delta \frac{\Lambda^a\left(\tilde{\delta}^{a*}_\xi(p)\right)}{{\Lambda^a}'\left(\tilde{\delta}^{a*}_\xi(p)\right)}\right),\quad \textrm{if\;} \xi > 0,$$ and
$$p=\tilde{\delta}^{a*}_\xi(p) + \frac{\Lambda^a\left(\tilde{\delta}^{a*}_\xi(p)\right)}{{\Lambda^a}'\left(\tilde{\delta}^{a*}_\xi(p)\right)}, \quad \textrm{if\;} \xi = 0,$$
or equivalently
\begin{equation}
\label{sec3:deltaa}
\tilde{\delta}^{a*}_\xi(p) = {\Lambda^a}^{-1}\left(\xi H^a_{\xi}(p) - \frac{{H_{\xi}^a}'(p)}{\Delta}\right).
\end{equation}
Furthermore, the functions $p \mapsto \tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p)$ and $p \mapsto \tilde{\delta}^{a*}_\xi(p)$ are $C^1$ and increasing.\\
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
We prove the results for the bid side. The proof is similar for the ask side.\\
Let us start with $\xi>0$.\\
$\forall p \in \mathbb{R}$, let us define $g_p : \delta \mapsto \frac{\Lambda^b(\delta)}{\xi}\left(1-\exp\left(-\xi\Delta \left(\delta - p \right)\right)\right)$.\\
$g_p$ is a function of class $C^1$, positive for $\delta \in (p, +\infty)$ and nonpositive otherwise. Because $g_p(p) = 0$ and $\lim_{\delta \to +\infty} g_p(\delta) = 0$, the supremum of $g_p$ is attained at, at least, one point $\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p) \in (p,+\infty)$. The first order condition characterizing the suprema of $g_p$ is
$$\frac{{\Lambda^b}'(\delta)}{\xi}\left(1-\exp\left(-\xi\Delta \left(\delta - p \right)\right)\right) + \Delta \Lambda^b(\delta) \exp\left(-\xi\Delta \left(\delta - p \right)\right) = 0.$$
By rearranging the terms, we obtain $$p=\delta - \frac 1{\xi\Delta} \log\left(1 -\xi \Delta \frac{\Lambda^b\left(\delta\right)}{{\Lambda^b}'\left(\delta\right)}\right).$$
Because $\Lambda^{b}(\delta){\Lambda^{b}}''(\delta) < 2 \left({\Lambda^{b}}'(\delta)\right)^2$, the function
$$j : \delta \mapsto \delta - \frac 1{\xi\Delta} \log\left(1 -\xi \Delta \frac{\Lambda^b\left(\delta\right)}{{\Lambda^b}'\left(\delta\right)}\right)$$ is increasing\footnote{We have indeed
$$ j'(\delta) = 1 + \frac{1- \frac{{\Lambda^b}(\delta){\Lambda^b}''(\delta)}{{{\Lambda^b}'(\delta)}^2}}{1 - \xi \Delta\frac{{\Lambda^b}(\delta)}{{\Lambda^b}'(\delta)} }
= \frac{2 - \frac{{\Lambda^b}(\delta){\Lambda^b}''(\delta)}{{{\Lambda^b}'(\delta)}^2} - \xi \Delta\frac{{\Lambda^b}(\delta)}{{\Lambda^b}'(\delta)}}{1 - \xi \Delta\frac{{\Lambda^b}(\delta)}{{\Lambda^b}'(\delta)} }
> 0.$$
} and there is therefore a unique maximizer $\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p)$ of $g_p$, characterized by
$$p=\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p) - \frac 1{\xi\Delta} \log\left(1 -\xi \Delta \frac{\Lambda^b\left(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p)\right)}{{\Lambda^b}'\left(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p)\right)}\right).$$
Moreover, by the implicit function theorem, $p \mapsto \tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p)$ is a function of class $C^1$ which verifies
$$
\tilde{\delta}^{b*'}_\xi(p) = \frac{1}{j'\left(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p)\right)} = \frac{1 - \xi \Delta\frac{{\Lambda^b}(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p))}{{\Lambda^b}'(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p))} } {2 - \frac{{\Lambda^b}(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p)){\Lambda^b}''(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p))}{{{\Lambda^b}'(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p))}^2} - \xi \Delta\frac{{\Lambda^b}(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p))}{{\Lambda^b}'(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p))}}
> 0.$$
In particular, $p \mapsto \tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p)$ is increasing.\\
Moreover, the function $H^b_\xi$ is of class $C^2$, with
$${H^b_\xi}'(p) = -{\Lambda^b}(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p)) \Delta \exp\left(-\xi\Delta \left(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p) - p \right)\right)$$
and
$${H^b_\xi}''(p) = \left(-\tilde{\delta}^{b*'}(p) {\Lambda^b}'(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p)) + \xi\Delta {\Lambda^b}(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p)) \left(\tilde{\delta}^{b*'}_\xi(p) - 1 \right) \right) \Delta \exp\left(-\xi\Delta \left(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p) - p \right)\right).$$
In particular, $H^b_\xi$ is decreasing.\\
We also see, by using the definition of $H^b_\xi$, that $$\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\xi(p) = {\Lambda^b}^{-1}\left(\xi H^b_{\xi}(p) - \frac{{H_{\xi}^b}'(p)}{\Delta}\right).$$
In the $\xi= 0$ case, we define $\forall p \in \mathbb{R}$, $h_p : \delta \mapsto \Delta \Lambda^{b}(\delta) \left(\delta - p \right)$.\\
$h_p$ is a function of class $C^1$, positive for $\delta \in (p, +\infty)$ and nonpositive otherwise. By using the same reasoning as in footnote 11, we see that there is a unique maximizer $\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_0(p)$ of $h_p$, characterized by
$$p=\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_0(p) + \frac{\Lambda^{b}\left(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_0(p)\right)}{{\Lambda^{b}}'\left(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_0(p)\right)}.$$
As above, by the implicit function theorem, $p \mapsto {\delta}^{b*}_0(p)$ is a function of class $C^1$ which verifies
$$
\tilde{\delta}^{b*'}_0(p)= \frac{1} {2 - \frac{\Lambda^{b}(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_0(p)){\Lambda^{b}}''(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_0(p))}{{{\Lambda^{b}}'(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_0(p))}^2} }
> 0.$$
In particular, $p \mapsto \tilde{\delta}^{b*}_0(p)$ is increasing.\\
Moreover, the function $H^{b}_0$ is of class $C^2$, with
$${H^{b}_0}'(p) = - \Delta {\Lambda^{b}}(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_0(p))$$
and
$${H^{b}_0}''(p) = - \Delta \tilde{\delta}^{b*'}_0(p) {\Lambda^{b}}'(\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_0(p)).$$
In particular, $H^{b}_0$ is decreasing and we have $$\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_0(p) = {\Lambda^{b}}^{-1}\left( - \frac{{H_{0}^{b}}'(p)}{\Delta}\right).$$
This proves the lemma.\qed\\
\end{proof}
We now prove a comparison principle for Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetagen}) which gives \emph{a priori} bounds that will enable us to prove the existence of a solution to Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetagen}) with terminal condition (\ref{sec3:thetagenCT}).
\begin{Lemma}
\label{sec3:cp}
Let $\tau \in [0,T)$.\\
Let $\underline{\theta}: [\tau,T]\times \mathcal{Q} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ be a $C^1$ function with respect to time satisfying the subsolution property, i.e.,
$$\forall q\in \mathcal{Q},\quad \underline{\theta}(T,q) \leq -\ell(|q|)$$
and $\forall (t,q) \in [\tau,T)\times \mathcal{Q}$,
$$ -\partial_t \underline{\theta}(t,q) +
\frac{1}{2}\gamma\sigma^2 q^2
- 1_{q<Q} H^b_{\xi}\left(\frac{\underline{\theta}(t,q) - \underline{\theta}(t,q+\Delta)}{\Delta}\right) - 1_{q>-Q} H^a_{\xi}\left(\frac{\underline{\theta}(t,q) - \underline{\theta}(t,q-\Delta)}{\Delta}\right) \leq 0.$$
Let $\overline{\theta}: [\tau,T]\times \mathcal{Q} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ be a $C^1$ function with respect to time satisfying the supersolution property, i.e.,
$$\forall q \in \mathcal{Q},\quad \overline{\theta}(T,q) \geq -\ell(|q|)$$
and $\forall (t,q) \in [\tau,T)\times \mathcal{Q}$,
$$-\partial_t \overline{\theta}(t,q) +
\frac{1}{2}\gamma\sigma^2 q^2 - 1_{q<Q} H^b_{\xi}\left(\frac{\overline{\theta}(t,q) - \overline{\theta}(t,q+\Delta)}{\Delta}\right) - 1_{q>-Q} H^a_{\xi}\left(\frac{\overline{\theta}(t,q) - \overline{\theta}(t,q-\Delta)}{\Delta}\right) \geq 0.$$
Then
$$\overline{\theta} \geq \underline{\theta}.$$
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\varepsilon > 0$.\\
Let us consider a couple $(t^*_{\varepsilon}, q^*_{\varepsilon})$ such that
$$ \underline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}) - \overline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}) - \varepsilon(T-t^*_{\varepsilon}) =
\sup_{(t,q) \in [\tau,T]\times\mathcal{Q}}\underline{\theta}(t,q) - \overline{\theta}(t,q) - \varepsilon(T-t).
$$
If $t^*_{\varepsilon}\neq T$, then
$$\partial_t \underline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}) - \partial_t \overline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}) + \varepsilon \leq 0.$$
Now, by using the definition of the functions $\underline{\theta}$ and $\overline{\theta}$, the above inequality gives
$$ 1_{q^*_{\varepsilon}<Q} H^b_{\xi}\left(\frac{\overline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}) - \overline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}+\Delta)}{\Delta}\right) + 1_{q^*_{\varepsilon}>-Q} H^a_{\xi}\left(\frac{\overline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}) - \overline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}-\Delta)}{\Delta}\right)$$$$ - 1_{q^*_{\varepsilon}<Q} H^b_{\xi}\left(\frac{\underline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}) - \underline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}+\Delta)}{\Delta}\right) - 1_{q^*_{\varepsilon}>-Q} H^a_{\xi}\left(\frac{\underline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}) - \underline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}-\Delta)}{\Delta}\right) \le -\varepsilon. $$
But, by definition of $(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon})$, since $H^b_{\xi}$ and $H^a_{\xi}$ are decreasing functions, we have
$$1_{q^*_{\varepsilon}<Q} \left(H^b_{\xi}\left(\frac{\overline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}) - \overline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}+\Delta)}{\Delta}\right) - H^b_{\xi}\left(\frac{\underline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}) - \underline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}+\Delta)}{\Delta}\right)\right) \ge 0,$$
and
$$1_{q^*_{\varepsilon}>-Q} \left(H^a_{\xi}\left(\frac{\overline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}) - \overline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}+\Delta)}{\Delta}\right) - H^a_{\xi}\left(\frac{\underline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}) - \underline{\theta}(t^*_{\varepsilon},q^*_{\varepsilon}+\Delta)}{\Delta}\right)\right) \ge 0.$$
This leads to $0 \leq - \varepsilon$. By contradiction, we must have $t^*_{\varepsilon} = T$.\\
Therefore,
$$\sup_{(t,q) \in [\tau,T]\times\mathcal{Q}}\underline{\theta}(t,q) - \overline{\theta}(t,q) - \varepsilon(T-t) = \underline{\theta}(T,q^*_{\varepsilon}) - \overline{\theta}(T,q^*_{\varepsilon}) \le 0.$$
As a consequence, $\forall (t,q) \in [\tau,T)\times \mathcal{Q}$,
$$\underline{\theta}(t,q) - \overline{\theta}(t,q) \le \varepsilon T.$$
By sending $\varepsilon$ to $0$, we obtain $\underline{\theta} \le \overline{\theta}$.\qed\\
\end{proof}
Let us now come to the existence and uniqueness of a solution to Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetagen}) with terminal condition (\ref{sec3:thetagenCT}).
\begin{Theorem}
\label{sec3:theotheta}
There exists a unique function $\theta : [0,T]\times \mathcal{Q} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$, $C^1$ in time, solution of Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetagen}) with terminal condition (\ref{sec3:thetagenCT}).
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetagen}) with terminal condition (\ref{sec3:thetagenCT}) can be regarded as a backward Cauchy problem. Since $H^b_\xi$ and $H^a_\xi$ are functions of class $C^1$, by Cauchy-Lipschitz, there exists $\tau \in [0,T)$ and a function $\theta : (\tau,T]\times \mathcal{Q} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$, $C^1$ in time, solution of Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetagen}) on $(\tau,T]$ with terminal condition (\ref{sec3:thetagenCT}).\\
It is straightforward to verify that $\forall q \in \mathcal{Q}, t \in (\tau,T] \mapsto \theta(t,q) + \frac 12 \gamma \sigma^2 q^2 (T-t)$ is a decreasing function. Therefore, the only reason why there would not be a global solution on $[0,T]$ is because $\sup_{q \in \mathcal{Q}} \theta(t,q)$ blows up at $\tau>0$. However, by using Lemma~\ref{sec3:cp}, we know that $$\overline{\theta}(t,q) = (H^b_\xi(0) + H^a_\xi(0))(T-t)$$ defines a supersolution of Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetagen}) with terminal condition (\ref{sec3:thetagenCT}), and therefore that $\sup_{q \in \mathcal{Q}} \theta(t,q) \le (H^b_\xi(0) + H^a_\xi(0))(T-t)$ cannot blow up in finite time.\\
The conclusion is that $\theta$ is in fact defined on $[0,T]\times \mathcal{Q}$. Uniqueness comes then for the Cauchy-Lipschitz theorem.\qed\\
\end{proof}
The existence (and uniqueness) of a function $\theta$ solution of Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetagen}) with terminal condition~(\ref{sec3:thetagenCT}) enables us to find a solution to the HJB equation associated with Model A or Model~B. We will use a verification argument in the next subsection in order to prove that the solution to the HJB equation we obtain by this way is indeed the value function of the stochastic optimal control problem under consideration. However, before that, a remark needs to be made on $\theta$ and on Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetagen}) in the specific case -- often (not to say almost always) used in the academic literature -- of exponential intensities.\\
If we have $\Lambda^b(\delta)= \Lambda^a(\delta) = A e^{-k\delta} =: \Lambda(\delta)$, then we obtain (by straightforward computations)
$$H_\xi(p) := H^b_\xi(p) = H^a_\xi(p) = \frac{A\Delta}{k} C_\xi \exp(-kp),$$
where $$C_\xi = \begin{cases} \left(1 + \frac{\xi\Delta}{k}\right)^{-\frac{k}{\xi\Delta} - 1} &\mbox{if } \xi > 0 \\
e^{-1} & \mbox{if } \xi=0. \end{cases}$$
By using Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetagen}), the function
$$ v: (t,q) \in [0,T] \times \mathcal{Q} \mapsto v_q(t) = \exp\left(\frac{k}{\Delta} \theta(t,q)\right)$$ is solution of the linear system of ordinary differential equations
\begin{equation}
\label{sec3:eqv}
\forall q \in \mathcal{Q}, \forall t \in [0,T], -\partial_t v_q(t) + \frac{1}{2\Delta}k\gamma\sigma^2 q^2 v_q(t) - A C_\xi \left(1_{q<Q} v_{q+\Delta}(t) + 1_{q>-Q} v_{q-\Delta}(t) \right) = 0,
\end{equation}
with terminal condition $\forall q \in \mathcal{Q}, v_q(T) = \exp\left(-\frac{k}{\Delta} \ell(|q|)\right)$.
\subsection{Verification argument}
We are now ready to solve the stochastic optimal control problems associated with Model~A and Model B. We start with Model A.
\begin{Theorem}
\label{sec3:theomodelA}
Let us consider the solution $\theta$ of Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetagen}) with terminal condition (\ref{sec3:thetagenCT}) for $\xi=\gamma$.\\
Then, $u : (t,x,q,S) \mapsto -\exp(-\gamma(x+qS + \theta(t,q)))$ defines a solution to Eq.~(\ref{sec3:HJBModelA}) with terminal condition (\ref{sec3:HJBModelACT}), and
$$u(t,x,q,S) = \sup_{(\delta^b_s)_{s\ge t}, (\delta^a_s)_{s\ge t} \in \mathcal{A}(t)} \mathbb{E}\left[- \exp\left(-\gamma\left(X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_T+q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_T S^{t,S}_T- \ell(|q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_T|)\right)\right) \right],$$
where $\mathcal{A}(t)$ is the set of predictable processes on $[t,T]$, bounded from below and where
$$dS^{t,S}_s = \sigma dW_s, \qquad S^{t,S}_t = S,$$
$$dX^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_s = (S_s + \delta^a_s) \Delta dN^a_s - (S_s - \delta^b_s) \Delta dN^b_s , \qquad X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_t = x,$$
$$dq^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_s = \Delta dN^b_s - \Delta dN^a_s, \qquad q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_t = q,$$
where the point processes $N^b$ and $N^a$ have stochastic intensity $(\lambda^b_s)_s$ and $(\lambda^a_s)_s$ given by $\lambda^b_s = \Lambda^b(\delta^b_s) 1_{q_{s-} < Q}$ and $\lambda^a_s = \Lambda^a(\delta^a_s) 1_{q_{s-} > -Q}$.\\
The optimal bid and ask quotes $S^b_t = S_t - \delta^{b*}_t$ (for $q_{t-}< Q$) and $S^a_t = S_t + \delta^{a*}_t$ (for $q_{t-}>-Q$) are characterized by\begin{equation}
\label{sec3:deltaoptimal}
\delta^{b*}_t = \tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\gamma\left(\frac{\theta(t,q_{t-}) - \theta(t,q_{t-}+\Delta)}{\Delta}\right) \text{ and } \delta^{a*}_t = \tilde{\delta}^{a*}_\gamma\left(\frac{\theta(t,q_{t-}) - \theta(t,q_{t-}-\Delta)}{\Delta}\right),
\end{equation}where the functions $\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_\gamma(\cdot)$ and $\tilde{\delta}_\gamma^{a*}(\cdot)$ are defined in Eqs.~(\ref{sec3:deltab}) and (\ref{sec3:deltaa}).
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let us consider $t\in [0,T)$, and two processes $(\delta^b_s)_{s\ge t}$ and $(\delta^a_s)_{s\ge t}$ in $\mathcal{A}(t)$. We have
\begin{equation}
\label{verif1}u(T,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T-}, S^{t,S}_T) = u(t,x,q,S) + \int_t^T \partial_t u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s) ds
\end{equation}$$ + \sigma \int_t^T \partial_{S} u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s) dW_s + \frac 12 \sigma^2 \int_t^T \partial^2_{SS} u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s) ds$$$$ + \int_t^T \left(u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} - \Delta S^{t,S}_s + \Delta \delta^b_s ,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} + \Delta, S^{t,S}_s) - u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s)\right)dN^b_s$$
$$ + \int_t^T \left(u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} + \Delta S^{t,S}_s + \Delta \delta^a_s ,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} - \Delta, S^{t,S}_s) - u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s)\right)dN^a_s.$$
Let $C < 0$. If almost surely $\forall s \in [t,T), \delta^b_s \ge -C$, then
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T \partial_S u\left(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s\right)
^2ds\right]\\
&\le& \mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T{\gamma^2q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}}^2\exp\left(-2\gamma\left(X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} + q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} S^{t,S}_s + \theta(s,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}) \right)\right) ds\right]\\
&\le& \gamma^2 Q^2\exp\left(2\gamma \|\theta\|_{L^\infty([t,T]\times\mathcal{Q})}\right)\\
&&\times\mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T\exp\left(-2\gamma\left(x+qS + \int_t^s \delta^b_u dN^b_u + \int_t^s \delta^a_u dN^a_u + \int_t^s \sigma q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{u-} dW_u \right)\right) ds\right]\\
&\le& \gamma^2 Q^2 \exp\left(2\gamma \|\theta\|_{L^\infty([t,T]\times\mathcal{Q})}\right) \exp(-2\gamma (x+qS))\\
&&\times \mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T \exp\left(-6\gamma\int_t^s \delta^b_u dN^b_u \right) ds\right]^{\frac 13} \mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T \exp\left(-6\gamma\int_t^s \delta^a_u dN^a_u \right) ds\right]^{\frac 13}\\
&&\times \mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T \exp\left(-6\gamma \int_t^s \sigma q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{u-} dW_u\right)ds\right]^{\frac 13}\\
&\le& \gamma^2 Q^2\exp\left(2\gamma \|\theta\|_{L^\infty([t,T]\times\mathcal{Q})}\right) \exp(-2\gamma (x+qS))\\
&&\times \mathbb{E}\left[\exp\left(6\gamma C(N^b_T-N^b_t)\right)(T-t)\right]^{\frac 13} \mathbb{E}\left[\exp\left(6\gamma C(N^a_T-N^a_t)\right)(T-t)\right]^{\frac 13}\\
&&\times \left(\int_t^T \mathbb{E}\left[\exp\left(-6\gamma \int_t^s \sigma q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{u-} dW_u - 18\gamma^2 \int_t^s \sigma^2 {q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{u-}}^2 du\right)\right]ds\right)^{\frac 13}\\
&&\times \exp\left(6\gamma^2 (T-t) \sigma^2 Q^2\right)\\
&\le& \gamma^2 Q^2\exp\left(2\gamma \|\theta\|_{L^\infty([t,T]\times\mathcal{Q})}\right) \exp(-2\gamma (x+qS))\\
&&\times \exp\left(\Lambda^b(-C)(T-t) \left(\exp(6\gamma C)-1\right) \right) \exp\left(\Lambda^a(-C)(T-t) \left(\exp(6\gamma C)-1\right) \right) (T-t)^{\frac 23} \\
&&\times \exp\left(6\gamma^2 (T-t) \sigma^2 Q^2\right)(T-t)^{\frac 13}<+\infty.\\
\end{eqnarray*}
We also have
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T |u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s)
|\Lambda^b(\delta^b_s)1_{q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}<Q}ds\right]\\
&\le& \Lambda^b(-C)\mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T\exp\left(-\gamma\left(X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} + q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} S^{t,S}_s + \theta(s,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}) \right)\right) ds\right]\\
&\le& \Lambda^b(-C) \exp\left(\gamma \|\theta\|_{L^\infty([t,T]\times\mathcal{Q})}\right)\\
&&\times\mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T\exp\left(-\gamma\left(x+qS + \int_t^s \delta^b_u dN^b_u + \int_t^s \delta^a_u dN^a_u + \int_t^s \sigma q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{u-} dW_u \right)\right) ds\right]\\
&\le& \Lambda^b(-C) \exp\left(\gamma \|\theta\|_{L^\infty([t,T]\times\mathcal{Q})}\right) \exp(-\gamma (x+qS))\\
&&\times \mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T \exp\left(-3\gamma\int_t^s \delta^b_u dN^b_u \right) ds\right]^{\frac 13} \mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T \exp\left(-3\gamma\int_t^s \delta^a_u dN^a_u \right) ds\right]^{\frac 13}\\
&&\times \mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T \exp\left(-3\gamma \int_t^s \sigma q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{u-} dW_u\right)ds\right]^{\frac 13}\\
&\le& \Lambda^b(-C) \exp\left(\gamma \|\theta\|_{L^\infty([t,T]\times\mathcal{Q})}\right) \exp(-\gamma (x+qS))\\
&&\times \exp\left(\Lambda^b(-C)(T-t) \left(\exp(3\gamma C)-1\right) \right) \exp\left(\Lambda^a(-C)(T-t) \left(\exp(3\gamma C)-1\right) \right) (T-t)^{\frac 23} \\
&&\times \exp\left(\frac 32\gamma^2 (T-t) \sigma^2 Q^2\right)(T-t)^{\frac 13}\\
&<&+\infty.
\end{eqnarray*}
Similarly
$$\mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T |u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} - \Delta S^{t,S}_s + \Delta \delta^b_s ,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} + \Delta, S^{t,S}_s)
|\Lambda^b(\delta^b_s)1_{q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}<Q}ds\right] < +\infty,$$
$$\mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T |u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s)
|\Lambda^a(\delta^a_s)1_{q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}>-Q}ds\right] < +\infty,$$
and
$$\mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T |u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} + \Delta S^{t,S}_s + \Delta \delta^a_s ,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} - \Delta, S^{t,S}_s)
|\Lambda^a(\delta^a_s)1_{q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}>-Q}ds\right] < +\infty.$$
By taking expectations in Eq.~(\ref{verif1}), we obtain
$$\mathbb{E}\left[u(T,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T-}, S^{t,S}_T)\right] = u(t,x,q,S)$$$$ + \mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T \left(\partial_t u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s) + \frac 12 \sigma^2 \partial^2_{SS} u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s)\right) ds\right]$$$$ + \mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T \left(u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} - \Delta S^{t,S}_s + \Delta \delta^b_s ,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} + \Delta, S^{t,S}_s)\right.\right.$$$$\left. - u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s)\right)\Lambda^b(\delta^b_s)1_{q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}<Q}ds$$
$$ + \int_t^T \left(u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} + \Delta S^{t,S}_s + \Delta \delta^a_s ,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} - \Delta, S^{t,S}_s)\right.$$$$\left.\left. - u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s)\right)\Lambda^a(\delta^a_s)1_{q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}>-Q}ds\right].$$
By definition of $u$, we have therefore
$$\mathbb{E}\left[u(T,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T-}, S^{t,S}_T)\right] = u(t,x,q,S)$$$$ + \mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s)\left( -\gamma \partial_t \theta(s,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}) + \frac 12 \gamma^2 \sigma^2 {q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}}^2\right) ds\right]$$$$ + \mathbb{E}\Bigg[\int_t^T -u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s)\Lambda^b(\delta^b_s)1_{q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}<Q}$$$$\left(1-\exp\left(-\gamma\left(\Delta \delta^b_s + \theta(s,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}+\Delta) - \theta(s,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-})\right)\right)\right)ds\Bigg]$$
$$ + \mathbb{E}\Bigg[\int_t^T -u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s)\Lambda^a(\delta^a_s)1_{q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}>-Q}$$$$\left(1-\exp\left(-\gamma\left(\Delta \delta^a_s + \theta(s,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}-\Delta) - \theta(s,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-})\right)\right)\right)ds\Bigg].$$
By definition of $\theta$, we have the inequality
$$\mathbb{E}\left[u(T,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T}, S^{t,S}_T)\right] = \mathbb{E}\left[u(T,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T-}, S^{t,S}_T)\right] \le u(t,x,q,S),$$
i.e.,
$$\mathbb{E}\left[-\exp\left(-\gamma(X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T}+q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T} S^{t,S}_T - \ell(|q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T}|))\right)\right] \le u(t,x,q,S).$$
Furthermore, by Lemma \ref{sec3:lemmaH}, there is equality in the above inequality if $(\delta^b_s)_{s\ge t}$ and $(\delta^a_s)_{s\ge t}$ are given (in closed-loop) by Eq.~(\ref{sec3:deltaoptimal}).\\
Therefore, $u$ is indeed the value function
$$u(t,x,q,S) = \sup_{(\delta^b_s)_{s\ge t}, (\delta^a_s)_{s\ge t} \in \mathcal{A}(t)} \mathbb{E}\left[- \exp\left(-\gamma\left(X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_T+q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_T S^{t,S}_T- \ell(|q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_T|)\right)\right) \right],$$
and the optimal quotes are given in closed-loop by Eq.~(\ref{sec3:deltaoptimal}).\qed\\
\end{proof}
For Model B, a similar result holds.
\begin{Theorem}
\label{sec3:theomodelB}
Let us consider the solution $\theta$ of Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetagen}) with terminal condition (\ref{sec3:thetagenCT}) for $\xi=0$.\\
Then, $u : (t,x,q,S) \mapsto x+qS + \theta(t,q)$ defines a solution to Eq.~(\ref{sec3:HJBModelB}) with terminal condition (\ref{sec3:HJBModelBCT}), and
$$u(t,x,q,S) =$$$$ \sup_{(\delta^b_s)_{s\ge t}, (\delta^a_s)_{s\ge t} \in \mathcal{A}(t)} \mathbb{E}\left[X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_T+q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_T S^{t,S}_T- \ell(|q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_T|) - \frac 12 \gamma \sigma^2 \int_t^T {q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_s}^2 ds \right],$$
where $\mathcal{A}(t)$ is the set of predictable processes on $[t,T]$, bounded from below and where
$$dS^{t,S}_s = \sigma dW_s, \qquad S^{t,S}_t = S,$$
$$dX^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_s = (S_s + \delta^a_s) \Delta dN^a_s - (S_s - \delta^b_s) \Delta dN^b_s , \qquad X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_t = x,$$
$$dq^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_s = \Delta dN^b_s - \Delta dN^a_s, \qquad q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_t = q,$$
where the point processes $N^b$ and $N^a$ have stochastic intensity $(\lambda^b_s)_s$ and $(\lambda^a_s)_s$ given by $\lambda^b_s = \Lambda^b(\delta^b_s) 1_{q_{s-} < Q}$ and $\lambda^a_s = \Lambda^a(\delta^a_s) 1_{q_{s-} > -Q}$.\\
The optimal bid and ask quotes $S^b_t = S_t - \delta^{b*}_t$ (for $q_{t-}< Q$) and $S^a_t = S_t + \delta^{a*}_t$ (for $q_{t-}>-Q$) are given by
\begin{equation}
\label{sec3:deltaoptimal2}
\delta^{b*}_t = \tilde{\delta}^{b*}_0\left(\frac{\theta(t,q_{t-}) - \theta(t,q_{t-}+\Delta)}{\Delta}\right) \text{ and } \delta^{a*}_t = \tilde{\delta}^{a*}_0\left(\frac{\theta(t,q_{t-}) - \theta(t,q_{t-}-\Delta)}{\Delta}\right),
\end{equation}
where the functions $\tilde{\delta}^{b*}_{0}(\cdot)$ and $\tilde{\delta}^{a*}_0(\cdot)$ are defined in Eqs.~(\ref{sec3:deltab}) and (\ref{sec3:deltaa}).
\end{Theorem}
\vspace{10pt}
\begin{proof}
Let us consider $t\in [0,T)$, and two processes $(\delta^b_s)_{s\ge t}$ and $(\delta^a_s)_{s\ge t}$ in $\mathcal{A}(t)$. We have
\begin{equation}
\label{verif2}u(T,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T-}, S^{t,S}_T) = u(t,x,q,S) + \int_t^T \partial_t u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s) ds
\end{equation}$$ + \sigma \int_t^T \partial_{S} u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s) dW_s + \frac 12 \sigma^2 \int_t^T \partial^2_{SS} u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s) ds$$$$ + \int_t^T \left(u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} - \Delta S^{t,S}_s + \Delta \delta^b_s ,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} + \Delta, S^{t,S}_s) - u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s)\right)dN^b_s$$
$$ + \int_t^T \left(u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} + \Delta S^{t,S}_s + \Delta \delta^a_s ,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} - \Delta, S^{t,S}_s) - u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s)\right)dN^a_s.$$
If almost surely $\forall s \in [t,T), \delta^b_s \ge -C$, then
\vspace{10pt}
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T \partial_S u\left(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s\right)
^2ds\right]\\
&\le& \mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T {q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}}^2ds\right]\\
&\le& Q^2(T-t)\\
&<&+\infty.
\end{eqnarray*}
We also have
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T |u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} - \Delta S^{t,S}_s + \Delta \delta^b_s ,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} + \Delta, S^{t,S}_s) \right.\\
&&\left.- u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s)|\Lambda^b(\delta^b_s)1_{q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}<Q}ds\right]\\
&\le& \mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T \Lambda^b(\delta^b_s) |\Delta \delta^b_s + \theta(s,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}+\Delta) - \theta(s,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-})| ds\right]\\
&\le& 2 \Lambda^b(-C) \|\theta\|_{L^\infty([t,T]\times\mathcal{Q})}(T-t) + \Delta (T-t) \sup_{\delta>-C} |\delta| \Lambda^b(\delta)\\
&\le& 2 \Lambda^b(-C) \|\theta\|_{L^\infty([t,T]\times\mathcal{Q})}(T-t) + (T-t) \max( \Delta C \Lambda^b(-C), H^b_0(0))\\
&<&+\infty.
\end{eqnarray*}
Similarly
$$\mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T |u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} + \Delta S^{t,S}_s + \Delta \delta^a_s ,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} - \Delta, S^{t,S}_s) \right.$$$$\left.- u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s)|\Lambda^a(\delta^a_s)1_{q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}>-Q}ds\right] < +\infty.$$
By taking expectations in Eq.~(\ref{verif2}), we obtain
$$\mathbb{E}\left[u(T,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T-}, S^{t,S}_T)\right] = u(t,x,q,S)$$$$ + \mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T \left(\partial_t u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s) + \frac 12 \sigma^2 \partial^2_{SS} u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s)\right) ds\right]$$$$ + \mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T \left(u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} - \Delta S^{t,S}_s + \Delta \delta^b_s ,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} + \Delta, S^{t,S}_s)\right.\right.$$$$\left. - u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s)\right)\Lambda^b(\delta^b_s)1_{q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}<Q}ds$$
$$ + \int_t^T \left(u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} + \Delta S^{t,S}_s + \Delta \delta^a_s ,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-} - \Delta, S^{t,S}_s)\right.$$$$\left.\left. - u(s,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}, S^{t,S}_s)\right)\Lambda^a(\delta^a_s)1_{q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}>-Q}ds\right].$$
By definition of $u$, we have therefore
$$\mathbb{E}\left[u(T,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T-}, S^{t,S}_T)\right] = u(t,x,q,S) + \mathbb{E}\left[\int_t^T \partial_t \theta(s,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}) ds\right]$$$$ + \mathbb{E}\Bigg[\int_t^T \Lambda^b(\delta^b_s)1_{q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}<Q}\left(\Delta \delta^b_s + \theta(s,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}+\Delta) - \theta(s,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-})\right)ds\Bigg]$$
$$ + \mathbb{E}\Bigg[\int_t^T \Lambda^a(\delta^a_s)1_{q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}>-Q}\left(\Delta \delta^a_s + \theta(s,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}-\Delta) - \theta(s,q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-})\right)ds\Bigg].$$
By definition of $\theta$, we have the inequality
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\mathbb{E}\left[u(T,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T}, S^{t,S}_T)\right]\\
&=& \mathbb{E}\left[u(T,X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T-},q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T-}, S^{t,S}_T)\right]\\
&\le& u(t,x,q,S) + \mathbb{E}\Bigg[\int_t^T \frac 12 \gamma \sigma^2 {q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s-}}^2 ds\Bigg]\\
&\le& u(t,x,q,S) + \mathbb{E}\Bigg[\int_t^T \frac 12 \gamma \sigma^2 {q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s}}^2 ds\Bigg]\\
\end{eqnarray*}
i.e.,
$$\mathbb{E}\left[X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T}+q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T} S^{t,S}_T - \ell(|q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T}|) - \int_t^T \frac 12 \gamma \sigma^2 {q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s}}^2 ds \right] \le u(t,x,q,S).$$
Furthermore, by Lemma \ref{sec3:lemmaH}, there is equality in the above inequality if $(\delta^b_s)_{s\ge t}$ and $(\delta^a_s)_{s\ge t}$ are given (in closed-loop) by Eq.~(\ref{sec3:deltaoptimal2}).\\
Therefore, $u$ is indeed the value function
$$u(t,x,q,S) =$$$$ \sup_{(\delta^b_s)_{s\ge t}, (\delta^a_s)_{s\ge t} \in \mathcal{A}(t)} \mathbb{E}\left[X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T}+q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T} S^{t,S}_T - \ell(|q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{T}|) - \int_t^T \frac 12 \gamma \sigma^2 {q^{t,q,\delta^b,\delta^a}_{s}}^2 ds\right],$$
and the optimal quotes are given in closed-loop by Eq.~(\ref{sec3:deltaoptimal2}).\qed\\
\end{proof}
\subsection{Comments on the results}
In both Model A and Model B, the dynamic optimization problem faced by the market maker was initially characterized by a Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman equation with 4 variables: the time $t$, and 3 state variables (the cash $x$, the inventory $q$, and the reference price $S$). Computing a numerical approximation for the solution of a 4-dimensional HJB equation such as Eq.~(\ref{sec3:HJBModelA}) or Eq.~(\ref{sec3:HJBModelB}) is always time-consuming. Therefore, the results obtained in Theorem 3.2 and Theorem 3.3 are very useful: they state that the optimal quotes of a market maker in both Model A and Model B can in fact be computed by solving a tridiagonal system of nonlinear ordinary differential equations. This corresponds to a reduction of the dimensionality of the problem from 4 to 2. Furthermore, the systems of nonlinear ordinary differential equations are similar for Model A and Model B: they correspond to Eq.~(\ref{sec3:thetagen}) -- with terminal condition (\ref{sec3:thetagenCT}) -- with $\xi = \gamma$ for Model A and with $\xi = 0$ for Model B.\\
The objective functions of Model A and Model B lead to similar equations, but it is interesting to understand the differences between the two modeling approaches. In fact, the penalization term $$ \frac 12 \gamma \sigma^2 \int_0^T q_t^2 dt$$ in Model B leads to the term $\frac 12 \gamma \sigma^2 q^2$ in the ODEs characterizing $\theta$ (when $\xi = 0$), and this term arises also in the ODE associated with Model A (when $\xi=\gamma$) because of the market maker's aversion to price risk. However, in Model A, the market maker is not only averse to price risk, but also to the risk of not finding a counterparty to trade with -- this is what we call non-execution risk. There is indeed a source of risk coming from the process $(W_t)_t$, and another source of risk coming from the processes $(N_t^b)_t$ and $(N^a_t)_t$, and risk aversion in Model A applies to both kinds of risk. In other words, things work as if the market maker of Model A was risk averse to both kinds of risk, while the market maker of Model B is only averse to the risk associated with price changes. In particular, the parameter $\xi$ can be regarded as some form of risk aversion parameter applying to non-execution risk only: it is equal to $\gamma$ in the case of Model A, and equal to $0$ in the case of Model B.\\
\section{Closed-form and almost-closed-form approximations}
In \cite{gueant2013dealing}, the authors show in the specific case where $\Lambda^b(\delta)= \Lambda^a(\delta) = A e^{-k\delta} =: \Lambda(\delta)$ that there is an asymptotic regime far from $T$ for the optimal quotes in Model A.\footnote{The authors of \cite{gueant2013dealing} use the linear system of ODEs (\ref{sec3:eqv}) in the case $\Delta = 1$ and $\xi=\gamma$.} In other words, far from the terminal time $T$, the optimal quotes in \cite{gueant2013dealing} are well approximated by functions that only depend on the inventory $q$ -- and not on the time variable $t$. In practice, in markets (such as most dealer-driven OTC markets) for which there is no natural terminal time $T$, this result is not surprising -- even, somehow, reassuring -- and only the asymptotic formula should be used. Furthermore, the authors of \cite{gueant2013dealing} proposed closed-form approximations for the asymptotic values of the optimal quotes. In this section, we propose new approximation formulas which generalize those obtained in \cite{gueant2013dealing} to a more general set of intensity functions, and to both Model~A and Model~B (only Model~A was considered in \cite{gueant2013dealing}). These more general approximations are based on heuristic arguments, and we will see in the numerical experiments of Section 6 when they are (or are not) satisfactory.
\subsection{Approximation with an elliptic partial differential equation}
To compute the optimal quotes given in Eqs.~(\ref{sec3:deltaoptimal}) and (\ref{sec3:deltaoptimal2}), the first step consists in computing the function $\theta$ solution of the system of ODEs (\ref{sec3:thetagen}), with terminal condition~(\ref{sec3:thetagenCT}). In order to approximate the optimal quotes, we first approximate therefore the function $\theta$.\\
To carry out our reasoning, we suppose that the intensity functions $\Lambda^b$ and $\Lambda^a$ are identical (equal to $\Lambda$), and that $H_\xi : = H^b_\xi = H^a_\xi$ verifies $H_\xi''(0) > 0$.\footnote{The condition $H''_{\xi}(0) > 0$ is always verified when $\xi = 0$ (see the proof of Lemma \ref{sec3:lemmaH}). A sufficient condition in general is
$$\forall \delta \in \mathbb{R},\quad \xi \Delta \frac{\Lambda(\delta)^2 \Lambda''(\delta)}{\Lambda'(\delta)^3} < 1.$$ This condition (obtained by using the expression of $H''_\xi$ in the proof of Lemma \ref{sec3:lemmaH}) is verified for instance if $\Lambda$ is convex (exponential intensities enter this category).}\\
Our heuristic reasoning consists in replacing the function $\theta : [0,T]\times \mathcal{Q} \to \mathbb{R}$ by a function $\tilde{\theta} : [0,T]\times \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$ and to replace the system of ODEs (\ref{sec3:thetagen}) characterizing $\theta$, i.e.,
$$
0=-\partial_t \theta(t,q) + \frac{1}{2} \gamma \sigma^2 q^2
$$
$$- 1_{q<Q} H^b_{\xi}\left(\frac{\theta(t,q) - \theta(t,q+\Delta)}{\Delta}\right) - 1_{q>-Q} H^a_{\xi}\left(\frac{\theta(t,q) - \theta(t,q-\Delta)}{\Delta}\right)$$
by the PDE
$$0 = - \partial_t \tilde\theta(t,q) + \frac 12 \gamma \sigma^2 q^2 - 2H_{\xi}\left(0\right)$$\begin{equation}\label{sec4:thetatilde} - H_{\xi}''(0) (\partial_q \tilde\theta(t,q))^2 + \Delta H_{\xi}'(0) \partial^2_{qq} \tilde\theta(t,q).\end{equation}
This PDE comes from an expansion in $\epsilon$ of the expression\footnote{We remove here the boundaries associated with $-Q$ and $Q$.}
$$
0=-\partial_t \tilde{\theta}(t,q) + \frac{1}{2} \gamma \sigma^2 q^2
$$
$$- H_{\xi}\left(\frac{\tilde{\theta}(t,q) - \tilde{\theta}(t,q+\epsilon\Delta)}{\Delta}\right) - H_{\xi}\left(\frac{\tilde\theta(t,q) - \tilde\theta(t,q-\epsilon\Delta)}{\Delta}\right),$$ applied to $\epsilon =1$.\footnote{Another way to see this expansion is to consider an expansion of order 2 in $\Delta$ (an expansion of order 1 would correspond, after rescaling $H_\xi$, to a fluid-limit regime where non-execution risk vanishes) combined with an approximation of $H_{\xi}$ by using the first three terms of its Taylor expansion (in 0).}\\
We have indeed
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& H_{\xi}\left(\frac{\tilde{\theta}(t,q) - \tilde{\theta}(t,q+\epsilon\Delta)}{\Delta}\right) + H_{\xi}\left(\frac{\tilde\theta(t,q) - \tilde\theta(t,q-\epsilon\Delta)}{\Delta}\right)\\
&=& H_{\xi}\left(-\epsilon \partial_q \tilde{\theta}(t,q) - \frac 12 \epsilon^2 \Delta \partial^2_{qq}\tilde{\theta}(t,q) + o(\epsilon^2)\right) + H_{\xi}\left(\epsilon \partial_q \tilde{\theta}(t,q) - \frac 12 \epsilon^2 \Delta \partial^2_{qq}\tilde{\theta}(t,q) + o(\epsilon^2)\right)\\
&=& 2 H_{\xi}(0) - \epsilon^2 \Delta H'_{\xi}(0) \partial^2_{qq}\tilde{\theta}(t,q) + \epsilon^2 H''_{\xi}(0) \left(\partial_q \tilde{\theta}(t,q)\right)^2 + o(\epsilon^2).\\
\end{eqnarray*}
By considering
$$\tilde{v}(t,q) = \exp\left(-\frac{H''_{\xi}(0)}{\Delta H'_{\xi}(0) } \tilde{\theta}(t,q)\right),$$
the nonlinear PDE (\ref{sec4:thetatilde}) becomes the linear PDE\footnote{One can see the proximity with Eq.~(\ref{sec3:eqv}).}
\begin{equation}
\label{sec4:v}0 = \partial_t \tilde{v}(t,q) - \frac{H''_{\xi}(0)}{\Delta H'_{\xi}(0)}\left( 2 H_{\xi}(0) - \frac 12 \gamma \sigma^2 q^2\right) \tilde{v}(t,q) -\Delta H'_{\xi}(0) \partial^2_{qq} \tilde{v}(t,q),\end{equation}
and the terminal condition relevant with our problem is
$$\tilde{v}(T,q) = \exp\left(\frac{H''_{\xi}(0)}{\Delta H'_{\xi}(0) } \ell(|q|)\right).$$
Eq.~(\ref{sec4:v}) is a linear PDE and it can be studied using basic tools of spectral theory. Our goal is to study the asymptotic behavior of $\tilde{v}(t,q)$ when $T$ tends to infinity, and to use the formulas obtained in this asymptotic regime in order to approximate successively $\tilde{v}$, $\tilde{\theta}$, $\theta$, and ultimately the optimal quotes $(\delta_t^{b*})_t$ and $(\delta^{a*}_t)_t$.\\
\subsection{Generalization of the Gu\'eant-Lehalle-Fernandez-Tapia's formulas}
By classical spectral theory,\footnote{The basic reasoning consists in proving that the operator $\tilde{v} \mapsto -\frac 12\frac{H''_{\xi}(0)}{\Delta H'_{\xi}(0)} \gamma \sigma^2 q^2 \tilde{v} + \Delta H'_{\xi}(0) \partial^2_{qq} \tilde{v}$ is a positive self-adjoint operator with a compact inverse (see Chapter 6 of \cite{brezis} for more details). Therefore, this operator can be diagonalized in an orthonormal basis. Its minimum eigenvalue can be shown to be simple by using the same methodology as in \cite{gueant2013dealing}.} we know that $$\tilde{v}(t,q) \sim_{T \to +\infty} (\tilde{v}(T,\cdot),\tilde{f}^0)\tilde{f}^0(q) \exp\left(\nu (T-t)\right),$$ where $\nu$ and $\tilde{f}^0$ are respectively the minimum and a minimizer of the functional
$$ \tilde{f} \in \lbrace \tilde{g} \in H^1(\mathbb{R}), \|\tilde{g}\|_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}=1\rbrace \mapsto \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \left(\alpha x^2 \tilde{f}(x)^2 + \eta \tilde{f}'(x)^2\right) dx,$$
with $$\alpha = - \frac 12 \frac{H''_{\xi}(0)}{\Delta H'_{\xi}(0)} \gamma \sigma^2 \text{ and } \eta = -\Delta H'_{\xi}(0),$$ and where $(\cdot,\cdot)$ designates the scalar product in $L^2(\mathbb{R})$.\\
In particular,
$$\tilde{f}^0(q) \propto \exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\frac{\alpha}{\eta}}q^2\right).$$
From
\begin{eqnarray*}
\tilde{v}(t,q) & \sim_{T \to +\infty}& C \exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\frac{\alpha}{\eta}}q^2\right) \exp(\nu (T-t)),\\
\end{eqnarray*}
where $C$ is a constant, independent of $(t,q)$, we deduce:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\tilde{\theta}(t,q) + \frac{\Delta H'_{\xi}(0) }{H''_{\xi}(0)} \nu(T-t) &\to_{T \to +\infty}& - \frac{\Delta H'_{\xi}(0) }{H''_{\xi}(0)}\left(\log(C) -\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\frac{\alpha}{\eta}}q^2\right)\\
\end{eqnarray*}
i.e.,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\tilde{\theta}(t,q) + \frac{\Delta H'_{\xi}(0) }{H''_{\xi}(0)} \nu(T-t) &\to_{T \to +\infty}& - \frac{\Delta H'_{\xi}(0) }{H''_{\xi}(0)}\left(\log(C) -\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{2H''_{\xi}(0)}}q^2\right).\\
\end{eqnarray*}
As a consequence, we consider the approximations
$$\frac{\theta(t,q) - \theta(t,q+\Delta)}{\Delta} \simeq \frac{2q+\Delta}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{2H''_{\xi}(0)}}$$
and
$$\frac{\theta(t,q) - \theta(t,q-\Delta)}{\Delta} \simeq -\frac{2q-\Delta}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{2H''_{\xi}(0)}}.$$
These approximations are independent of $t$ and of the final penalty function $\ell$. They can be plugged into Eqs.~(\ref{sec3:deltaoptimal}) and (\ref{sec3:deltaoptimal2}) to obtain the general approximation formulas
\begin{equation}
\label{sec4:gueantformulab}\delta^{b*}_t \simeq \delta_{\text{approx}}^{b*}(q_{t-}) := \tilde{\delta}^{*}_\xi\left(\frac{2q_{t-}+\Delta}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{2H''_{\xi}(0)}}\right)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{sec4:gueantformulaa}
\delta^{a*}_t \simeq \delta_{\text{approx}}^{a*}(q_{t-}) := \tilde{\delta}^{*}_\xi\left(-\frac{2q_{t-}-\Delta}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{2H''_{\xi}(0)}}\right),
\end{equation} where
\begin{equation}
\label{sec4:deltatilde}
\tilde{\delta}^{*}_\xi(p) = {\Lambda}^{-1}\left(\xi H_{\xi}(p) - \frac{{H_{\xi}}'(p)}{\Delta}\right).
\end{equation}
In particular, if $\Lambda(\delta) = A e^{-k\delta}$, then
$$\tilde{\delta}_\xi^*(p) = \begin{cases} p + \frac{1}{\xi \Delta} \log\left(1 + \frac{\xi\Delta}{k}\right) &\mbox{if } \xi > 0 \\
p + \frac 1k & \mbox{if } \xi=0, \end{cases}$$
and we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{sec4:glftformulab}\delta_{\text{approx}}^{b*}(q) = \begin{cases} \frac{1}{\xi \Delta} \log\left(1 + \frac{\xi\Delta}{k}\right) + \frac{2q+\Delta}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{2A\Delta k} \left(1 + \frac{\xi\Delta}{k}\right)^{\frac{k}{\xi\Delta} + 1} } &\mbox{if } \xi > 0\\
\frac{1}k + \frac{2q+\Delta}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2e}{2A\Delta k} } & \mbox{if } \xi=0, \end{cases}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{sec4:glftformulaa}
\delta_{\text{approx}}^{a*}(q) = \begin{cases} \frac{1}{\xi \Delta} \log\left(1 + \frac{\xi\Delta}{k}\right) - \frac{2q-\Delta}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{2A\Delta k} \left(1 + \frac{\xi\Delta}{k}\right)^{\frac{k}{\xi\Delta} + 1} } &\mbox{if } \xi > 0\\
\frac{1}k - \frac{2q-\Delta}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2e}{2A\Delta k} } & \mbox{if } \xi=0. \end{cases}
\end{equation}
In particular, we recover, in the specific case where $\Delta = 1$ and $\xi=\gamma$, the Gu\'eant-Lehalle-Fernandez-Tapia's formula of \cite{gueant2013dealing} and \cite{gueantbook} often used in the industry.
\subsection{Comments on the approximations}
The approximations obtained above deserve a few comments. First, in the general case (i.e., even when the intensity function $\Lambda$ is not exponential), the approximations are almost in closed form, in the sense that they are only functions of the parameters and of transforms of $\Lambda$. In practice, one simply needs to compute $\Lambda^{-1}$, $H_\xi$, $H'_\xi$, and $H''_\xi$, in order to compute the approximations (\ref{sec4:gueantformulab}) and (\ref{sec4:gueantformulaa}). Second, the above approximations enable to better understand the optimal strategy of a market maker, and the role played by the different parameters. In particular, they enable to better understand the different types of risk faced by a market maker.\\
By using Eqs.~(\ref{sec4:gueantformulab}) and (\ref{sec4:gueantformulaa}), we see that
$$
\frac{d\ }{dq}\delta_{\text{approx}}^{b*}(q) = \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{2H''_{\xi}(0)}}\tilde{\delta}^{*'}_\xi\left(\frac{2q+\Delta}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{2H''_{\xi}(0)}}\right) > 0
$$
and
$$
\frac{d\ }{dq} \delta_{\text{approx}}^{a*}(q) = \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{2H''_{\xi}(0)}} \tilde{\delta}^{*'}_\xi\left(-\frac{2q-\Delta}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{2H''_{\xi}(0)}}\right)< 0.
$$
This means that a market maker proposes lower prices at the bid and at the ask when his inventory increases, and conversely, higher prices at the bid and at the ask when his inventory decreases. In particular, a market maker with a positive or negative inventory always skews his bid and ask prices in order to increase his chance to go back to a flat position.\\
In the particular case of exponential intensities, it is interesting to notice that the approximation of the bid-ask spread is independent of $q$, and the skew is linear in $q$:
\begin{equation}
\label{sec4:spread}\delta_{\text{approx}}^{b*}(q) + \delta_{\text{approx}}^{a*}(q) = \begin{cases} \frac{2}{\xi \Delta} \log\left(1 + \frac{\xi\Delta}{k}\right) + \Delta \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{2A\Delta k} \left(1 + \frac{\xi\Delta}{k}\right)^{\frac{k}{\xi\Delta} + 1} } &\mbox{if } \xi > 0\\
\frac{2}k + \Delta \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2e}{2A\Delta k} } & \mbox{if } \xi=0, \end{cases}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{sec4:skew}\delta_{\text{approx}}^{b*}(q) - \delta_{\text{approx}}^{a*}(q) = \begin{cases} 2q \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{2A\Delta k} \left(1 + \frac{\xi\Delta}{k}\right)^{\frac{k}{\xi\Delta} + 1} } &\mbox{if } \xi > 0\\
2q\sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2e}{2A\Delta k} } & \mbox{if } \xi=0. \end{cases}
\end{equation}
As far as volatility is concerned, we have
$$
\frac{d\ }{d\sigma}\delta_{\text{approx}}^{b*}(q) = \frac{2q+\Delta}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma}{2H''_{\xi}(0)}} \tilde{\delta}^{*'}_\xi\left(\frac{2q+\Delta}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{2H''_{\xi}(0)}}\right)
$$
and
$$
\frac{d\ }{d\sigma}\delta_{\text{approx}}^{a*}(q) = -\frac{2q-\Delta}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma}{2H''_{\xi}(0)}} \tilde{\delta}^{*'}_\xi\left(-\frac{2q-\Delta}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{2H''_{\xi}(0)}}\right).
$$
Therefore we have three cases:
\begin{itemize}
\item if $q=0$, then $\frac{d\ }{d\sigma}\delta_{\text{approx}}^{b*}(q) = \frac{d\ }{d\sigma}\delta_{\text{approx}}^{a*}(q) > 0$. In other words, an increase in volatility leads to an increase in the bid-ask spread, symmetric around the reference price (no skew).
\item if $q \ge \Delta$, then $\frac{d\ }{d\sigma}\delta_{\text{approx}}^{b*}(q) >0$ and $\frac{d\ }{d\sigma}\delta_{\text{approx}}^{a*}(q) < 0$. In other words, an increase in volatility leads to lower bid and ask prices: it increases the skew in absolute value, \emph{ceteris paribus}.
\item if $q \le -\Delta$, then $\frac{d\ }{d\sigma}\delta_{\text{approx}}^{b*}(q) <0$ and $\frac{d\ }{d\sigma}\delta_{\text{approx}}^{a*}(q) > 0$. In other words, an increase in volatility leads to higher bid and ask prices: it increases the skew in absolute value, \emph{ceteris paribus}.
\end{itemize}
In the particular case of exponential intensities, it is interesting to notice that the bid-ask spread is approximated by an affine function of $\sigma$, and the skew by a linear function of $\sigma$ (see Eqs.~(\ref{sec4:spread}) and (\ref{sec4:skew})).\\
As far as liquidity is concerned, if we replace $\Lambda$ by $\beta\Lambda$, for $\beta >0$, then we see that $H_\xi$ is replaced by $\beta H_\xi$, and that $\tilde{\delta}_\xi$ is unchanged (see Eq.~(\ref{sec4:deltatilde})). Therefore, we see from Eqs.~(\ref{sec4:gueantformulab}) and (\ref{sec4:gueantformulaa}), that replacing $\Lambda$ by $\beta\Lambda$ is equivalent to replacing $\sigma^2$ by $\frac{\sigma^2}\beta$. In other words, an increase in liquidity is equivalent to a decrease in volatility and, conversely, a decrease in liquidity has the same effects as an increase in volatility.\\
As far as risk aversion is concerned, the differences between Model A and Model B help to clarify the different roles played by $\gamma$.\\
In the case of Model B, where $\xi=0$, we see from Eqs.~(\ref{sec4:gueantformulab}) and (\ref{sec4:gueantformulaa}), that an increase in~$\gamma$ is equivalent to an increase in $\sigma^2$. In particular, an increase in $\gamma$ increases the bid-ask spread and increases the skew in absolute value. This is expected, since $\gamma$, in Model B, penalizes positive and negative inventory.\\
In the case of Model A, the situation is different, but the introduction of the variable $\xi$ helps to understand what is at stake. As already mentioned, everything works as if $\xi$ was a risk aversion parameter for non-execution risk and $\gamma$ a risk aversion parameter for price risk. To analyze the different effects, we consider the specific case of exponential intensities. We see in Eq.~(\ref{sec4:spread}) that the approximation of the bid-ask spread is made of two parts:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\frac{2}{\xi \Delta} \log\left(1 + \frac{\xi\Delta}{k}\right)$, which is decreasing in $\xi$. This term is related to the static risk faced by a market maker, associated with transaction uncertainty only. When $\xi=\gamma$ increases, a market maker reduces his bid-ask spread to lower the uncertainty with respect to transactions.
\item $\Delta \sqrt{\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{2A\Delta k} \left(1 + \frac{\xi\Delta}{k}\right)^{\frac{k}{\xi\Delta} + 1} }$, which is increasing in $\gamma$ and $\xi = \gamma$. This term, that only appears with volatility, is related to the dynamic risk faced by a market maker. This risk is complex and definitely more subtle than the classical risk that the price moves. In fact, both $\xi$ and $\gamma$ appear in the formula because the risk faced by a market maker is actually the risk that the price moves adversely without him being able to unwind his position rapidly enough (because of trade uncertainty). The higher the risk aversion to this combination of price risk and non-execution risk, the larger the bid-ask spread, because a market maker wants to avoid holding large inventories (in absolute value).
\end{enumerate}
As far as the skew is concerned, only the second effect matters. This is confirmed by Eq.~(\ref{sec4:skew}), and we see that the skew in absolute value is increasing with $\gamma$ and $\xi=\gamma$.\\
Comparative statics is always interesting to understand the role played by the different parameters involved in a model. Here, we have carried out comparative statics on almost-closed-form and closed-form approximations, and not on the original optimal bid and ask quotes, which can only be computed numerically. We will see in Section 6 the differences between the actual optimal bid and ask quotes and the approximations proposed in this section.\footnote{In particular, in the case of exponential intensities, the actual bid-ask spread is not independent of $q$.}
\section{Multi-asset market making strategies}
In most papers of the academic literature on market making, only single-asset market making is tackled. In practice, however, market makers are often in charge of a book of several assets. An evident case is the one of corporate bonds, since there are usually dozens of bonds issued by the same company, and the same market maker is in charge of all these bonds. As a consequence, optimal quotes for a specific bond should not depend on the market maker's inventory in that bond, but instead on the risk profile of the whole bond portfolio with respect to the issuer. In particular, when a market maker has a short inventory in an asset and an almost equivalent long inventory in another asset, highly correlated with the first, there may be no reason for him to skew his bid and ask quotes on these two assets, contrary to what single-asset market making models would suggest. In this section, we generalize our market making model to the multi-asset case. In particular, we obtain closed-form approximations for the optimal quotes of a multi-asset market maker.
\subsection{Modeling framework and notations}
We consider a market maker in charge of $d$ assets. For $i \in \{ 1, \ldots, d\}$, the reference price of asset $i$ is modeled by a process $(S^i_t)_t$ with the following dynamics
\begin{equation}
\label{sec5:dS}
dS^i_t = \sigma^i dW^i_t,\quad S^i_0 \text{\; given},
\end{equation}
where $(W^1_t, \ldots, W^d_t)_t$ is a $d$-dimensional Brownian motion adapted to the filtration $(\mathcal{F}_t)_{t\in \mathbb{R}_+}$, with nonsingular correlation matrix. We denote by $\Sigma = (\rho^{i,j} \sigma^i\sigma^j)_{1 \le i,j \le d}$, the variance-covariance matrix associated with the process $(S_t)_t = (S^1_t, \ldots, S^d_t)_t$.\\
This market maker proposes bid and ask quotes to buy and sell the $d$ assets. These bid and ask quotes are modeled by $2d$ stochastic processes, respectively denoted by $(S^{1,b}_t)_t, \ldots, (S^{d,b}_t)_t$ and $(S^{1,a}_t)_t, \ldots, (S^{d,a}_t)_t$.\\
As in the single-asset case, we denote by $(N^{i,b}_t)_t$ and $(N^{i,a}_t)_t$, for each $i \in \{1, \ldots, d \}$, the two point processes modeling the number of transactions at the bid and at the ask, respectively, for asset $i$. We assume that the asset $i$ is traded $\Delta^i$ units by $\Delta^i$ units.\\
The inventory of the market maker, modeled by the $d$-dimensional process $(q_t)_t = (q^1_t, \ldots, q^d_t)_t$, has therefore the following dynamics:
\begin{equation}
\label{sec5:dq}
\forall i \in \{1, \ldots, d\}, dq^i_t = \Delta^i dN^{i,b}_t - \Delta^i dN^{i,a}_t, \quad q^i_0 \text{\; given.}
\end{equation}
We assume that the processes $(N^{1,b}_t, \ldots, N^{d,b}_t)_{t}$ and $(N^{1,a}_t, \ldots, N^{d,a}_t)_t$ are independent of the Brownian motion $(W^1_t, \ldots, W^d_t)_t$. For $i \in \{1, \ldots, d\}$, we denote by $(\lambda_t^{i,b})_t$ and $(\lambda_t^{i,a})_t$ the intensity processes of $(N^{i,b}_t)_t$ and $(N^{i,a}_t)_t$, respectively. We assume that $(\lambda_t^{i,b})_t$ and $(\lambda_t^{i,a})_t$ verify
\begin{equation}
\label{sec5:intensity} \lambda_t^{i,b} = \Lambda^{i,b}(\delta_t^{i,b})1_{q^i_{t-}<Q^i} \quad \text{and} \quad \lambda_t^{i,a} = \Lambda^{i,a}(\delta_t^{i,a})1_{q^i_{t-}>-Q^i},
\end{equation} where $$\delta_t^{i,b} = S^i_t - S_t^{i,b} \quad \text{and} \quad \delta_t^{i,a} = S^{i,a}_t - S^i_t,$$
and where $\Lambda^{i,b}$ and $\Lambda^{i,a}$ are two functions satisfying the following hypotheses:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\Lambda^{i,b}$ and $\Lambda^{i,a}$ are twice continuously differentiable,
\item $\Lambda^{i,b}$ and $\Lambda^{i,a}$ are decreasing, with $\forall \delta \in \mathbb{R}$, ${\Lambda^{i,b}}'(\delta) <0$ and ${\Lambda^{i,a}}'(\delta) <0$,
\item $\lim_{\delta \to +\infty} \Lambda^{i,b}(\delta) = \lim_{\delta \to +\infty} \Lambda^{i,a}(\delta) = 0$,
\item $\sup_{\delta}\frac{\Lambda^{i,b}(\delta){\Lambda^{i,b}}''(\delta)}{\left({\Lambda^{i,b}}'(\delta)\right)^2} < 2 \quad \text{and} \quad \sup_{\delta} \frac{\Lambda^{i,a}(\delta){\Lambda^{i,a}}''(\delta)}{\left({\Lambda^{i,a}}'(\delta)\right)^2} < 2.$
\end{itemize}
Finally, the process $(X_t)_t$ modeling the market maker's cash account has the dynamics
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber dX_t &=& \sum_{i=1}^d S^{i,a}_t \Delta^i dN^{i,a}_t - S^{i,b}_t \Delta^i dN^{i,b}_t\\
&=& \sum_{i=1}^d (S^i_t + \delta^{i,a}_t) \Delta^i dN^{i,a}_t - (S^i_t -
\delta^{i,b}_t) \Delta^i dN^{i,b}_t. \label{sec5:dX}
\end{eqnarray}
In the $d$-dimensional generalization of Model A, the problem consists in maximizing
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{E}\left[-\exp\left(-\gamma \left(X_T + \sum_{i=1}^d q^i_T S^i_T - \ell_d(q^1_T, \ldots, q^d_T)\right) \right)\right], \qquad \textbf{(Model A)}
\end{equation*}
over $(\delta_t^{1,b}, \ldots, \delta_t^{d,b})_t \in \mathcal{A}^d$ and $(\delta_t^{1,a}, \ldots, \delta_t^{d,a})_t \in \mathcal{A}^d$, where $\ell_d$ is a penalty function.\\
In the $d$-dimensional generalization of Model B, the problem consists instead in maximizing
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{E}\left[X_T + \sum_{i=1}^d q^i_T S^i_T - \ell_d(q^1_T, \ldots, q^d_T) - \frac 12 \gamma \int_0^T \sum_{i=1}^d \sum_{j=1}^d \rho^{i,j} \sigma^i\sigma^j q^i_t q^j_t dt \right], \qquad \textbf{(Model B)}
\end{equation*}
over $(\delta_t^{1,b}, \ldots, \delta_t^{d,b})_t \in \mathcal{A}^d$ and $(\delta_t^{1,a}, \ldots, \delta_t^{d,b})_t \in \mathcal{A}^d$.
\subsection{Towards a general system of ordinary differential equations}
For solving the two stochastic optimal control problems of Model A and Model B, we use similar changes of variables as in Section 3. In particular, we show that finding the value function (and the optimal bid and ask quotes) in both models boils down to solving a system of ordinary differential equations, and that, as in the single-asset case, the equations associated with Model~A and Model B are part of the same family of ODEs.\\
The HJB equation associated with Model A is given by\footnote{We denote by $(e^1, \ldots, e^d)$ the canonical basis of $\mathbb{R}^d$.}
\begin{equation}
\label{sec5:HJBModelA}0= -\partial_t u(t,x,q,S) - \frac 12 \sum_{i=1}^d \sum_{j=1}^d \rho^{i,j} \sigma^i\sigma^j \partial^2_{S^iS^j} u(t,x,q,S)
\end{equation}
$$ - \sum_{i=1}^d 1_{q^i<Q^i}\sup_{\delta^{i,b}}
\Lambda^{i,b}(\delta^{i,b}) \left[u(t,x-\Delta^i S^i+\Delta^i\delta^{i,b},q+\Delta^i e^i,S) - u(t,x,q,S) \right]$$
$$ - \sum_{i=1}^d 1_{q^i>-Q^i} \sup_{\delta^{i,a}} \Lambda^{i,a}(\delta^{i,a}) \left[u(t,x+\Delta^i S^i+\Delta^i \delta^{i,a},q-\Delta^ie^i,S) -
u(t,x,q,S) \right],$$ for $\forall i \in \{ 1, \ldots, d\}, q^i \in \mathcal{Q}^i = \lbrace -Q^i, -Q^i + \Delta^i, \ldots, Q^i-\Delta^i, Q^i \rbrace$, and $(t,S,x) \in [0,T]\times \mathbb{R}^d\times \mathbb{R}$, with the terminal condition \begin{equation}\label{sec5:HJBModelACT}u(T,x,q,S) = -\exp\left(-\gamma\left(x+\sum_{i=1}^d q^iS^i - \ell_d(q^1,\ldots, q^d)\right)\right).\end{equation}
If one uses the ansatz
\begin{equation}\label{sec5:ansatzModelA}u(t,x,q,S) = -\exp\left(-\gamma\left(x+\sum_{i=1}^d q^iS^i + \theta(t,q)\right)\right),\end{equation}
then Eq.~(\ref{sec5:HJBModelA}) becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{sec5:thetaModelA}
0=-\partial_t \theta(t,q) + \frac{1}{2} \gamma \sum_{i=1}^d\sum_{j=1}^d \rho^{i,j} \sigma^i\sigma^j q^i q^j
\end{equation}
$$- \sum_{i=1}^d 1_{q^i<Q^i}\sup_{\delta^{i,b}} \frac{\Lambda^{i,b}(\delta^{i,b})}{\gamma}\left(1-\exp\left(-\gamma\left(\Delta^i \delta^{i,b} + \theta(t,q+\Delta^ie^i) - \theta(t,q) \right)\right)\right)$$
$$- \sum_{i=1}^d 1_{q^i>-Q^i} \sup_{\delta^{i,a}} \frac{\Lambda^{i,a}(\delta^{i,a})}{\gamma}\left(1-\exp\left(-\gamma \left(\Delta^i \delta^{i,a} + \theta(t,q-\Delta^ie^i) - \theta(t,q) \right)\right)\right),
$$ for $\forall i \in \{ 1, \ldots, d\}, q^i \in \mathcal{Q}^i$, and $t \in [0,T]$, and the terminal condition (\ref{sec5:HJBModelACT}) becomes $\theta(T,q) = -\ell_d(q^1,\ldots,q^d)$.\\
The HJB equation associated with Model B is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{sec5:HJBModelB}0= -\partial_t u(t,x,q,S) + \frac{1}{2} \gamma \sum_{i=1}^d\sum_{j=1}^d \rho^{i,j} \sigma^i\sigma^j q^i q^j
\end{equation}
$$- \frac 12 \sum_{i=1}^d \sum_{j=1}^d \rho^{i,j} \sigma^i\sigma^j \partial^2_{S^iS^j} u(t,x,q,S)$$
$$ - \sum_{i=1}^d 1_{q^i<Q^i}\sup_{\delta^{i,b}}
\Lambda^{i,b}(\delta^{i,b}) \left[u(t,x-\Delta^i S^i+\Delta^i\delta^{i,b},q+\Delta^i e^i,S) - u(t,x,q,S) \right]$$
$$ - \sum_{i=1}^d 1_{q^i>-Q^i} \sup_{\delta^{i,a}} \Lambda^{i,a}(\delta^{i,a}) \left[u(t,x+\Delta^i S^i+\Delta^i \delta^{i,a},q-\Delta^ie^i,S) -
u(t,x,q,S) \right],$$ for $\forall i \in \{ 1, \ldots, d\}, q^i \in \mathcal{Q}^i$ and $(t,S,x) \in [0,T]\times \mathbb{R}^d\times \mathbb{R}$, with the terminal condition \begin{equation}\label{sec5:HJBModelBCT}u(T,x,q,S) = x+\sum_{i=1}^d q^iS^i - \ell_d(q^1,\ldots,q^d).\end{equation}
If one uses the ansatz
\begin{equation}\label{sec5:ansatzModelB}u(t,x,q,S) = x+\sum_{i=1}^d q^iS^i + \theta(t,q),\end{equation}
then Eq.~(\ref{sec5:HJBModelB}) becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{sec5:thetaModelB}
0=-\partial_t \theta(t,q) + \frac{1}{2} \gamma \sum_{i=1}^d\sum_{j=1}^d \rho^{i,j} \sigma^i\sigma^j q^i q^j
\end{equation}
$$- \sum_{i=1}^d 1_{q^i<Q^i} \sup_{\delta^{i,b}} \Lambda^{i,b}(\delta^{i,b})\left(\Delta^i \delta^{i,b} + \theta(t,q+\Delta^ie^i) - \theta(t,q) \right)$$
$$- \sum_{i=1}^d 1_{q^i>-Q^i} \sup_{\delta^{i,a}} \Lambda^{i,a}(\delta^{i,a})\left(\Delta^i \delta^{i,a} + \theta(t,q-\Delta^ie^i) - \theta(t,q) \right),
$$ for $\forall i \in \{ 1, \ldots, d\}, q^i \in \mathcal{Q}^i$, and $t \in [0,T]$, and the terminal condition (\ref{sec5:HJBModelBCT}) becomes $\theta(T,q) = -\ell_d(q^1,\ldots,q^d)$.\\
As in the single-asset case, Eqs.~(\ref{sec5:thetaModelA}) and (\ref{sec5:thetaModelB}) are in fact two systems of ODEs which belong to the same family. Let us introduce for $\xi >0$ the functions
$$H^{i,b}_{\xi}(p) = \sup_{\delta} \frac{\Lambda^{i,b}(\delta)}{\xi}\left(1-\exp\left(-\xi\Delta^i \left(\delta - p \right)\right)\right)$$
and
$$H^{i,a}_{\xi}(p) = \sup_{\delta} \frac{\Lambda^{i,a}(\delta)}{\xi}\left(1-\exp\left(-\xi\Delta^i \left(\delta - p \right)\right)\right),$$
and the limit functions (for $\xi=0$) $$H^{i,b}_{0}(p) = \Delta^i \sup_{\delta} \Lambda^{i,b}(\delta)(\delta - p),$$ and $$H^{i,a}_{0}(p) = \Delta^i \sup_{\delta} \Lambda^{i,a}(\delta)(\delta - p).$$ Then, we can consider the general equation
\begin{equation}
\label{sec5:thetagen}
0=-\partial_t \theta(t,q) + \frac{1}{2} \gamma \sum_{i=1}^d\sum_{j=1}^d \rho^{i,j} \sigma^i\sigma^j q^i q^j
\end{equation}
$$- \sum_{i=1}^d 1_{q^i<Q^i} H^{i,b}_{\xi}\left(\frac{\theta(t,q) - \theta(t,q+\Delta^ie^i)}{\Delta^i}\right) - \sum_{i=1}^d 1_{q^i>-Q^i} H^{i,a}_{\xi}\left(\frac{\theta(t,q) - \theta(t,q-\Delta^ie^i)}{\Delta^i}\right),$$
for $\forall i \in \{ 1, \ldots, d\}, q^i \in \mathcal{Q}^i$, and $t \in [0,T]$, with the terminal condition
\begin{equation}
\label{sec5:thetagenCT}
\theta(T,q) = -\ell_d(q^1,\ldots,q^d).
\end{equation}
Eq.~(\ref{sec5:thetaModelA}) corresponds to Eq.~(\ref{sec5:thetagen}) for $\xi=\gamma$ while Eq.~(\ref{sec5:thetaModelB}) corresponds to Eq.~(\ref{sec5:thetagen}) for $\xi=0$.\\
\subsection{Solution of the market making problem}
In order to characterize the optimal quotes in our multi-asset market making model, we proceed as in the single-asset case. In particular, we start by proving that there exists a solution of Eq.~(\ref{sec5:thetagen}) with terminal condition (\ref{sec5:thetagenCT}).\\
\begin{Theorem}
\label{sec5:theotheta}
There exists a unique function $\theta : [0,T]\times \prod_{i=1}^{d}\mathcal{Q}^i \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$, $C^1$ in time, solution of Eq.~(\ref{sec5:thetagen}) with terminal condition (\ref{sec5:thetagenCT}).
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
Eq.~(\ref{sec5:thetagen}) with terminal condition (\ref{sec5:thetagenCT}) is a backward Cauchy problem. Because the functions $H^{i,b}_\xi$ and $H^{i,a}_\xi$ are functions of class $C^1$ for all $i \in \{1,\ldots,d\}$, the Cauchy-Lipschitz theorem applies, and there exists $\tau \in [0,T)$ and a function $\theta : (\tau,T]\times \prod_{i=1}^{d}\mathcal{Q}^i \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$, $C^1$ in time, solution of Eq.~(\ref{sec5:thetagen}) on $(\tau,T]$ with terminal condition (\ref{sec5:thetagenCT}).\\
$\forall q \in \prod_{i=1}^{d}\mathcal{Q}^i$, the function $t \in (\tau,T] \mapsto \theta(t,q) + \frac 12 \gamma \sum_{i=1}^d\sum_{j=1}^d \rho^{i,j} \sigma^i\sigma^j q^i q^j (T-t)$ is a decreasing function. Therefore, the only reason why there would not be a global solution on $[0,T]$ is because $\sup_{q \in \prod_{i=1}^{d}\mathcal{Q}^i} \theta(t,q)$ blows up at $\tau>0$. However, by using a comparison principle similar to that of Lemma~\ref{sec3:cp}, we easily see that $$\sup_{q \in \prod_{i=1}^{d}\mathcal{Q}^i} \theta(t,q) \le \sum_{i=1}^d(H^{i,b}_\xi(0) + H^{i,a}_\xi(0))(T-t).$$ Therefore, $\sup_{q \in \prod_{i=1}^{d}\mathcal{Q}^i} \theta(t,q)$ cannot blow up in finite time, and $\theta$ is in fact defined on $[0,T]\times \prod_{i=1}^{d}\mathcal{Q}^i$.\\
Uniqueness comes then for the Cauchy-Lipschitz theorem.\qed\\
\end{proof}
We are now ready to state the two theorems characterizing the optimal quotes in Model~A and Model B. The proofs of these results are based on verification arguments, and are (\emph{mutatis mutandis}) identical to those in the single-asset case.\\
Let us start with Model A.\\
\begin{Theorem}
\label{sec5:theomodelA}
Let us consider the solution $\theta$ of Eq.~(\ref{sec5:thetagen}) with terminal condition (\ref{sec5:thetagenCT}) for $\xi=\gamma$.\\
Then, $u : (t,x,q,S) \mapsto -\exp(-\gamma(x+\sum_{i=1}^d q^iS^i + \theta(t,q)))$ defines a solution to Eq.~(\ref{sec5:HJBModelA}) with terminal condition (\ref{sec5:HJBModelACT}), and
$$u(t,x,q,S) = \sup_{(\delta^{1,b}_s,\ldots, \delta^{d,b}_s)_{s\ge t}, (\delta^{1,a}_s,\ldots, \delta^{d,a}_s )_{s\ge t} \in \mathcal{A}(t)^d} \mathbb{E}\Bigg[- \exp\Bigg(-\gamma\Bigg(X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_T+\sum_{i=1}^d q^{i,t,q^i,\delta^b,\delta^a}_T S^{i,t,S^i}_T$$$$- \ell_d(q^{1,t,q^1,\delta^b,\delta^a}_T, \ldots, q^{d,t,q^d,\delta^b,\delta^a}_T)\Bigg)\Bigg) \Bigg],$$
where
$$\forall i \in \{1, \ldots, d\}, \quad dS^{i,t,S^i}_s = \sigma^i dW^i_s, \qquad S^{i,t,S^i}_t = S^i,$$
$$dX^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_s = \sum_{i=1}^d (S^i_s + \delta^{i,a}_s) \Delta^i dN^{i,a}_s - (S^i_s - \delta^{i,b}_s) \Delta^i dN^{i,b}_s , \qquad X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_t = x,$$
$$\forall i \in \{1, \ldots, d\}, \quad dq^{i,t,q^i,\delta^b,\delta^a}_s = \Delta^i dN^{i,b}_s - \Delta^i dN^{i,a}_s, \qquad q^{i,t,q^i,\delta^b,\delta^a}_t = q^i,$$
and where $\forall i \in \{1, \ldots, d\}$, the point processes $N^{i,b}$ and $N^{i,a}$ have stochastic intensity $(\lambda^{i,b}_s)_s$ and $(\lambda^{i,a}_s)_s$ given by $\lambda^{i,b}_s = \Lambda^{i,b}(\delta^{i,b}_s) 1_{q^i_{s-} < Q^i}$ and $\lambda^{i,a}_s = \Lambda^{i,a}(\delta^{i,a}_s) 1_{q^i_{s-} > -Q^i}$.\\
For $i \in \{1, \ldots, d\},$ the optimal bid and ask quotes $S^{i,b}_t = S^i_t - \delta^{i,b*}_t$ (for $q^i_{t-}< Q^i$) and $S^{i,a}_t = S^i_t + \delta^{i,a*}_t$ (for $q^i_{t-}>-Q^i$) are characterized by\begin{equation}
\label{sec5:deltaoptimalA}
\delta^{i,b*}_t = \tilde{\delta}^{i,b*}_\gamma\left(\frac{\theta(t,q_{t-}) - \theta(t,q_{t-}+\Delta^i e^i)}{\Delta^i}\right) \text{ and } \delta^{i,a*}_t = \tilde{\delta}^{i,a*}_\gamma\left(\frac{\theta(t,q_{t-}) - \theta(t,q_{t-}-\Delta^i e^i)}{\Delta^i}\right),
\end{equation}where the functions $\tilde{\delta}^{i,b*}_\gamma(\cdot)$ and $\tilde{\delta}_\gamma^{i,a*}(\cdot)$ are defined by
$$\tilde{\delta}^{i,b*}_\gamma(p) = {\Lambda^{i,b}}^{-1}\left(\gamma H^{i,b}_{\gamma}(p) - \frac{{H_{\gamma}^{i,b}}'(p)}{\Delta^i}\right) \text{ and } \tilde{\delta}^{i,a*}_\gamma(p) = {\Lambda^{i,a}}^{-1}\left(\gamma H^{i,a}_{\gamma}(p) - \frac{{H_{\gamma}^{i,a}}'(p)}{\Delta^i}\right).$$
\end{Theorem}
For model B, the result is the following:
\begin{Theorem}
\label{sec5:theomodelB}
Let us consider the solution $\theta$ of Eq.~(\ref{sec5:thetagen}) with terminal condition (\ref{sec5:thetagenCT}) for $\xi=0$.\\
Then, $u : (t,x,q,S) \mapsto x+\sum_{i=1}^d q^iS^i + \theta(t,q)$ defines a solution to Eq.~(\ref{sec5:HJBModelB}) with terminal condition (\ref{sec5:HJBModelBCT}), and
$$u(t,x,q,S) = \sup_{(\delta^{1,b}_s,\ldots, \delta^{d,b}_s)_{s\ge t}, (\delta^{1,a}_s,\ldots, \delta^{d,a}_s )_{s\ge t} \in \mathcal{A}(t)^d} \mathbb{E}\Bigg[X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_T+\sum_{i=1}^d q^{i,t,q^i,\delta^b,\delta^a}_T S^{i,t,S^i}_T$$$$- \ell_d(q^{1,t,q^1,\delta^b,\delta^a}_T, \ldots, q^{d,t,q^d,\delta^b,\delta^a}_T) - \frac 12 \gamma \int_0^T \sum_{i=1}^d \sum_{j=1}^d \rho^{i,j} \sigma^i\sigma^j q^{i,t,q^i,\delta^b,\delta^a}_t q^{j,t,q^j,\delta^b,\delta^a}_t dt\Bigg],$$
where:
$$\forall i \in \{1, \ldots, d\}, \quad dS^{i,t,S^i}_s = \sigma^i dW^i_s, \qquad S^{i,t,S^i}_t = S^i,$$
$$dX^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_s = \sum_{i=1}^d (S^i_s + \delta^{i,a}_s) \Delta^i dN^{i,a}_s - (S^i_s - \delta^{i,b}_s) \Delta^i dN^{i,b}_s , \qquad X^{t,x,\delta^b,\delta^a}_t = x,$$
$$\forall i \in \{1, \ldots, d\}, \quad dq^{i,t,q^i,\delta^b,\delta^a}_s = \Delta^i dN^{i,b}_s - \Delta^i dN^{i,a}_s, \qquad q^{i,t,q^i,\delta^b,\delta^a}_t = q^i,$$
and where $\forall i \in \{1, \ldots, d\}$, the point processes $N^{i,b}$ and $N^{i,a}$ have stochastic intensity $(\lambda^{i,b}_s)_s$ and $(\lambda^{i,a}_s)_s$ given by $\lambda^{i,b}_s = \Lambda^{i,b}(\delta^{i,b}_s) 1_{q^i_{s-} < Q^i}$ and $\lambda^{i,a}_s = \Lambda^{i,a}(\delta^{i,a}_s) 1_{q^i_{s-} > -Q^i}$.\\
For $i \in \{1, \ldots, d\},$ the optimal bid and ask quotes $S^{i,b}_t = S^i_t - \delta^{i,b*}_t$ (for $q^i_{t-}< Q^i$) and $S^{i,a}_t = S^i_t + \delta^{i,a*}_t$ (for $q^i_{t-}>-Q^i$) are characterized by
\vspace{3mm}\begin{equation}
\label{sec5:deltaoptimalB}
\delta^{i,b*}_t = \tilde{\delta}^{i,b*}_0\left(\frac{\theta(t,q_{t-}) - \theta(t,q_{t-}+\Delta^i e^i)}{\Delta^i}\right) \text{ and } \delta^{i,a*}_t = \tilde{\delta}^{i,a*}_0\left(\frac{\theta(t,q_{t-}) - \theta(t,q_{t-}-\Delta^i e^i)}{\Delta^i}\right),
\end{equation}where the functions $\tilde{\delta}^{i,b*}_0(\cdot)$ and $\tilde{\delta}_0^{i,a*}(\cdot)$ are defined by
$$\tilde{\delta}^{i,b*}_0(p) = {\Lambda^{i,b}}^{-1}\left(- \frac{{H_{0}^{i,b}}'(p)}{\Delta^i}\right) \text{ and } \tilde{\delta}^{i,a*}_0(p) = {\Lambda^{i,a}}^{-1}\left(- \frac{{H_{0}^{i,a}}'(p)}{\Delta^i}\right).$$
\end{Theorem}
\subsection{About closed-form approximations}
In the single-asset case, closed-form approximations were obtained in Section 4, in the special case where $\Lambda^b = \Lambda^a =: \Lambda$ and $H''_\xi(0) > 0$.\footnote{Very recently, closed-form approximations have also been found in the case of asymmetric intensities -- see~\cite{egv2017}.} In the multi-asset case, if we assume that $\forall i \in \{1, \ldots, d\}, \Lambda^{i,b} = \Lambda^{i,a} =: \Lambda^i$, and $H^{i''}_\xi(0) > 0$, then it is natural to wonder whether the same techniques can be used in order to obtain closed-form approximations.\\
The answer is in fact that the change of variables used to derive closed-form approximations does not work in general in dimension higher than 1. However, the idea of transforming Eq.~\eqref{sec5:thetagen} into a multidimensional equivalent of Eq.~\eqref{sec4:thetatilde} enables to obtain results, without using the Hopf-Cole transform -- i.e., without relying on a multidimensional equivalent of Eq.~\eqref{sec4:v}.\\
Following the same reasoning as in Section 4, we can indeed introduce the PDE
$$0 = - \partial_t \tilde\theta(t,q) + \frac 12 \gamma \sum_{i=1}^d\sum_{j=1}^d \rho^{i,j} \sigma^i\sigma^j q^i q^j - 2\sum_{i=1}^d H^i_{\xi}\left(0\right)$$\begin{equation}\label{sec5:thetatilde}- \sum_{i=1}^d H_{\xi}^{i''}(0) (\partial_{q^i} \tilde\theta(t,q))^2 + \Delta^i H_{\xi}^{i'}(0) \partial^2_{q^iq^i} \tilde\theta(t,q),\end{equation}
with final condition $\tilde\theta(T,q_1,\ldots,q_d) = -\ell_d(q_1,\ldots,q_d)$.\\
In the case where $\ell_d(q_1,\ldots,q_d) = \sum_{i=1}^d\sum_{j=1}^d a^{i,j} q^i q^j$ with $(a^{i,j})_{i,j}$ a symmetric positive matrix, it is easy to see that Eq.~\eqref{sec5:thetatilde} can be solved in closed-form by using the ansatz
$$\tilde{\theta}(t,q) = \theta_0(t) - q'\theta_2(t)q,$$
where $\theta_2(t)$ is a $d\times d$ symmetric matrix (see the companion paper \cite{egv2017}).\\
In particular, we show in \cite{egv2017} that $\theta_2(t)$ verifies:
$$\theta_2(t) \to_{T \to +\infty} \frac 12 \sqrt{\frac \gamma 2} \Gamma,$$ where$$\Gamma = D^{-\frac 12}\left(D^{\frac 12} \Sigma D^{\frac 12}\right)^{\frac 12}D^{-\frac 12}, \qquad D =
\left(\begin{matrix}
H_{\xi}^{1''}(0) & 0 & \ldots & 0\\
0 & H_{\xi}^{2''}(0) & \ldots & 0\\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots\\
0 & 0 &\ldots & H_{\xi}^{d''}(0)
\end{matrix}\right).
$$
As a consequence, we can consider the approximations
$$\frac{\theta(t,q) - \theta(t,q+\Delta^i e^i)}{\Delta^i} \simeq \sqrt{\frac \gamma 2 }\left( \Gamma^{ii} \frac{2q^i+\Delta^i}{2} + \sum_{1\le j \le d, j\not= i} \Gamma^{ij} q^j \right)$$
and
$$\frac{\theta(t,q) - \theta(t,q-\Delta^i e^i)}{\Delta^i} \simeq -\sqrt{\frac \gamma 2 } \left(\Gamma^{ii} \frac{2q^i-\Delta^i}{2} + \sum_{1\le j \le d, j\not= i} \Gamma^{ij} q^j \right).$$
These approximations can be plugged into Eqs.~(\ref{sec5:deltaoptimalA}) and (\ref{sec5:deltaoptimalB}) to obtain the general approximation formulas
\begin{equation}
\label{sec5:gueantformulab}\delta^{i,b*}_t \simeq \delta_{\text{approx}}^{i,b*}(q_{t-}) := \tilde{\delta}^{i*}_\xi\left(\sqrt{\frac \gamma 2 } \left( \Gamma^{ii} \frac{2q_{t-}^i+\Delta^i}{2} + \sum_{1\le j \le d, j\not= i} \Gamma^{ij} q_{t-}^j \right)\right)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{sec5:gueantformulaa}
\delta^{i,a*}_t \simeq \delta_{\text{approx}}^{i,a*}(q_{t-}) := \tilde{\delta}^{i*}_\xi\left(-\sqrt{\frac \gamma 2 } \left( \Gamma^{ii} \frac{2q_{t-}^i-\Delta^i}{2} + \sum_{1\le j \le d, j\not= i} \Gamma^{ij} q_{t-}^j \right)\right),
\end{equation} where
\begin{equation}
\label{sec5:deltatilde}
\tilde{\delta}^{i*}_\xi(p) = {\Lambda^i}^{-1}\left(\xi H^i_{\xi}(p) - \frac{{H^i_{\xi}}'(p)}{\Delta^i}\right).
\end{equation}
These approximation formulas are interesting because we see the cross-effects coming from the non-diagonal terms of the matrix $\Gamma$.
\section{Application: the case of two credit indices}
In this section, we apply our single-asset and multi-asset market making models, along with the associated closed-form approximations, to the case of two credit (or CDS) indices: the investment grade (IG) index CDX.NA.IG and the high yield (HY) index CDX.NA.HY. We consider a market maker who is in charge of proposing bid and ask quotes for these two indices, and we will assume throughout this section that this market maker is only concerned with spread risk and not with default risk -- this hypothesis is always made by practitioners for market making fixed-income and credit instruments.\\
Without going into the details of these indices,\footnote{See www.markit.com for more details.} we need to specify their main financial characteristics. Basically, for the IG index, the protection buyer pays quarterly (at fixed dates in order to ease compensation) a coupon corresponding to an annualized rate of 100~bps, and pays upfront an amount (positive or negative) corresponding to an upfront rate (positive or negative) determined by the market. In practice, for market making, the upfront rate is the relevant variable because a round trip on the index leads to a PnL corresponding to the difference between upfront rates (times the notional of the transaction). However, in practice, this index is quoted in spread -- this spread being computed using a basic CDS model. For the HY index, the protection buyer pays quarterly (at fixed dates) a coupon corresponding to an annualized rate of 500 bps, and pays upfront an amount (positive or negative) corresponding to an upfront rate (positive or negative) determined by the market. Unlike the IG index, the HY index is quoted in upfront rate, or more precisely as $100(1- \text{upfront\; rate})$. It is also noteworthy that, in practice, buying the IG index means buying protection, whereas buying the HY index means selling protection. For simplifying the exposition, we will consider that buying always means buying protection, and that the index quotes are the upfront rates. The conversion of our numerical results into market standard quotes can easily be carried out by using a basic CDS model.\\
In order to apply our models to these credit indices, we need first to estimate the value of the different parameters. This has been done thanks to the data provided by BNP Paribas in the framework of the Research Initiative ``Nouveaux traitements pour les donn\'ees lacunaires issues des activit\'es de cr\'edit'', which is financed by BNP Paribas under the aegis of the Europlace Institute of Finance. For estimating the volatilty and correlation parameters $\sigma^{IG}, \sigma^{HY},$ and $\rho$, mid-prices (prices here are upfront rates) have been considered. For the intensity functions, exponential intensities have been considered and the parameters $A^{IG}$, $k^{IG}$, $A^{HY}$, and $k^{HY}$ have been estimated with classical likelihood maximization techniques using real quotes posted by the bank and the trades occurring between the bank and other market participants.\footnote{The period of estimation was over the first semester of 2016.}\\
If we consider that the two theoretical assets correspond to $\$1$ of each index respectively, the value of the parameters are the following (figures are rounded):
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
& IG index & HY index \\
\hline \hline
$\sigma\; (\$.s^{-\frac 12})$ & $\sigma^{IG} = 5.83\cdot10^{-6}$ & $\sigma^{HY} = 2.15\cdot10^{-5}$ \\
\hline
$\rho$ & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{$\rho = 0.9$} \\
\hline
$A\; (s^{-1})$ & $A^{IG} = 9.10\cdot10^{-4}$ & $A^{HY} = 1.06\cdot10^{-3}$ \\
\hline
$k\; (\$^{-1})$ & $k^{IG} = 1.79\cdot10^{4}$ & $k^{HY} = 5.47\cdot10^{3}$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
Coming now to the order sizes, we consider orders of size $\Delta^{IG} = \$50$ million for the IG index, and orders of size $ \Delta^{HY} = \$10$ million for the HY index.\\
As far as risk aversion is concerned, we consider a reference value $\gamma = 6 \cdot10^{-5} \$^{-1}$.\\
Regarding risk limits, we consider that $\frac{Q^{IG}}{\Delta^{IG}} = \frac{Q^{HY}}{\Delta^{HY}} = 4$.\\
Finally, we always consider a final time $T = 7200 \;s$, corresponding to 2 hours. We will see indeed on the examples below that the asymptotic regime is reached very rapidly, in far less than 2 hours.\\
We can consider first the case of the IG index alone. We approximated the solution $\theta$ of the systems of ODEs (\ref{sec3:thetagen}) by using an implicit scheme and a Newton's method at each time step to deal with the nonlinearity. Then we obtained the feedback control function $$(t,q^{IG}) \mapsto (\delta^{IG,b}(t,q^{IG}), \delta^{IG,a}(t,q^{IG}))$$ which gives the optimal bid and ask quotes\footnote{In fact the difference between the reference price and the actual quote, as in the rest of the paper.} at time $t$ when $q^{IG}_{t-} = q^{IG}$.\\
We see in Figure \ref{convergence1} that the asymptotic regime is reached after less than 1 hour.\\
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{time_convergence_2h_IG.pdf}
\caption{$t \mapsto \delta^{IG,b}(t,q^{IG})$ in Model A for the different values of $q^{IG}$.}\label{convergence1}
\end{figure}
In Figures \ref{IG_bid} and \ref{IG_ask}, we plot the initial (i.e., asymptotic) values of the bid and ask quotes, obtained with Model A, for the IG index, when it is considered on a stand-alone basis. We see that the market maker quotes conservatively at the bid and aggressively at the ask when he is long, and conversely that he quotes conservatively at the ask and aggressively at the bid when he is short.\\
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{IG_bid.pdf}
\caption{$q^{IG} \mapsto \delta^{IG,b}(0,q^{IG})$ (crosses) and the associated closed-form approximations (line) obtained with Eq. (\ref{sec4:glftformulab}) -- in the case of Model A.}\label{IG_bid}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{IG_ask.pdf}
\caption{$q^{IG} \mapsto \delta^{IG,a}(0,q^{IG})$ (crosses) and the associated closed-form approximations (line) obtained with Eq. (\ref{sec4:glftformulaa}) -- in the case of Model A.}\label{IG_ask}
\end{figure}
We also see that the closed-form approximations are satisfactory for small values of the inventory (in absolute value), but more questionable for larger values. In particular, the optimal quotes are not affine functions of the inventory as the closed-form approximations suggest.\\
The difference between actual values, obtained through the numerical approximation of the solution of a system of ODEs, and closed-form approximations can also be seen in Figures \ref{IG_spread} and \ref{IG_skew}, which represent the bid-ask spread and the skew of a market maker quoting optimally. The bid-ask spread is indeed not constant, and the skew is not linear on our example.\\
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{IG_spread.pdf}
\caption{$q^{IG} \mapsto \delta^{IG,b}(0,q^{IG}) + \delta^{IG,a}(0,q^{IG})$ (crosses) and the associated closed-form approximations (line) obtained with Eq. (\ref{sec4:spread}) -- in the case of Model A.}\label{IG_spread}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{IG_skew.pdf}
\caption{$q^{IG} \mapsto \delta^{IG,b}(0,q^{IG}) - \delta^{IG,a}(0,q^{IG})$ (crosses) and the associated closed-form approximations (line) obtained with Eq. (\ref{sec4:skew}) -- in the case of Model A.}\label{IG_skew}
\end{figure}
However, if we consider market conditions with less volatility, then the closed-form approximations are far better -- see Figures \ref{low1} and \ref{low2} where we computed the optimal bid and ask quotes (in Model A) for a value of $\sigma^{IG}$ divided by 2. The quality of the approximations depends therefore strongly on the considered market and on the market context. Practitioners must subsequently understand in depth the trade-off between accuracy and computational time (especially when there are hundreds of assets) in order to choose between the two methods. \\
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{IG_bid_sigmalow.pdf}
\caption{$q^{IG} \mapsto \delta^{IG,b}(0,q^{IG})$ (crosses) and the associated closed-form approximations (line) obtained with Eq. (\ref{sec4:glftformulab}) -- in the case of Model A, when $\sigma^{IG}$ is reduced by half.}\label{low1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{IG_ask_low.pdf}
\caption{$q^{IG} \mapsto \delta^{IG,a}(0,q^{IG})$ (crosses) and the associated closed-form approximations (line) obtained with Eq. (\ref{sec4:glftformulaa}) -- in the case of Model A, when $\sigma^{IG}$ is reduced by half.}\label{low2}
\end{figure}
So far in this section, we have only considered optimal quotes in Model A. We see in Figures~\ref{comp1} and \ref{comp2} that the differences between the two models is in fact very small. In other words, although Model B ignores part of the risk (or more precisely aversion to part of the risk), it constitutes a very interesting simplification of Model A.\\
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{IG_bid_compare.pdf}
\caption{$q^{IG} \mapsto \delta^{IG,b}(0,q^{IG})$ in Model A (crosses) and $q^{IG} \mapsto \delta^{IG,b}(0,q^{IG})$ in Model B (circles).}\label{comp1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{IG_ask_compare.pdf}
\caption{$q^{IG} \mapsto \delta^{IG,a}(0,q^{IG})$ in Model A (crosses) and $q^{IG} \mapsto \delta^{IG,a}(0,q^{IG})$ in Model B (circles).}\label{comp2}
\end{figure}
Let us now come to the case of the HY index alone. Like for the IG index, we approximated the solution $\theta$ of the systems of ODEs (\ref{sec3:thetagen}) by using an implicit scheme and a Newton's method at each time step to deal with the nonlinearity. Then we obtained the feedback control function $$(t,q^{HY}) \mapsto (\delta^{HY,b}(t,q^{HY}), \delta^{HY,a}(t,q^{HY}))$$ which gives the optimal bid and ask quotes at time $t$ when $q^{HY}_{t-} = q^{HY}$.\\
We see in Figure \ref{convergence2} that the asymptotic regime is reached after nearly 1 hour.\\
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{time_convergence_2h_HY.pdf}
\caption{$t \mapsto \delta^{HY,b}(t,q^{HY})$ in Model A for the different values of $q^{HY}$.}\label{convergence2}
\end{figure}
In Figures \ref{HY_bid} and \ref{HY_ask}, we plot the initial (i.e., asymptotic) values of the bid and ask quotes, obtained with Model A, for the HY index, when it is considered on a stand-alone basis. As above, we see that the market maker quotes conservatively at the bid and aggressively at the ask when he is long, and conversely that he quotes conservatively at the ask and aggressively at the bid when he is short. We also see that the closed-form approximations are satisfactory only for small values of the inventory (in absolute value).\\
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{HY_bid.pdf}
\caption{$q^{HY} \mapsto \delta^{HY,b}(0,q^{HY})$ (crosses) and the associated closed-form approximations (line) obtained with Eq. (\ref{sec4:glftformulab}) -- in the case of Model A.}\label{HY_bid}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{HY_ask.pdf}
\caption{$q^{HY} \mapsto \delta^{HY,a}(0,q^{HY})$ (crosses) and the associated closed-form approximations (line) obtained with Eq. (\ref{sec4:glftformulaa}) -- in the case of Model A.}\label{HY_ask}
\end{figure}
The difference between actual values and closed-form approximations can also be seen in Figures \ref{HY_spread} and \ref{HY_skew}, which represent the bid-ask spread and the skew of a market maker quoting optimally. The bid-ask spread is indeed not constant, and the skew is not linear on our example.\\
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{HY_spread.pdf}
\caption{$q^{HY} \mapsto \delta^{HY,b}(0,q^{HY}) + \delta^{HY,a}(0,q^{HY})$ (crosses) and the associated closed-form approximations (line) obtained with Eq. (\ref{sec4:spread}) -- in the case of Model A.}\label{HY_spread}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{HY_skew.pdf}
\caption{$q^{HY} \mapsto \delta^{HY,b}(0,q^{HY}) - \delta^{HY,a}(0,q^{HY})$ (crosses) and the associated closed-form approximations (line) obtained with Eq. (\ref{sec4:skew}) -- in the case of Model A.}\label{HY_skew}
\end{figure}
As far as the comparison between Model A and Model B are concerned, we see in Figures \ref{comp3} and \ref{comp4} that the differences between the two models is very small, as in the case of the IG index.\\
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{HY_bid_compare.pdf}
\caption{$q^{HY} \mapsto \delta^{HY,b}(0,q^{HY})$ in Model A (crosses) and $q^{HY} \mapsto \delta^{HY,b}(0,q^{HY})$ in Model B (circles).}\label{comp3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{HY_ask_compare.pdf}
\caption{$q^{HY} \mapsto \delta^{HY,a}(0,q^{HY})$ in Model A (crosses) and $q^{HY} \mapsto \delta^{HY,a}(0,q^{HY})$ in Model B (circles).}\label{comp4}
\end{figure}
We can now consider the two indices together, and look at the influence of correlation for the market making of several assets at the same time. We approximated the solution $\theta$ of the systems of ODEs (\ref{sec5:thetagen}) by using an implicit scheme and a Newton's method at each time step to deal with the nonlinearity. Then we obtained the feedback control function $$(t,q^{IG},q^{HY}) \mapsto (\delta^{IG,b}(t,q^{IG},q^{HY}), \delta^{IG,a}(t,q^{IG},q^{HY}), \delta^{HY,b}(t,q^{IG},q^{HY}), \delta^{HY,a}(t,q^{IG},q^{HY}))$$ which gives the optimal bid and ask quotes at time $t$ for the two indices when $q^{IG}_{t-} = q^{IG}$ and $q^{HY}_{t-} = q^{HY}$.\\
In Figures \ref{IG_bid_2d} and \ref{HY_bid_2d}, we have plotted the optimal bid quotes for the two indices.\footnote{The results are similar, \emph{mutatis mutandis}, for the ask quotes, and are not displayed.} We see that the market maker's inventory on both indices influences his quotes. Because the correlation coefficient is positive, $(q^{IG},q^{HY}) \mapsto \delta^{IG,b}(0,q^{IG},q^{HY})$ and $(q^{IG},q^{HY}) \mapsto \delta^{HY,b}(0,q^{IG},q^{HY})$ are increasing in $q^{IG}$ and $q^{HY}$.\\
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{BidIG2d.pdf}
\caption{$(q^{IG},q^{HY}) \mapsto \delta^{IG,b}(0,q^{IG},q^{HY})$ -- in the case of Model A.}\label{IG_bid_2d}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{BidHY2d.pdf}
\caption{$(q^{IG},q^{HY}) \mapsto \delta^{HY,b}(0,q^{IG},q^{HY})$ -- in the case of Model A.}\label{HY_bid_2d}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{BidHYcorrel.pdf}
\caption{$q^{IG} \mapsto \delta^{HY,b}(0,q^{IG},0)$ in the case of Model A, for different values of $\rho$. $\rho=0.9$ (crosses), $\rho=0.6$ (circles), $\rho=0.3$ (stars)and $\rho=0$ (dots).}\label{correl}
\end{figure}
To see the influence of correlation, we have also computed the optimal quotes for four values of the correlation parameter: $\rho \in \lbrace 0, 0.3, 0.6, 0.9 \rbrace$. Figure \ref{correl} represents, for these different values of $\rho$, the bid quote $\delta^{HY,b}(0,q^{IG},0)$ for the HY index, when the inventory with respect to the HY index is equal to $0$, for different values of the inventory with respect to the IG index. We see that the correlation coefficient has a strong influence on the optimal quote: the more correlated the two assets, the more conservatively (respectively aggressively) the market maker should quote at the bid when he has a long (respectively short) inventory in the other asset.\\
\section*{Conclusion}
In this paper, we considered a framework \emph{\`a la} Avellaneda-Stoikov with general intensity functions, and we showed that for the different optimization criteria used in the literature, the dimensionality of the problem can be divided by 2. We also showed how to find closed-form approximations for the optimal quotes, generalizing therefore the Gu\'eant--Lehalle--Fernandez-Tapia formulas (used by many in the industry) to the two kinds of objective function used in the literature and to almost any intensity function. We also generalized our model to the multi-asset case, and showed the importance of taking account of the correlation between assets. In particular, we have derived closed-form approximations for the optimal quotes of a multi-asset market maker, an important breakthrough for practitioners who sometimes cannot solve systems of dozens or hundreds of nonlinear ODEs. The simple applications to credit indices we considered confirm the importance of the multi-asset framework.\\
\begin{center}
\textbf{Financial support received for presenting the research results in an international conference}
\end{center}
Ce travail a \'et\'e r\'ealis\'e dans le cadre du laboratoire d'excellence ReFi port\'e par heSam Universit\'e, portant la r\'ef\'erence ANR-10-LABX-0095. Ce travail a b\'en\'efici\'e d'une aide de l'Etat g\'er\'ee par l'Agence Nationale de la Recherche au titre du projet Investissements d'Avenir Paris Nouveaux Mondes portant le r\'ef\'erence ANR-11-IDEX-0006-02.
\vspace{1cm}
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Information security is one of the most challenging problem in wireless communications due to the open access of wireless medium. The security schemes in traditional wireless networks are developed in upper layers through cryptographic encryptions \cite{liang,cumanan2012new,cumanan2009sinr}. The broadcast nature of wireless communications introduces different challenges in terms of key exchange and distributions \cite{chu1,cumanan2014secrecy,chu2017robust,cumanan2010multiuser,cumanan2010sinr}. In order to improve the security performance of wireless transmissions, the information-theoretic based physical layer security was first proposed by Shannon \cite{Shannon}, and then developed by Wyner \cite{Wyner} and Csiszar \cite{csiszar}. This approach implements security in the physical layer to complement the cryptographic methods by exploiting the channel state information (CSI) of legitimate parties and eavesdroppers. In \cite{Wyner}, Wyner introduced the wiretap channel model and the concept of secrecy capacity, which is defined as the difference of the mutual information between the legitimate channel and the wiretap channel.\\
\indent Recently, simultaneous wireless information and power transfer (SWIPT) has significantly influenced the research community as the radio signals can be exploited to harvest energy for power constrained devices including unreachable sensor nodes. Traditional energy harvesting schemes utilize the energy from nature such as hydro-power, solar and wind. However, these methods are not suitable for mobile terminals, since the aspects of geographical position, climate and the design of devices may limit the performance of energy harvesting \cite{ng2015secure}. In order to circumvent these issues, wireless power transfer has been recently proposed as the solution and has become an interesting research area as evidenced by the recent work in the literature \cite{ng2015secure,varshney,grover2010shannon}. In \cite{liu}, secrecy wireless information and power transfer based beamforming design has been proposed for a SWIPT system to avoid the eavesdropping by the energy receivers through physical layer security. On the other hand, the information receivers could also exploit wireless energy harvesting technique to simultaneously receive the information and energy through a power splitting (PS) scheme \cite{yuan2014joint}, where the received signal is divided into information and energy streams \cite{leng2014power}. However, this could introduce some security threats to information receivers as the received signal strength at energy receivers is better than that of the information receivers and the achieved secrecy rate decreases to zero \cite{liu}. To address this issue, we consider secrecy rate maximization for a multiple-input single-output (MISO) multicasting SWIPT with PS scheme with minimum energy requirements at legitimate users and energy receivers. In particular, transmit beamforming vectors are designed to maximize the secrecy rate and satisfy the energy constraints based on convex optimization approach \cite{boyd2004convex}. \\
\indent In this paper, we consider a MISO secure multicasting SWIPT system, where the transmitter and legitimate users with multiple and single antennas, respectively. Similar to \cite{chu2015robust}, the eavesdroppers are equipped with mutiple antennas. In addition, it is assumed that the transmitter has the perfect channel state information (CSI) of all links. The energy receivers could attempt to intercept the information intended for the legitimate users and could turn out to be the potential eavesdroppers in the network. In particular, both the legitimate users and the eavesdroppers are able to decode information and harvest energy simultaneously. However, in order to guarantee confidential transmission, we focus on the worst scenario that the PS ratio for information decoding at the eavesdroppers are assumed to one and the transmitter only guarantees the harvested energy requirements at the eavesdroppers when they do not attempt to eavesdrop \cite{leng2014power}. To ensure the secure communication between legitimate terminals and satisfy the energy requirements, we exploit artificial noise (AN) approach to confuse the eavesdroppers or degrade the decoding capability while providing the required energy \cite{chu1}\cite{chu2016secrecy}. For this network set up, we formulate the beamforming design into a secrecy rate maximization problem with energy constraints. This original problem is not convex in terms of beamforming vectors. To circumvent this non-convexity issue, we exploit semidefinite relaxation (SDR) \cite{luo2010semidefinite} and \emph{Charnes-Cooper} Transformation \cite{charnes1962programming} techniques to cast the problem into a semidefinite programming (SDP), which can be efficiently solved through interior point methods \cite{grant2009cvx}.\\
\indent The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. The system model is presented in Section II, while the secrecy rate maximization problem is formulated in section III. Section IV provides simulation results to validate the performance of the proposed design and Section V concludes this paper.
\subsection{Notations}
We use the upper case boldface letters for matrices and lower boldface for vectors. $I$ denotes the identity matrix whereas $(\cdot)^{-1}$, $(\cdot)^T$ and $(\cdot)^H$ stand for inverse, transpose and conjugate transpose operation, respectively. $\mathbf{A}\succeq\mathbf{0}$ means that $\mathbf{A}$ is a positive semidefinite matrix. $|\mathbf{A}|$ and $||\mathbf{A}||$ represents the determinant and the Euclidean norm of matrix $\mathbf{A}$, respectively. The $\textrm{rank}(\mathbf{A})$ denotes the rank of a matrix, and $\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{A})$ represents the trace of matrix $\mathbf{A}$. The circularly symmetric complex Gaussian (CSCG) distribution is represented by $\mathcal{CN}(\mu,\sigma^2)$ with mean $\mu$ and variance $\sigma^2$. $\mathbb{H}^{N}$ denotes the set of all $N \times N$ Hermitian matrices.
\section{System Model}
We consider a secure multicasting MISO SWIPT system, where the legitimate transmitter establishes secured communication links with $K$ legitimate users in the presence of $L$ multiple antenna eavesdroppers. Here, it is assumed that both legitimate users and eavesdroppers are employed with the PS scheme to simultaneously decode the information and harvest the energy. In addition, the transmitter is equipped with $N_{T}$ transmit antennas and each legitimate user consists of single antenna whereas all eavesdroppers are equipped with $N_{E}$ receive antennas. The channel coefficients between the transmitter and the $k$-th legitimate user as well as the $l$-th eavesdropper are denoted by $\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\in\mathcal{C}^{N_{T}\times1}$ and $\mathbf{H}_{e,l}\in\mathcal{C}^{N_{T}\times N_{E}}$, respectively. Thus, the received signal at the $k$-th legitimate user and the $l$-th eavesdropper can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
y_{s,k}=\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{x}+n_{sa,k},~k=1,2,...,K
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
y_{e,l}=\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{x}+\mathbf{n}_{ea,l},~l=1,2,...,L
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{x}\in\mathcal{C}^{N_{T}\times1}$ denotes the transmitted signal, which can be written as
$\mathbf{x}=\mathbf{q}s+\mathbf{v}$,
where $\mathbf{q}\in\mathcal{C}^{N_{T}\times1}$ is the transmit beamforming, $s$ is the information signal and $\mathbf{v}\in\mathcal{C}^{N_{T}\times1}$ is the AN. In addition, all of the receivers exploit PS to handle the received signal, then we can write (1) and (2) as
\begin{equation}
y_{s,k}=\sqrt{\rho_{s,k}}(\mathbf{h}_{sa,k}^{H}\mathbf{x}+n_{sa,k})+n_{sp,k},~\forall k
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
y_{e,l}=\sqrt{\rho_{e,l}}(\mathbf{H}_{ea,l}^{H}\mathbf{x}+\mathbf{n_{ea,l}})+\mathbf{n}_{ep,l}, ~\forall l
\end{equation}
where $\rho_{s,k}\in(0,1]$ and $\rho_{e,l}\in(0,1]$ denote the PS factor of the $k$-th legitimate user and the $l$-th eavesdropper, respectively. The antenna noise at the $k$-th legitimate receiver and the $l$-th eavesdropper are represented by $n_{sa,k}\sim\mathcal{CN}(0,\sigma_{sa,k}^{2})$ and $n_{ea,l}\in\mathcal{C}^{N_{E}\times1}\sim\mathcal{CN}(0,\sigma_{ea,l}^2\mathbf{I})$, respectively, whereas $n_{sp,k}\sim\mathcal{CN}(0,\sigma_{sp,k}^2)$ and $\mathbf{n}_{ep,l}\in\mathcal{C}^{N_{E}\times1}\sim\mathcal{CN}(0,\sigma_{ep,l}^{2}\mathbf{I})$ represent the signal processing noise for the $k$-th legitimate receiver and the $l$-th eavesdropper, respectively. In this paper, we model the AN vector as covariance matrix, where $\mathbf{V}=\mathbf{v}\mathbf{v}^{H}$, $\mathbf{V}\in\mathbb{H}^{N_{T}}$, $\mathbf{V}\succeq 0$.
The mutual information of the $k$-th legitimate user can be written as
\begin{equation}
R_{s,k}=\log_{2}\bigg(1+\frac{\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{q}\mathbf{q}^{H}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}}{\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}+\sigma_{sa,k}^{2}+\frac{\sigma_{sp,k}^{2}}{\rho_{s,k}}}\bigg)
\end{equation}
and the mutual information of the $l$-th eavesdropper is written as
\begin{align}
&R_{e,l}=\nonumber\\
&\log_{2}\!\bigg|\mathbf{I}\!+\![\rho_{e,l}(\sigma_{ea,l}^{2}\mathbf{I}\!+\!\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{H}_{e,l})\!+\!\sigma_{ep,l}^{2}\mathbf{I}]^{\!-\!1}\!\rho_{e,l}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{q}\mathbf{q}^{H}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}\bigg|\nonumber\\
&\leq\log_{2}\bigg|\mathbf{I}\!+\!(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{q}\mathbf{q}^{H}\mathbf{H}_{e,l})^{-1}\rho_{e,l}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{q}\mathbf{q}^{H}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}\bigg|\!=\!R_{e,l}^{\textrm{UP}}
\end{align}
The upper bound is obtained by setting $\rho_{e,l}=1$ and $\sigma_{e,l}^{2}=\sigma_{ea,l}^{2}+\sigma_{ep,l}^{2}$. Here, $\eta_{s,k}\in(0,1]$ and $\eta_{e,l}\in(0,1]$ are the power transformation ratio of the $k$-th legitimate user and the $l$-th energy receiver, respectively. The harvested power at the $k$-th legitimate user can be written as
\begin{equation}
E_{s,k}=\eta_{s,k}(1-\rho_{s,k})\bigg[\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{q}\mathbf{q}^{H}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}+\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}+\sigma_{sa,k}^{2}\bigg]
\end{equation}
whereas the harvested power at the $l$-th energy receiver can be written as
\begin{align}
E_{e,l}\!\!=\!\!\eta_{e,l}(1\!\!-\!\!\rho_{e,l})\!\bigg[\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{q}\mathbf{q}^{H}\mathbf{H}_{e,l})\!\!+\!\!\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}\!\!+\!\!N_{E}\sigma_{ea,l}^{2})\bigg]
\end{align}
\section{Problem Formulation}
Here, we consider the secrecy rate maximization problem for this multicasting MISO SWIPT network, where the minimum secrecy rate between the legitimate users is maximized with transmit power and energy harvesting constraints. This problem can be formulated as
\begin{subequations}\label{eq:Sec_rate_max_ori}
\begin{align}
\max_{\mathbf{q},\mathbf{V},\rho_{s,k}} & \min_{k,l} R_{k} = R_{s,k} - R_{e,l}^{\textrm{UP}} \label{eq:Sec_rate_max_obj} \\
s.t. &~ \min_{k} E_{s,k} \geq \bar{E}_{s}, ~\min_{l} E_{e,l} \geq \bar{E}_{e},~ \forall k,l, \label{eq:Sec_rate_max_EH_contraints}\\
&~ \|\mathbf{q}\|^{2} + \textrm{tr}(\mathbf{V}) \leq P_{\textrm{total}}, \label{eq:Sec_rate_max_power_constraints}\\
&~ 0 < \rho_{s,k} \leq 1, \mathbf{V} \succeq \mathbf{0}. \label{eq:Sec_rate_max_another_constraints}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
The physical meaning of the constraint in \eqref{eq:Sec_rate_max_EH_contraints} is that the transmitter should satisfy the minimum power requirement at the $l$-th passive eavesdropper if it is only interested in energy harvesting and not in eavesdropping (i.e., $\rho_{e,l}=0$). For convenience, the power transformation ratio is assumed to be $\eta_{s,k}=\eta_{e,l}=1$ and this problem can be expressed by introducing the transmit covariance matrix $\mathbf{Q}_{s}=\mathbf{q}\mathbf{q}^{H}$ as
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\max_{\mathbf{Q}_{s},\mathbf{V},\rho_{s,k},t}& \min_{k} \log_{2}\bigg(1\!+\!\frac{\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}}{\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\!+\!\sigma_{sa,k}^{2}\! +\!\frac{\sigma_{sp,k}^{2}}{\rho_{s,k}}}\bigg)\!+\! \log_{2}( t ) \label{eq:Sec_rate_max_obj_slack_variable_t}\\
\!\!\!\!s.t.~ & \log_{2}\! \bigg| \mathbf{I}\!+\! (\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}\!+\! \sigma_{e,l}^{2}\mathbf{I})\!^{\!-\!1} \mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{H}_{e,l} \bigg|\!\leq\!\log(\frac{1}{t}), \label{eq:Eves_rate_constraint}\\
&(1\!-\!\rho_{s,k})\bigg[ \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{h}_{s,k} \!+\! \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{h}_{s,k} \!+\!\sigma_{sa,k}^{2} \bigg]\! \geq\! \bar{E}_{s}, \label{eq:User_EH_constraint} \\
&\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{H}_{e,l})\! +\! \textrm{tr}(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}) \!+\! N_{E}\sigma_{ea,l}^{2}\! \geq\! \bar{E}_{e}, \label{eq:Eve_EH_constraint} \\
&\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{Q}_{s})+\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{V}) \leq P_{\textrm{total}},\\
& 0 \!<\! \rho_{s,k} \!\leq \!1, \mathbf{Q}_{s}\!\succeq \!\mathbf{0},\mathbf{V}\! \succeq\! \mathbf{0},\textrm{rank}(\mathbf{Q}_{s})\! =\! 1.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
The constraint in \eqref{eq:Eves_rate_constraint} can be recast by removing the logarithm from both sides as
\begin{align}\label{eq:Eve_rate_LMI}
\eqref{eq:Eves_rate_constraint} \Rightarrow (t^{-1}-1) (\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{H}_{e,l} + \sigma_{e,l}^{2}\mathbf{I}) \succeq \mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}
\end{align}
It can be easily seen that \eqref{eq:Eve_rate_LMI} is a linear matrix inequality (LMI) constraint \cite{boyd2004convex} whereas \eqref{eq:Eves_rate_constraint} and \eqref{eq:Eve_rate_LMI} are equivalent. Then we obtain
\begin{align}
\eqref{eq:User_EH_constraint} \Rightarrow \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{h}_{s,k} + \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{h}_{s,k} \geq \frac{\bar{E}_{s}}{1-\rho_{s,k}} - \sigma_{sa,k}^{2}
\end{align}
\begin{align}
\eqref{eq:Eve_EH_constraint} \Rightarrow \textrm{tr}(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}) + \textrm{tr}(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}) \geq \bar{E}_{e} - N_{E}\sigma_{ea,l}^{2}
\end{align}
Therefore, the problem can be formulated as
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\max_{\mathbf{Q}_{s},\mathbf{V},\rho_{s,k},t} & \min_{k} \log_{2}\!\bigg(1\!+\frac{\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}}{\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\!+\!\sigma_{sa,k}^{2} \!+\!\frac{\sigma_{sp,k}^{2}}{\rho_{s,k}}}\bigg)\!+\! \log_{2}( t ) \\
s.t.~ & (t^{-1} - 1) (\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{H}_{e,l} + \sigma_{e,l}^{2}\mathbf{I}) \succeq \mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}, \\
& \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{h}_{s,k} + \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{h}_{s,k} \geq \frac{\bar{E}_{s}}{1-\rho_{s,k}} - \sigma_{sa,k}^{2}, \\
& \textrm{tr}(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{H}_{e,l})\! +\! \textrm{tr}(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}) \geq \bar{E}_{e}\!-\! N_{E}\sigma_{ea,l}^{2}, \\
&\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{Q}_{s})+\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{V}) \leq P_{\textrm{total}},\\
&0 \!<\! \rho_{s,k} \!\leq \!1, \mathbf{Q}_{s}\!\succeq \!\mathbf{0},\mathbf{V}\! \succeq\! \mathbf{0},\textrm{rank}(\mathbf{Q}_{s})\! =\! 1.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
The above problem is still not convex in terms of transmit covariance matrices as well as the PS ratio and therefore cannot be solved using existing software. To circumvent this issue, we convert the original problem into a two-level optimization problem. The outer problem can be written with respect to (w.r.t.) the variable $ t $ as
\begin{align}\label{eq:Outer_problem}
R^{*} \!=\! \max_{t} \log_{2}(1\! +\! f(t) ) \!+\! \log_{2}(t), ~s.t. ~t_{\min} \!\leq\! t\! \leq\! 1,
\end{align}
whereas the inner problem can be expressed as
\begin{align}\label{eq:Inner_problem}
f(t) &= \max_{\mathbf{Q}_{s},\mathbf{V},\rho_{s,k}} \min_{k} \frac{\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}}{\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}+\sigma_{sa,k}^{2} +\frac{\sigma_{sp,k}^{2}}{\rho_{s,k}}} \nonumber\\
s.t. & \max_{l} \log_{2}\! \bigg| \mathbf{I}\!+\! (\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}\!\!+\! \sigma_{e,l}^{2}\mathbf{I})\!^{-\!1}\! \mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{H}_{e,l} \bigg|\! \leq\! \log_{2}\!(\frac{1}{t}), \nonumber\\
&~ \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{h}_{s,k} + \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{h}_{s,k} \geq \frac{\bar{E}_{s}}{1-\rho_{s,k}} - \sigma_{sa,k}^{2}, \nonumber\\
&~ \textrm{tr}(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}) + \textrm{tr}(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}) \geq \bar{E}_{e} - N_{E}\sigma_{ea,l}^{2}, \nonumber\\
&~\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{Q}_{s})+\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{V}) \leq P_{\textrm{total}}, \nonumber\\
&~ 0 <\rho_{s,k} \leq 1, \mathbf{Q}_{s}\succeq \mathbf{0},~ \mathbf{V} \succeq \mathbf{0},~\textrm{rank}(\mathbf{Q}_{s}) = 1.
\end{align}
The upper bound of $ t $ in \eqref{eq:Outer_problem} is 1 due to \eqref{eq:Eves_rate_constraint}, and the lower bound $ t_{\min} $ can be derived from \eqref{eq:Sec_rate_max_obj_slack_variable_t} as
\begin{align}
t & \!\geq \!\bigg(\! 1\!+\!\frac{\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}}{\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\!+\!\sigma_{sa,k}^{2}\!+\!\frac{\sigma_{sp,k}^{2}}{\rho_{s,k}}} \bigg)^{-1}\!\!\!\!\! \geq\! \bigg(\! 1\!+\!\frac{\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}}{\sigma_{sa,k}^{2}} \bigg)^{-1} \nonumber\\
& \geq \bigg( 1\!+\!\frac{\lambda_{\max}(\mathbf{Q}_{s})\|\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\|^{2}}{ \sigma_{sa,k}^{2} } \bigg)^{-1} \!\geq\! \bigg( 1\!+\!\frac{\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{Q}_{s})\|\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\|^{2}}{ \sigma_{sa,k}^{2} } \bigg)^{-1} \nonumber\\
&\geq \bigg( 1+\frac{P_{\textrm{total}}\|\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\|^{2}}{ \sigma_{sa,k}^{2} } \bigg)^{-1} = t_{\min},
\end{align}
where the last inequality is obtained from the total power constraint. The outer problem in \eqref{eq:Outer_problem} is a single-variable optimization problem with a bounded interval constraint $[t_{\min}, 1]$, which can be solved through an one-dimensional line search, provided that $ f(t) $ can be evaluated for any feasible $ t $. Therefore, in the following, we will focus on the inner problem in \eqref{eq:Inner_problem}, which is a fractional programming problem. Generally, bisection search is employed to tackle this problem. However, the complexity of this method based on one dimensional search algorithm is high and difficult to implement. The inner problem in \eqref{eq:Inner_problem} can be written as
\begin{align}
\tilde{f}(t) &= \max_{\mathbf{Q}_{s},\mathbf{V},\rho_{s,k}} \min_{k} \frac{\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}}{\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}+\sigma_{sa,k}^{2} + \frac{\sigma_{sp,k}^{2}}{\rho_{s,k}} } \nonumber\\
s.t. &~ (t^{-1}-1) (\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{H}_{e,l} + \sigma_{e,l}^{2}\mathbf{I}) \succeq \mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}, \nonumber\\
&~ \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{h}_{s,k} + \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{h}_{s,k} \geq \frac{\bar{E}_{s}}{1-\rho_{s,k}} - \sigma_{sa,k}^{2}, \nonumber\\
&~ \textrm{tr}(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}) + \textrm{tr}(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}) \geq \bar{E}_{e} - N_{E}\sigma_{ea,l}^{2}, \nonumber\\
&~\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{Q}_{s})+\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{V}) \leq P_{\textrm{total}}, \nonumber\\
&~ 0 < \rho_{s,k} \leq 1, ~\mathbf{Q}_{s}\succeq \mathbf{0},~ \mathbf{V} \succeq \mathbf{0},~\textrm{rank}(\mathbf{Q}_{s}) = 1.
\end{align}
Then, we exploit \emph{Charnes-Cooper} transformation \cite{charnes1962programming}
\begin{align}
\mathbf{Q}_{s} = \frac{\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}_{s}}{\xi},~\mathbf{V} = \frac{\mathbf{\tilde{V}}}{\xi}, ~
\rho_{s,k} =\frac{\tilde{\rho}_{s,k}}{\xi},
\end{align}
and we can obtain
\begin{align}
\tilde{f}(t) & = \max_{\mathbf{Q}_{s},\mathbf{V},\tilde{\rho}_{s,k},\xi} \min_{k} \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}_{s}\mathbf{h}_{s,k} \nonumber\\
s.t. &~ \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{\tilde{V}}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}+ \xi \sigma_{sa,k}^{2} + \frac{\sigma_{sp,k}^{2}}{\tilde{\rho}_{s,k}} = 1, \nonumber\\
&~ (t^{-1}-1) (\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{\tilde{V}}\mathbf{H}_{e,l} + \xi \sigma_{e,l}^{2}\mathbf{I}) \succeq \mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}_{s}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}, \nonumber\\
&~ \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}_{s}\mathbf{h}_{s,k} + \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{\tilde{V}}\mathbf{h}_{s,k} \geq \frac{\xi^{2} \bar{E}_{s}}{\xi-\tilde{\rho}_{s,k}} - \xi \sigma_{sa,k}^{2}, \nonumber\\
&~ \textrm{tr}(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}_{s}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}) + \textrm{tr}(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{\tilde{V}}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}) \geq \xi(\bar{E}_{e} - N_{E}\sigma_{ea,l}^{2}), \nonumber\\
&~\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}_{s})+\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{\tilde{V}}) \leq \xi P_{\textrm{total}}, \nonumber\\
&~ 0 < \tilde{\rho}_{s,k} \leq \xi, \label{eq:Power_splitting_ratio_constraint}\nonumber\\
&~\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}_{s}\succeq \mathbf{0},~ \mathbf{\tilde{V}} \succeq \mathbf{0},~\textrm{rank}(\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}_{s}) = 1.
\end{align}
Note that (20) is equivalent to (18), the proof can be found in \cite{li2011}. Thus, the inner problem can be relaxed by removing the rank constranit as
\begin{align}
\tilde{f}(t) & = \max_{\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}_{s},\mathbf{\tilde{V}},\tilde{\rho}_{s,k},\xi} \theta \nonumber\\
s.t. &~ \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}_{s}\mathbf{h}_{s,k} \geq \theta,\nonumber\\
&~ \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{\tilde{V}}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}+ \xi \sigma_{sa,k}^{2} + \frac{\sigma_{sp,k}^{2}}{\tilde{\rho}_{s,k}} = 1, \nonumber\\
&~ (t^{-1}-1) (\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{\tilde{V}}\mathbf{H}_{e,l} + \xi \sigma_{e,l}^{2}\mathbf{I}) \succeq \mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}_{s}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}, \nonumber\\
&~ \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}_{s}\mathbf{h}_{s,k} + \mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{\tilde{V}}\mathbf{h}_{s,k} \geq \frac{\xi^{2} \bar{E}_{s}}{\xi-\tilde{\rho}_{s,k}} - \xi \sigma_{sa,k}^{2}, \nonumber\\
&~ \textrm{tr}(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}_{s}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}) + \textrm{tr}(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{\tilde{V}}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}) \geq \xi(\bar{E}_{e} - N_{E}\sigma_{ea,l}^{2}), \nonumber\\
&~\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}_{s})+\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{\tilde{V}}) \leq \xi P_{\textrm{total}}, \nonumber\\
&~ 0 < \tilde{\rho}_{s,k} \leq \xi, ~\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}_{s}\succeq \mathbf{0},~ \mathbf{\tilde{V}} \succeq \mathbf{0}.
\end{align}
The above problem is convex for a given $ t $ by relaxing the non-convex rank-one constraint, and can be solved by using interior-point method. \\
\begin{Proposition}\label{proposition:rank_proof}
Suppose we obtain $\mathbf{Q}^{*}_{s} = \frac{\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}^{*}_{s}}{\xi^{*}}, \mathbf{V}^{*} = \frac{\mathbf{\tilde{V}}^{*}}{\xi^{*}}$, where $\tilde{\mathbf{Q}}^{*}_{s}$, $\mathbf{\tilde{V}}^{*}$ and $\xi^{*}$ are the optimal solutions of (21). The rank of $\mathbf{Q}^{*}_{s}$ is less than or equal to $K$ (i.e., $\textrm{rank}(\mathbf{Q}^{*}_{s})\leq K$) and satisfies $\textrm{rank}^{2}(\mathbf{Q}^{*}_{s})+\textrm{rank}^{2}(\mathbf{V}^{*})\leq 2K+L$
\end{Proposition}
\begin{IEEEproof}
Please refer to Appendix.
\end{IEEEproof}
\vspace{0.9em}
By exploiting \emph{Proposition} 1, it is easy to show that the optimal solution to (21) returns rank-one. Thus a particular optimal solution is employed by considering rank-reduction algorithm \cite{huang2010rank}.
Therefore, we considered two approaches to obtain the achievable secrecy rate: 1) 'SDR' approach, recover $\mathbf{Q}^{*}_{s} = \frac{\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}^{*}_{s}}{\xi^{*}}, ~\mathbf{V}^{*} = \frac{\mathbf{\tilde{V}}^{*}}{\xi^{*}}, ~
\rho^{*}_{s,k} =\frac{\tilde{\rho}^{*}_{s,k}}{\xi{*}}$, and the achievable secrecy rate can be obtained by
\begin{align}
R_{ach}=&\log_{2}\bigg(1+\frac{\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{Q}^{*}_{s}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}}{\mathbf{h}_{s,k}^{H}\mathbf{V}^{*}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}+\sigma_{sa,k}^{2}+\frac{\sigma_{sp,k}^{2}}{\rho^{*}_{s,k}}}\bigg)\nonumber\\
&-\log_{2}\bigg|\mathbf{I}\!+\!(\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{V}^{*}\mathbf{H}_{e,l})^{-1}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}^{H}\mathbf{Q}^{*}_{s}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}\bigg|
\end{align}
2) 'SDR+GR' approach, there the first step is same as the 'SDR' approach and then apply the GR technique, the details of which can be found in \cite{sidiropoulos2006transmit}. In addition, $\log_2[\tilde{f}^{*}(t)]$
is the upper bound of the secrecy capacity to satisfy the constraints.
\section{Simulation Results}
In this section, we provide numerical simulation results to validate the performance of the proposed schemes. In particular, we consider a MISO multicasting SWIPT network with different number of legitimate users (3 and 5) and three eavesdroppers.It is assumed that the transmit and all the eavesdroppers consist of five $N_{T}=5$ and two $N_{E}=2$ antennas. All the channels coefficients are generated by CSCG with zero mean and $10^{-3}$ variance. All noise variances are assumed to be $10^{-7}$ and the minimum harvested energy for all legitimate users and eavesdroppers are assumed to be equal. The legend 'Upper bound' in Fig. \ref{fig:SRP} and Fig. \ref{fig:SRE} presents the values of $\log_{2}[\tilde{f}^{*}(t)]$ where $\tilde{f}^{*}(t)$ is the optimal solution of (21). The results denoted by 'SDR' is obtained by determining $\mathbf{Q}^{*}_{s} = \frac{\mathbf{\tilde{Q}}^{*}_{s}}{\xi^{*}}, \mathbf{V}^{*} = \frac{\mathbf{\tilde{V}}^{*}}{\xi{*}},
\rho^{*}_{s,k} =\frac{\tilde{\rho}^{*}_{s,k}}{\xi{*}}$ whereas the results denoted by 'SDR+GR' are obtained by using SDR approach and GR techniques.
Fig. \ref{fig:SRP} represents the achieved secrecy rates with different transmit power and different numbers of legitimate users based on 'SDR' and 'SDR+GR' approaches. As seen in Fig. \ref{fig:SRP} the performance of 'SDR+GR' is better than that of 'SDR'. In addition, the performance gap between 'SDR+GR' and the upper bound is not significant in particular for five users scenario.
\begin{center}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig1.eps}
\caption{Secrecy Rate versus Transmit Power}
\label{fig:SRP}
\end{figure}
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig2.eps}
\caption{Secrecy Rate versus Harvested Energy}
\label{fig:SRE}
\end{figure}
\end{center}
Fig. \ref{fig:SRE} depicts the relationship between secrecy rate and the harvested energy, where the available transmit power is assumed to be 30 dBm with 3 legitimate users. As seen in Figure \ref{fig:SRE}, the harvested energy increases as the secrecy rate decreases. The achievable secrecy rate significantly reduces when the energy harvesting requirement is larger than 2 dBm and it is zero at 8 dBm energy harvesting. However, the performance of 'SDR' and 'SDR+GR' are almost the same at different levels of energy harvesting.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we have considered the design of the transmit and AN covariance matrices for a MISO multicasting SWIPT system with multiple-antenna eavesdroppers. In particular, the secrecy rate maximization problem was solved with transmit power and energy harvesting constraints. The original problem was not convex in terms of the covariance matrices. To overcome this non-convexity issue, we convert the original problem into a convex one by exploiting semidefinite relaxation and \emph{Charnes-Cooper} transformation. In addition, we used GR to construct the rank one solution for the original problem from the non-rank one results. Simulation results were provided to validate the performance of proposed schemes.
\begin{appendix}
\subsection*{Proof of Proposition \ref{proposition:rank_proof}}\label{proof_of_proposition}
Let the optimal value obtained by solving (21) to be $\tilde{f}^{*}(t)$. We consider the following minimization problem.
\begin{align}
&\min_{\mathbf{Q}_{s},\mathbf{V},\rho_{s,k}} ~\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{Q}_{s}) \nonumber\\
&s.t. ~ \textrm{tr}(\mathbf{Q}_{s})+\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{V})\leq P_{total}\nonumber\\
&\mathbf{h}^{H}_{s,k}[\mathbf{Q}_{s}-\tilde{f}^{*}(t)\mathbf{V}]\mathbf{h}_{s,k}-\tilde{f}^{*}(t)(\sigma^{2}_{sa,k}+\frac{\sigma^{2}_{sp,k}}{\rho_{s,k}})\geq 0,\forall k,\nonumber\\
&(t^{-1}-1)(\mathbf{H}^{H}_{e,l}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}+\sigma^{2}_{e,l}\mathbf{I})-\mathbf{H}^{H}_{e,l}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}\succeq 0,\forall l,\nonumber\\
&\mathbf{h}^{H}_{s,k}(\mathbf{Q}_{s}+\mathbf{V})\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\geq \frac{\bar{E}_{s}}{1-\rho_{s,k}}-\sigma^{2}_{sa,k},\forall k,\nonumber\\
&\textrm{tr}[\mathbf{H}^{H}_{e,l}(\mathbf{Q}_{s}+\mathbf{V})\mathbf{H}_{e,l}]\geq \bar{E}_{e}-N_{E}\sigma^{2}_{ea,l},\forall l,\nonumber\\
&0<\rho_{s,k}\leq 1, \mathbf{Q}_{s}\succeq 0, \mathbf{V}\succeq 0.
\end{align}
The optimal solution of the problem in (21) is also the optimal solution of the problem in (23) and vice versa \cite{li2011}. Therefore, we can analyse the rank property of the optimal solution of the problem in (21) by analysing that of the problem in (23). First, we write the Lagrange dual function as
\begin{align}
&\mathcal{L}(\mathbf{Q}_{s},\mathbf{V},\mathbf{Z},\mathbf{Y},\lambda,\mu_{k},\mathbf{A}_{l},\alpha_{k},\beta_{l})\!=\!\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{Q}_{s})\!-\!\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{Z}\mathbf{Q}_{s})\!-\!\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{Y}\mathbf{V})\nonumber\\
&\!-\!\lambda[\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{Q}_{s})\!+\!\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{V})\!-\!P_{total}]\!-\!\sum_{k=1}^{K}\mu_{k}\bigg[\mathbf{h}^{H}_{s,k}[\mathbf{Q}_{s}\!-\!\tilde{f}^{*}(t)\mathbf{V}]\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\nonumber\\
&\!-\!\tilde{f}^{*}(t)(\sigma^{2}_{sa,k}\!+\!\frac{\sigma^{2}_{sp,k}}{\rho_{s,k}})\bigg]\!-\!\sum_{l=1}^{L}\textrm{tr}\{\mathbf{A}_{l}[(t^{-1}\!-\!1)(\mathbf{H}^{H}_{e,l}\mathbf{V}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}\!+\!\sigma^{2}\mathbf{I})\nonumber\\
&\!-\!\mathbf{H}^{H}_{e,l}\mathbf{Q}_{s}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}]\}\!-\!\sum_{k=1}^{K}\alpha_{k}[\mathbf{h}^{H}_{s,k}(\mathbf{Q}_{s}\!+\!\mathbf{V})\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\!-\!\frac{\bar{E}_{s}}{1-\rho_{s,k}}\!+\!\sigma^{2}_{sa,k}]\nonumber\\
&-\sum_{l=1}^{L}\beta_{l}\bigg[\textrm{tr}[\mathbf{H}^{H}_{e,l}(\mathbf{Q}_{s}+\mathbf{V})\mathbf{H}_{e,l}]-\bar{E}_{e}+N_{E}\sigma^{2}_{ea,l}\bigg]
\end{align}
where $\mathbf{Z}\in\mathbb{H}_{+}^{N_{T}}$, $\mathbf{Y}\in\mathbb{H}_{+}^{N_{T}}$, $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}_{+}$,$\mu_{k}\in\mathbb{R}_{+}$ $\mathbf{A}_{l}\in\mathbb{H}_{+}^{N_{E}}$, $\alpha_{k}\in\mathbb{R}_{+}$ and $\beta_{l}\in\mathbb{R}_{+}$ are Langrangian dual vaiables associated with (23). Then we derive the following \emph{Karush-Kuhn-Tucker} (KKT) conditions \cite{boyd2004convex}:
\begin{subequations}\label{eq:KKT_conditions}
\begin{align}
&\frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial\mathbf{Q}_{s}}=\mathbf{I}-\mathbf{Z}+\lambda\mathbf{I}-\sum_{k=1}^{K}\mu_{k}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\mathbf{h}^{H}_{s,k}+\sum_{l=1}^{L}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}\mathbf{A}_{l}\mathbf{H}^{H}_{e,l}\nonumber\label{eq:KKT1}\\
&-\sum_{k=1}^{K}\alpha_{k}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\mathbf{h}^{H}_{s,k}-\sum_{l=1}^{L}\beta_{l}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}\mathbf{H}^{H}_{e,l}=0,\\
&\frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial\mathbf{V}}\!=\!\!-\!\mathbf{Y}\!+\!\lambda\mathbf{I}\!-\!\sum_{k=1}^{K}\mu_{k}\tilde{f}^{*}(t)\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\mathbf{h}^{H}_{s,k}\!-\!\sum_{l=1}^{L}(\frac{1}{t}\!-\!1)\mathbf{H}_{e,l}\mathbf{A}_{l}\mathbf{H}^{H}_{e,l}\nonumber\label{eq:KKT2}\\
&-\sum_{k=1}^{K}\alpha_{k}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\mathbf{h}^{H}_{s,k}-\sum_{l=1}^{L}\beta_{l}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}\mathbf{H}^{H}_{e,l}=0,\\
&\mathbf{Z}\mathbf{Q}_{s}=0, \mathbf{Y}\mathbf{V}=0, \mathbf{Z}\succeq 0, \mathbf{Y}\succeq 0.\label{eq:KKT3}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
The following equality holds:
\begin{align}
&\eqref{eq:KKT1}-\eqref{eq:KKT2}=\mathbf{I}-\mathbf{Z}+\mathbf{Y}-\sum_{k=1}^{K}\mu_{k}[1+\tilde{f}^{*}(t)]\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\mathbf{h}^{H}_{s,k}+\nonumber\\
&\sum_{l=1}^{L}t^{-1}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}\mathbf{A}_{l}\mathbf{H}^{H}_{e,l}=0,\nonumber\\
&\rightarrow\! \mathbf{Z}\!=\!\mathbf{I}\!+\!\mathbf{Y}\!+\!\sum_{l=1}^{L}t^{-1}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}\mathbf{A}_{l}\mathbf{H}^{H}_{e,l}\!-\!\sum_{k=1}^{K}\mu_{k}[1\!+\!\tilde{f}^{*}(t)]\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\mathbf{h}^{H}_{s,k}\nonumber\\
&\rightarrow[\mathbf{I}+\mathbf{Y}+\sum_{l=1}^{L}t^{-1}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}\mathbf{A}_{l}\mathbf{H}^{H}_{e,l}]\mathbf{Q}_{s}\nonumber\\
&=[1+\tilde{f}^{*}(t)](\sum_{k=1}^{K}\mu_{k}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\mathbf{h}^{H}_{sk})\mathbf{Q}_{s}
\end{align}
From the above equality, the following rank relation can be derived:
\begin{align}
&\textrm{rank}(\mathbf{Q}_{s})=\textrm{rank}\{[1+\tilde{f}^{*}(t)][\mathbf{I}+\mathbf{Y}+\sum_{l=1}^{L}t^{-1}\mathbf{H}_{e,l}\mathbf{A}_{l}\mathbf{H}^{H}_{e,l}]^{-1}\nonumber\\
&(\sum_{k=1}^{K}\mu_{k}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\mathbf{h}^{H}_{s,k})\mathbf{Q}_{s}\}\leq\textrm{rank}(\sum_{k=1}^{K}\mu_{k}\mathbf{h}_{s,k}\mathbf{h}^{H}_{s,k})\leq K.
\end{align}
In order to derive this rank condition, the following $lemma$ is required \cite{huang2010rank}.\\
$Lemma$ $1$: Consider the following SDP problem
\begin{align}
&\min_{\mathbf{W}_{k}\in\mathbb{H}^{N},k=1,...,K} ~\sum_{k=1}^{K}\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{A}_{k}\mathbf{W}_{k})\nonumber\\
&s.t.~\sum_{k=1}^{K}\textrm{tr}(\mathbf{B}_{m,k}\mathbf{W}_{k})\unrhd_{m} b_{m},m\!=\!1,...,M,\mathbf{W}_{k}\succeq0, k\!=\!1,...,K,
\end{align}
where $b_{m}\in\mathbb{R}$, $\mathbf{A}_{k}$, $\mathbf{B}_{m,k}\in\mathbb{H}^{N}$, and for each $m$, $\unrhd_{m} \in \{\geq,=,\leq\}$. Provided that the problem in (28) is feasible, then there exists an optimal solution $(\mathbf{W}^{*}_{1},...,\mathbf{W}^{*}_{K})$, such that $\sum_{k=1}^{K}\textrm{rank}^{2}(\mathbf{W}^{*}_{k})\leq M$.
\\By applying $Lemma$ 1 to be the problem in (23), we have the conclusion that exists an optimal $\mathbf{Q}_{s}$ and an optimal $\mathbf{V}$ that $\textrm{rank}^{2}(\mathbf{Q}_{s})+\textrm{rank}^{2}(\mathbf{V})\leq 2K+L$.
\end{appendix}
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
The nature of dark matter nature is one of the major scientific questions the modern era. Approximately 86\% of the matter of the universe is not luminous, and observed only by its gravitational interaction.\cite{Frieman:2008,Frenk:2012} The neutral, weakly interacting neutrino from the Standard Model was once considered a dark matter candidate, but further measurements proved that these particles cannot account for the the entirety of the dark matter.\cite{Frenk:2012,White:1983,Michael:2006} Although neutrinos were no longer a serious candidate for dark matter experiments, they could still be a background.\cite{Feng:2014uja} Early dark matter experiments did not account for the neutrino flux because they were not sensitive to it. However, as dark matter remains undetected and detector sensitivity has increased, the relevant backgrounds will need to be precisely measured and subtracted.\cite{Billard:2014} In \Fig{Fig:sensitivities} we show the projected sensitivities for future dark matter experiments.\cite{Feng:2014uja} The thick, dashed line on this graph indicates at what cross-sections for various candidate WIMP masses the experiments will be sensitive to neutrino backgrounds.
\begin{figure}[h!tbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.50]{Dark_Matter_Sensitivities}
\caption{The cross-section limits (solid curves) for the WIMP-nucleon spin independent interaction and projection (dashed curves) for future direct detection experiments expected in the next decade. Of particular interest to this analysis, the lowest sweeping dashed orange band indicates the projected sensitively for WIMP experiments to backgrounds of solar, atmospheric and diffuse supernovae neutrinos.\cite{Feng:2014uja}}
\label{Fig:sensitivities}
\end{figure}
Since the sun is the closest cosmic nuclear reactor, it should produce the largest flux of neutrinos close to earth.
There are many different reactions that the sun undergoes as it produces photons, but the most common one is known as the ``pp chain.''\cite{Moaz, Chieze:2010} In \Fig{Fig:neutrinoFlux} we show the fluxes as a function of the neutrino energies produced by other nuclear reactions in the sun.\cite{Chieze:2010}
\begin{figure}[h!tbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{NeutrinoFlux.pdf}
\caption{Energy dependence for the various neutrino sources with the detectors that are sensitive to each of these signals.~\cite{Chieze:2010}}
\label{Fig:neutrinoFlux}
\end{figure}
The first step in the sequence of reactions for the pp chain is
\begin{equation}
p + p \rightarrow d + e^+ + \nu_e,
\label{Eq:pp_chain}
\end{equation}
which gives off 0.420~MeV as a proton turns into a neutron to form deuteron. The proton, deuteron, and electron have rest masses of 938.27~MeV, 1875.6~MeV, and 0.511~MeV, respectively, so the maximum amount of energy that a massless neutrino could carry away would be
\begin{equation}
\text{max}(E_\nu) = [2(938.27)-1875.6-0.511] \text{MeV} = 0.420~\text{MeV}.
\end{equation}
The neutrino's flight direction could help determine whether a given dark matter candidate event could be background. If solar neutrinos were to enter an active detector volume, a fraction of these neutrinos could interact with the atoms to eject valence electrons. Assuming technology will be developed to allow for tracking such electrons, we wanted to determine the feasibility of correlating the direction of the ejected electron with the flight direction of the incident neutrino. This simulation that we developed predicts this correlation by finding the possible angles of deflection for the ejected electron. Experimentally, smaller angles would be preferred since this better constrains the neutrino's path and therefore yields the most information about the incident solar neutrino flux.
\section{Theoretical Tools}
The model we used to find the angle of the ejected electron assumes that the valence electron is initially at rest. To justify these assumptions, recall that most noble elements have a typical ionization energy of 20 eV, and by the virial theorem, this is also the kinetic energy of the electron. The MeV order energies of the incident neutrinos are sufficiently large compared to the kinetic energies of the valence electrons, verifying the assumption of an electron at rest. Similarly, in the model we used a massless neutrino because the neutrino mass is of the order of an eV or smaller, at least millionth of the energy of the incident neutrino. We illustrate the relevant variables in this model in \Fig{Fig:model}.
\begin{figure}[h!tbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{Reaction.pdf}
\caption{Schematic defining the variables for the model for the interaction.}
\label{Fig:model}
\end{figure}
Conservation of energy requires
\begin{equation}
E_\nu + m_e = E_\nu' + E_e',
\label{Eq: energy conservation}
\end{equation}
where the subscript $\nu$ refers to the neutrino while the subscript $e$ pertains to the electron. The unprimed variables correspond to the values before the collision and the primed variables denote post-collision values. $E$ stands for energy and $m$ is for mass, because in natural units, $c = 1$ so energy and mass have the same units.
Also, the application of conservation of momentum along the flight direction of the incoming neutrino and in the transverse direction yields \Equation{Eq:p_p} and \Equation{Eq:p_t}, respectively,
\begin{equation}
p_\nu = p_\nu' \cos(\theta_1)+ p_e' \cos(\theta_2),
\label{Eq:p_p}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
0 = p_v' \sin(\theta_1)+ p_e' \sin(\theta_2),
\label{Eq:p_t}
\end{equation}
where $p$ stands for momentum and the same convention for subscripts and superscripts is observed as in \Equation{Eq: energy conservation}. The variables $\theta_1$ and $\theta_2$ are defined in \Fig{Fig:model}.
Then we can relate the energies and momentums, utilizing Einstein's relation
\begin{equation}
E_i^2 = p_i^2 + m_i^2.
\end{equation}
Since the neutrino is approximated as massless, its energy will equal its momentum. The initial energy of the neutrino, $E_\nu$, was set to 0.420~MeV because this is the maximum energy that is given off by this reaction in the pp chain. Therefore, applying Einstein's relation yields three equations for four unknowns: $\theta_1, \theta_2, E_\nu', \text{ and } E_e'$. The conservation of energy and conservation of momentum equations do not admit a unique solution because there are many possible values of, for instance, the angles that can satisfy the existing constraints. To select the most probable configurations, we employ the scattering cross-section for this process, which is proportional to the probability that such an interaction will occur. The generic equation for the cross-section of the interaction is \Equation{cs},\cite{Hosen}
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\sigma}{dy} = \frac{G_F^2 s}{4 \pi} [ (c_V + c_A)^2 + (c_V - c_A)^2 (1 - y)^2 ],
\label{cs}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma$ is the total cross-section; $s$ is the is the square of the energy, $(E_\nu+m_e)^2$; $c_V$ and $c_A$ are the vectorial and axial couplings, respectively; and $y = \frac{1-cos(\theta)}{2}$ incorporates the angular dependence of the cross section, since $\theta \equiv \theta_1 - \theta_2$ by \Fig{Fig:model} .
However, the formula above is not complete, because this interaction is governed by the weak force, and it can be mediated by either the Z boson or the charged W boson. The Feynman diagrams for these two interactions are shown in \Fig{Fig:Feynman}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[h!btp]{0.4\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Zcurrent.pdf}
\caption{Interaction mediated by Z boson.}
\label{Fig:Zcurrent}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[h!btp]{0.4\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Wcurrent.pdf}
\caption{Interaction mediated by W boson.}
\label{Fig:Wcurrent}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Feynman diagrams that interfere with each other to determine the probability for for the cross-section of the interaction $\nu_e + e- \rightarrow \nu_e + e-$, given in \Equation{cs}.\cite{Hosen}}
\label{Fig:Feynman}
\end{figure}
Since these two diagrams can interfere with each other, an extra interference term $\frac{G_F^2 m_e^2 y}{2 \pi}[(c_V + 1)^2 - (c_A+1)^2]$ is added to \Equation{cs}, where $G_F$ is the Fermi coupling.\cite{Hosen} In addition, the couplings in \Equation{cs} are replaced by $c_V \rightarrow c_V + 1$ and $c_A \rightarrow c_A + 1$. This means that the cross-section for the interaction, written out completely at leading order, is
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\sigma}{dy} = \frac{G_F^2 s}{4 \pi} [ (c_V + c_A + 2)^2 + (c_V - c_A)^2 (1 - y)^2 ] + \frac{G_F^2 m_e^2 y}{2 \pi}[(c_V + 1)^2 - (c_A+1)^2].
\label{cs_final}
\end{equation}
\section{Monte Carlo Simulation}
We can write the conservation of energy and momentum equations in terms of any one of the unknowns in the problem: $E_v', E_e', \theta_1$, or $\theta_2$. Since the system is underdetermined, we can use the cross-section in \Equation{cs_final} as a probability distribution to find the range of allowed values for the parameter of interest.
We use a Monte-Carlo program to run an accept-reject method to accomplish this task.
We reduced the conservation of energy and momentum equations to a single equation in terms of $E_\nu'$, and then expressed the other relevant variables in terms of $E'_\nu$.
Since the maximum neutrino energy for solar neutrinos that can come from the pp reaction is 0.420~MeV, a Python-implemented uniform random number generator produced values for $E_\nu'$ between 0 and 0.420~MeV because all physical solutions had to lie in this range.
However, the neutrino can never have its energy go all the way to zero because in the massless neutrino model, the neutrino must travel at the speed of light, and hence has a non-zero energy $hc / \lambda$, where $\lambda$ is the neutrino's wavelength.
The approximation limits the energy of the neutrino to lie above a minimum that is not zero.
We discarded values of $E_\nu'$ that produced unphysical solutions.
If the random $E_\nu'$ values allowed physical solutions for $E_e'$, $\sin(\theta_1)$, and $\sin(\theta_2)$, then the probability for the event was calculated.
The calculation was performed in two steps.
First, the event generator found $10^6$ physical events and returned the maximum cross-section, $p_{max}$, to use in the accept-reject cycle.
The goal of the accept-reject method is to use the probability distribution to find the distribution of $\theta_2$ values.
To implement, as the event generator looped through the events and found the cross-section, $p_{cal}$, for each physical event, another uniform random number generator generated a value, $p_{ex}$, between 0 and $p_{max}$.
If $p_{ex} > p_{cal}$, we kept the values of the angles and particle energies used to determine $p_{cal}$. However, if $p_{ex} < p_{cal}$, the event was rejected. After repeating this for $10^6$ iterations, we plotted the histogram for the $\theta_2$ values, representing the scattering of $10^6$ neutrinos off atomic electrons in some detector medium.
Then we used this histogram to find the upper limit angle for $\theta_2$ that included 68.3\%, 90\%, 95\%, and 99\% of the data.
Although 0.420~MeV neutrinos are interesting because they are the highest energy that neutrinos from the pp chain reaction can have and thus will be the easiest of the pp-neutrinos to detect, other energies were also of interest. For example, most of the pp-neutrinos would have an energy of around 0.260~MeV,\cite{Moaz} and neutrinos from other nuclear reactions in the sun could have even larger energies, as shown in \Fig{Fig:neutrinoFlux}. To compare energies with the values seen in \Fig{Fig:neutrinoFlux}, we made $\theta_2$ histograms for a range of incident energies. We then determined the upper $\theta_2$ limit for different confidence levels for each of these histograms to plot the upper $\theta_2$ limit as a function of energy.
\section{Results}
In \Fig{Fig:prob_dist_res} we show the frequency for accepting the $p_{cal}$ probability values, indicating the shape of the probability density function.
\begin{figure}[h!tbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.50]{prob_420keV.pdf}
\caption{A sample differential cross-section graph when the incident neutrino energy is $E_\nu = 0.420$~MeV.}
\label{Fig:prob_dist_res}
\end{figure}
In \Fig{Fig:variables} we plot the other parameters of interest $E_e'$, $E_{\nu}'$, $\theta_1$, and $\theta$.
\begin{figure}[h!tbp]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Evf_dist.pdf}
\caption{$E_\nu'$: the final energy of the ejected neutrino.}
\label{Fig:Evf}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Eef_dist.pdf}
\caption{$E_e'$: the final energy of the ejected electron.}
\label{Fig:Eef}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{theta_dist.pdf}
\caption{$\theta$: the opening angle between the electron and the neutrino.}
\label{Fig:th}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{theta1_dist.pdf}
\caption{$\theta_1$: the angle of deflection for the neutrino from its original flight trajectory.}
\label{Fig:th1}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Relevant variables that were calculated for the $E_{\nu}$ = 0.420~MeV case.}
\label{Fig:variables}
\end{figure}
In \Fig{Fig:Evf} we discover that the final values for the neutrino's energy cannot be below approximately 0.16~MeV, and the neutrino is more likely to give up more of its energy. Once the ejected neutrino's energy is known, the final energy for the electron is determined by the conservation of energy equation $E_e' = E_\nu + m_e - E_\nu'$. The final energy for the electron can never be less than 0.511~MeV since this is the rest mass for the electron. The negative slope of and $E_e'$ versus $E_v'$ curve implies the electron is more likely to have a lower energy. Since the neutrino can never give up all of its energy, the electron can never receive the full 0.420~MeV of the neutrino's incident energy, which is why the $E_e'$ graph cuts off between $0.76 \text{ and } 0.78$~MeV.
We show in \Fig{Fig:th} that opening angle between the electron and the neutrino can never be less than $\frac{\pi}{2}$ because of conservation of momentum, and the distribution also peaks at~$\theta = \frac{\pi}{2}$.
In \Fig{Fig:th1} we see how this opening angle is distributed to the deflection angle of the neutrino. The $\theta_1$ distribution is an approximately bell shaped distribution varying between 0 and $\pi$, but skewed to the right, favoring smaller deflection angles.
Finally, we show the $\theta_2$ distribution in \Fig{Fig:th2_dist}. Like the $\theta_1$ distribution, it is approximately bell-shaped, with a mean of 0.843 radians.
The $1\sigma$ confidence line is shown in magenta (left-most line) on the plot, the vertical line the furthest to the left at 0.99 radians, demarcating the upper-limit for 68.5\% of the $\theta_2$ values. Similarly, the 90\%, 95\%, and 99\% confidence lines are shown in purple, green, and teal with the higher confidence values positioned progressively to the right.
\begin{figure}[h!tbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{theta2_dist.pdf}
\caption{$\theta_2$ histogram for $E_{\nu}$ = 0.420 MeV. The vertical lines on the graph, reading from left to right, indicate the $\theta_2$ confidence limits for the 68.5\%, 90\%, 94.5\%, and 99\%, respectively.}
\label{Fig:th2_dist}
\end{figure}
We then proceeded to find the confidence values for the $\theta_2$ histogram over a range of incident neutrino energies, $E_{\nu}$ = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.42, 0.52, 0.72, 0.92, 1.1, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, and 9.0~MeV.
We overlaid the $\theta_2$ histograms for each of these incident solar neutrino energies in \Fig{Fig:th2}. The $\theta_2$ distributions become more sharply peaked for higher values for the incident neutrino energy.
\begin{figure}[h!tbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Overlay_theta2
\caption{Overlaying the histograms for allowed $\theta_2$ values for the various energies. Increasing $E_\nu$ shifts the $\theta_2$ distribution to the left as the peak becomes more pronounced.}
\label{Fig:th2}
\end{figure}
For each of the $\theta_2$ plots, we calculated the 68\%, 90\%, 95\%, and 99\% confidence levels, and plotted the confidence points as a function of energy as shown in \Fig{Fig:confidence_points}. The 68\% confidence line is the lowest, because it does not require as many $\theta_2$ values to be below this limit. The confidence level is higher for lower incident energy values, and plateaus for the larger incident neutrino energies. This property was seen earlier from the overlaid $\theta_2$ plot distribution since the larger incident neutrino energies corresponded to more tightly peaked $\theta_2$ graphs.
\begin{figure}[h!tbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{confidence_points}
\caption{The upper bound for $\theta_2$ for the desired confidence levels.}
\label{Fig:confidence_points}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\newpage
\newpage
\section{Checking Results}
\subsection{Other variable dependancies for $E_\nu$ = 0.420~MeV}
Each of the plots depends on the calculated value of the probability distribution for the randomly generated $E_\nu'$ values.
Since we calculate other pertinent variables after we have a physical random $E_\nu'$, we investigated the dependence of the variables with respect $E_\nu'$.
We show the dependance of the deflection angle of the neutrino with respect to the ejected energy of the neutrino in \Fig{Fig:Ev_f_v_th1}. If the neutrino loses very little energy, it should not be expected to be deflected much from its path, and hence it should have a very narrow deflection angle. So large $E_\nu'$ values should correspond to small $\theta_1$ values, and visa-versa, as illustrated in \Fig{Fig:Ev_f_v_th1}.
Furthermore, a larger $E_\nu'$ allows the magnitude of the opening angle for the electron to be larger while still conserving energy and momentum.
We expect that larger $E_\nu'$ should yield a larger magnitude for $\theta_2$, which is confirmed in Figure~\ref{Fig:Ev_f_v_th2}.
Also, $|\theta_2|$ never exceeds $\frac{\pi}{2}$, because if the electron back-scatters, momentum could not be conserved in the $\hat{z}$ direction.
\begin{figure}[h!tbp]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[h!btp]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Ev_f_v_th1.eps}
\caption{Final neutrino energy versus ejected angle for the neutrino.}
\label{Fig:Ev_f_v_th1}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[h!tbp]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Ev_f_v_th2.eps}
\caption{Final neutrino energy versus ejected angle for the electron.}
\label{Fig:Ev_f_v_th2}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[h!tbp]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Ev_f_v_th.eps}
\caption{Final neutrino energy versus opening angle.}
\label{Fig:Ev_f_v_th}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[h!tbp]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{th1_v_th2.eps}
\caption{Opening angle for the neutrino versus the opening angle for the electron.}
\label{Fig:th1_v_th2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Examining how $E_\nu'$ varies as a function of $\theta_1$ and $\theta_2$.}
\end{figure}
The opening angle between the electron and the neutrino is defined as $\theta = \theta_1 - \theta_2 = |\theta_1| + |\theta_2|$.
Since larger $E_v'$ tend to produce larger magnitudes for $\theta_1$, but smaller magnitudes for $\theta_2$, these two effects should compete with each other.
It turns out that the $\theta_1$ dependence is stronger because larger $E_\nu'$ values correspond to smaller $\theta$ values according to Figure~\ref{Fig:Ev_f_v_th}.
The $\theta$ values range between $[\frac{\pi}{2}, \pi]$.
The largest values for $E_\nu'$ correspond to $\theta = \frac{\pi}{2}$, and this makes sense because this is the value that $\theta_2$ has when the energy is maximum.
The smallest values for $E_\nu$ are for $\theta = \pi$, and this is when the $\theta_1$ distribution takes over, because the $E_\nu'$ is minimized when $\theta_1$ is maximized, at $\theta = \pi$.
Finally $\theta_1$ and $\theta_2$ were plotted against each other. Since smaller $\theta_1$ values and larger $|\theta_2|$ values both corresponded to smaller $E_\nu'$ values, $\theta_1$ and $|\theta_2|$ should have a negative slope when plotted against each other. We see this confirmation in \Fig{Fig:th1_v_th2}, which verifies that the experimental results are self-consistent.
\subsection{Increasing Incident Neutrino Energy}
As a final test, we increased the incident neutrino energy up dramatically. For solar neutrinos, $E_\nu =$ 0.42 MeV is approximately 90\% of the electron's rest mass. When the neutrino's energy is much larger than the electron's rest mass, we can use a simplified formula for the interaction's cross-section,\cite{Hosen}
\begin{equation}
s = (E_\nu + m_e)^2.
\label{cross_section_large_Ev}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[h!tbp]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{prob_420keV.pdf}
\caption{Cross section distribution for $E_\nu = 0.42$~MeV.}
\label{Fig:prob_420keV}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{prob_4MeV.eps
\caption{Cross section distribution for $E_\nu = 4$~MeV.}
\label{Fig:prob_4MeV}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{prob_40MeV.pdf}
\caption{Cross section distribution for $E_\nu = 40$~MeV.}
\label{Fig:prob_40MeV}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{prob_1GeV.pdf}
\caption{Cross section distribution for $E_\nu = 1$~GeV.}
\label{Fig:prob_1GeV}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Plots for the probability distributions for various energies.}
\label{Fig:prob_dist}
\end{figure}
Since this constant cross section formula is valid for large enough energies, the differential cross-section becomes peaked and approaches a delta function as the incident neutrino energy is increased. In \Fig{Fig:prob_dist} we display the differential cross-section distribution for varying incident neutrino energies $E_\nu$ = 0.42~MeV, 4~MeV, 40~MeV and 1~GeV.
The probability distribution becomes more peaked as $E_\nu$ increases, until it is indistinguishable from a delta function when $E_\nu =$~1~GeV for the precision of the abscissa axis.
This agrees with the prediction in \Equation{cross_section_large_Ev} that the cross-section approaches a constant function for large enough incident neutrino energies.
As before, we use the differential cross-sections to find $\theta_2$, the ejected angle for the electron. The more energy the neutrino has, the more energy it can impart to the electron. More energetic electrons have smaller angles of deflection, as explained previously in the discussion for \Fig{Fig:Ev_f_v_th2}. Therefore, larger values for the incident neutrino energy, $E_\nu$, should yield tighter opening angles for $\theta_2$, which we verify in \Fig{Fig:th2_VaryEv}.
\begin{figure}[h!tbp]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{th2_420keV.eps}
\caption{$\theta_2$ distribution for $E_\nu = 0.42$~MeV.}
\label{Fig:th2_420keV}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{th2_4MeV.eps}
\caption{$\theta_2$ distribution for $E_\nu = 4$~MeV.}
\label{Fig:th2_4MeV}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{th2_40MeV.eps}
\caption{$\theta_2$ distribution for $E_\nu = 40$~MeV.}
\label{Fig:th2_40MeV}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{th2_1GeV.eps}
\caption{$\theta_2$ distribution for $E_\nu = 1$~GeV.}
\label{Fig:th2_1GeV}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Plots for the $\theta_2$ distribution for various incident neutrino energies.}
\label{Fig:th2_VaryEv}
\end{figure}
A more peaked $\theta_2$ distribution gives us more information about the incident neutrinos flight direction, so these graphs can also explain why higher energy neutrinos from the solar neutrino spectrum shown in \Fig{Fig:sensitivities} are more reliable in assessing the neutrino flight direction in experiment.
\section{Conclusion}
Using the scattering cross-section for electron-neutrino interactions at leading order, given by relativistic quantum mechanics, we determined the probability distribution for the interaction. From this distribution, we used the accept-reject method to find the allowed angles for the ejected electron. This $\theta_2$ was found to be within 0.99~radians, or $57^\circ$ for the 1~sigma confidence level. This angular resolution is sufficient to at least determine which hemisphere a given event originated in, and might therefore be used to provide a way to distinguish which ``hits'' could be due solar neutrinos in an underground dark matter experiment. We hope this simulation encourages future development of detector technology that can provide information about the directionality of low-energy scattering events in experiments searching for rare cosmic phenomena, such as dark matter interactions.
\begin{acknowledgments}
We gratefully acknowledge R. Stroynowski for proposing this project and his helpful directions and suggestions. We would also like to thank R. Scalise for valuable discussions throughout the course of this analysis.
This research was supported by SMU.
\end{acknowledgments}
\newpage
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
Network coding allows routers in networks to mix packets. This helps attain information-theoretically throughput for a variety of network communication problems; in particular for {\it network multicast}~\cite{ahlswede2000network,ho2003benefits}, often via linear coding operations~\cite{li2003linear,koetter2003algebraic}. Throughput-optimal network codes can be efficiently designed~\cite{jaggi2005polynomial}, and may even be implemented distributedly~\cite{ho2006random}. Also, network-coded communication is more robust to packet losses/link-failures~\cite{koetter2003algebraic,ho2003benefits,lun2005efficient}.
However, when the network contains malicious nodes/links, due to the mixing nature of network coding, even a single erroneous packet can cause all packets at the receivers being corrupted. This motivates the problem of network error correction, which was first studied by Cai and Yeung in~\cite{yeung2006network,cai2006network}. They considered an {\it omniscient} adversary capable of injecting errors on {\it any} $z$ links, and showed that $C-2z$ was both an inner and outer bound on the optimal throughput, where $C$ is the {\it network-multicast min-cut}. Jaggi {\it et al.}~\cite{jaggi2007resilient} proposed efficient network codes to achieve this rate. In parallel, K{$\ddot{\text{o}}$}tter and Kschischang~\cite{koetter2008coding} developed a different and elegant approach based on subspace/rank-metric codes to achieve the same rate. Furthermore, when the adversary is of ``limited-view" in some manner (for instance, adversary can observe only a sufficiently small subset of transmissions, or is computationally bounded, or is ``causal/cannot predict future transmissions"), a higher rate is possible, and in fact~\cite{jaggi2007resilient,yao2014network,nutman2008adversarial} proposed a suite of network codes that achieve $C-z$, all of which meet the network Hamming bound in~\cite{yeung2006network}. A more refined adversary model is considered in \cite{zhang2015coding}.
Although communication in the presence of link-based adversaries is now relatively well-understood, problems where the adversaries are ``node-based" seem to be much more challenging. In node-based case, the adversaries can attack any subset of at most $z$ nodes by injecting errors on outgoing edges of those nodes. Since the adversary is restricted to control nodes, this places restrictions on the subsets of links it can control. This problem was first studied by Kosut {\it et al.} in~\cite{kosut2010adversaries, kosut2014polytope}, where it is shown that reducing node-based adversary to link-based one is too coarse, and linear codes are insufficient in general. A class of non-linear network codes was proposed~\cite{kosut2014polytope} to achieve capacity for a subset of planer networks, but the general problem of characterizing network capacity with node-based adversaries is still open.
This problem has been studied from various perspectives. A cut-set bound was given in \cite{kosut2010adversaries, kosut2014polytope}. The routing-only capacity was studied in~\cite{che2013routing}. The work of \cite{kim2011network} explored the unequal link capacities, and \cite{kosut2014generalized} considered a general problem formulation subsuming both link-based and node-based adversaries. The fundamental complexity was examined in \cite{huang2015connecting}, where the authors showed the general network error correction is as hard as a long standing open problem, {\it i.e.} multiple unicast network coding.
On the other hand, in coding theory, hard problems can be considerably simplified if terminal nodes share a small amount of common randomness. For instance, the capacity of adversarial bit-flip channel is still unknown in general, but it can be characterized if shared randomness is available. In fact, Langberg~\cite{langberg2004private} shows that $\Theta(\log n)$ bits shared secrets are sufficient to force such a powerful adversary to become ``random noise".
Motivated by the power of shared secrets, this paper focuses on node-based adversary problems with a small amount of shared secrets. Under such settings, we provide a family of network codes that are computationally efficient and information-theoretically optimal. The shared secrets between source and \emph{each} other node can either be pre-allocated or distributed by applying network secrets sharing schemes, for example, see, for example, \cite{shah2013secure}. In addition, our network codes can be distributedly implemented and work well even when the network topology is unknown.\footnote{Our code design in Section~\ref{sec:codeconstruction} requires no knowledge of network topology.}
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. We present a concrete example to describe previous adversary models and our model of this paper in Section~\ref{sec:example}. After introducing the general network model in Section~\ref{sec:model}, we present our main results in Section~\ref{sec:mainresults}. The details of the code construction and complexity analysis are in Section~\ref{sec:codeconstruction}. Finally, we briefly discuss the generalizations and conclude in Section~\ref{sec:conclusion}.
\section{An Illustrative Example}
\label{sec:example}
Consider the network in Figure~\ref{fig:toy example network}. The source Alice wishes to transmits her message $M$ to the destination Bob through an adversarial network. The adversary Calvin, hidden somewhere in the network, can control a subset of the network and tries to corrupt the communication from Alice to Bob. In addition, through the whole paper, we assume the adversary is omniscient but casual, that is, Calvin can observe all information transmitted on the links causally. Furthermore, we focus on computationally unbounded adversary (although it is also interesting to consider the computationally bounded adversary). The goal is to find the maximum communication rate in the presence of an adversary. Before studying the capacity of this network in our setting, we examine the capacity when there is no shared secret between nodes, both for the link-based adversary model and the node-based adversary model.
\subsection{Previous Work}
\textit{Link-based adversary:} Calvin can choose \textit{any two links} to attack. Although Alice and Bob know at most two links can be controlled, they have no idea a priori which two links that Calvin chooses. The maximum achievable rate of this model is shown to be $C-2z$ by~\cite{jaggi2007resilient} (here $C$ is the minimum min-cut from Alice to Bob in the network and $z$ is the number of \textit{links} the adversary can attack). Therefore, the capacity is $0$ with such an adversary in this example.
The following ``symmetrization" argument shows why reliable communication is impossible in this particular setting, \emph{i.e.} $C = 3$ and $z = 2$. For any message $M$ and any code used, suppose $x_a,x_b,x_c$ are the packets induced by $M$ and the network codes on links $(a,t),(b,t),(c,t)$, respectively. Knowing the message and network codes, Calvin can choose another message $M'\neq M$ and obtain corresponding packets $x_a',x_b',x_c'$ if $M'$ were transmitted. The adversary then replaces $x_b,x_c$ by $x_b',x_c'$ on links $(b,t),(c,t)$, respectively. After receiving $x_a,x_b',x_c'$, Bob cannot distinguish between the following two events: (a) $M$ is transmitted and links $b,c$ are attacked; (b) $M'$ is transmitted and link $a$ is attacked. Therefore, no communication is possible.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{example.pdf}
\caption{An illustrative network example: source node $v_0$ (Alice) wishes to communicate to sink node $t$ (Bob), while adversary Calvin tries to corrupt the communication.}
\label{fig:toy example network}
\end{figure}
\textit{Node-based adversary:} Calvin can choose \textit{any one node} and attack on the outgoing links of his chosen node. Similarly, Alice and Bob know at most one node can be controlled but have no idea about which node. Since the out degree of any intermediate node is at most $2$, it is tempting to reduce such an adversary to previous link-based one, and we get zero rate. However, it turns out that the capacity is 1, achievable by the following ``majority decoding" based code. Alice sends message $M$ on all outgoing links. All intermediate nodes perform majority decoding and forward the decoded message. A simple case-by-case analysis indicates that node $t$ can always decode $M$ correctly: If node $a$ is controlled, after majority decoding, nodes $b, c$ forward $M$ to node $t$. If node $c$ is controlled, then nodes $a,b$ forward $M$ to node $t$. The converse follows from the Singleton bound~\cite{Singleton:64} (see also~\cite[Theorem 1]{kosut2014polytope}).
\subsection{Our Model and Scheme Sketch}
In our model, in addition to treating the adversary as node-based (that can control \textit{any one node}), we also allow the source Alice to share independent common randomness (or shared secrets) with \textit{every} other node in the network. As we will see later, this is a crucial assumption that distinguishes our model from prior models. The shared secrets between source Alice and any other node, say node $a$, are sequences of bits only known to Alice and node $a$, that is, Calvin cannot access these bits unless he chooses to control node $a$.
At a very superficial level, the role of the shared secret is to let a node \emph{just} downstream from the adversary detect any corrupted packets by verifying (using the shared secret) whether or not the received packets belong to the subspace spanned by original packets. We show that even with an asymptotically negligible rate of shared secret, rate $2$ is achievable in this example. Further, this is the best one can hope for as the adversary can always send zeros on one link in a min cut.
In the remainder of this section, we describe the sketch of the achievability scheme for the above example. The detailed description for general case is in Section~\ref{sec:codeconstruction}.
The code consists of a \emph{source encoder}, \emph{intermediate node encoders} and a \emph{destination decoder}.
{\textbf{Source encoder}:} Let $r = 2$. There are two steps. First, as in random linear network coding~\cite{ho2006random}, each message $M\in\mathbb{F}_q^{nr}$ is encoded as a matrix $X\in\mathbb{F}_q^{r\times (n+r)}$ consisting of the information part $U\in\mathbb{F}_q^{r\times n}$ and coefficient header part $I\in\mathbb{F}_q^{r\times r}$ (identity matrix). The second step is crucial, which is computation of the hash header $h$. The two resulting vectors $(X_1,h)$ and $(X_2,h)$ are referred as original packets. Then random linear combinations $(a_1X_1+a_2X_2,h)$ are sent on outgoing links, where $a_1,a_2\in\mathbb{F}_q$.
In this example, $h$ consists of four parts $h_a,h_b,h_c,h_t$, each being a vector from $\mathbb{F}_q^{r^2}$ and corresponding to nodes $a,b,c,t$, respectively. The length of $h$ therefore is $\delta = 16$, which is independent of $n$. In the following, we formally describe the computation of $h_c$; all other hashes, {\em i.e.}, $h_a, h_b, h_t$ can be computed in a similar way.
Denote the shared secret $\mathbb{S}_c$ between source $v_0$ and node $c$ by $\mathbb{S}_c = (
s_{c,1}, s_{c,2}, d_{c,1,1},d_{c,1,2},d_{c,2,1},d_{c,2,1} )\in\mathbb{F}_q^{r^2+r} $,
and rewrite $ h_c\in\mathbb{F}_q^{r^2}$ as $
h_c = ( h_{c,1,1},h_{c,1,2},h_{c,2,1},h_{c,2,2})$.
Then $h_c$ can be computed by the following so-called \textit{linearized polynomials} based on $X$ and $\mathbb{S}_c$:
\[
h_{c,i,j} := d_{c,i,j} - \sum_{k=1}^{n+r}x_{ik}s_{c,j}^{p^k},\hspace{5mm}1\leq i,j\leq 2,
\]
where $x_{ik}$ is the $(i,k)$-th entry in $X$. Some nice properties of the polynomials here allow the detection of corrupted packets, as we will see later.
{\textbf{Verify-and-encode at intermediate nodes:}} Each intermediate node receives a collection of random linear combinations of original packets $X_1,X_2$ with hash headers. Every incoming packet to an intermediate node is verified using the shared secret and hash meant for that node. Depending on the outcome of the verification, each incoming packet is classified as valid if it is verified, and invalid otherwise. After this, the intermediate node sends random linear combinations of valid packets on all outgoing links. As an example, we describe below a sample verification step at node $c$ for the packet received from node $a$. The general case is described in Section~\ref{sec:codeconstruction}.
Suppose node $c$ receives $(W,h')$ from node $a$ and the coefficient header part in $W$ is $(1,2)$, then if $(W,h')$ is uncorrupted, $W = X_1 + 2X_2$ should hold. To verify, node $c$ computes $Q_1$ and $Q_2$ by
\[
Q_1 := \sum_{k=1}^{n+r} w_k(s_{c,1} + s_{c,2})^{p^k},
\]
\[
Q_2 := (d_{c,1,1} - h'_{c,1,1}) + (d_{c,1,2} - h'_{c,1,2}) + 2(d_{c,2,1} - h'_{c,2,1}) + 2(d_{c,2,2} - h'_{c,2,2}),
\]
where $W = (w_1,\ldots,w_{n+r})$, $h' = (h_a',h_b',h_c',h_t')$ and $h_c' = ( h_{c,1,1}', h_{c,1,2}', h_{c,2,1}',h_{c,2,2}')$.
Packet $W$ is regarded as valid if $Q_1 = Q_2$, and invalid if $Q_1\neq Q_2$. We prove in Appendix~\ref{app:lemma} that if $W\neq X_1 + 2X_2$, then $Q_1\neq Q_2$ w.h.p. Details are not important at present and the point here is to sketch the verification process.
{\textbf{Decoder:}} Let $(Y_1,h_1)$, $(Y_2,h_2)$ and $(Y_3,h_3)$ be the packets received on links $(a,t)$, $(b,t)$ and $(c,t)$. Bob first verifies $Y_i$'s by previously described verification process. Since at most one node is controlled, at least two of $Y_1,Y_2,Y_3$ are valid, say $Y_1,Y_2$. Then decoding is done by solving the system of linear equations
\[
\begin{pmatrix}
Y_1\\
Y_2
\end{pmatrix} = T
\begin{pmatrix}
X_1\\
X_2
\end{pmatrix},\notag
\]
where $T$ is the network transformation and can be obtained directly from the coefficients header part. As shown in~\cite{ho2006random}, $T$ is full rank w.h.p., therefore, rate 2 is achieved.
\section{Definitions and Network Model}
\label{sec:model}
\subsection{Definitions}
\emph{Notation:} For a positive integer $k$, $[k]$ denotes the set $\lbrace 1,2,\ldots,k\rbrace$. Whenever there is little scope for ambiguity, we simply use $F$ to denote the finite field $\mathbb{F}_q$, where $q = p^m$ for some prime $p$ and integer $m$.
A \emph{directed graph} is given by ${\cal G}=({\cal V},{\cal E})$, where ${\cal V}$ is the \emph{vertex set} and ${\cal E}\subset{\cal V}\times{\cal V}$ is the \emph{edge set}. For an edge $e:=(i,j)$, we say $\text{tail}(e)=i$ and $\text{head}(e)=j$. For a node $i\in{\cal G}$, denote the set of \emph{incoming edges} as ${\cal E}_{\text{in}}(i): = \lbrace e\in{\cal E}|\text{head}(e) = i\rbrace$, the set of \emph{outgoing edges} as ${\cal E}_{\text{out}}: = \lbrace e\in{\cal E}|\text{tail}(e) = i\rbrace$, the set of \emph{upstream neighbours} as ${\cal N}_{\text{in}}(i):=\lbrace j\in{\cal V}|(j,i) \in {\cal E}_{\text{in}}(i)\rbrace$, and the set of \emph{downstream neighbours} as ${\cal N}_{\text{out}}(i):=\lbrace j\in{\cal V}|(i,j) \in {\cal E}_{\text{out}}(i)\rbrace$. For any subset of edges $A\subset{\cal E}$, the subgraph ${\cal G}_A$ is the graph obtained by deleting all edges in $A$; i.e. ${\cal G}_A=({\cal V},{\cal E}\setminus A)$. For a subset of nodes $Z\subset{\cal V}$, we similarly define the subgraph obtained by deleting nodes $Z$ by ${\cal G}_Z$.
A \emph{cut} is a subset of nodes $B\subset{\cal V}$. Given subgraph ${\cal G}'=({\cal V}',{\cal E}')$, the \emph{cut-set} of cut $B$ on ${\cal G}'$ is given by
\[
\text{cut-set}(B;{\cal G}'):=\lbrace e\in{\cal E}'|e = (a,b), a\in B\cap{\cal V}', b\in {\cal V}'\setminus B\rbrace.
\]
Given two nodes $v_1,v_2$, the \emph{minimum cut} from $v_1$ to $v_2$ on the subgraph ${\cal G}'$ is given by
\[
\text{min-cut}(v_1,v_2;{\cal G}'):= \min_{B:v_1\in B, v_2\notin B} |\text{cut-set}(B;{\cal G}')|.
\]
For example, in Figure~\ref{fig:toy example network}, we have $\text{min-cut}(v_0,t;{\cal G}_a) = 2$.
\subsection{Network Model}
\textbf{Network:} We model the network with a directed graph ${\cal G}=({\cal V},{\cal E})$, where ${\cal V}$ is the set of nodes (routers) and $\cal E$ is the set of links between nodes. We assume that all links have unit capacity\footnote{We discuss networks with unequal link capacities in Section~\ref{sec:conclusion}}, meaning that they can carry one symbol from $F$ per time step. We also allow multiple edges connecting the same pair of nodes. The source node $v_0$ (Alice) wishes to multicast the message $M$, which is a vector chosen uniformly at random form $F^{nr}$, to a set of destination nodes ${\cal D}:=\lbrace t_1,\ldots,t_K\rbrace$. The network model is illustrated in Figure~\ref{NetworkModel}.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale = 0.5]{model.pdf}
\caption{General network model: Source $v_0$ wishes to multicast message $M$ to a set of destinations $t_{i}$'s. Adversary can selects any $z$ nodes and attack on outgoing links of these $z$ nodes. Source $v_0$ shared common randomness of negligible rate with every other node in the network. \label{NetworkModel}}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Shared secrets:} For each node $v$ other than Alice, there is an $s$-length vector $\mathbb{S}_v$, drawn uniformly at random from $F^s$, known only to Alice and node $v$.
\textbf{Adversary model: }We consider a node-based adversary (Calvin). That is, Calvin can control any $z$ nodes from ${\cal V}\backslash \lbrace v_0,t_1,\ldots,t_K\rbrace$ and transmit any information in the outgoing edges of these $z$ nodes. In other words, let ${\cal A}$ be the collection of all sets of outgoing edges of any $z$ nodes in ${\cal V}\backslash \lbrace v_0,t_1,\ldots,t_K\rbrace$; the adversary can choose any one set $A\in {\cal A}$ and inject arbitrary information on links in $A$.
The adversary is \emph{omniscient}. That is, Calvin knows the message, the code, and all packets transmitted in the network. For the $z$ nodes that Calvin selects to control, he also knows their shared secrets with source node. Calvin does not know shared secrets between the source and honest nodes (nodes that Calvin cannot control).
The table in Figure~\ref{fig:wkww} summarizes the knowledge of each communication party.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{wkww.pdf}
\caption{Summary of ``who knows what when": ``Y" represents yes and ``N" represents no. Adversaries do not know the common randomness between source and honest nodes. Source, intermediate nodes and destination have no knowledge of the network topology, while the adversaries know the network topology completely. We also assume the adversaries know the transmitted message and the coding coefficients/link transmissions non-causally (\textcircled{2}\textcircled{4}). By \textcircled{1} and \textcircled{3}, we mean that the encoder, intermediate nodes and decoder only have partial knowledge on link transmissions and coding coefficients. The chronological order of the left most column describes the following relations: common randomness, network topology and message are independent with each other. The adversaries then based on the knowledge to determine the adversarial locations. Link transmissions and coding coefficients depend on common randomness, network topology, message and adversaries' locations.}
\label{fig:wkww}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Code:} A code consists of the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Link encoders:} For each node $v$ and each link $e\in{\cal E}_{\text{out}}(v)$, a function that gives the symbol to send on $e$, given all information available to node $v$: shared secrets for node $v$, all packets from edges in ${\cal E}_{\text{in}}(v)$, and, if $v$ is Alice, the message, and shared secrets for all nodes.
\item \emph{Decoder:} For each destination node $t_k$ and each message $M_i$ for $i\in[q^{nr}]$, a function for estimating $M_i$ based on information available at node $t_k$: shared secrets and received packets.
\end{itemize}
\textbf{Code metrics:} We evaluate codes based on the following quantities:
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Field size} $q$,
\item \emph{Shared secret dimension} $s$,
\item \emph{Number of message symbols} $q^{nr}$,
\item \emph{Probability of error}: for any $A\in\mathcal{A}$, let $P_e(A)$ be the probability that $\hat{M}_{t_k,i}\ne M_i$ for any $t_k\in\cal D$ and any $i\in[q^{nr}]$, maximized over all possible data injections on edges in $A$,
\item \emph{Total blocklength (bits)}, denoted by $N$,
\item \emph{Rate} $R=(nr\log q)/N$, where the base of the logarithm is 2 throughout the paper,
\item \emph{Complexity} $\mathcal{T}$, including encoding/decoding complexity.
\end{itemize}
\section{Main Results}
\label{sec:mainresults}
We begin by stating our main results: computationally efficient achievability. Generally speaking, the natural ``erasure outer bound" can be achieved with asymptotically negligible shared secrets. In addition, computationally efficient such codes can be constructed as described in subsequent sections.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:no_feedback}
For any $\epsilon>0$, there exists a code satisfying
\begin{itemize}
\item $R\ge \min_{A\in{\cal A}}\min_{t_k\in\cal D}\textup{min-cut}(v_0,t_k;{\cal G}_A)-\epsilon$,
\item $P_e(A)\le \epsilon$ for all $A\in{\cal A}$,
\item $s\le \epsilon N$,
\item $N = \Theta(1/\epsilon^2)$,
\item $\mathcal{T}$ is at most polynomial in $N$ (or equivalently, in $m,n$) and network parameters $|{\cal V}|$ and $d_{\text{in}}$, as shown in Table~\ref{table:cc}.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|}
\hline
& Complexity in terms of $m,n$ & Complexity in terms of $N$\\
\hline
Source & ${\cal O}(|{\cal V}|r^2nm \log m))$ & ${\cal O}(|{\cal V}|r^2N\log N))$ \\
Internal node & $\mathcal{O}(d_{\text{in}}nm\log m)$ & $\mathcal{O}(d_{\text{in}}N\log N)$ \\
Decoder & $\mathcal{O}((d_{\text{in}}+r^2)nm\log m)$ & $\mathcal{O}((d_{\text{in}}+r^2)N\log N)$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption[Table caption text]{Computational complexity}
\label{table:cc}
\end{center}
\end{table}
For comparison, we also state two converse results that follow fairly directly from results already in the literature. The first states that the rate can be no larger than if the adversarial edges were simply deleted, and this ``erasure outer bound" follows from \cite{ahlswede2000network} when the residual graph is considered. This confirms that the rate achieved in Theorem~\ref{thm:no_feedback} is essentially as large as possible. The second result states that shared secrets are necessary to achieve vanishing probability of error for all adversary sets. Proofs are in the appendices.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:converse1}
For any code if the adversary controls links $A$, the rate is upper bounded by
\[
R\le\frac{1}{1-P_e(A)}\left[ \min_{t_k\in\cal D} \textup{min-cut}(v_0,t_k;{\cal G}_A)+\frac{H(P_e(A))}{N}\right]
\]
where $H(\cdot)$ is the binary entropy function.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:converse2}
For any code with $s=0$ (i.e. no shared secrets) and $r>0$, if there exist two adversary sets $A_1$ and $A_2$ such that $A_1\cup A_2$ covers a cut between Alice and any destination node $t_k$, then $P_e(A_1)+P_e(A_2)\ge 1$. In particular, it is impossible for both $P_e(A_1)$ and $P_e(A_2)$ to be arbitrarily small.
\end{theorem}
\section{Coding with shared secrets}
\label{sec:codeconstruction}
In this section, we state our scheme for the general case: Alice wishes to multicast her message to $K$ receivers, and any $z$ intermediate nodes can any controlled by the adversary. Let ${\cal A}$ be the collection of sets of outgoing edges of any $z$ nodes in ${\cal V}\backslash \lbrace v_0,t_1,\ldots,t_K\rbrace$. In the following, $r:= \min_{A\in{\cal A}}\min_{t_k\in\mathcal{D}}\textup{min-cut}(v_0,t_k;{\cal G}_A)$.
\begin{mydef} A single-variable linearized polynomial (SLP) $L(x)$ over finite field $F$ is of the form $ L(x): = \sum_{i = 1}^{n}a_i x^{p^i}$, where $a_i\in F$ for any $1\leq i\leq n$ and integer $n$.
\end{mydef}
\begin{mydef}[SLP hash function]
Let $k$ be a positive integer. For a vector ${\bf x} \in F^{k}$ and $s_1,s_2\in F$, define the SLP hash function $\psi: F^{k} \times F^2 \rightarrow F$ by $ \psi({\bf x},s_1,s_2) := s_{2} - \sum_{l = 1}^{k} x_{l}s_{1}^{p^l}$.
\end{mydef}
The code consists of a \emph{source encoder}, \emph{intermediate node encoders} and a \emph{destination decoders}.
\textbf{Source encoder:} Algorithm~\ref{sourceencoder} describes the encoding process, which consists of two steps. Firstly, each message $M\in [q^{nr}]$ is encoded into a matrix $X$ as described in Section~\ref{sec:example}. Denote $X_i$ the $i$-th row of $X$ and $x_{il}$ the $(i,l)$-th entry of $X$. Secondly, the hash header $h\in F^{\delta}$ is computed and appended to all $X_i$'s. Notice here that $\delta$ (specified later) is negligible as $N$ tends to infinity. Figure \ref{packet} shows the structure of the $i$-th packet.
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale = 0.4]{packet.pdf}
\caption{The $i$-th packet $(X_i,h)$ and size of each part. The total length of $(X_i,h)$ is $n+r+\delta$ many finite field elements, or equivalently $(n+r+\delta)\log_2 q$ bits, where $\delta $ is independent of $n$.
\label{packet}}
\end{figure}
The header $h$ consists of $|{\cal V}|-1$ parts, with each part being a vector $h_v\in F^{r^2}$ and corresponding to a non-source node $v$. Denote entries of $h_v$ by $h_{v,i,j}$ with $1\leq i,j\leq r$. Let $\mathbb{S}_v\in F^{r^2+r}$ be the shared secrets between node $v$ and the source. These dimensions are determined by the particular hash function based on SLP's, as described below. Rewriting $\mathbb{S}_v := \lbrace s_{v,j}, d_{v,i,j}\rbrace _{1\leq i,j\leq r}$, we then compute $h_v$ by
\[
h_{v,i,j} := \psi(X_i, s_{v,j},d_{v,i,j})
= d_{v,i,j} - \sum_{l = 1}^{n+r}x_{il}s_{v,j}^{p^l}.
\]
A more concise form to describe the computation of $h_v$ is $ [h_v] = [d_v] - X\times [s_v]$, where $[h_v]$ denotes the matrix with entries being $h_{v,i,j}$, $[d_{v}]$ the matrix with entries being $d_{v,i,j}$ and $[s_{v}]$ the matrix with $(i,j)$-th entry being $s_{v,j}^{p^i}$, $1\leq i\leq n+r$ and $1\leq j\leq r$, i.e.,
\[
[s_{v}]: = \begin{pmatrix}
s_{v,1}^p & s_{v,2}^p & \dots & s_{v,r}^p \\
s_{v,1}^{p^2} & s_{v,2}^{p^2} & \dots & s_{v,r}^{p^2} \\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots &\vdots \\
s_{v,1}^{p^{(n+r)}} & s_{v,2}^{p^{(n+r)}} & \dots & s_{v,r}^{p^{(n+r)}}
\end{pmatrix}.
\]
The hash header $h$ consists of $h_v$'s and is a row vector of length $\delta $. Each message $M$ is encoded into $r$ \emph{original packets}: $(X_i,h), 1\leq i\leq r $. Random linear combinations $(\sum_{i=1}^{r}a_iX_i,h)$ are sent on links in ${\cal E}_{\text{out}}(v_0)$, where $a_i\in F $.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Source encoder}\label{sourceencoder}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Procedure{Source Encoder}{$M, \mathbb{S}_v, \forall v\in {\cal V}\backslash \lbrace v_0,t\rbrace$}\\
Rewrite $M$ as $X$;
\ForAll{$v\in {\cal V}\backslash \lbrace v_0,t\rbrace$}
\State Compute $[s_v]$;
\State Compute $[h_v] := [d_v] - X\times [s_v]$;
\EndFor
\State Obtain $h$ by rewriting all $h_v$'s in a row vector;
\ForAll {$e = (v_0,v)\in\mathcal{E}_{\text{out}}(v_0)$}
\State Create and send $(\sum_{i = 1}^{r} a_{e,i}X_i, h)$ on $e$; where $a_{e,i}$'s are generated uniformly at random from $F$.
\EndFor
\EndProcedure
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\emph{Encoding complexity analysis:} First of all, notice that multiplication in $\mathbb{F}_{p^m}$ can be done in ${\cal O}(m\log m)$ time, see \cite{Gathen:2003:MCA:945759}. For each node $v$,
\begin{itemize}
\item Computation of $[s_v]$ costs ${\cal O}(rnm \log m))$ time: For each $a\in\mathbb{F}_{p^m}$, computation of $a^p$ costs $\log p$ many multiplications in $\mathbb{F}_{p^m}$, which in total is $\mathcal{O}((\log p)m\log m )$ (which again is $\mathcal{O}(m\log m )$ since $p$ is a fixed constant). Therefore, computation of $[s_v]$ costs $\mathcal{O}(r(n+r)m\log m)$ time.
\item Computation of $[h_v]$ costs ${\cal O}(r^2nm \log m))$ time: The multiplication $X\times [s_v]$ costs most, which is in ${\cal O}(r^2(n+r)m\log m)$ time.
\end{itemize}
In total, the encoding complexity is ${\cal O}(|{\cal V}|r^2nm \log m)$. Since our scheme requires $m = \Theta(n)$ to ensure small error probability (see Appendix~\ref{app:lemma}), equivalently, the encoding complexity is $\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{V}|r^2N\log N)$, where $N$ is the number of bits in each packet.
\textbf{Verify-and-encode at intermediate nodes:} Each intermediate node $u$ performs a ``verify-and-encode" procedure.
For each packet $(W(e),h(e))$\footnote{Here we use $h(e)$ to denote the hash header received on link $e$ to indicate that the adversary may also corrupt the hash header $h$.} received from edge $e\in\mathcal{E}_{\text{in}}(u)$, node $u$ first \emph{verifies} whether $W(e)$ is a correct linear combination of $X_1,\ldots, X_r$, based on the hash $h(e)$ and shared secrets $\mathbb{S}_u $. Then node $u$ forwards a random linear combination of all ``valid" packets on links in $\mathcal{E}_{\text{out}}(u)$. We now describe the verification process (Algorithm~\ref{internalencoder}).
Denote $W(e) = (w_1,\ldots,w_n, w_{n+1},\ldots,w_{n+r})$, then we know that $W(e)$ should be the linear combination $\sum_{i=1}^{r}w_{n+i}X_i$ if $W(e)$ is not corrupted by the adversary. Node $u$ computes $Q_1,Q_2$ defined below. Then $W(e)$ is regarded as valid if $Q_1=Q_2$ and invalid otherwise.
\begin{align*}
Q_1 &:= \sum_{l=1}^{n+r}w_{l}\Big(\sum_{i' = 1}^{r}\mathbbm{1}_{i'}\times s_{u,i'}\Big)^{p^l}\\
Q_2 &:= \sum_{i=1}^{r}w_{n+i}\sum_{i' = 1}^{r}\mathbbm{1}_{i'}\times (d_{u,i,i'} - h(e)_{u,i,i'})
\end{align*}
Here $\mathbbm{1}_{i'}$ is the indicator function of event $\lbrace w_{n+i'}\neq 0\rbrace$. In Section~\ref{sec:example}, we have described the verification procedure in details for the specific packet $W = X_1 + 2X_2$. This scheme works w.h.p. over the randomness in the shared secrets. The following lemma states this formally.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma1} When $W(e)\neq\sum_{i=1}^{r}w_{n+i}X_i$, then $Q_1\neq Q_2$ with probability at least $1-1/p^{\Theta(n)}$ when the field size is $q = p^{\Theta(n)}$. When $W(e)=\sum_{i=1}^{r}w_{n+i}X_i$ and $[h'_u] = [h_u]$, then $Q_1 = Q_2$ always holds.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix~\ref{app:lemma}. As a remark, the relation between the block length $N$ (in bits) and $m,n$ is $N = \Theta(nm)$. Therefore, the general relations are: $m = \Theta(\sqrt{N})$, $ n = \Theta(\sqrt{N})$, $q = p^m$, and $ m = cn $ for some constant $c>1$. To be concrete, we can think of the following parameter settings: $n = \sqrt{N/2}$, $m = 2n = \sqrt{2N}$ and $q = 2^{\sqrt{2N}}$. With this setting, the probability that a corrupted packet is not detected with probability at most $2^{-n} = 2^{-\sqrt{N/2}}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Internal encoder}\label{internalencoder}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Procedure{Verifier}{$ \mathbb{S}_u$}
\ForAll{$e\in {\cal E}_{\text{in}}(u)$}
\State Compute $Q_1,Q_2$;
\State if $Q_1=Q_2$, then label $W(e)$ as valid;
\State else, label $W(e)$ as invalid.
\EndFor
\EndProcedure
\Procedure{ Encoder}{all valid $W(e)$, $e\in\mathcal{E}_{\text{in}}(u)$}
\ForAll {$e\in\mathcal{E}_{\text{out}}(u)$}
\State Create and send $(\sum_{e'\in\mathcal{E}_{\text{in}}(u)} a_{e'}W(e'), h)$ on $e$; where $a_{e'} = 0$ if $W(e')$ is invalid; $a_{e'}$ is generated uniformly at random from $F$ if $W(e')$ is valid.
\EndFor
\EndProcedure
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\emph{Complexity analysis:} For each intermediate node $u$,
\begin{itemize}
\item Computation of $Q_1$ costs ${\cal O}(d_{\text{in}}nm \log m))$ time: For each incoming link of $u$, computation of $Q_1$ for this link costs at most $2(n+r)$ many multiplications. Thus, the complexity for computations of $Q_1$'s on all incoming links cost ${\cal O}(d_{\text{in}}(n+r)m\log m)$ time, where $d_{\text{in}}$ denotes the maximum in-degree in the graph.
\item Computation of $Q_2$ costs ${\cal O}(d_{\text{in}}rm \log m))$ time: For each link, there are at most $2r$ additions and $r$ multiplications in $F$ needed for the computation of $Q_2$.
\end{itemize}
In total, the complexity of each intermediate node is ${\cal O}(d_{\text{in}}nm\log m)$, or equivalently, ${\cal O}(d_{\text{in}}N\log N)$ with $N$ be the number of bits in each packet.
\textbf{Decoder:} Each destination node verifies received packets, and decodes using all valid ones (see Algorithm~\ref{decoder}). The \emph{decoding complexity} for each decoder is $\mathcal{O}((d_{\text{in}}+r^2)nm\log m)$, or equivalently,
$\mathcal{O}((d_{\text{in}}+r^2)N\log N)$ as analysed in the following.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Destination decoder}\label{decoder}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Procedure{Verifier}{$\mathbb{S}_t$}
\ForAll{$e\in {\cal E}_{\text{in}}(t)$}
\State Compute $Q_1,Q_2$;
\State if $Q_1=Q_2$, then label $W(e)$ as valid;
\State else, label $W(e)$ as invalid.
\EndFor
\State Rearrange all valid packets as $Y$.
\EndProcedure
\Procedure{Decoder}{all valid $W(e)$, $e\in\mathcal{E}_{\text{in}}(t)$}
\State Solve $Y = TX$ with unknowns being $X$ ;
\EndProcedure
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\emph{Decoding complexity analysis: } For each destination node decoder,
\begin{itemize}
\item Computations of $Q_1, Q_2$ cost ${\cal O}(d_{\text{in}}nm\log m)$ time, the same as each intermediate node;
\item Decoding is done by solving a system of linear equations $Y = TX$. Notice here that the matrix $T$ is different for each decoder in general. Dimensions of these three matrices are $X\in F^{r\times (n+r)}$, $T\in F^{r\times r}$ and $Y\in F^{r\times (n+r)}$. The complexity of Gaussian elimination is ${\cal O}(r^2nm\log m)$.
\end{itemize}
Therefore, the total complexity for each decoder is ${\cal O}((d_{\text{in}} + r^2)nm\log m)$, or equivalently ${\cal O}((d_{\text{in}} + r^2)N\log N)$.
\section{Discussion and Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
We develop novel computationally-efficient network codes using shared secrets for node-based adversary problems. Our codes meet a natural erasure outer bound.
Although the description of our codes is specialized for the case of node-based adversaries in multicast settings, our techniques also extend to more general cases. We briefly describe some of them in the following.
\begin{itemize}
\item\emph{General adversarial sets} \label{subsec:gas}
Let $\cal A$ be collection of all possible subsets of links that the adversary can control. The set $\cal A$ is given and known to both the transmitter and receivers, however, the specific set $A\in\mathcal{A}$ of attacked links is a priori known only to the adversary. Since our code is essentially designed to detect corrupted links, it works even for this general adversarial set $\cal A$. Note that link-based (respectively, node-based) adversaries correspond to $\mathcal{A}$ being the collection of all subsets of $z$ links (respectively, collection of sets of outgoing links from all subsets of $z$ nodes). In this setting, the code has similar guarantees as Theorem~\ref{thm:no_feedback}. The proof also follows on similar lines and is skipped here.
\begin{corollary}
For any $\epsilon>0$, there exists a code satisfying
\begin{itemize}
\item $R\ge \min_{A\in{\cal A}}\min_{t_k\in\cal D}\textup{min-cut}(v_0,t_k;{\cal G}_A)-\epsilon$,
\item $P_e(A)\le \epsilon$ for all $A\in{\cal A}$,
\item $s\le \epsilon N$,
\item $N = \Theta(1/\epsilon^2)$,
\item $\mathcal{T}$ is at most polynomial in $N$ (or equivalently, in $m,n$) and network parameters $|{\cal V}|$ and $d_{\text{in}}$, as shown in Table~\ref{table:cc}.
\end{itemize}
\end{corollary}
\item\emph{Unequal link capacities}
Networks with unequal link capacities can be handled in a manner similar to unit capacities networks with general adversarial set. For integer (or rational) link capacities, Figure~\ref{fig:reduction} shows a simple example where such a reduction is done. The case of irrational link capacities can be approximated by rational capacities. Therefore, this is a special case of the general adversarial set.
\item\emph{Network with cycles}
Although our codes here cannot be directly applied to network with cycles, it is possible to generalize our ideas by working with the corresponding \emph{acyclic} time-expanded network ({\em c.f.}~\cite[Chapter~20]{yeung2008information}).
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{reduction.pdf}
\caption{Left: link $e_1$ has capacity 1 and link $e_2$ has capacity 2. The adversarial set ${\cal A} = \left\{\lbrace e_1 \rbrace, \lbrace e_2 \rbrace\right\}$. Right: link $e_1,e_2',e_2''$ all have capacity 1 and the adversarial set ${\cal A}' = \left\{\lbrace e_1 \rbrace, \lbrace e_2',e_2'' \rbrace\right\}$. }
\label{fig:reduction}%
\end{figure}
\end{itemize}
\appendices
\section{Proof of Lemma \ref{lemma1}}
\label{app:lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $W'(e): = (w'_1,\ldots,w'_n,w_{n+1},\ldots,w_{n+r})$ $ = \sum_{i=1}^{r} w_{n+i}X_i $ be the correct linear combination claimed by header of $W(e)$. We bound the probability of the event $E_1 :=\lbrace Q_1=Q_2 \rbrace$ conditioned on $E_2:=\lbrace W(e)\neq W'(e)\rbrace$.
Rewrite $Q_1$ as the following
\begin{align*}
Q_1 &= \sum_{l = 1}^{n+r}(w'_l + (w_l - w'_l))\sum_{i' = 1}^{r}\mathbbm{1}_{i'}s_{u,i'}^{p^l}\\
&= \sum_{i=1}^{r}w_{n+i}\sum_{i' = 1}^{r}\mathbbm{1}_{i'}\times (d_{u,i,i'} - h_{u,i,i'}) + \sum_{l = 1}^{n}(w_l - w'_l)\sum_{i' = 1}^{r}\mathbbm{1}_{i'}s_{u,i'}^{p^l}
\end{align*}
Then, $Q_1 = Q_2$ is equivalent to
\[
\sum_{l = 1}^{n}(w_l - w'_l)\sum_{i' = 1}^{r}\mathbbm{1}_{i'}s_{u,i'}^{p^l} + \sum_{i=1}^{r}w_{n+i}\sum_{i' = 1}^{r}\mathbbm{1}_{i'}\times (h'_{u,i,i'} - h_{u,i,i'}) = 0,
\]
where the left hand side is a non-zero polynomial of degree at most $p^n$ in $s_{u,1},\ldots,s_{u,r}$. Since the shared secrets $s_{u,1},\ldots,s_{u,r}$ are uniformly generated from $\mathbb{F}_{p^m}$, by the Schwartz Zippel Lemma (see~\cite{motwani2010randomized}), we have $P(E_1|E_2)\leq\frac{p^n}{p^m}$, which is exponentially small in $n$ when $m=cn$ for some constant $c>1$. The case of $W(e) = W'(e)$ follows from direct computation, which we omit here.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:no_feedback}}
\label{app:no_feedback}
\begin{proof}
Let $r = \min_{A\in{\cal A}}\min_{t_k\in\cal D}\textup{min-cut}(v_0,t_k;{\cal G}_A)$ and $\delta := (|{\cal V}|-1)r^2$. Denote the maximum node degree (sum of in-degree and out-degree) in $\cal{G}$ as $d_{\text{max}}$.
Given any $\epsilon>0$, let $n = \sqrt{N/2}$, $m = 2n = \sqrt{2N}$ and $q = 2^{\sqrt{2N}}$, then take $N$ large enough such that $z\cdot d_{\text{max}}\cdot 2^{-\sqrt{N/2}} < \epsilon $ and $ \frac{nr}{n+r+\delta} > r-\epsilon $. Design network code described in Section~\ref{sec:codeconstruction} over $\mathbb{F}_{q}$. Denote the constructed network code by $\mathbb{C}(r,\epsilon)$. We analyse the code $\mathbb{C}(r,\epsilon)$ in the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Rate:} $R = \frac{nr}{n+r + \delta} > r - \epsilon$ by choice of $n$;
\item \emph{Error probability:} For any $A\in\mathcal{A}$, the error probability is upper bounded by the probability that some corrupted packet is not detected by the very next downstream node, which, by union bound, is at most $z\cdot d_{\text{max}}\cdot 2^{-\sqrt{N/2}} < \epsilon $ by taking $N$ to be large. Therefore, $P_e(A)\leq\epsilon$ for any $A\in\mathcal{A}$.
\item \emph{Dimension of shared secrets:} Our scheme in Section~\ref{sec:codeconstruction} requires $s = r^2+r$ for each node, which is independent of $n$ (also independent of $N$).
\item \emph{Block length:} $N = \Theta(1/\epsilon^2)$ follows from the error probability requirement $z\cdot d_{\text{max}}\cdot 2^{-\sqrt{N/2}} < \epsilon $ and rate requirement $\frac{nr}{n+r+\delta} > r-\epsilon$. The former requires $N > 2\log^2(\frac{z\cdot d_{\text{max}}}{\epsilon})$ and the latter requires $N>\frac{|{\cal V}|^\alpha}{\epsilon^2}$ for some constant $\alpha$ (a crude estimation yields $\alpha = 7$). Since we are interested in the regime where $\epsilon$ tends to zero, we have $N = \Theta(1/\epsilon^2)$.
\item \emph{Complexity:} The complexity is given in our description of the code design in Section~\ref{sec:codeconstruction}.
\end{itemize}
Note that not all corrupted packets are detectable and honest nodes can be isolated by adversarial nodes, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:multiple}. However, these cases do not change the minimum cut and the theorem still holds.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[scale = 0.25]{case1.pdf}
}
\quad
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[scale = 0.35]{case2.pdf}
}
\caption{(a) A simple example shows that corrupted packets may not be detectable. When nodes $a$ and $b$ are both controlled by the adversary, the corrupted packet from $a$ to $b$ is not detectable. (b) A simple example shows that honest node can be isolated by adversarial nodes. }
\label{fig:multiple}%
\end{figure}
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:converse1}}
\label{app:converse1}
\begin{proof}
Let $A\in\mathcal{A}$ and $r=\min_{t_k\in\cal D} \textup{min-cut}(v_0,t_k;{\cal G}_A)$. Suppose adversary sends zeros on links in $A$, and let $E\subset\mathcal{E}$ be the cut-set of a minimum cut between $v_0$ to $t_k$ (minimized over all $k$), then $|E|=r$. Denote $W_1,\ldots, W_{r}$ be the random variables induced by any codes on links in $E$, then we can get a Markov chain $M\rightarrow (W_1,\ldots,W_{r})\rightarrow\hat{M}$. The proof is completed by the following:
\begin{align*}
NR &= H(M) = H(M|\hat{M}) + I(M;\hat{M}) \\
&\leq H(M|\hat{M}) + I(M; W_1,\ldots,W_{r}) \\
&\leq H(P_e(A)) + P_e(A)NR + H(W_1,\ldots,W_{r}) \\
&\leq H(P_e(A)) + P_e(A)NR + Nr.
\end{align*}
Therefore, $R\leq \frac{1}{1-P_e(A)}\left [r + \frac{H(P_e(A))}{N} \right ]$.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:converse2}}
\label{app:converse2}
\begin{proof}
The proof is based on a symmetrization argument (similar to, e.g.\cite[Theorem 1]{kosut2014polytope}). Suppose there is a code $\mathbb{C}$, which has rate $R>0$. There exist two messages $w_1$ and $w_2$ such that the packets induced by this code on edges in $A_1$ and $A_2$ are $\mathbb{C}(w_1,A_1),\mathbb{C}(w_1,A_2)$ and $\mathbb{C}(w_2,A_1),\mathbb{C}(w_2,A_2)$, respectively. The adversary then adopts the following attack strategy such that the receiver cannot distinguish which one of $w_1,w_2$ is transmitted, thus causing non-vanishing probability of decoding error.
\begin{itemize}
\item If $w_1$ is transmitted, then Calvin replaces packets $\mathbb{C}(w_1,A_1)$ by $\mathbb{C}(w_2,A_1)$;
\item If $w_2$ is transmitted, then Calvin replaces packets $\mathbb{C}(w_2,A_2)$ by $\mathbb{C}(w_1,A_2)$;
\end{itemize}
Then once the destination node receives $\mathbb{C}(w_2,A_1),\mathbb{C}(w_1,A_2)$, the decoder cannot distinguish between the above two events, and so $w_1$ and $w_2$ are not distinguishable, and hence the probability of decoding error is at least 1/2.
\end{proof}
\section{Table of Notations}
All notations used are listed in the following table.
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\small
\begin{tabular}{ |l|l|l| }
\hline
\multicolumn{3}{|c|}{Model Parameters} \\
\hline
Notation & Meaning & Value/Range\\
\hline
${\cal G} = ({\cal V}, {\cal E})$ & directed acyclic network with vertex set ${\cal V}$ and edge set ${\cal E}$
& - \\
$v_0$ & source node & $v_0\in{\cal V}$\\
$t_i$ & the $i$-th receiver node & $t_i\in{\cal V}$\\
${\cal E}_{in}(v)$ & set of incoming edges at node $v$ & $\subseteq\mathcal{E}$\\
${\cal E}_{out}(v)$ & set of outgoing edges from node $v$ & $\subseteq\mathcal{E}$\\
${\cal N}_{in}(v)$ & set of adjacent upstream nodes of $v$ & $\subseteq\mathcal{V}$\\
${\cal N}_{out}(v)$ & set of adjacent downstream nodes of $v$ & $\subseteq\mathcal{V}$\\
$d_{\text{in}}$ & maximum node in-degree in ${\cal G}$ & \\
$d_{\text{max}}$ & maximum node degree in ${\cal G}$ & \\
\hline
\multicolumn{3}{|c|}{Code Parameters} \\
\hline
$p$ & a fixed prime number & \\
$q$ & field size & $q = p^m$ for some positive integer $m$\\
$F$ & simplified notation for finite field & $F: = \mathbb{F}_{p^m}$\\
$M$ & message & $\in [q^{nr}]$\\
$s$ & dimension of shared secrets & \\
$\mathbb{S}_{u}$ & shared secrets between source $v_0$ and node $u$ & $\in F^s$\\
$N$ & block length in bits & \\
$n$ & number of payload (finite field elements) in each packet & \\
$P_e$ & error probability & \\
$R$ & rate of network codes & $R = \frac{\log q^{nr}}{N}$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption[Table caption text]{Notations}
\label{table: notation}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\bibliographystyle{ieeetr}
|
\section{Introduction}
The experimental realization of Graphene in 2004\,\cite{graphene-2004,novoselov-2005} opened the gates to a whole scientific field of quasi-twodimensional materials with the promise of novel applications and peculiar physical phenomena by virtue of their reduced dimensionality. Among these, the transition metal dichalcogenides (TMD) of molybdenum and tungsten are an interesting addition due to their intrinsic semiconducting nature and high chemical stability both in bulk and few-layer phases. Analogously to graphite, these materials assume a hexagonal crystal structure with stacked layers of quasi-twodimensional atomic layers that are bound together through van-der-Waals forces. The strong spin-orbit interaction and missing inversion symmetry in the monolayer materials cause a significant split of the valence band edge with an associated valley pseudospin and magnetic moment. This gives rise to coupled spin- and valley physics in these materials\,\cite{spin-valley} that manifest, for instance, in optically induced spin and valley polarizations due to valley-dependent circular dichroism and a combination of the spin and valley Hall effects.%
{\let\thefootnote\relax\footnote{\\{\copyright}2016 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in other works.}}
At the same time, being indirect semiconductors in their bulk forms, the attenuation of interlayer interaction causes a transition from indirect to direct band gap materials between bi- and monolayer TMD structures and a strong enhancement of photoluminescence quantum yield for decreasing material thickness\,\cite{mak-2010,splendiani-2010,MoSe2WSe2MoS2-PL,WS2-PL,MoS2-tunable-PL,scheuschner-2014}. These findings suggest a strong light-matter interaction in these
low-dimensional materials, which, apart from the insights from the scientific point-of-view, suggest possible novel applications of two-dimensional TMDs in thin and flexible optoelectronic devices, such as photodiodes\,\cite{led1,led2} and photodetectors\,\cite{photodetector1}, single-photon emitters\,\cite{single-photon3,single-photon1
single-photon2} or in spin- and valleytronic devices\,\cite{zeng-2012}. However, their quasi-2D nature is a double-edged sword in the sense that the low thickness limits the absorption efficiency and optical quantum yields of the TMD materials. A number of strategies have thus recently been reported to increase the light-matter interaction and thus the absorption and emission efficiency by placing TMD materials in optical microcavities and enhancing the coupling of light to excitonic\,\cite{schwarz-2014,liu-2015-light-matter,garstein-2015} or trionic\,\cite{baeten-2015} dipoles through formation of cavity polaritons. Another approach is tuning the light-matter interaction through resonant exciton-plasmon coupling in hybrid systems of TMDs in plasmonic lattices, \emph{e.g.} gold nanoantennas\,\cite{kern-2015} or silver nanodisk arrays\,\cite{butun-2015,liu-2016-exciton-plasmon}.
At the heart of these interesting physics are the excited states in the form of excitons and trions. The low-dimensionality of the TMD systems allows for long-range Coulomb interaction channels through the adjacent environment of reduced electric field screening and gives rise to tightly bound exciton and trion states that dominate experimental optical spectra of doped\,\cite{MoS2-trions} and undoped\,\cite{mak-2010} few-layer TMDs and have binding energies that are an order of magnitude higher than in conventional bulk systems. On the other hand, the corresponding excitonic wavefunctions are fairly extended, with radii on the order of several nm, and can be well described in the framework of Mott-Wannier theory\,\cite{lambrecht-2012}. This mixed Wannier-Mott and Frenkel character of excitons is well-known for carbon nanotubes\,\cite{nt-excitons} and other two-dimensional materials\,\cite{Cudazzo-esxciton-bandstructure}.
However, the low thickness renders the materials highly sensitive to the environment. Another problem arises from peak broadening from the strong electron-phonon coupling\,\cite{li-elphon} and makes determination of the exciton binding energy as difference between exciton peak energy and the band edge difficult. Correspondingly, the derived binding energies for the prominent sub-gap excitons in molybdenum and tungsten TMDs depend highly on the details of the experimental setup and, to the best of our knowledge, experimental studies of the exciton binding energy have been so far limited to monolayer TMDs. A variety of strategies for the measurement of the excitonic binding energies have been reported, including \emph{(i)} application of a modified, nonhydrogenic, Rydberg model to one-photon photoluminescence excitation (PLE) spectra\,\cite{MoS2-exciton-binding-3, WS2-exciton-binding-1}, and determination of the electronic band edge through \emph{(ii)} scanning tunneling spectroscopy (STS)\,\cite{MoS2-exciton-binding-1,ugeda-MoSe2-excitons}, \emph{(iii)} photocurrent spectroscopy\,\cite{MoS2-exciton-binding-2} and \emph{(iv)} two-photon PLE\,\cite{WSe2-exciton-binding1} spectroscopy.
For monolayer MoS$_2$, this yielded experimental binding energies of the lowest-energy exciton between 220 and 570\,meV\,\cite{MoS2-exciton-binding-1,MoS2-exciton-binding-2,MoS2-exciton-binding-3}, while the reported binding energies for other monolayer Mo and W dichalcogenides are typically in the range of 0.3-1.0\,eV\,\cite{ugeda-MoSe2-excitons,yang-MoTe2-exciton-binding,WS2-exciton-binding-1,plechinger-WS2,WS2-WSe2exciton-binding, WSe2-exciton-binding1}. Beyond the exciton binding energy, several groups have
reported experimental studies on the peculiar exciton and trion dynamics and the photocarrier relaxation pathways\,\cite{kozawa-TMD-photocarriers-bandnesting,vega-mayoral-2016,Malic-WS2,trion-dynamics}, that provide insights into the interplay of excited quasiparticles with the underlying electronic band structure. This is beneficial for understanding, \emph{e.g.}, the mechanism of charge separation of interlayer excitons in photodevices based on heterostructures of stacked TMD materials\,\cite{hong-hetero}.
On the theoretical side, a variety of studies of the optical properties of quasi-2D TMDs have been reported based on \textit{ab initio} calculations employing the excitonic Bethe-Salpeter equation and various analytical approaches. Here, a main focus was the interpretation of experimental optical spectra and the theoretical derivation of relevant exciton binding energies, Bohr radii, and quasi-particle band gaps. In a similar fashion to experiments, the reported values show a significant dependence on the computational details: the obtained binding energies of the lowest-energy exciton in MoS$_2$ and similar systems are in the range of 0.2-1.0\,eV\,\cite{qiu-2013,qiu-erratum,wirtz-MoS2-excitons,Ramasubramian-excitons,huser-MoS2,shi-2012,gunnar-MoS2,komsa-excitons,palumno-2015,kidd-2016}, with the absolute peak positions moving accordingly. One cause of this significant scattering is the peculiar anisotropic screening of the Coulomb interaction in two-dimensional systems that obtains a distinct dependence on the in-plane momentum transfer \textit{q} in the vicinity of the \textit{$\Gamma$} point and requires sufficiently dense \textit{q}-point grids or analytical modeling to yield reliable results\,\cite{huser-MoS2}. Based on this, recent \textit{ab initio} studies investigated the exciton radiative lifetimes in MoS$_2$/WS$_2$ and MoSe$_2$/WSe$_2$ heterobilayer structures\,\cite{palumno-2015} and the temperature-dependent effect of electron-phonon coupling on the simulated optical spectra and obtained good quantitative agreement with experiments. On the other hand, analytic methods based on tight-binding or parametrized Hamiltonians lack the flexibility of first principles approaches, but possess the necessary computational simplicity to go beyond static descriptions of isolated excitons and to study higher charge carrier complexes, such as trions\,\cite{Berkelbach-trions, komsa-2015, kidd-2016} and biexcitons\,\cite{komsa-2015, kidd-2016}, exciton dynamics\,\cite{Malic-WS2}, carrier density dependent optical spectra\,\cite{steinhoff-MoS2} or the excitonic bandstructure\,\cite{MoS2-exciton-bandstructure}.
However, while the nature of the strongest excitonic transitions has been established for monolayer MoS$_2$, possible effects of the changed electronic dispersions compared to monolayer MoS$_2$ from different chalcogen species (as in MoSe$_2$ and MoTe$_2$) or interlayer interactions have so far not been addressed, to the best of our knowledge. Insights into the spatial distribution of the exciton wavefunctions in monolayer and few-layer materials and the differences compared to the well-studied monolayer MoS$_2$ could contribute to the understanding of interlayer excitons in TMD heterostructures and few-layer systems and related experimental results, such as recently discovered interlayer resonant Raman modes in few-layer MoS$_2$\,\cite{scheuschner-interlayer-modes}. Based on theoretical simulations, we thus analyse in this paper the contribution of excitonic states to the absorption spectra in mono- and bilayer MoS$_2$, MoSe$_2$, and MoTe$_2$ and their distributions in real and reciprocal space. We show that the changes in electronic dispersion due to interlayer interactions and different chalcogen atoms move the dominant region of band nesting between valence and conduction band and affect the composition of the dominant transitions close to the electronic band gap. Further, we confirm the existence of interlayer excitons in all three bilayer materials due to the out-of-plane character of the conduction band orbitals at the band nesting points.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=\textwidth]{absorption_soi}
\caption{\label{fig:absorption} (Color online) Calculated imaginary parts of the dielectric function for (a)-(c) mono- and (d)-(f) bilayer molybdenum and decomposition into the main excitonic transitions. Electron-hole effects were included by solution of the Bethe-Salpeter Equation; spin-orbit splitting was included \emph{a posteriori} for the monolayer systems. With the exception of \textsl{A} and \textsl{B} and their excitations, the excitonic transitions were labeled after the peak in the dielectric function they contribute to. Transitions with the same label in different materials might thus not correspond. The added '-' and '+' mark transitions of same nature that are split by spin-orbit interaction. We broadened the peaks by a Lorentzian of width 0.05\,eV.}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=0.9\columnwidth]{exp_spectrum}
\caption{\label{fig:expspectrum} (Color online) Photoluminescence spectra of mono- and bilayer MoS$_2$ on Si/SiO$_2$ substrates at an excitation energy of 2.33\,eV. The sharp peaks just below 2.3\,eV are the Raman modes. The shown experimental data has been published previously in Ref.~\onlinecite{scheuschner-2014}. }
\end{figure}
\section{Computational approach}
We calculated the groundstate properties of all considered materials from density functional theory (DFT) within the common Perdew-Burke-Ernzerhof (PBE) approximation. A 13x13x1 k-point sampling and normconserving pseudopotentials, including semicore states for molydenum, together with a cutoff energy of 1200\,eV were employed on this stage. The DFT electronic bandstructure and wavefunctions served as input for the solution of the excitonic Bethe-Salpeter Equation (BSE)\,\cite{bgw-2} on discrete 30x30 k-point samplings of the Brillouin zone to obtain the dielectric functions including electron-hole effects for the studied dichalcogenides. A sufficient amount of valence and conduction bands to converge the derived optical spectra was included in the calculations. The electronic eigenvalues from DFT were shifted by oneshot G$_0$W$_0$ quasiparticle corrections, using 24x24 k-point grids, a cutoff energy of 300\,eV, and 500/800 bands for the monolayer/bilayer systems.
The dielectric functions and bandstructures of the monolayer systems were corrected {\it a posteriori} for spin-orbit effects following the approach in Ref.~\onlinecite{qiu-2013}. Supercells of 20x20x1 unit cells were used for the plots of the excitonic wavefunctions in real space and the position of the hole was fixed at the Mo atoms in the center of this unit cell. Further details and parameters for trilayer MoS$_2$ can be found in the supplementary material.
\section{Results and Discussion}
\subsection{Absorption properties}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=\textwidth]{MoS2-1L-AAsAss.jpg}
\caption{\label{fig:MoS2-1L-A} (Color online) (a) Calculated imaginary part of the dielectric function of MoS$_2$ without spin-orbit interaction. (b) Representation of the \textit{A} transition in reciprocal and slice of the excitonic wavefunction in real space ($\|\psi(\vec{r})\|^2$) through the plane of Mo atoms. We used a supercell of 20x20x1 unit cells for the expansion of the excitonic wavefunctions in real space. The position of the hole was fixed at the Mo atom in the center of this supercell. (c) and (d) Same for the first (\textsl{A$^{*}$}) and second excitation (\textsl{A$^{**}$}) of \textsl{A}. The representations of the \textsl{B}, \textsl{B$^{*}$}, \textsl{B$^{**}$} transitions are equal to those of their \textsl{A} counter-parts by construction. }
\end{figure*}
While a number of groups have studied MoS$_2$ in both its mono- and bilayer forms, simulations that include electron-hole effects are to date scarce for MoSe$_2$\,\cite{Ramasubramian-excitons,komsa-excitons,ugeda-MoSe2-excitons} and MoTe$_2$\,\cite{Ramasubramian-excitons,yang-MoTe2-exciton-binding}.
Figure~\ref{fig:absorption} shows the obtained imaginary parts of the dielectric functions from our calculations. The spectrum of 1L-MoS$_2$, shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:absorption}~(a) agrees well with recent reports\,\cite{wirtz-MoS2-excitons,qiu-2013} in both shape and energies supports our approach for the other materials as well. Inclusion of electron-hole effects induces a number of prominent excitonic peaks that dominate the low-energy imaginary part of the dielectric function: The direct band gap at the \textit{K} point in the Brillouin zone gives rise to two peaks, \textsl{A} and \textsl{B}, that are split from the local spin-orbit coupling and form the fundamental transitions in experimental optical spectra, see Fig.~\ref{fig:expspectrum}. We calculate a binding energy of the \textsl{A} exciton of 0.51\,eV relative to the fundamental electronic band gap of 2.69\,eV from our G$_0$W$_0$ calculations, which fits well into the range of reported values for the \textsl{A} exciton of 0.2-0.57\,eV from experiments\,\cite{MoS2-exciton-binding-1,MoS2-exciton-binding-2,MoS2-exciton-binding-3} and to recent theoretical calculations\,\cite{qiu-erratum,gunnar-MoS2,komsa-excitons}. Apart from the transition forming the absorption onset, the dielectric function features a prominent peak at an energy of 2.9\,eV, which has been previously linked to the prominent '\textsl{C}' feature in photoluminescence spectra at 2.8\,eV\,\cite{C-exc} and consists of a number of strong optical excitations that we will analyse in Sec.~\ref{sec:decomposition}.
While the obtained binding energies of the \textsl{A} (and \textsl{B}) excitons show a good agreement with experiment, our calculations systematically overestimate the absolute peak positions, a fact that our calculations share with previous reports. We attribute parts of this overestimation to the employed G$_0$W$_0$ approximation (we refer to the supplementary material for details) and the neglect of temperature effects in our calculations. The latter have been shown recently\,\cite{mol-sanchez-exciton-temperature} to red-shift the predicted A and B peak positions in MoS$_2$ by about 0.1\,eV.
The dielectric functions of 1L-MoSe$_2$ and 1L-MoTe$_2$ appear qualitatively similar to that of 1L-MoS$_2$, but show more structure, with the main '\textsl{C}' peak being split into a number of subpeaks of similar height, \textsl{Ca} and \textsl{Cb}. For MoSe$_2$, these two dominant subpeaks appear at energies of 2.45\,eV and 2.55\,eV, above the electronic band gap, while in case of MoTe$_2$ the \textsl{Ca} transition moves below the electronic band gap. This is accompanied by a decrease of the fundamental (direct) band gap along the series S$\rightarrow$Se$\rightarrow$Te due to the increase of the in-plane lattice constants. This increase weakens the hybridization of Mo $d$ orbitals with chalcogen $p$ orbitals that is responsible for opening of the fundamental band gap\,\cite{kang-offsets}. Correspondingly, the optical band gap decreases along the series as well.
Our G$_0$W$_0$ calculations predict a direct band gap of 2.33\,eV for 1L-MoSe$_2$, resulting in a binding energy of the \textsl{A} exciton of 0.48\,eV, which is slightly decreased compared to MoS$_2$ and in good agreement with recent studies based on Keldysh electrostatic potentials\,\cite{komsa-2015, kidd-2016}.
The \textsl{A} peak appears at an energy of 1.86\,eV with a spin-orbit-splitting of the \textsl{B} peak by 166\,meV. These values can be compared to the recent report by Ugeda \emph{et. al}\,\cite{ugeda-MoSe2-excitons}, who studied layers of MoSe$_2$ on bilayer graphene by STS and photoluminescence spectroscopy and BSE@GW calculations. Experimentally, they obtained an electronic band gap of E$_g$=2.18\,eV, and an exciton binding energy of E$_b^A$=0.55\,eV, which places the \textsl{A}-peak position at 1.63\,eV. As for MoS$_2$, our calculated exciton binding energy is thus close to experimental values, while the error in the predicted peak position appears to be contained in an overestimated G$_0$W$_0$ band gap compared to experiment. On the other hand, the theoretical calculations in\,\cite{ugeda-MoSe2-excitons} yielded a larger exciton binding energy of 0.63\,eV, which compensated for the overestimated band gap (E$_g$=2.26\,eV) and restored the experimental peak position. Substrate screening was identified to be the main cause of error between theoretical and experimental values in that case and we expect this to add to previously mentioned inaccuracies due to coarse \textit{k}-point samplings.
For MoTe$_2$, we obtain a G$_0$W$_0$ band gap of 1.78\,eV and an \textsl{A} peak at 1.36\,eV, which, again, is about 0.2\,eV higher than the \textsl{A}-peak energy of 1.1\,eV from photoluminescence experiments reported in a recent study\,\cite{yang-MoTe2-exciton-binding}. While the theoretical calculations in\,\cite{yang-MoTe2-exciton-binding} yielded a G$_0$W$_0$ band gap very similar to ours, they predicted a significantly higher exciton binding energy of about 0.6\,eV that led to a good agreement of the simulated and predicted A peak energies and resembles the earlier results by Komsa \emph{et. al}\,\cite{komsa-excitons}. The available theoretical and experimental data thus suggest a binding energy of the A exciton between 0.4 and 0.65\,eV.
For the bilayer materials, it is well established that stacking two layers of MoS$_2$ leads to a transition from direct to indirect semiconductor due to the additional interlayer interactions. At the same time, the direct electronic band gap decreases relative to the monolayer forms due to weaker quantum confinement of the electronic wavefunctions. For bilayer MoS$_2$, our G$_0$W$_0$ calculations predict a reduction of the direct band gap to a value of 2.37\,eV.
We note that we did not include corrections for spin-orbit interactions in the bilayer systems. This causes an underestimation of the splitting of the \textsl{A} and \textsl{B} peaks in our calculations, which arises solely from band splitting by virtue of interlayer interactions of 100\,meV and introduces an additional error on the band gap of order 50\,meV.
On the other hand, the binding energy of the \textsl{A} peak significantly decreases compared to monolayer MoS$_2$ to a value of 0.13\,eV. This places the \textsl{A} peak at an energy of 2.24\,eV, \emph{i.e.} slightly blue-shifted compared to the \textsl{A} peak in monolayer MoS$_2$, compare to the simulated absorption spectrum of monolayer MoS$_2$ in absence of spin-orbit corrections in Fig.~\ref{fig:MoS2-1L-A}. This is in good agreement with a recent theoretical study\,\cite{palumno-2015} and matches the slight blueshift in the experimental spectra in Fig.~\ref{fig:expspectrum}. On the other hand, the relative positions of the \textsl{A} peaks of mono- and bilayer systems appears to depend on the sample and both spectra with blue-shifted\,\cite{splendiani-2010,scheuschner-2014,MoS2-tunable-PL} and red-shifted\,\cite{mak-2010} bilayer \textsl{A} peak have been reported.
We attribute the reduced binding energies of the \textsl{A} exciton to the proximity of the adjacent layer, which increases the screening of the Coulomb interaction between the electron-hole pair.
At the same time, changes in the electronic structure due to the second layer split the high \textsl{C} peak from monolayer MoS$_2$ into two dominant peaks, \textsl{C} and \textsl{E}, at energies of 2.7 and 2.9\,eV in 2L-MoS$_2$. We note that our calculations can only account for direct transitions and thus do not include the low-energy peak '\textsl{I}' that is observed in photoluminescence spectra due to the fundamental indirect band gap in few-layer MoS$_2$, refer to Fig.~\ref{fig:expspectrum}. Inclusion of such indirect transitions would lead to a shift of oscillation strength from the \textsl{A} exciton to the '\textsl{I}' transition compared to our simulations.
We find similar results for 2L-MoSe$_2$ and 2L-MoTe$_2$. The binding energy of the \textsl{A} peak of 2L-MoSe$_2$ greatly decreases to a value of E$_b^A$=0.14\,eV compared to the electronic band gap of E$_g$=2.11\,eV and the A peak position of 1.97\,eV is slightly above that of the monolayer form. The dominant \textsl{C} peaks from 1L-MoSe$_2$ contain a significantly lower oscillation strength in 2L-MoSe$_2$ in our calculations, while most of the spectral weight is shifted to a tall peak at higher energies. In 2L-MoTe$_2$, the binding energy of the \textsl{A} exciton of E$_b^A$=0.17\,eV continues the trend and is slightly larger than for the other two bilayer materials. A possible reason might be the increasing layer separation
along the series 2L-MoX$_2$ with X=S,Se,Te, that is mirrored in the increase of out-of-plane lattice constants in the bulk materials. The larger layer separation might weaken the effect of an adjacent layer on the screening that counteracts and cancels the binding energy trend observed for the monolayers.
In the following sections we will have a closer look on the detailed compositions of the peaks in the calculated dielectric functions.
\subsection{Decomposition of excitonic transitions in monolayer MoS$_2$}\label{sec:decomposition}
For the sake of clarity, we will start with the dielectric function in the absence of spin-orbit effects, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:MoS2-1L-A}~(a). In agreement with expectations, we find that the \textsl{A} peak is caused by excitations from the valence band maxima at the \textit{K} and \textit{K'} points in the Brillouin zone to the lowest conduction band, see Fig.~\ref{fig:MoS2-1L-A}~(b).
In real space, this strong confinement to the \textit{K} point manifests in a relatively large Bohr radius of the exciton wavefunction of about 16\,\AA, if we define the Bohr radius as full-width-half-maximum (FWHM) of the upper envolope and place the hole on the central Mo atom in the supercell. The excited electrons are mainly in $p_x$ and $p_y$ orbitals, which dominate the conduction band edge around \textit{K} and confine the exciton wavefunction to the MoS$_2$ plane.
A number of additional transitions with lower dipole-strength appear in the energy range of 2.45-2.55 eV. Without inclusion of spin-orbit coupling, these transitions give rise to two additional features between the \textsl{A} and \textsl{C} peaks, see Fig.~\ref{fig:MoS2-1L-A}~(a). The first of these transitions is strongly localized in reciprocal space and corresponds to a transition between the valence band maximum and conduction band minimum at the \textit{K} point, suggesting that it is indeed the first excited state of the \textsl{A} transition, \textsl{A$^{*}$}. This is confirmed by a node in the real-space representation of the excitonic wavefunction [plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:MoS2-1L-A}~(c)] at a distance of 23.5\,\AA\space from the hole.
The second peak corresponds to transitions between the band edges very close to the \textit{K} point and is more delocalized in reciprocal space compared to \textsl{A} and \textsl{A$^{*}$}. Our analysis reveals two nodes in the excitonic wavefunction at distances of roughly 11.5\,\AA\space and 34\,\AA\space from the hole, suggesting that this transition is the second excited state, \textsl{A$^{**}$}, of the \textsl{A} peak.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=\columnwidth]{MoS2-1L-C3C4.jpg}
\caption{\label{fig:MoS2-1L-C} (Color online) Reciprocal and real space wavefunctions of (a) the \textsl{C3$^{+/-}$} and (b) the \textsl{C4$^{+/-}$} transitions contributing to the \textsl{C} peak in the dielectric function of MoS$_2$. Both dominant contributions and the A transition are indicated in the electronic bandstructure in (c). As in Fig.~\ref{fig:MoS2-1L-A}, we did not include spin-orbit effects for the sake of simplicity.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=\textwidth]{MoSe2-1L-AD2C2C3}
\caption{\label{fig:MoSe2-1L-DCE} (Color online) Reciprocal and real space representations of the (a) \textsl{A}/\textsl{B}, (b) \textsl{D2$^{+/-}$}, (c) \textsl{C2$^{+/-}$} and (d) \textsl{C3$^{+/-}$} transition of MoSe$_2$.}
\end{figure*}
The picture slightly changes if spin-orbit effects are included, see Fig.~\ref{fig:absorption}~(a). The strong localization at the \textit{K} point leads to splitting of \textsl{A}, \textsl{A$^{*}$} and \textsl{A$^{**}$} by 148\,meV into three pairs of transitions, \textsl{A}$\rightarrow$\textsl{A}+\textsl{B}, \textsl{A$^{*}$}$\rightarrow$\textsl{A$^{*}$}+\textsl{B$^{*}$} and \textsl{A$^{**}$}$\rightarrow$\textsl{A$^{**}$}+\textsl{B$^{**}$}. These transitions occur between pairs of valence and conduction bands ($v_1\rightarrow c_1$ and $v_2\rightarrow c_2$) that satisfy the Laporte rule of $\Delta l=\pm 1$, $\Delta s=0$ for the angular momentum quantum number $l$ and the spin quantum number $s$. This has two consequences: \emph{(i)} transitions are only allowed between spin-matched Mo $d$ and S $p$ orbitals, which satisfy the required conditions. \emph{(ii)} The absence of inversion symmetry imposes a reverse order of the spin-orbit split bands at \textit{K'} compared to the \textit{K} point. Hence, the excited electrons possess $s_{K}=\frac{1}{2}$ and $s_{K'}=-\frac{1}{2}$ at the \textit{K} and \textit{K'} points, respectively, in the \textsl{A} exciton, while $s_{K}=-\frac{1}{2}$ and $s_{K'}=\frac{1}{2}$ for the \textsl{B} exciton, giving rise to optical dichroism.
We further find that the dark \textsl{A$^{*}$} exciton is resonant with the \textsl{B} transition in our calculations, while \textsl{B$^{*}$} is almost degenerate to the considerably brighter \textsl{A$^{**}$} transition. Our calculations thus suggest that the two peaks between \textsl{B} and \textsl{C} in Fig.~\ref{fig:absorption}~(a) do not correspond to \textsl{A$^{*}$} and \textsl{B$^{*}$} but to the spin-orbit split excitations of the \textsl{A} and \textsl{B} transitions, \textsl{A$^{**}$} and \textsl{B$^{**}$}.
The \textsl{C} peak is made up of a number of transitions in the range of 2.7-3.0 eV. Two dark contributions, \textsl{C1$^{-}$} and \textsl{C2$^{-}$} (not shown), appear at the lower end of the peak at energies of 2.75 and 2.79\,eV. They correspond to $v_1\rightarrow c_1$ transitions in the vicinity of \textit{K}/\textit{K'}, from points on the \textit{$\Gamma$}-\textit{K} (\textsl{C1$^{-}$}) and \textit{K}/\textit{K'}-\textit{M} lines (\textsl{C2$^{-}$}).
The corresponding transitions from $v_2$ to $c_2$, \textsl{C1$^{+}$} and \textsl{C2$^{+}$}, are shifted to higher energies due to the spin-orbit splitting of the valence band top around the \textit{K} and \textit{K'} points. Approximating the binding energy as the difference between the transition energy and the electronic band gap on the point of the main contribution on the \textit{$\Gamma$}-\textit{K} or \textit{K}-\textit{M} lines yields binding energies on the order of 0.005\,eV, which suggests that both \textsl{C1$^{-/+}$} and \textsl{C2$^{-/+}$} are un- or weakly bound electron-hole pairs. Plots of the representation in reciprocal space and the exciton wavefunction of \textsl{C1$^{+/-}$} can be found in the Supplementary Material.
The bright transitions \textsl{C3} and \textsl{C4} appear at slightly higher energies of 2.86-2.92\,eV and carry almost the entire oscillator strength of the \textsl{C} peak, see Fig.~\ref{fig:absorption}~(a). Despite their energetic similarity, we found significant differences between the two transitions: The reciprocal space representation in Fig.~\ref{fig:MoS2-1L-C}~(a) shows that \textsl{C3} is dominated by contributions from points on the \textit{K}-\textit{M} lines, with weaker, six-fold degenerated contributions around a point \textit{X} at about $\frac{1}{3}$ of the \textit{$\Gamma$}-\textit{K} lines. As for the other transitions, the close vicinity to \textit{K} and \textit{K'} in reciprocal space leads to a split of \textsl{C3} into two transitions \textsl{C3$^{-}$} and \textsl{C3$^{+}$} that are separated by about 0.07\,eV. The corresponding exciton wavefunction, shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:MoS2-1L-C}~(a), inherits a distinct out-of-plane character (not shown) around the hole position from $p_z$ orbitals that strongly contribute to the conduction band at the \textit{X} point, which contrasts the intra-plane nature of the \textsl{A} and \textsl{B} excitons. Interestingly, the probablity of presence of the excited electron exhibits what appears like additional rings surrounding a core with radius on the order
of 20\,\AA, which makes the exciton wavefunction fairly extended. We find similar features for the C1 transitions. It is thus possible that higher order excitations, \emph{e.g.} of \textsl{A}, are mixed into the \textsl{C1} and \textsl{C3} transitions.
In contrast, the second dominant peak, \textsl{C4}, is almost entirely composed of six-fold degenerated contributions at \textit{X}, with relatively minor additional contributions near \textit{K} (and \textit{K'}), see Fig.~\ref{fig:MoS2-1L-C}~(b). The split transitions \textsl{C4$^{-}$} and \textsl{C4$^{+}$} between $v_1$/$v_2$ and $c_1$/$c_2$ are almost degenerate as neither the highest valence nor the lowest conduction bands show a noticeable spin-orbit splitting at \textit{X}, leaving only a relatively minor energy separation of 0.013\,eV from the contributions near \textit{K} and \textit{K'}. The relative expansion of the excitonic transition in reciprocal space leads to a considerable confinement of the exciton wavefunction in real space with a small Bohr radius of 11\,\AA\space compared to that of the \textsl{A} and \textsl{B} excitons. Correspondingly, we find a increased binding energy of about 0.7\,eV compared to the \textit{X} point. These results for \textsl{C4} are in good agreement with previous reports in\,\cite{qiu-2013,qiu-erratum,wirtz-MoS2-excitons}. On the other hand, \textsl{C3} has not been described before, to the best of our knowledge. The similarity of reciprocal space representations and transition energy might suggest that the separation of \textsl{C3} and \textsl{C4} might be an artifact due to symmetry breaking during our calculations. We thus tested the effect of changes in the electronic structure or the sampling in the BSE kernel, but found our results to be robust.
A number of additional features can be found in an energy window \textless 3\,eV in our calculations. Two additional strong transitions, \textsl{C5$^{+}$} and \textsl{C6$^{+}$}, form a shoulder to \textit{C} at energies around 3\,eV and each have about half the oscillator strength of \textsl{C3$^{+/-}$}. These peaks are composed of unbound electron-hole pairs with wavevectors from a triangular-shaped region around the \textit{K} and \textit{K'} points and vanishing contributions from the entire \textit{$\Gamma$}-\textit{K} line. The spin-orbit splitting pushes \textsl{C5$^{-}$} to an energy of about 2.92\,eV, where it is almost degenerate with the \textsl{C3$^{+}$} transition and thus is expected to be a by-product of the excitation of \textsl{C3$^{+}$}.
The plateau following the \textsl{C} peak [Fig.~\ref{fig:absorption}~(a)] is formed by a number of smaller transitions. Particularly notable are the \textsl{E2$^{+/-}$} transitions that appear at an energy of 3.145\,eV and have the strongest oscillation strength. They consist mainly of contributions within a circle spanned by the six degenerate \textit{X} points and an additional feature at a point '\textit{X'}' [Fig.~\ref{fig:MoS2-1L-C}~(c)] along the \textit{$\Gamma$}-\textit{K} line. Correspondingly, the spin-orbit splitting of \textsl{E2$^{-/+}$} is relatively minor, and on the order of 0.02\,eV. The excitonic wavefunction in real space is well localized within a radius of about 20\,\AA\space and indicates a bound excitonic state. Considering the energy difference to \textsl{C4$^{+/-}$} and the dipole strength, part of \textsl{E2$^{+/-}$} could conceivably be composed of an excited state of \textsl{C4$^{+/-}$} with additional contributions around \textit{$\Gamma$} and on the \textit{$\Gamma$}-\textit{K} lines; however, our calculations do not indicate a node in the excitonic wavefunction. We refer to the supplementary material for the reciprocal and real space representations of \textsl{E2$^{+/-}$}.
\subsection{Excitonic transitions in monolayer MoSe$_2$}
For MoSe$_2$, the \textsl{A} and \textsl{B} transitions and their excitations correspond to those of MoS$_2$ by virtue of the similar electronic dispersion around the \textit{K} and \textit{K'} points, with an energy separation of 168\,meV. The excitonic wavefunction, depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:MoSe2-1L-DCE}, matches the one of the \textsl{A} exciton of MoS$_2$, with a similar Bohr radius of 17\,\AA. The energy separation between the \textsl{A}/\textsl{B} pair and the \textsl{C} peaks decreases compared to MoS$_2$. As a result, the peak following \textsl{A$^{**}$} [see Fig.~\ref{fig:absorption}~(b)] does not solely originate from \textsl{B$^{**}$} as in MoS$_2$, but has another contribution from the \textsl{D2} peak. This peak corresponds to the \textsl{C1} peak in MoS$_2$ and was pushed to lower energies by the decrease of the band around \textit{K} and \textit{K'}. Fig.~\ref{fig:MoSe2-1L-DCE}~(a) shows our calculated reciprocal space and real space representation of the \textsl{D2} transition. Similar to \textsl{C1} in MoS$_2$, the excitonic wavefunction suggests a weakly or unbound electron-hole pair.
For excitation energies larger than 2.4\,eV, the differences in electronic band structure away from the \textit{K} and \textit{K'} points, induced by exchanging the chalcogen atoms, significantly affect the dielectric function. The dominant contributions come from the \textsl{C2} transitions [Fig.~\ref{fig:absorption}~(b)], which are of similar strength to the \textsl{A} and \textsl{B} peaks. The \textsl{C3} transitions give another strong contribution and appear similar to \textsl{C2}, but are more delocalized in reciprocal space and have about half the oscillation strength of \textsl{C2}, on the same level as the \textsl{A$^{**}$} and \textsl{B$^{**}$} transitions. The plots of reciprocal space representations in Fig.~\ref{fig:MoSe2-1L-DCE}~(b), (c) reveal two main qualitative differences between the dominant \textsl{C} transitions in MoS$_2$ and MoSe$_2$: For one, \textsl{C2} and (particularly) \textsl{C3} in MoSe$_2$ show a significantly stronger weight of contributions in the vicinity of the \textit{K} and \textit{K'} points compared to \textsl{C3} and \textsl{C4} in MoS$_2$, see Figs.~\ref{fig:MoS2-1L-C}~(a),(b) and~\ref{fig:MoSe2-1L-DCE}~(c),(d). This causes a noticeable spin-orbit splitting into subtransitions \textsl{C2$^{+/-}$} and \textsl{C3$^{+/-}$} that give rise to the two peaks \textsl{Ca} and \textsl{Cb} in the dielectric function, with an additional contribution of \textsl{D2$^+$} to \textsl{Ca}. The second difference is found for the contributions away from the \textit{K} and \textit{K'} valleys. While these originate mainly from a point closer to \textit{$\Gamma$} in MoS$_2$, this six-fold degenerated \textit{X} point in MoSe$_2$ appears further along the \textit{$\Gamma$}-\textit{K} line and conincides with the \textit{X'} point in MoS$_2$ [Fig.~\ref{fig:MoS2-1L-C}~(b)]. The excitonic wavefunctions are well localized in real space, with somewhat larger extension than the \textsl{C4} transition in MoS$_2$, We derive Bohr radii of 10\,\AA\space and 19\,\AA\space for the \textsl{C2} and \textsl{C3} transitions, respectively.
A band of transitions of roughly equal strength make up the high \textsl{E} peak between 2.7 and 2.9\,eV in the dielectric function, see Fig.~\ref{fig:absorption}~(b). The strongest contribution comes from the \textsl{E1$^{+}$}, with an oscillation strength similar to that of \textsl{D2$^{+/-}$} or \textsl{C3$^{+/-}$}, and with a second transition, \textsl{E2$^{+}$}, is close in energy. The split-off transitions \textsl{E1$^{-}$} and \textsl{E2$^{-}$} contribute to the \textsl{Cb} peak. Both transitions share some similarity to \textsl{C3}, with main contributions at points at around $\frac{1}{2}$\textit{K}-\textit{M} and at the \textit{X} point. The corresponding wavefunctions are relatively extended but well-defined and could thus suggest a bound excitonic state.
\subsection{Excitonic transitions in monolayer MoTe$_2$}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=\columnwidth]{MoTe2-1L-C3C4C8}
\caption{\label{fig:MoTe2-1L-C} (Color online) Reciprocal space representations of the (a) \textsl{C3$^{+/-}$}, (b) \textsl{C4$^{+/-}$} and (c) \textsl{C8$^{+/-}$} transitions of MoTe$_2$. (d) Electronic bandstructure of MoTe$_2$ without spin-orbit effects and sketches of the \textsl{A}, \textsl{C3} and \textsl{C4} transitions.}
\end{figure}
In monolayer MoTe$_2$, the spin-orbit splitting at \textit{K} and \textit{K'} of 220\,meV is large enough to push the \textsl{B} transition between the first two excitations of \textsl{A}, see Fig.~\ref{fig:absorption}~(c). The \textsl{B} peak thus consists of a superposition of \textsl{B} with \textsl{A$^{*}$} and \textsl{A$^{**}$}.
The excitonic wavefunction (not shown) assumes the spherical shape seen for MoS$_2$ and MoSe$_2$ and we obtain a slightly increased Bohr radius of about 17\,\AA from the FWHM.
As for MoSe$_2$, the \textsl{C} peak is split into two subpeaks \textsl{Ca} and \textsl{Cb}. \textsl{Ca} mainly consists of the \textsl{C4$^{-}$} transition with smaller contributions from \textsl{C2$^{-}$} and \textsl{C3$^{-}$}. Analysis of the reciprocal space representations show that \textsl{C2$^{+/-}$} correspond to the \textsl{D2$^{+/-}$} transitions in MoSe$_2$, while \textsl{C3} and \textsl{C4} show strong similarities to the \textsl{C2$^{+/-}$} and \textsl{C3$^{+/-}$} excitons in MoSe$_2$, see Fig.~\ref{fig:MoTe2-1L-C}~(a). Transitions at the \textit{X} point on the \textit{$\Gamma$}-\textit{K} line contribute less to the overall oscillation strength of the exciton compared to the other materials. We show in Sec.~\ref{sec:nesting} that the evolution of the \textit{X} point position and its relative contributions along the chalcogen series can be understood from band nesting effects in the electronic band structure. As for the other materials, the excitonic wavefunctions of the \textsl{C3$^{+/-}$} and \textsl{C4$^{+/-}$} transitions are well localized in real space, but have a larger extension
While \textsl{Ca} consists of well-separated excitonic transitions, the composition of \textsl{Cb} appears to be more complex. We find that the \textsl{Cb} peak is almost completely made up of two bright sub-peaks of large oscillation strength: The higher subpeak at 1.92\,eV is formed by a superposition of the \textsl{C3$^{+}$} and \textsl{C4$^{-}$} transitions with an energy separation of only 0.001\,eV. This originates in the smaller energy separation between \textsl{C4$^{-}$} and \textsl{C4$^{+}$} of 150\,meV due to the significantly larger contribution at the \textit{X} point, where the spin-orbit splitting of $v_1$/$v_2$ and $c_1$/ $c_2$ is smaller than at \textit{K}.
The second, weaker, sub-peak at 1.89\,eV consists of the \textsl{C2$^{+}$} and \textsl{C8$^{-}$} transitions, which are degenerate ($\Delta E_b=0.0005$\,eV) in our calculations. As Fig.~\ref{fig:MoTe2-1L-C}~(b) shows, \textsl{C8$^{-}$} introduces contributions outside of the vicinity of the \textit{K} and \textit{K'} points, particularly from transitions from $v_1$ and $v_2$ to $c_1$ along the \textit{K}-\textit{M} line. The boundary condition E$_u$(k)=E$_u$(-k) at \textit{M} acts similarly to inversion symmetry and, together with time-reversal symmetry E$_u$(k)=E$_d$(-k), induces a Kramer's degeneracy on the one-electron states of different spins, thus lifting the spin-orbit splitting of the valence band maximum. In a similar fashion as for the higher peak, this leads to a slightly decreased energy separation of \textsl{C8$^{-}$} and \textsl{C8$^{+}$} ($\Delta$E=150\,meV). The latter forms the \textsl{D} shoulder in the dielectric function in Fig.~\ref{fig:absorption}~(c).
Additional prominent poles in the dielectric function appear at higher energies. We refer to the supplementary material for details.
\subsection{Excitonic states in few-layer TMDs}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=\textwidth]{MoS2-2L-AC1E10.jpg}
\caption{\label{fig:MoS2-2L} (Color online) (a) Electronic bandstructure of bilayer MoS$_2$ in the absence of spin-orbit coupling. The reciprocal space representations are plotted for the (b) \textsl{A}, (c) \textsl{C1} and (d) \textsl{E10} transitions. As for the monolayer systems, the excitonic wavefunctions were expanded in real space on a 20x20 supercell. For the sake of clarity, the corresponding real space wavefunctions are shown as slices through the excited layer (upper subpanel) and projected onto the $x$-$z$ plane (lower subpanel). The hole was placed on the center molybdenum atom in the upper MoS$_2$ layer.}
\end{figure*}
Due to the weak interlayer coupling compared to intralayer bonding in layered TMDs, one would expect a relatively small effect of the material thickness on the qualitative nature of the direct excitations. A significant effect here comes from the previously mentioned band splitting due to interlayer interactions, particularly at the \textit{$\Gamma$} and \textit{Q} points that causes a direct-to-indirect bandgap transitions for 1L$\rightarrow$2L, see Fig.~\ref{fig:MoS2-2L}~(a). In bilayer structures (or any even layer number), the added inversion symmetry due to the AB stacking reverses the order of spin-orbit split bands between layers (not included in our presented calculations) and lifts the spin-orbit splitting of the peaks at the absorption onset. In contrast to the monolayer structure, the \textsl{A} peak seen in experiments is thus caused by transitions from two degenerate bands of different total angular momentum at the valence band top at \textit{K}/\textit{K'} to two degenerate conduction bands, while the \textsl{B} peak originates from the corresponding (degenerate) spin-orbit- and interlayer-split bands.
Figure~\ref{fig:MoS2-2L}~(b) shows the calculated reciprocal space representation of the \textsl{A} peak of bilayer MoS$_2$ and the real space excitonic wavefunctions projected onto the x-y and x-z planes, respectively. While the excitonic wavefunction is $s$-like as in monolayer, the Bohr radius of the \textsl{A} transition increases to a value of 20\,\AA\space as a result of the stronger dielectric screening in the bilayer material.
On the other hand, we find a relatively small spill-over of the excitonic wavefunction into the second layer if an electron-hole pair is excited in the upper layer. This agrees well with recent resonant Raman studies\,\cite{scheuschner-interlayer-modes}, where few-layer MoS$_2$ acts as a superposition of $N$ quasi-independent layers if in resonance with the \textsl{A} and \textsl{B} excitons. The confinement to one plane can be readily explained by the composition of the band edges at the $K$ point, which consist of
Mo $d_{xy}$, $d_{x^2-y^2}$ (valence band) or Mo $d_{z^2}$ (conduction band) orbitals that are hybridized with sulfur $p_x$ and $p_y$ states and thus extend mainly in-plane. The \textsl{D} peak in the imaginary dielectric function in Fig.~\ref{fig:absorption}~(d) consists of a superposition of \textsl{A$^{**}$} and a second peak of low oscillation strength, \textsl{D1}. Interestingly, this darker second peak is a direct transition at the \textit{$\Gamma$} point, which is energetically closer to the absorption onset due to the strong splitting from to interlayer hybridization of the $p_z$ orbitals that make up the valence band maximum at \textit{$\Gamma$}. It appears from its delocalized excitonic wavefunction that this transition does not form a bound electron-hole pair.
The strongest single transition in the spectrum is \textsl{C1} that makes up the \textsl{C} peak in the imaginary dielectric function. It appears to correspond to the \textsl{C3} transition in monolayer MoS$_2$, with a considerable contribution away from the vicinity of the \textit{K} and \textit{K'} points. However, the 'off-\textit{K}' contributions appear significantly closer to the \textit{$\Gamma$} point, see Fig.~\ref{fig:MoS2-2L}~(c), which should render the nature of the transitions more \textit{$\Gamma$}-like compared to monolayer MoS$_2$. This $p_z$ character of the conduction band results in a strong interlayer nature of the excitonic wavefunction, which significantly spills over the neighbouring layers if the upper layer is excited. This couples the few-layer structure for optical measurements that are resonant with the \textsl{C} exciton and, \emph{e.g.} activates interlayer resonant Raman modes in MoS$_2$\,\cite{scheuschner-interlayer-modes}. On the other hand, we find that the modified orbital makeup of the \textsl{C} transition changes the shape and the extent of the excitonic wavefunction within the plane of the excited MoS$_2$ layer as well. The interlayer character of the \textsl{C} exciton also carries over to the trilayer system, where the exciton wavefunction is significantly delocalized over all three layers. In contrast, the exciton wavefunction of the \textsl{A} exciton is confined to the excited layer, see Fig.~\ref{fig:MoS2-3L}.
Two additional bright transitions of similar oscillation strength give rise to the dominant \textit{E} peak in the dielectric function of 2L-MoS$_2$ at an energy around 2.9\,eV, see Fig.~\ref{fig:absorption}~(d). While bearing some resemblance in reciprocal space to the \textsl{C1} transition, the contributions are mainly localized within the hexagonal region around the \textit{$\Gamma$} point and on the \textit{$\Gamma$}-\textit{K} line and might correspond to the \textsl{C4} in monolayer MoS$_2$. However, the calculated excitonic wavefunctions appear delocalized within and between the layers, see Fig.~\ref{fig:MoS2-2L}~(d).
Our results for bilayer MoSe$_2$ draw a similar picture as those for MoS$_2$. The strongest transition in our calculations has a similar reciprocal space representation as the \textsl{C3} excitons in the monolayer material and forms the \textsl{C} peak in the imaginary dielectric function [Fig.~\ref{fig:absorption}~(e)]. As for MoS$_2$, we find a noticeable out-of-plane component of the excitonic wavefunction. The main factor is the orbital composition of the involved first valence and conduction bands at the \textit{X} points at around $\frac{3}{5}$ of the \textit{$\Gamma$}-\textit{K} line, which consist of selene p$_y$ and p$_z$ and Mo $d$ states, while the first valence band has a larger Se p$_x$ character.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\includegraphics*[width=\columnwidth]{MoS2-3L-AC}
\caption{\label{fig:MoS2-3L} (Color online) Reciprocal space representations and corresponding excitonic wavefunction in real space (projected onto the the $x$-$z$ plane) of the \textsl{A} and \textsl{C} transitions in trilayer MoS$_2$ corresponding to the \textsl{A} and \textsl{C1} excitons in 2L-MoS$_2$. As for the other materials, the hole was placed on the central Mo atom in the upper-most layer.}
\end{figure}
Compared to MoS$_2$ and MoSe$_2$, the dielectric function of 2L-MoTe$_2$ features a number of bright transitions that dominate the dielectric function below an energy of 2.0\,eV, see Fig.~\ref{fig:absorption}~(f). The \textsl{C} and \textsl{D} peaks, see Fig.~\ref{fig:absorption}, are dominated by transitions between the two highest valence bands $v_1$ and $v_2$ to the two lowest conduction bands that in reciprocal space show a striking resemblance to \textsl{C3} and \textsl{C4} in the monolayer. Here, the \textsl{C1} transition is mainly localized at the \textit{K} point, with a relatively low contribution at the \textit{X} point away from \textit{K}. The excitonic wavefunction shows a relatively small Bohr radius of 13\,\AA\space within the excited layer, but, as for MoS$_2$ and MoSe$_2$, is delocalized over the bilayer structure. In contrast, the \textit{D3} transition, which dominates the \textsl{D} peak, has no contribution from \textit{K} or its immediate neighbourhood, but mainly consists of transitions at the \textit{X} point. The corresponding excitonic wavefunction appears to be very extended with a radius of more than 25\,\AA, indicating a weakly bound electron-hole pair.
A number of higher features appear in the dielectric functions of both 2L-MoSe$_2$ and 2L-MoTe$_2$ above the bright C transitions and should be accessible through suitable laser energies. The \textsl{E} peak in MoTe$_2$ is predominantly a transition from $v_2$ to the third conduction band $c_3$ at the \textit{K} (and \textit{K'}) point. The broad \textsl{G} peak in MoSe$_2$ is composed of band transitions that mainly involve the \textit{$\Gamma$} point. Plots of the reciprocal and real space representations of selected transitions of MoSe$_2$ and MoTe$_2$ and of the \textsl{E} transitions in MoS$_2$ can be found in the supplementary information.
\subsection{Band nesting}\label{sec:nesting}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=\textwidth]{nesting.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:nesting} (Color online) Differences of gradient between the highest valence band ($v_1$) and lowest conduction band ( $c_1$) and electronic bandstructures (without spin-orbit coupling) for monolayer (a) MoS$_2$, (b) MoSe$_2$, and (c) MoTe$_2$, and for (d) bilayer MoS$_2$. Arrows in the bandstructures indicate transitions at the band nesting points with large joint density of states.}
\end{figure*}
Following Fermi's Golden Rule, two factors are important for optical absorption of a solid material: One is the dipole matrix element of a specific transition between valence band $v$ and conduction band $c$ at a given \textit{k}-point $k$. The second factor is the joint density of states $\rho(\hbar\omega)=\sum_{v,c}\rho_{vc}(\hbar\omega)$, i.e. the number of different absorption channels for a given energy $\hbar\omega$. The joint density of states between $v$ and $c$ is commonly defined as
\begin{equation}
\rho_{vc}(\hbar\omega)\propto\int\frac{d\vec{S}(\vec{k})}{ \left|\nabla_k(E_{c}(\vec{k})-E_{v}(\vec{k}))\right|_{E_{c}(\vec{k})-E_{v}(\vec{k})=\hbar\omega} },
\end{equation}
where integration is performed over a constant energy surface $S$ in reciprocal space\,\cite{carvalho-band-nesting}. It is clear from this definition that major contributions to the joint-density of states come from quasi-stationary regions in reciprocal space where $\left|\nabla_k(E_{c}-E_{v})\right|$ is small or vanishing. On one hand, this is the case at points with a conduction band minimum and valence band maximum, where the individual gradients vanish, i.e. $\left|\nabla_k(E_{c})\right|=\left|\nabla_k(E_{v})\right|=0$ and thus causes strong absorption at the band edges. On the other hand, the condition is also fulfilled at points in the bandstructure, where $\left|\nabla_k(E_{c})\right|\neq 0$ and $\left|\nabla_k(E_{v})\right|\neq 0$, but $\left|\nabla_k(E_{c}-E_{v})\right|\approx 0$.
Carvalho \emph{et al.}\,\cite{carvalho-band-nesting} recently suggested by DFT calculations that such points of "band nesting" give rise to the dominant peaks in the optical conductivity of various transition metal dichalcogenides.
Figure~\ref{fig:nesting}~(a)-(c) show plots of the gradient of the energy difference between the GW corrected first valence and conduction bands of the three monolayer materials over the first Brillouin zone in the absence of spin-orbit interaction.
For monolayer MoS$_2$, we find a range of points with small or vanishing gradient in the Brillouin zone, specifically at the high symmetry points and along the \textit{$\Gamma$}-\textit{K} direction. Most notably, the plot reveals a hexagonally shaped area around the \textit{$\Gamma$} point with a low gradient that, when compared to Fig.~\ref{fig:MoS2-1L-C}, fits well to the off-\textit{K} contributions to the \textsl{C3} and \textsl{C4} transitions. Another point of vanishing gradient difference appears at $\frac{2}{3}$ of the \textit{$\Gamma$}-\textit{K} line, which originates from a region close to the \textit{Q} valley in the electronic dispersion, see the bandstructure plot in Fig.~\ref{fig:nesting}~(a), where both conduction and valence band exhibit similar curvature. Due to the band gap of about 3.8\,eV, this region does not noticeably influence the dielectric function up to energies of 3\,eV, where the \textsl{E2} and \textsl{E3} transitions contain first contributions from the band nesting point.
Replacing S with Se has a significant effect on the electronic structure that change the picture, see Fig.~\ref{fig:nesting}~(b). The relative splitting of valence and conduction band at the \textit{$\Gamma$} point increases compared to MoS$_2$, increasing the steepness of the conduction band between \textit{$\Gamma$} and \textit{Q}, and simultaneously pushing the valence band maximum at \textit{$\Gamma$} towards lower energies, thus decreasing the gradient in \textit{$\Gamma$}-\textit{Q} direction. This lifts the band nesting that MoS$_2$ exhibits between \textit{$\Gamma$} and \textit{Q} and increases the transition energy relatively to the fundamental electronic band gap. Correspondingly, the contribution of this point to the low-energy part of the absorption spectra is negligible. This leaves the band nesting point between \textit{Q} and \textit{K}, which is barely affected, as the changes in valence and conduction band dispersion cancel each other. At the same time, the band gap at \textit{Q} decreases relatively to \textit{K} and brings transitions at this point closer to the low-energy part of the absorption spectrum compared to MoS$_2$. The band nesting at this point thus strongly contributes to the dominant \textsl{C2} and \textsl{C3} transitions in MoSe$_2$, compare Fig.~\ref{fig:nesting}~(b) and Fig.~\ref{fig:MoSe2-1L-DCE}~(c),(d).
This trend continues for MoTe$_2$; the splitting at \textit{$\Gamma$} further increases, which counteracts the general lowering of the conduction band compared to the valence band due to the increased interatomic distances and results in a high-gradient difference region around the \textit{$\Gamma$} point that does not contribute to the low-energy absorption. The band nesting point \textit{X} between \textit{Q} and \textit{K} also appears for MoTe$_2$ and strongly contributes to the \textsl{C3} and \textsl{C4} transitions in Fig.~\ref{fig:absorption}~(c). This explains the noticeable similarity in nature of the dominant \textsl{C} transitions in MoTe$_2$ and MoSe$_2$ compared to the \textsl{C3} and \textsl{C4} transitions in MoS$_2$. Further, the band nesting around \textit{X} forms a band of low gradient difference between neighbouring \textit{M} points that surrounds \textit{K} and \textit{K'} and contributes to a relative delocalization of the contributions to excitonic transitions that can, for instance, be seen for the \textsl{C8} transition depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:MoTe2-1L-C}~(c).
On the other hand, we have seen in the previous section that the interlayer interaction in few-layer materials is another source for modifications in the electronic dispersion compared to their monolayer forms that affects the
quality of optical excitations. In bilayer MoS$_2$, this particularly concerns the region around the \textit{$\Gamma$} point, where hybdridization of the out-of-plane sulfur $p_z$ orbitals between the two layers induces a splitting of the valence band by 0.72 eV. This increases the band energy gradient around \textit{$\Gamma$}. At the same time, we find that the energy difference between the conduction band edges at \textit{$\Gamma$} and \textit{Q} only negligibly changes compared to 1L-MoS$_2$. As
Fig.~\ref{fig:nesting}~(d) shows, this shifts the point of band nesting on
the \textit{$\Gamma$}-\textit{K} lines and forms a compressed region of low gradient difference between valence and conduction band around \textit{$\Gamma$}. The obtained band nesting region fits well to the position of the off-\textit{K} contributions to the \textsl{C} exciton in our calculations and thus suggests that these contributions
are caused by a superposition of transitions with possibly weak oscillation strength that are amplified by the high joint density of states.
\section{Conclusion}
Based on \textit{ab initio} calculations, we showed that the composition and nature of the excitonic peaks in molydenum dichalcogenides is affected by the chalcogen species and interlayer interactions in the system. The bandstructures of the studied mono-and bilayer systems exhibit singularities in the joint-density of states between the first valence and conduction bands that are shifted along the \textit{$\Gamma$}-\textit{K} line as a consequence of changes in the electronic dispersion. This particularly concerns the prominent \textsl{C} peak that has been observed in MoS$_2$ and should also appear in the other materials as well. We predict that the moved band nesting point induces a sizeable spin-orbit splitting in the \textsl{C} peak for MoSe$_2$ and MoTe$_2$ due to its greater vicinity to the \textit{K} point, and a corresponding increasing peak broadening along the series MoS$_2\rightarrow$MoSe$_2\rightarrow$ MoTe$_2$. Further, we confirm the noticeable interlayer character of the excitonic wavefunction of the \textsl{C} peak transition in few-layer MoS$_2$, as opposed to the intralayer character of the fundamental \textsl{A} transition, and show that a similar behaviour can be expected for MoSe$_2$ and MoTe$_2$ as well. This has interesting implications for experimental measurements on N-layer dichalcogenide materials, which thus could be forced to act more decoupled (excitation resonant with \textit{A} exciton) or coupled (excitation resonant with \textsl{C} exciton.)
\section{Acknowledgements}
The authors gratefully acknowledge the North-German Supercomputing Alliance (HLRN) for providing the computational ressources used for the simulations in this work. This work was supported by the European Research Council (ERC) under grant number 259286 and the German Research Foundation (DFG) within SPP1459 "Graphene". The authors thank Nils Scheuschner for discussions and useful input.
|
\section{Introduction}
The amount of content online in different languages is greatly increasing, and the early days of English-language dominance on the Web have given way to language pluralism online. For many large user-generated content platforms, less than half the content is in English~\cite{hecht2010,hong2011} and many users do not speak English as a native language~\cite{hale2014twitter,hale2014wiki}. As Internet-penetration rates are already high in most English-speaking countries, future user growth (and the content contributed by these users) will be predominantly in non-English languages \cite{graham-inet-penetration}.
The language dynamics of online reviews have received little scholarly attention, and industry practices vary greatly. In general, many websites aggregate reviews from multiple languages together to compute an average rating as is the case with TripAdvisor, the travel review website analyzed in this paper. Many websites differ, however, on how reviews in other languages are displayed (if at all) to users. TripAdvisor generally shows reviews in reverse chronological order (most recent reviews first), but demotes foreign-language reviews so that they appear after all reviews in the language selected by the user. By contrast, Google Play, a mobile app store, hides reviews in other languages entirely making them completely inaccessible (although reviews from all languages appear to be used when calculating the average rating of an app).\footnote{For more details see, ``Design for multilinguals: Seemingly simple yet often missed,'' \url{http://www.scotthale.net/blog/?p=412}}
Beyond reviews, Twitter, Facebook, and Google Plus all provide the option to see machine translations of foreign-language posts, and Facebook has experimented with showing machine translations in place of foreign-language posts.
In general, a larger number of reviews is thought to be more helpful to potential consumers making purchasing decisions \cite{hu2008,park2007}.
There remains, however, a fundamental question of whether reviews in different languages are analytically similar to each other. If speakers of different languages focus on different aspects, evaluate products differently, and/or have consistently different experiences (e.g., different internationalization\slash{}localization choices for software or different information, etc. available for in-person activities) the reviews from one language may have less relevance to individuals primarily speaking a different language. If so, the practice of creating an average rating from reviews in multiple languages could be unhelpful or even misleading.
\section{Data and methods}
One large segment of user reviews is travel reviews. Tourist attractions in popular, international cities are reviewed by users from many countries, speaking many languages. TripAdvisor is one of the largest platforms for travel reviews, reporting 315 million unique visitors per month.\footnote{\url{http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/PressCenter-c6-About_Us.html}} All of the reviews on tripadvisor.co.uk about tourist attractions in London, England, were crawled and extracted using a custom-built webcrawler in Python3.\footnote{The code is freely available under an open-source license at \url{http://www.scotthale.net/pubs/?chi2016}.} London is a suitable choice as it is a large, international city and a top tourist destination for people from many countries. At the time of crawling in July 2015, TripAdvisor had 516,641 reviews pertaining to 3,040 different tourist attractions in London. The dataset only includes tourist attractions (as defined by TripAdvisor) and does not include reviews of hotels and restaurants.
TripAdvisor provides a link to machine translate non-English reviews, and the source-language parameter included in that machine translation link was taken as the language of the review. Reviews without a machine translation link were assumed to be in English. A human examination of 100 randomly chosen reviews did not find any errors in language labels. All reviews were also examined with the Compact Language Detection kit used within Google Chrome, and CLD detected the same language as that extracted from the translation link for 99.5\% of the reviews. Ad hoc examination suggested the disagreements between CLD and TripAdvisor were often due to the mixing of multiple languages within a single review.
The name and postcode of each attraction were recorded, and then the following elements for each review of the attraction were extracted:
\begin{itemize}
\item A numeric id of the user authoring the review stored in the HTML of the page
\item The ``star'' rating the user gave the attraction. This is a whole number between 1 (the lowest rating) and 5 (the highest rating)
\item The date on which the user authored the review
\item The location of the author (free-text, optional)
\end{itemize}
\section{Results}
The earliest reviews on TripAdvisor date from 2001 and are all in English. However, from 2006 onwards non-English reviews grew quickly as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:lang_growth}. By July 2015 when the site was crawled, 25\% of all reviews of London attractions were not in English. Just over half of all attractions had at least one non-English review, and 175 attractions (6\%) had more non-English than English-language reviews.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figs/trip_lang_growth}
\caption{The number of user reviews on TripAdvisor about London attractions from 2001 to 2015 for the top 8 languages}
\label{fig:lang_growth}
\end{figure}
Reviews of London attractions in all languages tended to be written in the summer months. Using a 30-day rolling window, the window with the most reviews was centered on July 1 and contained 12\% of all reviews (Figure~\ref{fig:global_doy}).\newpage
The timing of reviews in each language was similar but had slight differences. French reviews were written earlier in the year: 14\% of French reviews were written in the 30-day window centered on May 3. Italian reviews were written later in the year: 12\% of Italian reviews were written in the 30-day window centered on August 31.
Figure~\ref{fig:doy} shows the percentage of reviews written in different language each day of the year smoothed using a 30-day rolling window.
\begin{figure}
\hspace{-.5\marginparwidth}%
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth+0.5\marginparwidth]{figs/trip_global_doy_30smooth}
\caption{The number of user reviews on TripAdvisor about London attractions by day of the year for all languages. The plot combines data from 2001 to 2015, and the data is smoothed with a 30-day rolling window.}
\label{fig:global_doy}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\hspace{-.5\marginparwidth}%
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth+0.5\marginparwidth]{figs/trip_doy_30smooth}
\caption{The number of user reviews on TripAdvisor about London attractions by day of the year for the top 8 languages. The plot combines data from 2001 to 2015, and the data is smoothed with a 30-day rolling window.}
\label{fig:doy}
\end{figure}
The average star rating (1--5 stars) is sensitive to the number of reviews. With a small number of reviews, a single rating can be over represented. Through manual examination of different thresholds, 10 reviews was chosen as the minimum number of reviews needed to consider an attraction.
There were 471 attractions with at least 10 English and 10 non-English reviews, and among these attractions the correlation in the average rating between English and non-English reviews was strong (0.72). On average, the mean ratings of English reviews were 0.067 of a star lower than the mean ratings of non-English reviews (4.22 vs.~4.29 stars). While this difference is statistically significant at conventional levels ($p<0.03$), the magnitude of the difference is very small.
Applying the same criteria of at least 10 reviews in a language and 10 reviews in all other languages, correlations for each language were computed. Each correlation is the average star ratings of speakers of the language compared to the average star ratings of speakers of all other languages. As can be seen in Table~\ref{tbl:cor}, the correlations vary considerably. Ratings in German, Norwegian, and French are strongly correlated with ratings in other languages. In contrast, ratings in languages such as Portuguese and Japanese are less strongly correlated. Thus, the usefulness of reviews in another language may vary by language.
\begin{table}
\hspace{-.5\marginparwidth}
\begin{tabular}{lrrr@{}l}
\toprule
Language & Num.\ attractions & Correlation & Mean difference & \\
\midrule
Polish (pl) & 12 & 0.30 & 0.05 & \\
Turkish (tr) & 8 & 0.42 & 0.04 & \\
Greek (el) & 14 & 0.52 & 0.14 & \\
Danish (da) & 22 & 0.52 & $-$0.18 & \\
Japanese (ja) & 81 & 0.53 & $-$0.17 & ***\\
Portuguese (pt) & 199 & 0.61 & 0.17 & ***\\
Swedish (sv) & 38 & 0.63 & $-$0.11 & \\
Russian (ru) & 98 & 0.66 & 0.29 & ***\\
Dutch (nl) & 47 & 0.70 & $-$0.09 & \\
English (en) & 471 & 0.72 & $-$0.07 & *\\
Italian (it) & 216 & 0.73 & 0.02 & \\
Chinese (zh-CN) & 6 & 0.74 & $-$0.10 & \\
Spanish (es) & 174 & 0.77 & $-$0.01 & \\
French (fr) & 160 & 0.81 & $-$0.05 & \\
Norwegian (no) & 18 & 0.86 & $-$0.13 & \\
German (de) & 110 & 0.88 & 0.02 & \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Correlations and differences between the mean ratings for attractions given by speakers of a language compared to ratings given by speakers of all other languages. Asterisks indicate the significance of two-sample t-tests on the means of the average ratings (***~$p<0.001$, **~$p<0.01$, *~$p<0.05$).}
\label{tbl:cor}
\end{table}
Looking at pairs of languages, the correlations in the star ratings given by speakers of different languages to attractions ranged from a minimum of $-$0.1 between Chinese and Danish to a maximum of 0.97 between Chinese and Japanese as well as between Chinese and Russian. In general, the correlations were high (Figure~\ref{fig:lang_sim}). Within the distribution of correlations, the first quartile was 0.44, the median 0.56, and the third quartile 0.68.
Most users wrote only one review of a London attraction (162,801 of 254,518 users, or 64\%). Of the users writing multiple reviews, a small number wrote reviews in two different languages (943 of 91,717 users, or 1\%). No users wrote reviews in more than two languages. Although a small percentage of users, taken along with the single reviews that mixed multiple languages together, it is important for interface designers to consider bilingual users (including users who might read reviews in multiple languages but only write reviews in one language). Consistent with findings on Wikipedia \cite{hale2014wiki} and Twitter \cite{hale2014twitter}, users writing reviews in more than one language were more active on TripAdvisor than users writing reviews in only one language. Among users writing at least two reviews, users writing in two different languages authored more reviews than users writing in only one language (5.1 vs.~3.8 reviews per user on average; $p<0.001$).
\section{Discussions}
It is common practice to create one overall rating for a product or item by simply averaging all the available ratings without regard to the location or language of the reviewer. With regards to language and tourist attractions in London, this practice seems to be justified in general, although some language pairs are more strongly correlated than others.
In general, research has suggested that a larger number of reviews is more helpful to a person trying to make a decision about a product \cite{hu2008,park2007}.
Users may derive some utility from the star ratings of reviews in languages they do not read and possibly more from rough machine translations of the review text. At the same time, the experience of reviewers speaking a different language may be a poor indication of the experience the person will actually have with a product/service. As far as London attractions are concerned, the star ratings of reviews in different languages have varying correlations with each other. Ratings in German, Norwegian, and French are more strongly correlated with reviews in other languages than are ratings in Japanese, Portuguese, or Russian. Thus, the usefulness that users have from reviews in other languages likely varies with the languages they speak.
When there are few reviews in a user's language(s), it may be helpful to display reviews in other languages. The correlations between pairs of languages suggest that ratings from some languages will be more indicative of the experience a person speaking a given language will have than ratings from other languages. This may be due to underlying elements of culture that are captured by the language(s) of a person. Research has shown some differences in the use of social media platforms correlate with cultural dimensions measured at the country level \cite{garcia2013}, and similar cultural dimensions may affect the expectations and evaluations of people writing reviews in different languages.
Beyond the similarity of evaluations there is also a user-interface design question about how helpful people perceive reviews written in another language. Experiments are an exciting methodology to directly test how people respond to foreign-language content.
This extended abstract is a first and incomplete step into examining reviews in multiple languages. It is unclear how far the findings related to tourist attractions in London, England, extend to other locations or to other types of reviews.
Further work is needed to analyze other types of reviews such as reviews of mobile apps where the user experiences may vary across languages depending on the international and localization choices made. Even seemingly language-neutral factors such as the well-known 140-character limit on Twitter appear to have different effects on users writing in different languages \cite{liao2015,neubig2013}.
Such research is important, along with other information such as rates of bilingualism, for interface designers to decide which foreign-language reviews to show first (if any) and how ratings from multiple languages should be averaged (if at all).
At the same time, it is important to remember that many Internet users are bilingual \cite{hale2014twitter,hale2014wiki}---perhaps even the majority \cite{birner2005,grosjean2010}---and, designers should allow multilingual users access to content in their multiple languages.
\section{Acknowledgements}
I am grateful for funding support to conduct this research from the John Fell Oxford University Press (OUP) Research Fund as well as the University of Oxford's Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) Impact Acceleration Account and Higher Education Innovation Fund (HEIF) allocation.
I would also like to thank the UK Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) for funding the original collection of TripAdvisor data as part of a project studying the quality and completeness of the web archive data.
\bibliographystyle{SIGCHI-Reference-Format}
|
\section{Introduction}
One of the common features of dimensionally reduced supergravity
theories is that they contain a noncompact scalar coset sigma model
in their Lagrangians. Perhaps
the most famous example is the $E_{7(+7)}/SU(8)$
coset in $D=4$ ${\cal N}=8$ supergravity \cite{CJ} obtained by a
dimensional reduction of the eleven-dimensionally supergravity
\cite{CJS} to four dimensions. It is always the case that the global
symmetry of the nonlinear sigma model is a symmetry of
the whole supergravity system including the fermionic sector.
A reduction of the eleven-dimensional supergravity
to an intermediate dimension from 5 to 10
also yields an $E$-series symmetry \cite{JuliaGroupDisintegrations,Keurentyes},
whose discrete subgroup is nowadays understood as a
U-duality \cite{HullTownsend} of M-theory or type-II string theories.
It is also known that the symmetry is enhanced to $E_8$ or much
larger (infinite-dimensional)
upon reduction to three or lower dimensions
\cite{MarcusSchwarz,NicolaiN=16,Julia1982,GebertNicolai}.
The $E$-series is a token of lower-dimensional M/typeIIA/typeIIB
theories upon toroidal compactifications. The $D$-series, on the other hand,
is known to appear as
a similar symmetry group of the non-linear sigma model of the dimensionally
reduced NS-NS sector supergravity, whose discrete subgroup is
a T-duality of the toroidally compactified string theory \cite{MaharanaSchwarz}.
It is also very well known that the $A$-series is a symmetry
of dimensionally reduced pure gravity \cite{Geroch,BreitenlohnerMaison}.
The $B$-series may be obtained as a reduction of the NS-NS sector
coupled to an odd number of vector fields \cite{MaharanaSchwarz,Sen},
and $G_{2(+2)}$ has been shown to be the symmetry of the
dimensionally reduced $D=5$ minimal
supergravity to three dimensions \cite{MizoguchiOhta}.
So what about the remaining simple Lie algebras?
As for $F_4$, many years ago it was anticipated that
$F_{4(+4)}/(USp(6)\times SU(2))$ should be the sigma model of
the dimensionally reduced $D=5$ {\em magical supergravity} of the
simplest kind, reduced down to three dimensions \cite{GSTPhysLett}
\footnote{Among the $C$-series, which is also missing in the above description,
$Sp(6,\bbsub{R})/U(3)$ $(Sp(6)=C_3)$ has also been shown to appear \cite{GSTNuclPhys}
as a scalar coset of the same magical supergravity reduced to {\em four} dimensions. }
\footnote{See \cite{Karndumri1,Karndumri2} for the gaugings of the three-dimensional
magical supergravities.}.
Although the appearance of this particular quaternionic manifold has
been justified on various grounds and is now believed to be true,
a direct proof by performing a dimensional
reduction of the supergravity and comparing to the
construction to the coset group manifold seems to have never appeared
in print. The aim of this letter is to fill this gap.
The direct proof of the $F_{4(+4)}/(USp(6)\times SU(2))$ coset structure
has the following benefits:
\\
\noindent
(1) The direct dimensional reduction and the explicit construction of the
coset sigma model enable us to find the precise relationship between
the various components of the five-dimensional supergravity fields
and the relevant group elements. This allows us to use the $F_{4(+4)}$
global symmetry to generate a new supergravity solution from some known
seed solution. Such a solution-generating technique utilizing the three- or
four-dimensional global symmetry has been very powerful
in deriving, for instance, the five-dimensional black hole solutions
in five-dimensional minimal supergravity \cite{MizoguchiTomizawa}.
\\
\noindent
(2) By the above relationship between the supergravity fields and
the group manifold one can also give group theoretical characterizations
to some of the parameters and functions in the original magical
supergravity Lagrangians. For example, as we show below,
the $FFA$ coupling constants $C_{IJK}$ are identified as
the structure constants of the commutation relations between generators
both belonging to one of the ``Jordan pair'' in the decomposition
\cite{FerraraMarraniZumino} of
the quasi-conformal algebra of the relevant Jordan algebra.
We will also find a Lie algebraic characterization of the functions
of the scalars
$\stackrel{\circ}a\!{}^{IJ}$ and $\stackrel{\circ}a\!{}_{IJ}$.
In fact, the procedure of the dimensional reduction itself is common to
all the magical supergravity theories; the only difference is the
range of the values of the indices of the vector and scalar fields.
Although the three-dimensional duality Lie algebras also allow a common
decomposition in terms of the relevant Jordan algebras
\cite{GSTPhysLett,GSTNuclPhys,GunaydinKoepsellNicolai,GunaydinPavlyk,
FerraraMarraniZumino},
in this letter
we will work out in particular the $F_{4(+4)}$ case in detail.
We expect, however, a similar identification or a characterization
of the coupling constants
and scalar metric functions may be done in other magical supergravities.
\section{Dimensional Reduction of $D=5$ Magical Supergravity}
The magical supergravities are $D=5$ $\mathcal{N}=2$ Einstein-Maxwell supergravities
whose scalars of the vector multiplets constitute a coset sigma model with a symmetry
group being a {\em simple} Lie group \cite{GSTNuclPhys}.
There exist four such theories, each of which is associated with
one of the four division algebras
$\mathbb{A}=\mathbb{R},\mathbb{C},\mathbb{H},\mathbb{O}$
and a rank-3 Jordan algebra ${\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{A}}$ associated with it.
One of the characteristic features of these theories is that their five-dimensional
Lagrangians as well as their dimensional reductions to four and three dimensions
universally contain scalar sigma models of the forms
\cite{GSTNuclPhys,FerraraMarraniZumino}:
\beqa
\frac{\mbox{Str}_0({\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{A}})}{\mbox{Aut}({\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{A}})}~~(D=5),~~~
\frac{\mbox{M\"{o}}({\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{A}})}{\widetilde{\mbox{Str}}_0({\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{A}})
\times U(1)}~~(D=4),~~~
\frac{\mbox{qConf}({\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{A}})}{\widetilde{\mbox{M\"{o}}}({\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{A}})
\times SU(2)}~~(D=3),
\eeqa
where $\mbox{Aut}({\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{A}})$,
$\mbox{Str}_0({\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{A}})$,
$\mbox{M\"{o}}({\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{A}})$
and
$\mbox{qConf}({\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{A}})$
are respectively the automorphicm group,
the reduced structure group,
the superstructure group and
the quasi-conformal group of the Jordan algebra ${\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{A}}$.
$\widetilde{\phantom{AA}}$ denotes the corresponding compact form.
There supergravity theories have been dubbed ``magical" \cite{GSTPhysLett}
because these groups are precisely the elements of the
``magic square" (see \cite{GSTPhysLett} and references therein),
each Lie algebra ${\cal L}_{\bbsub{A},\bbsub{A}'}$
of which allows
the decomposition
\beqa
{\cal L}_{\bbsub{A},\bbsub{A}'}&=&{\rm D}_{\bbsub{A}} \oplus {\rm D}_{{\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{A}'}}
\oplus ({\bf A}_0 \times ({\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{A}'})_0),
\eeqa
where ${\bf A}'=\bb{R},{\bf C},\bb{H}$ and $\bb{O}$ corresponds to
$\mbox{Aut}$, $\mbox{Str}_0$, $\mbox{M\"{o}}$ and $\mbox{qConf}$, respectively.
Here ${\rm D}_{\bbsub{A}}$ and ${\rm D}_{{\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{A}'}}$ are
the generators of the automorphisms of ${\bf A}$ and ${\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{A}'}$,
and ${\bf A}_0$ and $({\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{A}'})_0$ are the traceless generators.
The magical supergravity corresponding to the division algebra ${\bf A}$
has $n=3(1+\mbox{dim}\mathbb{A})-1$ vector multiplets.
Keeping only the bosonic terms, the Lagrangian is given by
\beqa
\label{67}
\mathcal{L}&=&
\frac{1}{2}E^{(5)}R^{(5)}
-\frac{1}{4}E^{(5)}{\stackrel{\circ}a\!{}}_{IJ}F^I_{MN}F^{JMN}
-\frac{1}{2}E^{(5)}s_{xy}(\partial_M\phi^x)(\partial^M\phi^y)\n
&&
+\frac{1}{6\sqrt{6}}C_{IJK}\epsilon^{MNPQR}F^I_{MN}F^J_{PQ}A^K_R,
\eeqa
where $E^{(5)}$ is the determinant of the f\"{u}nfbein,
and $R^{(5)}$ is the scalar curvature in $D=5$.
${\stackrel{\circ}a\!{}}_{IJ}$ and $s_{xy}$ are functions of scalar fields $\phi^x$
which come from the vector multiplets
and satisfy ${\stackrel{\circ}a\!{}}_{IJ}={\stackrel{\circ}a\!{}}_{JI}$
and $s_{xy}=s_{yx}$, respectively.
In particular, $s_{xy}$ is the metric of $n$-dimensional
Riemannian space $\mathcal{M}$ which is parametrized
by the scalar fields $\phi^x$, where $x,y,\dots$ take $1,2,\dots,n$.
$F^I_{MN}$ is the Maxwell field strength $2\partial_{[\mu}A_{\nu]}^I$.
$C_{IJK}$ is a constant and symmetric in all indices.
$M,N,\dots$ are the five-dimensional curved indices.
There are $n+1$ vector fields $A^I_\mu$ because the graviton multiplet has a
single vector field, so that $I,J,\dots=1,2,\dots,n+1$.
\par
To reduce the dimensions to $D=3$, we set the f\"{u}nfbein and its inverse as
\begin{equation}
\label{68}
{E^{(5)}}_M{}^A=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
e^{-1}{E_\mu}^\alpha&B^m_\mu {e_m}^a\\
0&{e_m}^a
\end{array}
\right),\ \ \ \ \
{E^{(5)}}_A{}^M=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
e{E_\alpha}^\mu&-e{E_\alpha}^\mu B_\mu^m\\
0&{e_a}^m
\end{array}
\right),
\end{equation}
where $A,B,\dots$ are the five-dimensional flat indices,
$\mu,\nu,\dots$ and $\alpha,\beta,\dots$ are
the three-dimensional curved and flat indices,
$m,n,\dots$ and $a,b,\dots$ are
the compact two-dimensional curved and flat indices, respectively.
Then we get the reduced Lagrangian
\begin{equation}
\label{69}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{L}~=~&\frac{1}{2}ER-\frac{1}{8}Ee^2g_{mn}B^m_{\mu\nu}B^{n\mu\nu}+\frac{1}{8}E\partial_\mu g^{mn}\partial^\mu g_{mn}-\frac{1}{2}E e^{-2}\partial_\mu e\partial^\mu e-\frac{1}{2}Es_{xy}(\partial_\mu\phi^x)(\partial^\mu\phi^y)\\
&-\frac{1}{2}E{\stackrel{\circ}a\!{}}_{IJ}g^{mn}\partial_\mu A^I_m\partial^\mu A^J_n-\frac{1}{4}Ee^2{\stackrel{\circ}a\!{}}_{IJ}F^{(3)I}_{\mu\nu}F^{(3)J\mu\nu}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}C_{IJK}\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}\epsilon^{mn}F^I_{\mu\nu}\partial_\rho A^J_mA_n^K,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $B^m_{\mu\nu}=2\partial_{[\mu}B^m_{\nu]}$.
We define $F^{(3)I}_{\mu\nu}\equiv F'^I_{\mu\nu}+B^m_{\mu\nu}A_m^I$, where $F'^I_{\mu\nu}=2\partial_{[\mu}A'^I_{\nu]}$ is the field strength of the Kaluza-Klein invariant vector field $A'^I_\mu=A^I_\mu-B^m_\mu A^I_m$.\par
To dualize $A'^I_\mu$ and $B^m_\mu$ fields, we introduce Lagrange multipliers
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{\text{Lag.mult.}}&=\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}\varphi_I\partial_\mu F'^I_{\nu\rho}+\frac{1}{2}\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}\psi_m\partial_\mu B^m_{\nu\rho}\nonumber\\
&\overset{\text{P.I.}}{=}-\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}F^{(3)I}_{\mu\nu}\partial_\rho\varphi_I-\frac{1}{2}\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}B^m_{\mu\nu}(\partial_\rho\psi_m+\partial_\rho A_m^I\varphi_I-A^I_m\partial_\mu\varphi_I).
\label{70}
\end{align}
Using the equations of motion for $F^{(3)I}_{\mu\nu}$ and $B^m_{\mu\nu}$, we obtain the
dualized Lagrangian $\tilde{\mathcal L}\equiv\mathcal{L}+\mathcal{L}_{\text{Lag.mult.}}$:
\begin{align}
\tilde{\mathcal{L}}~=~&\frac{1}{2}ER+\frac{1}{8}E\partial_\mu g^{mn}\partial^\mu g_{mn}-\frac{1}{2}E e^{-2}\partial_\mu e\partial^\mu e-\frac{1}{2}Es_{xy}(\partial_\mu\phi^x)(\partial^\mu\phi^y)-\frac{1}{2}E{\stackrel{\circ}a\!{}}_{IJ}g^{mn}\partial_\mu A^I_m\partial^\mu A^J_n\nonumber\\
&-2Ee^{-2}{\stackrel{\circ}a\!{}}{}^{II'}\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}C_{IJK}\epsilon^{mn}\partial_\mu A_m^JA_n^K-\partial_\mu\varphi_I\right)\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}C_{I'J'K'}\epsilon^{m'n'}\partial^\mu A_{m'}^{J'}A_{n'}^{K'}-\partial^\mu\varphi_{I'}\right)\nonumber\\
&-Ee^{-2}g^{mn}\left(\frac{2}{3\sqrt{6}}C_{IJK}\epsilon^{pq}\partial_\mu A^I_pA^J_qA_m^K+\partial_\mu\psi_m+\partial_\mu A^I_m\varphi_I-A^I_m\partial_\mu\varphi_I\right)\nonumber\\
&\qquad\qquad\times\left(\frac{2}{3\sqrt{6}}C_{I'J'K'}\epsilon^{p'q'}\partial^\mu A^{I'}_{p'}A^{J'}_{q'}A^{K'}_n+\partial^\mu\psi_n+\partial^\mu A^{I'}_n\varphi_{I'}-A^{I'}_n\partial^\mu\varphi_{I'}\right).
\label{71}
\end{align}
\section{$F_{4(+4)}/(USp(6)\times SU(2))$ sigma model: the explicit proof}
In this section we prove that, if ${\bf A}=\bb{R}$ $(n=5)$, the sigma model part of the reduced
Lagrangian (\ref{71}) constitutes
the $F_{4(+4)}/(USp(6)\times SU(2))$ sigma model by an explicit construction.
The real form $F_{4(+4)}$
of the exceptional Lie algebra $F_4$ is decomposed into a sum of
representations of the Lie algebra of a maximal subgroup $SL(3,\bb{R})\times SL(3,\bb{R})$
as
\beqa
{\bf 52}&=&({\bf 8},{\bf 1})\oplus({\bf 3},{\bf \bar 6})
\oplus({\bf \bar 3},{\bf 6})\oplus({\bf 1},{\bf 8}).
\eeqa
In spite of the notation, they are represented by real matrices.
Later we will identify the first $SL(3,\bb{R})$ as the global symmetry group
arising from the reduction of the gravity sector from five to three
dimensions, and the second one as the numerator group of the coset
sigma-model scalars already
existing in five dimensions. To distinguish them
we call the first simply $SL(3,\bb{R})$ while the second $\widetilde{SL}(3,\bb{R})$.
Let $\hat E^i_{~j}$ ($i,j=1,2,3$) be generators of the $SL(3,\bb{R})$ algebra with a
constraint $\hat E^1_{~1}+\hat E^2_{~2}+\hat E^3_{~3}=0$.
Similarly let $\hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b}$ ${\tilde a},{\tilde b}=1,2,3$
be generators of
$\widetilde{SL}(3,\bb{R})$ with $\hat{\tilde E}{}^1_{~1}+\hat{\tilde E}{}^2_{~2}
+\hat{\tilde E}{}^3_{~3}=0$. Their commutations relations are
\beqa
{[}\hat E^i_{~j},~\hat E^{k}_{~l}
{]}&=&\delta^k_j \hat E^i_{~l} - \delta^i_l \hat E^k_{~j},
\label{F4com1}\\
{[}\hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b},\hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde c}_{~\tilde d}
{]}&=&\delta^{\tilde c}_{\tilde b} \hat {\tilde E}{}^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde d}
- \delta^{\tilde a}_{\tilde d} \hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde c}_{~\tilde b},\\
{[}\hat E^i_{~j},\hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde c}_{~\tilde d}
{]}&=&0.
\eeqa
We also introduce additional generators $E^I_i$, $E^{*i}_I$
($i=1,2,3$, $I=1,\ldots,6$) transforming respectively as
$({\bf 3},{\bf \bar 6})$, $({\bf \bar 3},{\bf 6})$ under $SL(3,\bb{R})\oplus \widetilde{SL}(3,\bb{R})$:
\beqa
{[}\hat E^i_{~j},E^{*k}_I
{]}&=&\delta^k_j E^{*i}_I,\\
{[}\hat E^i_{~j},E^I_{k}
{]}&=&-\delta^i_k E^I_j,\\
{[}\hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b},E^{*k}_I
{]}&=&\bar T^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b}{}_I^{~J} E^{*i}_J,\\
{[}\hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b},E^I_{k}
{]}&=&T^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b}{}^I_{~J} E_i^J.
\eeqa
$\bar T^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b}{}_I^{~J} $ and $T^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b}{}^I_{~J} $
are respectively the ${\bf \bar 6}$ and
${\bf 6}$ representation matrices of $\widetilde{SL}(3, \bb{R})$.
In fact, in the present choice of the basis of the generators
the structure constants satisfy
\beqa
\bar T^{\tilde a}_{~~\tilde b}{}_I^{~A}&=&
-T^{\tilde a}_{~~\tilde b}{}^A_{~\;I}.
\eeqa
Finally we
set the commutation relations among two of these generators as
\beqa
{[}E^I_i,~E^{*j}_J
{]}&=&
-4\delta_J^I \hat E^j_{~i}
+\delta^j_i D^{I\;~~\tilde b}_{~J\tilde a} \hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b},\\
{[}E^I_i,~E^J_j{]}&=&
+C^{IJK}\epsilon_{ijk}E^{*k}_K,\\
{[}E^{*i}_I,~E^{*j}_J{]}&=&
-C_{IJK}\epsilon^{ijk}E^K_{k},
\label{F4com11}
\eeqa
where $C_{IJK}=C^{IJK}$ are symmetric with respect to any permutation of indices,
and
\beqa
&&D^I_{~J}{}_{\tilde a}^{~\tilde b}=D^J_{~I}{}_{\tilde b}^{~\tilde a}.
\eeqa
Their actual values in the present basis are
\beqa
&&C^{123}=\sqrt{2},\n
&&C^{456}=+2,\n
&&C^{114}=C^{225}=C^{336}=-2,
\eeqa
and
\beqa
D^1_{~2}{}_2^{~1}=D^1_{~3}{}_1^{~3}&=&+2,\n
D^2_{~3}{}_3^{~2}&=&-2,\n
D^1_{~6}{}_3^{~2}=D^1_{~5}{}_2^{~3}&=&+2\sqrt{2},\n
D^3_{~4}{}_1^{~2}=D^3_{~5}{}_1^{~2}=D^2_{~4}{}_1^{~3}=D^2_{~6}{}_3^{~1}&=&-2\sqrt{2},\n
D^1_{~1}{}_1^{~1}=D^2_{~2}{}_2^{~2}=D^3_{~3}{}_3^{~3}&=&+2,\n
D^4_{~4}{}_1^{~1}=D^5_{~5}{}_2^{~2}=D^6_{~6}{}_3^{~3}&=&+4,
\eeqa
otherwise 0.
One may verify that the commutations relations (\ref{F4com1})-(\ref{F4com11})
close and generate the whole $F_{4(+4)}$ Lie algebra.
In fact, these commutations relations are derived from those among generators
of a more tractable realization of $F_{4(+4)}$ in terms of the decomposition into
representations of another maximal subalgebra $O(4,5)$:
\beqa
{\bf 52}&=&{\bf 36}\oplus{\bf 16},
\eeqa
where ${\bf 36}$ is the adjoint representation of $O(4,5)$ and
${\bf 16}$ is the Majorana spinor representation. They are further decomposed
into representations of $O(4,4)$ as
\beqa
{\bf 52}&=&{\bf 28}\oplus{\bf 8_v}\oplus{\bf 8_s}\oplus{\bf 8_c},
\eeqa
which shows the hidden triality in $F_{4(+4)}$. The commutation relations
among generators are
\beqa
{[}X^{ab},~X^{cd}
{]}&=&\eta^{bc}X^{ad}-\eta^{ac}X^{bd}-\eta^{bd}X^{ac}+\eta^{ad}X^{bc},\\
{[}X^{ab},~v^{c}
{]}&=&\eta^{bc}v^{a}-\eta^{ac}v^{b},\\
{[}v^{a},~v^{b}
{]}&=&-X^{ab},\\
{[}X^{ab},~s^{\alpha}
{]}&=&-\frac12 (\bar{\gamma}^{[a}\gamma^{b]})^\alpha_{~\beta}s^\beta,\\
{[}X^{ab},~c_{\alpha}
{]}&=&-\frac12 (\bar{\gamma}^{[a}\gamma^{b]})_\alpha^{~\beta}c_{\beta},\\
{[}v^{a},~s^{\alpha}
{]}&=&+\frac12 (\bar{\gamma}^{a})^{\alpha\beta}c_{\beta},\\
{[}v^{a},~c_{\alpha}
{]}&=&-\frac12 (\gamma^{a})_{\alpha\beta}s^{\beta},\\
{[}s^{\alpha},~s^{\beta}
{]}&=&-\frac12 (\bar{\gamma}_{a}\gamma_{b}C)^{\alpha\beta}X^{ab},\\
{[}c_{\alpha},~c_{\beta}
{]}&=&+\frac12 (\gamma_{a}\bar{\gamma}_{b}C)_{\alpha\beta}X^{ab},\\
{[}s^{\alpha},~c_{\beta}
{]}&=&+(\gamma_{a}C)_{\beta}^{~\alpha}v^{a},
\eeqa
where $X^{ab}=-X^{ba}\in {\bf 28}$ ($a,b=1,\ldots,8$),
$v^{a}\in {\bf 8_v}$ ($a=1,\ldots,8$),
$s^{\alpha}\in {\bf 8_s}$ ($\alpha=1,\ldots,8$), and
$c_{\alpha}\in {\bf 8_c}$ ($\alpha=1,\ldots,8$).
Here the conventions are
$\eta^{ab}=\mbox{diag}(-1,-1,-1,-1,1,1,1,1)$, and
$\gamma^{a}$,
$\bar{\gamma}^{a}$ $(a=1,\ldots,8)$
are off-diagonal blocks of $O(4,4)$ gamma
matrices in the Majorana-Weyl representation:
\beqa
\Gamma^a&=&\left(
\begin{array}{cc}& \bar{\gamma}^{a}\\
\gamma^{a}&
\end{array}
\right).
\eeqa
$C$ is the charge conjugation matrix satisfying
\beqa
C\gamma_{a}^T&=&-\gamma_{a}C,\\
C\bar{\gamma}_{a}^T&=&-\bar{\gamma}_{a}C.
\eeqa
The generators $\hat E^i_{~j}\in({\bf 8},{\bf 1})$ ($i,j=1,2,3$),
$\hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b}\in({\bf 1},{\bf 8})$ $(\tilde a,\tilde b=1,2,3)$,
$E^I_i\in({\bf \bar 3},{\bf 6})$ and
$E^{*i}_I\in({\bf 3},{\bf \bar 6})$ ($i=1,2,3$, $I=1,\ldots,6$)
in the $SL(3,\bb{R})\times \widetilde{SL}(3,\bb{R})$ decomposition
can be found as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item{One can take $\hat E^i_{~j}$'s as the standard $SL(3,\bb{R})$
generators in the $O(3,3)$ subalgebra of $O(4,4)$.}
\item{In the remaining generators of $O(4,4)$ one can find three pairs of
${\bf 3}$ and ${\bf\bar 3}$ of $SL(3,\bb{R})$.}
\item{Also in each of $v^a$, $s^\alpha$ and $c_\alpha$ one can find
a single pair, in total another three pairs, of ${\bf 3}$ and ${\bf\bar 3}$ of
$SL(3,\bb{R})$.}
\item{The remaining eight generators
that do not belong to any of the above turn out to generate another $SL(3,\bb{R})$
algebra, $\widetilde{SL}(3,\bb{R})$.}
\item{Finally, one can verify that these six pairs of ${\bf 3}$ and ${\bf\bar 3}$
respectively transform
as ${\bf\bar 6}$ and ${\bf 6}$ under $\widetilde{SL}(3,\bb{R})$.}
\end{itemize}
In terms of the $SL(3,\bb{R})\times\widetilde{SL}(3,\bb{R})$ decomposition,
the whole $F_{4(+4)}$ generators are classified into ${\bf H}$ and ${\bf K}$,
of which $F_{4(+4)}$ is a direct sum:
\beqa
F_{4(+4)}&=&{\bf H} \oplus {\bf K}.
\eeqa
${\bf H}$ consists of ``compact'' generators:
\beqa
{\bf H}&=&(\oplus_{i,j=1,2,3} \bb{R} (\hat E^i_{~j}-\hat E^j_{~i}))
\oplus
(\oplus_{\tilde a,\tilde b=1,2,3} \bb{R} (\hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b}-\hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde b}_{~\tilde a}))\n
&&
\oplus
(\oplus_{i=1,2,3;I=1,\ldots,6} \bb{R} (E_i^{I}-E_I^{*i})).
\eeqa
The Killing bilinear form on ${\bf H}$ is negative definite. It turns out that
the independent $3+3+18=24$ generators of ${\bf H}$ generate
$USp(6)\oplus SU(2)$. The generators of this factorized $SU(2)$ are
\beqa
H_i&=&\frac12\left(
\hat E^{i+1}_{~~i+2}-\hat E^{i+2}_{~~i+1})
\right)
+\frac14
\left(
E^4_i-E^{*i}_4+E^5_i-E^{*i}_5+
E^6_i-E^{*i}_6
\right)
\eeqa
$(i=1,2,3)$, where the indices of $\hat E$ are defined modulo 3.
$H_i$'s satisfy the $SU(2)$ commutation relations
\beqa
{[}H_i,~H_j{]}&=&-2\epsilon_{ijk}H_k.
\eeqa
In fact, this $SU(2)$ is one of the irreducible $SU(2)$ subalgebra of
$O(4)=SU(2)\oplus SU(2)$, which itself is an irreducible one of
the maximal compact subalgebra $O(4)\oplus O(4)$ of $O(4,4)$.
Thus they trivially commute with other compact generators
contained in $O(4,5)=O(4,4)\oplus \oplus_{a=1,\ldots,8}\bb{R} v_a$. It can also be verified that they also commute with compact generators made out of $s^\alpha$'s and $c_\alpha$'s.
The remaining orthogonal compliment in ${\bf H}$ consisting of 21 generators
generates $USp(6)$.
On the other hand, ${\bf K}$ is spanned by all the ``noncompact'' generators:
\beqa
{\bf K}&=&(\oplus_{i,j=1,2,3} \bb{R} (\hat E^i_{~j}+\hat E^j_{~i}))
\oplus
(\oplus_{\tilde a,\tilde b=1,2,3} \bb{R} (\hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b}+\hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde b}_{~\tilde a}))\n
&&
\oplus
(\oplus_{i=1,2,3;I=1,\ldots,6} \bb{R} (E_i^{I}+E_I^{*i})).
\eeqa
The $52-28=24$ generators of ${\bf K}$ parametrize
the ``physical'' degrees of freedom of the $F_{4(+4)}/(USp(6)
\times SU(2))$ nonlinear sigma model.
$F_{4(+4)}/(USp(6)
\times SU(2))$ is a symmetric space for which we denote the Cartan involution as $\tau$:
\beqa
{[}{\bf H},~{\bf H}{]}&\subset&{\bf H},\n
{[}{\bf K},~{\bf K}{]}&\subset&{\bf H},\\
{[}{\bf H},~{\bf K}{]}&\subset&{\bf K},
\eeqa
\beqa
\tau({\bf H})=-{\bf H},~~~\tau({\bf K})=+{\bf K}.
\eeqa
As usual, to construct a coset nonlinear sigma model, we define
some group element ${\cal V}$ and consider
\beqa
{\cal M}&\equiv&\tau({\cal V}^{-1}){\cal V}.
\eeqa
Then the Lagrangian is given, up to a constant, by
\beqa
-\frac14 E^{(3)}\mbox{Tr}\partial_\mu{\cal M}^{-1} \partial^\mu{\cal M}
&=&E^{(3)}\mbox{Tr}\left(\frac12\left(
\partial_\mu{\cal V}{\cal V}^{-1}+\tau\left(\partial_\mu{\cal V}{\cal V}^{-1}\right)
\right)\right)^2.
\label{TrdMdM-1}
\eeqa
In order to reproduce the dimensionally reduced Lagrangian (\ref{71}) of the
magical supergravity, we take \footnote{Here we use
dotted numbers for the flat local Lorentz (though Euclidean here) indices
$a'=\dot 1,\dot 2$,
to distinguish them from the curved tangent space indices $i'=1,2$
for the reduced dimensions.
}
\beqa
{\cal V}&=&{\cal V}_-{\cal V}_+,\\
{\cal V}_+&=&{\cal V}_+^{grav.}+{\cal V}_+^{scalar},\\
{\cal V}_+^{grav.}&=&
\exp\left(
\log e_{\dot 1}^{~1}\hat E^1_{~1}
+\log e_{\dot 2}^{~2}\hat E^2_{~2}
+\log e\;\hat E^3_{~3}
\right)\n
&&\cdot\exp\left(
-e_1^{~\dot 2} e_{\dot 2}^{~2} \hat E^1_{~2}\right)
\exp\left(
\psi_1\hat E^1_{~3}+\psi_2\hat E^2_{~3}
\right),
\\
{\cal V}_+^{scalar}&=&\exp\left((\log{\bf\tilde e}^{-1})_{\tilde a}^{~\tilde i}
\hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde i}\right)~~~~(\tilde a,\tilde i=1,2,3),
\eeqa
where we have taken the zweibein for the reduced dimensions to be
in the upper-triangular form
\beqa
e_{i'}^{~a'}&=&\left(
\begin{array}{cc} e_{1}^{~\dot 1}&e_{1}^{~\dot 2}\\
0&e_{2}^{~\dot 2}
\end{array}
\right)
\eeqa
so that
\beqa
e&=&{\rm det}e_{i'}^{~a'
=(e_{\dot 1}^{~1}e_{\dot 2}^{~2})^{-1},
\eeqa
and
\beqa
{\bf \tilde e}^{-1}&=&\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
s_{11}&s_{12}&s_{13}~~\\
0&s_{22}&s_{23}~~\\
0&0&(s_{11}s_{22})^{-1}
\end{array}
\right)^{-1}.
\label{etilde}
\eeqa
For ${\cal V}_-$ we take
\beqa
{\cal V}_-&=&\exp\left(
A_{i'}^I E_I^{*i'}
+\varphi_I E^I_3\right)
~~~(i'=1,2; ~ I=1,\ldots,6).
\eeqa
Then a straightforward calculation yields
\beqa
\partial_\mu {\cal V}{\cal V}^{-1}&=&
\partial_\mu {\cal V}_+{\cal V}_+^{-1}
+ {\cal V}_+(\partial_\mu {\cal V}_-{\cal V}_-^{-1}){\cal V}_+^{-1},\\
\partial_\mu {\cal V}_+{\cal V}_+^{-1}&=&
(e_{\dot 1}^{~1})^{-1}\partial_\mu e_{\dot 1}^{~1} \hat E^1_{~1}+
(e_{\dot 2}^{~2})^{-1}\partial_\mu e_{\dot 2}^{~2} \hat E^2_{~2}+
e^{-1}\partial_\mu e \hat E^3_{~3}\n
&&-e_{\dot 1}^{~1}(e_{\dot 2}^{~2})^{-1} \partial_\mu B\hat E^1_{~2}
+e^{-1}\left(
e_{\dot 1}^{~1}(\partial_\mu \psi_1-B\partial_\mu \psi_2)\hat E^1_{~3}
+e_{\dot 2}^{~2}\partial_\mu \psi_2 \hat E^2_{~3}
\right)\n
&&+\partial_\mu \tilde e_{\tilde a}^{~\tilde i}~\tilde e{}_{\tilde i}^{~\tilde b}
\hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b}
\label{dV+V+-1}
\eeqa
$\left(e_{a'}^{~i'}=\left(
\begin{array}{cr}
e_{\dot 1}^{~1}&-e_{\dot 1}^{~1} B\\
0&e_{\dot 2}^{~2}
\end{array}
\right)\right)$,
and
\beqa
{\cal V}_+(\partial_\mu {\cal V}_-{\cal V}_-^{-1}){\cal V}_+^{-1}
&=&
e_{a'}^{~i'}\stackrel{\circ}f\!{}_I^{~A}\partial_\mu A_{i'}^I E_A^{*a'}\n
&&+e^{-1}\stackrel{\circ}f\!{}^I_{~A}\left(
\partial_\mu\varphi_I-\frac12 C_{JKI}\epsilon^{i'j'}A_{i'}^J\partial_\mu A_{j'}^K
\right)E^A_3\n
&&+e^{-1}e_{a'}^{~i'}
\left(
2 (A_{i'}^I\partial_\mu\varphi_I- \partial_\mu A_{i'}^I ~\varphi_I)
-\frac{2}3 C_{JKI} \epsilon^{j'k'}A_{i'}^I A_{j'}^J\partial_\mu A_{k'}^K
\right)\hat E^{a'}_{~~3},\n
\label{V+dV-V--1V--1}
\eeqa
where
\beqa
\stackrel{\circ}f\!{}_I^{~A}&=&(\exp((\log \tilde {\bf e}^{-1})_{\tilde a}^{~\tilde b}
\bar T^{\tilde a}_{~~\tilde b}))_I^{~A},\\
\stackrel{\circ}f\!{}^I_{~A}&=&(\exp((\log \tilde {\bf e}^{-1})_{\tilde a}^{~\tilde b}
T^{\tilde a}_{~~\tilde b}))^I_{~A}
\eeqa
are respectively the ${\bf \bar 6}$ and ${\bf 6}$ representation matrices
of the $\widetilde{SL}(3,\bb{R})$ group element $\tilde {\bf e}^{-1}$
(\ref{etilde}).
Plugging (\ref{dV+V+-1})(\ref{V+dV-V--1V--1})
into (\ref{TrdMdM-1}), $\frac12(\partial_\mu{\cal V}{\cal V}^{-1}
+\tau(\partial_\mu{\cal V}{\cal V}^{-1}))$ projects out the ${\bf H}$ piece of
$\partial_\mu{\cal V}{\cal V}^{-1}$, leaving only the ${\bf K}$ piece.
This amounts to the replacements
\beqa
\hat E^i_{~j}&\longrightarrow&\frac12(\hat E^i_{~j}+\hat E^j_{~i}),\n
\hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b}&\longrightarrow&\frac12(\hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b}
+\hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde b}_{~\tilde a}),\n
E^I_i&\longrightarrow&\frac12(E^I_i+E_I^{*i}),\n
E_I^{*i}&\longrightarrow&\frac12(E^I_i+E_I^{*i})
\eeqa
in $\partial_\mu{\cal V}{\cal V}^{-1}$.
Thus, using the invariant bilinear form computed in the adjoint representation
normalized by twice the dual Coxeter number $2 h^\vee_{F_4}=18$:
\footnote{It is simpler to use $E^a_{~b}$, $\tilde E^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b}$ than to use
hatted generators to compute traces, where
$\hat E^a_{~b}=E^a_{~b}-\frac13\delta^a_b(E^1_{~1}+E^2_{~2}+E^3_{~3})$
and similarly for $\hat{\tilde E}{}^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b}$}
\beqa
\frac1{18}
{\rm Tr}E^a_{~b}E^c_{~d}&=&\delta^c_b \delta^a_d~~~(a,b,c,d=1,2,3),
\n
\frac1{18}
{\rm Tr}\tilde E^{\tilde a}_{~\tilde b}\tilde E^{\tilde c}_{~\tilde d}
&=&2\delta^{\tilde c}_{\tilde b} \delta^{\tilde a}_{\tilde d}
~~~(\tilde a,\tilde b,\tilde c,\tilde d=1,2,3),
\n
\frac1{18}{\rm Tr}E^A_{a}E_B^{*b}&=&
4\delta^b_a \delta^A_B~~~(a,b=1,2,3;~~A,B=1,\ldots,6) ,
\n
\mbox{otherwise}&=&0,
\eeqa
we obtain
\beqa
\frac1{72}{\rm Tr}\partial_\mu{\cal M}^{-1}
\partial^\mu {\cal M}
&=&\frac14 \partial_\mu g^{ij} \partial_\mu g_{ij}
-e^{-2}\partial_\mu e \partial^\mu e
+\frac12 \partial_\mu \tilde g^{\tilde i\tilde j} \partial_\mu \tilde g_{\tilde i\tilde j}
-2 g^{ij}\!\stackrel{\circ}a\!{}_{IJ} \partial_\mu A_i^I
\partial^\mu A_j^J\n
&&-2 e^{-2}
\stackrel{\circ}a\!{}^{IJ}
\left(
\partial_\mu\varphi_I
-\frac12 C_{KLI}\epsilon^{kl}A^K_k \partial_\mu A^L_l
\right)\n
&&
~~~~~~~~~~~~\cdot
\left(
\partial^\mu\varphi_J
-\frac12 C_{K'L'J}\epsilon^{k'l'}A^K_{k'} \partial_\mu A^L_{l'}
\right)
\n
&&-\frac12 e^{-2} g^{ij}
\left(
\partial_\mu\psi_i -2(\varphi_I\partial_\mu A^I_i-\partial_\mu\varphi\; A^I_i)
-\frac23 C_{KLI}\epsilon^{kl} A^K_k \partial_\mu A^L_l \; A^I_i
\right)\n
&&~~~~~~~\cdot \left(
\partial^\mu\psi_j -2(\varphi_I\partial_\mu A^J_j-\partial_\mu\varphi\; A^J_j)
-\frac23 C_{K'L'J}\epsilon^{k'l'} A^{K'}_{k'} \partial_\mu A^{L'}_{l'}A^J_j
\right).\n
&&
\eeqa
This final form of the sigma model coincides with $2E^{-1}$ times the
dimensionally reduced Lagrangian (\ref{71}) obtained in the previous section
with the rescalings
\beqa
A^I_i\rightarrow \frac{A^I_i}{\sqrt 2},~~\varphi_I\rightarrow \frac{\varphi_I}{\sqrt 2},
~~~\psi_i\rightarrow 2\psi_i,~~~C_{IJK}\rightarrow\frac4{\sqrt 3}C_{IJK}.
\eeqa
This complete the direct proof of the equivalence of the dimensionally reduced Lagrangian
of the magical supergravity to the $F_{4(+4)}/(USp(6))\times SU(2))$
nonlinear sigma model.
\section{Conclusions and Discussion: Other magical supergravities}
In this letter we have shown the direct relationship between the (bosonic part of the)
simplest of the four magical theories reduced to three dimensions and
the $F_{4(+4)}/(USp(6))\times SU(2))$ coset sigma model.
As we mentioned in Introduction, these
relations will be used to generate various new supergravity solutions by
applying $F_{4(+4)}$ transformations to some known solutions of
this magical supergravity.
We can give some Lie algebraic characterizations to various geometrical
quantities defined in the supergravity Lagrangian:
\begin{itemize}
\item{$C_{IJK}$'s are the structure constants of the commutation relations between
generators both belonging to $({\bf 3},{\bf \bar 6})$. In particular $I=1,\ldots,6$
are the indices for a symmetric tensor representation ${\bf \bar 6}$ of the
$SL(3,\bb{R})$, which is the numerator group of the scalar coset $SL(3,\bb{R})/SO(3)$
already existing
in five dimensions.}
\item{$\stackrel{\circ}a\!{}^{IJ}$ and $\stackrel{\circ}a\!{}_{IJ}$ are nothing but
the ${\bf 6}$ and ${\bf \bar 6}$ representation matrices of
the metric of the reduced two dimensions viewed as an $SL(3,\bb{R})$ group element. }
\end{itemize}
We note that the structures we found here are very similar to the dimensionally
reduced
eleven-dimensional supergravity or the $D=5$ minimal supergravity to
three dimensions \cite{MizoguchiE10,MizoguchiOhta,MizoguchiSchroder},
whose sigma models are respectively
$E_{8(+8)}/SO(16)$ and $G_{2(+2)}/SO(4)$.
In all the magical supergravity theories, the number of the original scalars ($=n$)
is always one less than the number of the abelian gauge fields.
In the simplest magical case considered in this letter, this is the number of
the dimension of the {\em symmetric tensor} representation, which is 6.
In fact, for the other three magical cases, we can also find representations
of the numerator group of the coset whose dimensions are {\em pricisely}
one more than the dimensions of the coset of the respective theories
\cite{FerraraMarraniZumino}:
\begin{itemize}
\item{ ${\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{C}}$ magical}:
\beqa
E_{6(+2)}&\supset& SL(3,\bb{R})\times SL(3,{\bf C})=SL(3,\bb{R})\times (SL(3,\bb{R})\times SL(3,\bb{R}))\\
{\bf 78}&=&({\bf 8},({\bf 1},{\bf 1}))\oplus({\bf 3},({\bf \bar 3},{\bf \bar 3}))
\oplus({\bf \bar 3},({\bf 3},{\bf 3}))\oplus({\bf 1},({\bf 8},{\bf 1}))\oplus({\bf 1},({\bf 1},{\bf 8})).
\eeqa
The dimension of the five-dimensional scalar coset is
\beqa
{\rm dim}
\frac{SL(3,{\bf C})}{SU(3)}&=&8,
\eeqa
so the index $I$ runs from $1$ to $9$. This agrees with the fact that
the {\em direct product} representation $({\bf 3},{\bf 3})$ or $({\bf \bar 3},{\bf \bar 3})$
is nine-dimensional.
\item{ ${\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{H}}$ magical}:
\beqa
E_{7(-5)}&\supset& SL(3,\bb{R})\times SU^*(6)\\
{\bf 133}&=&({\bf 8},{\bf 1})\oplus({\bf 3},{\bf \bar 15})
\oplus({\bf \bar 3},{\bf 15})\oplus({\bf 1},{\bf 35}).
\eeqa
The dimension of the coset is
\beqa
{\rm dim}
\frac{SU^*(6)}{USp(6)}&=&14.
\eeqa
In this case the relevant representations are the {\em rank-2 antisymmetric tensor}
representations, which are ${\bf 15}$ and ${\bf \overline{15}}$.
\item{ ${\rm J}_3^{\bbsub{O}}$ magical}:
\beqa
E_{8(-24)}&\supset& SL(3,\bb{R})\times E_{6(-26)}\\
{\bf 133}&=&({\bf 8},{\bf 1})\oplus({\bf 3},{\bf \overline{27}})
\oplus({\bf \bar 3},{\bf 27})\oplus({\bf 1},{\bf 78}).
\eeqa
In this case
\beqa
{\rm dim}
\frac{E_{6(-26)}}{F_4}&=&26.
\eeqa
This also agrees with the existence of the {\em fundamental}
${\bf 27}$ and ${\bf \overline{27}}$ representations of $E_6$ with
the above decomposition of $E_{8(-24)}$.
\end{itemize}
In view of this common structure of decompositions (known as
the decomposition of the quasi-conformal algebra of the Jordan
algebra in terms of the super-Ehlers' algebra \cite{FerraraMarraniZumino}
), we expect the same characterization for $C_{IJK}$ or
$\stackrel{\circ}a\!{}^{IJ}$ and $\stackrel{\circ}a\!{}_{IJ}$ will be possible
for the other three magical supergravity theories.
To show this the realizations worked out in \cite{GunaydinKoepsellNicolai}
will be useful. Work along this line is in progress.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We would like to thank A. Ishibashi, H. Kodama and S. Tomizawa
for discussions. A conversation had with H. Nicolai some time ago
has been also useful, for which he is also acknowledged.
The work of S.~M. is supported by
Grant-in-Aid
for Scientific Research
(C) \#25400285,
(C) \#16K05337
and
(A) \#26247042
from
The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science
and Technology of Japan.
|
\setcounter{equation}{0}\Section{\setcounter{equation}{0}\Section}
\newcommand{\mathbb{R}}{\mathbb{R}}
\newcommand{\mathbb{L}}{\mathbb{L}}
\newcommand{\mathcal{H}}{\mathcal{H}}
\newcommand{\mathcal{E}}{\mathcal{E}}
\newcommand{\bold{1}}{\bold{1}}
\newcommand{\epsilon}{\epsilon}
\newcommand{{\gamma}}{\gamma\alpha}
\def\thesection.\arabic{equation}{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}
\def\mathbb{R}{\mathbb{R}}
\def\mathbb{N}{\mathbb{N}}
\def\mathbb{E}{\mathbb{E}}
\def{\rm Tr}{{\rm Tr}}
\def{\underline h}{B^H }
\def{\bf Problem\ \ \ }{{\bf Problem\ \ \ }}
\def\widetilde{\widetilde}
\def{\bf a}{{\bf a}}
\def{\bf b}{{\bf b}}
\def{\bf c}{{\bf c}}
\def{\bf d}{{\bf d}}
\def{\bf e}{{\bf e}}
\def{\bf f}{{\bf f}}
\def{\bf g}{{\bf g}}
\def{\bf h}{{\bf h}}
\def{\bf i}{{\bf i}}
\def{\bf j}{{\bf j}}
\def{\bf k}{{\bf k}}
\def{\bf l}{{\bf l}}
\def{\bf m}{{\bf m}}
\def{\bf n}{{\bf n}}
\def{\bf o}{{\bf o}}
\def{\bf p}{{\bf p}}
\def{\bf q}{{\bf q}}
\defr{r}
\defs{s}
\def{\bf t}{{\bf t}}
\def{\bf u}{{\bf u}}
\def{\bf v}{{\bf v}}
\def{\bf w}{{\bf w}}
\def{\bf x}{{\bf x}}
\def{\bf y}{{\bf y}}
\def{\bf z}{{\bf z}}
\def{\cal A}{{\cal A}}
\def{\cal B}{{\cal B}}
\def{\cal D}{{\cal D}}
\def{\cal C}{{\cal C}}
\def{\cal E}{{\cal E}}
\def{\cal F}{{\cal F}}
\def{\cal G}{{\cal G}}
\def{\cal H}{{\cal H}}
\def{\hfill $\Box$}{{\hfill $\Box$}}
\def{\beta}{{\beta}}
\def{\delta}{{\delta}}
\def{\lambda}{{\lambda}}
\def{\sigma}{{\sigma}}
\def{\bb E}{{\bb E}}
\def{\cal F}{{\cal F}}
\def{\Delta}{{\Delta}}
\def{\eta}{{\eta}}
\def{\cal L}{{\cal L}}
\def{\Omega}{{\Omega}}
\def{\alpha}{{\alpha}}
\def{\Xi}{{\Xi}}
\def{\beta}{{\beta}}
\def{\Gamma}{{\Gamma}}
\def{\gamma}{{\gamma}}
\def{\delta}{{\delta}}
\def{\Delta}{{\Delta}}
\def{\hbox{Exp}}{{\hbox{Exp}}}
\def{\sigma}{{\sigma}}
\def{\Sigma}{{\Sigma}}
\def{ \hbox{ Tr} }{{ \hbox{ Tr} }}
\def{ \hbox{ ess\ sup} } {{ \hbox{ ess\ sup} }}
\def{\lambda}{{\lambda}}
\def{\Lambda}{{\Lambda}}
\def{\varepsilon}{{\varepsilon}}
\def \eref#1{\hbox{(\ref{#1})}}
\def{\underline t}{{\underline t}}
\def{\underline f}{{\underline f}}
\def{\underline g}{{\underline g}}
\def{\underline h}{{\underline h}}
\def{\theta}{{\theta}}
\def{\Theta}{{\Theta}}
\def{\Omega}{{\Omega}}
\def{\omega}{{\omega}}
\def{\cal S}{{\cal S}}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\newcommand{\lMr}[3]{\:{}_{#1} #2_{#3}}
\newcommand{\Ceil}[1]{\left\lceil #1 \right\rceil}
\newcommand{\Indt}[1]{1_{\left\{#1 \right\}}}
\newcommand{\Norm}[1]{\left|\left| #1 \right|\right|}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{graphics}
\usepackage{epsfig}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}}
\newcommand{\FoxH}[5]{H_{#2}^{#1}\left(#3\:\middle\vert\: \begin{subarray}{l}#4\\[0.4em] #5\end{subarray}\right)}
\RequirePackage[colorlinks,citecolor=blue,urlcolor=blue]{hyperref}
\usepackage{enumerate}
\newenvironment{keywords}{\small\begin{quote}{\textbf{Keywords:}}\,\,}{\end{quote}}
\begin{document}
\title{Some stochastic time-fractional diffusion equations with variable coefficients and time dependent noise}
\author{ {\sc Guannan Hu}}
\date{}
\maketitle
\begin{abstract}
We prove the existence and uniqueness of mild solution for the stochastic partial differential equation $$\left(\partial^\alpha - \textit{B} \right) u(t,x)= u(t,x) \cdot \dot{W}(t,x),$$ where $$\alpha \in (1/2, 1)\cup(1, 2);$$ $\textit{B}$ is an uniform elliptic operator with variable coefficients and $\dot W$ is a Gaussian noise general in time with space covariance given by fractional, Riesz and Bessel kernel.
\end{abstract}
\begin{keywords}
Gaussian noisy environment, time fractional order
spde, Fox H-functions, mild solutions, uniform elliptic operator, chaos expansion, Riesz kernel, Bessel kernel.
\end{keywords}
\setcounter{equation}{0}\Section{Introduction}
In this article we prove the existence and uniqueness of the mild solution of the equation
\begin{align} \label{E:SPDE}
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle \left(\partial^\alpha - \textit{B}\right) u(t,x)=u(t,x) \dot{W}(t,x),&\qquad t\in(0, T],\: x\in\mathbb{R}^d, \\[0.5em]
\displaystyle \left.\frac{\partial^k}{\partial t^k} u(t,x)\right|_{t=0}=u_k(x), &\qquad 0\le k\le \Ceil{\alpha}-1, \:\: x\in\mathbb{R}^d,
\end{cases}
\end{align}
with any fixed $T\in \mathbb{R}^+$, $\alpha \in (1/2, 1) \cup (1, 2)$, where $\Ceil{\alpha}$ is the smallest integer not less than $\alpha$.
Here we assume
\begin{itemize}
\item $u_0(x)$ is bounded continuously differentiable. Its first order derivative bounded and H\"{o}lder continuous. The H\"{o}lder exponent $\gamma >\frac{2-\alpha}{\alpha}$
\item $u_1(x)$ is bounded continuous function(locally h\"{o}lder continuous if $d>1$)
\end{itemize}
In this equation, $\dot{W}$ is a zero mean Gaussian noise with the following covariance structure
\[
\mathbb{E}(\dot{W}(t,x)\dot{W}(s,y))=\lambda(t-s)\Lambda(x-y),
\]
where $\lambda(\cdot)$ is nonnegative definite and locally intergrable and $\Lambda(\cdot)$ is one of the following situations:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item Fractional kernel. $\displaystyle \Lambda(x):=\prod^{d}_{i=1}2H_i(2H_i-1)|x_i|^{2H_i-1},$ $x\in\mathbb{R}^d$ and $1/2<H_i<1$.
\item Reisz kernel. $\Lambda(x):=C_{\alpha,d}|x|^{-\kappa}$, $x\in\mathbb{R}^d$ and $0<\kappa<d$ and $C_{\alpha,d}=\Gamma(\frac\kappa2)2^{-\alpha}\pi^{-d/2}/\Gamma(\frac\alpha2).$
\item Bessel kernel. $\Lambda(x):=C_\alpha\int_0^\infty \omega^{-\frac{\kappa}{2}-1}e^{-\omega} e^{\frac{-|x|^2}{4\omega}}d\omega$, $x\in\mathbb{R}^d$, $0<\kappa<d$, and $C_\alpha=(4\pi)^{\alpha/2}\Gamma(\alpha/2)$.
\end{enumerate}
$$\textit{B}:=\sum^d_{i, j=1}a_{i, j}(x)\frac{\partial^2}{\partial x_i\partial x_j}+\sum^d_{j=1}b_j(x)\frac{\partial}{\partial x_j}+c(x)$$ is uniformly elliptic. Namely it satisfies the following conditions:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item $a_{ij}(x), b_j(x)$ and $c(x)$ are bounded H\"older continuous functions on $\mathbb{R}^d$
\item $\exists a_0>0,$ such that $\forall x, \xi \in \mathbb{R}^d,$
$$\sum^d_{i, j=1}a_{i, j}(x)\xi_i\xi_j \geq a_0 |\xi|^2.$$
\end{enumerate}
The fractional derivative in time $\partial^\alpha $ is understood in {\it Caputo} sense:
\[
\partial^\alpha f(t) :=
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle
\frac{1}{\Gamma(m-\alpha)} \int_0^t\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}
\tau\: \frac{f^{(m)}(\tau)}{(t-\tau)^{\alpha+1-m}}&
\text{if $m-1<\alpha<m$\;,}\\[1em]
\displaystyle
\frac{\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}^m}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} t^m}f(t)& \text{if $\alpha=m$}\;.
\end{cases}
\]
Throughout this chapter, the initial conditions $u_k(x)$ are bounded continuous(H\"older continuous, if $d>1$) functions.
The study of the mild solution relies on the asymptote property of the Green's function $Z, Y$ of the following deterministic equation.
\begin{align} \label{E:PDE}
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle \left(\partial^\alpha - {\it B} \right) u(t,x)= f(t,x),&\qquad t>0,\: x\in\mathbb{R}^d, \\
\displaystyle \left.\frac{\partial^k}{\partial t^k} u(t,x)\right|_{t=0}=u_k(x), &\qquad 0\le k\le \Ceil{\alpha}-1, \:\: x\in\mathbb{R}^d,
\end{cases}
\end{align}
In \cite{HuHu15} we cover the case $\alpha\in (1/2, 1)$.
When $\alpha\in (1, 2)$, \cite{Pskhu09} showed that when {\it B} is $\Delta$, Green's function $Y$ of \eqref{E:PDE} the following:
$$Y(t, x)=C_dt^{\frac\alpha2(2-d)}f_{\frac\alpha2}(|x|t^{-\frac\alpha2}; d-1, \frac\alpha2(2-d)),$$
where
$$f_{\frac\alpha2}(z; \mu, \delta)=
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle \frac{2}{\Gamma(\frac{\mu}{2})}\int_1^{\infty}\phi(-\frac\alpha2, \delta; -zt)(t^2-1)^{\frac{\mu}{2}-1}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} t, &\qquad \mu>0, \\[0.5em]
\displaystyle \phi(-\frac\alpha2, \delta; -z), &\qquad \mu=0;
\end{cases}
$$ $C_d=2^{-n}\pi^{\frac{1-d}{2}}$ and the wright's function
$$\phi(-\frac\alpha2, \delta; -z):=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{z^n}{n!\Gamma(\delta-\frac\alpha2 n)}$$
The solution of \eqref{E:PDE} has the following form:
\begin{align}\label{E:Duhamel}
u(t,x) = J_0(t,x) +
\int_0^t \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} s \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y\: f(s,y) Y(t-s,x-y),
\end{align}
where and throughout the chapter, we denote
\begin{align}\label{E:J0}
J_0(t,x):=
\sum_{k=0}^{\Ceil{\alpha}-1}\int_{\mathbb{R}^d} u_{ k}(y) Z_{k+1}(t,x-y) \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y\,.
\end{align}
For case of $\alpha\in(1/2, 1)$, we use $Z$ in place of $Z_1$.
We have the following facts about $Z_1(t, x),\, Z_2(t, x)$ and $Y(t, x)$.
$$Z_1(t, x)=D^{\alpha-1}Y(t, x); \qquad Z_1(t, x)=\frac{\partial }{\partial t}Z_2(t, x)$$
As in \cite{HuHu15}, We first get the estimation of $Y$, then use Wiener chaos expansion to obtain relation between the parameter $\alpha, d, H_i$ and $\kappa$ such that the mild solution exist.
The rest of the article is organized as follows. Section 2 gives more details about the solution of \eqref{E:SPDE}, estimation of $Y$ for $\alpha\in(1/2, 1)$ and some preliminaries about Wiener spaces. Section 3 gives the estimation of $Y$ for $\alpha\in(1, 2)$ and further estimations before proving the existence of the mild solution.
\\
{\bf Notation:} Throughout this chapter we denote $$p(t,x):=\exp\left\{-\sigma\left|\frac{x}{t^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}}\right|^{\frac{2}{2-\alpha}}\right\},$$ where
$\sigma>0$ is a generic positive constant whose values may vary at different occurrence, so is C.
\bigskip
\setcounter{equation}{0}\Section{Preliminary}\label{Sec:Pre}
We consider a Gaussian noise $W$ on a complete probability space
$(\Omega,\mathcal{F},P)$ encoded by a
centered Gaussian family $\{W(\varphi) ; \, \varphi\in
L^2(\mathbb{R}_+\times \mathbb{R}^{d})\}$, whose covariance structure $\lambda(s-t)$
is given by
\begin{equation}\label{cov1}
\mathbb{E} \left ( W(\varphi) \, W(\psi) \right)
= \int_{\mathbb{R}_{+}^{2}\times\mathbb{R}^{2d}}
\varphi(s,x)\psi(t,y)\lambda(s-t)\Lambda(x-y)\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} x\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} s\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} t,
\end{equation}
where $\lambda: \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}_+$ is nonnegative definite and locally intergrable.
Throughout the chapter, we denote
\begin{align}\label{E:Ct}
C_t := 2 \int_0^t \lambda(s)\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} s, \quad t>0.
\end{align}
$\Lambda: \mathbb{R}^d \rightarrow
\mathbb{R}_+$ is a fractional, Reisz or Bessel kernel.
\begin{definition}\label{D:Sol} Let $Z$ and $Y$ be the fundamental solutions defined by
\eqref{E:PDE} and \eqref{E:Duhamel}.
An adapted random field $ \{ u={u(t,x): \:t\geq 0, x\in \mathbb{R}^d} \} $ such that
$\mathbb{E} \left[u^2(t,x)\right]<+\infty$ for all $(t,x)$
is a {\it mild solution} to \eqref{E:SPDE}, if for all $(t,x)\in\mathbb{R}_+\times \mathbb{R}^d$,
the process
\[
\left\{Y(t-s, x-y)u({s,y})1_{[0,t]}(s): \: s\ge0,\: y\in \mathbb{R}^d \right\}
\]
is Skorodhod integrable (see \eqref{E:dual}), and
$u$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{E:mild}
u(t,x)=J_0(t,x)+\int_0^t\int_{\mathbb{R}^d}Y(t-s,x-y)u(s,y) W(\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} s,\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y)
\end{equation}
almost surely for all $(t,x)\in\mathbb{R}_+\times\mathbb{R}^d$, where $J_0(t,x)$ is defined by
\eqref{E:J0}.
\end{definition}
We use a similar chaos expansion to the one used in chapter 3. To prove the existence and uniqueness of the solution we show that for all $(t,x)$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq: L2 chaos}
\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}n!\|f_n(\cdot,\cdot,t,x)\|^2_{\mathcal{H}^{\otimes n}}< \infty\,.
\end{equation}
\setcounter{equation}{0}\Section{Estimations of the Green's functions}
The fundamental solution of \eqref{E:PDE} is constructed by Levi's parametrix method. We refer the reader to \cite{fried} for detail of this method.
In this section $x:=(x_1,x_2, \cdots, x_d) \in \mathbb{R}^d,\xi, \eta$ are defined the same way; $t\in(0, T]$. We use $\gamma$ to denote the H\"older exponents with respect to spatial variables. We can assume they are equal. For $\alpha\in(1, 2)$, we assume
$$\gamma>2-\frac 2\alpha.$$
For $\alpha\in(\frac12,1)$, Chapter 4 gives the estimations the $Z$ and $Y$.
For $\alpha\in(1, 2)$, we need some lemmas before we can estimate $Z_1, Z_2$ and $Y$.
From
\cite{koch} we have
\begin{align*}
Z_j(t, x- \xi)=&Z_j^0(t, x- \xi, \xi)+V_{Z_j}(t, x; \xi), \qquad j=1, 2.\\
Y(t, x- \xi)=&Y_0(t, x- \xi, \xi)+V_Y(t, x; \xi).
\end{align*}
We refer the reader to \cite{koch} for the definitions of $Z_k^0(t, x- \xi, \xi), Y_0(t, x- \xi, \xi)$ and $V_Y(t, x; \xi).$
Here we list their estimations which we use to get the estimations of $Z_k$ and $Y$ in section 3.
These estimations are given in section 2.2 of \cite{koch} or Lemma 15 in \cite{Pskhu09}.
\begin{lemma}\label{est.z_0}
$$|Z^0_1(t, x- \xi, \eta)|\leq Ct^{-\frac{\alpha d}{2}} \mu_d(t^{-\frac{\alpha }{2}}|x-\xi|)p(t, x-\xi),$$
$$|Z^0_2(t, x- \xi, \eta)|\leq Ct^{-\frac{\alpha d}{2}+1} \mu_d(t^{-\frac{\alpha }{2}}|x-\xi|)p(t, x-\xi),$$ where
\begin{equation}
\mu_d(z):= \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
$$ 1$$, & \hbox{ $d=1$;} \\
$$1+|\log z|$$, & \hbox{ $d=2$;} \\
$$z^{2-d} $$, & \hbox{ $d\geq 3$.}
\end{array}
\right. \label{1e.Z_0-bound}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{1est.y_0}
$$|Y_0(t, x- \xi, \eta)|\leq Ct^{\alpha-\frac{\alpha d}{2}-1} \mu_d(t^{-\frac{\alpha }{2}}|x-\xi|)p(t, x-\xi),$$ where
\begin{equation}
\mu_d(z):= \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
$$ 1$$, & \hbox{ $d\leq3$;} \\
$$1+|\log z|$$, & \hbox{ $d=4$;} \\
$$z^{4-d} $$, & \hbox{ $d\geq 5$.}
\end{array}
\right. \label{1e.Y_0-bound}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\
The following estimations of $V_{Z_1},V_{Z_2}$ and $V_Y$ are from Theorem 1 of \cite{koch}, where $\nu_1\in (0,1)$, such that $\gamma>\nu_1>2- \frac{2}{\alpha}$ and $ \nu_0=\nu_1-2+\frac{2}{\alpha}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{1est.v_z_1}
\begin{equation}
|V_{Z_1}(t, x; \xi)|\leq
\begin{cases} Ct^{(\gamma-1)\frac\alpha2} p(t, x-\xi)\,, & \qquad \ d=1\,;\\
Ct^{\nu_0 \alpha-1}|x-\xi|^{-d+\gamma-\nu_1+2-\nu_0} p(t, x-\xi)\,,
&\qquad \ d\geq 2 \\
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{1est.v_z_2}
\begin{equation}
|V_{Z_2}(t, x; \xi)|\leq
\begin{cases} Ct^{(\gamma-1)\frac\alpha2+1} p(t, x-\xi)\,, & \qquad \ d=1\,;\\
Ct^{\frac{\nu_0 \alpha}{2}+1-\alpha}|x-\xi|^{-d+\gamma-\nu_1+2-\nu_0} p(t, x-\xi)\,,
&\qquad \ d\geq 2 \\
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{1est.v_y}
\begin{equation}
|V_Y(t, x; \xi)|\leq
\begin{cases} Ct^{\alpha -1+(\gamma-1)\frac\alpha2} p(t, x-\xi)\,, & \qquad \ d=1\,;\\
Ct^{\nu_0 \alpha-1}|x-\xi|^{-d+\gamma-\nu_1+2-\nu_0} p(t, x-\xi)\,,
&\qquad \ d\geq 2 \\
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
Based on the above three lemmas we have
\begin{lemma}\label{1est.y}
Let $x \in \mathbb{R}^d, t\in(0, T]$. Then
\begin{equation}
|Y(t, x- \xi)|\leq \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
$$ Ct^{-1+\frac{\alpha}{2}} p(t, x-\xi)$$, & \hbox{$d=1$;} \\
$$Ct^{\alpha -\frac\alpha2\gamma+\nu_0\alpha-2} |x-\xi|^{-d+\gamma-2\nu_0+\frac{2}{\alpha}} p(t, x-\xi)$$, & \hbox{$d\geq 2$.}
\end{array}
\right. \label{1e.Y-bound}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We "add" together the estimation of $Y_0$ in Lemma \ref{1est.y_0} and $V_y$ in Lemma \ref{1est.v_y} to get the estimation of $Y$. We use the following inequality throughout the proof.
$$a, b, \sigma>0, \quad \text{then} \quad \exists \sigma, C>0, \quad s.t. \quad x^{a}e^{-\sigma x^b}<Ce^{-\sigma'x^b}, $$
First when $d=1$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
|Y(t, x-\xi)|
&\leq& |Y_0(t, x-\xi, \xi)|+|V_Y(t, x,\xi)|\\
&\leq& Ct^{\alpha -1+(\gamma-1)\frac\alpha2} p(t, x-\xi)+Ct^{-1+\frac{\alpha}{2}} p(t, x-\xi)\\
&\leq& Ct^{-1+\frac{\alpha}{2}} p(t, x-\xi)\,.
\end{eqnarray*}
When $d\geq 5$,
by the fact $$\nu_0=\nu_1-2+2/\alpha \qquad\text{and}\qquad \gamma>\nu_1>2-\frac2\alpha\,,$$ we have
$$4-\gamma+2\nu_0-\frac2\alpha=-\gamma+2\nu_1+\frac{2}{\alpha}\geq0\,.$$
Therefore
\begin{eqnarray*}
|Y_0(t, x-\xi, \xi)|
&\leq&Ct^{\alpha-\frac{\alpha d}{2}-1} \bigg|\frac{x-\xi}{t^\frac\alpha2}\bigg|^{4-d} p(t, x-\xi)\\
&=& C t^{\alpha-\frac{\alpha d}{2}-1}\bigg|\frac{x-\xi}{t^\frac\alpha2}\bigg|^{-d+\gamma-2\nu_0+\frac{2}{\alpha} }\bigg|\frac{x-\xi}{t^\frac\alpha2}\bigg|^{4-\gamma+2\nu_0-\frac2\alpha}p(t, x-\xi)\\
&\leq& C t^{\alpha -\frac\alpha2\gamma+\nu_0\alpha-2}|x-\xi|^{-d+\gamma-2\nu_0+\frac{2}{\alpha} }p(t, x-\xi)\,.
\end{eqnarray*}
Furthermore because of the assumption $$ \gamma>2-\frac 2\alpha,$$ we have
$$\alpha -\frac\alpha2\gamma+\nu_0\alpha-2<\nu_0\alpha-1.$$
Therefore
\begin{eqnarray*}
|Y(t, x-\xi)|
&\leq&|Y_0(t, x-\xi, \xi)|+|V_y(t, x,\xi)|\\
&\leq& C t^{\alpha -\frac\alpha2\gamma+\nu_0\alpha-2}|x-\xi|^{-d+\gamma-2\nu_0+\frac{2}{\alpha} }p(t, x-\xi)\\
&+&Ct^{v_0\alpha-1} |x-\xi|^{-d+\gamma-2\nu_0+\frac{2}{\alpha}} p(t, x-\xi)\\
&\leq& Ct^{\alpha -\frac\alpha2\gamma+\nu_0\alpha-2} |x-\xi|^{-d+\gamma-2\nu_0+\frac{2}{\alpha}} p(t, x-\xi) \,.
\end{eqnarray*}
When $d=2$ and $d=3$, as in the previous cases, we first have
\begin{eqnarray*}
|Y_0(t, x-\xi, \xi)|
&\leq& Ct^{\alpha-\frac{\alpha n}{2}-1} p(t, x-\xi)\\
&\leq& C t^{\alpha -\frac\alpha2\gamma+\nu_0\alpha-2}|x-\xi|^{-d+\gamma-2\nu_0+\frac{2}{\alpha}} p(t, x-\xi).
\end{eqnarray*}
Then as the last step in the case of $d\geq 5$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
|Y(t, x-\xi)|
&\leq& Ct^{\alpha -\frac\alpha2\gamma+\nu_0\alpha-2} |x-\xi|^{-d+\gamma-2\nu_0+\frac{2}{\alpha}} p(t, x-\xi) \,.
\end{eqnarray*}
When $d=4$, let's first transform the estimation of $Y_0$ into the following form:
$$t^{\zeta_d} |x-\xi|^{\kappa_d} p (t, x-\xi).$$
We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
|Y_0(t, x-\xi, \xi)|
&\leq&Ct^{\alpha-\frac{\alpha d}{2}-1} \left\{\bigg|\frac{x-\xi}{t^\frac\alpha2}\bigg|^{\theta}+\bigg|\frac{t^\frac\alpha2}{x-\xi}\bigg|^{\theta}\right\} p(t, x-\xi)\\
&\leq&Ct^{\alpha-\frac{\alpha d}{2}-1} \bigg|\frac{t^\frac\alpha2}{x-\xi}\bigg|^{\theta}\left\{\bigg|\frac{x-\xi}{t^\frac\alpha2}\bigg|^{2\theta}+1\right\} p(t, x-\xi),\\
\end{eqnarray*}
for $\forall \, \theta>0$.
If $|\frac{x-\xi}{t^\frac\alpha2}|\leq1$, then
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left\{\bigg|\frac{x-\xi}{t^\frac\alpha2}\bigg|^{2\theta}+1\right\} p(t, x-\xi)
&\leq&2 p(t, x-\xi);
\end{eqnarray*}
if $|\frac{x-\xi}{t^\frac\alpha2}|>1$, then
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left\{\bigg|\frac{x-\xi}{t^\frac\alpha2}\bigg|^{2\theta}+1\right\} p(t, x-\xi)
&\leq&2\bigg|\frac{x-\xi}{t^\frac\alpha2}\bigg|^{2\theta} p(t, x-\xi)\\
&\leq&Cp(t, x-\xi).
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore if we choose $\theta>0$ such that $$-\theta>-d+\gamma-2\nu_0+\frac{2}{\alpha},$$ we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
|Y_0(t, x-\xi, \xi)|
&\leq&Ct^{\alpha-\frac{\alpha d}{2}-1} \bigg|\frac{x-\xi}{t^\frac\alpha2}\bigg|^{-\theta}p(t, x-\xi)\\
&\leq& C t^{\alpha-\frac{\alpha d}{2}-1}\bigg|\frac{x-\xi}{t^\frac\alpha2}\bigg|^{-d+\gamma-2\nu_0+\frac{2}{\alpha} }p(t, x-\xi)\\
&\leq& C t^{\alpha -\frac\alpha2\gamma+\nu_0\alpha-2}|x-\xi|^{-d+\gamma-2\nu_0+\frac{2}{\alpha} }p(t, x-\xi)\,.
\end{eqnarray*}
As in previous two cases, we end up with
\begin{eqnarray*}
|Y(t, x- \xi)|
&\leq& Ct^{\alpha -\frac\alpha2\gamma+\nu_0\alpha-2} |x-\xi|^{-d+\gamma-2\nu_0+\frac{2}{\alpha}} p(t, x-\xi) \,.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proof}
Let's denote the the estimation function of $Y$ by $t^{\zeta_d} |x-\xi|^{\kappa_d} p (t, x-\xi).$ For the estimation of integral \eqref{basin} involving $Y$ and fractional kernel it more convenient to represent the estimation of $Y$ as the
the product of one dimensional functions. To this purpose,
as in the case of $0<\alpha<1$, the estimation of $Y$ is represented as the product of one dimensional functions, which is shown in the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}
Let $x_i, \xi_i \in \mathbb{R}, t\in(0, T]$
\begin{equation}\label{e.Y-product-b}
|Y(t, x- \xi)|\leq C\prod_{i=1}^{d} t^{\zeta_d/d} |x_i-\xi_i|^{\kappa_d/d} p (t, x_i-\xi_i)\,,
\end{equation}
where $\zeta_{d}$ and $\kappa_{d}$ are the powers of $t$ and $x-\xi$ in the estimation of $Y$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{zeta2}
\zeta_{d} =
\begin{cases} -1+\frac{\alpha}{2} , & d=1 ; \\
\alpha -\frac\alpha2\gamma+\nu_0\alpha-2 , & d\geq 2\,.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\kappa_{d} =
\begin{cases} 0 , & d=1 ; \\
-d+\gamma-2\nu_0+\frac{2}{\alpha} , & d\geq 2\,.
\end{cases}\label{kappa2}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{est.z_k}
\[
\sup_{t, x}\left|\int_{\mathbb{R}^d}Z_{k+1}(t, x-\xi)u_{k}(t, \xi)d\xi\right| \leq C\, \qquad k=0, 1.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First recall that $u_{k}(x)$ are bounded. Thanks to the following fact from \cite{Koc}
$$\int_{\mathbb{R}^d}Z_1^0(t, x, \xi)d\xi =1 \quad \text{and}\quad \int_{\mathbb{R}^d}Z_2^0(t, x, \xi)d\xi =t ,$$ we only need to show
$$\sup_{t, x}\int_{\mathbb{R}^d}V_{Z_{j}}(t, x, \xi)\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\xi \leq C,$$ since $u_k$ are bounded.
Let's consider the case $d\geq3$ and $d=2$ for $V_{z_1}$ as examples. When $d\geq3$,
by the estimation of $V_{Z_1}$ in Lemma \ref{est.z_0}, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^d}|V_{Z_1}(t, x, \xi) |d\xi
&\leq& \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} Ct^{-\frac{\alpha d}{2}} \mu_d(t^{-\frac{\alpha }{2}}|x-\xi|)p(t, x-\xi) dy\\
&\leq& \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} Ct^{-\frac{\alpha d}{2}+d} \mu_d(z)p(t, x-\xi) dz\\
&\leq& Ct^{-\frac{\alpha d}{2}+d}\\
&\leq& C,
\end{eqnarray*}
due to the fact $ t\in(0, T].$
\
For the case $d=2, Z_1$, notice that $$\forall \theta>0, \exists C>0 \quad s.t. \quad (\log|z|+1)<c|z|^{\theta}, $$ as shown in the case of d=4 in the proof of \ref{1est.y}. Then the above argument ends proof.
The proof for the rest of the cases is almost the same, so we omit it.
\end{proof}
\setcounter{equation}{0}\Section{Miscellaneous estimations}
\
For fractional kernel, we need the following estimation, which is immediate from Corollary 15 of \cite{HuHu15}.
\begin{lemma}\label{basic.ineq1}
Let $0<r, s\le T$ and
\begin{equation}\label{condtion.h2}
2H_i+\frac{2\kappa_d}{d}>0.
\end{equation}
Then for any
$\rho_1, \tau_2 \in \mathbb{R}, \rho_1\neq\tau_2$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}|\rho_1-\tau_1|^{2H_i-2}|\rho_2-\rho_1|^{\frac{\kappa_d}{d}}|\tau_2-\tau_1|^{\frac{\kappa_d}{d}}p(s, \rho_2-\rho_1)p(r, \tau_2-\tau_1)\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\rho_1 \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\tau_1\leq C (s\: r)^{\theta_i},
\end{eqnarray*} where
$$\theta_i=
\begin{cases}
C (s\: r)^{\frac{H_i d+\kappa_d}{2d}\alpha}\,,& \qquad 2H_i-2+\kappa_d/d\not =-1;\\
C (s\: r)^{\frac{d\epsilon+\kappa_d+d }{4d}\alpha}\,,& \qquad2H_i-2+\kappa_d/d= -1\,.
\end{cases} \nonumber\\$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
In Corollary 15 of \cite{HuHu15}, let $\theta_1=2H_i-2, \theta_2=\kappa_d/d$. Then notice that for $0<r\le T$
$$\forall \epsilon<0, \exists\: C>0, \quad s.t. \quad \log r<Cr^\epsilon. $$
\end{proof}
The next lemma can be proved as in Lemma 11 of \cite{HuHu15}.
\begin{lemma}\label{intes}
Let $-1<\beta\leq0, x\in \mathbb{\mathbb{R}}^d$. Then, there is a constant $C$, dependent on
$\sigma$, $\alpha$ and $\beta$, but independent of $\xi$ and $s$ such that
\[
\int_{\mathbb{R}^d}|x|^{\beta}
p(s, x-\xi)d x\leq C s^{\frac{\alpha\beta}{2}+\frac{\alpha}{2}d}\,.
\]
\end{lemma}
For Bessel kernel, we need the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{basic.ineq2}
Assume $0<s, r\leq T$ and $y_1, y_2, z_1, z_2\in\mathbb{R}^d$, we have that
\[
\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2d}} \left|Y(r, y_1-y_2) Y(s, z_1-z_2)\right|\: \int_0^\infty \omega^{-\frac{\kappa}{2}-1}e^{-\omega} e^{\frac{-|y_1-z_1|^2}{4\omega}}d\omega \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y_1 \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} z_1
\leq C \cdot(r\: s)^\ell,
\] where
\[
\ell:=\zeta_d-\frac{\alpha}{4}\kappa+\frac{\alpha}{2}\kappa_d+\frac{\alpha}{2}d
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that the estimation of $Y(t, x)$ in Lemma 9 of \cite{HuHu15} and \eqref{1e.Y-bound} has the following form:
$$Cs^{\zeta_d}|x|^{\kappa_d}p(t, x).$$
By substituting $Y$, we have
\begin{align*}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2d}} \left|Y(r, y_1-y_2)Y(s, z_1-z_2)\right|\: \int_0^\infty \omega^{-\frac{\kappa}{2}-1}e^{-\omega} e^{\frac{-|y_1-z_1|^2}{4\omega}}d\omega \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y_1 \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} z_1
\end{align*}
$$\leq C\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}s^{\zeta_d}|z_2-z_1^{\kappa_d}|p(s, z_2-z_1)r^{\zeta_d}\int_0^\infty I\:\cdot \omega^{-\frac{\kappa}{2}-1}e^{-\omega} \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\omega \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} z_1,$$
where
$$I:=\int_{\mathbb{R}_d}|y_2-y_1|^{\kappa_d} \exp \left\{-\sigma \left|\frac {y_2-y_1}{r^{\frac\alpha2}}\right|^{\frac{2}{2-\alpha}}\right\}\exp \left\{-\frac {|y_1-z_1|^2}{4\omega}\right\}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y_1.$$
For $I$, we have two estimations:
\begin{align*}
I&\leq \int_{\mathbb{R}_d}|y_2-y_1|^{\kappa_d} \exp \left\{-\sigma \left|\frac {y_2-y_1}{r^{\frac\alpha2}}\right|^{\frac{2}{2-\alpha}}\right\}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y_1\\
&\leq C r^{\frac{\alpha}{2}\kappa_d+\frac{\alpha}{2}d},
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
I&\leq \int_{\mathbb{R}_d}|y_2-y_1|^{\kappa_d} \exp \left\{-\frac {|y_1-z_1|^2}{4\omega}\right\}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y_1\\
&\leq C \omega^{\frac{\kappa_d}{2}+\frac{d}{2}},
\end{align*}
by Lemma \ref{intes}.
With the estimations of $I$, we have
\begin{align*}
\int_0^{\infty} I\:\cdot \omega^{-\frac{\kappa}{2}-1}e^{-\omega}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\omega&=\int_0^{r^\alpha} I\:\cdot \omega^{-\frac{\kappa}{2}-1}e^{-\omega} \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\omega+\int_{r^\alpha}^\infty I\:\cdot \omega^{-\frac{\kappa}{2}-1}e^{-\omega}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\omega\\
&\leq r^{\frac{\alpha}{2}\kappa_d+\frac{\alpha}{2}d-\frac{\alpha}{2}\kappa}+ \int^\infty_{r^\alpha}\omega^{\frac{\kappa_d}{2}+\frac{d}{2}}\: \omega^{-\frac{\kappa}{2}-1}e^{-\omega}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\omega.
\end{align*}
For $\int^\infty_{r^\alpha}\omega^{\frac{\kappa_d}{2}+\frac{d}{2}}\: \omega^{-\frac{\kappa}{2}-1}e^{-\omega}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\omega$,
\
if $\frac{\kappa_d}{2}+\frac{d}{2}-\frac{\kappa}{2}<0$
\begin{align*}
\int^\infty_{r^\alpha} \omega^{\frac{\kappa}{2}+\frac{d}{2}}\: \omega^{-\frac{\kappa_d}{2}-1}e^{-\omega}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\omega&\leq \int^\infty_{r^\alpha} \omega^{\frac{\kappa_d}{2}+\frac{d}{2}-\frac{\kappa}{2}-1}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\omega\\
&=C r^{\alpha(\frac{\kappa_d}{2}+\frac{d}{2}-\frac{\kappa}{2})};
\end{align*}
if $\frac{\kappa_d}{2}+\frac{d}{2}-\frac{\kappa}{2}\geq0$
\begin{align*}
\int^\infty_{r^\alpha} \omega^{\frac{\kappa}{2}+\frac{d}{2}}\: \omega^{-\frac{\kappa_d}{2}-1}e^{-\omega}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\omega&= \int^\infty_{r^\alpha} \omega^{\frac{\kappa}{2}+\frac{d}{2}-\frac{\kappa_d}{2}-1}e^{-\omega}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\omega\\
&= C\\
&\leq C r^{\alpha(\frac{\kappa_d}{2}+\frac{d}{2}-\frac{\kappa}{2})}.
\end{align*}
Therefore we end up with
$$\int_0^\infty I\:\cdot \omega^{-\frac{\kappa}{2}-1}e^{-\omega} \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\omega\leq C r^{\alpha(\frac{\kappa_d}{2}+\frac{d}{2}-\frac{\kappa}{2})}.$$
The estimation of integration with respect to $z_1$ is straightforward thank to fact that C is independent of $z_1$.
We have
$$\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d}}s^{\zeta_d}|z_2-z_1|p(s, z_2-z_1)r^{\zeta_d}\int_0^\infty I\:\cdot \omega^{-\frac{\kappa}{2}-1}e^{-\omega} \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\omega \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} z_1 $$
$$\leq Cr^{\alpha(\frac{\kappa_d}{2}+\frac{d}{2}-\frac{\kappa}{2})}\cdot r^{\zeta_d}\cdot s^{\alpha(\frac{\kappa_d}{2}+\frac{d}{2}-\frac{\kappa}{2})} s^{\zeta_d},$$
by Lemma \ref{intes}.
\
By symmetry, we have
$$\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2d}} \left|Y(r, y_1-y_2) Y(s, z_1-z_2)\right|\: \int_0^\infty \omega^{-\frac{\kappa}{2}-1}e^{-\omega} e^{\frac{-|y_1-z_1|^2}{4\omega}}d\omega \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y_1 \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} z_1 $$
$$\leq C s^{\alpha(\frac{\kappa_d}{2}+\frac{d}{2}-\frac{\kappa}{2})}\cdot s^{\zeta_d}\cdot r^{\alpha(\frac{\kappa_d}{2}+\frac{d}{2}-\frac{\kappa}{2})} r^{\zeta_d}.$$
Combining the two estimations we get the estimation in the lemma.
\end{proof}
The following lemma is Theorem 3.5 from \cite{BC3}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{stint}
Let $T_n(t)=\{s=(s_1, \ldots,s_n):\: 0<s_1<s_2 < \ldots <s_n<t\}$. Then
\[
\int_{T_n(t)} [(t-s_n)(s_n-s_{n-1}) \ldots
(s_2-s_1)]^{h} \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} s =\frac{\Gamma(1+h)^{n}}{\Gamma(n(1+h)+1)}
t^{n(1+h)},
\]
if and only if $1+h>0$.
\end{lemma}
\setcounter{equation}{0}\Section{Existence and uniqueness of the solution}
\begin{theorem}\label{main.theorem}
Assume the following conditions:
\begin{enumerate}[(1)]
\item $\lambda(t)$ is a nonnegative definite locally integrable function\,;
\item $\alpha \in (1/2,1)\cup(1, 2)$.
\end{enumerate}
Then relation \eref{eq: L2 chaos} holds for each $(t,x)$, if any of the following is true.
Consequently, equation \eref{E:SPDE} admits a unique mild solution in the sense of Definition \ref{D:Sol}.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item $\Lambda(x)$ is fractional kernel with condition:
\begin{equation*}
H_i>\begin{cases}
\frac12, &\qquad \hbox{}\ \ d=1, 2, 3, 4\\
1-\frac{2}{d}-\frac{\gamma}{2d},&\qquad \hbox{}\ \ d\ge 5, \alpha\in(0, 1) \\
1-\frac{2}{d},&\qquad \hbox{}\ \ d\ge 5, \alpha\in(1, 2) \\
\end{cases}
\label{e.cond.main-hi}
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{i=1}^{d}H_i>d-2+\frac1\alpha \,.
\label{e.cond.main}
\end{equation*}
\item $\Lambda(x)$ is the Reisz or Bessel kernel with condition:
\[
\kappa< 4-2/\alpha;
\]
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Fix $t>0$ and $x\in \mathbb{R}^d$.
Let $$ (s, y, t, x):=(s_1, y_1,\cdots, s_n, y_n, t, x);$$
\[
g_n(s, y, t, x):=\frac{1}{n!}Y(t-s_{\sigma(n)}, x-y_{\sigma(n)} )\cdots Y(s_{\sigma(2)}-s_{\sigma(1)}, y_{\sigma(2)}-y_{\sigma(1)}) \,;
\]
\begin{align*}
f_n(s, y, t, x):=g_n(s, y, t, x)J_0(s_{\sigma(1)}, x_{\sigma(1)}),
\end{align*}
where $\sigma$ denotes a permutation of $ \{1,2,\cdots, n\}$ such that
$0<s_{\sigma(1)}<\cdots<s_{\sigma(n)}<t$.
By iteration of $u(t, x)$, we have
\begin{multline}\label{E:fnNorm}
n! \| f_n(\cdot,\cdot,t,x)\|^2_{\mathcal{H}^{\otimes n}}\\
= n!\int_{[0,t]^{2n}} \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} s\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} r\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2nd}}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} z\: f_n(s, y, t, x)f_n(r, z, t, x)\prod_{i=1}^n\Lambda(y_i-z_i)\prod_{i=1}^n\lambda(s_i-r_i),
\end{multline}
where $\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y:=\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y_1 \cdots \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y_n$, the differentials $\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} z$, $\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} s$ and $\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} r$ are defined similarly.
Set $\mu(\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\xi) : = \prod_{i=1}^{n} \mu(\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\xi_i)$.
Recall that $J_0$ is bounded, so we have
\begin{multline*}
n! \| f_n(\cdot,\cdot,t,x)\|^2_{\mathcal{H}^{\otimes n}}\\
\leq C\frac{1}{n!}\int_{[0,t]^{2n}} \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} s\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} r\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2nd}}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} z\: g_n(s, y, t, x)g_n(r, z, t, x)\prod_{i=1}^n\Lambda(y_i-z_i)\prod_{i=1}^n\lambda(s_i-r_i).
\end{multline*}
Furthermore by Cauchy-Schwarz inequality,
\begin{multline*}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2nd}}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} z\: g_n(s, y, t, x)g_n(r, z, t, x)\prod_{i=1}^n\Lambda(y_i-z_i)\\
\leq \left\{\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2nd}}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} z\: g_n(s, y, t, x)g_n(s, z, t, x)\prod_{i=1}^n\Lambda(y_i-z_i)\right\}^{1/2}\\
\cdot\left\{\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2nd}}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} z\: g_n(r, y, t, x)g_n(r, z, t, x)\prod_{i=1}^n\Lambda(y_i-z_i)\right\}^{1/2}
\end{multline*}
(i)
Let $\Lambda(\cdot)=\varphi_{H}(\cdot)$ and use the estimation of $Y$ in Lemma \ref{1est.y}, we have
\begin{multline}\label{basin}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2nd}}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} z\: g_n(s, y, t, x)g_n(s, z, t, x)\prod_{i=1}^n\Lambda(y_i-z_i)\\
\leq C \prod_{i=1}^d\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2n}}\prod_{k=1}^n\varphi_{H_i}(y_{ik}-z_{ik}) \Theta_{n}(t, y_{ik}, s)\Theta_{n}(t, z_{ik}, s)dy_idz_i
\end{multline}
where
$$
\Theta_{ n}(t, y_{ik}, s):= |s_{\sigma(k+1)}-s_{\sigma(k)}|^{\frac{\zeta_{d}}{d}}|y_{i\sigma(k+1)}-y_{i\sigma(k)}|^{\frac{\kappa_{d}}{d}} p(s_{\sigma(k+1)}-s_{\sigma(k)}, y_{i\sigma(k+1)}-y_{i\sigma(k)});
$$
$$y_i=(y_{i1}, y_{i2}, \cdots, y_{ik}, \cdots,y_{in}), \qquad z_i=(z_{i1}, z_{i2}, \cdots, z_{ik}, \cdots,z_{in});$$
$$dy_i:=\prod_{k=1}^n dy_{ik}\qquad dz_i:=\prod_{k=1}^n dz_{ik}; $$
and
$$y_{\sigma(k+1)}=z_{\sigma(k+1)}:=x_{i}\,; \qquad s_{\sigma(n+1)}=r_{\sigma(n+1)}:=t.$$
Let's first consider the case $2H_i-2+\kappa_d/d\ne -1$. Applying Lemma \ref{basic.ineq1} to
\begin{equation}\label{theta.int}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2n}}\prod_{k=1}^n\varphi_{H_i}(y_{ik}-z_{ik}) \Theta_{n}(t, y_{ik}, s)\Theta_{n}(t, z_{ik}, s)dy_idz_i
\end{equation}
for $dy_{i\sigma(1)}dz_{i\sigma(1)}$, we have
\begin{multline*}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2n}}\prod_{k=1}^n\varphi_{H_i}(y_{ik}-z_{ik}) \Theta_{n}(t, y_{ik}, s)\Theta_{n}(t, z_{ik}, s)dy_idz_i\\
\leq C(s_{i\sigma(2)}-s_{i\sigma(1)})^{2\ell_i}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2n}}\prod_{k=2}^n\varphi_{H_i}(y_{ik}-z_{ik}) \Theta_{n}(t, y_{ik}, s)\Theta_{n}(t, z_{ik}, s)dy_idz_i
\end{multline*}
where $$ \ell_i=\frac{\zeta_{d}}{d}+\theta_i \,.$$
Applying Lemma \ref{basic.ineq1} to \eqref{theta.int} for $dy_{i\sigma(k)}dz_{i\sigma(k)}, k=2,\cdots, n$,
we have
$$ \prod_{i=1}^d\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2n}}\prod_{k=1}^n\varphi_{H_i}(y_{ik}-z_{ik}) \Theta_{n}(t, y_{ik}, s)\Theta_{n}(t, z_{ik}, s)dy_idz_i \leq \prod_{k=1}^nC^n(s_{\sigma(k+1)}-s_{\sigma(k)})^{2\ell}$$
where
\begin{equation}\label{de.l}
\ell =\sum_{i=1}^d \ell_i= \zeta_{d} + \frac{|H|\alpha}{2} +\frac{\kappa_d\alpha }{2 } \quad {\rm with}\quad
|H|=\sum_{i=1}^d H_i\,.
\end{equation}
Due to the same argument, we have
$$ \prod_{i=1}^d\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2n}}\prod_{k=1}^n\varphi_{H_i}(y_{ik}-z_{ik}) \Theta_{n}(t, y_{ik}, r)\Theta_{n}(t, z_{ik}, r)dy_idz_i \leq \prod_{k=1}^nC^n(r_{\rho(k+1)}-r_{\rho(k)})^{2\ell}$$
Therefore
\[
\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2nd}}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} z\: g_n(s, y, t, x)g_n(r, z, t, x)\prod_{i=1}^n\Lambda(y_i-z_i) \leq C^n \; (\phi(s)\phi(r))^\ell,
\]
where
\[
\phi(s) :=\prod_{i=1}^{n}(s_{\sigma(i+1)}- s_{\sigma(i)}), \qquad \phi(r): = \prod_{i=1}^{n} (r_{\rho(i+1)}- r_{\rho(i)}),
\]
with
\[
0<s_{\sigma(1)}<s_{\sigma(2)}<
\ldots < s_{\sigma(n)} \quad \text{and} \quad 0<r_{\rho(1)}<r_{\rho(2)}< \ldots <
r_{\rho(n)} .
\]
Hence,
\begin{align*}
n! \| f_n(\cdot,\cdot,t,x)\|^2_{\mathcal{H}^{\otimes n}}
&\leq \frac{C^n}{n!}\int_{[0,t]^{2n}} \prod_{i=1}^n \lambda(s_i-r_i) (\phi(s)\phi(r))^\ell \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} s \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} r\\
&\leq \frac{C^n}{n!} \frac{1}{2} \int_{[0,t]^{2n}} \prod_{i=1}^n \lambda(s_i-r_i) \left(\phi(s) ^{2\ell} + \phi(r)^{2\ell} \right) \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} s \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} r\\
&= \frac{C^n}{n!} \int_{[0,t]^{2n}} \prod_{i=1}^n \lambda(s_i-r_i) \phi(s) ^{2\ell} \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} s \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} r\\
&\leq \frac{C^nC_t^n}{n!} \int_{[0,t]^n} \phi(s)^{2\ell} \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} s\\
&= C^nC_t^n \int_{T_n(t)} \phi(s)^{2\ell} \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} s\\
&= \frac{C^n C_t^n \Gamma(2\ell +1)^n t^{(2\ell+1)n}}{\Gamma((2\ell+1)n+1)}\,,
\end{align*}
where $C_t= 2\int_0^t \lambda(r)dr$. The last step is by Lemma \ref{stint}.
Therefore,
\[
n! \| f_n(\cdot,\cdot,t,x)\|^2_{\mathcal{H}^{\otimes n}}\leq \frac {C^nC_t^n}{\Gamma((2\ell+1)n+1)}\:,
\]
and
$\sum_{n\ge 0} n! \| f_n(\cdot,\cdot,t,x)\|^2_{\mathcal{H}^{\otimes n}}$ converges if $\ell>-1/2$.
\
Next we need to show $$\ell>-1/2 \iff |H|>d-2+\frac{1}{\alpha}\,.$$
Firstly by definition of $\ell$, \eqref{de.l}
$$\ell>-1/2\iff |H|>-\frac1\alpha-\kappa_d-\frac{2}{\alpha}\zeta_d.$$
Then using the definition of $\zeta_d$ and $\kappa_d$ in (4.2), (4.3) of \cite{HuHu15} for $1/2<\alpha<1$ and \eqref{zeta2}, \eqref{kappa2} for $1<\alpha<2$, we have:
when $1/2<\alpha<1$,
\begin{equation*}
\frac1\alpha-\kappa_d-\frac{2}{\alpha}\zeta_d =
\begin{cases} -1+\frac1\alpha , & d=1 ; \\
\frac1\alpha , & d=2 ; \\
\frac1\alpha+2 , & d=4; \\
\frac1\alpha-2+d , & d=3\ {\rm or}\ d\geq 5\,;
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
when $1<\alpha<2$,
\begin{equation*}
\frac1\alpha-\kappa_d-\frac{2}{\alpha}\zeta_d =
\begin{cases} -1+\frac1\alpha , & d=1 ; \\
d-2+\frac{1}{\alpha} , & d\geq 2\,;
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
For case $2H_i-2+\kappa_d/d= -1$,
applying Lemma \ref{basic.ineq1} to \eqref{theta.int},
we have
$$ \prod_{i=1}^d\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2n}}\prod_{k=1}^n\varphi_{H_i}(y_{ik}-z_{ik}) \Theta_{n}(t, y_{ik}, s)\Theta_{n}(t, z_{ik}, s)dy_idz_i \leq \prod_{k=1}^nC^n(s_{\sigma(k+1)}-s_{\sigma(k)})^{2\ell'},$$
where
\begin{equation*}\label{de.l2}
\ell' = \zeta_{d} + \frac{d\epsilon+\kappa_d+d }{4}\alpha \quad {\rm with}\quad
|H|=\sum_{i=1}^d H_i\,.
\end{equation*}
Using the relation $2H_i-2+\kappa_d/d= -1$, we have
$$\ell'= \ell + \frac{d\alpha}{4}\varepsilon.$$
Since
$$|H|>d-2+\frac{1}{\alpha} \implies \ell>-1/2\,,$$
we can choose $\varepsilon$ big enough such such
$$|H|>d-2+\frac{1}{\alpha} \implies \ell'>-1/2 \,.$$
\
Lastly, when $\alpha \in(1/2, 1)$, for $d\leq 4, H_i>1/2$ implies condition \eqref{condtion.h2}; for $d>4$, condition \eqref{condtion.h2} is implied by
$$H_i>1-\frac{2}{d}-\frac{\gamma}{2d} $$ with $\gamma_0$ sufficiently small;
when $\alpha \in(1, 2)$ for $d=1, H_i>1/2$ implies \eqref{condtion.h2}; for $d\geq 2$, \eqref{condtion.h2} is implied by
$$H_i>1-\frac{2}{d} $$ with $\nu_0$ sufficiently small.
This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{main.theorem} for case of $\Lambda(\cdot)=\varphi_{H}(\cdot)$
\
(ii) Let $x=(x_1, x_2, \cdots, x_d)\in\mathbb{R}^d$. For Reisz kernel, notice that
$$|x|^{-\kappa}\leq C\prod_{i=1}^d|x_i|^{\frac{\kappa}{d}},$$ so this case is reduced to case (i) with $H_i=(-\frac{\kappa}{d}+2)\frac{1}{2}, \: i=1, 2, \cdots, d$.
\
Correspondingly
$$|H|>d-2+\frac{1}{\alpha} $$ is
$$\kappa< 4-2/\alpha,$$ which also guarantees condition \eqref{condtion.h2} .
\
For Bessel kernel,
applying Lemma \ref{basic.ineq2} for $\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y_{\sigma(i)}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} z_{\sigma(i)}$ in the order of $i=1, 2, \cdots, n$ to
$$\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2nd}}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} z\: g_n(s, y, t, x)g_n(s, z, t, x)\prod_{i=1}^n\Lambda(y_i-z_i)$$
yields
$$\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2nd}}\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} y\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} z\: g_n(s, y, t, x)g_n(s, z, t, x)\prod_{i=1}^n\Lambda(y_i-z_i)\leq \prod_{k=1}^nC^n(s_{\sigma(k+1)}-s_{\sigma(k)})^{2\ell},$$
where
\[
\ell:=\zeta_d-\frac{\alpha}{4}\kappa+\frac{\alpha}{2}\kappa_d+\frac{\alpha}{2}d
\]
As in case (i), $\sum_{n\ge 0} n! \| f_n(\cdot,\cdot,t,x)\|^2_{\mathcal{H}^{\otimes n}}$ converges if $\ell>-1/2$. Then using the definition of $\zeta_d$ and $\kappa_d$ in (4.2), (4.3) of \cite{HuHu15} for $1/2<\alpha<1$ and \eqref{zeta2}, \eqref{kappa2} for $1<\alpha<2$, we have
$$\ell>-1/2\iff\kappa< 4-2/\alpha.$$
This finishes the the proof of the theorem.
\end{proof}
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Quadrotor UAVs are being utilized for various missions such as Mars surface exploration, search and rescue, and payload transportation~\cite{kumargrasp2013,kim2013grasping,gooddaewontaeyoungacc14} due to their simple structure and outstanding capabilities. It is very important to implement a robust controller which can handle uncertainties and disturbances to ensure the safety during mission. Different sensors utilized for controlling purposes commonly provide noisy measurements, which can cause instability and may result in the failure of the mission. Also, there are some states, such as translational velocity, that cannot be measured directly. Furthermore, there are cases where each sensor onboard may fail. Thus, a filter or estimator is required in real-time flight to ensure the safety from noisy measurements.
The critical issue in designing controllers and estimators for quadrotors is that they are mostly based on local coordinates. Some developments and estimation derivations are demonstrated at~\cite{05983144, 07347700,07364907,07361930} based on Euler angles. They involve complicated expressions for trigonometric functions, and they exhibit singularities in representing quadrotor attitudes, thereby restricting their ability to achieve complex rotational maneuvers significantly. Furthermore, most of the studies in the existing literature do not consider the coupling effect between translational and rotational dynamics explicitly, so the estimation process and controller design are presented for only attitude of the quadrotor~\cite{05649111,06390926}.
On the other hand, this issue restricts the researchers to design and introduce an estimator that can perform in situation where an onboard sensor fail to work. For instance, in a GPS denied environment, where there is no direct measurements are available for the position and translational velocities, estimator fails to provide estimations since the translational and rotational dynamics are not coupled. A quaternion-based Kalman filter for real-time pose estimation was shown in~\cite{07053092}. Quaternions do not have singularities but, as the three-sphere double-covers the special orthogonal group, one attitude may be represented by two antipodal points on the three-sphere. This ambiguity should be carefully resolved in quaternion-based attitude control systems and estimator, otherwise they may exhibit unwinding, where a rigid body unnecessarily rotates through a large angle even if the initial attitude error is small~\cite{BhaBerSCL00}. References \cite{06713891,07364907} provide a Kalman filter based on Euler-angles for attitude and position control of the quadrotors without experimental results. Kalman filters may not work properly in a real-time experimental testbed due to sensitivity and several failure situations. It is very important to perform and provide experiments to validate the numerical and analytical solutions.
Recently, the dynamics of a quadrotor UAV is globally expressed on the special Euclidean group, $\ensuremath{\mathsf{SE(3)}}$, and nonlinear control systems are developed to track outputs of several flight modes and complicated models for autonomous payload transportation with a large number of degrees of freedom~\cite{farhadacc15,IJCASPAPERfarhad14,farhadthesisphd}. Several aggressive maneuvers of a quadrotor UAV are demonstrated based on a hybrid control architecture. As they are directly developed on the special Euclidean group, complexities, singularities, and ambiguities associated with minimal attitude representations or quaternions are completely avoided. In this paper, the geometric nonlinear controller presented in the prior work of the authors in~\cite{Farhad2013,farhadASME15} is utilized with an EKF, developed for the closed loop system on $\ensuremath{\mathsf{SE(3)}}$. A coordinate-free from of linearization is performed for the closed loop system to be used in the EKF.
In short, new contributions and the unique features of the dynamics model, control system, and the extended kalman filter proposed in this paper compared with other studies are as follows: (i) it is developed for the full dynamic model of a quadrotor UAVs on $\ensuremath{\mathsf{SE(3)}}$, including the coupling effects between the translational dynamics and the rotational dynamics on a nonlinear manifold, (ii) the control systems are developed directly on the nonlinear configuration manifold in a coordinate-free fashion in the presence of unstructured uncertainties in both rotational and translational dynamics, (iii) a precise linearization for closed loop system and an extended kalman filter for closed loop system developed on $\ensuremath{\mathsf{SE(3)}}$ to estimate the unmeasured states and improve the noisy measurements. Thus, singularities of local parameterization are completely avoided to generate agile maneuvers in a uniform way, (iv) the proposed algorithm is validated with numerical simulations along with real-time experiments with a quadrotor UAV.\\
This paper is organized as follows. A dynamic model is presented and problem is formulated at Section \ref{sec:DM}. Control systems are constructed at Sections \ref{sec:control} and extended kalman filter developments are presented in \ref{sec:Kalman}, which are followed by numerical examples in Section \ref{sec:NS} and an experimental results in Section \ref{sec:EXP}.
\section{Quadrotor's Dynamical Model}\label{sec:DM}
Consider a quadrotor UAV model illustrated in \reffig{QM}. We choose an inertial reference frame $\{\vec e_1,\vec e_2,\vec e_3\}$ and a body-fixed frame $\{\vec b_1,\vec b_2,\vec b_3\}$. The origin of the body-fixed frame is located at the center of mass of this vehicle. The first and the second axes of the body-fixed frame, $\vec b_1,\vec b_2$, lie in the plane defined by the centers of the four rotors.
The configuration of this quadrotor UAV is defined by the location of the center of mass and the attitude with respect to the inertial frame. Therefore, the configuration manifold is the special Euclidean group $\ensuremath{\mathsf{SE(3)}}$, which is the semi-direct product of $\Re^3$ and the special orthogonal group $\ensuremath{\mathsf{SO(3)}}=\{R\in\Re^{3\times 3}\,|\, R^TR=I,\, \det{R}=1\}$.
The mass and the inertial matrix of a quadrotor UAV are denoted by $m\in\Re$ and $J\in\Re^{3\times 3}$. Its attitude, angular velocity, position, and velocity are defined by $R\in\ensuremath{\mathsf{SO(3)}}$, $\Omega,x,v\in\Re^3$, respectively, where the rotation matrix $R$ represents the linear transformation of a vector from the body-fixed frame to the inertial frame and the angular velocity $\Omega$ is represented with respect to the body-fixed frame. The distance between the center of mass to the center of each rotor is $d\in\Re$, and the $i$-th rotor generates a thrust $f_i$ and a reaction torque $\tau_i$ along $-\vec b_3$ for $1\leq i \leq 4$. The magnitude of the total thrust and the total moment in the body-fixed frame are denoted by $f\in\Re$, $M\in\Re^3$, respectively.
\begin{figure}[h]
\setlength{\unitlength}{0.8\columnwidth}\footnotesize
\centerline{
\begin{picture}(1.2,0.91)(0,0)
\put(0,0){\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{Figures/fig1.pdf}}
\put(0.2,0.23){\shortstack[c]{$\vec e_1$}}
\put(0.17,0.08){\shortstack[c]{$\vec e_2$}}
\put(0.02,0.0){\shortstack[c]{$\vec e_3$}}
\put(1.13,0.66){\shortstack[c]{$\vec b_1$}}
\put(0.85,0.3){\shortstack[c]{$\vec b_2$}}
\put(0.61,0.34){\shortstack[c]{$\vec b_3$}}
\put(0.92,0.8){\shortstack[c]{$f_1$}}
\put(0.58,0.86){\shortstack[c]{$f_2$}}
\put(0.52,0.68){\shortstack[c]{$f_3$}}
\put(0.83,0.55){\shortstack[c]{$f_4$}}
\put(0.35,0.41){\shortstack[c]{$x$}}
\end{picture}}
\caption{Quadrotor model}\label{fig:QM}
\end{figure}
By the definition of the rotation matrix $R\in\ensuremath{\mathsf{SO(3)}}$, the direction of the $i$-th body-fixed axis $\vec b_i$ is given by $Re_i$ in the inertial frame, where $e_1=[1;0;0],e_2=[0;1;0],e_3=[0;0;1]\in\Re^3$. Therefore, the total thrust vector is given by $-fRe_3\in\Re^3$ in the inertial frame. In this paper, the thrust magnitude $f\in\Re$ and the moment vector $M\in\Re^3$ are viewed as control inputs. The corresponding equations of motion are given by
\begin{gather}
\dot x = v,\label{eqn:EL1}\\
m \dot v = mge_3 - f R e_3 + \Delta_x,\label{eqn:EL2}\\
\dot R = R\hat\Omega,\label{eqn:EL3}\\
J\dot \Omega + \Omega\times J\Omega = M + \Delta_R,\label{eqn:EL4}
\end{gather}
where the \textit{hat map} $\hat\cdot:\Re^3\rightarrow\ensuremath{\mathsf{SO(3)}}$ is defined by the condition that $\hat x y=x\times y$ for all $x,y\in\Re^3$. This identifies the Lie algebra $\ensuremath{\mathsf{SO(3)}}$ with $\Re^3$ using the vector cross product in $\Re^3$. The inverse of the hat map is denoted by the \textit{vee} map, $\vee:\ensuremath{\mathsf{SO(3)}}\rightarrow\Re^3$. Throughout this paper, the two-norm of a matrix $A$ is denoted by $\|A\|$. The standard dot product in $\Re^n$ is denoted by $\cdot$, i.e., $x\cdot y =x^Ty$ for any $x,y\in\Re^n$. Unstructured, but fixed uncertainties in the translational dynamics and the rotational dynamics of a quadrotor UAV are denoted by $\Delta_x$ and $\Delta_R\in\Re^3$, respectively.
\section{Geometric Nonlinear Controller}\label{sec:control}
Since the quadrotor UAV has four inputs, it is possible to achieve asymptotic output tracking for at most four quadrotor UAV outputs. The quadrotor UAV has three translational and three rotational degrees of freedom; it is not possible to achieve asymptotic output tracking of both attitude and position of the quadrotor UAV. This motivates us to introduce two flight modes, namely (1) an attitude controlled flight mode, and (2) a position controlled flight mode. While a quadrotor UAV is under-actuated, a complex flight maneuver can be defined by specifying a concatenation of flight modes together with conditions for switching between them.
\subsection{Attitude Tracking Errors}
Suppose that a smooth attitude command $R_d(t)\in\ensuremath{\mathsf{SO(3)}}$ satisfying the following kinematic equation is given:
\begin{align}
\dot R_d = R_d \hat\Omega_d,
\end{align}
where $\Omega_d(t)\in\Re^3$ is the desired angular velocity, which is assumed to be uniformly bounded. We first define errors associated with the attitude dynamics as follows~\cite{BulLew05,LeeITCST13}.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:1}
For a given tracking command $(R_d,\Omega_d)$, and the current attitude and angular velocity $(R,\Omega)$, we define an attitude error function $\Psi:\ensuremath{\mathsf{SO(3)}}\times\ensuremath{\mathsf{SO(3)}}\rightarrow\Re$, an attitude error vector $e_R\in\Re^3$, and an angular velocity error vector $e_\Omega\in \Re^3$ as follows~\cite{LeeITCST13}:
\begin{gather}
\Psi (R,R_d) = \frac{1}{2}\tr{I-R_d^TR},\label{eqn:psii}\\
e_R =\frac{1}{2} (R_d^TR-R^TR_d)^\vee,\label{eqn:errr}\\
e_\Omega = \Omega - R^T R_d\Omega_d\label{eqn:eomega}.
\end{gather}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
See \cite{farhadASME15}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Attitude Tracking Controller}
We now introduce a nonlinear controller for the attitude controlled flight mode:
\begin{align}
M & = -k_R e_R -k_\Omega e_\Omega -k_I e_I\nonumber\\
&\qquad +(R^TR_d\Omega_d)^\wedge J R^T R_d \Omega_d + J R^T R_d\dot\Omega_d,\label{eqn:aM}\\
e_I & = \int_0^t e_\Omega(\tau)+ c_2e_R(\tau)d\tau,\label{eqn:eI}
\end{align}
where $k_R,k_\Omega,k_I,c_2$ are positive constants. The control moment is composed of proportional, derivative, and integral terms, augmented with additional terms to cancel out the angular acceleration caused by the desired angular velocity. Unlike common integral control terms where the attitude error is integrated only, here the angular velocity error is also integrated at \refeqn{eI}. This unique term is required to show exponential stability in the presence of the disturbance $\Delta_R$ in the subsequent analysis.
\begin{prop}{(Attitude Controlled Flight Mode)}\label{prop:Att}
Consider the control moment $M$ defined in \refeqn{aM}. For positive constants $k_R,k_\Omega$, the zero equilibrium of tracking errors and the estimation errors is stable in the sense of Lyapunov, and $e_R,e_\Omega\rightarrow 0$ as $t\rightarrow\infty$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
See \cite{farhadASME15}.
\end{proof}
While these results are developed for the attitude dynamics of a quadrotor UAV, they can be applied to the attitude dynamics of any rigid body. Nonlinear adaptive controllers have been developed for attitude stabilization in terms of modified Rodriguez parameters~\cite{SubJAS04} and quaternions~\cite{SubAkeJGCD04}, and for attitude tracking in terms of Euler-angles~\cite{ShoJuaPACC02}. The proposed tracking control system is developed on $\ensuremath{\mathsf{SO(3)}}$, therefore it avoids singularities of Euler-angles and Rodriguez parameters, as well as unwinding of quaternions.
\subsection{Position Tracking Errors}
We introduce a nonlinear controller for the position controlled flight mode in this section. Suppose that an arbitrary smooth position tracking command $x_d (t) \in \Re^3$ is given. The position tracking errors for the position and the velocity are given by:
\begin{align}
e_x = x - x_d,\quad
e_v = \dot e_x = v - \dot x_d.
\end{align}
Similar with \refeqn{eI}, an integral control term for the position tracking controller is defined as
\begin{align}
e_i = \int_0^t e_v(\tau) + c_1 e_x (\tau) d\tau,
\end{align}
for a positive constant $c_1$ specified later. For a positive constant $\sigma\in\Re$, a saturation function $\mathrm{sat}_\sigma:\Re\rightarrow [-\sigma,\sigma]$ is introduced as
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{sat}_\sigma(y) = \begin{cases}
\sigma & \mbox{if } y >\sigma\\
y & \mbox{if } -\sigma \leq y \leq\sigma\\
-\sigma & \mbox{if } y <-\sigma\\
\end{cases}.
\end{align*}
If the input is a vector $y\in\Re^n$, then the above saturation function is applied element by element to define a saturation function $\mathrm{sat}_\sigma(y):\Re^n\rightarrow [-\sigma,\sigma]^n$ for a vector.
In the position controlled tracking mode, the attitude dynamics is controlled to follow the computed attitude $R_c(t)\in\ensuremath{\mathsf{SO(3)}}$ and the computed angular velocity $\Omega_c(t)$ defined as
\begin{align}
R_c=[ b_{1_c};\, b_{3_c}\times b_{1_c};\, b_{3_c}],\quad \hat\Omega_c = R_c^T \dot R_c\label{eqn:RdWc},
\end{align}
where $b_{3_c}\in\ensuremath{\mathsf{S}}^2$ is given by
\begin{align}
b_{3_c} = -\frac{-k_x e_x - k_v e_v -k_i\mathrm{sat}_\sigma(e_i) - mg e_3 +m\ddot x_d}{\norm{-k_x e_x - k_v e_v -k_i\mathrm{sat}_\sigma(e_i)- mg e_3 + m\ddot x_d}},\label{eqn:Rd3}
\end{align}
for positive constants $k_x,k_v,k_i,\sigma$. The unit vector $b_{1_c}\in\ensuremath{\mathsf{S}}^2$ is selected to be orthogonal to $b_{3_c}$, thereby guaranteeing that $R_c\in\ensuremath{\mathsf{SO(3)}}$. It can be chosen to specify the desired heading direction, and the detailed procedure to select $b_{1c}$ is described later at Section \ref{sec:b1c}.
\subsection{Position Tracking Controller}
The nonlinear controller for the position controlled flight mode, described by control expressions for the thrust magnitude and the moment vector, are:
\begin{align}
f & = ( k_x e_x + k_v e_v +k_i\mathrm{sat}_\sigma(e_i)+ mg e_3-m\ddot x_d)\cdot Re_3,\label{eqn:f}\\
M & = -k_R e_R -k_\Omega e_\Omega -k_I e_I\nonumber\\
&\qquad +(R^TR_c\Omega_c)^\wedge J R^T R_c \Omega_c + J R^T R_c\dot\Omega_c.\label{eqn:M}
\end{align}
The nonlinear controller given by Eq.~\refeqn{f}, \refeqn{M} can be given a backstepping interpretation. The computed attitude $R_c$ given in Eq.~\refeqn{RdWc} is selected so that the thrust axis $-b_3$ of the quadrotor UAV tracks the computed direction given by $-b_{3_c}$ in \refeqn{Rd3}, which is a direction of the thrust vector that achieves position tracking. The moment expression \refeqn{M} causes the attitude of the quadrotor UAV to asymptotically track $R_c$ and the thrust magnitude expression \refeqn{f} achieves asymptotic position tracking.
\begin{prop}{(Position Controlled Flight Mode)}\label{prop:Pos}
Suppose that the initial conditions satisfy
\begin{align}\label{eqn:Psi0}
\Psi(R(0),R_c(0)) < \psi_1 < 1,
\end{align}
for positive constant $\psi_1$. Consider the control inputs $f,M$ defined in \refeqn{f}-\refeqn{M}.
For positive constants $k_x,k_v$, the zero equilibrium of the tracking errors and the estimation errors is stable in the sense of Lyapunov and all of the tracking error variables asymptotically converge to zero. Also, the estimation errors are uniformly bounded.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
See \cite{farhadASME15}.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}{(Position Controlled Flight Mode with a Larger Initial Attitude Error)}\label{prop:Pos2}
Suppose that the initial conditions satisfy
\begin{gather}
1\leq \Psi(R(0),R_c(0)) < 2\label{eqn:eRb3},\quad \|e_x(0)\| < e_{x_{\max}},
\end{gather}
for a constant $e_{x_{\max}}$. Consider the control inputs $f,M$ defined in \refeqn{f}-\refeqn{M}, where the control parameters satisfy \refeqn{Psi0} for a positive constant $\psi_1<1$. Then the zero equilibrium of the tracking errors is attractive, i.e., $e_x,e_v,e_R,e_\Omega\rightarrow 0$ as $t\rightarrow\infty$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
See \cite{farhadASME15}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Direction of the First Body-Fixed Axis}\label{sec:b1c}
As described above, the construction of the orthogonal matrix $R_c$ involves having its third column $b_{3_c}$ specified by \refeqn{Rd3}, and its first column $b_{1_c}$ is arbitrarily chosen to be orthogonal to the third column, which corresponds to a one-dimensional degree of choice. By choosing $b_{1_c}$ properly, we constrain the asymptotic direction of the first body-fixed axis. This can be used to specify the heading direction of a quadrotor UAV in the horizontal plane~\cite{LeeLeoAJC13}.
\section{Extended Kalman Filter (EKF)}\label{sec:Kalman}
The Kalman Filter is an algorithm which utilizes a set of measurements observed over time while considering statistical noise, and generates estimates of uncertain variables that are more accurate and precise than those variables which are based on a single measurement. It contains of two general steps, prediction (or flow update), and the measurement update. It uses the prior knowledge of state along with the measurements to predict and update the state variables. The EKF is motivated by linearizing the nonlinear system considering the control input as the closed loop system. In the following, we presented the nonlinear equations used in the EKF derivations, along with a precise linearization on $\ensuremath{\mathsf{SE(3)}}$, followed by the derivations for EKF implementation on the system.
\subsection{Flow Update}
The equations of motion, given by \refeqn{EL1}-\refeqn{EL4}, can be rearranged as
\begin{align}\label{eqn:NLEM}
\dot{\chi}=f(\chi,u)+w,
\end{align}
where the state vector $\chi\in\Re^{24\times1}$ is given by
\begin{align}
\chi=[x,v,R,\Omega,e_{i1},e_{i1}]^{T},
\end{align}
and the process noise is denoted by $w\in\Re^{24}$. Assume the covariance of the process noise is $Q=\text{E}[ww^{T}]\in\Re^{24\times 24}$. In the above nonlinear equation of motion, the translational and rotational dynamics are coupled as rotation matrix $R$ and angular velocity $\Omega$ directly appear in the dynamics of the rigid body.
Let the measurement $z\in\Re^{24}$ be a nonlinear function of state
\begin{align}
z=h(\chi)+v,
\end{align}
where $v\in\Re^p$ denotes measurement noise with covariance $\mathcal R=\text{E}[vv^{T}]$.
Next, we show the linearized equations of motion. The key idea is to represent the infinitesimal variation of $R\in\ensuremath{\mathsf{SO(3)}}$ using the exponential map
\begin{align}
\delta R = \frac{d}{d\epsilon}\bigg|_{\epsilon = 0} R \exp (\epsilon \hat\eta) = R\hat\eta,\label{eqn:delR}
\end{align}
for $\eta\in\Re^3$. The unit vector $\frac{\eta}{\|\eta\|}$ corresponds to the axis of the rotation, expressed in the body-fixed frame, and $\norm{\eta}$ is the rotation angle.
Using this, we linearize the controlled equation of motion.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:linearizedcontroled}
Consider the controlled dynamical model presented in~\refeqn{EL1}, \refeqn{EL2}, \refeqn{EL3}, and \refeqn{EL4}, along with the control inputs presented in~\refeqn{f} and \refeqn{M}. The linearized equations of motion for the closed loop dynamics are given by
\begin{align}\label{eqn:EOMLin}
\delta\dot{\mathbf{x}}=A_{L}\delta\mathbf{x},
\end{align}
where $\delta$ represents an infinitesimal change of the state vector $\mathbf{x}\in\Re^{18\times1}$ given by
\begin{align}
\mathbf{x}=\begin{bmatrix}
{x},v,\eta,\Omega,{e}_{i1},{e}_{i2}
\end{bmatrix}^{T},\label{eqn:xb}
\end{align}
and $A_{L}\in\Re^{18\times 18}$ is given in details in the appendix.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix
\end{proof}
Next, we describe the proposed extended Kalman filter. Let $\bar{\;}$ denote an estimate of state and assume that the mean of the initial state are given by $\bar{\chi}_0$. The initial state for the linearized system, namely $\bar{\mathbf{x}}_0$ can be obtained from \refeqn{delR}, and suppose the variance of $\bar{\mathbf{x}}_0$ is given by $\mathcal{P}_0\in\Re^{18\times 18}$.
The extended Kalman filter is formulated in the discrete-time setting, and let subscript $k$ denote the value of a variable at the $k$-th time step. Also, superscripts $-$ and $+$ mean the a priori (before measurements) and a posteriori (after measurements) variables, respectively.
Runge-Kutta method~\cite{RungeKutta87} is utilized for \refeqn{NLEM} to propagate the mean from the current a posteriori estimate $\bar{\chi}_{k}^+$ to the next a priori estimate $\bar{\chi}_{k+1}^-$. The a priori state covariance uses the linearized matrix $A_{L_k}$,
\begin{align}
\mathcal{P}_{k+1}^- = A_{L_k} \mathcal{P}_k^+ A_{L_k}^T + \mathcal{Q}_k,\label{eqn:Pkpm}
\end{align}
where $A_{L_k}$ serves to reshape the covariance and $\mathcal{Q}_k$ is the added uncertainty along the propagation.
\subsection{Measurement Update}
The measurement matrix is linearized with respect to the state to obtain
\begin{align}
H_{k+1}=\frac{\partial h}{\partial \chi}\bigg|_{x=\bar{\chi}_{k+1}^-}\in\Re^{24\times 18},
\end{align}
where the derivative with respect to $R$ is taken by using \refeqn{delR}.
The predicted knowledge $(\bar{\chi}_{k+1}^-,\mathcal{P}_{k+1}^-)$ is converted into the reduced state $(\bar{\mathbf{x}}_{k+1}^-,\mathcal{P}_{k+1}^-)$ from \refeqn{delR} and \refeqn{xb}. Then, the measurement update provides a correction to obtain an \textit{a posteriori} estimate $(\bar{\mathbf{x}}_{k+1}^+,\mathcal{P}_{k+1}^+)$:
\begin{gather}
\mathcal{K}_{k+1} = \mathcal{P}_{k+1}^- H_{k+1}^T(H_{k+1} \mathcal{P}_{k+1}^- H_{k+1}^T + \mathcal{R}_{k+1})^{-1}\label{eqn:K}\\
\bar \mathbf{x}^+_{k+1} = \bar \mathbf{x}^-_{k+1} + \mathcal{K}_{k+1} ( \mathbf{z}_{k+1}-h(\bar \mathbf{x}^-_{k+1})),\label{eqn:xhatp}\\
\mathcal{P}^+_{k+1} = (I-\mathcal{K}_{k+1} H_{k+1} )\mathcal{P}^{-}_{k+1},\label{eqn:Pp}
\end{gather}
where the updated state $\bar \mathbf{x}^+_{k+1}$ takes both the predicted process and measurement into account and the matrix $\mathcal{K}_{k+1}$ is referred to as \textit{Kalman gain} at the $(k+1)$-th time step. Also, $\mathbf{z}_{k+1}$ is the measurement vector obtained from the reference attitude using Eq.~\refeqn{delR}. The key idea of implementing the attitude in the measurement update, is that the difference between the predicted attitude and the measured attitude is given by $\eta$ in Eq.~\refeqn{xhatp} for $\mathbf{z}_{k+1}$. Finally, the $\bar \chi_{k+1}^+$ is obtained from $\bar \mathbf{x}^+_{k+1}$ using Eq.~\refeqn{delR}.
\section{Numerical Simulations}\label{sec:NS}
We demonstrate the desirable properties of the proposed extended kalman filter with two numerical examples. Consider the geometric nonlinear control system designed in previous section, we need to provide the controller with state variables namely, position, velocity, attitude and angular velocity of the quadrotor. We implement the extended kalman filter to estimate the un-measured states and also improve the noisy measurements from sensors. For both examples, properties of the quadrotor are chosen as
\begin{gather}
m=0.755\,\mathrm{kg},\; J=\mathrm{diag}[0.557,\,0.557,\,1.05]\times 10^{-2}\,\mathrm{kgm^2},\nonumber
\end{gather}
and controller parameters are selected as follows: $k_x=13.84$, $k_v=4.84$, ${k_R}=0.67$, ${k_\Omega}= 0.11$, $k_{I}=0.01$, $B_{5}=B_{6}=0.1$.
The following two fixed disturbances are included in this numerical example.
\begin{gather*}
\Delta_R=[0.01,-0.02,0.01]^T,\\
\Delta_x=[-0.02,0.01,-0.03]^T.
\end{gather*}
The initial conditions for the quadrotor are given by $x(0)=0_{3\times 1}$, $\dot{x}(0)=0_{3\times 1}$, $R(0)=I_{3\times 3}$, and $\Omega(0)=0_{3\times 1}$. Initial estimates of the attitude and angular velocity are given by $\bar{R}(0)=I_{3\times 3}$ and $\bar{\Omega}(0)=[0.1,-0.2,0.1]^{T}$ respectively for both examples.
\subsection{\textbf{Example 1- Estimating the translational velocity with large initial error and high-noisy measurements}}
In this example, we investigate a case where noisy measurements on position, attitude and angular velocity are available via sensors and we wish to estimate the translational velocity while improving the noisy measurements. The measurements noise covariance is chosen as $\mathcal{R}=1.0$ with process noise of $\mathcal{Q}=0.01$. Also the initial estimation values are chosen as $\bar{x}(0)=\bar{v}(0)=[4,4,-3]^{T}$ to have large initial estimation errors. Desired trajectory is chosen to be a Lissajous curve as
\begin{gather*}
x_d(t) =[\sin(t)+\frac{\pi}{2},\; \sin(2t),\; -0.5]^{T},\;b_{1d}=[1,\; 0,\; 0]^{T}.
\end{gather*}
and geometric nonlinear controller is employed along with proposed EKF to track the above desired trajectory. The observation matrix, $H\in\Re^{9\times18}$ utilized in this example is
\begin{align*}
H=\begin{bmatrix}
I_{3}&0&0&0&0&0\\
0&0&I_{3}&0&0&0\\
0&0&0&I_{3}&0&0
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{align*}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{
\subfigure[Quadrotor position, $x$, $\hat{x}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman4_noisy/x4}\label{fig:sim_x4}}
\subfigure[$\Omega_{1}$, $\hat{\Omega}_{1}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman4_noisy/W1_4}\label{fig:sim_W14}}}\centerline{
\subfigure[Quadrotor velocity, $v$, $\hat{v}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman4_noisy/v4}\label{fig:sim_v4}}
\subfigure[$\Omega_{2}$, $\hat{\Omega}_{2}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman4_noisy/W2_4}\label{fig:sim_W24}}}\centerline{
\subfigure[3D view, $x$, $\hat{x}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman4_noisy/3D.jpg}\label{fig:eq4}}
\subfigure[$\Omega_{3}$, $\hat{\Omega}_{3}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman4_noisy/W3_4}\label{fig:sim_W34}}}\centerline{
\subfigure[Position error]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman4_noisy/x_error4}\label{fig:errorsx4}}
\subfigure[Velocity error]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman4_noisy/v_error4}\label{fig:errorsv4}}
}
\caption{EKF performance in the first numerical example (dotted: EKF, dashed: desired, solid: noisy measurements). A short animation is also available at \href{https://youtu.be/F4Vntws97RU}{https://youtu.be/F4Vntws97RU}}\label{fig:sim1}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:sim1} illustrates the performance of the proposed controller and EKF in this numerical simulation. Estimated position, $\bar{x}$ and angular velocity, $\Omega$ of the quadrotor is presented along with the noisy measurements at Figures \ref{fig:sim_x4}, \ref{fig:sim_W14}, \ref{fig:sim_W24}, and \ref{fig:sim_W34} respectively. Desired translational velocity and the estimated velocity outputted from proposed EKF is plotted at Figure \ref{fig:sim_v4} which shows s satisfactory estimate during the maneuver. Figures \ref{fig:errorsx4} and \ref{fig:errorsv4} are the position and velocity estimation errors calculated from the following expressions.
\begin{gather*}
\bar{e}_{x}=\bar{x}-x_{d},\;\bar{e}_{v}=\bar{v}-v_{d}.
\end{gather*}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{
\subfigure[$R_{11}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman4_noisy/R11_4}\label{fig:sim_R11_4}}\hspace{-0.3cm}
\subfigure[$R_{12}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman4_noisy/R12_4}\label{fig:sim_R11_4}}\hspace{-0.3cm}
\subfigure[$R_{13}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman4_noisy/R13_4}\label{fig:sim_R11_4}}}\centerline{
\subfigure[$R_{21}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman4_noisy/R21_4}\label{fig:sim_R11_4}}\hspace{-0.3cm}
\subfigure[$R_{22}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman4_noisy/R22_4}\label{fig:sim_R11_4}}\hspace{-0.3cm}
\subfigure[$R_{23}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman4_noisy/R23_4}\label{fig:sim_R11_4}}}\centerline{
\subfigure[$R_{31}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman4_noisy/R31_4}\label{fig:sim_R11_4}} \hspace{-0.3cm}
\subfigure[$R_{32}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman4_noisy/R32_4}\label{fig:sim_R11_4}}\hspace{-0.3cm}
\subfigure[$R_{33}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman4_noisy/R33_4}\label{fig:sim_R11_4}}
}
\caption{EKF performance in the first numerical example for quadrotor rotation matrix (dotted: EKF, dashed: desired, solid: noisy measurements). A short animation is also available at \href{https://youtu.be/Dfi3IljfS-U}{https://youtu.be/Dfi3IljfS-U}}\label{fig:sim1R}
\end{figure}
We have also illustrated the attitude of the quadrotor as a rotation matrix in Figure \ref{fig:sim1R}. Noisy measurement data from sensor are presented along with the estimated attitude obtained from the proposed EKF and the desired attitude, $R_{d}$.
\subsection{\textbf{Example 2- GPS denied environment}}
Assume that we receive measurements for attitude and angular velocity from an (Inertial Measurement Unit), IMU installed onboard and there is no sensor or measurements available for position and translational velocity for the quadrotor. In other words, we present a scenario where GPS systems fails to work. In this case our measurement vector, $z\in\Re^3\times\ensuremath{\mathsf{SO(3)}}$ consists of the angular velocity and the gravitational acceleration. The measurements noise covariance is chosen as $\mathcal{R}=0.1$ with process noise of $\mathcal{Q}=0.001$ and initial estimates of the state variables are given by $\bar{x}(0)=[0.2,-0.5,-0.5]^{T}$ and $\bar{{v}}(0)=[0.1,-0.1,-0.1]^{T}$. Desired trajectory is chosen to be an Elliptic Helix as
\begin{gather*}
x_d(t) =[0.4t,\; a\sin(wt),\; -b\cos(wt)]^{T},\nonumber\\
b_{1d}=[\cos(wt),\; \sin(wt),\; 0]^{T},
\end{gather*}
where constants $a=0.4$, $b=0.6$, $w=\pi$ and chosen particularly with several rotations of the quadrotor to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed controller and extended kalman filter on $\ensuremath{\mathsf{SE(3)}}$ which does not concerns with singularities and ambiguities as seen in derivations with Euler angles or quaternions.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{
\subfigure[Quadrotor position, $x$, $\hat{x}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman2/x2}\label{fig:sim_x}}
\subfigure[$\Omega_{1}$, $\hat{\Omega}_{1}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman2/W1_2}\label{fig:sim_W1}}}\centerline{
\subfigure[Quadrotor velocity, $v$, $\hat{v}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman2/v2}\label{fig:sim_v}}
\subfigure[$\Omega_{2}$, $\hat{\Omega}_{2}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman2/W2_2}\label{fig:sim_W2}}}\centerline{
\subfigure[3D view, $x$, $\hat{x}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman2/3D.jpg}\label{fig:eq}}
\subfigure[$\Omega_{3}$, $\hat{\Omega}_{3}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman2/W3_2}\label{fig:sim_W3}}}\centerline{
\subfigure[Position error]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman2/x2_error}\label{fig:errorsx}}
\subfigure[Velocity error]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Kalman2/v2_error}\label{fig:errorsv}}
}
\caption{EKF performance in the second numerical example (dotted: EKF, dashed: desired, solid: noisy measurements). A short animation is also available at \href{https://youtu.be/F4Vntws97RU}{https://youtu.be/F4Vntws97RU}}\label{fig:sim2}
\end{figure}
Figures \ref{fig:sim_x} and \ref{fig:sim_v} illustrate the position and velocity of the quadrotor estimated with EKF and plotted verse the true path respectively. As it is clear from this figure, although we did not have measurements on position and translational velocity, EKF was able to estimate this values significantly. Position and velocity estimation errors are also presented in Figures \ref{fig:errorsx} and \ref{fig:errorsv} respectively. \\
Figures \ref{fig:sim_W1}, \ref{fig:sim_W2}, and \ref{fig:sim_W3} illustrate the angular velocity of the quadrotor during this maneuver. Noisy measurement data and the estimated value from EKF are presented along with the true path to show the performance and effectiveness of the EKF to reduce the error and improve noisy measurements. Position and velocity estimation errors for this example are presented in Figures \ref{fig:errorsx} and \ref{fig:errorsv}.
\section{Experimental Results}\label{sec:EXP}
The quadrotor UAV developed at the flight dynamics and control laboratory at the George Washington University is shown at Figure~\ref{fig:Quad}. We developed an accurate CAD model as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:QM} to identify several parameters of the quadrotor, such as moment of inertia and center of mass. Furthermore, a precise rotor calibration is performed for each rotor, with a custom-made thrust stand as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:stand} to determine the relation between the command in the motor speed controller and the actual thrust. For various values of motor speed commands, the corresponding thrust is measured, and those data are fitted with a second order polynomial.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{
\subfigure[Hardware configuration]{
\setlength{\unitlength}{0.1\columnwidth}\scriptsize
\begin{picture}(7,4)(0,0)
\put(0,0){\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{Figures/Quad.jpg}}
\put(1.95,3.2){\shortstack[c]{OMAP 600MHz\\Processor}}
\put(2.3,0){\shortstack[c]{Attitude sensor\\3DM-GX3\\ via UART}}
\put(0.85,1.4){\shortstack[c]{BLDC Motor\\ via I2C}}
\put(0.1,2.5){\shortstack[c]{Safety Switch\\XBee RF}}
\put(4.3,3.2){\shortstack[c]{WIFI to\\Ground Station}}
\put(5,2.0){\shortstack[c]{LiPo Battery\\11.1V, 2200mAh}}
\end{picture}\label{fig:Quad}}
\subfigure[Motor calibration setup]{
\includegraphics[width=0.25\columnwidth]{Figures/stand}\label{fig:stand}}
}
\caption{Hardware development for a quadrotor UAV}
\end{figure}
Angular velocity and attitude are measured from inertial measurement unit (IMU). Position of the UAV is measured from motion capture system (Vicon). Ground computing system receives the Vicon data and send it to the UAV via XBee. The Gumstix is adopted as micro computing unit on the UAV. A multi-threaded C/C++ software developed for autonomous control of the quadrotor. It has two main threads, namely Vicon thread, control and estimation thread. The Vicon thread receives the Vicon measurement. In second thread, it receives the IMU measurement, estimates the velocity with EKF and handles the control outputs. Figures \ref{fig:exp} presents the experimental results for a maneuver where quadrotor autonomously tracks the following desired trajectory which is defined as a Lissajous curve
\begin{align*}
x_d (t) = [\sin(t)+\frac{\pi}{2},\;\sin 2(t),\; -0.3].
\end{align*}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{
\subfigure[$x$, $x_{d}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Experiment/3D}\label{fig:exp_x}}
\subfigure[$\Psi$, $e_{R}$, $e_{\Omega}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Experiment/errors}\label{fig:exp_error}}}\centerline{
\subfigure[$\frac{dx_{1}}{dt}$, $v_{d_{1}}$, $\hat{v}_{1}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Experiment/v1}\label{fig:exp_v1}}
\subfigure[$\Omega_{1}$, $\hat{\Omega}_{1}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Experiment/W1}\label{fig:exp_W1}}}\centerline{
\subfigure[$\frac{dx_{2}}{dt}$, $v_{d_{1}}$, $\hat{v}_{2}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Experiment/v2}\label{fig:exp_v2}}
\subfigure[$\Omega_{2}$, $\hat{\Omega}_{2}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Experiment/W2}\label{fig:exp_W2}}}\centerline{
\subfigure[$\frac{dx_{3}}{dt}$, $v_{d_{1}}$, $\hat{v}_{3}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Experiment/v3}\label{fig:exp_v3}}
\subfigure[$\Omega_{3}$, $\hat{\Omega}_{3}$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Figures/Experiment/W3}\label{fig:exp_W3}}
}
\caption{EKF performance in real-time experiment (dotted: EKF, dashed: desired, solid: noisy measurements).}\label{fig:exp}
\end{figure}
Quadrotor parameters are same as presented in the numerical simulations section and controller gains are tuned to $k_{x}=4.0$, $k_{v}=2.0$, $k_{R}=0.62$, $k_{\Omega}=0.15$, and $k_{I}=0.1$ with $c_{1}=c_{2}=0.1$. The observation matrix, $H\in\Re^{9\times18}$ utilized in this example same as one presented in the first numerical simulation and so for measurement state, $\mathbf{z}_{k}\in\Re^{9\times1}$.
Figure \ref{fig:exp_x} illustrates the position of the quadrotor following the desired trajectory obtained from the experiment. The quadrotor starts from the ground, increases its altitude to get to $z_3=-0.3\ \mathrm{m}$, and starts following the trajectory. Quadrotor attitude errors, $\Psi$, $e_{R}$, and angular velocity error, $e_{\Omega}$, which are previously defined in Eq. \refeqn{psii}, \refeqn{errr}, and \refeqn{eomega}, respectively, are presented in Figure \ref{fig:exp_error}, which illustrate the performance of the geometric nonlinear controller during the autonomous trajectory tracking in this test.
Figures \ref{fig:exp_v1}, \ref{fig:exp_v2}, and \ref{fig:exp_v3} illustrate the estimated velocity obtained form EKF namely, $\hat{v}$ and plotted verse the desired velocity, $v_{d}$. We have also presented the integrated velocity, $\frac{dx}{dt}$ in this figure by taking direct derivative from the position measurements to magnify the performance of the filter. Figures \ref{fig:exp_W1}, \ref{fig:exp_W2}, and \ref{fig:exp_W3} are also present the angular velocity measurements from IMU, and the estimated angular velocity from the EKF, $\hat{\Omega}$. As it is clear from the figures, EKF is able to improve the measurement noises significantly and provide more smoother data for real-time experimentation. The effect of noise from velocity measurements is substantially reduced with the extended Kalman filter, while avoiding any lagging issues common with low-pass filtering.
\section{CONCLUSIONS}
An extensive Extended Kalman Filter on $\ensuremath{\mathsf{SE(3)}}$ for full nonlinear dynamic model of quadrotor UAV employing geometric nonlinear controller presented in this paper. Linearization performed considering all the coupling effects between translational and rotational dynamics to provide an precise estimation characteristics in different scenarios of sensor failure or receiving highly noised measurements. These results validated by numerical simulations followed by experimental results for velocity estimation during an autonomous trajectory tracking.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
\addcontentsline{toc}{section}{Acknowledgment}
The authors would like to acknowledge Evan Kaufman for his helpful comments that served to improve the clarity of the discussion and writing of this paper.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
In recent years there have been an increasing interest in a singular phenomenon which is enhancement of diffusion by weak disorder~\cite{reimann2008weak,khoury2011weak,lindenberg2012weak,simon2013transport,salgado2014effective}. This phenomenon has been shown to occur in a system consisting of an ensemble of non-interacting overdamped particles moving on a weakly disordered periodic potential with a constant driving force in presence of Gaussian white noise~\cite{reimann2008weak}. Thereafter, it was found that the diffusion of particles in such kind of systems can become anomalous, both, superdiffusive and subdiffusive in a wide range of the parameter space~\cite{khoury2011weak}. On the other hand, in purely deterministic systems, i.e., in systems without noise fluctuations, the anomalous diffusion has also been found~\cite{kunz2003mechanical,denisov2010biased,denisov2010anomalous,salgado2013normal}. However, contrary to the systems with noise in which the anomalous phase is robust with respect to other parameters, in deterministic systems the anomalous phase emerge as a critical property~\cite{kunz2003mechanical,denisov2010biased,denisov2010anomalous,salgado2013normal}. This means that, for deterministic systems, one of the parameter should have a critical value (the driving constant force) in order for the system to exhibits the asymptotic anomalous behavior. These finding would suggest that the origin of the anomalous diffusion in the models presented in Ref.~\cite{khoury2011weak} could be due, besides to the long-range correlation of the disordered potential~\cite{khoury2011weak}, to the presence of noise. In this work we show that this is not necessarily the case. Indeed we introduce a simple model for deterministic diffusion which exhibits a transition from normal to anomalous diffusion as a function of a parameter. This model has significant differences with respect to previously proposed models for deterministic diffusion in disordered systems. Particularly, we found that in our model the anomalous phase does not emerge as a critical property, which means that we do not require a fine-tuning of the parameters to obtain anomalous diffusion. Moreover, we show that the anomalous behavior is robust with respect to a driving constant force. These findings thus provide a different mechanism leading to anomalous deterministic diffusion in disordered systems.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section~\ref{sec:model} we state the model for the disordered potential. In Section~\ref{sec:anomalous} we perform the calculations to obtain the diffusion coefficient when the normal diffusion occurs. We also obtain the diffusion exponent for the anomalous phase and we prove that the systems transits from anomalous superdiffusion to subdiffusion. In Section~\ref{sec:simulations} we test our findings with numerical simulations. Finally in Section~\ref{sec:conclusions} we give the conclusions of our work.
\section{Model}
\label{sec:model}
Let us consider an ensemble of non-interacting overdamped particles moving on a one-dimensional substrate. The equation of motion of each particle is given by
\begin{equation}
\gamma \frac{dx}{dt} = f(x) + F,
\label{eq:motion}
\end{equation}
where $f(x)$ is minus the gradient of a potential $V(x)$ and $F$ is constant driving force. We assume that $V(x)$ is a weakly disordered potential in the sense that it consists of some ``defects'' scattered along the substrate. In order to write an analytical expression for $V(x)$ let us introduce a function defined on a finite interval that will play the role of defect. Let $\varphi : [0,L] \to \mathbb{R}$ be a real-valued function to which we will refer to $\varphi$ as ``potential defect''. Here $L\in \mathbb{R}^+$ stands for the width of the defect. Let $\{ \ell_j \in \mathbb{R}^+ \}_{j\in\mathbb{Z}}$ be a sequence of non-negative numbers defined as follows,
\begin{equation}
\ell_{j} = \left\{ \begin{array}
{r@{\quad \mbox{ if } \quad}l}
\delta_{j/2} & j \ \mbox{is even } \\
L & j\ \mbox{is odd}, \\
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
where $\{ \delta_j \in \mathbb{R}^+ \}_{j\in\mathbb{Z}}$ is a set of independent and identically distributed random variables. Additionally let $L_n$ be defined as the partial sum of the $\ell_j$'s up to $n$ (we set $L_0 =0$),
\begin{equation}
L_n = \left\{ \begin{array}
{r@{\quad \mbox{ if } \quad}l}
\sum_{j=0}^n \ell_j & n > 0 \\
-\sum_{j=1}^{|n|} \ell_j& n<0, \\
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
Then, in terms of the above-defined quantities we can define the disordered potential $V(x)$ is defined as follows
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:random_potential}
V(x) = \left\{ \begin{array}
{r@{\quad \mbox{ if } \quad}l}
\varphi(x-L_{2n}) & L_{2n} \leq x<L_{2n+1} \\
0 & L_{2n+1} \leq x<L_{2n+2}. \\
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
This potential can be thought as a constant potential, $V(x)=0$, that has been ``contaminated'' with some defects, which are modeled through the potential profile $\varphi$. The distance between two consecutive defects is $\delta_j$, which is randomly chosen from a prescribed distribution, while the width of the defect is a constant $L$. In Figure~\ref{fig:potential} we can appreciate an schematic representation of a realization of this potential. Additionally, notice that the equation of motion allows two types of motion, namely, running and locked trajectories. The condition to have running solutions is that the driving constant for ce $F$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:motion} should be larger that the critical value $F_{\mathrm{c}}:=\sup_{x}\{|f(x)|\} = \sup_{x}\{|-\varphi^\prime(x)|\}$. On the other hand, to have locked trajectories we require that $F\leq F_{\mathrm{c}}$. In the following we will assume that the driving force $F$ is strictly above the critical value $F_{\mathrm{c}}$, i.e., $F > F_{\mathrm{c}} $, which means that every particle in the disordered potential moves always to the right and never gets stuck.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.35}{\includegraphics{fig_01ed}}
\end{center}
\caption{
Schematic representation of the potential model.
}
\label{fig:potential}
\end{figure}
In the following we will assume that every random variable $\delta_j$ has a heavy tailed distribution. Particularly, we will chose a probability density function $\rho(x)$ given by,
\begin{equation}
\label{heavy tailed dist}
\rho_\alpha (x) = \left\{ \begin{array}
{r@{\quad \mbox{ if } \quad}l}
\alpha x^{-\alpha -1} & x\geq 1 \\
0 & x < 1 \\
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
Notice that the larger distance between defects the fewer defects are present in the substrate. For $\alpha$ small, the distance between two successive defect are typically larger than the distance between two contiguous defects when $\alpha$ is large. Thus, we can interpret $\alpha$ as a parameter controlling the ``quantity'' of defects present in the substrate.
We are interested in knowing the asymptotic behavior of typical trajectories $X_t$ for large $t$. To this end we will made use of generalized limit theorems~\cite{gnedenko1968limit,feller1960introduction,chazottes2015fluctuations} which have been shown to be useful in calculating the asymptotic behavior of typical trajectories in disordered media~\cite{kotulski1995asymptotic,salgado2013normal,salgado2014effective,salgado2015normal,salgado2015unbiased}.
Notice that the equation of motion~\eqref{eq:motion} can be solved analytically on every ``piece'' of the potential. Indeed we can calculate the time that the particle spent in crossing every piece. First let us consider the time $\tau_{\mathrm{D}}$ that the particle takes to go across the defect. This quantity is given by,
\begin{equation}
\tau_{\mathrm{D}} = \int_0^L \frac{\gamma dx}{-\phi^\prime(x) + F}.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, the time $\tau_j$ that the particle takes to go from the $j$th defect to the $(j+1)$th one is given by
\begin{equation}
\tau_j = \frac{\gamma }{F}\delta_j.
\end{equation}
Clearly, the time $\tau_j$ is a random variable that depends linearly on the (random) distance between two defects
Let us call ``unit cell'' the piece of the potential which contains a defect followed by the flat potential between such a defect and the next one. Then the total time $T_n$ that the particle takes to cross throughout the first $n$ unit cells is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:T_n}
T_n = \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\tau_j + n\tau_{\mathrm{D}} = \frac{\gamma}{F}\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\delta_j + n\tau_{\mathrm{D}}.
\end{equation}
Moreover, since the unit cells have a random length (given by $L + \delta_j$), the total displacement achieved by the particle during a time $T_n$ is given by,
\begin{equation}
X_n = \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\delta_j + nL.
\end{equation}
The above definitions of $T_n$ and $X_n$ give us implicitly the (random) trajectory of a particle. However, we cannot extract directly from these expression how the mean displacement and the mean square displacement behaves as a function of time. First we need to perform an intermediate step. In order to have explicitly the dependence of $X_n$ in terms of the time $T_n$ we will use the classical limit theorems for sums of random variables. We should notice that both, $X_n$ and $T_n$ are expressed in terms of the sum of independent and identically distributed random variables,
\begin{equation}
S_n = \sum_{j=0}^{n-1} \delta_j
\end{equation}
As we stated above, the random variables $\{ \delta_j\}_{ j\in\mathbb{N}}$ have heavy-tailed distributions, and therefore, the asymptotic properties of $S_n$ for large $n$ strongly depends on the exponent $\alpha$ of the distribution $\rho_\alpha$. As we will see below, we have several scenarios depending on the values of $\alpha$.
\section{Normal diffusion}
\label{sec:normal}
\subsection{The case $\alpha >2$}
We should remind that the distribution of $\delta_j$ have its first and second moments finite if $\alpha >2$. Since all the random variables $\{\delta_j\}_{j\in\mathbb{Z}}$ are assumed to be independent, it is clear that we can apply the central limit theorem~\cite{gnedenko1968limit,feller1960introduction}. Then, for sufficiently large $n$, this theorem implies the sum random variables $\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\delta_j$ can be approximated by a normal random variable~\cite{gnedenko1968limit,feller1960introduction,salgado2013normal},
\begin{equation}
\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\delta_j \approx n\bar{\delta} + \sqrt{n}\sigma_\delta Z ,
\end{equation}
where we defined $\bar{\delta}$ and $\sigma_\delta$ as the expected value and standard deviation of $\delta_j$ respectively,
\begin{eqnarray}
\bar{\delta} &:=& \mathbb{E}[\delta_j],
\\
\sigma_\delta &:=& \sqrt{\mbox{Var}(\delta_j)},
\end{eqnarray}
which in our case are explicitly given by
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:delta_mean}
\bar{\delta} &:=& \frac{\alpha}{\alpha- 1},
\\
\sigma_\delta^2 &:=& \frac{\alpha}{\alpha -2} - \frac{\alpha^2}{(\alpha -1)^2}\label{eq:delta_var}.
\end{eqnarray}
Within this approximation we can rewrite the time $T_n$ and the displacement $X_n$, for asymptotically large $n$, as
\begin{eqnarray}
T_n &\approx& n\tau_{\mathrm{D}} + n \frac{\gamma \bar{\delta} }{F} + \frac{\gamma \sigma_\delta }{F}\sqrt{n} Z,
\label{eq:Tn}
\\
X_n &\approx& n L + n\bar{\delta} + \sqrt{n}\sigma_\delta Z.
\label{NPosition}
\end{eqnarray}
Calling $N_t$ the number of unit cells that the particle has crossed during a time $t$, we can define implicitly $N_t$ by the equation $T_{N_{t}}=t$, as it has been done in~\cite{salgado2013normal}. From Eq.~\eqref{eq:Tn} we can observe that the random variable $N_t$ is related to the random variable $Z$ as follows,
\begin{equation}
\frac{t-N_t(\tau_{\mathrm{D}}+\frac{\gamma \bar{\delta}}{F})}{\sqrt{\frac{\gamma^{2}}{F^{2}}\sigma_\delta^{2} N_t}}\simeq Z.
\end{equation}
The most probable values for $Z$ are around zero, which implies that the distribution of $N_t$ should be centered around the root of a function,
\[
\psi(N_t):=\frac{t-N_t(\tau_{\mathrm{D}}+\frac{\gamma \bar{\delta}}{F})}{\sqrt{\frac{\gamma^{2}}{F^{2}}\sigma_\delta^{2} N_t}}.
\]
We can see that $t/({\tau_{\mathrm{D}}+\frac{\gamma \bar{\delta}}{F}})$ is the unique root of $\psi(N_t)$. To find an expression of $N_t$ in terms of $Z$ we proceed to make a linear expansion of $ \psi(N_t) $ around its root. We have
\begin{equation}
\psi(N_t)\simeq -\frac{(\tau_{\mathrm{D}}+\frac{\gamma \bar{\delta}}{F})^{\frac{3}{2}}}{\frac{\gamma}{F}\sigma_\delta \sqrt{ t}}(N_t - \frac{t}{\tau_{\mathrm{D}}+\frac{\gamma \bar{\delta}}{F}})+O(t^{-\frac{3}{2}})
\end{equation}
from above we obtain
\begin{equation}
-\frac{(\tau_{\mathrm{D}}+\frac{\gamma \bar{\delta}}{F})^{\frac{3}{2}}}{\frac{\gamma}{\delta}\sigma_\delta \sqrt{t}}(N_t - \frac{t}{\tau_{\mathrm{D}}+\frac{\gamma \bar{\delta}}{F}}) \approx Z.
\end{equation}
Finding the value for $N_t$, this can be expressed by
\begin{equation}
\label{Ncells}
N_t \approx \frac{t}{\tau_{\mathrm{D}} + \frac{\gamma \bar{\delta}}{F}} - \frac{\frac{\gamma}{F}\sigma_\delta \sqrt{t}Z}{(\tau_{\mathrm{D}}+\frac{\gamma \bar{\delta}}{F})^{\frac{3}{2}}}.
\end{equation}
Now we can substitute Eq.~\eqref{Ncells} into Eq.~\eqref{NPosition} to find the expected value and variance for the particle position $X_t$. This gives
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbb{E}[X_t] &=& \frac{L+\bar{\delta}}{\tau_{\mathrm{D}}+\frac{\gamma \bar{\delta}}{F}}t,
\\
\mbox{Var}(X_t) &=& \Bigg(\frac{1}{\sqrt{\tau_{\mathrm{D}}+\frac{\gamma \bar{\delta}}{F}}}-\frac{\frac{\gamma}{F}(L+\bar{\delta})}{(\tau_{\mathrm{D}}+\frac{\gamma \bar{\delta}}{F})^{\frac{3}{2}}}\Bigg)^{2}\sigma_\delta^{2}t.
\end{eqnarray}
Applying the usual definitions of particle current, $J_{\mathrm{eff}}$, and effective diffusion coefficient, $D_{\mathrm{eff}}$, we obtain the following expressions,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{J_Diff_Norm}
J_{\mathrm{eff}} &=& \lim_{t\to\infty} \frac{\mathbb{E}[X_{t}]}{t} = \frac{L+\bar{\delta}}{\tau_{\mathrm{D}}+\frac{\gamma \bar{\delta}}{F}},
\\
D_{\mathrm{eff}} &=& \lim_{t\to\infty} \frac{\mbox{Var}(X_t)}{2t}
\nonumber
\\
\label{D_Diff_Norm}
&=& \Bigg(\frac{1}{\sqrt{\tau_{\mathrm{D}}+\frac{\gamma \bar{\delta}}{F}}}-\frac{\frac{\gamma}{F}(L+\bar{\delta})}{(\tau_{\mathrm{D}}+\frac{\gamma \bar{\delta}}{F})^{\frac{3}{2}}}\Bigg)^{2} \frac{\sigma_\delta^{2}}{2}.
\end{eqnarray}
\section{Anomalous diffusion}
\label{sec:anomalous}
\subsection{The case $ 1 <\alpha <2 $}
If the distribution of $\delta_j$ (given by Eq.~\eqref{heavy tailed dist}) is such that the exponent $\alpha$ is in the interval $ 1 < \alpha < 2$ we have that the variance of $\delta_j$ is longer finite but its mean remains finite. In that case, the central limit theorem cannot be applied in its standard form. Actually, the sum $\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\delta_j $ tends to a stable law if such a sum is adequately normalized. According to a well-known theorems in probability~\cite{gnedenko1968limit,feller1960introduction}, we have that
\begin{equation}
\frac{\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\delta_j - n\bar{\delta} }{ n^{1/\alpha}} \to W.
\end{equation}
where $W$ is a $\alpha$-stable random variable. This means that we can approximate the sum $\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\delta_j $ by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sum_delta_2}
\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\delta_j \approx n \bar{\delta} + n^{1/\alpha} W.
\end{equation}
Now, we proceed to define the random variable $N_t$ by using the relationship $T_{N_t}=t$. Recalling the definition for $T_n$ given in Eq.~\eqref{eq:T_n} we obtain that $N_t$ satisfies the equation,
\begin{equation}
\frac{\gamma }{ F } \big(N_t \bar{\delta} + N_t^{1/\alpha} W \big) + N_t \tau_{\mathrm{D}} \approx t.
\end{equation}
The above equation implicitly defines a transformation from the random variable $W$ to $N_t$. Notice that the above equation can be rewritten as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:psi_1}
\psi (N_t) := \frac{t-\tau_{\mathrm{c}} N_t}{\frac{\gamma}{F} N_t^{1/\alpha}} \approx W,
\end{equation}
where we have denoted by $\tau_{\mathrm{c}}$ the quantity
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:def_tau_c}
\tau_{\mathrm{c}} := \frac{\gamma \bar{\delta}}{F} + \tau_{\mathrm{D}}.
\end{equation}
Eq.~\eqref{eq:psi_1} means that the transformation from $W$ to $N_t$ is mediated by the inverse function $\psi^{-1}$. As it has been shown in Ref.~\cite{salgado2013normal} we have that the asymptotic behavior of $N_t$ for $t\to \infty$ is given by,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Nt_2}
N_t \approx \frac{1}{\tau_{\mathrm{c}} } t + \frac{\frac{\gamma}{F} \, t^{1/\alpha}}{\tau_{\mathrm{c}}^{1+1/\alpha}}\, W.
\end{equation}
Now, in order to have an expression for the displacement of the particle as a function of $t$, we will use the approximation given in Eq.~\eqref{eq:sum_delta_2} to obtain an approximation of $X_n$ for $n \to \infty$. Recalling that $X_n$ is given by
\[
X_n = \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\delta_j + nL,
\]
we can observe that
\begin{equation}
X_n \approx n \bar{\delta} + n^{1/\alpha} W + nL.
\end{equation}
Next, if we substitute $n=N_t$ , given in Eq.~\eqref{eq:Nt_2} into the above expression for $X_n$ we obtain,
\begin{eqnarray}
X_t &\approx& ( L+\bar{ \delta}) N_t + N_t^{1/\alpha} W,
\nonumber
\\
&\approx& ( L+\bar{ \delta}) \left( \frac{t}{ \tau_{\mathrm{c}} } + \frac{ \frac{\gamma}{F} \, t^{1/\alpha}}{\tau_{\mathrm{c}}^{1+1/\alpha}}\, W \right)
\nonumber
\\
&+& \bigg(\frac{t}{ \tau_{\mathrm{c}} } + \frac{\frac{\gamma}{F} \, t^{1/\alpha}}{\tau_{\mathrm{c}}^{1+1/\alpha}}\, W \bigg)^{1/\alpha} W.
\end{eqnarray}
Now, if we retain the leading terms in the above expression we have that,
\begin{eqnarray}
X_t &\approx&
\bigg(\frac{L+\bar{ \delta}}{ \tau_{\mathrm{c}} }\bigg)\, t
+
\bigg( \frac{\frac{\gamma}{F} ( L+\bar{ \delta}) }{\tau_{\mathrm{c}}^{1+1/\alpha}} + \frac{1}{\tau_{\mathrm{c}}^{1/\alpha} } \bigg)\, t^{1/\alpha}\, W
\nonumber
\\
&+& O(t^{2/\alpha -1})
\end{eqnarray}
With the above result we can see that the mean displacement of an ensemble of particles is given by
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E}[X_t] \approx \frac{L+\bar{ \delta}}{ \frac{\gamma}{F} + \tau_\mathrm{D}}\, t, \qquad \mbox{for} \, \, t\to\infty.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, the square fluctuations of $X_t$ grow as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:SD_12}
(X_t - \mathbb{E}[X_t])^2 \approx\bigg( \frac{\frac{\gamma}{F} ( L+\bar{ \delta}) }{\tau_{\mathrm{c}}^{1+1/\alpha}} + \frac{1}{\tau_{\mathrm{c}}^{1/\alpha} } \bigg)^2 t^{2/\alpha} W^2,
\end{equation}
which means that the diffusion exponent $\beta$ is given by,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:superdif}
\beta = \frac{2}{\alpha},
\end{equation}
for $1 < \alpha <2 $. In this case we see clearly that the system undergoes a transition from normal to anomalous superdiffusion when the parameter $\alpha$ diminishes. In this anomalous phase, the mean displacement is still finite, and therefore the particle current can be written as
\begin{equation}
J_{\mathrm{eff}} = \frac{L+\bar{ \delta}}{\tau_\mathrm{c}}.
\end{equation}
\subsection{The case $ 0 <\alpha < 1 $}
Now we will explore the case in which the parameter $\alpha$ is in the range $0 < \alpha < 1$. In this case we have that the mean value of $\delta_j$ diverge, which means that the approximation for the sum of $\delta_j$ given in Eq.~\eqref{eq:sum_delta_2} cannot be applied. However the sum $\sum_{j=0}^{n-1} \delta_j $ still converge to a stable law if it is normalized appropriately. Explicitly we have that~\cite{gnedenko1968limit,feller1960introduction},
\begin{equation}
\frac{\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\delta_j }{ n^{1/\alpha}} \to W,
\end{equation}
where $W$ has an $\alpha$-stable distribution~\cite{feller1960introduction}. In this case we can approximate the sum of random variables by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sum_delta_3}
\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\delta_j \approx n^{1/\alpha} W,
\end{equation}
which allows us to obtain an asymptotic expression for $N_t$ by using the relationship $T_{N_t} = t$,
\begin{equation}
\frac{\gamma }{ F } N_t^{1/\alpha} W + N_t \tau_{\mathrm{D}} \approx t.
\end{equation}
Now we proceed as in the above cases, i.e., we will obtain an asymptotic expression for $N_t$ for $t\to \infty$. For such purpose we first write the above equation as follows
\[
N_t \approx \frac{t^\alpha}{ \left(\frac{\gamma}{F} W \right)^\alpha}\bigg( 1 - \frac{\tau_{\mathrm{D} } N_t}{t} \bigg)^\alpha,
\]
and then we use this expression recursively in order to obtain an asymptotic expression for $t\to \infty$. We obtain
\begin{equation}
N_t\approx \frac{t^\alpha}{ \left(\frac{\gamma}{F} W \right)^\alpha} + O(t^{2\alpha -1}) \qquad \mbox{for} \, \, t\to \infty.
\end{equation}
Now, in order to see how $X_t $ behaves in time, we use the approximation~\eqref{eq:sum_delta_3} to obtain an asymptotic expression for $X_n$ for large $n$,
\begin{equation}
X_n = \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\delta_j + nL \approx n^{1/\alpha} W + nL.
\end{equation}
Thus, if we substitute $n$ by $N_t$ into the above equation we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
X_t &\approx& \bigg( \frac{t^\alpha}{ \left(\frac{\gamma}{F} W \right)^\alpha} \bigg)^{1/\alpha} W + \frac{ L t^\alpha}{ \left(\frac{\gamma}{F} W \right)^\alpha}
\nonumber
\\
&=&
\frac{F}{\gamma} \, t + \frac{1}{ \left(\frac{\gamma}{F} W \right)^\alpha }\, t^\alpha.
\label{eq:xt_3}
\end{eqnarray}
The above result for $X_t$ allows us to obtain an expression for the particle current. First notice that the expected value of $X_t$ is give by,
\[
\mathbb{E}[X_t] = \frac{F}{\gamma} \, t + \frac{ t^\alpha}{ \left(\frac{\gamma}{F} \right)^\alpha }\, \mathbb{E}[W^{-\alpha}],
\]
from which, after noticing that $\mathbb{E}[W^{-\alpha}]$ is finite and recalling that $0<\alpha <1$, we obtain,
\begin{equation}
J_{\mathrm{eff}} = \lim_{t\to \infty} \frac{\mathbb{E}[X_t]}{t} = \frac{F}{\gamma}.
\end{equation}
The expression for $X_t$ that we obtained in Eq.~\eqref{eq:xt_3} also allows us to calculate the asymptotic behavior of the diffusion. Indeed we have that
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:SD_01}
\mbox{Var}(X_t) &:=& \mathbb{E}[(X_t - \mathbb{E}[X_t])^2]
\nonumber
\\
&=& \bigg(\frac{ t^\alpha}{ \left(\frac{\gamma}{F} \right)^\alpha }\, \bigg)^2 \mathbb{E}[( W^{-\alpha} - \mathbb{E}[W^{-\alpha}] )^2]
\end{eqnarray}
which means that the means square displacement of the particle distribution grows in time as $t^{2\alpha}$, giving a diffusion exponent
\begin{equation}\label{eq:subdif}
\beta = 2\alpha.
\end{equation}
The above result implies that the anomalous regime for $0< \alpha <1$ exhibits two different behaviors, namely, an anomalous superdiffusive phase for $1/2 <\alpha < 1$, and an anomalous subdiffusive phase for $0 < \alpha <1/2 $. Then, a transition from superdiffusion to subdiffusion occurs at the critical value $\alpha = 1/2$.
\subsection{The marginal cases $\alpha = 2$ and $\alpha = 1$}
In this section we will explore the transport properties for the special values $\alpha = 2$ and $\alpha =1$. We should emphasize that in these cases the asymptotic behavior of $S_n$ for large $n$ is rather different than in the above cases. First lets us consider the marginal value $\alpha = 2$. In this case the variance of $\delta_j$ diverge. However, according to Ref.~\cite{feller1960introduction} we have that $\sum_{j=0}^{n-1} \delta_j$ still converge to a normal distribution if it is appropriately normalized. Indeed we have that~\cite{gnedenko1968limit,feller1960introduction}
\[
\frac{\sum_{j=0}^{n-1} \delta_j - n \bar{\delta}}{\sqrt{n \ln n}}\to W, \qquad \mbox{for} \, \, n\to\infty,
\]
where $W$ is a normal random variable. The above means that if $n$ is large enough we can approximate the sum $\sum_{j=0}^{n-1} \delta_j$ as follows,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sum_delta_4}
\sum_{j=0}^{n-1} \delta_j \approx n \bar{\delta} + \sqrt{n \ln n} \, W.
\end{equation}
As above, we use the equation $T_{N_t} = t$ to approximate $N_t$ for large $t$. After some calculations we obtain that $N_t$ satisfy the equation,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:psi_4}
\psi(N_t) := \frac{ t- \tau_{\mathrm{c}} N_t}{ \left( N_t \ln (N_t) \right)^{1/2}} \approx \frac{\gamma}{F} \, W.
\end{equation}
As we argued in preceding sections, the random variable $ \frac{\gamma}{F} \, W $ has zero mean value, which implies that the most probable values of $N_t$ are around the (unique) root of $\psi(N_t)$. If we expand $\psi$ around $N_t = t/\tau_{\mathrm{c}}$ we obtain,
\begin{equation}
\psi(N_t) \approx - \frac{\tau_{\mathrm{c}} }{ \left[ \frac{t}{ \tau_{\mathrm{c}} }\ln\left( \frac{t}{ \tau_{\mathrm{c}}} \right) \right]^{1/2}}\, \left( N_t -\frac{t}{\tau_{\mathrm{c}}} \right),
\end{equation}
which allows us to obtain $N_t$ in terms of $W$ by means of Eq.~\eqref{eq:psi_4},
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:N_t_4}
N_t \approx \frac{t}{ \tau_{\mathrm{c}} } -
\frac{ 1 }{\tau_{\mathrm{c}} }
\left[ \frac{t}{ \tau_{\mathrm{c}} }\ln\left( \frac{t}{\tau_{\mathrm{c}} } \right) \right]^{1/2}\, W.
\end{equation}
Now, we use again the approximation for the sum given in~\eqref{eq:sum_delta_4} to obtain an asymptotic expression for $X_n$. This gives,
\begin{equation}
X_n \approx n \bar{\delta} + \sqrt{n \ln n} \, W + nL.
\end{equation}
Next we substitute $n$ by $N_t$ in the above expression, resulting in an expression for the displacement $X_t$ given by,
\begin{eqnarray}
X_n &\approx & \left( \frac{ L+ \bar{\delta}}{\tau_{\mathrm{c}} } \right) \, t
\nonumber
\\
&+&
\left( \frac{F}{\gamma} - \frac{L+ \bar{\delta} }{ \tau_{\mathrm{c}} } \right)
\bigg[ \left(\frac{t}{\tau_{\mathrm{c}} } \right) \ln \left(\frac{t}{\tau_{\mathrm{c}} } \right)\bigg]^{1/2} \, W.
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Thus, the last expression implies that mean displacement of the trajectory grows linearly in time. This means that the particle current is well defined and has the value
\begin{equation}
J_{\mathrm{eff}} = \frac{ L+\bar{\delta} }{\tau_{\mathrm{c}} } .
\end{equation}
On the other hand, the mean square fluctuations of the trajectory can also be calculates, giving,
\begin{equation}
\mbox{Var}(X_t) = \left( \frac{F}{\gamma} + \frac{L+ \bar{\delta} }{ \tau_{\mathrm{c}} } \right)^2
\left(\frac{t}{\tau_{\mathrm{c}} } \right) \ln \left(\frac{t}{\tau_{\mathrm{c}} } \right) \, \mathbb{E}[W^2].
\end{equation}
The above result states that the mean square fluctuations do not grow linearly in time nor as a power law, but it still grows faster than linear by the presence of the logarithm term $\ln(t/\tau_{\mathrm{c}})$. This kind of behavior of the mean square displacement is commonly called \emph{marginal superdiffusion}.
Another case that it is necessary to explore separately is $\alpha =1$. In this case the sum $S_n$ converge to a stable law, but the renormalizing factor is not of the form $n^{1/\alpha}$. Actually we have that~\cite{feller1960introduction},
\begin{equation}
\frac{\sum_{j=0}^{n-1} \delta_j }{n\ln( n)} \to W,\qquad \mbox{for} \,\, n\to \infty,
\end{equation}
where $W$ is a random variable with a $\alpha$-stable distribution with $\alpha =1$. In this case we approximate the sum $S_n$ by
\[
\sum_{j=0}^{n-1} \delta_j \approx n\ln (n) W,
\]
which allows us to estimate the asymptotic behavior of $N_t$ by the equation,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:N_t_5}
\frac{\gamma}{F} N_t\ln (N_t) W + N_t \tau_{\mathrm{D}} \approx t.
\end{equation}
Following a similar reasoning as in preceding sections we use the above relation to obtain an asymptotic expression for $N_t$. Indeed, if we notice that the leading term in Eq.~\eqref{eq:N_t_5} is $N_t \ln(N_t)$ we obtain,
\begin{equation}
N_t\approx \frac{t/\left(\frac{\gamma}{F}W\right)}{\ln\left[ t/\left(\frac{\gamma}{F}W\right) \right]}.
\end{equation}
Next, if we substitute $n$ by $N_t$ into the expression for $X_n$ we can observe that,
\begin{equation}
X_t \approx \frac{F}{\gamma}\, t + \left(L-\frac{F\tau_{\mathrm{D}} }{\gamma} \right)\frac{t/\left(\frac{\gamma}{F}W\right)}{\ln\left[ t/\left(\frac{\gamma}{F}W\right) \right]}.
\end{equation}
The last result means that the mean displacement exists and grows linearly in time, which gives for the particle current,
\[
J_{\mathrm{eff}} = \frac{F}{\gamma}.
\]
Additionally we obtain that, for $\alpha = 2$ the square displacement grows as
\[
\left( X_t - \mathbb{E}[X_t] \right)^2 \sim \left( \frac{t}{\ln(t)}\right)^2
\]
which can be considered as \emph{marginally ballistic} since the square displacement grows nearly as $t^2$ but this growth is screened by the inverse logarithmic factor.
Finally let us summarize the asymptotic behavior of the mean displacement and the square displacement $\left( X_t - \mathbb{E}[X_t]\right)^2$ for different values of $\alpha$. We obtain that the particle current is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Jef}
J_{\mathrm{eff}} = \left\{ \begin{array}
{r@{\quad \mbox{ if } \quad}l}
F/\gamma & 0 < \alpha \leq 1 \\
\frac{ L + \bar{\delta}}{ \tau_{\mathrm{D}} + \frac{\gamma \bar{\delta} }{ F}} & \alpha >1 . \\
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, the square displacement has the asymptotic behavior,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:MSD}
\left(X_t - \mathbb{E}[X_t] \right)^2\sim \left\{ \begin{array}
{r@{\quad \mbox{ if } \quad}l}
t^{2 \alpha} & 0 < \alpha < 1 \\
t^2/\ln^2(t) & \alpha = 1 \\
t^{2/\alpha} & 1 < \alpha < 2 \\
t\ln(t) & \alpha = 2 \\
t & \alpha >2.
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
\section{Numerical simulations}
\label{sec:simulations}
In order to test the theoretical results presented in Section~\ref{sec:anomalous}, we perform numerical simulations of our model. We numerically solve the equation of motion given in Eq.~\eqref{eq:motion} for an ensemble of non-interacting particles. Different particles are placed in different realizations of the random potential described by Eqs.~\eqref{eq:random_potential} and~\eqref{heavy tailed dist}. Thus, once we have obtained the time series for the particle position, we compute the mean displacement and the square displacement by averaging over all the time series obtained. This actually corresponds to average over the ensemble of random potentials. For the sake of simplicity we model the defects of the random potential model by means of symmetric peaks with constant height and width. Thus the potential profile modeling the defects is defined as
\begin{equation}
\varphi(x) = \left\{ \begin{array}
{r@{\quad \mbox{ if } \quad}l}
2 a x /L & 0<x<\frac{L}{2} \\
2a(L-x)/L & \frac{L}{2}<x<L , \\
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
where $a$ and $L$ stand for the height and width of the ``potential peak''. The corresponding random force field is given by,
\begin{equation}
-\varphi^{\prime}(x) = \left\{ \begin{array}
{r@{\quad \mbox{ if } \quad}l}
-2 a /L & 0<x<\frac{L}{2} \\
2 a /L & \frac{L}{2}<x<L \\
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.35}{\includegraphics{fig_02}}
\end{center}
\caption{
Schematic representation of the random potential and the corresponding random force field. The height and width of the potential peak are $a$ and $L$ respectively. The distance between $j$th and the $(j+1)$th peaks is a random variable $\delta_j$ whose distribution is given in Eq.~\eqref{heavy tailed dist}.
}
\label{fig:potential simulations}
\end{figure}
In the numerical simulations we fixed the parameter values $L=1$ and $a = 1/2$. We have also taken the driving force $F$ above the critical one, which, according to our random potential model, is given by
\[
F_{\mathrm{c}} =\max_x |-\varphi^\prime(x)|= 2a/L = 1.
\]
This choice for the driving force ensures the absence of locked trajectories.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:Jeff_alpha} we show the particle current as a function of the parameter $\alpha$ obtained by using the exact formula~\eqref{eq:Jef}. We plot the particle current for two different values of the driving force, namely $F=3$ (solid line) and $F=4$ (dashed line). We also plot the particle current obtained from numerical simulation for the same values of the parameter, i.e., for $F=3$ (filled circles) and $F=4$ (open squares). The numerical simulation were performed as follows.
We solved the equation of motion, Eq.~\eqref{eq:motion}, for $500$ particles placed on random potentials during a time of $10^5$ arb.~units. According to our simulation scheme, different particles move on different random potentials. After that, we obtained the mean displacement the corresponding quantities over the ensemble of trajectories obtained from the simulations.
It is important to emphasize that the system undergoes a kind of second order ``phase transition'' in the sense that the particle current curve changes continuously with the parameter $\alpha$, but its derivative does not. Indeed we observe that in the range $0 < \alpha \leq 1$ the particle current remains constant, a phenomenon which seems counterintuitive. This is because the presence of the defects has the effect of delaying the particles. Thus we would expect that if $\alpha$ increases then the particle current diminishes. As $\alpha$ increases beyond the critical value $\alpha = 1$, the particle current starts decreasing due to the presence of the defects as expected from the above reasoning.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.25}{\includegraphics{J_vs_alpha_F3_F4_V3_ed}}
\end{center}
\caption{
Particle current as a function of $\alpha$. (a) We plot the particle current, by using the exact result given in Eq.~\eqref{eq:Jef}, for $F=3$ (solid line). We also show the particle current obtained from the numerical simulation of 500 particles during a time of $10^5$ arbitrary units, for $F=3$ (filled circles). (b) As in (a) but using $F=4$. This graph allows us to appreciate the abrupt change in the behavior of $J_{\mathrm{eff}}$ as $\alpha$ decreases.
}
\label{fig:Jeff_alpha}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:Deff_alpha} we show the behavior of $D_{\mathrm{eff}}$ as a function of $\alpha$ for two different values of the driving force. We use the the exact result given in Eq.~\eqref{D_Diff_Norm}. It is clear that this expression is only valid for $\alpha > 2$ because in this case the diffusion is normal. We plot the theoretical curves for the cases $F=3$ (solid line) and $F=4$ (dashed line), which are compared with the corresponding coefficients obtained from numerical simulations. The simulations were performed by numerically solving the equation of motion~\eqref{eq:motion} for $500$ particles placed on random potentials during a time of $10^5$ arb.~units.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.25}{\includegraphics{D_vs_alpha_F3_F4_V2_ed}}
\end{center}
\caption{
Effective diffusion coefficient as a function of $\alpha$. We plot the effective diffusion coefficient by using the exact formula given in Eq.~\eqref{D_Diff_Norm}, for two different values of the driving force $F=3$ (solid line) and $F=4$ (dashed line). We also show the diffusion coefficient obtained from the numerical simulation of 500 particles during a time of $10^5$ arbitrary units, for $F=3$ (filled circles) and $F=4$ (open circle) for several values of $\alpha$.
}
\label{fig:Deff_alpha}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:J_D_vs_F}(a) and~\ref{fig:J_D_vs_F}(b) we can appreciate the behavior of the particle current $J_{\mathrm{eff}}$ versus the driving force $F$. We plot the theoretical prediction given in Eq.~\eqref{J_Diff_Norm} for two different values of $\alpha$: for $\alpha = 3$ and $\alpha = 4$ (solid lines). We also plot the diffusion coefficient obtained by means of numerical simulations for the same cases: for $\alpha = 3$ and $\alpha = 4$ (filled circles). To estimate the particle current (and the effective diffusion coefficient) we simulated 500 particles under the dynamics defined in Eq.~\eqref{eq:motion}, each particle placed on a different realization of the random potential. The total simulation time was $10^4$ arb.~units. Then, we obtained the particle current and the diffusion coefficient estimating the mean position of the particles and its variance by averaging over the 500 trajectories obtained from the simulations. In Fig.~\ref{fig:J_D_vs_F}(c) we show the effective diffusion coefficient $D_{\mathrm{eff}}$ as a function of the driving force $F$. We plot the theoretical prediction for $D_{\mathrm{eff}}$ given in Eq.~\eqref{D_Diff_Norm} for $\alpha = 3$ (solid line) and $\alpha =4$ (dashed line). We also display the diffusion coefficient obtained from the numerical simulations described above for the estimation of the particle current. In all cases we observe good agreement with the theoretical predictions within the accuracy of our numerical simulations.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.23}{\includegraphics{J_D_vs_F_A3_A4_V3_ed}}
\end{center}
\caption{
Particle current and effective diffusion coefficient versus $F$. (a) The particle current versus the driving force for $\alpha = 3$. Solid line: analytical prediction given in Eq.~\eqref{J_Diff_Norm}. Filled circles: numerical simulation of 500 particle during a time of $10^5$ arb. units. (b) The same as (a) but using $\alpha = 4$. (c) Effective diffusion coefficient versus $F$. We show the analytical prediction for $D_\mathrm{eff}$ given in Eq.~\eqref{D_Diff_Norm} for $\alpha =3$ (solid line) and $\alpha =4$ (dashed line). We also display the effective diffusion coefficient obtained from the numerical simulations described in (a). We used the parameter values $\alpha = 3$ (filled circles) and $\alpha = 4$ (open circles) to compare against the theoretical counterpart, given a good agreement within the accuracy of our numerical experiments.
}
\label{fig:J_D_vs_F}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:Anomalous_diff} we observe the behavior of the diffusion exponent $\beta$ versus $\alpha$. We plot the theoretical prediction for $\beta$ (solid line), given through Eq.~\ref{eq:MSD}, versus $\alpha$ for $F=1.5$. We also show the diffusion exponent obtained from numerical simulations (open circles) for the same parameter values as the theoretical curve. It is interesting to note that in the range $0<\alpha<1$ we observe that the diffusion exponent fits better to the theoretical curve than in the range $1<\alpha<2$. This phenomenon is actually a manifestation of the nature of the random variable resulting from the limit theorems. As we see from Eq.~\eqref{eq:SD_12} and~\eqref{eq:SD_01} the square displacement $\Delta X_t^2 := \left( X_t - \mathbb{E}[X_t] \right)^2$ behaves as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq_SD_01}
\Delta X_t^2 &\approx& \bigg(\frac{ t^\alpha}{ \left(\frac{\gamma}{F} \right)^\alpha }\, \bigg)^2 ( W^{-\alpha} - \mathbb{E}[W^{-\alpha}] )^2, \ \mbox{for} \ 0<\alpha<1.
\nonumber
\\
\Delta X_t^2 &\approx&
\bigg( \frac{\frac{\gamma}{F} ( L+\bar{ \delta}) }{\tau_{\mathrm{c}}^{1+1/\alpha}} + \frac{1}{\tau_{\mathrm{c}}^{1/\alpha} } \bigg)^2 t^{2/\alpha} W^2, \ \mbox{for} \ 1<\alpha<2,
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.25}{\includegraphics{beta_vs_alpha_V3_ed}}
\end{center}
\caption{
Diffusion exponent versus $\alpha$. We plot the theoretical exponent $\beta$ (solid line) versus $\alpha$ obtained from Eq.~\eqref{eq:MSD} for $F=1.5$. We also plot the diffusion exponent obtained from numerical simulations (filled circles). We observe that the numerically estimated diffusion exponent is in good agreement with the theoretical result in the range $0<\alpha <1$. However, in the interval $1<\alpha <2$ the diffusion exponent exhibits large fluctuations. The last observation is due to the fact that the random variable to which converge $\Delta X_t^2$ (for $t\to \infty$) does not have a finite mean. This particularly implies that the estimation of the mean value of $\Delta X_t^2$ does not converge. This phenomenon is not present in $0<\alpha <1$ because the random variable $\Delta X_t^2$ has a finite mean value.
}
\label{fig:Anomalous_diff}
\end{figure}
The main difference between these expressions for $\Delta X_t^2$ is that the corresponding mean value $\mathbb{E}[\Delta X_t^2]$ is finite for $0<\alpha<1$, but it does not exists in the range $1<\alpha<2$. Indeed, we have that the square displacement $\Delta X_t^2$ seen as a random variable for fixed $t$ has a distribution having a heavy tail for $1<\alpha <2$ whose mean value does not exists. Actually, the properties of the distribution of the square displacement are given by the random variable $W^2$, where $W$ has a $\alpha$-stable distribution. These facts imply that every realization of $\Delta X_t^2$ have large fluctuations impeding the convergence of the estimator of the mean value $\mathbb{E}[\Delta X_t^2]$. This phenomenon is of course absent in the range $0<\alpha<1$ since the random variable $( W^{-\alpha} - \mathbb{E}[W^{-\alpha}] )^2$ has a distribution with a well-defined mean value.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusions}
We have introduced a simple model for deterministic diffusion which exhibit a transition from normal to anomalous diffusion. The model consists of an ensemble of non-interacting overdamped particles on a random potential under the influence of a constant driving force. The random potential can be seen as a one-dimensional medium with scarce defects which are responsible of ``delaying'' the particles. We have show that this model is able to exhibit anomalous diffusion if the distance between defects has a heavy tailed distribution with the distribution exponent $\alpha <2$. The system also exhibits normal diffusion when the distribution exponent $\alpha \geq 2$. In the anomalous diffusive phase we observed both superdiffusion (for $1/2 < \alpha < 2$) and subdiffusion (for $0<\alpha <1/2$). Moreover, we proved that the transport is normal (which means that the particle current is well-defined) for all the values of $\alpha$. However, we observed that the particle current versus $\alpha$ exhibits a second-order-like ``phase transition''. Explicitly, we showed that the particle current is continuous and piecewise smooth: it is a strictly decreasing function of $\alpha$ for $\alpha \geq 1$ and a constant function in the range $0< \alpha <1$. Particularly the fact that the particle current remains constant in the interval $0< \alpha <1$ seems to be a counterintuitive phenomenon. This is because we intuitively expect that the less defects in the medium the lower particle current we have. This is not the case for $\alpha < 1$ because the particle current remains constant independently of the ``quantity'' of defects (or, equivalently, the value of $\alpha$). Finally, another phenomenon that it is worth mentioning is the fact that the square displacement $\Delta X_t^2$, seen as a random variable, has a heavy tailed distribution in the range $1< \alpha < 2$. Such a distribution is such that the mean value $\mathbb{E}[\Delta X_t^2]$ does not exists. This implies that the average of realizations (through numerical experiments) of $\Delta X_t^2$ does not converge. On the contrary, in the interval $ 0 < \alpha < 1$ the mean value $\mathbb{E}[\Delta X_t^2]$ is finite, and by this reason, the numerical simulations fits better to the theoretical prediction for diffusion exponent. All these properties are simply consequences of the limit theorems for sums of random variables.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors thank CONACyT for financial support through Grant No. CB-2012-01-183358.
\nocite{*}
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro}
\subsection{Notation}
Consider $n$ measurements ${\mathbold y}_n=(y_1,\ldots,y_n)^t$ of a
variable $y$ and for each $y_i$ concomitant measurements of $k$
covariables $x_j, j=1,\ldots,k,$ given by ${\mathbold
x}_{i\cdot}=(x_{i1},\ldots,x_{ik})^t$ forming an $n\times k$ matrix
${\mathbold x}_n$ with $j$th column ${\mathbold x}_{\cdot j}$. A
subset of the covariates will be denoted by a row
vector $e=(e_1,\ldots,e_k)$ with $e_j\in \{0,1\}$ whereby $e_j=1$
means that the $j$th covariate is included. A model $e$ will be
encoded as $\sum_{j=1}^ke_j2^{j-1}$. The subset consisting of
all covariates will be denoted by $e_f$. Given an $e$ with
$\sum_{j=1}^k e_j=k(e)$ the $n\times k(e)$ matrix with columns
corresponding to those covariates with $e_j=1$ will be
denoted by ${\mathbold x}_n(e)$ with ${\mathbold x}_{i\cdot}(e)$,
${\mathbold x}_{\cdot j}(e)$ and ${\mathbold x}(e)$ having the
corresponding interpretations. The empirical measure of the data will
be denoted by $\mathbb P_n$
\begin{equation} \label{equ:emp_measure}
\mathbb P_n=\mathbb P_n(({\mathbold y}_n,{\mathbold
x}_n))=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\delta_{y_i,{\mathbold x}_{i\cdot}}
\end{equation}
with the corresponding definition of $\mathbb P_{n,e}$ for any subset $e$. The
$L_1$ and $L_2$ norms will be denoted by $\Vert\,\Vert_1$ and
$\Vert\,\Vert_2$ respectively.
\subsection{The problem}
The problem to decide which
if any of the covariates $x_j$ influence the value of $y$. There
are many proposals for doing this. Some such as AIC
(\cite{AKAIK73,AKAIK74,AKAIK81}) or BIC (\cite{SCH78}) require an
explicit model such as
\begin{equation} \label{equ:linreg1_mod}
Y={\mathbold x}^t{\mathbold \beta}+\varepsilon
\end{equation}
where ${\mathbold x}^t=(x_1,\ldots,x_k)$, ${\mathbold
\beta}=(\beta_1,\ldots,\beta_k)^t$ and the errors
$\varepsilon$ are random variables with an explicit
distribution. Others such as Lasso (\cite{TIB96})
\begin{equation} \label{equ:linreg1}
\operatorname{argmin}_{\mathbold \beta}\left\{\sum_{i=1}^n (y_i-{\mathbold
x}_{i\cdot}{\mathbold \beta})^2+\lambda \sum_{j=1}^k \vert
\beta_j\vert \right\}
\end{equation}
may or may not require an explicit model to determine the choice of
the smoothing parameter $\lambda$.
The following is based on a simple idea. Let $s^2$ denotes the least
sum of squares based on all covariates and for a given subset let
$S_e^2$ denote the least sum of squares when all the covariates with
$e_j=0$ are replaced by i.i.d. $N(0,1)$ random variables. If $s^2$ is
not significantly small than $S_e^2$ the conclusion is that the
omitted covariates are no better than random noise. To define
`significantly' the process is repeated a large number of times. For a
given $\alpha$, $\alpha=0.95$ for example, $s^2$ is significantly
smaller the $S_e^2$ if in at least $100\alpha\%$ the simulations
$s^2\le S_e^2$. The P-value $p_e$ is the proportion of simulations for
which $S_e^2 < s^2$, so that the excluded covariates are
significantly better than random noise if $p_e \le 1-\alpha$. A small
values of $p_e$ indicates that at least some of the omitted covariates
are relevant. A large value of $p_e$ indicates that in toto the
omitted covariates are no better than random noise.
The method is not restricted to least squares regression. It can be
equally well applied to $L_1$ regression or more generally to any
measure of discrepancy $d({\mathbold y}_n,{\mathbold x}_n)$.
As an example consider the stack loss data of \cite{BRO60}. It is
one of the data sets provided by \cite{R13} and is used in
\cite{KOEN10}. There are 21 observations with one dependent variable
`Stack.Loss' and the three covariates `Air.Flow', `Water.Temp' and
`Acid.Conc' labelled from one to three. In the following the intercept
will always be included. There are eight possible models. The results of an $L_1$
regression for the stack loss data are given in
Table~\ref{tab:stackloss_L_1}. The total computing time was 102
seconds using \cite{KOEN10}. The only subset with a large $P$-value is
the subset encoded as 3 which corresponds to $e=(1,1,0)$.
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccc}
subset&0&1&2&3&4&5&6&7\\
$P$-value&0.000&0.015&0.000&0.231&0.000&0.007&0.000&1.000\\
\quad\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Encoded subsets and $P$-values for the stack loss
data based on 5000 simulations.\label{tab:stackloss_L_1}}
\end{table}
\subsection{Non-significance regions} \label{sec:n-s-r_example}
Given a subset $e$ of covariates the best linear approximation to the
variable ${\mathbold y}_n$ in the $L_1$ norm is
\begin{equation} \label{equ:best_l_1}
{\mathbold x}_n(e){\mathbold \beta}_{1,n}(e)
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation} \label{equ:best_l_1_1}
{\mathbold \beta}_{1,n}(e)= \operatorname{argmin}_{{\mathbold \beta}(e)}\Vert
{\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_n(e){\mathbold \beta}(e)\Vert_1\,.
\end{equation}
A single value is not sufficient to answer many questions of
interest which require a range of plausible values. In frequentist
statistics such a range is provided by a confidence region. This
option is not available in the present context as a confidence region
assumes that there is a `true' value to be covered. The confidence
region will be replaced by a non-significance region whose
construction will be illustrated for the median.
Given data ${\mathbold y}_n$ the median minimizes $s_1({\mathbold y}_n)=\sum_{i=1}^n\vert
y_i-\text{med}({\mathbold y}_n)\vert $. For any other value $m\ne
\text{med}({\mathbold y}_n)$
\[\sum_{i=1}^n\vert y_i-\text{med}({\mathbold y}_n)\vert <
\sum_{i=1}^n\vert y_i-m\vert \]
A value $m$ will be considered as not being significantly different from
the median $\text{med}({\mathbold y}_n)$ if the difference
\[\sum_{i=1}^n\vert y_i-m\vert-\sum_{i=1}^n\vert
y_i-\text{med}({\mathbold y}_n)\vert\]
is of the order attainable by a random perturbation of the
$y$-values. More precisely if
\begin{equation} \label{equ:def_nonsig_med}
\mathbold P\left(\inf_b\sum_{i=1}^n\vert y_i+bZ_i-m\vert < s_1({\mathbold
y}_n)\right)\ge 1-\alpha.
\end{equation}
The set of values $m$ which satisfy (\ref{equ:def_nonsig_med}) can be
determined by simulations. For the ${\mathbold y}_n$ of the stack loss
data the 0.95-non-significance region is $[11.86,18.71]$ which can be
compared with the 0.95-confidence region $[11,18]$ based on the order
statistics. For any $m$ the P-value $p(m)$ is defined as
\begin{equation} \label{equ:def_nonsig_med-Pval}
p(m)=\mathbold P\left(\inf_b\sum_{i=1}^n\vert y_i+bZ_i-m\vert < s_1({\mathbold
y}_n)\right).
\end{equation}
\section{Choice of functional}
The procedure expounded in the previous section makes no use of a
model of the form (\ref{equ:linreg1_mod}). It solely based on the
approximation of ${\mathbold y}_n$ by a linear combination of the
covariates as measured in the $L_1$ and $L_2$ norms. There is no
mention of an error term. It therefore makes little sense to describe
the procedure as one of model sense. It makes more sense to interpret
it as one of functional choice. There does not seem to be any
immediate connection with 'wrong model' approaches as in
\cite{BERetal13} and \cite{LINLIU09}.
For a given subset $e$ the $L_1$ function
$T_{1,e}$ is defined by
\begin{eqnarray} \label{equ:functional_L_1}
T_{1,e}(\mathbb P_n) &=& \operatorname{argmin}_{{\mathbold \beta}(e)}
\int\vert y-{\mathbold x}(e)^t{\mathbold \beta}(e)\vert \,
d\mathbb P_n(y,{\mathbold x}(e))\nonumber\\
&=&\operatorname{argmin}_{{\mathbold \beta}(e)}\Vert
{\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_n(e){\mathbold \beta}(e)\Vert_1
\end{eqnarray}
with the corresponding definition of the $L_2$ functional
\begin{eqnarray} \label{equ:functional_L_2}
T_{2,e}(\mathbb P_n) &=& \operatorname{argmin}_{{\mathbold \beta}(e)}
\int (y-{\mathbold x}(e)^t{\mathbold \beta}(e))^2 \,
d\mathbb P_n(y,{\mathbold x}(e))\nonumber\\
&=&\operatorname{argmin}_{{\mathbold \beta}(e)}\Vert
{\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_n(e){\mathbold \beta}(e)\Vert_2.
\end{eqnarray}
More generally an $M$-functional $T_{\rho,e}$ can be defined as
\begin{eqnarray} \label{equ:functioal_rho_0}
T_{\rho,e}(\mathbb P_n) &=& \operatorname{argmin}_{{\mathbold \beta}(e)}
\int\rho\left(\frac{y-{\mathbold x}(e)^t{\mathbold
\beta}(e)}{\sigma_n}\right) \, dP(y,{\mathbold x}(e))\nonumber\\
&=&\operatorname{argmin}_{{\mathbold \beta}(e)}
\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\rho\left(\frac{y_i-{\mathbold
x}_{i\cdot}(e)^t{\mathbold \beta(e)}}{\sigma_n}\right).
\end{eqnarray}
The function $\rho$ is taken to be convex with a bounded first
derivative. This is the case for the default choice in this paper
namely the Huber $\rho$-function defined by
\begin{equation} \label{equ:huber_rho}
\rho_c(u)=\left\{\begin{array}{l@{\quad:\quad}l}
\frac{1}{2}u^2& \vert u\vert \le c\\
c\vert u\vert-\frac{1}{2}c^2 &\vert u\vert > c\\
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
where $c$ is a tuning constant. The functional can be calculated using
the iterative scheme described in Chapter 7.8.2 of \cite{HUBRON09}.
For reasons of equivariance (\ref{equ:functioal_rho_0}) contains a
scale parameter $\sigma_n$ which may be external or part of the
definition of $T_{\rho}$ (see Chapter 7.8 of \cite{HUBRON09}). The
default choice in this paper is the Median Absolute Deviation of the
residuals from an $L_1$ fit:
\begin{equation} \label{equ:default_sig_2}
\sigma_n=\text{mad}({\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_n{\mathbold
\beta}_{1,n}(e_f)).
\end{equation}
One use of $M$-functionals is to protect against outlying
$y$-values. The choice (\ref{equ:default_sig_2}) preserves this
property.
\subsection{$L_1$ regression}\label{sec:rq_modchc}
The best linear fit based on all covariates is determined by
\begin{equation} \label{equ:rq_functional_1}
T_{1,e_{\text f}}(\mathbb P_n)={\mathbold \beta}_{1,n}(e_{\text f})=
\operatorname{argmin}_{{\mathbold \beta}}\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\vert
y_i-{\mathbold x}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold \beta}\vert=\operatorname{argmin}_{{\mathbold
\beta}}\Vert {\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_n{\mathbold \beta}\Vert_1
\end{equation}
with mean sum of absolute deviations
\begin{equation} \label{equ:rq_functional_3}
s_{1,n}(e_{\text f})=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\vert y_i-
{\mathbold x}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold \beta}_{1,n}(e_{\text f})\vert =\Vert {\mathbold y}_n-
{\mathbold x}_n{\mathbold \beta}_{1,n}(e_{\text f})\Vert_1 \,.
\end{equation}
Let ${\mathbold Z}_n$ be a $n\times k$ matrix with elements $Z_{ij}$
which are i.i.d. $N(0,1)$. Given $e$ replace the covariates with
$e_j=0$ by the $Z_{ij}$, that is, put $W_{i,j}(e)=x_{i,j}$ if
$e_j=1$ and $W_{ij}(e)=Z_{ij}$ if $e_j=0$. Denote the relevant
matrices by ${\mathbold W}_n(e)$ and ${\mathbold
Z}_n(e^c)$ and the empirical measure by ${\tilde \mathbb P}_{n,e}$. The
best linear fit based on these covariates is determined
\begin{equation} \label{equ L_1_all}
T_{1,e_{\text f}}({\tilde \mathbb P}_{n,e})={\tilde
{\mathbold \beta}}_{1,n}(e)=\operatorname{argmin}_{{\mathbold \beta}} \Vert {\mathbold y}_n-
{\mathbold W}_n(e){\mathbold \beta}\Vert_1
\end{equation}
with mean sum of absolute deviations
\begin{equation} \label{equ:rq_functional_2}
S_{1,n}(e)=\Vert {\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold W}_n(e) {\tilde
{\mathbold \beta}}_{1,n}(e)\Vert_1
\end{equation}
The quantity $S_{1,n}(e)$ is a random variable. The $P$-value
$p_n(e)$ is defined by
\begin{equation} \label{equ:rq_functional_21}
p_n(e)={\mathbold P}(S_{1,n}(e)\le s_{1,n}(e_{\text f}))\,.
\end{equation}
There is no explicit expression for the $P$-values in the case of
$L_1$ regression. They must be calculated using simulations as in
Table~\ref{tab:stackloss_L_1}. This results in four of the
$P$-values being zero and so no comparison between them. A comparison
can be obtained as follows. Simulate the distribution of
\begin{equation} \label{equ:s_S_1}
s_{1,n}(e)- S_{1,n}(e)
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation} \label{equ:s(e)}
s_{1,n}(e)=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\vert y_i-
{\mathbold x}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold \beta}_{1,n}(e)\vert =\Vert {\mathbold y}_n-
{\mathbold x}_n{\mathbold \beta}_{1,n}(e)\Vert_1
\end{equation}
and then approximate it by a $\Gamma$-distribution with the shape and
scale parameters $sh(e)$ and $sc(e)$ estimated from the simulations
as $\hat{sh}(e)$ and $\hat{ sc}(e)$ respectively. The resulting estimated
$P$-values are given by
\begin{equation} \label{equ:p_gamma_approx_1}
{\hat p}_n(e)=1-\text{pgamma}(s_{1,n}(e)-s_{1,n}(e_{\text f}),
\hat{sh}(e),\hat{sc}(e))\,.
\end{equation}
The results for the stack loss data are given in
Table~\ref{tab:stack_loss_gamma} and may be compared with the
$P$-values of Table~\ref{tab:stackloss_L_1}.
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccc}
functional&0&1&2&3&4&5&6&7\\
$P$-value&1.93e-7&1.41e-2&4.90e-4&2.32e-1&5.02e-9&7.43e-3&2.57e-4&1.00\\
\quad\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Encoded $L_1$-functionals and $P$-values for the stack loss
data based on 1000 simulations using the $\Gamma$-approximation
(\ref{equ:p_gamma_approx_1}),\label{tab:stack_loss_gamma}}
\end{table}
Small $P$-values indicate that covariables have been omitted which have
a significant effect on the dependent variable. This excludes the
functionals encoded as 0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 although the functional
encoded as 1 could possible be retained. The functional 3 with
$P$-value 0.232 omits the covariable Acid.Conc. As the functional 7
differs from 3 only through the inclusion of Acid.Conc the conclusion
is that it contains a covariate which is little better than random
noise. Thus an analysis of the $P$-values leads to the choice of the
functional 3. The interpretation of $P$-values and the choice of
functional will be considered in greater detail in
Sections~\ref{sec:eval_p} and \ref{sec:choose_func} respectively.
The second running example is the low birth weight data of
\cite{HOSLEM89} with $n=189$ and $k=9$. The dependent variable is the
weight of the child at birth. The nine covariates range from the
weight and age of the mother to hypertension and indicators of
race. There are in all 512 different functionals. In the context of
model choice it is considered in \cite{HJOCLA03B}.
For this data set the computing time using 1000 simulations is about 50
minutes. This can be reduced by a factor of about ten by approximating
the modulus function $\vert x\vert$ by the Huber $\rho$-function
(\ref{equ:huber_rho}) with a small value of the tuning constant $c$,
for example $c=0.01$ (see Section~\ref{sec:M_modchc}). Care must be
taken in interpreting the decrease in computing time as the
$L_1$-functional was calculated using package \cite{KOEN10} whereas
the program for the $M$-functional was written entirely in Fortran using
the algorithm given in Chapter 7.8 of \cite{HUBRON09} (see also
\cite{DUTT77a} and \cite{DUTT77b}) and the pseudo-random number
generator {\it ran2} (see \cite{PRTEVEFL03}). A pure Fortran program
for the $L_1$-functional may be much faster (see
\cite{KoenkerPortnoy1997}).
\subsection{$M$-regression functionals}\label{sec:M_modchc}
The $M$-functionals can be treated in the same manner as the $L_1$
functional but with the added advantage that for large values of the
tuning constant $c$ in (\ref{equ:huber_rho}) there exist asymptotic
approximations for the $P$-values. On writing
\begin{eqnarray}
T_{\rho,e_{\text f}}(\mathbb P_n) &=&{\mathbold \beta}_{\rho}(e_{\text f})=\operatorname{argmin}_{{\mathbold \beta}}
\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\rho\left(\frac{y_i-{\mathbold
x}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold \beta}}{\sigma_n}\right)\\
s_{\rho,n}(e_{\text{f}})&=&\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\rho
\left(\frac{y_i-{\mathbold x}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold \beta}_{\rho}(e_{\text f})}{\sigma_n}\right)\\
T_{\rho,e}(\mathbb P_n) &=&{\mathbold \beta}_{\rho}(e)=\operatorname{argmin}_{{\mathbold
\beta}}\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n
\rho\left(\frac{y_i-{\mathbold x}_{i\cdot}(e)^t{\mathbold \beta}}{\sigma_n}\right)\\
s_{\rho}(e)&=&\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\rho\left(\frac{y_i-{\mathbold
x}_{i\cdot}(e)^t{\mathbold \beta}_{\rho}(e)}
{\sigma_n}\right)\\
T_{\rho,e}({\tilde \mathbb P}_n) &=&{\tilde {\mathbold \beta}}_{\rho}(e)=\operatorname{argmin}_{{\mathbold \beta}(e)}
\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\rho\left(\frac{y_i-{\mathbold
W}_{i\cdot}(e)^t{\mathbold \beta}(e)}{\sigma_n}\right)\\
S_{\rho,n}(e)&=&\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\rho\left(\frac{y_i-{\mathbold W}_{i\cdot}(e)^t
{\tilde {\mathbold \beta}}_{\rho}(e)}{\sigma_n}\right)
\end{eqnarray}
a second order Taylor expansion gives
\begin{equation} \label{equ:taylor_approx_1}
S_{\rho,n}(e)\approx s_{\rho,n}(e)-\frac{1}{2}\frac{ \left(\frac{1}{n}
\sum_{i=1}^n\rho^{(1)}\left(\frac{r_i(e)}{\sigma_n}\right)^2\right)
\chi^2_{k-k(e)}}{\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\rho^{(2)}
\left(\frac{r_i(e)}{\sigma_n}\right)}
\end{equation}
where $\rho^{(1)}$ and $\rho^{(2)}$ are first and second derivatives
of $\rho$ respectively, $r_i(e)=y_i-{\mathbold x}_{i\cdot}(e)^t{\mathbold \beta}(e)$ and
$\chi^2_{k-k(e)}$ is a chi-squared random variable with $k-k(e)$
degrees of freedom. The inequality $S_{\rho,n}(e) \le s_{\rho,n}(e_{\text
f})$ is asymptotically equivalent to
\begin{equation}
\frac{\left(\frac{2}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\rho^{(2)}\left(\frac{r_i(e)}{\sigma_n}
\right)\right)(s_{\rho,n}(e)-s_{\rho,n}(e_{\text
f}))}{\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n
\rho^{(1)}\left(\frac{r_i(e)}{\sigma_n}\right)^2}\le \chi^2_{k-k(e)}
\end{equation}
with asymptotic $P$-value
\begin{equation} \label{equ:asymp_p_rho}
p_n(e)\approx 1-\text{pchisq}\left(\frac{\left(\frac{2}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n
\rho^{(2)}\left(\frac{r_i(e)}{\sigma_n}\right)\right)(s_{\rho,n}(e)-s_{\rho,n}
(e_{\text f}))}{\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\rho^{(1)}
\left(\frac{r_i(e)}{\sigma_n}\right)^2},k-k(e)\right)\,.
\end{equation}
As the tuning constant $c$ tends to zero the terms
$\rho_c^{(1)}\left(\frac{r_i(e)}{\sigma_n}\right)^2$ and
$\rho_c^{(2)}\left(\frac{r_i(e)}{\sigma_n} \right)$ become
one and zero respectively and the approximation breaks down.
The results for the stack loss data with $c=1.5$ are given in
Table~\ref{tab:stackloss_M_1.5} and may be compared with those given
in Table~\ref{tab:stackloss_L_1} for the $L_1$-functional.
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccc}
functional&0&1&2&3&4&5&6&7\\
$P$-value&0.000&0.012&0.000&0.293&0.000&0.006&0.000&1.000\\
$P$-value&3.19e-7&1.23e-2&4.40e-4&3.03e-1&3.79e-8&5.74e-3&3.59e-5&1.00\\
$P$-value&1.89e-6&9.96e-3&1.81e-3&2.33e-1&4.63e-11&2.67e-3&6.66e-5&1.00\\
\quad\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Encoded $M$-functionals (c=1.5) and $P$-values for the stack loss
data based on 5000 simulations: first row the raw values, second row
the values based on the $\Gamma$-approximation
(\ref{equ:p_gamma_approx_1}), third row the values based on the
asymptotic approximation (\ref{equ:asymp_p_rho}). \label{tab:stackloss_M_1.5}}
\end{table}
\subsection{Least squares regression}
The $L_2$-regression functionals are a special case of the
$M$-functionals for a sufficiently large tuning constant $c$.
The $P$-values can either be estimated directly using simulations or
using the $\Gamma$-approximation (\ref{equ:p_gamma_approx_1}) or
using the asymptotic approximation (\ref{equ:asymp_p_rho}) which takes the
form
\begin{equation} \label{equ:lsq_functional_4}
p_n(e)\approx 1-\text{pchisq}\left(\frac{n(\Vert
{\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_n(e){\mathbold \beta}_{2,n}(e)\Vert_2^2-\Vert {\mathbold
y}_n- {\mathbold x}_n{\mathbold \beta}_{2,n}\Vert_2^2)}{\Vert
{\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_n(e){\mathbold \beta}_{2,n}(e)\Vert_2^2},k-k(e)\right)\,.
\end{equation}
If a lower bound $\alpha$ is given for $p_n(e)$ then
(\ref{equ:lsq_functional_4}) is asymptotically
equivalent to the $F$-test in the linear regression model for
testing the null hypothesis that the coefficients of the covariates
not included are zero.
The $P$-values for the stack loss data are given in
Table~\ref{tab:stackloss_L_2}.
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccc}
functional&0&1&2&3&4&5&6&7\\
$P$-value&0.000&0.011&0.000&0.427&0.000&0.005&0.000&1.000\\
$P$-value&1.89e-4&1.07e-2&1.28e-4&4.35e-1&2.80e-5&4.42e-3&4.24e-4&1.00\\
$P$-value&2.53e-4&1.51e-2&1.04e-4&3.11e-1&8.14e-5&4.69e-3&2.20e-4&1.00\\
\quad\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Encoded $L_2$-functionals and $P$-values for the stack loss
data based on 5000 simulations: first row the raw values, second row
the values based on the $\Gamma$-approximation
(\ref{equ:p_gamma_approx_1}), third row the values based on the
asymptotic approximation (\ref{equ:lsq_functional_4}).\label{tab:stackloss_L_2}}
\end{table}
\subsection{Non-linear regression}
The ideas can be applied mutatis mutandis to non-linear
regression
\begin{equation} \label{equ:non_lin}
T_{\text{nl},1,e}(\mathbb P_n)=\operatorname{argmin}_{{\mathbold \beta}(e)} \Vert {\mathbold y}_n-g({\mathbold
x}_n(e),{\mathbold \beta}(e))\Vert_1
\end{equation}
with corresponding definitions for $T_{\text{nl},\rho,e}$ and
$T_{\text{nl},2,e}$. The computational cost is much higher so that
only small values of $k$ are possible.
\subsection{Lower bounds for $P$-values} \label{sec:eval_p}
In contrast to AIC and BIC the $P$-values do not order the different
functionals. One possibility it to choose a cut-off value $p_0(n,k)$ for
$p_n(e)$ and consider only those functionals $T_e$ with $p_n(e)\ge p_0(n,k)$. A
possible value for $p_0(n,k)$ can be obtained by considering the size of
the $P$-values when all covariates are noise, ${\mathbold
x}_n={\tilde {\mathbold Z}_n}$. For each such ${\mathbold
x}_n={\tilde {\mathbold Z}_n}$ the minimum value of $p_n(e)$ over all $e$ can be
calculated and then simulated for different ${\tilde {\mathbold
Z}_n}$. The $\alpha$ quantile with for example $\alpha=0.05$ can
then be taken as the value of $p_0(n,k)=p_0(n,k,\alpha)$.
The minimum of the $p(e)$-values can only be determined by simulation
and then further simulations are required in order to determine the
quantiles of the minimum values. For $L_1$-functionals for the stack
loss data with $n=21$ and $k=3$ the time required with 1000
simulations for each $p(e)$ and 2000 simulations for the quantile was
10 minutes using the approximation to $\vert x\vert$ based on the
Huber $\rho$-function (\ref{equ:huber_rho}) with tuning constant
$c=0.01$. The results using the $\Gamma$-approximation
(\ref{equ:p_gamma_approx_1}) are given in the first line of
Table~\ref{tab:p0nkalpha}.
The computational time for the low birth weight data with $k=9$ was
considerably higher. The time required for 1000 simulations for the
minimum values of the $p_n(e)$ each of which was also based on 500
simulations was 34 hours. The results using
the $\Gamma$-approximation (\ref{equ:p_gamma_approx_1}) are given in
the second line of Table~\ref{tab:p0nkalpha}.
The corresponding $p_0$ values for the $M$-functional and the
$L_2$-functional are based on 500 simulations with 250 simulations for
each $p_n(e)$ value. The computing time for the low birth weight data was
2 1/2 hours in each case. The results are given in
the lines 3-6 of Table~\ref{tab:p0nkalpha}.
\vspace*{-0.5cm}
\begin{center}
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
$L_1$-functional&&\\
$p_0(21,3,0.01)=0.00368$&$p_0(21,3,0.05)=0.0155$&$p_0(21,3,0.10)=0.0340$\\
$p_0(189,9,0.01)=0.00044$&$p_0(189,9,0.05)=0.0031$&$p_0(189,9,0.10)=0.0068$\\
$L_2$-functional&&\\
$p_0(21,3,0.01)=0.0055$&$p_0(21,3,0.05)=0.0193$&$p_0(21,3,0.10)=0.036$\\
$p_0(189,9,0.01)=0.00011$&$p_0(189,9,0.05)=0.0020$&$p_0(189,9,0.10)=0.0056$
\end{tabular}
\caption{The $P$-values $p_0(n,k,\alpha)$ for the $L_1$- and
$L_2$-functionals.\label{tab:p0nkalpha}}
\end{table}
\end{center}
For the $M$-functionals with a not too smaller a value of $c$ in
(\ref{equ:huber_rho}) and the $L_2$-functionals use can be made of the
approximations (\ref{equ:asymp_p_rho}) and
(\ref{equ:lsq_functional_4}) respectively which allow simulations
for larger values of $k$. The computational load can be further reduced as
follows. Without loss of generality suppose $\Vert {\mathbold y}_n
\Vert_2=1$. As all the ${\mathbold x}_n={\tilde {\mathbold Z}_n}$ are
standard Gaussian white noise random variables it follows for the
$L_2$-functionals
\begin{equation} \label{equ:lsq_functional_2.1}
\frac{\Vert
{\mathbold Z}_n(e^c)^t({\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_n(e){\mathbold
\beta}_{2,n}(e))\Vert_2^2}{\Vert
{\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_n(e){\mathbold
\beta}_{2,n}(e)\Vert_2^2}\approx \Vert {\mathbold
Z}_n(e^c)^t{\mathbold
y}_n\Vert_2^2\approx\sum_j\Vert {\mathbold Z}_n(e^c_j)^t{\mathbold y}_n\Vert_2^2
\end{equation}
where $e^c=\sum_je^c_j$ and each $e^c_j$ has only one element not
equal to zero. Furthermore the ${\mathbold Z}_n(e^c_j)^t{\mathbold
y}_n$ are independent $N(0,1)$ random variables. This yields the
asymptotic approximation
\begin{equation} \label{equ:chipr}
{\tilde p}(e)=1-\text{pchisq}\Big(\sum_{j \in S}\chi^2_1(j),\vert S\vert\Big)
\end{equation}
where the $\chi^2_1(j),j=1,\ldots,k$ are independent $\chi^2$ random
variables with one degree of freedom. Taking the minimum over $e$, simulating
sets of $\chi^2$ random variables and then taking the $\alpha$
quantile gives a value ${\tilde p}_0(k,\alpha)$. It is only necessary
to perform the simulations one for each value of $k$. The ${\tilde
p}_0(k,\alpha)$ can be approximated by
\begin{equation} \label{equ:min_pr_approx}
{\tilde p}_0(k,\alpha)\approx \exp(c_1(k)+
c_2(k)\log(\alpha)+c_3(k)\log(\alpha)^2)
\end{equation}
for $\alpha<0.5$ (see Chapter 2.9 of \cite{DAV14}) and can be used in
place of the $p_0(n,k,\alpha)$. For $k=17$ the time required on a
standard laptop was 7 hours 42 minutes. As an example
\[{\tilde p}_0(9,0.01)=0.00028,\,{\tilde p}_0(9,0.05)=0.0025,\, {\tilde
p}_0(9,0.10)=0.0059\,.\]
The results compare well with those based on simulations as given in
Table~\ref{tab:p0nkalpha} and their computing costs are essentially
zero. This suggests that they can be used as guidelines when
simulations are too expensive.
\subsection{Choosing functionals} \label{sec:choose_func}
In view of the interpretation of the $P$-value of a functional the
first step is to decide on a cut-off value $p_0$ and then restrict
consideration to those functionals $T_e$ with $p_n(e)>p_0$. A possible choice
of $p_0$ is $p_0=p_0(n,k,\alpha)$ and this will be done below. The
choice may be further restricted by requiring that for each such $e$
and for all $e'$ with $e'<e$ pointwise all the omitted covariates are
relevant with respect to $e$. More precisely $p_n(e',e) < p_0(n,k(e),\alpha)$ for
all $e'< e$ where $p_n(e',e)$ is the $P$-value of $e'$ calculated with
respect to the covariates ${\mathbold x}(e)$. A final choice may be
made by choosing that functional $T_e$ with the highest $p_n(e)$-value.
The results of applying the above strategy to the stack loss data with
the $L_1$-norm are as follows. Taking the cut-off value to be
$p_0(21,3,0.01)=0.00368$ (based on Table~\ref{tab:p0nkalpha}) the first step
results in the functionals based on $e_1=(1,0,0)$, $e_2=(1,1,0)$ and
$e_3=(1,0,1)$. The second step eliminates the functionals based on
$e_2$ and $e_3$. The choices $\alpha=0.05$ and $\alpha=0.1$ both lead
to $e=e_2$ with $p_n(e_2)=0.232$.
The results for the low birth weight data are as follows. The first
step with $\alpha=0.01$ leads to 379 functionals. The second step
results in the single functional encoded as 260 with just two
variables and a $P$-value of $4.25e$-3. Putting
$\alpha=0.05$ results in 221 functionals after the first step. The
second step yields the five functionals encoded as 292, 166,
260, 36 and 60. The functional 292 has the highest $P$-value with
$p_n(e)=0.074$. Finally the choice $\alpha=0.1$ results in 149
functionals after the first step. The second step reduces this to the
seven functionals 308, 292, 166, 262, 38, 52 and 260 of which the
functional encoded as 308 has the highest $P$-value equal to 0.321.
The strategy described above `guarantees' that all included covariates
are relevant. If it is more important not to exclude covariates which may
have an influence at the possible cost of including some irrelevant
covariates the this may be done by increasing the value of $\alpha$ in
$p_0(n,k,\alpha)$ or by simply specifying some cut-off level $p_0$
judged to be appropriate.
Although AIC and BIC list the models in order of preference they give
no indication as to whether any of the models under consideration is
an adequate approximation to the data or not. Presumably this is the
responsibility of the user before applying the criterion.
The first ten models for the birth weight data based on BIC are
encoded as
\begin{equation} \label{equ:encoded_vals}
308, 310, 436, 438, 294, 292, 182, 316, 422,309\,.
\end{equation}
The functionals obtained using the $P$-values strategy are encoded as
260, 292 and 308. Their positions in the BIC list are 66, 6 and 1
respectively.
The second model on the BIC list is encoded as 310 and includes the
additional covariate `weight of mother' compared to the 308
model. If one uses \cite{R13} to do an $L_1$ regression based on
the covariates corresponding to 310 the 95\% confidence interval for
`weight of mother' includes zero. This may be interpreted as a
non-significant effect given the other covariates. This interpretation
is consistent with the $P$-value strategy with $\alpha=0.1$ where the
encoded value 310 is not included in the list
(\ref{equ:encoded_vals}). The reason is that the $P$-value
for the functional excluding `weight of mother' has a $P$-value of
0.112 which exceeds $p_0(189,5,0.1)=0.017$.
This shows that models may be high in the BIC list although they
contain variables which are not significantly better than random
noise. This can be made more explicit by replacing the all covariates
by random noise and using simulations to determine how often a model
containing a random noise covariate is first on the BIC list. This
was simulated 500 times with the weight of the child as the dependent
variable. This happened in 43\% of the cases. With $\alpha=0.1$ the
$P$-value strategy is calibrated to do this in $100\alpha\%=10\%$ of
the cases. The simulations resulted in 9\%.
\section{Non-Significance regions}
\subsection{The median and $M$-functionals}
The 0.95-non-significance region for the median of the stack loss data was
defined and calculated in Section~\ref{sec:n-s-r_example} with the
result $[11.86, 18.71]$. In general the $\alpha$-non-significance region
is defined by
${\mathbold y}_n$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{\mathcal{NS}({\mathbold y}_n,\text{med},\alpha)}\label{equ:med_approx_gen}\\
&=&\left\{m:\sum_{i=1}^{n}\vert
y_i-m\vert-\sum_{i=1}^{n}\vert y_i-\text{med}({\mathbold y}_n)\vert\le
\text{ql1}(\alpha,m,{\mathbold y}_n)\right\}\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\text{ql1}(\alpha,m,{\mathbold y}_n)$ is the $\alpha$-quantile
of
\begin{equation} \label{equ:med_approx0_gen}
\sum_{i=1}^n\vert y_i-m\vert-\inf_b\,\sum_{i=1}^n\vert
y_i-m-bZ_i\vert
\end{equation}
and the $Z_i$ are standard Gaussian white noise.
The non-significance region (\ref{equ:med_approx_gen}) can be calculated
as follows. Put
\begin{equation} \label{equ:quad_approx1}
f(m,\alpha,{\mathbold y}_n)=\text{ql1}(\alpha,m,{\mathbold y}_n)-
\sum_{i=1}^n\vert y_i-m\vert+\sum_{i=1}^n\vert y_i -
\text{med}({\mathbold y}_n)\vert
\end{equation}
and note that $f(\text{med}({\mathbold y}_n),\alpha,{\mathbold y}_n)\ge 0$.
Now determine an order statistic $y_{(nl)}$ with
$nl=\text{qbinom}((1-\beta)/2,n,0.5))$ for a suitably large $\beta$
such that $f(y_{(nl)},\alpha,{\mathbold y}_n)< 0$. Interval bisection
combined with simulations can now be used to find an approximate
solution $m_{\text{lb}}$ of $f(m,\alpha,{\mathbold y}_n)
=0$. This gives a lower bound and the same process can be used to get
an upper bound $m_{\text{ub}}$ to give $\mathcal{NS}({\mathbold
y}_n,\text{med},\alpha)=[m_{\text{lb}},m_{\text{ub}}]$.
Non-significance regions for $M$-functionals $T_{\rho}$ are defined
analogously by replacing (\ref{equ:med_approx_gen}) by
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{\mathcal{NS}({\mathbold y}_n,T_{\rho},\alpha)}\label{equ:m_approx_gen}\\
&=&\left\{m:\sum_{i=1}^{n}\rho\left(\frac{y_i-m}{\sigma_n}\right)-
\sum_{i=1}^{n}\rho\left(\frac{y_i-T_{\rho}(\mathbb P_n)}{\sigma_n}\right)\le
\text{qrho}(\alpha,m,{\mathbold y}_n)\right\}\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\text{qrho}(\alpha,m,{\mathbold y}_n)$ is the $\alpha$-quantile
of
\begin{equation} \label{equ:m_approx0_gen}
\sum_{i=1}^n\rho\left(\frac{y_i-m}{\sigma_n}\right)-
\inf_b\,\sum_{i=1}^n\rho\left(\frac{y_i-m-bZ_i}{\sigma_n}\right),
\end{equation}
the $Z_i$ are standard Gaussian white noise and $\sigma_n$ is
a scale functional whose default value in this situation is
(\ref{equ:default_sig_2}).
For smooth functions $\rho$ an asymptotic expression for the
non-significance region is available. Let $\rho^{(1)}$ and
$\rho^{(2)}$ denote the first and second derivative of $\rho$. A
Taylor series expansion results in
\begin{equation}\label{equ:m_approx_gen_asymp_1}
\mathcal{NS}({\mathbold y}_n,T_{\rho},\alpha)\approx \left\{m:\vert
T_{\rho}(\mathbb P_n)-m\vert \le
\text{qnorm}((1+\alpha)/2)\sigma_n\sqrt{v(T_{\rho},\mathbb P_n)/n}\,\right\}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{equ:m_approx_gen_asymp_2}
v(T_{\rho},\mathbb P_n)= \frac{\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\rho^{(1)}
\left(\frac{y_i-T_{\rho}(\mathbb P_n)}{\sigma_n}\right)^2}
{\left(\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\rho^{(2)}\left(\frac{y_i-T_{\rho}(\mathbb P_n)}
{\sigma_n}\right)\right)^2}\,.
\end{equation}
This latter expression is well known in robust statistics and
corresponds to the asymptotic variance of an $M$-location
functional: the non-significance region
(\ref{equ:m_approx_gen_asymp_1}) is the corresponding
$\alpha$-confidence region for the `unknown' $T_{\rho}(P)$. In the
special case $\rho(u)=u^2/2$ (\ref{equ:m_approx_gen_asymp_1}) is
the asymptotic $\alpha$-confidence region for the mean based on
Gaussian errors.
\subsection{$L_1$ regression} \label{sec:approx_qunatile}
The idea carries over to the $L_1$ regression functional. For any
${\mathbold \beta}$ put
\begin{equation} \label{equ:rq_approx_1}
\Gamma({\mathbold y}_n,{\mathbold x}_n,{\mathbold \beta},{\mathbold Z}_n)=\Vert {\mathbold
y}_n-{\mathbold x}_n{\mathbold \beta}\Vert_1-\inf_{\mathbold b}\Vert
{\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_n{\mathbold \beta}-{\mathbold
Z}_n{\mathbold b}\Vert_1
\end{equation}
and denote the $\alpha$-quantile of $\Gamma({\mathbold y}_n,{\mathbold
x},{\mathbold \beta},{\mathbold Z}_n)$ by $\text{q1}(\alpha,{\mathbold \beta},{\mathbold
y}_n,{\mathbold x}_n)$. An $\alpha$-non-significance region is then
defined as
\begin{equation} \label{equ:rq_approx_2}
\mathcal{NS}({\mathbold y}_n,{\mathbold x}_n,\alpha,T_{1})=\{{\mathbold \beta}:\Vert
{\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_n{\mathbold \beta}\Vert_1-\Vert {\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold
x}_n{\mathbold \beta}_{1,n}\Vert_1 \le \text{q1}(\alpha,{\mathbold \beta},{\mathbold
y}_n,{\mathbold x}_n)\}
\end{equation}
where ${\mathbold \beta}_{1,n}=T_{1}(\mathbb P_n)$.
As it stands the non-significance region is difficult to calculate as it
requires a grid of values for the possible values of ${\mathbold \beta}$ and the
values of $\text{q1}(\alpha,{\mathbold \beta},{\mathbold y}_n,{\mathbold x}_n)$
have to be estimated using simulations. If the quantiles are largely
independent of the ${\mathbold \beta}$-values then
$\text{q1}(\alpha,{\mathbold \beta}_{1},{\mathbold y}_n,{\mathbold
x}_n)$ can be used with a large reduction in computation.
Section~\ref{sec:cov_prop} contains some asymptotics which suggest that
the independence may hold for large sample sizes $n$. The defining
inequality in (\ref{equ:rq_approx_2}) will still have to be checked
over a grid of values.
Most software packages provide only confidence regions for the
individual components of ${\mathbold \beta}$. Corresponding component wise
non-significance regions can be defined with a large
reduction in the computational overload. For the first component
$\beta_1$ of $T_{1}(\mathbb P_n)$ the $\alpha$-non-significance region is
given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{\mathcal{NS}({\mathbold y}_n,{\mathbold x}_n,\alpha,
T_{1,1})=\Big\{\beta_1:\inf_{\beta_2,\ldots,\beta_k}\Big\Vert
{\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_{\cdot
1}\beta_1-\sum_{j=2}^k{\mathbold x}_{\cdot j}\beta_j\Big\Vert_1} \label{equ:rq_approx_3}\\
&&\hspace{3cm}-\Big\Vert
{\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_n{\mathbold \beta}_{1,n}\Big\Vert_1 \le
\text{q1}(\alpha,\beta_1,{\mathbold
y}_n,{\mathbold x}_n)\Big\}\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\text{q1}(\alpha,\beta_1,{\mathbold y}_n,{\mathbold x}_n)$ is
the $\alpha$-quantile of
\begin{eqnarray}
\Gamma_1({\mathbold y}_n,{\mathbold x}_n,\beta_1,Z_{\cdot 1})
&=&\inf_{\beta_2,\ldots,\beta_k}\Big\Vert {\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_{\cdot
1}\beta_1
-\sum_{j=2}^k{\mathbold x}_{\cdot j}\beta_j\Big\Vert_1-\label{equ:rq_approx_4}\\
&&\inf_{b_1,\beta_2,\ldots,\beta_k}\Big\Vert
{\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_{\cdot
1}\beta_1-\sum_{j=2}^k{\mathbold x}_{\cdot j}\beta_j-{\mathbold
Z}_{\cdot 1}b_1\Big\Vert_1 \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The non-significance intervals of the stack loss data and for
comparison the 0.95-confidence intervals are given in
Table~\ref{tab:approx_stackloss2}.
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
&Air.Flow&Water.Temp&Acid.Conc\\
Non-sig. intervals (\ref{equ:rq_approx_3})&(0.552,1.082)&(0.225,1.603)&(-0.345,0.102)\\
$L_1$ confidence intervals&(0.509,1.168)&(0.272,3.037)&(-0.278,0.015)\\
\quad\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{First line: 0.95-non-significance intervals for the stack loss
data. Second line: 0.95-confidence intervals produced by \cite{KOEN10} for the
default choice `se=rank'. \label{tab:approx_stackloss2}}
\end{table}
\subsection{$M$-regression functionals}
Non-significance regions for $M$-regression functionals are defined in
the same manner as for $L_1$ regression. Just as in
Section~\ref{sec:M_modchc} the computational burden can be reduced for
large $n$ by using the asymptotic expressions. These result in
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{\hspace{-1cm}\mathcal{NS}({\mathbold y}_n,{\mathbold
x}_n,\alpha,T_{\rho})=\Biggl\{{\mathbold
\beta}:\sum_{i=1}^n\rho\left(\frac{y_i-{\mathbold
x}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold \beta}}{\sigma_n}\right)-\sum_{i=1}^n
\rho\left(\frac{y_i-{\mathbold x}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold
\beta_{\rho}}}{\sigma_n}\right)\le }\label{equ:m_approx_1}\\
&&\hspace{3cm}\frac{\text{qchisq}(\alpha,k)}{2}\frac{\sum_{i=1}^n
\rho^{{(1)}^2}\left(\frac{y_i-{\mathbold x}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold \beta}}{\sigma_n}\right)}{\sum_{i=1}^n
\rho^{(2)}\left(\frac{y_i-{\mathbold x}_{\cdot}i^t{\mathbold \beta}}{\sigma_n}\right)}\Biggr\}\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where ${\mathbold \beta_{\rho}}=T_{\rho}(\mathbb P_n)$. This can be further
simplified to
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{\hspace{1.5cm}\mathcal{NS}({\mathbold y}_n,{\mathbold
x}_n,\alpha,T_{\rho})=\Bigg\{{\mathbold \beta}:({\mathbold
\beta}-{\mathbold \beta}_{\rho})^t{\mathbold x}_n^t{\mathbold
x}_n({\mathbold \beta}-{\mathbold \beta}_{\rho})
\le } \label{equ:m_approx_2}\\
&&\hspace{2cm}\hspace{3cm}\left.\text{qchisq}(\alpha,k)\frac{\sum_{i=1}^n
\rho^{{(1)}^2}\left(\frac{y_i-{\mathbold x}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold
\beta_{\rho}}}{\sigma_n}\right)}{\sum_{i=1}^n
\rho^{(2)}\left(\frac{y_i-{\mathbold x}_{\cdot}i^t{\mathbold
\beta_{\rho}}}{\sigma_n}\right)}\right\}\,.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Least squares regression}
The method goes through for the least squares functional with the
advantage that explicit expressions are available. The result
corresponding to (\ref{equ:m_approx_1}) is
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{\hspace{-2cm}\mathcal{NS}({\mathbold y}_n,{\mathbold x}_n,\alpha,T_2)=\Bigg\{{\mathbold \beta}:\Vert {\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_n{\mathbold \beta}\Vert_2^2-\Vert
{\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_n{\mathbold \beta}_{2,n}\Vert_2^2\le} \label{equ:lsq_approx_1}\\
&&\hspace{2cm}\frac{\Vert {\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold
x}_n{\mathbold \beta}\Vert_2^2}{n}\text{qchisq}(\alpha,k)\Bigg\}
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
which is the same as
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{\hspace{-1.5cm}\mathcal{NS}({\mathbold y}_n,{\mathbold
x}_n,\alpha,T_{2})=\Bigg\{{\mathbold \beta}:({\mathbold
\beta}-{\mathbold \beta}_{2,n})^t{\mathbold x}_n^t{\mathbold
x}_n({\mathbold \beta}-{\mathbold \beta}_{2,n})
\le } \label{equ:lsq_approx_2}\\
&&\hspace{2cm}\frac{\Vert
{\mathbold y}_n-{\mathbold x}_n{\mathbold \beta}_{2,n}\Vert_2^2
\text{qchisq}(\alpha,k)}{n-\text{qchisq}(\alpha,k)}\Bigg\}\,. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where ${\mathbold \beta}_{2,n}=T_2(\mathbb P_n)$. The region is
asymptotically equivalent to a standard $\alpha$-confidence region for
the `true' parameter value.
\subsection{Covering properties} \label{sec:cov_prop}
The concept of a non-significance region makes no mention of a model
or true values. Nevertheless there are situations where a model and
its parameters are well founded and relate to well-defined properties
of the real world. In such cases there is an interest in
specifying a region which includes the real world value with the
required frequency in repeated measurements. It has to
be kept in mind however that covering true parameter values in
simulations is not the same as covering the corresponding real values
for real data (see Chapter 5.5 of \cite{DAV14}, \cite{STIG77}, Chapter
8.1 of \cite{HAMRONROUSTA86}, \cite{KUNBERHAMP93}).
Given this there is an interest in the covering properties of
non-significance regions. Table~\ref{tab:l1_approx_reg1} gives the
frequencies with which the non-significance intervals
(\ref{equ:med_approx_gen}) and the confidence intervals based on the rank
statistics cover the population median and
also the average lengths of the intervals. The results are for the
normal, Cauchy, $\chi^2_1$ and the Poisson ${\mathfrak
P}{\mathfrak o}(4)$ distributions and four different sample sizes
$n=10, 20, 50, 100$ and are based on 1000 simulations. The
discreteness of Poisson distribution was taken into account in the
calculations of the non-significance region as follows. If an
non-significance interval
$[\ell,u]$ contains an integer it is by $[\lceil
\ell \rceil,\lfloor u\rfloor]$. If it does not contain an integer it is
replaced by $[\lfloor\ell\rfloor,\lceil u\rceil]$. The covering
frequencies and lengths refer to this modified interval.
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
&$n$&10&20&50&100\\
$N(0,1)$& (\ref{equ:med_approx_gen})&0.940 1.512&0.954 1.040&0.948 0.648&0.942 0.464\\
&rank&0.968 2.046&0.968 1.198&0.970 0.767&0.964 0.530\\
$C(0,1)$&(\ref{equ:med_approx_gen})&0.960 3.318&0.956 1.670&0.960 0.958&0.952 0.629\\
&rank&0.978 5.791&0.950 1.850&0.968 1.069&0.964 0.700\\
$\chi^2_1$& (\ref{equ:med_approx_gen})&0.944 1.368&0.936 0.877&0.932 0.550&0.942 0.396\\
&rank&0.982 2.064&0.958 1.086&0.970 0.675&0.968 0.452\\
Pois(4)&(\ref{equ:med_approx_gen})&0.934 1.918&0.925 0.993&0.926 0.288&0.938 0.071\\
&rank&0.996 3.948&0.964 2.342&0.997 1.573&1.000 1.085\\
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Covering frequencies and average interval lengths based on
1000 simulations for the median for the 0.95-non-significance
intervals as defined by (\ref{equ:med_approx_gen}) and
(\ref{equ:med_approx0_gen}) with $Z=N(0,1)$ and the 0.95-confidence
intervals based on the ranks. For each sample size the first column
gives the covering frequency and the second the average interval
length. \label{tab:l1_approx_reg1}}
\end{table}
In this well defined situation Table~\ref{tab:l1_approx_reg1}
indicates that the 0.95-non-significance intervals also have covering
probabilities of about 0.95. The finite sample behaviour seems to be
better than that of the ranks procedure. Both methods have
approximately the correct covering frequencies but the lengths of the
non-significance intervals are uniformly smaller than the lengths of the
confidence intervals.
There is some theoretical explanation as to why the non-significance
regions have covering frequencies given by $\alpha$, at least
asymptotically. Consider firstly i.i.d. integer valued random
variables $Y_j$ with a unique median $\nu$. Then for a large sample
size $n$
\[ \sum_{j=1}^n \vert Y_j-\nu-bZ_j\vert\]
is, with large probability, minimized by putting $b=0$. In other words
the 0.95-non-significance interval is simply $[\nu,\nu]$ with a covering
probability tending to one. This is illustrated by the Poisson
distribution in Table~\ref{tab:l1_approx_reg1}.
Suppose that the $Y_j$ are continuous random variables with median 0
and a density $f$ which is continuous at 0 with $f(0)>0$. Then the
approximation
\begin{equation} \label{equ:rq_cov_prob_1}
\sum_{i=1}^n \left\vert Y_i-\frac{bZ_i}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert \approx
\sum_{i=1}^n\vert Y_i\vert -bN(0,1)+f(0)b^2
\end{equation}
holds (see the Appendix for a heuristic proof) and minimizing over $b$ gives
\begin{equation} \label{equ:rq_cov_prob_2}
\inf_b\,\sum_{i=1}^n \left\vert Y_i-\frac{bZ_i}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert \approx
\sum_{i=1}^n\vert Y_i\vert- \frac{\chi^2_1}{4f(0)}\,.
\end{equation}
Moreover the same proof gives
\begin{equation} \label{equ:rq_cov_prob_3}
\inf_b\,\sum_{i=1}^n \left\vert Y_i-\text{med}({\mathbold
Y}_n)-\frac{\theta}{\sqrt{n}}-\frac{bZ_i}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert
\approx \sum_{i=1}^n\vert Y_i-\text{med}({\mathbold
Y}_n)\vert+f(0)\theta^2-\frac{\chi^2_1}{4f(0)}
\end{equation}
from which the asymptotic $\alpha$-non-significance interval
\begin{equation} \label{equ:rq_cov_prob_4}
\left[\text{med}({\mathbold
Y}_n)-\sqrt{\frac{\text{qchisq}(\alpha,1)}{4f(0)^2n}},\,
\text{med}({\mathbold Y}_n)+\sqrt{\frac{\text{qchisq}(\alpha,1)}{4f(0)^2n}}\,\right]
\end{equation}
as defined in (\ref{equ:med_approx_gen}) and
(\ref{equ:med_approx0_gen}) follows. This latter interval is
the same as the asymptotic confidence interval based on the
median. Just as for the inverse rank method it does not require an
estimate of $f(0)$.
$L_1$ linear regression can be treated in the same
manner. Corresponding to (\ref{equ:rq_cov_prob_1}) one has
\begin{equation} \label{equ:rq_cov_prob_5}
\sum_{i=1}^n \left\vert Y_i-\frac{{\mathbold Z}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold
b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert \approx
\sum_{i=1}^n\vert Y_i\vert -N(0,\mathbold{I}_k)^t{\mathbold b}+f(0)\Vert
{\mathbold b}\Vert_2^2\,.
\end{equation}
Applying this to the $L_1$ regression functional gives
\begin{equation} \label{equ:rq_cov_prob_6}
\inf_{\mathbold b}\,\sum_{i=1}^n \left\vert Y_i-{\mathbold
x}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold \beta}_{1,n}-\frac{{\mathbold
x}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold
\theta}}{\sqrt{n}}-\frac{{\mathbold Z}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert
\approx\sum_{i=1}^n \vert Y_i-{\mathbold x}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold \beta}_{1,n}\vert
+f(0){\mathbold \theta}^t{\mathbold Q}_n{\mathbold \theta}-\frac{\chi^2_k}{4f(0)^2}
\end{equation}
where ${\mathbold Q}_n=\frac{1}{n}{\mathbold x}_n^t{\mathbold x}_n$. From this the asymptotic
$\alpha$-non-significance region
\begin{equation} \label{equ:rq_cov_prob_7}
({\mathbold \beta}-{\mathbold \beta}_{1,n})^t{\mathbold
Q}_n({\mathbold \beta}-{\mathbold \beta}_{1,n})\le
\frac{\text{qchisq}(\alpha,k)}{4f(0)^2n}
\end{equation}
follows. It is the same as the $\alpha$-confidence region based on
the $L_1$ regression estimate ${\mathbold \beta}_{1}$, see for example
\cite{ZHOPOR96}.
Table~\ref{tab:cov_stack_loss} gives the covering frequencies and
average interval lengths for data generated according to
\begin{equation} \label{equ:stackloss_data_gen}
Y=-39.69+0.832\cdot Air.Flow+0.574\cdot Water.Temp-0.061\cdot
Acid.Conc +\varepsilon
\end{equation}
using the $L_1$ coefficients for the stack loss data. The
sample size is $n=21$. The following four distributions for
the error term $\varepsilon$ are used:
$\varepsilon=N(0,1)*\text{Res}$, $\varepsilon=\sigma N(0,1)$
for the normal distribution, $\varepsilon=\sigma L^*$ for the Laplace
distribution and $\varepsilon=\sigma C^*$ for the Cauchy distribution
where $L^*$ and $C^*$ are respectively the Laplace and Cauchy
distributions closest to the $N(0,1)$ distribution, $\text{Res}$ are
the residuals and $\sigma$ the mean absolute deviation of the
residuals of the stack loss data.
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
&&$\beta_2$&$\beta_3$&$\beta_4$\\
residuals&(\ref{equ:rq_approx_3})&0.944 0.265&0.982 0.682&0.998 0.248\\
&rank&0.976 0.390&0.970 1.205&0.970 0.273\\
Normal&(\ref{equ:rq_approx_3})&0.954 0.381&0.946 1.042&0.964 0.442\\
&rank&0.974 0.435&0.956 1.208&0.962 0.542\\
Laplace&(\ref{equ:rq_approx_3})&0.953 0.501&0.959 1.375&0.952 0.580\\
&rank&0.966 0.594&0.959 1.697&0.960 0.761\\
Cauchy&(\ref{equ:rq_approx_3})&0.928 1.467&0.942 4.052&0.936 1.731\\
&rank&0.936 1.948&0.946 5.676&0.942 2.984\\
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Covering frequencies and average interval lengths for data
generated according to (\ref{equ:stackloss_data_gen}) with different
distributions for the error term: $\alpha=0.95$.\label{tab:cov_stack_loss}}
\end{table}
Finally, in the case of non-linear $L_1$ regression the asymptotic
$\alpha$-non-significance is, under suitable regularity conditions,
given by
\begin{equation} \label{equ:rq_cov_prob_8}
({\mathbold \beta}-{\mathbold \beta}_{{\text nlr1},n})^t{\mathbold
Q}_n({\mathbold \beta}-{\mathbold \beta}_{{\text nlr1},n})\le
\frac{\text{qchisq}(\alpha,k)}{4f(0)^2n}
\end{equation}
where
\[{\mathbold Q}_n=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n {\mathbold
\nabla}_i{\mathbold \nabla}_i^t\]
and
\[{\mathbold \nabla}_i =\left( \frac{\partial m({\mathbold x}_{i\cdot},{\mathbold \theta})}{\partial
\theta_1},\ldots,\frac{\partial m({\mathbold x}_{i\cdot},{\mathbold \theta})}{\partial
\theta_k}\right)^t\,.\]
\section{Choice of noise} \label{sec:choice_noise}
It is possible to use random variables other than Gaussian. As an
example the 0.95-non-significance intervals for the
median of the stack loss data using $N(0,1)$, $\pm 1$, $U(-1,1)$, $\pm
\text{beta}(5,5)$ and the standard Cauchy distribution are $(11.88, 18.63)$,
$(11.86,18.25)$ $(11.83, 18.16)$, $(11.93, 18.21)$, $(11.83, 18.16)$
and $(11.00,18.56)$ respectively. It is clear that the results depend
on the choice of noise to some extent but that at least in this
example the dependence is weak. Given the advantages of Gaussian
noise are the easily available asymptotic expressions such
(\ref{equ:asymp_p_rho}) it would seem to be the default choice of
noise.
Other possibilities are to make the noise dependent on the size of the
covariates as in $W_{ij}=x_{ij}Z_{ij}$ or to randomly permute the
covariates (see \cite{ANDROB01}, \cite{KLI09}).
\section{Appendix}
Consider
\begin{equation} \label{equ:sum_med}
\sum_{i=1}^n \left\vert
\varepsilon_i-\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert
\end{equation}
where the $\varepsilon_i$ are symmetric, i.i.d. random variables with a continuously
differentiable density at $u=0$ with $f(0)>0$. The ${\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}$ are $k$
dimensional random variables ${\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}=(U_{i,1},\ldots,U_{i,k})^t$ where the
$U_{ij}$ are symmetric i.i.d. random variable with unit variance. The
sum (\ref{equ:sum_med}) may be decomposed as
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum_{i=1}^n \left\vert
\varepsilon_i-\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert
&=& \sum_{\varepsilon_i\le -\left\vert{\mathbold
U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold
b}/\sqrt{n}\right\vert}\left(-\varepsilon_i+ {\mathbold
U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}/\sqrt{n}\right) \\
&&+\sum_{\varepsilon_i\ge \left\vert
{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}/\sqrt{n}\right\vert}\left(\varepsilon_i-{\mathbold
U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}/\sqrt{n}\right)\\
&&+\sum_{\vert \varepsilon_i\vert \le \left\vert
{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}/\sqrt{n}\right\vert}\left\vert \varepsilon_i+
\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert\\
&=&\sum_{i=1}^n\vert \varepsilon_i\vert
+\sum_{i=1}^n\pm\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold
b}}{\sqrt{n}}
-\sum_{\vert \varepsilon_i\vert \le \left\vert
{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold
b}/\sqrt{n}\right\vert}\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold
b}}{\sqrt{n}}\\
&&+\sum_{\vert \varepsilon_i\vert \le \left\vert
\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert}\left( \left\vert \varepsilon_i-
\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert -\vert \varepsilon_i\vert \right)\,.
\end{eqnarray*}
The random variables
\[V_i=\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\left\{\vert \varepsilon_i\vert \le \left\vert
\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert\right\}\]
are i.i.d with mean zero and variance
\[\frac{1}{n}\mathbold E_U \left(({\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b})^2\left(F\left(\left\vert
\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert\right)-
F\left(-\left\vert\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}t^{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert\right)\right)
\right)=o\left(\frac{\Vert {\mathbold b}\Vert_2^2}{n}\right)\,.\]
This together with the central limit theorem implies
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum_{i=1}^n \left\vert
\varepsilon_i-\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert
&=&\sum_{i=1}^n\vert \varepsilon_i\vert +{\mathbold Z}^t{\mathbold b}+\sum_{\vert
\varepsilon_i\vert \le \left\vert {\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}/\sqrt{n}\right\vert}\left( \left\vert \varepsilon_i-\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert -\vert \varepsilon_i\vert\right)+o\left(\Vert {\mathbold b}\Vert_2^2\right)
\end{eqnarray*}
where ${\mathbold Z}\stackrel{D}{=}N(0,I_k)$. Denote the distribution function of
${\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}$ by $H$. Then
\[\mathbold E_U\left(\left\vert\varepsilon_i-\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert\left\{\vert
\varepsilon_i\vert \le \left\vert\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert\right\}\right)=
\frac{2}{\sqrt{n}}\int_0^{\infty}w\left\{\vert\varepsilon_i\vert \le
\frac{w}{\sqrt{n}}\right\}\,dH(w) \]
and taking the expected value with respect to $\varepsilon_i$ gives
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{\hspace{-2cm}\mathbold E\left(\left\vert\varepsilon_i-\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert\left\{\vert
\varepsilon_i\vert \le
\left\vert\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert\right\}\right)}\\
&=&
\frac{2}{\sqrt{n}}\int_0^{\infty}w
\left(F\left(\frac{w}{\sqrt{n}}\right)-
F\left(-\frac{w}{\sqrt{n}}\right)\right)\,dH(w)\\
&\approx&\frac{4f(0)}{n}\int_0^{\infty}w^2\,dH(w)
=\frac{2f(0)\Vert {\mathbold b}\Vert_2^2}{n}
\end{eqnarray*}
as the $U_{ij}$ are symmetric random variables with variance 1. A similar
calculation gives
\[\mathbold E\left(\vert\varepsilon_i\vert\left\{\vert
\varepsilon_i\vert \le
\left\vert\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert\right\}\right)\approx
\frac{f(0)\Vert {\mathbold b}\Vert_2^2}{n}\,.\]
Putting this together leads to
\[\sum_{i=1}^n \left\vert
\varepsilon_i-\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert \approx
\sum_{i=1}^n\vert \varepsilon_i\vert +Z^t{\mathbold b} +\frac{f(0)\Vert
{\mathbold b}\Vert_2^2}{n}
\]
and minimizing over ${\mathbold b}$ results in
\[\inf_{\mathbold b}\sum_{i=1}^n \left\vert
\varepsilon_i-\frac{{\mathbold U}_{i\cdot}^t{\mathbold b}}{\sqrt{n}}\right\vert\approx\sum_{i=1}^n\vert
\varepsilon_i\vert -\frac{\chi_k^2}{4f(0)}\]
where $\chi_k^2$ is a chi-squared random variable with $k$ degrees of freedom.
|
\section{Introduction}
Sensor networks have attracted massive attention in past years due to its extended range of applications and its ability to handle distributed sensing and processing for systems with inherently distributed sources of information,
e.g., power networks, social, ecological and economic systems, surveillance, disaster management health monitoring, etc.\ \cite{gun10,mai02,cho03}.
{For such distributed systems, one can assume complete communication between every source of information (e.g. nodes or local processing unit) and centralized processor can be cumbersome.}
Therefore, one might consider cooperation strategies where nodes with limited sensing capabilities distributively aggregate information to perform certain global estimation or processing task.
Following the seminal work of Jadbabaie et al.\ in \cite{jad12,mol15}, there have been many studies of Non-Bayesian rules for distributed algorithms.
Non-Bayesian algorithms involve an aggregation step, usually consisting of weighted geometric or arithmetic average of the received beliefs, and a Bayesian update that is based on the { locally available data.} Therefore, one can exploit results from consensus literature~\cite{ace08,tsi84,jad03,ned13,ols14} and Bayesian learning
literature~\cite{ace11,mos14}.
Recent studies have proposed several variations of the Non-Bayesian approach and have proved consistent, geometric and non-asymptotic convergence rates for a
general class of distributed algorithms; from asymptotic analysis \cite{sha13,lal14,qip11,qip15,sha15,rah15} to non-asymptotic bounds \cite{sha14,ned15,lal14b}, time-varying directed graphs \cite{ned15b} and transmission and node failures ~\cite{su16}.
In contrast with the existing results that assume a finite hypothesis set,
in this paper, we are extending the framework to the cases of a countable many and a {continuum of hypotheses.}
We build upon the work in \cite{bir15} on non-asymptotic behaviors of Bayesian estimators to construct non-asymptotic concentration results for distributed learning. In the distributed case, the observations will be scattered among a set of nodes or agents and the learning algorithm should guarantee that every node in the network will learn the correct parameter as if it had access to the complete data set.
Our results show that in general the network structure will induce a transient time after which all agents will learn at a network independent rate, where the rate is geometric.
{\it The contributions of this paper are threefold}: First, we provide an interpretation of a general class of distributed Non-Bayesian algorithms as specific instances of a distributed version of the stochastic mirror descent.
This motivates the proposed update rules and makes a connection between the Non-Bayesian learning literature in social networks and the Stochastic Approximations literature. Second,
we establish a non-asymptotic concentration result for the proposed learning algorithm when the set of hypothesis is countably infinite.
Finally, we provide a non-asymptotic bound for the algorithm when the hypothesis set is a bounded subset of
$\mathbb{R}^d$. This is an initial approach to the analysis of distributed
Non-Bayesian algorithms for a more general family of hypothesis sets.
This paper is organized as follows: Section~\ref{setup} describes the studied problem and the proposed algorithm, together
with the motivation behind the proposed update rule and its connections with distributed stochastic mirror descent algorithm. Section~\ref{sec_count} and Section~\ref{sec_cont} provide the non-asymptotic concentration rate results for
the beliefs around the correct hypothesis set
for the cases of countably many and continuum of hypotheses, respectively.
Finally, conclusions are presented in Section~\ref{sec_conclusion}.
\noindent
{\bf Notation}:
The set $B^c$ denotes the complement of a set $B$.
Notation $\mathbb{P}_B$ and $\mathbb{E}_B$ denotes
the probability measure and expectation under a distribution $P_B$.
The $ij$-th entry of a matrix $A$
is denoted by $\left[A\right]_{ij}$ or $a_{ij}$.
Random variables are denoted with upper-case letters, while the corresponding lower-case letters denote their realizations.
Time indices are indicated by subscripts and the letter $k$.
Superscripts represent the agent indices, which are usually $i$ or~$j$.
\section{Problem Formulation }\label{setup}
We consider the problem of distributed non-Bayesian learning, where a network of agents access
sequences of realizations of a random variable with an unknown distribution.
The random variable is assumed to be of finite dimension with the constraint that each agent can access only a strict subset of the entries of the realizations (e.g., an $n$-dimensional vector and $n$ agents each observing a single entry).
Observations are assumed to be independent among the agents.
We are interested in situations where no single agent has the ability to learn the underlying distribution from
its own observations, while collectively the agents can do so if they collaborate.
The learning objective is for the agents to jointly agree on a distribution
(from a parametrized family of distributions or a hypothesis set)
that best describes the observations in a specific sense (e.g., Kullback-Leibler divergence).
Therefore, the distributed learning objective requires collaboration among the agents which
can be ensured by using some protocols for information aggregation and coordination.
Specifically in our case, agent coordination consists of sharing their estimates (\textit{beliefs}) of
the best probability distribution over the hypothesis set.
Consider, for example, the distributed source location problem with limited sensing capabilities \cite{rab04,rab05}. In this scenario a network of $n$ agents receives noisy measurements of the distance to a source,
where sensing capabilities of each sensor might be limited to a certain region.
The group objective is to jointly identify the location of the source and that every node knows the source location.
Figure \ref{location} shows an example, where a group of $7$ agents (circles) wants to localize a source (star).
There is an underlying graph that indicates the communication abilities among the nodes.
Moreover, each node has a sensing region indicated by the dashed line around it.
Each agent $i$ obtains realizations of the random variable $S_k^i = \|x^i - \theta^*\| + W_k^i$,
where $\theta^*$ is the location of the source, $x^i$ is the position of agent $i$ and
$W_k^i$ is a noise in the observations.
If we consider $\Theta$ as the set of all possible locations of the source, then each $\theta \in \Theta$ will induce a probability distribution about the observations of each agent.
Therefore, agents need to cooperate and share information in order to guarantee that all of them correctly localize the target.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\captionsetup{justification=centering}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{location4}
\caption{Distributed source localization example}
\label{location}
\end{figure}
We will consider a more general learning problem,
where agent observations are drawn from an unknown joint distribution $\boldsymbol{f} = \prod_{i=1}^{n} f^i$,
where $f^i$ is the distribution governing the observations
of agent $i$.
We assume that $\boldsymbol{f}$ is an element of $\mathscr{P} = \prod_{i=1}^n \mathscr{P}^i$, the space of all joint probability measures
for a set of {$n$ independent random variables} $\{S^i\}_{i=1}^n$ (i.e., $S^i$ is distributed according to an unknown distribution $f^i$). Also, we assume that each $S^i$ takes values in a finite set. When these random variables are considered at time $k$, we denote them by $S^i_k$.
Later on, for the case of countably many hypotheses, we will use
the {\it pre-metric} space $\left(\mathscr{P},D_{KL}\right)$ as the vector space $\mathscr{P}$ equipped with
the Kullback-Liebler divergence. This will generate a topology, where we can define an open ball
$\mathcal{B}_r(p)$ with a radius $r>0$ centered at a point $p \in \mathscr{P}$ by
${\mathcal{B}_r(p) = \{q \in \mathscr{P}| D_{KL}(q,p) < r \}}$.
When the set of hypothesis is continuous, we instead equip $\mathscr{P}$ with the Hellinger distance~$h$
to obtain the {\it metric} space $\left(\mathscr{P},h\right)$,
which we use to construct a special covering of subsets $B\subset \mathscr{P}$ consisting of $\delta$-separated sets.
Each agent constructs a set of hypothesis parametrized by $\theta \in \Theta$ about the distribution $f^i$. Let $\mathscr{L}^i = \{P^i_\theta | \theta\in \Theta\}$ be a parametrized family of probability measures for $S_k^i$
with densities $\ell^i\left(\cdot|\theta\right) = dP^i_\theta / d\lambda^i$ with respect to a dominating measure\footnote{A measure $\mu$ is dominated by $\lambda$ if $\lambda(B) = 0$ implies $\mu(B)=0$ for every measurable set $B$.}
$\lambda^i$. Therefore, the learning goal is to distributively solve the following problem:
\begin{align}\label{opt_problem}
\min_{\theta \in \Theta} F(\theta) & \triangleq D_{KL}\left(\boldsymbol{f}\|\boldsymbol{\ell}\left(\cdot | \theta\right)\right) \ \ \ \\
& = \sum\limits_{i=1}^n D_{KL}\left(f^i\|\ell^i\left(\cdot|\theta\right)\right) \nonumber
\end{align}
where $\boldsymbol{\ell}\left(\cdot | \theta\right)=\prod_{i=1}^n \ell^i\left(\cdot|\theta\right)$ and
$D_{KL}\left(f^i\|\ell^i\left(\cdot|\theta\right)\right)$ is
the Kullback-Leibler divergence between the true distribution of $S_k^i$ and $\ell^i( \cdot | \theta)$
that would have been seen by agents $i$ if hypothesis $\theta$ were correct.
For simplicity {\it we will assume that there exists a single $\theta^* \in \Theta$}
such that $\ell^i\left(\cdot|\theta^*\right) = f^i$ almost everywhere for all agents.
Results readily extends to the case when the assumption does not hold
(see, for example,~\cite{ned14,ned15,ned15b} which disregard this assumption).
The problem in Eq.~\eqref{opt_problem} consists of finding the parameter $\theta^*$ such that
$\boldsymbol{\ell}\left(\cdot | \theta\right) = \prod_{i=1}^{n}\ell^i\left(\cdot|\theta\right)$ minimizes
its Kullback-Liebler divergence to $\boldsymbol{f}$. However, $\mathscr{L}^i$ is only available to agent $i$ and the distribution $\boldsymbol{f}$ is unknown. Agent $i$ gains information on $f^i$ by observing realizations
$s_{k}^i$ of $S_k^i$ at every time step $k$.
The agent uses these observations to construct a sequence $\{\mu_k^i\}$
of probability distributions over the parameter space $\Theta$. We refer to these distributions as
agent $i$ \textit{beliefs},
where $\mu_k^i\left(B\right)$ denotes the belief, at time $k$, that agent $i$ has about
the event $\theta^* \in B \subseteq \Theta$ for a measurable set $B$.
We make use of the following assumption.
\begin{assumption}\label{assum:init}
For all agents $i=1,\ldots,n$ we have:
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item
There is a unique hypothesis $\theta^*$ such that $\ell^i\left(\cdot|\theta^*\right) = f^i$.
\item
If $f^i\left(s^i\right)>0$, then there exists an $\alpha >0$ such that $\ell^i\left(s^i | \theta \right) > \alpha$ for all $\theta \in \Theta$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{assumption}
{Assumption~\ref{assum:init}(a) guarantees that we are working on the realizable case and
there are no conflicting models among the agents, see~\cite{ned14,ned15,ned15b}
for ways of how to remove this assumption. }
{Moreover in Assumption~\ref{assum:init}(b), the lower bound $\alpha$ assumes the set of hypothesis are dominated by $f^i$ (i.e., our hypothesis set is absolutely continuous with respect to the true distribution of the data) and provide a way to show bounded differences when applying the concentration inequality results.}
Agents are connected in a network
$\mathcal{G} = \{V,E\}$ where $V = \{1,2,\ldots,n\}$ is the set of agents and
$E$ is a set of undirected edges, where $\left(i,j\right) \in E$ if agents $i$ and $j$ can communicate with each other.
If two agents are connected they share their beliefs over the hypothesis set at every time instant $k$. We will propose a distributed protocol to define how the agents update their beliefs based on their local observations and the beliefs received from their neighbors.
Additionally, each agent weights its own belief and the beliefs of its neighbors;
we will use $a_{ij}$ to denote the weight that agent $i$ assigns to beliefs coming from its neighbor $j$, and $a_{ii}$
to denote the weight that the agent assigns to its own beliefs.
The assumption of static undirected links in the network is made for simplicity of the exposition.
The extensions of the proposed protocol to more general cases of time varying undirected and directed graphs
can be done similar to the work in \cite{ned14,ned15,ned15b}.
Next we present the set of assumptions on the network over which the agents are interacting.
\begin{assumption}\label{assum:graph}
The graph $\mathcal{G}$ and matrix $A$ are such that:
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item $A$ is doubly-stochastic with $\left[A\right]_{ij} = a_{ij} > 0$ if $(i,j)\in E$.
\item If $(i,j) \notin E$ for some $i \neq j$ then $a_{ij}=0$.
\item $A$ has positive diagonal entries, $a_{ii}>0$ for all $i \in V $.
\item If $a_{ij}>0$, then $a_{ij} \ge \eta$ for some positive constant $\eta$.
\item The graph $\mathcal{G}$ is connected.
\end{enumerate}
\end{assumption}
Assumption~\ref{assum:graph} is common in distributed optimization and consensus literature.
It guarantees convergence of the associated Markov Chain and defines bounds
on relevant eigenvalues in terms of the number $n$ of agents.
To construct a set of weights satisfying Assumptions \ref{assum:graph}, for example, one can
consider a lazy metropolis ({stochastic}) matrix of the form
$\bar{A} = \frac{1}{2}I + \frac{1}{2}A$, where $I$ is the identity matrix and $
A$ is a stochastic matrix whose off-diagonal entries satisfy
\begin{align*}
a_{ij} = \left\{ \begin{array}{l l}
\frac{1}{\max \left\{ d^i+1,d^j+1 \right\} } & \quad \text{if $(i,j) \in E$ }\\
0 & \quad \text{if $(i,j) \notin E$}
\end{array} \right.
\end{align*}
where $d^i$ is the degree (the number of neighbors) of node $i$.
Generalizations of Assumption~\ref{assum:graph}
to time-varying undirected are readily available for weighted averaging
and push-sum approaches~\cite{ned09,ols14,ned13}.
\section{Distributed Learning Algorithm }\label{sec_stoc}
In this section, we present the proposed learning algorithm
and a novel connection between Bayesian update and the stochastic mirror descent method.
We propose the following (theoretical)
algorithm, where each node updates its beliefs
on a measurable subset $B\subseteq\Theta$ according to the following update rule:
for all agents $i$ and all $k\ge1$,
\begin{align}\label{protocol_cont}
\mu_{k}^i\left(B\right) & = \frac{1}{Z_{k}^i}\int\limits_{\theta \in B} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n} \left( \frac{d\mu_{k-1}^j\left(\theta\right)}{d\lambda(\theta)}\right)^{a_{ij}} \ell^i(s_{k}^i|\theta) d\lambda\left(\theta\right)
\end{align}
where $ Z_{k}^i $ is a normalizing constant and $\lambda$ is a probability distribution on
$\Theta$ with respect to which every $\mu_k^j$ is absolutely continuous.
The term $d \mu^j_k(\theta)/d \lambda(\theta)$ is the
Radon-Nikodym derivative of the probability distribution $\mu_k^j$.
The above process starts with some initial beliefs $\mu_{0}^i$, $i=1,\ldots,n$.
Note that, if $\Theta$ is a finite or a countable set, the update rule in Eq. \eqref{protocol_cont} reduces to:
for every $B\subseteq \Theta$,
\begin{align}\label{protocol_dis}
\mu_{k}^i\left(B\right) & = \frac{1}{Z_{k}^i}\sum\limits_{\theta \in B} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n} \mu_{k-1}^j\left(\theta\right)^{a_{ij}} \ell^i\left(s_{k}^i|\theta\right)
\end{align}
The updates in Eqs.~\eqref{protocol_cont} and~\eqref{protocol_dis}
can be viewed as two-step processes. First, every agent constructs an aggregate belief using weighted geometric average
of its own belief and the beliefs of its neighbors. Then,
each agent performs a Bayes' update using the aggregated belief as a prior.
\subsection{Connection with the Stochastic Mirror Descent Method}
To make this connection\footnote{Particularly simple when $\Theta$ is a finite set.}, we observe that
the optimization problem in Eq.~\eqref{opt_problem} is equivalent to the following problem:
\begin{align*
\min_{\pi \in \mathscr{P}_{\Theta} } \mathbb{E}_{\pi} \sum\limits_{i=1}^n D_{KL}\left(f^i\|\ell^i\right)
& = \min_{\pi \in \mathscr{P}_{\Theta} } \sum\limits_{i=1}^n \mathbb{E}_{\pi} \mathbb{E}_{f^i} [- \log \ell^i]
\end{align*}
where $\mathscr{P}_{\Theta}$ is the set of all distributions on $\Theta$.
Under some technical conditions the expectations can exchange the order, so the problem in Eq.~\eqref{opt_problem}
is equivalent to the following one:
\begin{align}\label{main2}
\min_{\pi \in \mathscr{P}_{\Theta} } \sum\limits_{i=1}^n \mathbb{E}_{f^i} \mathbb{E}_{\pi} [- \log \ell^i]
\end{align}
The difficulty in evaluating the objective function in Eq.~\eqref{main2}
lies in the fact that the distributions $f^i$ are unknown.
A generic approach to solving such problems is the class of stochastic approximation methods, where the objective is minimized by constructing a sequence of gradient-based iterates where the true gradient of the objective
(which is not available) is replaced with a gradient sample that is available at the given update time.
A particular method that is relevant here is the stochastic mirror-descent method which would solve the problem
in Eq.~\eqref{main2}, in a centralized fashion, by constructing a sequence $\{x_k\}$, as follows:
\begin{align}\label{central}
x_{k} & = \argmin_{y \in X} \left\lbrace \langle g_{k-1}, y\rangle
+ \frac{1}{\alpha_{k-1}} D_w(y,x_{k-1})\right\rbrace
\end{align}
where $g_k$ is a noisy realization of the gradient of the objective function
in Eq.~\eqref{main2} and $D_w(y,x)$ is a Bregman distance function associated with a distance-generating
function $w$, and $\alpha_k>0$ is the step-size.
If we take $w(t) = t \log t$ as the distance-generating function, then the corresponding Bregman distance is
the Kullback-Leiblier (KL) divergence $D_{KL}$. Thus, in this case,
{\it the update rule in Eq.~\eqref{protocol_cont} corresponds to
a distributed implementation of the stochastic mirror descent algorithm} in~\eqref{central},
where $D_w(y,x)=D_{KL}(y,x)$ and the stepsize is fixed, i.e.., $\alpha_k =1$ for all $k$.
We summarize the preceding discussion in the following proposition.
\begin{proposition}\label{mirror}
The update rule in Eq. \eqref{protocol_cont} {defines a probability measure $\mu_k^i$over the set $\Theta$ generated by the probability density $\bar{\mu}_k^i = d\mu_k^i/d\lambda$ that coincides with the solution of the distributed stochastic mirror descent algorithm applied to the optimization problem in Eq.~\eqref{opt_problem}., i.e.}
{
\begin{align}\label{stoc_mirror}
\bar{\mu}_{k}^i = \argmin_{\pi \in P_{\Theta} } \left\lbrace
\mathbb{E}_{\pi} [\textendash\log \ell^i(s_{k}^i|\cdot)] + \sum\limits_{j=1}^{n} a_{ij} D_{KL}(\pi\|\bar{\mu}_{k-1}^j)\right\rbrace
\end{align}
}
\end{proposition}
\begin{IEEEproof}
We need to show that {the density $\bar{\mu}_k^i$ associated with the probability measure $\mu_k^i$} defined by
Eq.~\eqref{protocol_cont} minimizes the problem in Eq.~\eqref{stoc_mirror}.
First, define the argument in Eq.~\eqref{stoc_mirror} as
\begin{align*}
G(\pi) & = - \mathbb{E}_{\pi} \log \ell^i\left(s_{k}^i|\cdot\right) + \sum_{j=1}^{n} a_{ij} D_{KL}\left(\pi||\bar{\mu}_{k-1}^j\right)
\end{align*}
and add and subtract the KL divergence between $\pi$ and the density $\bar{\mu}_{k}^i$ to obtain
\begin{align*}
G(\pi) &
= - \mathbb{E}_{\pi} \log \ell^i(s_{k}^i|\cdot) + \sum\limits_{j=1}^{n} a_{ij} D_{KL}(\pi\|\bar{\mu}_{k-1}^j)- D_{KL}(\pi\|\mu_{k}^i) + D_{KL}(\pi\|\bar{\mu}_{k}^i) \\
& =- \mathbb{E}_{\pi} \log \ell^i\left(s_{k}^i|\cdot\right)
+ D_{KL}\left(\pi\|\bar{\mu}_{k}^i\right)+ \sum\limits_{j=1}^{n}a_{ij} \mathbb{E}_\pi\left( \log \frac{\pi}{\bar{\mu}_{k-1}^j} - \log \frac{\pi}{\bar{\mu}_{k}^i}\right)\\
&= - \mathbb{E}_{\pi} \log \ell^i(s_{k}^i|\cdot)
+ D_{KL}\left(\pi\|\bar{\mu}_{k}^i\right) + \sum\limits_{j=1}^{n}a_{ij} \mathbb{E}_\pi \log \frac{\bar{\mu}_{k}^i}{\bar{\mu}_{k-1}^j}
\end{align*}
Now, we use the relation for the density $\bar{\mu}_k^i = d\mu_k^i/d\lambda$,
which is implied by the update rule for $\mu_{k}^i$ in Eq.~\eqref{protocol_cont}, and obtain
\begin{align*}
G(\pi)
&= - \mathbb{E}_{\pi} \log \ell^i\left(s_{k}^i|\cdot\right)
+ D_{KL}\left(\pi\|\bar{\mu}_{k}^i\right) + \sum\limits_{j=1}^{n}a_{ij} \mathbb{E}_\pi \log \left( \frac{1}{\bar{\mu}_{k-1}^j} \frac{1}{Z_{k}^i} \prod\limits_{m=1}^{n} \left(\bar{\mu}_{k-1}^m\right)^{a_{im}}\ell^i(s_{k}^i|\cdot) \right) \\
&= - \log Z_{k}^i + D_{KL}\left(\pi\|\bar{\mu}_{k}^i\right)
\end{align*}
The first term in the preceding line does not depend on the distribution $\pi$. Thus,
we conclude that the solution to the problem in Eq.~\eqref{stoc_mirror} is
the density $\pi^* = \bar{\mu}_{k}^i$ (almost everywhere).
\end{IEEEproof}
\section{Countable Hypothesis Set}\label{sec_count}
In this section we present a concentration result for
the update rule in Eq.~\eqref{protocol_dis} specific for the case of a countable hypothesis set.
Later in Section \ref{sec_cont} we will analyze the case of $\Theta\subset \mathbb{R}^d$.
First, we provide some definitions that will help us build the desired results.
Specifically, we will study how the beliefs of all agents concentrate around the true hypothesis~$\theta^*$.
\begin{definition}\label{kl_balls}
Define a Kullback-Leibler Ball (KL) of radius $r$ centered at $\theta^*$ as.
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{B}_r(\theta^*) & = \left\lbrace \theta \in \Theta \left| \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^{n} D_{KL}\left(\ell^i\left(\cdot|\theta^*\right) ,\ell^i\left(\cdot|\theta \right) \right) \right. \leq r \right\rbrace
\end{align*}
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}\label{covering}
Define the covering of the set $\mathcal{B}_r^c(\theta^*)$ generated by a strictly increasing sequence $\{r_l\}_{l=1}^{\infty}$ with $r_1=r$ as the union of disjoint KL bands as follows:
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{B}_r^c(\theta^*) & = \bigcup_{l=1}^{\infty} \{\mathcal{B}_{r_{l+1}}(\theta^*) \backslash \mathcal{B}_{r_{l}}(\theta^*)\}
\end{align*}
where $\{\mathcal{B}_{r_{l+1}} \backslash \mathcal{B}_{r_{l}}\}$ denotes the complement between the set $\mathcal{B}_{r_{l+1}}$ and the set $\mathcal{B}_{r_{l+1}}$, i.e. $\mathcal{B}_{r_{l+1}} \cap \mathcal{B}_{r_{l}}^c$
We denote the cardinality $\{\mathcal{B}_{r_{l+1}}\backslash \mathcal{B}_{r_{l}} \}$ by $\mathcal{N}_{r_l}$, i.e. $\left| \{\mathcal{B}_{r_{l+1}}\backslash \mathcal{B}_{r_{l}} \} \right| = \mathcal{N}_{r_l}$.
\end{definition}
We are interested in bounding the beliefs' concentration on a ball $\mathcal{B}_r\left(\theta^*\right)$ for an arbitrary $r>0$, which is based on a covering of the complement set $\mathcal{B}_r^c\left(\theta^*\right)$.
To this end, Definitions~\ref{kl_balls} and~\ref{covering} provide the tools for constructing such a covering. The strategy is to analyze how the hypotheses are distributed in the space of probability distributions, see Figure \ref{lcovering_dis}. The next assumption will provide conditions on the hypothesis set which guarantee the concentration results.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{overpic}[width=0.4\textwidth]{covering_dis}
\put(38,39){{\small $\mathcal{B}_r\left(\theta^*\right)$}}
\put(48,53){{\small $P_{\theta^*}$}}
\put(58,73){{\small $P_{\theta}$}}
\put(27,27){{\small $\mathcal{B}_{r_2}\left(\theta^*\right)$}}
\end{overpic}
\captionsetup{justification=centering}
\caption{Creating a covering for a ball $\mathcal{B}_r\left(\theta^*\right)$. $\bigstar$ represents the correct hypothesis
$\ell^i\left(\cdot|\theta^*\right)$, $\bullet$ indicates the location of other hypotheses and the dash lines indicates the boundary of the balls $\mathcal{B}_{r_l}\left(\theta^*\right)$.}
\label{lcovering_dis}
\end{figure}
\begin{assumption}\label{conv_hyp}
The series $\Sigma_{l \geq 1} \exp\left(-r_{l}^2 +\log \mathcal{N}_{r_l}\right)$ converges,
where the sequence $\{r_l\}$ is as in Definition~\ref{covering}.
\end{assumption}
We are now ready to state the main result for a countable hypothesis set $\Theta$.
\begin{theorem}\label{main_count}
Let Assumptions~\ref{assum:init},~\ref{assum:graph} and~\ref{conv_hyp} hold,
and let $\rho \in (0,1)$ be a desired probability tolerance.
Then, the belief sequences $\{\mu_{k}^i\}$, $i\in V$, generated by the update rule in Eq.~\eqref{protocol_dis},
with the initial beliefs such that ${\mu_0^i(\theta^*)>\epsilon}$ for all $i$,
have the following property: for any $\sigma \in (0,1)$ and any radius $r>0$ with probability $1-\rho$,
\begin{align*}
\mu_{k}^i\left(\mathcal{B}_r\left(\theta^*\right)\right) & \geq 1 - \sigma \qquad \text{ for all } i \text{ and all }k\geq N
\end{align*}
where $N = \min_{k \geq 1} \{k\in N_1\cap N_2\}$ with the sets $N_1$ and $N_2$ given by
{
\begin{align*}
N_1& =\left\lbrace k\mid \exp\left(\frac{ 1}{8\log^2\frac{1}{\alpha}}\right) \sum\limits_{l \geq 1} \mathcal{N}_{r_l} \exp \left( -kr_{l}^2 \right) \leq \rho \right\rbrace \\
N_2& =\left\lbrace k\mid { C_3 }\exp\left(-\frac{k}{2}\gamma(\theta)\right) \leq \sigma {\prod_{i=1}^n \mu_0^i\left(\theta\right)^{\frac{1}{n}} }, \forall\theta \not\in \mathcal{B}_r\left(\theta^*\right) \right\rbrace
\end{align*}
}
where { $\gamma(\theta) = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^{n}D_{KL}\left(\ell^i\left(\cdot|\theta^*\right)||\ell^i\left(\cdot|\theta\right)\right)$, ${C_3 = \frac{1}{\epsilon}\exp\left(\frac{8 \log \frac{1}{\alpha} \log n}{1 - \lambda}\right)}$},
$\alpha$ is as in Assumption~\ref{assum:init}(b), $\mathcal{N}_{r_l}$ and $r_l$ are as in
Definition~\ref{covering}, while
${\lambda = 1-\eta/4n^2}$.
If $A$ is a lazy-metropolis matrix, then ${\lambda = 1- 1/\mathcal{O}(n^2) }$.
\end{theorem}
Observe that if $k\in N_1$, then $m\in N_1$ for all $m\ge k$, and the same is true for the set $N_2$,
so we can alternatively write
\[N=\max\left\{ \min_{k\ge 1} \{k\in N_1\}, \ \min_{k\ge 1} \{k\in N_2\}\right\}.\]
Further, note that $N$ depends on the radius $r$ of the KL ball, as the set $N_1$
involves $\mathcal{N}_{r_{l}}$ and $r_l$ which both depend on~$r$, while
the set $N_2$ explicitly involves $r$. Finally, note that the smaller the radius $r$, the larger $N$ is.
We see that $N$ also depends on
the number $n$ of agents, the learning parameter $\alpha$,
the learning capabilities of the network represented by $\gamma(\theta)$, the initial beliefs $\mu_0^i$,
the number of hypotheses that are far away from $\theta^*$ and
their probability distributions.
Theorem~\ref{main_count} states that the beliefs of all agents will concentrate within the KL ball
$\mathcal{B}_r\left(\theta^*\right)$
with a radius $r>0$ for a large enough $k$, i.e., $k\ge N$.
Note that the (large enough) index $N$ is determined as the smallest $k$ for which two relations are satisfied,
namely, the relations defining the index sets $N_1$ and $N_2$.
The set $N_1$ contains all indices $k$ for which a weighted sum of the total mass of the hypotheses
$\theta\notin
\mathcal{B}_r\left(\theta^*\right)$ is small enough (smaller than the desired probability tolerance $\rho$).
Specifically, we require the number $\mathcal{N}_{r_l}$ of hypothesis in the $l$-th band does not grow
faster than the squared radius $r_{l}^2$ of the band, i.e., the wrong hypothesis should not accumulate too fast far away from the true hypothesis $\theta^*$. Moreover, the condition in $N_1$ also prevents having an infinite number of hypothesis per band. The set $N_2$ captures the iterations $k$ at which, for all agents, the current beliefs $\mu_k^i$ had recovered
from the the cumulative effect of ``wrong" initial beliefs that had given probability masses
to hypotheses far away from $\theta^*$.
In the proof for Theorem \ref{main_count}, we use the relation between
the posterior beliefs and the initial beliefs on a measurable set $B$ such that $\theta^* \in B$. For such a set, we have
{
\begin{align}\label{initial_measure}
\mu_{k}^i\left(B\right) & = \frac{1}{Z_{k}^i}\sum\limits_{\theta \in B} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n} \mu_0^j\left(\theta\right)^{\left[A^{k}\right]_{ij} } \prod\limits_{t=1}^{k} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n} \ell^j(s_{t}^j|\theta)^{\left[A^{k-t}\right]_{ij}}
\end{align}
}
where $ Z_{k}^i $ is the appropriate normalization constant.
Furthermore, after a few algebraic operations we obtain
{
\begin{align}\label{ready_for_bounds}
\mu_{k}^i\left(B\right) & \geq 1\text{--}\sum\limits_{\theta \in B^c} { \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n} \left( \frac{\mu_0^j(\theta)}{\mu_0^j(\theta^*)}\right) ^{\left[A^{k}\right]_{ij} }} \prod\limits_{t=1}^{k} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n} \left( \frac{\ell^j(s_{t}^j|\theta)}{\ell^j(s_{t}^j|\theta^*)}\right) ^{\left[A^{k\text{-}t}\right]_{ij}}
\end{align}
}
{
Moreover, since $\mu_0^j(\theta^*) > \epsilon$ for all $j$, it follows that}
{
\begin{align}\label{ready_for_bounds2}
\mu_{k}^i\left(B\right) & \geq 1\text{--}\frac{1}{\epsilon}\sum\limits_{\theta \in B^c}\prod\limits_{t=1}^{k} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n} \left( \frac{\ell^j(s_{t}^j|\theta)}{\ell^j(s_{t}^j|\theta^*)}\right) ^{\left[A^{k\text{-}t}\right]_{ij}}
\end{align}
}
Now we will state a useful result from \cite{sha14} which will allow us to bound the right hand term of Eq. \eqref{ready_for_bounds}.
\begin{lemma}\label{shahin}[Lemma 2 in \cite{sha14}]
Let Assumptions \ref{assum:graph} hold, then the matrix $A$ satisfies: for all $i$,
\begin{align*}
\sum\limits_{t=1}^{k} \sum\limits_{j=1}^{n} \left| \left[A^{k-t}\right]_{ij} - \frac{1}{n} \right| & \leq \frac{4 \log n}{1-\lambda}
\end{align*}
where $\lambda = 1-\eta / 4n^2$, and if $A$ is a lazy-metropolis matrix associated with $\mathcal{G}$ then $\lambda = 1- 1 / \mathcal{O}(n^2)$.
\end{lemma}
{
If follows from Eq. \eqref{ready_for_bounds2}, Lemma \ref{shahin} and Assumption \ref{assum:init} that
{
\begin{align}\label{bounded2}
\mu_{k}^i\left(B\right) & \geq 1\textendash C_3\sum\limits_{\theta \in B^c} \prod\limits_{t=1}^{k} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n} \left( \frac{\ell^j(s_{t}^j|\theta)}{\ell^j(s_{t}^j|\theta^*)}\right) ^{\frac{1}{n}}
\end{align}
}
for all $i$, where $C_3$ is as defined in Theorem \ref{main_count}.
}
Next we provide an auxiliary result about the concentration properties of the beliefs on a set $B$.
\begin{lemma}\label{bound_prob}
For any $k\ge0$ it holds that
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{P}_{\boldsymbol{f}}\left(\bigcup_{\theta \in B^c} \left\lbrace\bar{v}_{k}(\theta) \geq -\frac{k}{2} \gamma(\theta) \right\rbrace \right)
& \leq C_2\sum\limits_{l \geq 1} \mathcal{N}_{r_l} \exp \left( -kr_{l}^2 \right)
\end{align*}
where $C_2 = \exp\left(\frac{1}{8} \frac{ 1}{\log^2\frac{1}{\alpha}}\right) $, $\gamma(\theta)$ and $\mathcal{N}_{r_l}$ and $r_l$ are as in Theorem \ref{main_count}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{IEEEproof}
First define the following random variable
\begin{align*}
\bar{v}_{k}(\theta)
& = \sum\limits_{{t=1}}^{k} \frac{1}{n}\sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} \log \frac{\ell^i(S_{t}^i|\theta)}{\ell^i(S_{t}^i|\theta^*)}
\end{align*}
Then, by using the union bound and McDiarmid inequality we have,
{
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{P}_{\boldsymbol{f}}\left(\bigcup_{\theta \in B^c} \left\lbrace\bar{v}_{k}(\theta)
\text{-} \mathbb{E}_{\boldsymbol{f}}\bar{v}_{k}(\theta)
\geq \bar{\epsilon} \right\rbrace \right)
& \leq \sum\limits_{\theta \in B^c} \mathbb{P}_{\boldsymbol{f}}
\left\{ \bar{v}_{k}(\theta) - \mathbb{E}_{\boldsymbol{f}}\bar{v}_{k}(\theta) \geq \bar{\epsilon} \right\}\\
& \leq \sum\limits_{\theta \in B^c} \exp \left( \frac{2\bar{\epsilon}^2}{ 4k \log^2\frac{1}{\alpha} }\right)
\end{align*}
}
and by setting $\epsilon =-\frac{1}{2}\mathbb{E}_{\boldsymbol{f}}\left[\bar{v}_{k}(\theta)\right]$, it follows that
{
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{P}_{\boldsymbol{f}}
\left(\bigcup_{\theta \in B^c} \left\lbrace \bar{v}_{k}(\theta)
\geq \frac{1}{2} \mathbb{E}_{\boldsymbol{f}}\left[\bar{v}_{k}(\theta) \right]\right\rbrace \right)
\leq
\sum\limits_{\theta \in B^c} \exp \left( \frac{\left( \mathbb{E}_{\boldsymbol{f}}\left[\bar{v}_{k}(\theta)\right]\right) ^2}{8k\log^2\frac{1}{\alpha}} \right)
\end{align*}
}
It can be seen that $\mathbb{E}_{\boldsymbol{f}}\left[\bar{v}_{k}(\theta)\right] = - k\gamma(\theta)$, thus yielding
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{P}_{\boldsymbol{f}}
\left(\bigcup_{\theta \in B^c} \left\lbrace\bar{v}_{k}(\theta) \geq -\frac{k}{2} \gamma(\theta) \right\rbrace \right)
& \leq C_2\sum\limits_{\theta \in B^c} \exp \left( -k \gamma^2(\theta) \right)
\end{align*}
Now, we let the set $B$ be the KL ball of a radius $r$ centered at $\theta^*$
and follow Definition~\ref{covering} to exploit the representation of
$\mathcal{B}_r^c(\theta^*)$ as the union of KL bands, for which we obtain
{
\begin{align*}
\sum_{\theta \in \mathcal{B}_{r}^c(\theta^*)} \exp \left( -k\gamma^2(\theta) \right)
&= \sum\limits_{l \geq 1} \sum_{\theta \in \mathcal{B}_{r_{l+1}} \backslash \mathcal{B}_{r_{l}}} \exp \left( -k\gamma^2(\theta) \right)\\
& \leq \sum\limits_{l \geq 1} \mathcal{N}_{r_l} \exp \left( -kr_{l}^2 \right)
\end{align*}
}
thus, completing the proof.
\end{IEEEproof}
We are now ready to proof Theorem \ref{main_count}
\begin{IEEEproof}[Theorem \ref{main_count}]
From Lemma~\ref{bound_prob},
where we take $k$ large enough to ensure the desired probability, it follows that
with probability $1-\rho$, we have: for all $k\in N_1$,
\begin{align*}
\mu_{k}^i\left(\mathcal{B}_r(\theta^*)\right) &
\geq 1-C_3\sum\limits_{\theta \in \mathcal{B}_r^c(\theta^*) }\exp\left(-\frac{k}{2}\gamma(\theta)\right)\\
& \geq 1-\sum\limits_{\theta \in \mathcal{B}_r^c(\theta^*) } \sigma {\prod_{i=1}^n \mu_0^i\left(\theta\right)^{\frac{1}{n}} } \\
& \geq 1-\sigma
\end{align*}
where the last inequality follows from Eq.~\eqref{bounded2} where we further take sufficiently large $k$.
\end{IEEEproof}
\section{Continuum of Hypotheses}\label{sec_cont}
In this section we will provide the concentration results
for a continuous hypothesis set $\Theta \subseteq \mathbb{R}^d$.
At first, we present some definitions that we use in constructing coverings analogously to that in Section~\ref{sec_count}.
In this case, however, we employ the Hellinger distance.
\begin{definition}\label{h_balls}
Define a Hellinger Ball (H) of radius $r$ centered at $\theta^*$ as.
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{B}_r(\theta^*)
& = \left\lbrace \theta \in \Theta \left| \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}} h\left(\boldsymbol{\ell}\left(\cdot|\theta^*\right) ,\boldsymbol{\ell}\left(\cdot|\theta \right) \right) \right. \leq r \right\rbrace
\end{align*}
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
Let $\left(M,d\right)$ be a metric space. A subset $S_{\delta} \subseteq M$ is called $\delta$-separated with $\delta>0$ if $d(x,y)\geq \delta$ for any $x,y \in S_{\delta}$. Moreover, for a set
$B \subseteq M$, let $\mathcal{N}_B(\delta)$ be the smallest number of Hellinger balls with centers in $S_\delta$
of radius $\delta>0$ needed to cover the set $B$, i.e., such that $B \subseteq \bigcup_{ z \in S_\delta} \mathcal{B}_{\delta}\left(z\right)$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}\label{covering_cont}
Let $\{r_l\}$ be a strictly decreasing sequence such that ${r_1 =1}$ and $\lim_{l \to \infty} r_l = 0$.
Define the covering of the set $\mathcal{B}_{r}^c(\theta^*)$ generated by the sequence $\{r_l\}$ as follows:
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{B}_{r}^c(\theta^*)& = \bigcup_{l = 1}^{{{L_r}}-1} \{\mathcal{B}_{r_{l}} \backslash\mathcal{B}_{r_{l+1}} \}
\end{align*}
where ${L_r}$ is the smallest $l$ such that $r_l \leq r$.
Moreover, given a positive sequence $\{\delta_l\}$,
we denote by $\mathcal{N}_{r_{l}}(\delta_l)$ the maximal $\delta_l$-separated subset of the set $\{\mathcal{B}_{r_l} \backslash\mathcal{B}_{r_{l+1}} \}$ and denote its cardinality by
$K_l$, i.e. $K_l = |\mathcal{N}_l(\delta_l)|$.
Therefore, we have the following covering of $\mathcal{B}_{r}^c(\theta^*)$,
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{B}_{r}^c(\theta^*) & = \bigcup_{l \ge 1}^{{{L_r}}-1} \bigcup_{z_m\in \mathcal{N}_l(\delta_l)} \mathcal{F}_{l,m}
\end{align*}
where $\mathcal{F}_{l,m} = \mathcal{B}_{\delta_l}(z_m \in \mathcal{N}_{r_{l}}(\delta_l)) \cap \{\mathcal{B}_{r_{l}} \backslash\mathcal{B}_{r_{l+1}} \} $.
\end{definition}
Figure \ref{lcovering_cont} depicts the elements of a covering for a set $\mathcal{B}_r^c\left(\theta^*\right)$. The cluster of circles at the top right corner represents the balls $ \mathcal{B}_{\delta_l}(z_m \in \mathcal{N}_{r_{l}}(\delta_l))$ and for a specific case in the left of the image we illustrate the set $\mathcal{F}_{l,m}$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{overpic}[width=0.4\textwidth]{covering_cont}
\put(38,29){{\small $\mathcal{B}_{r}\left(\theta^*\right)$}}
\put(18,50){{\small $\mathcal{F}_{l,m}$}}
\put(48,53){{\small $P_{\theta^*}$}}
\end{overpic}
\captionsetup{justification=centering}
\caption{Creating a covering for a set $\mathcal{B}_r\left(\theta^*\right)$. $\bigstar$ represents the correct hypothesis $\ell^i\left(\cdot|\theta^*\right)$. }
\label{lcovering_cont}
\end{figure}
We are now ready to state the main result regarding continuous set of hypotheses $\Theta \subseteq \mathbb{R}^d$.
\begin{theorem}\label{main_cont}
Let Assumptions~\ref{assum:init},~\ref{assum:graph}, and~\ref{conv_hyp} hold, and let ${\rho \in (0,1)}$ be a given probability tolerance level.
Then, the beliefs $\{\mu_k^i\},$ $i\in V,$ generated by the update rule in~Eq.~\eqref{protocol_cont}
with uniform initial beliefs,
are such that, for any $\sigma \in (0,1)$ and any $r>0$ with probability $1-\rho$,
\begin{align*}
\mu_{k}^i\left(\mathcal{B}_{r}\left(\theta^*\right)\right) & \geq 1 - \sigma \qquad \text{ for all } i \text{ and all }k\geq N
\end{align*}
where $N = \min \left\lbrace k \geq 1 \left| k \in N_1 \text{ and } k \in N_2 \right. \right\rbrace $ with
{
\begin{align*}
N_1 &\text{=}\left\lbrace \sum_{l=1}^{{L_r}-1} \exp\left(\frac{8 \log \frac{1}{\alpha} \log n}{1 - \lambda} \text{ --}k \left( r_{l+1}\text{ --}\delta_l \text{ --}R\right) \text{--}d \log \delta_l \right)\leq \rho \right\rbrace \\
N_2 & \text{=}\left\lbrace \sum_{l=1}^{{L_r}-1} \exp \left(d\log\frac{r_l}{R} - 2k\left(r_{l+1}-\delta_l -R\right)\right) \leq \sigma \right\rbrace
\end{align*}
}
for a parameter $R$ such that $r>R$ and $r_{l+1}-\delta_l -R >0$ for all $l\ge1$.
The constant $\alpha$ is as in Assumption~\ref{assum:init}, $d$ is the dimension of the space of $\Theta$,
$r_{l}$ and $\delta_l$ are as in Definition~\ref{covering_cont}, while $\lambda$ is the same as in
Theorem~\ref{main_count}.
\end{theorem}
Analogous to Theorem \ref{main_count},
Theorem \ref{main_cont} provides a probabilistic concentration result for the agents' beliefs around
a Hellinger ball of radius $r$ with center at $\theta^*$ for sufficiently large $k$.
Similarly to the preceding section, we represent the beliefs $\mu_{k}^i$ in terms of the initial beliefs
and the cumulative product of the weighted likelihoods received from the neighbors.
In particular, analogous to Eq.~\eqref{initial_measure}, we have that for every $i$ and
for every measurable set $B \subseteq \Theta$:
\begin{align}\label{initial_measure_c}
\mu_{k}^i\left(B\right) &
= \frac{1}{Z_{k}^i}\int\limits_{\theta \in B} \prod\limits_{t=1}^{k} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n}
\ell^j(s_{t}^j|\theta)^{\left[A^{k-t}\right]_{ij}} d\mu_0^j\left(\theta\right)
\end{align}
with the corresponding normalization constant $Z_k^i$, and assuming all agents have uniform beliefs at time $0$.
It will be easier to work with the beliefs' densities, so we define the density of a measurable set with respect to the observed data.
\begin{definition}\label{g_densities}
The density $g_B^i$ of a measurable set $B\subseteq \Theta$, where $\mu_0^i\left(B\right) > 0$ with respect to the product distribution of the observed data is given by
\begin{align}\label{def_dens}
g_B^i\left(\hat{s}\right) & = \frac{1}{\mu_0^i\left(B\right)}
\int\limits_{B} \prod\limits_{t=1}^{k}
\prod\limits_{j=1}^{n} \ell^j(S_{t}^j|\theta)^{\left[A^{t-k}\right]_{ij}}d\mu_0^j\left(\theta\right)
\end{align}
where $\hat{s} = \{S_t^i\}_{t=1:k}^{i=1:n}$ and $P_B^i = g_B^i \cdot (\lambda^i)^{\otimes k}$.
\end{definition}
The next lemma relates the density $g_B^i\left(\hat{s}\right)$ which is defined per agent to a quantity that is common among all nodes in the network.
\begin{lemma}\label{dist_densities}
Consider the densities as defined in Eq. \eqref{def_dens}, then
\begin{align}
g_B^i\left(\hat{s}\right) & \leq C_1g_B\left(\hat{s}\right) ^{\frac{1}{n}}
\end{align}
where $C_1 = \exp\left(\frac{8 \log \frac{1}{\alpha} \log n}{1 - \lambda}\right) $ and
\begin{align*}
g_B\left(\hat{s}\right)
& = \int\limits_{B} \prod\limits_{t=1}^{k} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n} \ell^j(S_{t}^j|\theta)d\mu_0^j\left(\theta\right).
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{IEEEproof}
By definition of the densities, we have
{
\begin{align*}
g_B^i\left(\hat{s}\right) & = \frac{1}{\mu_0^i\left(B\right)} \int\limits_{B} \prod\limits_{t=1}^{k} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n} \ell^j(S_{t}^j|\theta)^{\left[A^{t-k}\right]_{ij}}d\mu_0^j\left(\theta\right)\\
& = \frac{1}{\mu_0^i\left(B\right)} \int\limits_{B} \exp\left(\sum\limits_{{t=1}}^{k}\sum\limits_{j=1}^{n} \left[A^{t-k}\right]_{ij} \log \ell^j(S_{t}^j|\theta)\right)d\mu_0^j\left(\theta\right)\\
& = \frac{1}{\mu_0^i\left(B\right)} \int\limits_{B} \exp\left(\sum\limits_{{t=1}}^{k}\sum\limits_{j=1}^{n} \left( \left[A^{t-k}\right]_{ij} - \frac{1}{n}\right) \log \ell^j(S_{t}^i|\theta)
+ \sum\limits_{{t=1}}^{k}\frac{1}{n} \sum\limits_{j=1}^{n} \log \ell^j(S_{t}^j|\theta) \right)d\mu_0^j\left(\theta\right)
\end{align*}
}
where the last line follows by adding and subtracting $1/n$. Hence, by Lemma~\ref{shahin}, we further obtain
{
\begin{align*}
g_B^i\left(\hat{s}\right)
& \leq \frac{C_1}{\mu_0^i\left(B\right)} \int\limits_{B} \exp\left( \sum\limits_{t=1}^{k}\frac{1}{n} \sum\limits_{j=1}^{n} \log \ell^j(S_{t}^j|\theta) \right)d\mu_0^j\left(\theta\right) \\
& = \frac{C_1}{\mu_0^i\left(B\right)} \int\limits_{B} \prod\limits_{t=1}^{k} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n} \ell^j(S_{t}^j|\theta)^{1/n} d\mu_0^j\left(\theta\right)\\
& \leq\frac{C_1}{\mu_0^i\left(B\right)} \left(\int\limits_{B} \prod\limits_{t=1}^{k} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n} \ell^j(S_{t}^j|\theta)d\mu_0^j\left(\theta\right)\right) ^{1/n}
\end{align*}
}
where the last inequality follows from Jensen's inequality.
\end{IEEEproof}
The next Lemma is an analog of Lemma \ref{bound_prob} which we use to bound the probability concentrations
with respect to the ratio $g_{\mathcal{F}_{l,m}}^i\left(\hat{s}\right)/ g_{\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)}^i\left(\hat{s}\right)$.
\begin{lemma}\label{bound_cont}
Consider the ratio $g_{\mathcal{F}_{l,m}}^i\left(\hat{s}\right)/ g_{\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)}^i\left(\hat{s}\right)$, then
{
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{P}_{\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)}\left( \log\left( \frac{g_{\mathcal{F}_{l,m}}^i\left(\hat{s}\right)}{g_{\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)}^i\left(\hat{s}\right)}\right)\geq -2k \left( r_l-\delta_l -R\right) \right) \leq C_2 \exp\left( -k \left( r_{l+1}-\delta_l -R\right) +d \log \delta_l \right).
\end{align*}
}
with $C_2$ as defined in Lemma \ref{bound_prob}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{IEEEproof}
By using the union bound, the Markov inequality and Lemma 1 in \cite{bir15}, we have that
{
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{P}_{\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)}\left(\log\left( \frac{g_{\mathcal{F}_{l,m}}^i\left(\hat{s}\right)}{g_{\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)}^i\left(\hat{s}\right)}\right)\geq y \right)
& \leq C_1\exp \left(-\frac{y}{2}\right) \exp \left( -k\frac{1}{n}h^2\left(\mathcal{F}_{l,m},\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)\right)\right) \\
& \leq C_1 \exp\left(-\frac{y}{2} - 2k\left( r_{l+1}-\delta_l -R\right) \right)
\end{align*}
}
where the last inequality follows from Proposition 5 and Corollary 1 in \cite{bir15}, where
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}} h\left(\mathcal{F}_{l,m},\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)\right) & \geq \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}} h\left(z_m \in \mathcal{N}_{r_l}\left(\delta_l\right),\theta^*\right) -\delta_l - R\\
& \geq \left(r_{l+1}-\delta_l -R\right)
\end{align*}
The desired result is obtained by letting ${y = -2k \left(r_{l+1}-\delta_l -R\right)}$.
\end{IEEEproof}
Furthermore,
{
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{P}_{\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)}\left(\bigcup_{\mathcal{F}_{l,m}}\left\lbrace \log\left( \frac{g_{\mathcal{F}_{l,m}}^i\left(\hat{s}\right)}{g_{\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)}^i\left(\hat{s}\right)}\right)\geq y\right\rbrace \right)
& \leq \sum\limits_{l=1}^{{{L_r}}-1} \sum\limits_{m=1}^{K_l} \mathbb{P}_{\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)}\left( \log\left( \frac{g_{\mathcal{F}_{l,m}}^i\left(\hat{s}\right)}{g_{\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)}^i\left(\hat{s}\right)}\right)\geq y\right) \\
& \leq C_2\sum\limits_{l=1}^{{{L_r}}-1} K_l \exp\left(-k\left(r_{l+1} -\delta_l -R\right) \right)\\
& \leq C_2 \sum\limits_{l=1}^{{{L_r}}-1} \exp \left(-k\left(r_{l+1}-\delta_l -R\right) -d \log \delta_l\right)
\end{align*}
}
where the last inequality follows from ${K_l \geq \delta_l^{-d}}$, see~\cite{dum07}, \cite{rog57}.
Lemma \ref{dist_densities} allows us to represent the beliefs on the set $B^c$ as the cumulative beliefs with respect to the density $g_B\left(\hat{s}\right)$. For this, similarly as in Section \ref{sec_count} we will partition the set $B^c$ into Hellinger bands. Then for each band we will find a covering of $\delta$-separated balls and compute the concentration of probability measure with respect to density rations.
\begin{IEEEproof}\label{proof_theo_cont}[Theorem \ref{main_cont}]
Lets consider the Hellinger ball $\mathcal{B}_{r}(\theta^*)$. We thus have
{
\begin{align}\label{mu_density}
\mu_{k}^i\left(\mathcal{B}_{r}(\theta^*)\right) & = \frac{\int\limits_{\theta \in \mathcal{B}_{r}(\theta^*)} \prod\limits_{t=1}^{k} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n}
\ell^j(s_{t}^j|\theta)^{\left[A^{k-t}\right]_{ij}} d\mu_0^j\left(\theta\right)}{\int\limits_{\theta \in\Theta} \prod\limits_{t=1}^{k} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n}
\ell^j(s_{t}^j|\theta)^{\left[A^{k-t}\right]_{ij}} d\mu_0^j\left(\theta\right)} \nonumber \\
& \geq 1 - \frac{ \int\limits_{\theta \in \mathcal{B}_{r}^c(\theta^*)} \prod\limits_{t=1}^{k} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n}
\ell^j(s_{t}^j|\theta)^{\left[A^{k-t}\right]_{ij}} d\mu_0^j\left(\theta\right)}{\int\limits_{\theta \in \mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)} \prod\limits_{t=1}^{k} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n}
\ell^j(s_{t}^j|\theta)^{\left[A^{k-t}\right]_{ij}} d\mu_0^j\left(\theta\right)} \nonumber \\
& \geq 1 - \frac{ \int\limits_{\theta \in \mathcal{B}_{r}^c(\theta^*)}\prod\limits_{t=1}^{k} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n}
\ell^j(s_{t}^j|\theta)^{\left[A^{k-t}\right]_{ij}} d\mu_0^j\left(\theta\right) }{\mu_0^i\left(\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)\right) g_{\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)}^i\left(\hat{s}\right) }
\end{align}
}
The construction of a partition of the set $\mathcal{B}_{r}^c$ presented in Definition \ref{covering_cont}
allows us to rewrite Eq. \eqref{mu_density} as follows:
{
\begin{align*}
\mu_{k}^i\left(\mathcal{B}_{r}^c(\theta^*)\right) & \leq \frac{\sum\limits_{l=1}^{{{L_r}}-1}\sum\limits_{m=1}^{K_l} \int\limits_{\mathcal{F}_{l,m}} \prod\limits_{t=1}^{k} \prod\limits_{j=1}^{n}
\ell^j(s_{t}^j|\theta)^{\left[A^{k-t}\right]_{ij}}d\mu_0^j\left(\theta\right) }{\mu_0^i\left(\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)\right) g_{\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)}^i\left(\hat{s}\right) } \\
& = \sum\limits_{l=1}^{{{L_r}}-1}\sum\limits_{m=1}^{K_l} \frac{\mu_0^j\left(\mathcal{F}_{l,m}\right) }{\mu_0^i\left(\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)\right)} \frac{g_{\mathcal{F}_{l,m}}^i\left(\hat{s}\right)}{g_{\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)}^i\left(\hat{s}\right)}
\end{align*}
}
Finally by applying Lemma \ref{bound_cont} and the fact that of all agents have uniform initial beliefs
\begin{align*}
\mu_{k}^i\left(\mathcal{B}_{r}^c(\theta^*)\right) & \leq \sum\limits_{l=1}^{{{L_r}}-1}\sum\limits_{m=1}^{K_l}\frac{ \mu_0^j\left(\mathcal{F}_{l,m}\right) }{\mu_0^j\left(\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)\right)}\exp(- 2k\left(r_{l+1}\text{-}\delta_l\text{-}R\right))\\
& \leq \sum\limits_{l=1}^{{{L_r}}-1}\frac{\mu_0^j\left(\mathcal{B}_{r_{l+1}}(\theta^*)\right)}{\mu_0^j\left(\mathcal{B}_{R}(\theta^*)\right)} \exp(- 2k\left(r_{l+1}-\delta_l -R\right)) \\
& \leq \sum\limits_{l=1}^{{{L_r}}-1} \exp \left(d \log\frac{r_{l+1}}{R} - 2k\left(r_{l+1}-\delta_l -R\right)\right)
\end{align*}
The last
inequality follows from the initial beliefs being uniform and the volume ratio of the two Hellinger balls with radius $r_l$ and $R$.
\end{IEEEproof}
\section{Conclusions}\label{sec_conclusion}
We proposed an algorithm for distributed learning with a countable and a continuous sets of hypotheses.
Our results show non-asymptotic geometric convergence rates for the concentration of the beliefs around the true hypothesis.
While the proposed algorithm is motivated by the non-Bayesian learning models,
we have shown that it is also a specific instance of a distributed stochastic mirror descent applied to a well defined optimization problem consisting of the minimization of the sum of Kullback-Liebler divergences.
This indicates an interesting connection between two ``separate" streams of literature and
provides an initial step to the study of distributed algorithms in a more general form.
Specifically, it is interesting to explore how variations on stochastic approximation algorithms will induce new non-Bayesian update rules for more general problems. In particular,
one would be interested in acceleration results for proximal methods, other Bregman distances and
other constraints in the space of probability distributions.
Interaction between the agents is modeled as exchange of local probability distributions (\textit{beliefs}) over the hypothesis set between connected nodes in a graph. This will in general generate high communication loads. Nevertheless, results are an initial study towards the distributed learning problems for general hypothesis sets.
Future work will consider the effect of parametric approximation of the beliefs such that one only needs to communicate a finite number of parameters such as, for example, in Gaussian Mixture Models or Particle Filters.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
\IEEEPARstart{T}{he} emergence of multi- and many-core processors has been a well-established
trend in the chip-making industry during the past decade. While this paradigm
guarantees the continued increase of CPU performance, it requires some
adaptation of existing code in order to better utilize these architectures.\\
Geant4 is a toolkit for Monte Carlo simulation of the transportation and interaction of particles in matter~\cite{Agostinelli2003250}
It can be used in a wide variety of applications including high energy physics, space and medical science.\\
With the release of Geant4 Version 10.0 in December 2013 event-level parallelism has been introduced~\cite{1742-6596-513-2-022005}.\\
A Geant4 application is defined by the use of an instance of the
\gclass{G4RunManager} class or of a user defined class derived from it. This
class defines the main interaction with the user: it provides interfaces to
define the {\it user initializations} (e.g. geometry and physics definitions)
and the {\it user actions} that permit interaction with the simulation kernel
and retrieve output information. In particular, \gclass{G4RunManager} provides
the interface to start the simulation of a run, which is a collection of events.
For multithreaded applications a derived class \gclass{G4MTRunManager} is used
allowing the number of worker threads to be specified. When a new run is requested it is
the responsibility of \gclass{G4MTRunManager} to start and configure worker
threads. Each thread owns an instance of \gclass{G4WorkerRunManager} and
shares only the user initialization classes, while it owns a private copy of the
user action classes. Workers continue to request events from the master until
there are no more events left in the current run. At the end of the run the
results collected by threads can be merged in the global run.\\
To maximize the compatibility with different systems multi-threading in Geant4 is implemented via the POSIX {\it pthread} library primitives. In this paper we present extensions to Geant4 that allow for integration with additional well established parallelization frameworks.
\section{TBB Integration}
The user can overwrite the default implementation of the threading model in Geant4 providing a user-derived \gclass{G4RunManager} (and other helper classes). This approach is demonstrated within the Gent4 TBB example, that replaces {\it pthreads}.\\
The Intel TBB library allows for the development of a task-based parallelism. When using TBB, a user should provide a user class derived from the base class \gclass{tbb::task} and implement a virtual method \gclass{execute}.\\
One of the characteristics of TBB is the mapping of tasks to the execution threads. It is done by the library dynamically at run-time and the user has no control over the underlying threads from a {\it task} object. This design poses some challenges to run a Geant4 job based on TBB. In our case threads need to be initialized and the thread-local-storage properly configured to comply with the Geant4 master/worker model~\cite{Ahn2013}.\\
Few new classes
, specific to TBB, have been introduced in Geant4 (to be released in Geant4 Version 10.2 under {\it examples/extended/parallel/TBB} directory).\\
With the latest version of TBB it is possible to control thread initialization via the class \gclass{tbb::task\_scheduler\_observer}, we use this feature to initialize specific thread-local-storage. The Geant4 master needs to live in its own thread, to accomplish this \gclass{tbb::task\_arena} instances can be used to partition the thread pool into two and assign a single thread to the master. The role of the master now is to create a list of \gclass{tbb::task}s that are passed to TBB run-time. Each task, when executed, will retrieve the thread-specific {\it worker-run-manager} and will accomplish the simulation of one or more events. This design has allowed the CMS Experiment at CERN to migrate the simulation framework (based on Geant4) to a parallel, TBB based, one. The ATLAS experiment at CERN is also investigating the possibility to use TBB as the parallelization library in their experiment software framework.\\
While TBB does not bring by itself any particular benefit in terms of CPU or functionality, this development will allow for an easier integration of Geant4 into large software projects where a task-based parallelism is adopted.
\section{MPI Interface}
Support for MPI parallelism is available in Geant4 since some time ({\it examples/extended/parallel/MPI} directory), recently we have extended this example to provide hybrid applications that use both MPI and MT. To efficiently reduce the memory consumption it is possible to schedule a single MPI job for each node and use Geant4 multi-threading capabilities to scale across the CPUs and cores available on the node.\\
To activate MPI in Geant4 it is enough to create instances of the two classes \gclass{G4MPImanager} and \gclass{G4MPIsession}. The user-interaction is performed via the usual Geant4 UI commands: a {\it /run/beamOn} command will trigger the MPI ranks to cooperatively perform the simulation of the run.\\
Up to Geant4 version 10.1 (December 2014), the use of MPI in a job is limited to the steering of the job: the {\it rank 0} accepts UI commands from the user, distributes work among all ranks and controls the random number generator seeds. Since Geant4 Version 10.0 a new module is available in Geant4 to support user-analysis~\cite{g4ana}: histograms and ntuples can be created and saved to different file formats (ROOT, AIDA XML and CSV). A characteristics of the g4analsysis package is its thread-safety and its ability to automatically reduce histograms at the end of the job: to minimize the use of mutex/locks each thread has its own copy of the analysis histograms, at the end of the job these are automatically reduced in the master thread and written to a single file. With the upcoming Geant4 Version 10.2 histograms in the g4analysis package will support streaming via MPI.\\
To simplify the user handling of histograms the following strategy is implemented:
\begin{itemize}
\item[1] Each thread of each rank owns its copy of the analysis histograms. These are filled independently during the event loop and no synchronization between threads or ranks is required
\item[2] At the end of the run, all working threads belonging to the same rank reduce the histograms in the master thread
\item[3] The MPI ranks with id $>0$ merge the histograms with into the rank with id 0 using MPI messages
\item[4] The MPI rank with id=0 is responsible of writing the final output file to disk
\end{itemize}
We are investigating improved MPI communication patterns to reduce the time needed at the end of the job to merge histograms. The improved code will be released with Geant4 Version 10.2 (scheduled for December 2015).
\section{Use of HPC resources}
Traditionally HPC resources, consisting of a very large number of nodes and processing units, are suited to MPI applications. In some cases MPI is the preferred way to run parallel jobs on such systems.\\
Up to Version 10.0 the use of Geant4 on these systems has been limited by its lack of parallelism: the only way to scale among the cluster was to use a multi-process approach in which for each computing unit a clone of the process was started. It was left to the user to create scripts to achieve this. In some cases, when the memory used by each process is large (e.g. LHC experiments), it was not possible to use all available cores in a node due to the limited amount of memory. An additional complication was the need for the user to define a strategy to manually handle the output histogram files and their merging.\\
With the introduction of multi-threading and the improved support of MPI it is now possible to take full advantage of HPC resources: no additional scripting to drive the jobs is required and the output data are naturally merged into a single file. As a demonstrator of the validity of our strategy, we have run test applications on the Babbage test-bed at NERSC
The results are very promising: we have managed to run an hybrid MPI/MT application on multiple Intel\textsuperscript{\textregistered} Xeon Phi\texttrademark cards, running up to 1000 threads without degradation of performances with respect to a perfect linear speedup. During the tests the only limitation has been the non-optimal use of MPI to merge a large number of histograms. The problem is understood and the final public release Geant4 Version 10.2 will solve this issue.
\section{Conclusions}
Since the introduction of multi-threading, Geant4 has entered the era of massive parallelism: it is the first large HEP code to be migrated to multi-threading. Recent improvements allow for a better integration with external parallelism frameworks and libraries. In particular the Geant4 users have expressed strong interest in TBB library (mainly the HEP community) and for MPI integration (Medical community and HPC users).\\
The integration with these two technologies is substantially improved and is demonstrated in specific examples. In particular an hybrid approach of MPI and MT allows for a simplified use of large core-count resources: the user does not need anymore to write custom scripts to perform job splitting / handling / merging. \\
Preliminary tests performed on the Babbage test-bed at NERSC have shown an excellent scaling of the multi-threading Geant4 scoring with a perfect linearity of the speedup as a function of the number of cores. Further improvements are expected for the MPI merging of results in time for the public release of Geant4 Version 10.2.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Fast radio bursts (FRBs) comprise a new emerging class of
radio transients (see a review in \citealt{2016arXiv160401799K}).
At the moment, 17 sources are known (see the catalogue in
\citealt{2016arXiv160103547P}).
They are characterised by short durations ($\sim$~few~msec),
and large values of dispersion measure (DM) which are much larger than the
expected Galactic contribution \citep{NE2001}. If these large values were
obtained during propagation through extragalactic medium, this would firmly
put FRBs at cosmological distances, $d > 1$~Gpc, and would correspond to
gigantic energy outputs (just in radio waves!) of these events:
\begin{equation}
L_{\mr{r}}\sim 10^{42}\left(\frac{S_\mr{peak}}{\mathrm{Jy}}\right)
\left(\frac{\Delta\nu}{1.4\, \mathrm{GHz}}\right)
\left(\frac{d}{1~\mr{Gpc}}\right)^{2}~\mr{erg~s^{-1}}.
\label{eq:frb_lum}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
E_{\mr{r}}\sim 10^{39}\left(\frac{\tau}{1~\mr{msec}}\right)
\left(\frac{d}{1~\mr{Gpc}}\right)^{2}\left(\frac{L_{\mr{iso}}}{10^{42}~\mr{erg~s^{-1}}}\right)~\mr{erg}.
\label{eq:frb_energy}
\end{equation}
Here $d$ is the distance to the source, $L_{\mr{r}}$ and $E_{\mr{r}}$ are the
radio luminosity and energy output under assumption of isotropy correspondingly,
$S_\mr{peak}$ --
peak flux, $\tau$ is the duration of the burst, and $\Delta \nu$ is the range of
frequencies which for estimates we set equal to the typical frequency of
observation of FRBs --- 1.4 GHz.
Short duration of these events implies that size of the active region
is very small, $ \lesssim 10^{8}$~cm,
which makes neutron stars-related phenomena
the most plausible candidates for explanation.
Still, the FRBs could be a heterogeneous phenomena,
consisting of several sub-populations for which different mechanisms of
burst emission might be applied.
Many models have been proposed to explain the nature of FRBs (see, for
example, references in
\citealt{2016arXiv160401799K}). Naturally, the majority of these scenarios are related to
neutron stars (NSs).
Among them several broad categories can be distinguished:
\begin{itemize}
\item FRBs are due to collapse of a supramassive NS to a black hole
(\citealt{2014A&A...562A.137F}).
\item FRBs are generated during NS-NS mergers
(\citealt{2010Ap&SS.330...13P,2013PASJ...65L..12T}).
\item FRBs are produced in (or after) magnetar hyperflares
(\citealt{2010vaoa.conf..129P, 2014MNRAS.442L...9L})
\item FRBs are phenomena akin to the Crab giant pulses (GPs). Very young
fast-rotating pulsars (PSRs) with ages less than $\sim$100
years can potentially demonstrate analogues of
GPs which are $10^{4}-10^{5}$ more luminous than in the Crab pulsar
(\citealt{2016MNRAS.457..232C, 2016MNRAS.458L..19C}).
Such hypothetical events are dubbed ``supergiant pulses''.
These flares could be observed as FRBs on Earth. In this scenario, most of DM
is accumulated in the very vicinity of pulsar in its supernova remnant,
and that allow to put FRBs at somewhat smaller distances:
$d \lesssim 100-200$~Mpc. All other models assume cosmological distances
$\gtrsim1$~Gpc.
\end{itemize}
The first among mentioned scenarios can hardly provide a reasonable estimate
for the rate of events inferred from the observations. The energy output is highly uncertain.
In addition, as FRBs are not shown to be coincident
with supernova (SN). Altogether, this means that
the model meets some severe restrictions.
The model with coalescing NSs could easily meet necessary energetic
requirements, but also
have serious difficulties explaining rate of
FRBs and repetitive bursts.
At the end of 2015 the magnetar model was considered as nearly the best,
but still any confirmations based on observations of Galactic magnetars
are lacking (i.e., up to date
there are no detections of radio bursts coincident with high energy flares;
see \citealt{2016arXiv160202188T}
and discussion in \citealt{2016arXiv160401799K}).
So, below we mainly focus on the model of supergiant pulses.\footnote{When
this paper was ready for submission, Lyutikov and Lorimer submitted an
e-print (arXiv: 1605.01468) in which they addressed the question of
contemporaneous counterparts of FRBs in the
framework of a magnetar flare.}
In this note we will briefly
analyse potentially testable predictions for multiwavelength observations
of the sources of FRBs in this scenario.
\section{FRBs by energetic radio pulsars}
\label{sec:lbp2016}
\cite{2016arXiv160302891L} developed further the model in which FRBs are due
to supergiants pulses of PSRs (\citealt{2016MNRAS.458L..19C,
2016MNRAS.457..232C}). In this section we briefly describe the main features
of this scenario.
In this model, a FRB is emitted by a very energetic PSR. Expected
spin-down luminosity, $\dot E$, are $\sim10^{43}$~erg~s$^{-1}$. The emission
mechanism is supposed to be similar to the mechanism of GPs, but
the maximal luminosity is scaled linearly with $\dot E$ (note, that FRBs can
be longer than GPs; as FRBs are widened due to scattering, and it is
difficult to derive their intrinsic duration. So, scaling of the total
energy release is a more complicated subject).
Then, it is possible to
obtain radio pulses $\sim 10^5$ stronger than GPs of the Crab. Such
events might explain properties (peak fluxes)
of known FRBs, if observed from 100-200 Mpc.
These distances guarantee roughly isotropic distribution of sources in the
sky.
At the moment the observational data are in an agreement with such
isotropy. Still, we note, that unless the statistics is significantly higher,
all analyses of isotropy are strongly limited by a small number of known
sources. If sources are indeed inside $\sim200$~Mpc radius sphere, then it can be possible
in the near future to probe deviation from the isotropy due to still slightly inhomogeneous distribution of galaxies in this volume (see, for example,
\citealt{2001MNRAS.328.1039C}).
Mostly, the DM is due
to a still dense shell (supernova remnant) around the NS. Then, expected
ages of such PSRs are about few tens of years.
For estimates below we use as a typical value
the age 30 years.
Note, that as in the model with supergiant pulses
and in the model with magnetar flares FRBs are
related to young NS, sources might be located in regions of intense
starformation. Then, significant DM can be partially due to the interstellar medium in
the local surroundings. In any case, absence of FRBs with low DM requires some
``guaranteed'' DM, either due to a SNR, or due to intergalactic medium.
Calculations (see \citealt{2016arXiv160302891L}) show that
it is possible to explain the estimated FRBs rate $\sim10^4$ per day
by the population
of young ($\lesssim$ few tens of years) energetic PSRs within 100-200 Mpc
from the Sun assuming that the repetition rate is $\lesssim 1$ per day,
in correspondence with observations.
This estimate is based on the core-collapse SN rate
$\sim 3 \times 10^{-4}$~yr$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-3}$
(\citealt{2012ApJ...757...70D}).
The supergiant pulses
scenario predicts that FRBs should
repeat quite frequently. Given that all FRBs were observed with high
signal-to-noise ratio \citep{2016arXiv160103547P},
and that GP rate falls very quickly with
increasing $L_\mr{r}$, it is natural to expect fainter but much more frequent
repetitive FRBs. The FRB 121102 can be an example of such
behaviour \citep{2016Natur.531..202S}.
We can expect to have $\gtrsim 10^5$ large galaxies within this volume.
This corresponds to about one source per 10 galaxies. Near-by
population of galaxies is relatively well studied, and if sources of FRBs
remain bright at some energy range even between the bursts, then we can hope
to identify them in catalogues, archival data, or dedicated observations.
Young PSRs with large $\dot E$ are known to be bright X-ray sources.
According to \cite{2002A&A...387..993P}
X-ray luminosity of such a source can be estimated as:
$L_\mathrm{X}=10^{-15.3} (\dot E)^{1.34}$. In addition, some fraction of
total energy losses might be re-emitted by a pulsar wind nebula (PWN).
A shell around the PSR relatively quickly, --- within few years, ---
becomes transparent for X-rays
(\citealt{2016arXiv160308875M}). So, at the ages required in the scenario by
\cite{2016arXiv160302891L} a bright (possibly ultraluminous) X-ray source might be
observed.
In this respect,
what would be the observational consequences of the supergiant PSR burst
scenario? How
presence of several thousand energetic
($\dot E\sim10^{43}~\mr{erg~s^{-1}}$) in 200~Mpc radius sphere (given
100\% fraction of young pulsar-related FRBs) can be probed?
We suggest that it might result in appearance of many ultraluminous X-ray
sources (ULXs). This conclusion seems to be unavoidable in this framework,
and we discuss it in the following section.
\section{ULXs as conterparts of young energetic pulsars}
\label{sec:ulx}
A young PSR might have an X-ray luminosity:
$$
L_\mathrm{X}\approx 2 \times 10^{42} \left(\dot E/10^{43}~\mr{erg~s}^{-1}
\right)^{1.34}~\mr{erg~s}~^{-1},$$
(see \citealt{2002A&A...387..993P}).
However, this relation is not probed for
very high values of $\dot E$, and so its usage is just an extrapolation.
Most probably, $L_\mr{X}$ does not grow that fast with $\dot E$ for large
values (still, for sure we expect to have a very bright X-ray sources for
large rotational energy losses).
On the other hand, significant additional
X-ray emission can appear due to a PWN (\citealt{2013arXiv1305.2552K}).
\cite{2004ApJ...615..222P} suggested that some of ultraluminous X-ray
sources (ULXs)
can be young energetic PSRs. Later, \cite{2013MNRAS.431.2690M} developed
this idea.
Such sources might dominate over high-mass X-ray binaries (HMXB) at high
($L_\mr{X}>10^{40}~\mr{erg~s^{-1}}$) luminosities
\citep{2004ApJ...615..222P,
2013MNRAS.431.2690M}.
\cite{2011ApJ...741...49S} studied a large (nearly complete, if we speak
about large bright objects) sample of galaxies within 14.5 Mpc.
They identified
$\sim100$ ULXs in 124 galaxies with total starformation rate (SFR) $\sim 50~
M_\odot$~yr$^{-1}$, but
found no sources with luminosities
$L_\mr{X}>10^{41}~\mr{erg~s^{-1}}$ in their sample.
Nevertheless, it does not
contradict the possibility that there could be $N_{200}\sim10^{4}$ such
sources in 200~Mpc radius sphere around the Sun.
For the local starformation rate density
value $(0.022\pm0.001)~M_{\odot}~\rm{yr^{-1}~Mpc^{-3}}$
\citep{2007MNRAS.375..931M} it is expected that only
$0.67\left({N_{200}}/{10^{4}}\right)$ sources with such luminosity might be
found in the
aforementioned survey.
Then non-detection of bright ULXs by \cite{2011ApJ...741...49S} does not
invalidate the scenario.
The most natural consequence of the model ---
which holds even if there was no
ULX-FRB connection --- is an expected considerable positional correlation of
FRBs with nearby galaxies.
Unfortunately, limited angular
resolution of FRB localization
($\sim 14$-$15$ arcmin in the case of Parkes telescope observations, where most of
the bursts have been identified, see \citealt{2016arXiv160103547P}) and
scarce statistics significantly complicate
deriving any definite conclusions.
Nevertheless, we
correlated FRB positions with bright galaxies from the 2MASS Redshift Survey
(2MRS, \citealt{2012ApJS..199...26H}). There are 37 209 galaxies with radial
velocities smaller than 14 000 $\mr{km~s^{-1}}$ which corresponds to
$d<200$~Mpc in this survey. It is expected to have 2.27 coincidences in
circles with radius $15$~arcmin\footnote{We use a more conservative estimate
for the positional accuracy which is double of the FWHM of a Parkes beam.}
for 17 FRB by chance alone,
and we found 5, which gives a
Poissonian probability $p\sim8\%$. More than that, 3 out of 17 FRBs
(FRB 010621, FRB 121102, and FRB 150418) are
very close to the Galactic plane and fall inside the ``blind spot'' of the
2MRS catalogue -- it was constructed using sources with $|b|>5^{{\circ}}$
($|b|>8^{{\circ}}$ closer to the bulge). This fact lowers probability to
$4\%$ level. Nevertheless, given unknown exposure map of the current FRB
catalogue it is difficult to make any far-reaching claims. However, if this
$\sim2\sigma$ fluctuation was real, then a meagre trebling of the number of
detected FRBs would be enough for FRB-2MRS correlation to reach a high level
of statistical significance.
Young energetic pulsar might demonstrate Crab-like properties,
i.e. they might be surrounded by a very bright PWN, which can
be used as a multiwavelength beacon. Huge spin-down luminosity cannot just
disappear without a trace (for example, carried away by a relativistic
particle flow).
Instead it must be (partially) dissipated and
radiated in different energy ranges.
In addition,
these objects should be bright persistent radio sources,
so additional cross-correlation between X-ray and radio catalogues
could lead to interesting results.
\section{Future searches for persistent counterparts}
\label{sec:disc}
In this section we discuss several issues related to the FRB-ULX connection.
\subsection{Possible \textit{XMM-Newton} observations}
\label{sec:disc_xmm}
Identification of host galaxies of FRBs is complicated as their positions
are not well-known. Most of the bursts have been discovered at the Parkes
telescope. Then, the uncertainty in position is about the size of the beam
of Parkes. Full beam width on half maximum amplitude is
$\approx 14$-15 arcmin (\citealt{2016arXiv160103547P}).
Note, that the field of view of the EPIC instrument onboard \textit{XMM-Newton} is
about 30$\arcmin$ in diameter(\citealt{Turner:2000jy}). If FRBs are mostly (or at least partly) due to
supergiant pulses of energetic PSRs, then we can expect to find an X-ray
source with flux $f\approx8\times10^{-13} (L_\mr{X}/10^{42}~\mr{erg~s}^{-1})
d_{100}^{-2}$~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$.
In the framework of the scenario developed by \cite{2016arXiv160302891L}
FRB luminosity is ~$L_\mathrm{r}=\eta \dot E$, where $\eta\approx 0.01$.
FRBs with different observed peak
fluxes are nearly uniformly distributed in distances, and DM is a poor
indicator of distance to the source.
According to \cite{2002A&A...387..993P}
$L_\mr{X}\sim\dot E^{1.34}$.
Then it is possible to find a relatively
bright (in terms of the flux) ULX coincident with a bright FRB in a relatively
distant galaxy. Moreover, if peak flux of FRBs is not correlated with the
distance (or correlates very weakly), then brighter (in terms of flux) ULXs
can be found in more distant galaxies.
This can be illustrated as follows.
For a typical FRB with peak flux $S_\mr{peak}=$~1~Jy we obtain radio
luminosity:
$$L_\mr{r}=1.7\times 10^{40} (S_\mr{peak}/1\, \mr{Jy})
(d/100\, \mathrm{Mpc})^2 \, \mathrm{erg} \, \mathrm{s}^{-1}.$$
Then, rotational energy losses are:
$$\dot E=1.7\times 10^{42} (S_\mr{peak}/1\, \mathrm{Jy})
(d/100\, \mathrm{Mpc})^2(\eta/0.01)^{-1}\,\mathrm{erg}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}.$$
Using the relation from Possenti et al. we obtain the X-ray luminosity:
$$L_\mr{X}=1.8\times 10^{41} (S_\mr{peak}/1\, \mr{Jy})^{1.34} \times
$$
$$
\times (d/100\, \mathrm{Mpc})^{2.68} (\eta/0.01)^{-1.34}\, \mathrm{erg}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}.$$
And so, the X-ray flux is:
$$f_\mr{X}=1.5\times 10^{-13} (S_\mr{peak}/1
\, \mr{Jy})^{1.34} \times
$$
$$ \times (d/100\, \mathrm{Mpc})^{0.68} (\eta/0.01)^{-1.34}
\,~\mathrm{erg}\,~\mathrm{cm}^{-2}~\, \mathrm{s}^{-1}.$$
For large distances we obtain higher $f_\mr{X}$ for a given $S_\mr{peak}$,
for smaller --- weaker.
If a source with peak flux 1 Jy is at 10 Mpc, then $f_\mr{X}=3.2\times
10^{-14}$~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$. Correspondently, for 200 Mpc we have
$f_\mr{X}=2.5\times 10^{-13}$~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$.
Then, a limit is determined by closer sources.\footnote{Note, that the
applied relation $L_\mr{X} vs. \dot E$ can not be valid for large luminosities.}
Non-detection of a stable X-ray source down to
$f\sim10^{-14}$~--~$10^{-15}$~~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$ can be a useful constraint.
\subsection{Search for FRBs in ``supernova factories''}
\label{sec:disc_snf}
Inside $\lesssim 50$~Mpc there are few galaxies with extreme values of
starformation rate and supernova rate. In particular, we note Arp 299
(\citealt{2004ApJ...611..186N}),
and NGC 3256 (\citealt{2004MNRAS.354L...1L}).
The rate of SNae in these galaxies is $\sim 1$ per year. Then, even if just
1/10 of young pulsars are energetic enough to produce a detectable FRB from
$d\sim40$~Mpc, then we can expect several of such sources in each galaxy. With
the rate of repetition $\sim$ once per day, it is worth trying to monitor
these galaxies in radio. Identification of an ULX, however, would be very
problematic in such cases due to crowding of X-ray sources.
\subsection{Sources in local starforming galaxies}
\label{sec:disc_sfg}
Inside $\lesssim 4$~Mpc most of starformation is related to just
four galaxies:
M82, M83, NGC 253, NGC 4945 (\citealt{1998ASPC..148..127H}).
Typically, SN rate in each of
these galaxies is higher than in the Milky way by a
factor of a few (up to 10, see data and references in
\citealt{2005astro.ph..2391P}).
We can expect few PSRs with ages $\lesssim 30$~yrs in each of these galaxies.
Some of them can be energetic enough to produce detectable FRBs.
As galaxies are near-by, identification of ULXs would not be a very
difficult task.
Note, that no ULXs with $L_\mr{X}>10^{41}$~erg~s$^{-1}$ have been found in
these galaxies. Then we can suspect that potential sources have smaller
$\dot E$, and so produce radio bursts with luminosities smaller that those
of classical FRBs. Still, radio monitoring is worthwhile due to proximity of
these galaxies.
\subsection{Bursts from M31}
\label{sec:disc_m31}
M31 is the closest large galaxy.
Recently
\cite{2013MNRAS.428.2857R} reported discovery of several millisecond
radio bursts from it. No periodicity have been found (so, the
interpretation based on radio pulsars or RRATs is not viable), however, some
sources can be repititive. \cite{2013arXiv1307.4924P} suggested that this
flares can be weak relatives of FRBs, originating from the same type of
sources which demonstrate activity in different ranges of released energy
(in the particular model these two types of activity are hyperflares of
magnetars and their usual weak bursts).
A similar interpretation can be made
in the case of supergiant pulses. I.e., we observed analogues of FRBs from
more numerous PSRs with smaller $\dot E$, which cannot produce strong bursts.
Then, search for weak FRBs from local galaxies
can be fruitful (or can put important constraints on the model
of supergiant pulses).
\subsection{Future observations}
It is expected that statistics of FRBs can be greatly increased in 1-2
years \citep{2016arXiv160207292C, 2016arXiv160205165K}.
This might be due to several new instruments.
UTMOST is already working \citep{2016MNRAS.458..718C}, and it is expected
that it is going to contribute to the increase of the FRB statistics with
the detection rate $\sim 1$ per 1-2 weeks.
Another telescope --- CHIME \citep{2014SPIE.9145E..22B} --- is expected to
start gathering data very soon and reach the rate up to $\sim 1$ per day, if
at lower frequencies FRBs are well-visible.
In the fall of 2016 the Five hundred meter Aperture Spherical Telescope
(FAST, \citealt{2011IJMPD..20..989N}) might be completed.
It is expected that this instrument
will detect one new FRB in a week of operation \citep{2016arXiv160206099L}.
In not-so-close future SKA will become extremely effective, detecting
nearly a FRB each hour in the final configuration
\citep{2015aska.confE..55M, 2016arXiv160205165K}!
By itself, new radio data can be used to probe many proposed models of FRBs.
For example, in the scenario with supergiant pulses we expect that with
$\sim100$ sources we can easily reach a statistically significant level of correlation with local galaxies.
New radio observations can be complemented by a new sensitive all-sky X-ray
survey by eROSITA onboard \textit{Spektrum-Roentgen-Gamma} \citep{2011SPIE.8145E..0DP}.
This would make testing this model even easier. And if the model is correct,
than we can expect many associations of FRBs with ULXs due to new
observations.
\section{Summary}\label{sec:summary}
The supergiant pulses model of FRBs can be tested on the base of
a direct identification of sources, because in this framework
they are young energetic pulsars
residing quite close to us, $d<200$~Mpc.
Large spin-down
luminosity of these pulsarss, $\dot E\sim10^{43}~\mr{erg~s^{-1}}$, will
lead to emergence of bright counterparts at various frequencies. The
pulsars (and also, possibly, their PWNs, see
\citealt{2013arXiv1305.2552K}) might be luminous X-ray sources and eventually
can manifest themselves as ULXs with luminosities that can even overcome
the brightest HMXBs, $L_\mr{X}>10^{41}$~erg~s$^{-1}$.
Unfortunately, at the moment no FRB
are known in the regions observed by the \textit{XMM-Newton} X-ray
observatory. There are two natural avenues to pursue: first, dedicated
observations at several directions, coinciding with FRB localizations, can
be performed; second, one can search for unusual ULXs in archival data.
As already stated above,
FRBs can also be rather bright persistent sources in radio waveband,
and this is crucial for discrimination between young pulsars and
HMXBs\footnote{Given that we are not dealing with the extreme case of ULX
with $L_\mr{X}>10^{41}$, as HMXBs with such luminosity might be extremely
rare, or even absent.}: one will not
expect any sizeable radio-emission from HMXBs, beside rare cases of
microquasars, which can be mostly filtered out due to their variability.
It can
also be the case when we are trying to discriminate against background AGNs
that can mimic our sought sources. Also, after accurate pin-pointing of
candidate position with X-ray and radio observations, it is possible to
search for counterparts at other frequiencies -- in optics, IR, or UV.
Finally, the conclusion that the FRBs should be local phenomena
($d<200$~Mpc) can be tested even if these sources are relatively
underluminous, because then a significant positional correlation with nearby
galaxies is expected. We correlated FRB positions with bright galaxies from
the 2MRS catalogue. We found 5 pairs FRB-galaxy
with distance less than 15$\arcmin$,
and 1.87 coincidences were expected by chance, giving a Poissonian
probability $p\sim4\%$. With even modest increase in total FRB number the
fraction of local population will be estimated (or, seriously constrained)
in the very near future.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The work of M.S.P. is supported by RSF grant No. 14-12-00146.
S.B.P. acknowledges support from RFBR (project 14-02-00657).
This research has made use of NASA's Astrophysics Data System.
The authors thank Prof. K.A. Postnov and Dr. I. Zolotukhin for discussions.
Also S.B.P. thanks for discussions Prof. M. Lyutikov.
S.B.P. is the ``Dynasty'' Foundation fellow.
\bibliographystyle{mnras}
|
\section{Introduction}
\paragraph{MST in the congested clique.} The \emph{congested clique}~\cite{lotker05} is a specialisation of the standard CONGEST model of distributed computing; in the congested clique, each of the $n$ nodes of the network can send a different message of $O(\log n)$ bits to each other node each synchronous communication round. The congested clique model has attracted considerable interest recently, as the fully connected communication topology allows for much faster algorithms than the general CONGEST model.
Minimum spanning tree is perhaps the most studied problem in the congested clique model, and a good example of the power of the model. The \citet{lotker05} paper introducing the congested clique model gave an $O(\log \log n)$-round deterministic MST algorithm. Subsequently, even faster randomised algorithms have been discovered: the $O(\log \log \log n)$-round algorithm by \citet{Hegeman15_MST_logloglogn}, and the recent $O(\log^* n)$-round algorithm by \citet{logstarMST}.
\paragraph{MST sparsification.} Both of the above fast randomised MST algorithms are based on fast randomised \emph{graph connectivity} algorithms. To solve MST, they use a reduction of \citet{Hegeman15_MST_logloglogn} from MST to graph connectivity; this works by (1) reducing general MST into two instances of MST on graphs with $O(n^{3/2})$ edges using a randomised sampling technique of \citet{karger1995randomized}, and (2) reducing MST on sparse graphs to multiple independent instances of graph connectivity.
In this work, we take a closer look at the sparsification step of the \citet{Hegeman15_MST_logloglogn} reduction. Specifically, we show that it is possible to do obtain much stronger sparsification for connectivity problems in constant rounds without using randomness:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm}
Given a weighted graph $G = (V,E)$ and an integer $k$, we can compute in $O(k)$ rounds an edge subset $E' \subseteq E$ with $\card{E'} = O\bigl(n^{1 + 1/2^k}\bigr)$ such that $E'$ contains one minimum spanning forest of $G$.
\end{theorem}
In particular, \theoremref{thm} implies that graphs with slightly superlinear number of edges are the hardest case for connectivity problems in the congested clique, as graphs with linear number of edges can be learned by all nodes in constant rounds using the routing protocol of \citet{lenzen2013optimal}. Alas, our sparsification technique alone fails to improve upon the state-of-the-art even for deterministic MST algorithms, though applying \theoremref{thm} with $k = \log \log n$ does give an alternative deterministic $O(\log \log n)$ algorithm for MST in the congested clique.
\section{Deterministic MST Sparsification}
Let $\mathcal{S} = \{ S_1, S_2, \dotsc, S_\ell \}$ be a partition of $V$. For integers $i,j$ with $1 \le i \le j \le \ell$, we define
\[E^\mathcal{S}_{ij} = \bigl\{\{ u, v \} \in E \mathbin{:} u \in S_i \text{ and } v \in S_j \bigr\}\,,\]
and denote by $G^\mathcal{S}_{ij}$ the subgraph of $G$ with vertex set $S_{i} \cup S_{j}$ and edge set $E^\mathcal{S}_{ij}$.
\begin{definition}
For $0 < \varepsilon \le 1$, graph $G = (V, E)$ and partition $\mathcal{S} = \{ S_1, S_2, \dotsc, S_\ell \}$ of $V$, we say that $(G,\mathcal{S})$ is \emph{$\varepsilon$-sparse} if $\ell = n^{\varepsilon}$, each $S \in \mathcal{S}$ has size at most $n^{1-\varepsilon}$ and for each $i,j$ with $1 \le i \le j \le \ell$, we have $\bigcard{E^{\mathcal{S}}_{ij}} \le 2n^{1-\varepsilon}$.
\end{definition}
If $(G,\mathcal{S})$ is $\varepsilon$-sparse, then $G$ can have at most $2n^{1+\varepsilon}$ edges. Moreover, we will now show that we can \emph{amplify} this notion of sparseness from $\varepsilon$ to $\varepsilon/2$ in constant rounds. Observing that for any graph $G = (V,E)$ and $\mathcal{S} = \bigl\{ \{ v \} \mathbin{:} v \in V \bigr\}$, we have that $(G,\mathcal{S})$ is $1$-sparse, we can start from arbitrary graph and apply this sparsification $k$ times to obtain sparsity $1/2^k$, yielding \theoremref{thm}.
For convenience, let us assume that the all edge weights in the input graph in distinct, which also implies that the minimum spanning forest is unique. If this is not the case, we can break ties arbitrarily to obtain total ordering of weights. Recall that each node in $V$ receives its incident edges in $G$ as input.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma1}
Given a graph $G = (V,E)$ with distinct edge weights and unique MSF $F \subseteq E$, and a globally known partition $\mathcal{S}$ such that $(G,\mathcal{S})$ is $\varepsilon$-sparse, we can compute a subgraph $G' = (V,E')$ of $G$ and a globally known partition $\mathcal{T}$ such that $(G', \mathcal{T})$ is $\varepsilon/2$-sparse and $F \subseteq E'$ in constant number of rounds.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
To obtain the partition $\mathcal{T} = \{ T_1, T_2, \dotsc, T_{n^{\varepsilon/2}} \}$, we construct each set $T_i$ by taking the union of $n^{\varepsilon/2}$ sets $S_j$. Clearly sets $T_i$ constructed this way have size $n^{1-\varepsilon}$, and this partition can be constructed by the nodes locally. Since $(G,\mathcal{S})$ is $\varepsilon$-sparse, we now have that
\[ \bigcard{E^\mathcal{T}_{ij}} = \sum_{x \colon S_{x} \subseteq T_i} \sum_{y \colon S_{y} \subseteq T_j} \bigcard{E^{\mathcal{S}}_{xy}} \le (n^{\varepsilon/2})^2 2n^{1-\varepsilon} = 2n\,. \]
We assign arbitrarily each pair $(i,j)$ with $1 \le i \le j \le n^{\varepsilon/2}$ as a \emph{label} for distinct node $v \in V$. The number of such pairs $(i,j)$ is at most $(n^{\varepsilon/2})^2 = n^\varepsilon \le n$, so this is always possible, though some nodes may be left without labels. The algorithm now proceeds as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Distribute information about the edges so that node with label $(i,j)$ knows the full edge set $E^{\mathcal{T}}_{ij}$. Since $\bigcard{E^\mathcal{T}_{ij}} \le 2n$, this can be done in constant rounds using the routing protocol of \citet{lenzen2013optimal}.
\item Each node with label $(i,j)$ locally computes a minimum spanning forest $F^{\mathcal{T}}_{ij}$ for the subgraph $G^\mathcal{T}_{ij}$ using information obtained in previous step. Since $\card{T_i \cup T_j} \le 2n^{1-\varepsilon/2}$, we also have $\bigcard{F^\mathcal{T}_{ij}} \le 2n^{1-\varepsilon/2}$.
\item Redistribute information about the sets $F^\mathcal{T}_{ij}$ so that each node knows which of its incident edges are in one of the sets $F^\mathcal{T}_{ij}$. Again, this takes constant rounds.
\end{enumerate}
Taking $E' = \bigcup_{(i,j)} F^\mathcal{T}_{ij}$, we have that $(G',\mathcal{T})$ is $\varepsilon/2$-sparse.
To see that $E'$ also contains all edges of $F$, recall the fact that an edge $e \in E$ is in MSF $F$ if and only if it is the minimum-weight edge crossing some cut $(V_1, V_2)$, assuming distinct edge weights (see e.g.~\citet{karger1995randomized}). If edge $e \in E^\mathcal{T}_{ij}$ is in $F$, then it is minimum-weight edge crossing a cut $(V_1, V_2)$ in $G$, and thus also minimum-weight edge crossing the corresponding cut in $G^\mathcal{T}_{ij}$, implying $e \in F^\mathcal{T}_{ij}$.
\end{proof}
\bigskip
\paragraph{Acknowledgements.} We thank Magn\'us M. Halld\'orsson, Juho Hirvonen, Tuomo Lempi\"ainen, Christopher Purcell, Joel Rybicki and Jukka Suomela for discussions, and Mohsen Ghaffari for sharing a preprint of \cite{logstarMST}. This work was supported by grant 152679-051 from the Icelandic Research Fund.
\pagebreak
\DeclareUrlCommand{\Doi}{\urlstyle{same}}
\renewcommand{\doi}[1]{\href{http://dx.doi.org/#1}{\footnotesize\sf doi:\Doi{#1}}}
\bibliographystyle{plainnat}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{section:Introduction}
By the end of this decade, exascale high-performance computing (HPC) systems promise to accelerate the pace of scientific discovery in a broad range of disciplines including climate and environmental modeling, chemistry and materials, high energy and nuclear physics, nanotechnology, astrophysics, and biology. These systems will enable the solution of vastly more accurate predictive models and the analysis of massive data sets \cite{ASASC:2010}.
Among the difficult challenges in designing and operating future exascale-class systems, guaranteeing reliability of operation in the presence of increasingly frequent faults and errors will be critical. Various studies \cite{Dongarra:2011:IES}\cite{DARPA_ExascaleTechStudyReport:2008} have suggested that the path to higher capability machines will require an exponential increase in the number of CPU cores and memory modules in order to drive performance. For an exascale-class supercomputer, its sheer scale is a challenge to the system's ability to tolerate faults and maintain service. Furthermore, the reliability of individual components is projected to decrease as Moore's law enables shrinking transistor geometries \cite{DARPA_ExascaleResilienceStudyReport:2009}.
In today's HPC systems, we enjoy a model of execution in which the application presumes correct behavior by the underlying fabric of hardware and system software, i.e., the execution environment. Some errors are masked by hardware-based mechanisms, and the error events that cannot be handled by the system layers usually result in fatal crash. This is usually catastrophic for the application processes running on the system. Therefore most HPC systems deal with anomalous events only when they result in catastrophic failure through a process of checkpoint and rollback recovery (C/R). However, for the projected fault rates in future exascale-class HPC systems relying solely on such mechanisms will lead to frequent application failures or incorrect results.
Many of the scientific applications that run on these systems contain features that allow the effect of certain faults and errors to be tolerated or mitigated at the application level through algorithmic methods. Various algorithm-based fault tolerance (ABFT) solutions \cite{Huang:1984} \cite{Bosilca:2008} support application-level error detection and correction. Therefore, not all faults and errors need to result in a catastrophic crash. Programmers of scientific applications, through their domain expertise and familiarity with the application codes, gained through code optimization efforts, are usually well-positioned to understand such application-level fault-resilience features. However, they lack convenient mechanisms to express such knowledge to the system. We believe that with modest extensions to existing programming model the application-level knowledge may be leveraged by the execution environment to enable HPC applications to continue running towards successful completion despite the presence of certain faults and errors in the system. In this paper we investigate whether simple language-level extensions in concert with a compiler infrastructure and a runtime inference framework can enhance the ability of HPC applications to manage the effects of faults and errors in their state. We propose Rolex, a set of \textbf{R}esilience-\textbf{O}riented \textbf{L}anguage \textbf{E}xtensions that capture HPC programmers' knowledge of the fault-tolerance features of the program code and their expectations of application outcomes. By making resilience essential to the programming model, the execution environment can use this application-level knowledge to reason about the significance of the errors to the correctness of the application's outcome. We define the syntax of the resilience-oriented language extensions, describe their fault-resilience semantics, and their integration with a compiler infrastructure and runtime inference system. We also describe our experience of applying Rolex to several common HPC application codes and evaluate the application resilience using accelerated fault injection experiments.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: Section \ref{sec:ProgrammerKnowledge} explains the basis of our approach on how capturing programmer knowledge through simple language extensions may be used to manage the application’s fault resilience. Section \ref{sec:LangExtDesign} describes the design goals and philosophies behind the Rolex extensions and Section \ref{sec:Syntax_Semantics} presents their syntax and semantics and several motivating examples which demonstrate the viability of applying these language extensions in the context of real HPC applications. Section \ref{sec:Compiler_Runtime} elaborates the role of the compiler and runtime inference engine. Section \ref{sec:Experimental_Eval} presents the evaluation results for fault injection experiments and also studies the impact on application performance. Section \ref{sec:Related_Work} surveys related programming model-based resilience approaches.
\section{Leveraging Programmer Knowledge for Fault Resilience}
\label{sec:ProgrammerKnowledge}
The HPC workload consists of scientific computations, many of which are naturally tolerant to data errors. Their algorithmic behavior might simply filter the occasional incorrect value, as is the case with many numerical iterative algorithms, or they might rely on pseudorandom processes, as is the case with Monte-Carlo techniques. Several applications that use numerical analysis methods can tolerate limited loss in floating point precision. In certain applications, the impact of errors in the data or computation can even be trivially healed through simple algorithmic methods. For example, parity and checksums can be applied to specific data structures or procedure executions to detect the presence of data corruptions within the application's address space. However, part of the variable state, especially that which affects program control flow and pointer arithmetic, is very sensitive to errors. Therefore, for certain parts of the program state, the notion of correctness may be defined within the bounds of certain rounding error, while for others it may require precise bit reproducible correctness \cite{DoE:ResilienceReport}.
\begin{figure} [t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{knowledge-wheel-edited.jpeg}
\caption{Themes of programmer knowledge to enhance application resilience}
\label{Fig:ResilienceKnowledge}
\end{figure}
HPC application programmers are well-positioned to understand the application's fault-tolerance features because they tend to be experts in their respective scientific domains and due to their familiarity with the program code structure. We believe that given appropriate interfaces to express their fault tolerance knowledge, programmers can contribute to enhancing the execution environment's management of the application resilience. Through programming model features we may be able to support fault-tolerance capabilities, namely error detection, containment and recovery at the application level. Such programming model-based mechanisms provide a fine-grained model of reliability in which individual data variables and program statements may be tuned for relaxed or strict reliability and seek to prevent application failure for every possible error instance in the system.
Broadly, the knowledge that programmers can express falls into three major themes. These are illustrated in Figure \ref{Fig:ResilienceKnowledge} along with plausible solutions and described below:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Tolerance:} A programmer may choose to tolerate limited loss in floating precision for certain program values, or allow occasional perturbations of certain data values. The programmer may also be aware of regions of computation that employ iterative refinement, such that errors which cause anomalous intermediate results may be absobred without affecting the correctness of the final outcome.
\item \textbf{Robustness:} Certain data structures and computation, notably those related to the program control flow and pointer arithmetic need bit-level correctness. The programmer may identify application-level constructs that require stronger checks. The error detection and correction may be accomplished by maintaining redundant copies and using masking mechanisms to guarantee deterministic program behavior.
\item \textbf{Amelioration:} A variety of algorithmic techniques exist that not only detect but also heal the effect of errors in data structures. Such techniques maintain redundant information, such as checksums, to recover erroneous values. They may also use value re-initialization to repair variable state. Certain computations even allow compensating erroneous values by interpolating neighboring values. The programmer may be able to provide the appropriate methods to ameliorate program state.
\end{itemize}
Programming model extensions designed to enable the execution environment to capture application-level features on each of these themes of knowledge supports a fault-aware execution environment that can provide error resilient operation for HPC application processes without compromising the application performance, or the productivity of programmers.
\section{Design of the Resilience Oriented Language Extensions}
\label{sec:LangExtDesign}
\subsection{Goals for Resilience-Oriented Language Extensions}
In designing the language extensions, we sought to capture each of the flavors of knowledge described in Section \ref{sec:ProgrammerKnowledge}, and in the process, also enable each of the aspects of fault management namely detection, containment and recovery. Broadly, our goals for the resilience-aware programming model extensions are:
\begin{enumerate}
\item It is our goal to retain the familiarity of current programming paradigms. We aim to adopt a simple syntax that permits embedding resilience capabilities within existing programming language features.
\item We seek to minimize the time and effort required by programmers to learn and adopt the language extensions; therefore, these resilience-oriented language extensions must provide a concise and elegant syntax and include a small set of new language keywords for expressing the resilience features.
\item We also seek a fair division of work between the language extensions and the compiler and runtime framework, such that the programmer does not need to be exposed to the complexity of the HPC execution environment, yet is provided with sufficient abstractions to be able to concisely convey fault management knowledge related to application-level constructs.
\item Recognizing that HPC programmers are very reluctant to trade off their performance, which is usually achieved by investing much time and effort in hand-tuning the code, we seek to ensure that the resilience-oriented language extensions and compiler transformations do not drastically affect the code structure.
\item As HPC systems become increasingly heterogeneous and topologically complex in pursuit of higher performance, they need to harness a variety of novel parallel programming frameworks. Yet the applications seek to retain the well-understood foundation of the Message Passing Interface (MPI) as well as certain well-tuned productivity libraries such as BLAS and LAPACK written in C and FORTRAN. It is also our goal to ensure that resilience-oriented language extensions integrate seamlessly with these language features and library frameworks.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{Description of Syntactic Structure of Rolex}
Based on these objectives we have designed programming language extensions that include a collection of features that extends the base language as well as compiler directives and runtime library routines that enable the execution environment to manage the application's error resilience. Rolex is designed to affect the following aspects of the program state \cite{Langou:2007}: (i) the \textit{computational environment}, which includes the data needed to perform the computation, i.e., the program code, environment variables etc.; (ii) the \textit{static data}, which represents the data that is computed once in the initialization phase of the application and is unchanged thereafter; (iii) the \textit{dynamic data}, which includes all the data whose value may change during the computation. Rolex extends the C, C++ language with constructs that provide application-level error detection, error containment and recovery strategies for each of these aspects of the program state. These extensions fully comply with the syntactic structure of the base language grammar and complement the existing language features. Some Rolex constructs serve as directives for the compiler to automatically generate code that supports fault resilience, whereas the Rolex routines support application-level resilience through the runtime environment.
\subsubsection{Type Qualifiers}
Rolex extends the declaration ability of C/C++ to allow type qualifiers that enable attaching a specific resilience attribute to functions, data variables and other objects. The programmer specifies, through explicit association, an error detection and/or tolerance feature for specific identifiers in the program code. The syntatic structure for the use of resilience type qualifiers is:
\begin{Code}
<rolex-error-management-qualifier> variable-declaration;
\end{Code}
The formal rules that extend the C/C++ grammar to include the resilience-oriented type qualifiers are described in Appendix A in Listing \ref{lst:TypeQualifierRules}. Through these qualifiers, the programmer explicitly specifies how the program variables are managed, when the associated object value is deemed to be in erroneous state. The error detection and correction capabilities are handled through bit manipulation on the low-level representation of the objects.
\subsubsection{Directives}
\label{sec:LangExtDesign_subsec:Directives}
Rolex directives enable the application programmer to impose rules for fault-tolerant execution of a region of the program code. In C/C++, {\tt \#pragma} directives specify program behavior. The syntactic structure of an executable Rolex directive and the code region is:
\begin{Code}
#pragma rolex <error-management-directive> [clause[[,] clause] ... ] new-line
{
/* binding region: structured blk*/
}
\end{Code}
The \textit{binding region} determines the scope of the execution context that is equipped with resilience capabilities. The bound region is a structured block, which is defined as an C/C++ executable statement, which may be a compound statement but has a single point of entry at the top and single point of exit at the bottom. The compound statement is enclosed within a pair of \texttt{\{} and \texttt{\}}. The point of entry cannot be the target of a branch and the point of exit cannot be a branch out. No branch is allowed from within the structured block, except for program exit. Instances of the structured block may be compound statements including iteration statements, selection statements, or try blocks.
We also provide declarative directives that may be associated with function declarations and definitions:
\begin{Code}
#pragma rolex declare <error-management-directive> [clause[[,] clause] ...] new-line
/* C/C++ function definition or declaration */
\end{Code}
These directives are not associated with the immediate execution of the application code but enable the compiler to create multiple versions of the specified C/C++ function, at least one of which includes resilience capabilities. The Listing \ref{lst:DirectiveRules} in Appendix A shows the grammar rules for the extensions based on the resilience-oriented directives.
\subsubsection{Runtime Library Routines}
Certain aspects of the resiliency of the execution environment can be controlled through runtime library routines. Also, some of the existing standard library calls may be extended to provide resilience capabilities. For example, the memory management library calls are equipped with error detection, correction and recovery capabilities on the allocated memory blocks. The routine identifier is suffixed with the fault management capability:
\begin{Code}
return_type var = rolex_libraryfunc_capabilitity ( 'arguments' );
\end{Code}
These routines are external C functions whose identifiers are prefixed with a {\tt rolex} keyword.
\subsubsection{Rolex Keywords}
We introduce a set of keywords that are distinct from the existing set of C/C++ reserved keywords in order to support resilience semantics on the C/C++ constructs. The Rolex directives and routines are identified by the {\tt rolex} keyword. Additionally, the keywords {\tt tolerant}, {\tt robust}, {\tt heal} are used as qualifiers in type declarations. The keywords {\tt recover-rollback} and {\tt recover-rollforward} are used to associate a recovery behavior to a structured code block following a directive while the keyword {\tt robust} is used to specify redundancy in state or computation. Additionally, there are clauses that support management of variable state and permit specification of the strength of redundancy in the context of Rolex constructs.
\subsection{Tolerance-based Extensions}
The \textbf{tolerance} language extensions are used to specify data variables or code block executions that support \textit{error elision}, i.e., ignore the presence of a corruption in program state and continue execution with the confidence that the algorithm can absorb the error or mask it through localized recovery. The extensions also enable applications to continue execution with imprecise but not unreasonable state through value coercion \cite{Hukerikar:FTXS:2012}. The extensions assume that error detection is provided by the hardware or system software, and that the error notification is communicated to the runtime system via an interrupt mechanism.
For errors detected that happen to be mapped to locations that have been explicitly specified as tolerant using Rolex, the runtime system reacts to an error notification by allowing an application execution to continue despite the corruption in its state. For instances of errors that are mapped to locations on which tolerance is not specified, the runtime terminates the application execution, as is the standard behavior for unrecoverable errors.
\subsubsection{Type Qualifiers}
\paragraph{Syntax} \hspace{0pt} \\
The \texttt{tolerant} type qualifier can be applied to primitive as well as compound data structures. These qualifiers can be applied to declaration of global variables and local automatic variables and may include static and dynamic program state.
The syntax for the type qualifiers variable declarations is:
\begin{CodeExample}[label={lst:Example1},frame=single]
tolerant(PRECISION=...) float low_precision_32;
tolerant(PRECISION=...) double low_precision_64;
tolerant unsigned int rgb[X_RES][Y_RES];
tolerant (MAXIMUS = 1023) unsigned int counter;
\end{CodeExample}
For floating point variables, the qualifier contains an additional specifier for precision. For integer values, the qualifier contains an additional specifier for maximum value.
\paragraph{Semantics} \hspace{0pt} \\
With these type qualifiers, error elision is achieved through coercion of the object value. For floating point objects, bit perturbation errors on the sign and exponent bits fundamentally alter the variable value, and the application is usually intolerant to such errors (shown in green in Figure \ref{Fig:IEEE_754_FP_Representation}). However, bit perturbations in the lower significand/mantissa bits may be ignored by the runtime and result in a truncation error in the value of the floating point variable (shown in grey in Figure \ref{Fig:IEEE_754_FP_Representation}). The {\tt PRECISION} construct specifies the minimum floating point precision that the programmer expects, i.e., it indicates the amount of precision loss the programmer is willing to tolerate.
\begin{figure} [ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=10mm,width=\linewidth]{float_tolerant.jpeg}
\caption{IEEE 754 floating point representation}
\label{Fig:IEEE_754_FP_Representation}
\end{figure}
For an integer variable whose maximum value is known apriori, only the lower significant bits in the bit representation are intolerant; i.e., these bits cannot accept bit perturbations without altering the value of the variable (shown in green in Figure \ref{Fig:Integer_Representation}). The upper significant bits are unused and are meant to always remain '0' (for unsigned integers in the binary representation). When these bits are perturbed, the error may be masked by simply resetting these bits. This knowledge may be explictly conveyed through the {\tt MAXIMUS} construct in the type qualifier.
\begin{figure} [ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=7mm,width=\linewidth]{integer_tolerant.jpeg}
\caption{Unsigned integer (32-bit) representation}
\label{Fig:Integer_Representation}
\end{figure}
The runtime responds to notifications that indicate the presence of an error which is mapped to a tolerant qualified data variable by manipulating the bit representation to coerce the data values into lower precision or mask the anomalous bits and allows the application execution to resume. These type qualifiers offer the program variables with error containment and limited recovery capabilities by masking perturbations and keeping their the values within permissible range of correctness.
\subsubsection{Directives} \label{subsec:Tolerance:Directives}
\paragraph{Syntax} \hspace{0pt} \\
The tolerance directives provide limited localized recovery capability from errors in the computation for the programmer-defined code regions. When the detected error maps to code sections, i.e., instruction memory of the application address space, or to the variables manipulated by the code region, the tolerance directive offers roll-back and roll-forward capabilities for the affected structured code block. The syntax of the tolerance roll-forward and roll-back directives is:
\begin{CodeExample}[label = {lst:Example3},frame=single]
#pragma rolex recover-rollback share ( variable_list ) private ( variable_list )
{ /* code block */ }
#pragma rolex recover-rollforward share ( variable_list ) private ( variable_list )
{ /* code block */ }
\end{CodeExample}
In order for the program state to remain consistent upon roll-forward/roll-back, the variable state must be the same as that during initial entry into the code block. Therefore, we provide optional \texttt{share} and \texttt{private} clauses that list the variables that need to be preserved and restored.
The {\tt declare} directives instruct the compiler to generate versions of the associated functions with retry or ignore capabilities. The syntax (shown below) contains an optional {\tt fallback} clause to specify a default function return value.
\begin{CodeExample}[label = {lst:Example4},frame=single]
#pragma rolex declare resilient ignore fallback()
/* function definition or declaration */
#pragma rolex declare resilient retry fallback()
/* function definition or declaration */
\end{CodeExample}
\paragraph{Semantics} \hspace{0pt} \\
When the runtime is informed of the presence of an error that is mapped to the instruction memory of the \textit{tolerant} structured code block, or to one of the data structure variables specified in the data clauses, the structured block is re-entered (the execution is rolled back) or the remaining code block is skipped (the execution is rolled forward). The initiation of roll-forward or roll-back may cause the data variable state to become inconsistent. Therefore, prior to original entry into the structured code block, the variables specified in the \texttt{share} clause are saved. Upon roll-forward or roll-back recovery, this variable state is restored to the previously preserved values. The variables in the \texttt{private} clause are not restored and are treated much like local automatic variables declared inside a function. The declare directives allow the qualified execution to be retried, or it may be discarded with the function caller receiving a default fallback value. The tolerance directives offer error containment by limiting the scope of error to the computation contained in the block following the directive. Additionally, these directives also support compensation-based recovery of the application's variable state and localized recovery of erroneous computation through roll-forward/roll-back semantics.
\subsubsection{Runtime Library Routines}
\paragraph{Syntax} \hspace{0pt} \\
The Rolex tolerant routine extends the functionality provided by malloc(). It accepts an additional parameter of type \texttt{rolex\_precision} to specify the \texttt{MAXIMUS} and \texttt{PRECISION} for individual primitive types (when the routine is used to allocate arrays of primitive integer or floating point type). The API format is:
\begin{CodeExample}[label = {lst:Example5},frame=single]
float* intermediate_sol_array = (float*) rolex_malloc_tolerant ( N * sizeof (float), NULL );
float* molecule_position = (float*) rolex_malloc_tolerant ( N * sizeof (float) , (rolex_precision) (6) ); /* PRECISION = 6 */
unsigned int* true_color_pixel_buffer =
(unsigned int*) rolex_malloc_tolerant ( N * N * sizeof (unsigned int), (rolex_precision) (16,777,216) ); /* MAXIMUS = 16,777,216 */
\end{CodeExample}
\paragraph{Semantics} \hspace{0pt} \\
Much like the standard library malloc, the {\tt rolex\_malloc\_tolerant()} allocates a block of memory whose address bounds are registered with the runtime system. Since such error-tolerant memory is explicitly requested, the runtime supports error elision, i.e., it ignores the notifications of any errors detected on this memory block and allows the application execution to resume.
For compound data structures composed of floating point or integer primitive types, the argument of {\tt rolex\_precision} type supports elision through value coercion, i.e., it allows the application to respond to error notifications by resuming the execution after ensuring the individual floating point or integer data values meet the precision or maximum values specified in the {\tt PRECISION} or {\tt MAXIMUS} constructs.
\subsubsection{Examples} \hspace{0pt}
Scientific modeling entails representation of continuous problems in terms of finite precision values which incurs some discretization error. Certain data structures in these applications may accept bit perturbations that result in round-off errors without affecting the validity of the simulation. Numerical analysis algorithms, such as the conjugate gradient method and the generalized minimal residual method (GMRES), progressively improve an initial approximate solution and terminate only when the solution is below a certain error norm. Direct methods such as Gaussian elimination and the QR factorization method terminate in a finite number of steps, but still yield an approximate solution. Limited loss in floating point precision in the intermediate solution state may be absorbed without impacting the correctness of the final solution.
Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations can maintain the numerical stability with limited loss in floating point precision for various constant energy and constant temperature simulations. The deviations in the force calculations are often small enough that the particle trajectories are almost identical in terms of numerical stability as full precision calculations. In large scale simulations the loss in precision in lower significand floating point bits results in a negligible difference in the coordinates of the simulations over millions of time steps \cite{Zou:2012}. The Hartree-Fock method, used in computational chemistry codes, contains structures such as the Fock matrix, density matrix, matrix exponential, and orbital transformation matrix, which can tolerate bit perturbations in the lower significant mantissa bits in the mantissa of floating point representation \cite{vanDam:2013}. Such structures may be tolerant type qualified or allocated using \texttt{rolex\_malloc\_tolerant()}. Similarly, visualization applications allow arbitrary bit flips on integer type pixel values because the graphics rendering pipeline often accounts for incorrect pixel attributes.
Algorithms that permit selective reliability may utilize directives to specify fault tolerant behavior for application phases. The FT-GMRES algorithm \cite{Hoemmen:2011} uses inner-outer iterations where the inner solver step preconditions the outer iteration. The inner solver step may be treated as an unreliable phase since it is allowed to return an incorrect solution without affecting the outer solver step. Similarly, neutron transport (NT) simulation codes use the Monte Carlo method and we may leverage its stochastic nature along with the fact that the simulation of every particle is independent. The code regions that create and simulate individual particles may be included in the structured block following tolerant directives, which allows the simulation to selectively discard the particles that experienced errors.
\subsection{Robustness-based Extensions}
The \textbf{robustness} language extensions are used to specify data variables or code blocks that are critical to the application correctness and as such could benefit from error detection and correction at the application-level. These include the application code sections (i.e., instruction memory), pointer variables, array index references as well as variables that affect control flow decisions. These aspects of the program state require bit-precise correctness in order to make a deterministic assertion on the correctness of the application outcome, even if it runs to completion in the presence of program state corruptions (but without raising any exceptions or abnormal behavior).
The robustness of these aspects of the program state may be guaranteed by the use of redundancy. This entails replicating part of the variable state, or specific portions of the program code execution, or at times both. The replicated part of the program state is compared to check for the presence of errors in the application's address space, or to filter errors through majority voting. Through these Rolex extensions the redundancy is selectively applied only on the sensitive data variables and computation whose correctness is critical to produce a correct application outcome.
\subsubsection{Type Qualifiers}
\paragraph{Syntax} \hspace{0pt} \\
The \texttt{robust} type qualifier may be applied to declarations of primitive as well as compound data structures. The syntax for the robust type qualifier, which includes a strength clause, is:
\begin{CodeExample}[label = {lst:Example6},frame=single]
robust (CORRECT) int* csr_matrix[row_offsets];
robust (DETECT) int* graph_edge_list[N];
\end{CodeExample}
\paragraph{Semantics} \hspace{0pt} \\
The type qualifier serves as a directive to the compiler, which performs source-to-source translation to duplicate or triplicate the variable declaration. For pointer variables, this amounts to creating aliases to the object being referenced. The compiler also duplicates/triplicates the statements in the program source that operate on the robust qualified variables as well as inserts statements that compare the redundant variable values and report any mismatch among the replicas to the runtime system. The qualifiers enable error detection and correction capabilities on the robust qualified objects and implicitly on their computation through statement-level DMR or TMR.
\subsubsection{Directives}
\paragraph{Syntax} \hspace{0pt} \\
The robust directives provide application-level detection/correction for specific regions of computation, whose scope is defined by the structured code block following the directive. The declarative robust directives may be applied to functions. The syntax for the directives is:
\begin{CodeExample}[label = {lst:Example7},frame=single]
#pragma rolex robust detect share ( variable_list ) private ( variable_list ) compare ( variable_list )
{ /* code block */ }
#pragma rolex robust correct share ( variable_list ) private ( variable_list ) compare ( variable_list )
{ /* code block */ }
#pragma rolex declare resilient robust (detect) fallback()
/* function definition or declaration */
\end{CodeExample}
The directives contain a \texttt{strength} clause, which specifies whether DMR or TMR is required for the structured block. The data management clauses \texttt{share} and \texttt{private} specify the data-sharing attributes for the variables listed in the respective clauses. The \texttt{compare} clause is used to specify the list of variables produced by the structured blocks that need to be compared/majority voted on to detect/correct an error in the computation. The fallback clause is used to return a default value to the function caller when the redundant execution of the function detects an error but is unable to conclusively vote on a correct value.
\paragraph{Semantics} \hspace{0pt} \\
When the compiler encounters the robust directive, it outlines the application code contained in the structured code block. It inserts statements that enable the redundant execution of the outlined code block by duplicating or triplicating the call to the outlined function and statements to compare the outputs of the structured block. The compiler also selectively replicates the variables in the data scoping clauses. Each redundant code block instance owns a separate replicated copy of \texttt{private} variables whereas a single copy of \texttt{share} scoped data is accessed by all redundant code block copies with the programmer responsible for synchronized access. The robust directives provide error containment by limiting scope to computation contained in the structured block in addition to the detection and correction capabilities.
\subsubsection{Runtime Library Routines}
\paragraph{Syntax} \hspace{0pt} \\
The robust version of the memory allocation routine supports redundancy-based error detection and/or correction for the dynamically allocated memory on the heap section of the application address space. The routine prototypes are:
\begin{CodeExample}[label = {lst:Example9},frame=single]
float* problem_matrix = (float*) rolex_malloc_robust ( N * sizeof (float), STRENGTH );
void rolex_validate_robust ( void * problem_matrix);
\end{CodeExample}
\paragraph{Semantics} \hspace{0pt} \\
The \texttt{rolex\_malloc\_robust()} enables the programmer to request redundant copies of the memory block. The STRENGTH macro specifies the number of copies of the memory block. The pointer references to the replicated memory are also replicated at the source level, as well as any program statements that manipulate the memory. The \texttt{rolex\_validate\_robust()} routine initiates comparison and majority voting of the memory block.
\subsubsection{Examples}
Scientific applications employ data structures that heavily use pointer references and these are known to be highly sensitive to memory failures \cite{Aumann:1996:FCS}. Even single-bit upsets in pointer variables lead to invalid references, causing segmentation faults. Linear algebra methods, particularly those based on sparse problems, use structured formats such as dictionary of keys (DOK), list of lists (LIL), coordinate list (COO), compressed sparse row (CSR) or compressed sparse column (CSC) to refer to the non-zero elements (NNZ) of the sparse matrix. The bit precise correctness of such addressing structures and their computations is critical to application correctness. Using the {\tt robust} qualifiers and memory management routines for such variable state prevents potential error states arising due to bit corruptions since they are detected, or even corrected, before they lead to application failure due to invalid references. These robustness-based extensions may serve application-level variables that affect the program control flow, such as loop condition and if-else condition variables, which also demand bit-precise correctness.
The robust directives may be applied to application phases whose reliability is critical to the application outcome. In molecular dynamics simulations, the correctness of the pairwise force calculation between the particles is critical for maintaining the numerical stability of the simulation. The directives may serve to provide in-situ detection and correction for these application phases, by leveraging the anti-symmetric property of the forces (for particles i and j, F$_{ij}$ = - F$_{ji}$ ) \cite{Yajnik:1994}. Linear solver methods, such as the FT-GMRES algorithm \cite{Hoemmen:2011} and the self-stabilizing conjugate gradient method \cite{Sao:2013}, permit partitioning of the algorithm into \textit{reliable} and \textit{unreliable} phases. In such a selective reliability model of execution, the correctness of the \textit{reliable} phases can be guaranteed through the redundancy-based error detection/correction semantics provided by the Rolex robust directives.
\subsection{Amelioration-based Extensions}
The \textbf{amelioration}-based language extensions are used to specify how data variables or code block executions may be repaired during program execution. The knowledge is based on algorithmic features of the application that allow the mitigation of the effects of errors on the program state. These methods compensate for the presence of errors by either maintaining encoding information on the variables, or by reconstructing incorrect values by interpolating from neighboring values. The amelioration approaches \cite{Hukerikar:HPEC:2015} may cause limited information loss, which may be acceptable to the user, but they seek to keep the application running towards solution rather than allow an error result in catastrophic failure of the application.
\subsubsection{Type Qualifiers}
\paragraph{Syntax} \hspace{0pt} \\
The \texttt{heal} type qualifier enables amelioration through the association of a routine that may be invoked to repair anomalies in the annotated data structure. The \texttt{heal} may be applied to declarations of primitive as well as compound data structures. The syntax for the qualifier is:
\begin{CodeExample} [label = {lst:Example10},frame=single]
heal (recovery_func()) float* matrix_A[N][N];
\end{CodeExample}
\paragraph{Semantics} \hspace{0pt} \\
The reference to the recovery function specified in the heal qualifier for the identifier in the type declaration is maintained by the runtime system. When the runtime receives an error notification for the heal qualified object, it invokes an event handler function with the recovery function pointer as argument. If the recovery function is able to repair the data structure, the runtime resumes the application process. The type qualifier provides error containment and recovery capabilities for the qualified object.
\subsubsection{Directives}
\paragraph{Syntax} \hspace{0pt} \\
The amelioration-based directives provide limited localized recovery for regions of computation that are contained in the structured block following the directive and the associated data structures. The syntax for the amelioration directives is:
\begin{CodeExample}[label = {lst:Example11},frame=single]
#pragma rolex recover-rollback reinitialize ( variable_list )
{ /* code block * }
#pragma rolex recover-rollforward reinitialize ( variable_list )
{ /* code block * }
#pragma rolex recover-rollback ameliorate ( recovery_func() )
{ /* code block */ }
#pragma rolex recover-rollforward ameliorate ( recovery_func() )
{ /* code block */ }
\end{CodeExample}
These directives permit more flexible recovery of the variable state in addition to the roll-forward and roll-back capabilities. The list in the \texttt{reinitialize} and \texttt{ameliorate} clauses include variable identifiers, an expression list, or a user-defined recovery\_func().
\paragraph{Semantics} \hspace{0pt} \\
When the error notification to the runtime system finds that the error location is mapped to the program code contained in the structured block, or on the data variables manipulated by the statements in the block, the runtime initiates the recovery. This entails restoring the variable state for the variable identifiers specified in the \texttt{reinitialize} clause. When the recovery of variable state needs to be more nuanced, the runtime invokes a recovery function through an event handler. The runtime also affects a roll-back (re-entry of the code block) or a roll-forward (resume execution at the end of the code block). The amelioration directives support error containment as well as flexible recovery of the computation and variable state.
\subsubsection{Runtime Library Routines}
\paragraph{Syntax} \hspace{0pt} \\
The library routines for memory allocation that support fault amelioration have the following APIs:
\begin{CodeExample}[label = {lst:Example12},frame=single]
float* problem_matrix = (float*) rolex_malloc_repairable ( N * sizeof (float), checksum_func_pointer );
void rolex_ameliorate_heal ( void* problem_matrix );
\end{CodeExample}
The \texttt{rolex\_malloc\_repairable()} routine accepts a size argument and a pointer reference to a user-defined recovery function, which is registered with the runtime system when the memory block is allocated. The routine {\tt rolex\_ameliorate\_heal()} for the invocation of the recovery method only requires a reference to the memory block.
\paragraph{Semantics} \hspace{0pt} \\
When an error is detected on the memory block, the runtime invokes the recovery function through an event handler routine. When the recovery function is able to \textit{heal} the memory block, the runtime allows the application execution to resume. In case the recovery function is unable to correct the error, the runtime gracefully terminates the application process. The runtime library routine {\tt rolex\_ameliorate\_heal()} may be inserted in the application code to explicitly invoke the recovery function.
\subsubsection{Examples}
Linear algebra methods that use dense matrix structures may maintain redundant information using checksum schemes to detect and correct perturbations. The checksum approach for amelioration is useful for a variety of matrix-based operations including matrix-matrix multiplication, Cholesky, LU and QR factorization methods. Sparse matrix-based problems, low overhead error detection and correction is possible by leveraging the structural properties of the matrix (diagonal, banded diagonal, block diagonal) using techniques such as approximate random (AR) checking and approximate clustered (AC) checking \cite{Sloan:2012}. These algorithm-based methods may be associated with the memory allocated for the matrix data structures using the Rolex amelioration type qualifier or memory allocation routine.
Linear solvers based on iterative methods may be recovered from errors by replaying iterations. The amelioration directives support such recovery through roll-forward and roll-back semantics and clauses to re-initialize or repair the variable state, which enables any incorrect iterations to be discarded and keeps an iterative solver on the path to correct completion. Such partial recomputation techniques have been demonstrated to be viable error recovery methods for various linear algebra methods \cite{Sloan:2013}. Recovery may also be possible through lossy methods. For example, errors in the intermediate solution of Krylov subspace solvers may be recovered using interpolation of neighboring error-free values. The least-squares linear interpolation method has been demonstrated to be effective while maintaining the monotonic decrease in the residual norm \cite{Agullo:2013}. In the Hartree-Fock algorithm, heuristic knowledge is used to develop bounds for the data values. For the orthonormalization vector, density matrix, matrix exponential and orbital transformation structures, exact bounds conditions are known whereas data values for which sharp bounds are not known, such as the Fock matrix, a heuristic bound may be defined \cite{vanDam:2013}. Error states in data values are ameliorated by replacing them with reasonable values within these heuristic bounds. The Rolex amelioration constructs allow such knowledge to be conveniently embedded in the application code.
\section{Rolex: Syntax and Semantics}
\label{sec:Syntax_Semantics}
This section provides more complete lexical syntax (how these extensions may be embedded in real programs) based on the syntactic structure from the previous section. The extensions support each of the previously described themes of knowledge, i.e., tolerance, robustness and amelioration. We also explain the semantics (what each extension means), how Rolex features affect program structure and their relationship to the runtime system. We also provide motivating examples that demonstrate how each Rolex feature enables fault resilience in real scientific application codes.
\input{04_a_Syntax_Semantics_TOLERANT}
\input{04_b_Syntax_Semantics_ROBUST}
\input{04_c_Syntax_Semantics_AMELIORATION}
\section{Compiler and Runtime Support for Rolex}
\label{sec:Compiler_Runtime}
\subsection{Compiler Infrastructure}
The compiler infrastructure is a key intermediary that propagates the fault-resilience knowledge expressed by the programmer to the generated target code and runtime system. We have developed a compiler front-end, based on the ROSE compiler infrastructure \cite{ROSE:Compiler}, which parses the qualifiers and directives to generate code that is equipped with the resilience capabilities specified by the Rolex constructs. The front-end parses the resilience knowledge into a \textit{profile} file that is used by the runtime system. The front-end also performs source-to-source code transformations, which entails insertion of statements (using base language (C/C++) constructs) that permit the application to manage error states during execution in collaboration with Rolex runtime library (RTL) routines. A native C/C++ compiler may still be used to generate code for the target platform. The two-stage compilation process enables incorporating the resilience oriented transformations in the front-end while leveraging standard C/C++ compiler infrastructures to generate the target platform code. The modular approach permits selective compilation of resilience features through the use of compiler flags or, even bypassing the front-end compilation phase altogether.
The front-end compiler parses all the Rolex qualified declarations in the program code in a single pass. For \texttt{tolerant} qualified objects, the compiler produces detection and correction masks based on the bit-level representation of the object type, which are included in the resilience profile file. For the \texttt{robust} qualified objects, the Rolex front-end duplicates/triplicates the declarations of the variables. It also traverses the uniform abstract syntax tree (AST) to discover the statements that perform operations on the \texttt{robust} qualified variables and inserts identical redundant statements for the replicated object copies and statements for comparison of the replicated variable values. For the \texttt{heal} type qualifier, a call to a RTL routine is added in order to register the recovery routine as a callback handler function.
The front-end compiler pass also processes Rolex directives: it creates computational blocks for which the error detection, containment and correction behavior is explicitly defined. The front-end \textit{outlines} the statement list in the structured block that follows the Rolex directive into a new function. The original code block is replaced with a call to the outlined function. The front-end inserts calls to Rolex RTL routines, which affect roll-forward and roll-back semantics as well as support data scoping, preservation and restoration, prior to and after the call to the outlined function. The compiler also adds internal control variables (ICV), which are initialized and manipulated by the runtime to control the behavior of the outlined function.
\subsection{Runtime Inference System}
In order to support a resilient execution environment, the runtime system manages the outcome of the error states in the application process. The runtime system maintains a resilience knowledge base, called the \textit{Dynamic Resilience Map (DRM)}, which contains the list of Rolex annotated data structures, their address offset in the address space and error-management strategies. The rules for error detection, containment and recovery strategies are those inferred from the Rolex annotations in the program source and parsed by the compiler into the profile file. These are populated into the DRM at the commencement of the application process execution. DRM entries are also dynamically added, removed and modified through the runtime library routines during the application execution. The runtime also provides an interface to the compiler front-end, which consists of RTL routines that are visible only to the compiler framework. The calls to these routines are associated with the outlined structured blocks. Table \ref{table:rolex-lib-routines} summarizes the Rolex RTL routines and their capabilities.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{r p{7cm}}
\hline
\textbf{Rolex library routine} & \textbf{Capability} \\
\hline
{\tt \_\_rolex\_initialize()} & Initialization of runtime, allocation and population of the DRM\\
{\tt \_\_rolex\_finalize()} & Clean up of DRM and termination of runtime system\\
{\tt \_\_rolex\_preserve\_state()} & Preserve program's current state and environment\\
{\tt \_\_rolex\_restore\_state()} & Restore previously saved program state\\
{\tt \_\_rolex\_jmp\_fwd()} & Jump to pre-defined forward reference point and resume execution\\
{\tt \_\_rolex\_jmp\_back()} & Jump to pre-defined previous reference point and resume execution\\
{\tt \_\_rolex\_create\_checkpoint()} & Save state of variables listed in args\\
{\tt \_\_rolex\_restore\_checkpoint()} & Restore state of variables from maintained copy in runtime\\
{\tt \_\_rolex\_copy()} & Duplicate the variable arg in the runtime\\
{\tt \_\_rolex\_register()} & Register program object in the DRM and default response\\
{\tt \_\_rolex\_deregister()} & Deregister program object from DRM\\
{\tt \_\_rolex\_compare()} & Compare memory of arg pointers\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Rolex runtime library routines}\label{table:rolex-lib-routines}
\end{center}
\end{table}
When the runtime is notified of the presence of an error state in the application address space, it queries the DRM to find the specific application-level construct that is in error state. Based on the application construct in error state and the error management knowledge available in the DRM, the runtime invokes the appropriate RTL routines that seek to compensate for the perturbations in the variable state and rolls back or rolls forward the execution, if required. When the runtime is able to account for the error states, it allows the application process to resume execution in partially/fully restored computational state. The runtime actions are inferred by traversing the decision tree in Figure \ref{Fig:Decision-Tree-DRM}, which is constructed using the Rolex annotations on the various program constructs. The traversal provides the runtime with defintive rules to manage specific error states that may arise during the application program execution. When no error management knowledge is available for an application-level construct in the DRM, the runtime gracefully terminates the application process.
\begin{figure} [tp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=205mm, height=130mm, angle=90]{decision-tree-drm.jpeg}
\caption{Decision tree for error management by runtime inference system}
\label{Fig:Decision-Tree-DRM}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Workflow of a Resilient Execution Environment}
\begin{figure} [tp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth, height=55mm]{system-overview.jpeg}
\caption{Overview of application compilation and execution with Rolex}
\label{Fig:Sys-Overview}
\end{figure}
With the incorporation of Rolex, we allow several changes to the programming model and the execution environment, which are captured by Figure \ref{Fig:Sys-Overview}. When HPC application codes are annotated with the Rolex qualifiers and pragma directives, the compiler parses these extensions and introduces source-level transformations in the C/C++ application program code. The restructuring of the application source code to incorporate Rolex-driven resiliency features introduces additional declarations of redundant variables, outlining of blocks of code and creation of additional functions, and the installation of handler functions. Therefore, the program control flow and function call graph may be different from that intended by the application programmer, yet these modifications are transparent to the user. Additionally, when the application program is executed, we include a pre-execution stage where the linkages of the application-level constructs from the compiled binary are discovered through a binary disassembly library. During this phase the DRM is also populated with the address offsets and error-handling actions.
In the current HPC execution models, the presence of a hardware detected error causes a machine check exception which raises an interrupt to the operating system. When the error state is uncorrectable, the kernel enters panic mode which leads to node shutdown. Therefore, all errors lead to failure and these are dealt with in failstop manner. With the support of the Rolex-based programming model, our execution environment includes a runtime inference system. The runtime is linked with the application code. The operating system contains a kernel module that intercepts the interrupts and passes them into the user space, i.e., to the runtime system through the signaling mechanism. The runtime contains a signal handler that contains the logic to query the DRM and to determine the best recourse for dealing with the error state. The runtime's RTL interface offers a well-defined API to augment the DRM knowledge base, which enables the runtime to affect error detection, containment and masking on application constructs. When the error state can be tolerated or ameliorated, the runtime allows the application execution to resume using the knowledge in the DRM. When no knowledge can be inferred, the runtime terminates the application, as is the norm for unrecoverable errors in current systems. Since the error-handling component of the runtime system is interrupt-driven, the runtime system does not add significant overhead to the application performance during error free execution.
The Rolex-based programming model makes the HPC applications fault-aware as well as fault-tolerant by imposing strict and relaxed reliability different on regions of the application state. Rolex enables an execution model in which there is an active interchange of error information between layers of the system stack. This prevents each error instance from causing a fatal application crash by reasoning about the significance of the error using the programmer's knowledge on the application's correctness expectations.
\section{Experimental Evaluation}
\label{sec:Experimental_Eval}
\subsection{Accelerated Fault Injection Experiments}
In order to experimentally evaluate the benefits of using Rolex to describe the resilience properties of scientific application codes, we perform a set of accelerated fault injection tests. We use dynamic software-based fault injections into application processes and observe their impact on the application's outcome - whether Rolex enables the application to run to completion and whether the results produced are within reasonable bounds of a correct answer.
For each application code, we use five fault injection rates: 1 fault/15 minutes, 1 fault/10 minutes, 1 fault/5 minutes, 1 fault/2 minutes and 1 fault/1 minute. By adjusting the input problem sizes, the execution time of each application run is adjusted to be greater than 20 minutes; this ensures that the application process execution experiences at most 1, 2, 4, 10 and 20 faults per run. With the fault rates that we have selected, the effective mean-time-to-error of the application process is set to 15, 10, 5, 2, and 1 minute(s). In comparison to the fault rates observed on production HPC systems today these error rates are extremely high. These rates are also significantly higher than most reasonable projections for exascale-class systems based on technology roadmaps. However, these experimental fault rates were chosen to validate the dependability of the application processes and the efficacy of a Rolex-based programming environment. They also provide insights into the precise behavior of the application in the presence of faults. Also, several error modes that are unseen today might emerge in future systems and these accelerated tests serve as stress tests for such scenarios.
Since some of the extensions only support tolerance and amelioration semantics, they rely on hardware-based detection mechanisms. Other Rolex features provide implicit error detection. Therefore, the type of the fault injected, i.e., whether it results in a detected memory error or a silent data corruption, depends on the type of Rolex extension being evaluated. We have developed a flexible software-based fault injection framework that simulates the different error behaviors. The fault injection framework is non-intrusive, i.e., it runs independently from the application process and does not require modification of the application program code, or compiler-based insertion of additional instructions. It simulates a hardware interrupt by passing a signal to the application process. The fault injection framework maintains a mapping of the address space of the application process and the offsets for the various application-level constructs and can inject faults into any region of the active address space. The fault site selection may be random or may target specific application constructs. The faults injection entails flipping the bits at the selected fault site in the application address space.
We evaluate the application resilience of the scientific codes by opportunistically annotating their source with the Rolex-type qualifiers, directives and runtime library routines to suit the inherent resilience properties of the code. The code is compiled with our ROSE-based front-end compiler and then with the GCC compiler infrastructure and is linked with the Rolex runtime library. The application binaries are executed in a Linux-based cluster environment. For each fault injection rate, the application run is performed 10,000 times each with randomly selected fault injection sites.
\subsubsection{Enabling Tolerance Using Rolex Extensions}
\begin{figure*} [t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth,height=50mm]{results-tolerance.jpeg}
\caption{Evaluation of tolerance Rolex extensions: Accelerated fault injection results}
\label{Fig:Results-Tolerance}
\end{figure*}
Rolex extensions for error tolerance support elision semantics or, provide value coercion, but seek to keep the application process running towards completion. Since these extensions depend on hardware-based detection mechanisms, the injected faults simulate system memory errors that manifest themselves as ECC SECDED errors (detected but unrecoverable by hardware-based ECC), whose notification is passed into the runtime system. Based on the location of the error, there are only two possible outcomes: compensation for the presence of the error (through error elision, masking the affected bits of the variables, or roll-forward/roll-back of the execution), or termination of the application to prevent further corruption. We simulate SECDED errors by raising a signal when the fault injection framework perturbs bits in the address space. We demonstrate error tolerance through Rolex for the following three codes:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{HPCC Random Access:}
The benchmark was originally designed to model a vectorized application and allows the same address to appear twice in a gather/scatter operation and therefore fails to guarantee sequential consistency. Due to this property, the benchmark is explicitly tolerant to the presence of errors in its HPCC Table array. The computational kernel performs repeated pseudorandom updates. We allocate the HPCC Table array structure using the {\tt rolex\_malloc\_tolerant()} runtime library routine to support error elision semantics on the memory region corresponding to the HPCC Table.
\item \textbf{3D Rendering Application:} The application converts a 3D model of a scene into a 2D screen representation. The final rendered scene is written to a frame buffer which is declared as a 2-D array in our test code. In order to ignore the presence of perturbations in the frame buffer, we qualify its declaration with the {\tt tolerant} type qualifier. For these application runs, the measure of correct completion is an execution that completes and renders the scene in which fewer than 5\% of pixel values are perturbed beyond a local characteristic threshold value.
\item \textbf{Molecular Dynamics Simulation:}
This simulation is based on time-stepping algorithm and contains floating-point array structures for the particle position, velocity and acceleration. These are calculated every time interval and it has been demonstrated that these coercing these vectors into lower precision does not affect the stability of the simulation over a large number of time steps. We qualify their declaration with the tolerant type qualifier and use the PRECISION construct to apply relaxed precision for the lower 26 bits of the mantissa (when declared using double-precision type). We monitor the properties of the complete system, including total energy and pressure, to determine the validity of a simulation run.
\end{itemize}
Figure \ref{Fig:Results-Tolerance} summarizes the results of these fault injection experiments. These results show the percentage of the total application runs that complete correctly despite the injected errors versus those that end fatally. In the Random Access benchmark, the memory footprint of the computational kernel that performs the pseudorandom updates is extremely small in comparison to the HPCC\_Table array, which occupies 50\% of the system memory and allocated with the tolerant version of the malloc routine. Therefore, upto 99\% of the execution runs converge - even for an error rate as high as 1 fault per minute. Similar resiliency features are demonstrated by the 3D rendering application in which the dominant portion of the active memory footprint is the integer type frame buffer array, which is declared with the {\tt tolerant} qualifier.
For the molecular dynamics simulations, the only resilience property exposed through Rolex is the relaxed precision on the position, velocity and acceleration arrays. This supports error tolerance on only a limited fraction of the total active address space. Accordingly as many as 85\% of the application runs converge correctly for a fault rate of 1 fault/5 minutes; the survival rate drops rapidly in the presence of higher fault rates. The ``failed" simulations include runs that terminate abnormally as well as completed runs in which with total energy and/or pressure of the system diverges outside $\pm$5\% of a fault-free run.
\subsubsection{Enabling Robustness Using Rolex Extensions}
\begin{figure*} [t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth,height=60mm]{results-robustness.jpeg}
\caption{Evaluation of robustness Rolex extensions: Accelerated fault injection results}
\label{Fig:Results-Robustness}
\end{figure*}
The Rolex extensions for robustness provide error detection and correction semantics through the use of redundancy. Since application-level error detection is often implicitly supported for such robust annotated application constructs, we make no assumptions about hardware-level detection and notification mechanisms. For these experiments, the fault injection framework simulates silent data corruptions (SDC). For these injections, the target application process is intercepted and bit-flip perturbations are introduced at the fault site. No notification is raised to the runtime system, and the fault injection framework allows the application process to resume execution. We consider four possible outcomes of a bit corruption injected in the application address space:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Silent data corruptions} that are detected using the redundancy injected into the application code.
\item \textbf{Benign faults} that remain in the program state until the conclusion of the execution, but do not affect the correctness of the outcome.
\item \textbf{Undetected faults} in the application state cause errors but these fall outside the coverage provided by the Rolex constructs.
\item \textbf{Application crash} that occurs when the injected perturbation affects part of program state mapped to the computational environment.
\end{itemize}
For the fault injection runs, we observe the propagation of the fault after injection until the application completes, or terminates. We apply the robustness extensions on the following two codes using Rolex:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Graph500 Breadth-First-Search:} This unstructured, integer-oriented benchmark is based on the graph abstraction and the code contains several pointer references that represent the graph edges and vertices. The correctness of these pointers is critical to the successful completion of an application run since any perturbations on these lead to usually lead to illegal address accesses and a fatal crash of the application process. We qualify all the pointer declarations for the graph edges and vertices with the robust qualifier in the Graph500 Breadth-First-Search (Kernel 2) code \cite{Hukerikar:HPEC:2013}.
\item \textbf{Algebraic Multigrid Solver:} Each multigrid iteration of the linear solver, referred to as a ``V-cycle," consists of smoothing, restriction and interpolation stages during which the algorithm starts with a fine grid, restricts to a coarser grid and then interpolates to a fine grid again. The intermediate solution grids are known to tolerate errors at the cost of needing additional V-cycles to converge to the correct solution. However, the algorithm is also sensitive to pointer variable corruptions. We apply the robust qualifier for each pointer variable declaration in code. Additionally, we allocate the intermediate solution grids using the \texttt{rolex\_malloc\_tolerant()} routine.
\end{itemize}
The Figure \ref{Fig:Results-Robustness} illustrates the distribution of the application outcomes for each fault injected. The Graph500 BFS algorithm contains a large number of pointer-related computations to traverse the graph edges. It is possible to detect and correct the corruptions in the pointer arithmetic for almost 50\% of all corruptions injected for a fault interval of 15 minutes. Since the number of visits for each vertex is fixed in the BFS algorithm, the memory for these vertices and their pointers are not used as the application progresses. Silent corruptions on these regions of the application address space are benign. Other parts of the computational environment as well as the graph vertex data elements contain no error management knowledge. When the injected faults hit these regions the application fails. Therefore, a majority of injected faults are fatal to the application at fault intervals of 1 and 2 since the Rolex fault coverage only protects the pointer variable state. The AMG code demonstrates a different resilience behavior since the address space dedicated to the inherently resilient intermediate solution grids is a significant part of the total address space. Therefore, although the Rolex constructs only provide coverage for the pointer variables, a majority of the injected silent faults still turn out benign since the resulting error in the intermediate state is refined by the iterative nature of the algorithm.
\subsubsection{Enabling Amelioration Using Rolex Extensions}
\begin{figure*} [t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth,height=50mm]{results-amelioration.jpeg}
\caption{Evaluation of amelioration Rolex extensions: Accelerated fault injection results}
\label{Fig:Results-Amelioration}
\end{figure*}
The Rolex extensions for amelioration enable recovery of the application's variable or computational state by using well-known algorithm-based fault tolerance methods. The extensions must be supported by hardware-based detection mechanisms. Since these extensions associate a recovery function with a data structure or computation, there are only two possible outcomes for each fault detected: the application state is repaired by the recovery function, which permits the application execution to resume or, the application must terminate since the recovery function is insufficient to repair the corruption. We demonstrate fault amelioration using Rolex constructs for the following codes:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Matrix-Matrix Multiplication:}
In the DGEMM code, calculating row and column-wise checksums is a well-known solution to detect and correct corruptions in the matrix. We define functions that maintain the row and column checksums for the operand matrices whose reference is passed to the {\tt rolex\_malloc\_repairable()} library routine. If the matrix declaration is static the recovery function may be included in a {\tt heal} type qualifier.
\item \textbf{Conjugate Gradient Solver:}
For the CG solver, the matrix is allocated by the library routine \texttt{rolex\allowbreak\_malloc\allowbreak\_repairable()}. The pointer to a function that maintains checksums of the matrix is passed to this routine. Additionally, we leverage the iterative property of the CG algorithm by including the CG iteration step in the {\tt \#pragma rolex roll-forward} amelioration directive and associate the checksum routine with the directive. This allows faulty iterations to be discarded and validating the correctness of the operand matrix upon roll-forward.
\item \textbf{Self-Stabilizing Conjugate Gradient:}
The self-stabilizing version of CG offers a correction step that restores the stability of the algorithm when it is affected by errors. This correction step is included in a recovery function whose reference is included in the {\tt ameliorate} clause of a directive. The CG iteration steps are included in the amelioration directive {\tt \#pragma rolex roll-back}. The roll-back capability allows the most recent faulty CG iteration to be discarded and the recovery to be invoked.
\end{itemize}
Figure \ref{Fig:Results-Amelioration} summarizes the results of these experiments. For the DGEMM code, the checksum-based amelioration is applicable for only the static state in the application address space, i.e., the operand matrices that are initialized at the beginning and whose values do not change throughout the execution. We have not applied any Rolex construct on the dynamic state, i.e., the result matrix. With this fault coverage, 75\% of all executions converge correctly for the fault rate that injects an error every 15 minutes, but only 27\% complete correctly at the accelerated rate of 1 error per minute in which case as many as 20 unrecoverable errors are injected into the process state. The inclusion of Rolex constructs to the CG solver yields a better resilience characteristic than DGEMM for similar fault intervals. This is because in addition to the checksum-based error detection/correction on the operand matrices, the iterative nature of the algorithm permits incorrect computation to be recovered. Due to the enhanced address space fault coverage through Rolex in CG codes the application demonstrates a better completion rate than DGEMM, even at higher fault rates. The SS-CG contains a correction step that is designed to restore the stability of the algorithm. This permits relaxation of the reliability requirements for the CG iterations. Therefore, a larger percentage of executions of the SS-CG converge correctly, in comparison to CG, for similar fault rates.
\subsection{Performance Evaluation}
\begin{figure*} [t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth,height=80mm]{results-workload-efficiency.jpeg}
\caption{Performance Evaluation of Rolex: Workload Efficiencies}
\label{Fig:Results-Performance}
\end{figure*}
We evaluate the overhead of embedding the resilience knowledge using Rolex for each of the application codes. With the introduction of Rolex constructs in the applications' source code, the overhead is introduced by compiler-inserted statements as well as runtime library routines. Additionally, the response to each type of error depends on its context, i.e., its location in the address space and the knowledge available in the runtime's DRM. Therefore, we evaluate the performance impact by comparing the workload efficiency which is the ratio of the ideal time-to-solution on a fault-free execution run to the actual running time in the presence of faults:
\begin{equation}
Efficiency = \frac{t_{fault-free}}{t_{actual-in-presence-faults}}
\end{equation}
The difference between t$_{fault-free}$ and t$_{actual-with-faults}$ is the overhead associated with dealing with faults by the Rolex runtime system. This includes the time for fault detection, diagnosis and applying any recovery and compensation. We compile each application code to two different binary versions: a binary with Rolex, compiled using our front-end source-to-source compiler followed by a regular GCC compiler; and a version using only a GCC compiler. The binary version without Rolex is executed in a fault-free environment to measure the baseline execution time. The version containing Rolex is subjected to fault injection for which we measure the application's time to solution for runs that survive all the faults and reach correct completion. The execution times for each fault are averaged for the fraction of the 10,000 application runs that complete correctly. This allows examination of the overhead incurred by the compiler-based transformations as well as the overhead incurred by the runtime inference system.
The results for the workload efficiency are summarized in Figure \ref{Fig:Results-Performance}. The overhead to manage errors in HPCC Random Access and the 3D rendering application are low because the runtime tolerates errors through elision and the size of the DRM is very small. Therefore, even for extremely high fault rates, the overhead is about 15\%. For the molecular dynamics simulation, the error tolerance is supported through value coercion on the position, velocity and acceleration vectors and this operation incurs a higher overhead than error elision. Consequently, the overhead for the largest fault interval is 4\% and as much as 19\% for the smallest fault interval.
The robustness-based constructs introduce redundancy through compiler-based transformations into the application source. However, since we only annotate the pointer variables in both the Graph500 BFS and AMG codes, there is a fixed overhead cost of about 10\% attributed to the redundant statements. The lower efficiency at higher fault rates may be attributed to the overhead in notifying the runtime system. The amelioration-based Rolex constructs demonstrate a significantly higher overhead compared to the tolerance and robustness extensions. However, much of this overhead may be attributed to the algorithmic amelioration functions rather than compiler and runtime overheads. The SS-CG offers the best efficiency among the codes that use the amelioration constructs since it requires only a stabilization step. The checksum operations are computationally expensive operations and therefore the efficiency of the DGEMM and CG codes are lower, particularly at higher fault rates when the checksum functions are invoked frequently.
\section{Related Work}
\label{sec:Related_Work}
HPC programmers have historically borne the burden of exploiting novel features in system architectures and execution models in the pursuit of performance. They usually rely on various extensions to high-level programming languages with the support of compilation techniques and runtime libraries. For example the OpenMP \cite{OpenMP:Spec} standard emerged in order to support shared memory multiprocessing programming in C, C++, and Fortran through a set of directives, library routines and environment variables. Similarly Berkeley's UPC effort \cite{Carlson:1999:UPC} also extends the C language with constructs that present the programmer with a single global partitioned global address space as the program runs on shared or distributed memory parallel systems. The Co-array Fortran (CAF) \cite{Numrich:1998:CFP} began as an extension of Fortran 95/2003 (and became part of the Fortran 2008 standard) to support the PGAS model for Fortran programs. NVIDIA's CUDA was derived from Brook \cite{Buck:2004:SIGGRAPH} which extended the C language with data-parallelism-oriented constructs that enabled the use of the graphics processing units (GPU) as streaming co-processors.
The support for fault tolerance capabilities through programming models-based approaches has been recently proposed and evaluated. Programming constructs called containment domains \cite{Chung:2011:SC} provide the application programmer with mechanisms to delineate computation that have transactional semantics. Upon execution of the code block, the results of the computation are checked for correctness and if the block's execution condition is not met, the results are discarded and the block may be re-executed. Similarly, language-level support for idempotent regions \cite{deKruijf:2012:PLDI} enables application programmers to specify "relax" blocks in C/C++ programs, which may be freely re-executed without checkpointed state or side-effects. The FaultTM scheme \cite{Yalcin:2010:PESPMA} requires an application programmer to define vulnerable sections of code which are executed by duplicate thread contexts. The original and the backup thread are executed as an atomic transaction, and their respective result values are compared before committing the result.
The Global View Resilience (GVR) project \cite{Fujita:2013:ASPLOS} provides annotations to create multiple snapshot versions of the application data, which enables recovery from failures by restoring the application state to a previous snapshot version.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:Conclusion}
This paper presented a set of Resiliency-Oriented Language Extensions (Rolex) for expressing the error resilience properties of scientific HPC application codes at the language level. They are developed as extensions to existing programming languages such that they may succinctly capture a programmer's knowledge on the fault tolerance features of the application through type qualifiers, directives and library routines. The semantics of the language extensions enable application-level error detection, containment and masking. We have presented concrete examples of widely used scientific computational kernels in which encoding the resilience knowledge using Rolex enhances the application's error resilience. We described the compiler transformations that leverage the language extensions to incorporate further error resilience features in the application codes. These transformations are enabled by a front-end source-to-source compiler infrastructure. We described the compiler-runtime interface and the design and implementation of the runtime inference system.
We demonstrated that the combination of the language-level programming model extensions, which are tightly integrated with the compiler infrastructure and runtime system, provides an execution environment that facilitates cross-layer efforts for error detection, masking and recovery.
For HPC applications, these capabilities in turn lead to a substantial increase in the checkpointing interval and a reduction in redundant computation, both of which enable a reduction in the time and energy required to reliably solve the most demanding computational challenges.
\section{Rolex Grammar}
This appendix shows the extensions to the base language grammar for C and C++ in order to support Rolex.
\subsection{Rules for Resilience Type Qualifiers}
\begin{Code} [caption= {Rules for resilience type qualifiers}, label = {lst:TypeQualifierRules}]
declaration_specifiers : storage_class_specifier
| storage_class_specifier declaration_specifiers
| type_specifier
| type_specifier declaration_specifiers
| type_qualifier
| type_qualifier declaration_specifiers
';'
storage_class_specifier : TYPEDEF | EXTERN | STATIC | AUTO | REGISTER ';'
type_specifier : VOID | CHAR | SHORT | INT | LONG | FLOAT | DOUBLE | SIGNED | UNSIGNED
| struct/union_specifier | enum_specifier | TYPE_NAME
';'
type_qualifier : CONST
| VOLATILE
| resilience_type_qualifier
';'
resilience_type_qualifier : TOLERANT
| TOLERANT '(' tolerance_limit ')'
| ROBUST '(' robust_strength ')'
| HEAL '(' function_declaration ')'
';'
tolerance_limit : PRECISION '=' CONSTANT
| MAXIMUS '=' CONSTANT
robust_strength: DETECT | CORRECT
\end{Code}
\subsection{Rules for Resilience Directives}
\begin{Code}[caption = {Rules for resilience directives},label = {lst:DirectiveRules}]
statement-list: statement
| resilience-directive
| statement-list statement
| statement-list resilience-directive
statement : labeled_statement
| compound_statement
| expression_statement
| selection_statement
| iteration_statement
| jump_statement
| resilience-construct
| declaration-definition
| function-statement
';'
resilience-construct: rolex-redundancy-construct
| rolex-recovery-construct
| rolex-declare-construct
rolex-redundancy-construct: redundancy-directive structured-block
rolex-recovery-construct: recovery-directive structured-block
rolex-declare-construct: declare-directive function-statement
structured-block: statement
recovery-directive:#pragma rolex recover-rollback recovery-data-clause(opt) new-line
#pragma rolex recover-rollforward recovery-data-clause(opt) new-line
redundancy-directive: #pragma rolex robust robust-strength-clause redundancy-data-clause(opt) new-line
declare-directive: #pragma rolex declare resilient declare-resilience-clause failsafe-data-clause(opt) new-line
robust-strength-clause: DETECT | CORRECT
recovery-data-clause: data-default-clause
| data-private-clause
| data-share-clause
| data-reinitialize-clause
| data-ameliorate-clause
redundancy-data-clause: data-default-clause
| data-private-clause
| data-share-clause
| data-compare-clause
failsafe-data-clause: fallback '(' variable-list ')'
data-default-clause: default '(' shared ')'
| default '(' none ')'
data-private-clause: private '(' variable-list ')'
data-share-clause: share '(' variable-list ')'
data-reinitialize-clause: reinitialize '(' variable-list ')'
data-ameliorate-clause: ameliorate '(' function_declaration ')'
data-compare-clause: compare '(' variable-list ')'
declare-resilient-clause: retry
| ignore
| robust '(' robust_strength ')'
\end{Code}
The redundancy directives enable error detection and/or correction for the computation contained in a structured block. The strength clause indicates whether dual or triple modular redundant execution must be applied. The recovery directives offer error containment since any fault that is activated leading to error state during the execution of the structured block is not allowed to propagate outside the block. Error recovery is performed by rolling forward or rolling back execution of the structured block.
The roll-forward and roll-back semantics on the structured code blocks require explicit specification of the data scoping to comply with the C/C++ memory consistency model. The rules for the data management and scoping clauses are also shown in Listing \ref{lst:DirectiveRules}. The clauses permit the variable state to be restored when execution is rolled forward or back. For the redundancy directives, the data clauses ensure that there are no races on the shared data. The declarative clauses in Rolex enable the creation of multiple versions of the associated function in order to support retry, ignore or redundant execution for the statements in the function body.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
Recent decades have witnessed a proliferation in embedded sensors for observing a variety of physical phenomena. Increased use of these sensors in security- and life-critical applications has been accompanied by a corresponding increase in attacks targeting sensing software, hardware, and even physical, analog signals themselves. While considerable research has explored sensor security from a system-level perspective---network redundancy, sensor fusion, ... etc---sensors themselves remain largely vulnerable to attacks targeting analog signals prior to digitization. This vulnerability can lead to catastrophic failures when a malicious third party attempts to spoof the sensor \cite{ghosttalk,Willams_SCADA,Sastry_HOTSEC08,YasserABS,AttackGryroUsenix}.
Several \emph{system-level} sensor security schemes have been proposed in the context of power grids. For example, Dorfler et al. have explored distributed cyber-physical attack detection in the context of power networks \cite{Bullo_TAC}. Similar ideas for providing system-level security in smart grids can be found in \cite{KimPowerAttack,KosutPowerAttack,SandbergPowerAttack,LiuPowerAttack,KalleGrid}.
Security schemes in this vein include, among others, state-space and control-theoretic approaches for detecting anomalous system behavior \cite{Hamza_TAC,Yasser_SMT,Bullo_TAC}. One idea common to these efforts is that an inherent security mechanism and robustness can be found in the physics governing the dynamics of the \emph{system} as a whole. For example, a mismatch between the rate of change in a vehicle's location as reported by GPS and by the odometer sensor may indicate that one of these two sensors is either faulty or under attack.
A complementary security mechanism can be found in the physics governing the \emph{sensor} itself. If a sensor observes an analog signal that appears to violate the physics governing the sensing dynamics, the signal itself may be under attack, necessitating security mechanisms at the analog signal level. To reduce sensor-level vulnerabilities, engineers often place sensors in secure or remote physical locations to preclude direct physical contact with the sensing hardware. Additionally, the phenomenon being sensed is often difficult to access, whether prohibitively far away or surrounded by protective material. In such scenarios, adversaries have access only to the analog signal prior to it reaching the sensor, and their attack must be carried out without direct access to any hardware in the entire sensing path, from source to sink. Even with these countermeasures in place, an adversary can still attack sensors by manipulating the physical signals before their transduction and subsequent digitization \cite{ghosttalk,YasserABS}. Robust countermeasures for such attacks must necessarily be carried out at the physical level as well---once these signals have been sampled and digitized, no amount of post-processing can repair the compromised sensor data.
Broadly speaking, sensors can be divided into two categories: passive (those that sense pre-existing physical signals) and active (those that perform some action to evoke and measure a physical response from some measurable entity). Examples of passive sensors include temperature, humidity, and ambient light, while active sensors include ultrasound, laser scanners (LIDAR), and radar.
Passive sensors are largely na\"ive listening devices--they will blindly relay information to higher levels of software without regard for the integrity of that information. Digital filtering and other post-processing techniques can be used to remove noise from passive sensors, but they remain unable to combat attacks at the physical layer in any meaningful way. On the other hand, active sensors introduce the possibility for more advanced security measures. PyCRA is, at its core, a method of ensuring the trustworthiness of information obtained by active sensors by comparing their responses to a series of physical queries or challenges. The driving concept behind PyCRA is that, by stimulating the environment with a randomized signal and measuring the response, we can ensure that the signal measured by the sensor is in accordance with the underlying sensing physics. The randomization in the stimulating signal is known to the active sensor but unknown to the adversary \footnote{Note that the randomness is purely private and there is no exchange/communication of it is needed.}.
This randomized stimulation and subsequent behavioral analysis---the physical challenge-response authentication---is the main contribution of this work.
We further extend the resilience of PyCRA against passive attacks by means of a \emph{confusion phase}---a period of low signal to noise ratio in which the ability to detect and respond to a physical challenge is made more difficult for any attacker. This additional phase leverages theoretical guarantees from the literature on point change detection, in which one party (the attacker, in our case) attempts to detect the point at which a signal randomly changes amplitudes in the presence of noise. An intelligent attacker could, upon sensing a physical challenge, attempt to respond in a timely manner by spoofing the measured, physical signal. By increasing the time required to detect each challenge, the confusion phase provides theoretical guarantees for PyCRA's resilience to active sensor attacks.
We demonstrate the effectiveness of PyCRA for three exemplary cases: physical attack detection for magnetic encoders, physical attack resilience for magnetic encoders, and passive eavesdropping detection for RFID readers. Magnetic encoders are used in a wide array of commercial and industrial applications and are representative of a large class of inductive active sensors. We demonstrate not only how active spoofing attacks can be detected for these inductive sensors but also how the effects of these attacks can be mitigated. Eavesdropping detection on RFID readers serves to illustrate an extension of PyCRA to enable detection of \emph{passive} attacks. We believe that the methods demonstrated in this work can be applied to a broad array of active sensors beyond those studied directly in this work, including ultrasound, optical sensors, active radar, and more.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{carsim2_edited.jpg}
\end{center}
\caption{The consequence of applying an ABS sensor spoofing attack while braking over ice. This simulation shows the position of the attacked car over multiple time instances.}
\label{fig:carsim}
\vspace{-3mm}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{A Motivating Example}
In order to illustrate the potential consequences of physical spoofing attacks on individual sensors, we will look at the example of the Antilock Braking System found in modern cars. The sensors used in these systems are responsible for measuring the angular rate of rotation for individual wheels in order to detect when a wheel is skidding. When a car begins to skid, the ABS prevents the wheels from locking up and thus gives the driver improved control over the vehicle in otherwise dangerous situations. If one or more of these sensors is compromised, the ABS can be tricked into thinking that the car is skidding when it is not or that it is operating nominally when in fact the car has entered a potentially life-threatening skid. Using a commercial vehicle simulation program called CarSim \cite{carsim}, we can visualize the effects of compromising the ABS system of a car. Figure \ref{fig:carsim} shows the result of an attack in a series of time-lapsed images. In this simulation, the car is proceeding in a straight line when it encounters a patch of ice and begins to apply the brakes. The vehicle begins to skid at some point, but the driver retains control thanks to the ABS. Shortly after the brakes are applied, the right, rear ABS sensor is spoofed such that it reports a slower speed, allowing the car to skid uncontrollably off the road. Work reported in \cite{YasserABS} has shown a physical implementation of such an attack.
In this paper we use ABS spoofing as a motivating example for the development of PyCRA, but it is important to note that securing ABS sensors with physical challenge-response authentication is merely a specific application of a broader security scheme---periodic injections of known stimuli into a physical system allow a sensor to monitor the trustworthiness of the perceived environment by comparing observed behavior to ideal or predicted \emph{responses}.
\subsection{Contributions of PyCRA }
In summary, the contributions described in this paper are multi-fold:\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{itemize}
\item We present a generalizable physical challenge-response authentication scheme for active sensing subsystems.
\item We extend the basic concept of physical challenge-response authentication for detecting the presence of passive attacks and providing resilience against active physical attacks.
\item We extend PyCRA with a novel security mechanism known as the \emph{confusion phase}, which limits the attacker's capability to counter-measure the physical challenge-response authentication scheme.
\item We provide rigorous mathematical results describing how the \emph{confusion phase} enhances the performance of PyCRA while adding fundamental limitations to the capabilities of active physical attacks.
\item We demonstrate the effectiveness of PyCRA, our implementation of physical challenge-response authentication, against several different attack types with three exemplary applications: (1) detection of active attacks on magnetic encoders, (2) resilience against active attacks on magnetic encoders, and (3) detecting passive eavesdropping attacks on RFID readers.
\end{itemize}
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section \ref{sec:attacker_model} outlines the attacker model. Section \ref{sec:pycra} describes basic operation of the PyCRA authentication scheme for detecting active attacks. Sections \ref{sec:ext_resilience} and~\ref{sec:sniffing} extend PyCRA to other applications, namely providing resilience against active attacks and detecting passive attacks. In order to enhance more the performance of PyCRA and increase its security, we introduce a novel design mechanism to PyCRA named the \emph{confusion phase}. Details of this novel mechanism along with theoretical analysis of security guarantees provided by this mechanism is detailed in Section~\ref{sec:theory} and Appendix~\ref{sec:proofodDetDelayDecay}.
Sections \ref{sec:absattacks}, \ref{sec:absattacks2} and \ref{sec:resultsRFID} are devoted to the results of three case studies: Section \ref{sec:absattacks} discusses attack detection for magnetic encoders; Section \ref{sec:absattacks2} describes how PyCRA authentication provides resilience against physical attacks on magnetic encoders; and Section \ref{sec:resultsRFID} shows the results of extending PyCRA to the detection of passive eavesdropping attacks on RFID readers. Finally, we offer a discussion and concluding thoughts in Sections \ref{sec:discussion} and \ref{sec:conclusion}.
A preliminary version of this paper appeared in~\cite{ShoukryPyCRA}, providing an explanation of only the physical challenge authentication mechanism itself. In this paper, we discuss the details of extending PyCRA to counteract \emph{passive} physical attacks and to provide \emph{resilience} against active physical attacks (Sections~\ref{sec:ext_resilience} and~\ref{sec:sniffing}) along with more experimental results demonstrating the performance of these extensions (Section~\ref{sec:absattacks2}). Finally, this paper introduces in detail the notion of a~\emph{confusion phase}, as briefly mentioned in~\cite{ShoukryPyCRA} along with the underlying mathematics shown in Section~\ref{sec:theory} and Appendix~\ref{sec:proofodDetDelayDecay}.
\section{Attacker Model}
\label{sec:attacker_model}
\begin{figure}
\centering
{
\includegraphics[width=0.75\columnwidth]{SensorFigPaul.pdf}
}
\caption{\label{fig:sensor}
A typical active sensor architecture. The actuator generates an analog signal (energy) which is reflected by the measured entity back to the sensor. The received analog signal is captured and processed by the analog front-end. The signal is then converted to a digital format which is processed once more (by the digital back-end) before being sent to higher level software layers.}
\vspace{-4mm}
\end{figure}
Before describing mechanisms by which we can detect and prevent sensor attacks at the physical layer, we must differentiate between two broad categories of sensors---namely passive and active sensors---and define what we mean by a physical attack.
\subsection{Passive vs. Active Sensors}
Sensors can be broadly classified as either passive or active based on the source of energy being sensed. Passive sensors measure ambient energy. For example, temperature sensors like those found in thermostats are considered passive, because they measure heat energy in the ambient environment. By contrast, active sensors probe some physical entity with self-generated energy as shown in Figure \ref{fig:sensor}. This energy is partially reflected back to the sensor where it is measured and used to infer properties about some physical phenomenon. Examples of active sensors include ultrasonic range finders (used in robotics), optical and magnetic encoders (used in automotive vehicles, industrial plants, \& chemical refineries), radar, and even radio-frequency identification (RFID) systems. In RFID, a reader is used to generate electromagnetic waves which are then used by wireless tags to transfer back their unique identifier to the reader.
In this paper, we focus on providing security for active sensors. In particular, we leverage an active sensor's ability to emit energy in order to 1) provide detection of active attackers trying to spoof the sensor, 2) mitigate the effects of active spoofing attacks and 3) detect passive eavesdropping attacks attempting to listen to the information received by the sensor. In the following subsections, we define what we mean by physical attacks on active sensors and outline the assumed properties and limitations of a potential adversary.
\subsection{Defining Physical Attacks}
In this paper, a physical attack refers to a malicious alteration of a physical, analog signal (e.g., magnetic waves, acoustic waves, visible waves) prior to transduction and digitization by a sensor, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:sensor}.
\subsection{Adversarial Goals}
The adversary considered in this work has a number of goals related to misinforming and misleading sensors. These goals are summarized below.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\textbf{G1}] \emph{\underline{Concealment}: An attacker does not want the presence of his or her attack to be known.}
\end{enumerate}
\noindent If a sensor attack can be easily detected, preventative countermeasures like hardware redundancy and resilience at the system-level can often be used to mitigate the damage done by the attack \cite{Yasser_SMT,Bullo_TAC}.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\textbf{G2}] \emph{\underline{Signal Injection}: An attacker will attempt to trick the sensor into thinking that a malicious, injected signal is the true physical signal. }
\end{enumerate}
\noindent The primary goal of an attack is to replace the true physical signal that a sensor aims to sense with a malicious signal. In other words, an adversary will attempt to ``inject'' a signal into the physical medium that the sensor is measuring in order to jam or spoof the sensor.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\textbf{G3}] \emph{\underline{Signal Masking}: An attacker will attempt to prevent the sensor from being able to detect the true physical signal.}
\end{enumerate}
\noindent If the sensor is still capable of reliably discerning the correct signal from the malicious, injected signal, then the attack may not be successful. Thus, the adversary aims not only to inject a signal but also to mask the true signal, whether by overpowering, modifying, or negating (canceling) it.
\begin{figure}
\centering
{
\includegraphics[width=0.4\columnwidth]{clock_legend.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\columnwidth]{rfid.pdf}
}
\caption{\label{fig:delays}Examples of physical delays seen in typical sensing and actuation hardware, including optical sensors (left) and electromagnetic coupled (e.g., RFID) sensors (right). In each case, the measured analog signal (blue solid) lags behind the ideal, ``logical'' signal (red dashed), causing delays. }
\vspace{-4mm}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Assumptions about the Adversary}
The physical attacks against sensors considered in this work operate under four main assumptions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\textbf{A1}]\emph{\underline{Non-invasiveness}: Attacks are of a \emph{non-invasive} nature---that is, the attacker is not allowed direct access to the sensor hardware. Additionally, the adversary does not have access to the sensor firmware or software, whether directly or through wired or wireless networking.}
\end{enumerate}
\noindent In most life- and safety-critical applications, engineers are careful to ensure that sensors are not physically exposed and vulnerable to direct tampering. For example:
\begin{itemize}
\item Sensors are often installed inside the body of a physically secured infrastructure (e.g., sensors inside the body of an automotive system, moving UAV drones, etc.).
\item For sensors which are physically accessible, existing techniques in the literature demonstrate ways to implement tamper-proof packaging to protect sensors from direct, physical modifications \cite{1260985,tamperProofSmartCards,AndersonTamperProof}.
\item Numerous sensor systems have methods for detecting when wires connecting their various sensors have been tampered with. For example, automotive systems are equipped with sensor failure detection systems which can detect whether all sensor subsystems are correctly connected and alert the driver if any of them fails
\cite{klassen1993fault}.
\end{itemize}
\noindent Because of this, any attack must be carried out from a distance, without direct access to any sensor hardware. In short, an adversary is assumed to have access only to the physical/analog medium used by the sensor---magnetic waves, optics, acoustics, etc.
Additionally, it is important to distinguish these sensors from \emph{sensor nodes} (which appear in the literature of sensor networks); the attacks and countermeasures in this work target \emph{sensors} themselves. Sensors are simple subsystems designed to perform only one simple task; sensing the physical world. Because of this, many sensors do not support remote firmware updates
and do not typically receive commands from a remote operator, making such attack vectors uncommon as many sensors do not have such capabilities.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
{
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:eavesdrop_attack}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{attack_eavesdrop.pdf}}&
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:simplistic_attack}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{attack_simple.pdf}}&
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:advanced_attack}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{attack_advanced.pdf}}
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{An illustration of three physical attack types: (a) a passive eavesdropping attack, (b) a simple spoofing attack where a malicious actuator blindly injects a disruptive signal, and (c) an advanced spoofing attack where an adversary uses a sensor to measure the original signal and an actuator to actively cancel the original signal and inject a malicious one. \label{fig:attack_types}}
\vspace{-4mm}
\end{figure*}
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\textbf{A2}]\emph{\underline{Trusted Measured Entity}
We assume that the physical entity to be measured by the sensor is trusted and incapable of being compromised.}
\end{enumerate}
\noindent Similar to the sensor hardware itself, the entity that the sensor aims to measure is typically difficult to access or alter directly while maintaining Goals G1--G3. For example, in RFID systems the tag itself is often encased in tamper-proof packaging \cite{1260985,tamperProofSmartCards}; for ultrasonic ranging and active radar, maliciously altering the measured entity (often the entire surrounding environment) is impractical in time \& effort and undoubtedly violates Goal G1; for airplane engine speed sensors, the engines cannot easily be modified or replaced; for heart monitors, the heart cannot (we hope) be modified \cite{ghosttalk}, and so forth.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\textbf{A3}]\emph{\underline{Physical Delays ($\tau_{attack}$)}: Adversaries require physical hardware with inherent physical delays.
This delay, though variable in duration, is fundamental to all physical actuation and sensing hardware. }
\end{enumerate}
\noindent These same analog/physical signals cannot be manipulated or even observed (i.e. sniffed) without physical hardware. That is, to tamper with magnetic waves, an attacker needs hardware that is able to generate magnetic waves, optical signals need physical hardware that generates optical signals, and so on. Furthermore, this hardware has to obey fundamental physics imposed by nature; the underlying physics dictate that the response of any physical element is governed by a dynamical model (mathematically modeled using differential/difference equations) \cite[ch. 2]{FradenBook}, \cite[chs. 8--9]{brauer2006magnetic}. This dynamical model describes the output response for each physical element in response to their inputs, e.g., the time for a voltage to drop from a certain value to zero and so on.
Although from a system point of view, we often assume that analog signals like those in Figure \ref{fig:delays} take on logical values of 0 and 1, the underlying physics is always different from this ``system'' point of view. For example, Figure \ref{fig:delays} shows how hardware that generates clock waveforms and optical pulse signals behaves quite differently from the desired, logical signals used to control them. In general, no physical signal can arbitrarily jump from one state to another without suffering from \emph{delays} imposed by physics \cite[ch. 2]{FradenBook}.
Furthermore, these physical delays are lower bounded by a non-zero, fundamental limit. For example, the time response of an electromagnetic sensor/actuator is a multiple of physical constants like magnetic permeability \cite[chs. 8--9]{brauer2006magnetic} or permitivity and electric constants for capacitive sensors \cite[ch. 4]{FradenBook}. In general, the time response of any sensor or actuator can never be below certain fundamental thresholds controlled by physical constants. We refer to this physical delay as $\tau_{attack}$ for the remainder of this paper.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\textbf{A4}]\emph{\underline{Computational Delays}:
PyCRA is designed and analyzed with a focus on \emph{physical} delays.
We make no assumption regarding the computational power of a potential adversary. }
\end{enumerate}
\noindent We assume that an adversary has knowledge of the underlying security mechanism, attempting to conceal an attack by reacting to each physical challenge or probe from the PyCRA-secured active sensor. In practice, such an adversary would suffer from \emph{computational delays} in addition to the physical delays addressed above. These delays would make it even more difficult for an adversary to respond to these challenges in a timely manner. PyCRA is designed to leverage only the physical delays addressed above, but additional computational delays would make it even easier to detect the presence of an attack.
\subsection{Physical Attack Types for Sensors}
\label{sec:attack_types}
Attacks can be classified as either passive (eavesdropping) or active (spoofing). While we consider only physical/analog attacks in accordance with assumptions A1--A4, the passivity of an attack is decided by whether or not the attacker is manipulating (or spoofing) the physical signal or merely listening to it. Active attacks themselves can be classified once more into simple spoofing or advanced spoofing attacks. In short,
physical sensor attacks in accordance with assumptions A1--A4 can be broadly divided into three categories (\underline{T}ypes):
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\textbf{T1}]\emph{\underline{Eavesdropping Attacks}:
\label{sec:eavesdropping}
In an eavesdropping attack, an adversary uses a malicious sensor in order to listen to the active sensor's ``communication'' with the measured entity (Figure \ref{fig:eavesdrop_attack})}.
\item[\textbf{T2}]\emph{\underline{Simple Spoofing Attacks}:
\label{sec:naivespoofing}
In a simple spoofing attack, an adversary uses a malicious actuator to blindly inject a malicious signal in order to alter the signal observed by the sensor. These attacks are simple in that the malicious signal is not a function of the original, true signal (Figure \ref{fig:simplistic_attack}). }
\item[\textbf{T3}]\emph{\underline{Advanced Spoofing Attacks}
\label{sec:intelligentspoofing}
In an advanced spoofing attack, an adversary uses a sensor in order to gain full knowledge of the original signal and then uses a malicious actuator to inject a malicious signal accordingly.
This enables an attacker to suppress the original signal or otherwise alter it in addition to injecting a malicious signal (Figure \ref{fig:advanced_attack}). }
\end{enumerate}
We argue that these attack types span all possible modes of attacks that abide by Assumptions A1--A4 with those goals outlined in G1--G3. For example, jamming or Denial of service (DoS) attacks falls in category T2 where the attacker's actuator is used to blindly generate high amplitude, wide bandwidth signals to interfere with the physical signal before it reaches the sensors; replay attacks fall in either category T2 or T3 based on whether the attacker is blindly replaying a physical signal or destructing the original physical signal before inserting the replay signal; spoofing attacks like those demonstrated in \cite{ghosttalk} fall in category T2; and attacks described in \cite{YasserABS} fall within both T2 and T3.
At first glance, attacks of type T1 may not seem important especially if the sensor under attack measures a physical signal that is publicly accessible (e.g., room temperature, car speed, etc.). In such cases, an adversary can measure the same physical signal without the need to ``listen'' to the interaction between the active sensor and the environment. However, this may not always be the case. For example, an attacker might measure magnetic waves during an exchange between an RFID reader and an RFID tag, learning potentially sensitive information about the tag. These attacks are passive, meaning that the attacker does not inject any energy into the system. Sections~\ref{sec:absattacks} describes methods for detecting attacks T2 and T3, leaving attack type T1 for later discussion in Section~\ref{sec:resultsRFID}.
\section{The PyCRA Authentication Scheme}
\label{sec:pycra}
The core concept behind PyCRA is that of physical challenge-response authentication. In traditional challenge-response authentication schemes, one party requires another party to prove their trustworthiness by correctly answering a question or \emph{challenge}. This challenge-response pair could be a simple password query, a random challenge to a known hash function, or other similar mechanisms. In the proposed physical challenge-response authentication, the challenge comes in the form of a \emph{physical} stimulus placed on the environment by an active sensor. Unlike traditional schemes, the proposed \emph{physical} challenge operates in the analog domain and is designed so that an adversary cannot issue the correct response because of immutable physical constraints rather than computational or combinatorial challenges.
We begin by modeling the problem of detecting physical sensor attacks as an authentication problem. To draw this analogy, let us consider the communication system shown in Figure \ref{fig:system_diagram_normal}. This figure shows two `parties': (1) an active sensor composed of actuation and sensing subsystems and (2) the measured entity which responds to signals emitted by the actuator contained within the active sensor. The first party---the active sensor---is responsible for initiating the ``communication'' by generating some physical signal such as a magnetic, acoustic, or optical wave. The second party---the measured entity---responds to this ``communication'' by modulating this signal and reflecting it back to the sensing subsystem of the active sensor. With this analogy in mind, the problem of detecting physical attacks can be posed as that of ensuring that the ``message'' seen by the sensor has originated from a trusted party (the true entity to be measured). This is akin to identity authentication in the the literature of computer security but applied to the analog domain.
\subsection{Simple PyCRA Attack Detector}
Using the communication analogy shown in Figure \ref{fig:system_diagram_normal} and recalling that we are interested only in active sensors as described in Section \ref{sec:attacker_model}.1, we notice that the measured entity, as a participating party in this communication, is strictly \emph{{passive}}, i.e. it cannot initiate communication; it responds only when the sensor generates an appropriate physical signal.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
{
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\subfloat[ ]{\label{fig:system_diagram_normal}
\resizebox{0.3\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[very thick,->] (-1.8,-0.2) -- (-1.1,-0.2);
\node at (-1.5,0) {$u(t)$};
\draw[very thick,->] (-1.1,-1.6) -- (-1.8,-1.6);
\node at (-1.5,-1.3) {$y(t)$};
\node at (-0.3,-0.8) {\includegraphics[width=.1\textwidth]{activesensor}};
\node at (3.8,-0.5) {\includegraphics[width=.1\textwidth]{environment}};
\draw[very thick,->] (0.7,0) -- (2.5,-0.7);
\draw[->] (1,0) -- (2.5,0) node[anchor=north]{\small $t$}
\draw[->] (1.2,-0.2) -- (1.2,0.7) node[anchor=west]{\small $\mathcal{A}(t)$};
\draw[-] (1.2, 0.45) -- (2.45, 0.45);
\draw[very thick,->] (2.5,-1.1) -- (0.7,-1.8);
\draw[->](2.5,-2.2) -- (1,-2.2) node[anchor=north]{\small $t$};
\draw \sinewave{1.1}{0.085}{-2.2}{0.25};
\draw[->](4.5,-2.2) -- (3,-2.2) node[anchor=north]{\small $t$};
\draw[->] (4.3,-2.4) -- (4.3,-1.7) node[anchor=east]{\small $a(t)$};
\end{tikzpicture}
}
}&
\subfloat[ ]{\label{fig:system_diagram_noattack}
\resizebox{0.3\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[very thick,->] (-1.8,-0.2) -- (-1.1,-0.2);
\node at (-1.5,0) {$u(t)$};
\draw[very thick,->] (-1.1,-1.6) -- (-1.8,-1.6);
\node at (-1.5,-1.3) {$y(t)$};
\node at (-0.3,-0.8) {\includegraphics[width=.1\textwidth]{activesensor}};
\node at (3.8,-0.5) {\includegraphics[width=.1\textwidth]{environment}};
\draw[very thick,->] (0.7,0) -- (2.5,-0.7);
\draw[->] (1,0) -- (2.5,0) node[anchor=north]{\scriptsize t}
\draw[->] (1.2,-0.2) -- (1.2,0.7) node[anchor=west]{\small $\mathcal{B}(t)$};
\draw[-] (1.2, 0.45) -- (1.7, 0.45);
\draw[-] (1.7, 0.45) -- (1.7, 0);
\draw[ultra thick,-,red!80!black] (1.7,0) -- (1.9,0)
\draw[-] (1.9, 0.45) -- (1.9, 0);
\draw[-] (1.9, 0.45) -- (2.45, 0.45);
\draw[very thick,->] (2.5,-1.1) -- (0.7,-1.8);
\draw[->](2.5,-2.2) -- (1,-2.2) node[anchor=north]{\small $t$};
\draw \halfsinewave{1.8}{0.08}{-2.2}{0.25};
\draw \halfsinewave{1.1}{0.08}{-2.2}{0.25};
\draw[ultra thick,-,red!80!black] (1.59,-2.2) -- (1.79,-2.2)
\draw[->](4.5,-2.2) -- (3,-2.2) node[anchor=north]{\small $t$};
\draw[->] (4.3,-2.4) -- (4.3,-1.7) node[anchor=east]{\small $a(t)$};
\end{tikzpicture}
}
}&
\subfloat[ ]{\label{fig:system_diagram_attack}
\resizebox{0.3\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[very thick,->] (-1.8,-0.2) -- (-1.1,-0.2);
\node at (-1.5,0) {$u(t)$};
\draw[very thick,->] (-1.1,-1.6) -- (-1.8,-1.6);
\node at (-1.5,-1.3) {$y(t)$};
\node at (-0.3,-0.8) {\includegraphics[width=.1\textwidth]{activesensor}};
\node at (3.8,-0.5) {\includegraphics[width=.1\textwidth]{environment}};
\draw[very thick,->] (0.7,0) -- (2.5,-0.7);
\draw[->] (1,0) -- (2.5,0) node[anchor=north]{\small $t$}
\draw[->] (1.2,-0.2) -- (1.2,0.7) node[anchor=west]{\small $\mathcal{B}(t)$};
\draw[-] (1.2, 0.45) -- (1.7, 0.45);
\draw[-] (1.7, 0.45) -- (1.7, 0);
\draw[ultra thick,-,red!80!black] (1.7,0) -- (1.9,0)
\draw[-] (1.9, 0.45) -- (1.9, 0);
\draw[-] (1.9, 0.45) -- (2.45, 0.45);
\draw[very thick,->] (2.5,-1.1) -- (0.7,-1.8);
\draw[->](2.5,-2.2) -- (1,-2.2) node[anchor=north]{\small $t$};
\draw \attackwave{1.8}{0.027}{-2.2}{0.15}{0.03};
\draw \attackwave{1.1}{0.027}{-2.2}{0.15}{0.03};
\draw[ultra thick,-,red!80!black] (1.59,-2.2) sin (1.65,-2.30) cos (1.70,-2.2) sin (1.75,-2.10) cos (1.80,-2.2);
\draw[->](4.5,-2.2) -- (3,-2.2) node[anchor=north]{\small $t$};
\draw[->] (4.3,-2.4) -- (4.3,-1.7) node[anchor=east]{\small $a(t)$};
\draw \sinewave{3.2}{0.04}{-2.2}{0.1};
\draw \sinewave{3.68}{0.04}{-2.2}{0.1};
\end{tikzpicture}
}
}
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{\label{fig:system_diagram}An illustration of the PyCRA architecture and attack detection scheme: (a) During normal operation, the active sensor generates a signal $\mathcal{A}(t)$. This signal passes through environmental dynamics and is reflected back to the sensor as $y(t)$; (b) Using the proposed PyCRA scheme, the sensor generates a modulated signal $\mathcal{B}(t)$. If there is no attack present, the reflected signal diminishes if the active sensor's actuator is driven to zero; (c) Using the proposed PyCRA scheme while the sensor is under attack (by signal $a(t)$), a malicious signal is detected during the period when the actuator is disabled.}
\vspace{-3mm}
\end{figure*}
PyCRA exploits this ``passivity'' in order to facilitate the detection of attacks. Without PyCRA, an active sensor's actuator would probe the measured entity in a normal fashion using a deterministic signal denoted by $\mathcal{A}(t)$. We embed in this signal a physical challenge through pseudo-random binary modulation of the form:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{B}(t) = u(t)\mathcal{A}(t), ~~~u(t) \in \{0,1\}
\label{eq:probe}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $u(t)$ is the binary modulation term and $\mathcal{B}(t)$ is the modulated output of the actuator. The output of the active sensor is denoted by $y(t)$ as shown in Figure \ref{fig:system_diagram}. In the absence of an attacker and from the passivity of the measured entity, setting $u(t) = 0$ (and consequently $\mathcal{B}(t) = 0$) at time $t_{challenge}$ will cause $y(t)$ to go to zero.
Potential attackers must actively emit a signal $a(t)$ to overpower or mask $y(t)$ (Goals G2--G3). A na\"ive attacker might continue to emit this signal even when $\mathcal{B}(t) = 0$ as shown in Figure \ref{fig:system_diagram_attack}. In this case, the attack can be easily detected, since any nonzero $y(t)$ while $u(t) = 0$ can be attributed to the existence of an attacker.
More advanced attackers might attempt to conceal their attacks when they sense the absence of $\mathcal{B}(t)$ as in Goal G1. Due to Assumption A3, an attacker could drive $a(t)$ to zero only after a delay of $\tau_{attack}$, where $\tau_{attack} \ge \tau_{physical \; limit} > 0$ is the unavoidable physical delay inherent in the attacker's hardware. Therefore, the mechanism described above can still detect the presence of an attack within this unavoidable time delay. Furthermore, an attacker cannot learn and compensate for this inherent delay preemptively due to the randomness of the modulation term $u(t)$. Again, any nonzero $y(t)$ sensed while $u(t) = 0$ can be attributed to the existence of an attacker. The simple PyCRA attack detector can be summarized as follows:\\
{\textbf{[Step 1]} Select a random time, $t_{challenge}$}\\
{\textbf{[Step 2]} Issue a physical challenge by setting $u(t_{challenge}) = 0$ }\\
{\textbf{[Step 3]} If $y(t_{challenge}) > 0$, declare an attack}\\
Note that the previous process needs to happen within small amount of time (e.g., in the order of milliseconds) such that it does not affect the normal operation of the system.
\subsection{$\chi^2$ PyCRA Attack Detector}
As with the attacker, the actuator used by the active sensor itself suffers from physical delays. This means that when PyCRA issues a physical challenge, the actuator output does not transition immediately. Apparently, if the physical delay in the active sensor is greater than $\tau_{attack}$, then an adversary can conceal his signal. To counter this, PyCRA constructs a mathematical model for the sensor that is used---in real time---to predict and eliminate the effects of the active sensor's physics. By calculating the residual between the expected output and the measured output, PyCRA can still detect the existence of an attack. The details of this procedure along with an experimental example are the subject of this subsection.
\subsubsection{Obtaining the Sensor Model}
To compensate for the actuator dynamics, we first need to acquire an accurate model that captures the underlying physics of the active sensor. Below we model the active sensor using the generic nonlinear state update of the form:
\begin{align}
x(t+1) &= f(x(t), u(t)) + w(t) \label{eq:sys1}\\
y(t) &= h(x(t)) + v(t) \label{eq:sys2}
\end{align}
\noindent where $x(t) \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n}$ is the active sensor state at time $t \in {\mathbb{N}}_0$ (e.g., the electrical current and voltages inside the sensor at time $t$), $u(t) \in {\mathbb{R}}$ is the modulation input to the sensor, the function \mbox{$f:{\mathbb{R}}^{n} \times {\mathbb{R}} \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}^{n}$} is a model describing how the physical quantities of the sensor evolve over time, and the function $h:{\mathbb{R}}^{n} \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}$ models the sensor measurement physics. Such models can be either derived from first principles \cite{FradenBook,brauer2006magnetic,grimes2006encyclopedia} or through experimental studies \cite{ljung1998system,Landaue_Book}.
Additionally, these models are used to design the sensors themselves and are typically known to the sensor manufacturers.
Finally, since no mathematical model can capture the true system behavior exactly, the term $w(t) \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n}$ represents the mismatch between the true sensor and the mathematical model while $v(t)$ models the noise in the sensor measurements.
\subsubsection{$\chi^2$ Detector}
\label{sec:sub:ch2detector}
We use the dynamical model of the sensor (Equations ~\eqref{eq:sys1} and~\eqref{eq:sys2}) in designing a $\chi^2$ detector to detect the existence of an attacker. $\chi^2$ detectors appear in the literature of automatic control, where they are used in designing fault tolerant systems \cite{MiroslavCDC,Mehra1971637,Willsky1976601}. The $\chi^2$ detector works as follows:\\
\textbf{[Step 1]} Select a random time, $t_{challenge}$.\\
\textbf{[Step 2]} Issue a physical challenge by entering the silent phase at time $t_{challenge}$.\\
\textbf{[Step 3] Residual Calculation:}
Here we use Equations ~\eqref{eq:sys1}~and~\eqref{eq:sys2} to calculate an estimate for the current sensor state $\hat{x}(t)$ and the predicted output $\hat{y}(t) = h(\hat{x}(t))$. This operation is initiated at $t_{challenge}$ when $u(t)$ transitions to 0---the actuator ``silence time''---and terminates once $u(t)$ transitions back to one, signaling the end of actuator ``silence.''
The model represented by Equations ~\eqref{eq:sys1} and \eqref{eq:sys2} describes the output of the sensor when the attack is equal to zero. Therefore, the residual{\footnote{The name of the Chi-squared ($\chi^2$) detector follows from the fact that, in the case of no attack, the residual $z(t)$ is a Gaussian random variable, and hence its square $g(t)$ is a $\chi^2$ distributed random variable.}} between the measured output and the predicted output, $z(t) = y(t) - \hat{y}(t)$, corresponds to both the attack signal as well as the environmental dynamics during the time interval before $u(t)$ drops to 0.
For each segment of length $T$ where $u(t) = 0$, we calculate the norm of the residual $z(t)$ as:
\begin{equation}
g(t) = \frac{1}{T}\sum_{\tau = t - T+1}^{t} z^2(\tau)
\label{eq:residual}
\end{equation}
\textbf{[Step 4] Detection Alarm:} Once calculated, we compare the $\chi^2$ residual $g(t)$ against a pre-computed alarm threshold $\alpha$. This alarm threshold is chosen based on the noise $v(t)$. Whenever the condition $g(t) > \alpha$ is satisfied, the sensor declares that an attacker has been detected.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
{
\begin{tabular}{c|c}
\subfloat[Attack signal]{\label{fig:pycra_out}
\includegraphics[width=0.41\columnwidth]{Figure_attack.pdf}}&
\subfloat[Sensor output]{\label{fig:pycra_out}
\includegraphics[width=0.41\columnwidth]{Figure_output.pdf}}\\\hline
\subfloat[Residual = $\vert$ output - expected $\vert$]{\label{fig:pycra_residual}
\includegraphics[width=0.41\columnwidth]{Figure_residual.pdf}}&
\subfloat[Expected sensor output per sensor model]{\label{fig:pycra_response}
\includegraphics[width=0.41\columnwidth]{Figure_response.pdf}}
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{\label{fig:pycra}Example showing attacker and sensor dynamics along with attack detection: (a) A smart attacker is spoofing the sensor. At time $t = 5ms$, PyCRA issues a challenge by halting its sensing actuator ($u(t) = 0$). Accordingly, the smart attacker stops his attack signal as well. However, due to his physical delay, the attack signal takes 2 ms to reach zero. On the right, (b) shows that the sensor itself suffers from physical delays (15x slower than the attacker delay!), transitioning to zero after $35 ms$. However, due to knowledge of the sensor model shown in (d), we are able to remove the effect of the sensor's physical delay and discover that the sensor was under attack due to the high residual at time $t = 5$ ms (c). }
\vspace{-3mm}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Experimental Example}
To better illustrate the operation of the proposed $\chi^2$ detector, consider the example shown in Figure \ref{fig:pycra}. In this example, an advanced attacker is spoofing a sensor. The attacker is aware of the existence of the PyCRA security scheme and tries to conceal the attacking signal. Recall that PyCRA issues physical challenges at random times (Equation \ref{eq:probe}). Therefore, the attacker is monitoring the output of the active sensor's actuator, $\mathcal{B}(t)$ (Figure \ref{fig:pycra} (b)) and once it detects that the sensor output is decaying at time = 5ms (as a consequence of switching the actuator from On to Off), the attacker immediately switches off his device. However, due to the physical delay in his device (Assumption A3), it takes him 2 ms for his signal to completely disappear (Figure \ref{fig:pycra} (a)). In this particular example, we designed the attacker's hardware to be 15x faster than the sensor itself. This can be seen by comparing the decay of the sensor signal (Figure \ref{fig:pycra} (b)) with that of the attacker (Figure \ref{fig:pycra} (a)).
To overcome the slow dynamics of the sensor, PyCRA uses the sensor model (Equations \ref{eq:sys1} and \ref{eq:sys2}) to estimate the output of the sensor $\hat{y}$ after the challenge is issued. This estimation is shown in Figure \ref{fig:pycra} (d). At each point in time, PyCRA calculates the residual error (Equation \ref{eq:residual}) as shown in Figure \ref{fig:pycra}(c). It is apparent from Figure \ref{fig:pycra}(c) that, because of the physical delays at the attacker, the residual exceeds the alarm threshold $\alpha$ when the physical challenge is issued at time = 5ms indicating the detection of an attack. The case studies shown in Sections \ref{sec:absattacks}-\ref{sec:resultsRFID} demonstrate in greater detail the effectiveness of this detection mechanism for several example applications and various attacks.
\section{Attack Resilience and Recovery using PyCRA} \label{sec:ext_resilience}
In the previous section, we discussed how to use physical challenge-response authentication to detect the existence of an attacker. While the proposed detection scheme can be used for a variety of sensor types, the same technique can be potentially extended to other applications as well.
In this section, we show how the PyCRA detection scheme can be applied to providing attack resilience against attack types T2 and T3. That is, our objective is not just to detect the existence of the attack, but also to recover (or estimate) the original sensor measurements.
Recall that PyCRA is based on the idea that by comparing the measured sensor signal with the predictive models described in Equations \eqref{eq:sys1} and \eqref{eq:sys2} we arrive at the residual $z(t)$. This residual was used for detecting the existence of attacks. However, this same residual effectively provides an estimate of the attacker signal $a(t)$. In the case of a jamming attack or similar ``dumb'' attacks, $a(t)$ may be a non-structured, noisy signal.
However, as far as the spoofing attacks T2 and T3 (described in Section~\ref{sec:attack_types}) are concerned, the goal of the attacker is to strategically mask the true signal and/or inject a malicious signal (Goals G2-G3). In these cases, $a(t)$ must be structured in a certain domain for short periods of time and it has to follow the same structure of the original sensor measurements. For example, if the original sensor measurements consists of slowly varying sinusoids, then for a spoofing attack to be successful, the attack signal $a(t)$ must follow the same structure and needs to consist as well of slowly varying sinusoids (with a different frequencies in order to spoof the sensor). In this case, it may be possible to build a model for $a(t)$ from $z(t)$ in order to subtract its effects from the measured signal $y(t)$ and thus counteract the attack as we discuss in the next subsections.
\subsection{Simple PyCRA Resilient Estimator}
\label{sec:res_simple}
For sake of simplicity, we illustrate the concept of PyCRA resilient estimator to the case when the original sensor measurement and the attack as well is sinusoidal wave dominated by a single frequency component. Such structure appears in many magnetic and optical encoders used in many industrial and automotive applications to measure the rotational speed of moving objects.
Given the previous signal structure, if we consider the frequency domain representation of the measured signal over a window, we expect to see the energy of the signal concentrated at one frequency corresponding to the tone ring frequency. In other words, the magnitude of the frequency domain representation of the signal consists of only one ``peak''.
However, in the existence of an attacker, and using Fourier analysis, we can reasonably expect to observe energy concentrated at multiple frequencies and hence more than one peak (Figure \ref{fig:twopeaks}). Only one of those peaks corresponds to the frequency of the tone ring while all other energy corresponds to the attacker signal. Therefore, the sensor needs to be able to distinguish between the correct tone ring frequency and the attacker frequency.
We again model the resilience problem as an authentication problem, building on top of the PyCRA attack detection scheme. In this case, the multiple peaks in the frequency domain correspond to multiple parties claiming to be the tone ring. If the sensor is able to successfully authenticate the identity of these peaks, it will remain resilient to such attacks.
Returning to the physical challenge-response authentication for resilience, we exploit once more the ``passivity'' property of the measured entity but now from the perspective of the frequency domain. It follows from the ``passivity'' of the tone ring that the energy at the frequency corresponding to the tone ring shall decay in correspondence to the physical model directly. Hence, for an attacker to be stealthy (Goal G1), he or she is obliged to control this energy such that it behaves in a manner consistent with the natural response of the tone ring.
To further explain the proposed mechanism, consider the example shown in Figure \ref{fig:timelapse}. Figure \ref{fig:timelapse} shows the frequency domain representation of the errors between the measured sensor values and the expected sensor values over a window of length $N$, immediately after a challenge is issued ($u(t)$ transitions to 0). The signal energy is concentrated at two frequencies. The first one at 50 Hz corresponds to the original signal while the other one at 120 Hz corresponds to the attack signal. The sensor does not know \emph{a priori} which frequency corresponds to the measured entity and therefore needs to authenticate the identity of these two frequencies. Since the measured entity is passive, the energy located at the frequency corresponding to the measured entity shall be zero during the silence time. Immediately after the sensor enters a silent period, the sensor starts to calculate the error between the expected natural response of the tone ring and the measured output. As shown in Figure \ref{fig:timelapse}, at the beginning of the silence time the error is equal to zero at both candidate frequencies. Even if the attacker can detect the silence time immediately and halt his attack, the dynamics of the actuator hardware used by the attacker will take some time to subside due to the un-mutable physical delay (Assumption A3). Within this time, the energy of the attack signal still exists in the measured signal (Assumption AR2). Therefore, as time continues, the error in the energy starts to accumulate in the frequencies corresponding to the attacker signal.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
{
\begin{tabular}{c||c|c|c}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:twopeaks}
\resizebox{0.21\textwidth}{!}{\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[xlabel={Freq(Hz)},ylabel={Amplitude},xmin=30, xmax=150, ymax = 220,axis lines={center},]
\addplot coordinates {(48,0) (50,20) (51,200) (52,50) (55,0)};
\addplot coordinates{(117,0) (120,80) (121,150) (122,30) (125,0)};
\legend{$Tone Ring$,$Attack$}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture} }
} &
\subfloat[ ]{\label{fig:timelapse2}
\resizebox{0.21\textwidth}{!}{\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[xlabel={Freq(Hz)},ylabel={Residual $G_k$},xmin=30, xmax=150,ymax = 120,axis lines={center},]
\addplot coordinates {(48,0) (50,0) (51,0) (52,0) (55,0)};
\addplot coordinates{(117,0) (120,0) (121,0) (122,0) (125,0)};
\legend{$Tone Ring$,$Attack$}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture} }
}&
\subfloat[ ]{\label{fig:timelapse2}
\resizebox{0.21\textwidth}{!}{\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[xlabel={Freq(Hz)},ylabel={Residual $G_k$},xmin=30, xmax=150,ymax = 120,axis lines={center},]
\addplot coordinates {(48,0) (50,0) (51,0) (52,0) (55,0)};
\addplot coordinates{(117,0) (120,12) (121,25) (122,8) (125,0)};
\legend{$Tone Ring$,$Attack$}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture} }
}&
\subfloat[ ]{\label{fig:timelapse2}
\resizebox{0.21\textwidth}{!}{\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[xlabel={Freq(Hz)},ylabel={Residual $G_k$},xmin=30, xmax=150,ymax = 120,axis lines={center},]
\addplot coordinates {(48,0) (50,0) (51,0) (52,0) (55,0)};
\addplot coordinates{(117,0) (120,53) (121,67) (122,35) (125,0)};
\legend{$Tone Ring$,$Attack$}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture} }
}
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{\label{fig:timelapse} (a) The amplitude of the $N$-point DFT representation of the measured signal. Energy is concentrated around two frequencies, one of which corresponds to the original tone ring frequency while the other corresponds to the attack signal. (b-d) An illustration of the frequency-domain error for an attacked signal evolving over time: (b) shows the errors for all frequency components at the beginning of a ``silent'' period, where the errors are initialized at 0; (c) shows the errors after some time, showing the increase in error on the attacked frequencies; (d) shows that the error of attacked frequencies continues to increase until the silence period ends or the attack ceases. }
\vspace{-3mm}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{$\chi^2$ PyCRA Resilient Estimator}
\label{sec:sub:resilient_chi2}
We can extend this simple resilience estimator to a more formal $\chi^2$ estimator as was done for the attack detection scheme. Because the resilience estimator operates in the frequency domain, we need to extend the model in Section \ref{sec:pycra} to the frequency domain as well. In particular, we use the recursive formulation of the Discrete Fourier Transform (DFT) which updates the previously calculated $N$-point DFT with the information of the most recently measured signal. The recursive DFT takes the following form:
\begin{align}
Y_k(t+1) &= e^{(j2\pi k/N)} Y_k(t) + e^{(-j2\pi k(N-1)/N)} y(t) - e^{(j2\pi k/N)} y(t-N)
\end{align}
where $Y_k(t) \in {\mathbb C}^N$ is the $k$th component of the $N$-point DFT of the sensor output $y(t)$ at time $t\in {\mathbb{N}}_0$.
Similar to the detection scheme described in Section \ref{sec:sub:ch2detector}, we design a $\chi^2$ detector operating in the frequency domain in order to detect which frequency-concentrated energy peaks have been attacked. The $\chi^2$ detector uses the sensor model along with the recursive DFT formula to predict the natural response of the tone gear (in the case of no attack) denoted $\widehat{Y}_k(t)$. We define the $\chi^2$ residual in the frequency domain as $Z_k(t) = \vert Y_k(t) \vert - \vert \widehat{Y}_k(t) \vert$. At the end of the silence time, we calculate the residual over the window of length $T$ as:
\begin{align}
G_k(t) = \frac{1}{T}\sum_{\tau=t-T+a}^{t} Z_k^2(\tau)
\end{align}
Finally, we set an alarm trigger $\beta$ against which we compare the value of $G_k(t)$ for all $k$ frequency components. Whenever the condition $G_k(t) > \beta$ is satisfied, we declare that the frequency $k$ is under attack. Again, the value of $\beta$ must be selected based on the noise information embedded in the model.
\section{Detecting Eavesdropping Attacks using PyCRA}
\label{sec:sniffing}
The basic operation of any sensor (active or passive) requires transduction of energy from some medium (heat, acoustic, optical, magnetic, etc.) to an electrical signal. From the Law of Conservation of Energy, this transduction and therefore the act of sensing itself necessarily removes energy from the system, effectively modifying the very signal being measured. In the case of active sensors, this affects the energy emitted by the actuator and results in an attenuated signal observed by the sensor. This effect is the basis for such technologies as RFID and other backscatter communication, where the attenuation is changed over time as a method for encoding data. Therefore, if the following condition is satisfied:
\begin{itemize}
\item[\textbf{AD1}] The interaction between the eavesdropping sensor and the measured signal is significant enough to cause the measured signal to deviate from the model.
\end{itemize}
then, PyCRA can be used as a detection mechanism for passive sniffing attacks, even though there is no malicious \emph{signal}---i.e., no external source of energy in the system as shown in Section \ref{sec:resultsRFID}.
\section{The Confusion Phase: Another Fundamental Limitation}
\label{sec:theory}
Every physical signal is subject to random perturbations i.e., noise. A fundamental characteristic of this noise is the \emph{signal to noise ratio} (SNR). This SNR determines the ability of any sensor to distinguish between changes in a signal of interest and the random noise. As with the physical delay $\tau_{attack}$, this SNR is fundamental, and it is never equal to zero. As a result, if a signal is within the noise floor (less than the noise amplitude), it is fundamentally impossible to detect any change in the physical signal~\cite{VeerValliGQPD2005}. The purpose of this section is to show how PyCRA can use this fundamental and immutable constraint on how quickly an attacker can detect changes in the physical challenge in order to introduce additional delay on the capability of the attacker to respond to physical attacks and hence
enhance both the detection as well as the resilience performance.
We refer to this strategy as the \emph{confusion phase}.
\subsection{Confusion Phase}
We begin by presenting the sequence of actions performed by PyCRA, as depicted by Figure \ref{fig:raw_signal}.\\
\textbf{[Step 1]} In steady state PyCRA actuates a constant signal of amplitude $A$.\\
\textbf{[Step 2]} At a random time $t_{challenge}$
PyCRA issues a physical challenge by entering the silent phase.\\
\textbf{[Step 3]} PyCRA draws at random the silent period length $\Gamma$, according to a probability function with a certain decay rate.\\
\textbf{[Step 4]} At the end of the silent period PyCRA turns the signal back on; however, this time the amplitude of the constant magnetic field is set to $\frac{A}{\beta}$, where $\beta > 1$.\\
\textbf{[Step 5]} After a random time $t_{confusion}$ PyCRA increases the amplitude of the magnetic field back to $A$.
Recall that one of the attacker's goals is to remain stealthy (Goal G1). If the attacker is unable to instantaneously detect the changes in the physical challenge, he or she will reveal themselves. Due to the existence of noise, no attacker---whether using software or hardware to counter the physical challenges issued by PyCRA---can instantaneously detect the change in the physical challenge. That is, there always exists a non-zero probability of the attacker missing the changes in the physical challenge. In this section, we detail a theoretical result that explains the relationship between the amplitude of the physical challenge within the confusion phase and the probability that the attacker will fail to detect changes in the physical challenge.
In the remainder of this section, we analyze---from the attacker's point of view---how this sequence of actions guarantees with a very high probability a finite delay on the attacker side. This delay is independent of the hardware or software employed by the attacker. Hence, the length of the delay can be adjusted to fit the response time of PyCRA such that it can detect the attack with a very high probability. Furthermore, introducing a delay can actually improve the system's ability to recover the system from the attack as discussed in Section~\ref{sec:ext_resilience}.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering{
\includegraphics[width=0.65\columnwidth]{raw_waveforms.pdf}
}
\caption{\label{fig:raw_signal}Sensor actuator output (top) with confusion and silence phases and the corresponding raw signal (bottom) with an attack.}
\vspace{-4mm}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Bayesian Quickest Change Point Detection: Basic Definitions and Results}\label{subsec:QCPDBasicDefinitionResults}
In this subsection we investigate from the attacker's point of view the fundamental limitations on its ability to detect when the physical challenge has been abandoned so that he can start re-attacking the sensor. Towards this end, we consider the Bayesian quickest change detection problem~\cite{VeerValliGQPD2005} which shows that SNR introduces immutable constraints on the capability of the attacker to perform such detections.
In the Bayesian quickest change detection problem~\cite{VeerValliGQPD2005} a sequence of random variables
$X_{1},X_{2},\dots$ which are i.i.d are observed, until a change occurs at an unknown point in time $\Gamma\in\pac{1,2,\dots}$ after which the observations are again i.i.d but according to a different distribution. In other words, we consider the case when $X_{1},\dots,X_{\Gamma-1}$ are drawn at random according to the Probability Distribution Function (PDF) $f_{0}\pa{x}$, whereas $X_{\Gamma},X_{\Gamma+1},\dots$ are drawn according to the PDF $f_{1}\pa{x}$.
The goal is to detect the change with minimal average delay based on the observed data and the change point distribution, subject to a constraint of false alarm probability. Therefore, a procedure decides whether a change has occurred at point $\tau$ based on the observations $X_{1},\dots,X_{\tau}$. For simplicity we denote by:
{\small\beq{eq:BD_taudefinition}{\tau\pa{X_{1},\dots,X_{\tau}}}}
the function determining whether a change occurred at time $\tau$ based on observing the data $X_{1},\dots,X_{\tau}$. A false alarm event occurs if one falsely detects a change and hence reports a time $\tau$ that is less than $\Gamma$ (i.e., $\tau < \Gamma$). Recall that the attacker's goal is to ensure that its attack signal is concealed.
Therefore, a false alarm (for the attacker) happens when the attacker erroneously concludes that the sensor is no longer in the silent or confusion phase. In this case the attacker could reveal itself by injecting its signal. On the other hand if the attacker detects the change with a delay, then for this period the active sensor obtains uncorrupted measurements.
These uncorrupted measurements can be used then to enhance the detection and resilience of PyCRA as we show in Section~\ref{sec:usingDelay}. For the remainder of this section,
we use the following notation to denote the detection delay at the attacker side:
{\small\beq{eq:BDdelaydef}{\pa{\tau-\Gamma}^{+}}}
where $\pa{x}^{+}$ equals $x$ for $x>0$ and zero otherwise. Our objective is to study this detection delay. In particular, we will show that because of the SNR this delay always exists and never equals to zero. Moreover, we show how PyCRA can increase this detection delay to enhance its performance.
Mathematically, the quickest change detection problem is formalized as the following minimization problem:
{\small\beq{eq:BDBQCDProblem}{\min_{\tau\in\Delta\pa{\alpha}}E\pac{\pa{\tau-\Gamma}^{+}}}}
subject to:
{\small\beq{eq:BDFAProblem}{P_{FA}=Pr\pa{\tau<\Gamma}\le\alpha\quad \forall\tau\in\Delta\pa{\alpha}}}
In other words, the Bayesian quickest change detection problem finds the minimal expectation of the detection delay under the constraint that the false alarm probability $P_{FA}$ is equal to or smaller than $\alpha$.
\subsection{Characterizing the Asymptotic Delay of the Attacker}\label{subec:AsymptoticDelayAttacker}
In this subsection, we argue that if the attacker would like to have a small false alarm rate, then it will suffer from high detection delay. Intuitively, if the attacker wants to reduce probability of detection (and hence selects a small false alarm probability), then the attacker needs a longer delay to average over the ambient random noise. This intuition is captured by the following result.
\begin{theorem}\label{th:DelayGuarantee}
\footnote{Although we present the proof for the case of AWGN, the equality holds for any sequence of random variables that are drawn i.i.d according to $f_{0}\pa{x}$, $f_{1}\pa{x}$ for which there exist $g_{1}\pa{\alpha}$, $g_{2}\pa{\alpha}$ such that:
(1) $\lim_{\alpha\to 0}\ln\pa{f_{1}\pa{g_{1}\pa{\alpha}}}/\ln\pa{1/\alpha}= 1$; (2) $\lim_{\alpha\to 0}\ln\pa{\frac{f_{1}\pa{g_{1}\pa{\alpha}}}{f_{0}\pa{g_{1}\pa{\alpha}}}}/\ln\pa{1/\alpha}=0$; (3) $\lim_{\alpha\to 0}\ln\pa{g_{2}\pa{\alpha}}/\ln\pa{1/\alpha}=0$; (4) $\lim_{\alpha\to 0}\ln\pa{Pr\pa{\Gamma=g_{2}\pa{\alpha}}}/\ln\pa{1/\alpha}\ge 1$.
In a nutshell $g_{2}\pa{\alpha}$ allows to consider a finite number of elements, that scales with $\alpha$, whereas $g_{1}\pa{\alpha}$ enables to show that the elements converge uniformly over as $\alpha$ decreases.}
Consider an attacker attempting to detect changes in a physical challenge signal, subject to a false alarm probability $\alpha$.
For any strategy the attacker chooses, and because of the signal to noise ratio (SNR) which exists for any sensor, the probability of the attacker having a constant detection delay $\tau > 0$ is bounded away from zero. Moreover, when $\alpha\ll 1$ the probability of a delay smaller than any constant $K$ fulfills:
\beq{eq:ProbDelaySmallAlpha}{Pr\pa{\Gamma\le\tau\le \Gamma + K}\dot{=}\alpha}
for any $\tau\in\Delta\pa{\alpha}$ (where $g\pa{\alpha}\dot{=}f\pa{\alpha}$ when $\lim_{\alpha\to 0}\frac{\ln\pa{g\pa{\alpha}}}{\ln\pa{\alpha}}=\frac{\ln\pa{f\pa{\alpha}}}{\ln\pa{\alpha}}$).
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The full proof is in Appendix \ref{sec:proofodDetDelayDecay}.
\end{proof}
In other words, if an attacker wants to detect the end of the physical challenge within one time step (e.g., $K = 1$) while the false alarm probability is small (e.g, $\alpha = 10^{-9}$), then Theorem~\ref{th:DelayGuarantee} guarantees that the probability of the attacker achieving this objective is equal to $10^{-9}$. The higher false alarm probability the attacker chooses, the higher the probability of it to being able to detect the end of the physical challenge period. Therefore, Theorem~\ref{th:DelayGuarantee} gives the attacker tradeoff between false alarm and detection delay.
Next, we show that due to the fact that PyCRA performs multiple physical-challenges over time, the attacker has to set his false alarm probability to a small number in order to avoid being detected over time.
\begin{cor}\label{cor:multipleChRe}
Assume the attacker has a false alarm probability $\alpha$ and that PyCRA performs $K$ physical-challenges over time. The probability of detecting the attack is larger than or equal to $1-\pa{1-\alpha}^{K}$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
The probability of detecting an attack at each instance is lower bounded by the misdetection probability. Therefore, the probability of detecting an attack at the $l$th physical challenge is lower bounded by the geometrical distribution $\pa{1-\alpha}^{l-1}\cdot \alpha$. Hence, the probability of detecting an attack after $K$ physical-challenges is lower bounded by
$\sum_{i=0}^{K-1}\alpha\cdot \pa{1-\alpha}^{i}=1-\pa{1-\alpha}^{K}.$
\end{proof}
From Corollary \ref{cor:multipleChRe} we get for $\alpha\ll 1$ and $K\cdot\alpha\ll 1$ that the probability of detecting an attack after $K$ physical-challenges is larger than approximately $K\cdot \alpha$.
Therefore, in order to maintain a small detection probability over time, the misdetection probability has to fulfill $\alpha\ll 1$.
\subsection{Using Delay for Detection and Estimation} \label{sec:usingDelay}
In this subsection, we present a method to increase the detection delay induced by the confusion phase, as well as the interplay between increasing the detection delay and the capability of PyCRA to perform the resilience estimation discussed in Section~\ref{sec:ext_resilience}. We begin by proving a theorem showing that by decreasing the
actuated amplitude (in the confusion phase) by a factor of $\beta>1$, the detection delay on the attacker side $K$ can be increased by a factor of $\beta^{2}$, with the same probabilistic guarantee for the delay. Then we show that if PyCRA uses a Maximum Likelihood (ML) estimation procedure to perform the resilient estimation, then increasing the detection delay on the attacker side assists in enhancing the resilience of PyCRA.
We start by proving the following theorem showing the relation between decreasing the amplitude of the actuated signal and the probability of a constant delay.
\begin{theorem}\label{th:ExtendedDelay}
Consider an attacker attempting to detect changes in a physical challenge signal with misdetection probability $\alpha$.
For any strategy the attacker chooses, and because of the SNR exists at any sensor, the probability of the attacker having a constant detection delay $\tau > 0$ is bounded away from zero,
i.e., with high probability the attacker will detect a change and turn off his signal only after time $T$ after the beginning of the confusion period.
In addition, decreasing the amplitude of the signal emitted by the active sensor during the confusion period by a factor of $\beta >1$ increases the delay $\tau$ by a factor of $\beta^{2}$.
Mathematically, the following equality holds:
{\small\beqn{}{Pr\pa{\Gamma\le\tau\le \Gamma + \beta^{2}\cdot K|\frac{A}{\beta},\beta^{2}T}=Pr\pa{\Gamma\le\tau\le \Gamma + K|A,T}}}
where $Pr\pa{\Gamma\le\tau\le \Gamma + K|A,T}$ is the probability of a delay of length smaller than or equal to $K$ when actuating with an amplitude $A$ and drawing the delay over a grid with a period time $T$, and $Pr\pa{\Gamma\le\tau\le \Gamma + \beta^{2}\cdot K|\frac{A}{\beta},\beta^{2}T}$ is the probability of a delay of length smaller than or equal to $\beta^{2} K$ when actuating with an amplitude $\frac{A}{\beta}$ and drawing the delay over a grid with a period time $\beta^{2} T$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Actuating with an amplitude $\frac{A}{\beta}$, changing the period time to $\beta^{2} T$, and projecting the received random process over this period time and then normalizing the projection by a factor of $\beta$ leads to the same pdf as the one that corresponds to actuating with an amplitude $A$, having a period time $T$, and projecting the received signal over this period time.
\end{proof}
Theorem \ref{th:ExtendedDelay} shows that the response time of the attacker and the delay can be decoupled. Furthermore, the delay can be adjusted to suit the response time of PyCRA.
We now discuss how increasing the delay affects the ML estimation and hence the resilience performance of PyCRA. As discussed in Section~\ref{sec:ext_resilience}, we consider the case when both the true sensor measurements as well as the attack signal have the same structure. Without loss of generality, we can parameterize this signal structure by a parameter $\theta$ and therefore the signal space can be written as $\phi_{\theta}\pa{t}$. For instance, if the signal structure is dominated by sinusoidal functions, then $\phi_{\theta}\pa{t}$ can be written as$\phi_{\theta}\pa{t}=\sin \pa{\theta t}$. Similarly, if the signal structure could be a rectangular function with a period time $\frac{1}{\theta}$ and so on. In general, these functions are asymptotically uncorrelated and hence:
{\small\beq{eq:CorrletaionofwheelReflection}{
\lim_{T\to \infty}\frac{1}{T}\int_{0}^{T}\phi_{\theta}\pa{t}\cdot \phi_{\theta^{'}}\pa{t} dt=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}1 & \theta=\theta^{'}\\
0 & \theta\neq\theta^{'}
\end{array}\right.}}
where it can be assumed for $\theta\neq\theta^{'}$ that the correlation decreases monotonically.
Due to the AWGN, the signal from which PyCRA estimates the true signal measurement:
{\small\beqn{}{
y\pa{t}=\phi_{\bar{\theta}}\pa{t}+n\pa{t}\qquad 0\le t\le T_{Delay}
}}
where $n\pa{t}$ is the AWGN. In this case the ML estimation of $\bar{\theta}$ is:
{\small\beq{}{
\widehat{\theta}=\arg\max_{\theta} Re\pa{\int_{0}^{T_{Delay}} y^{\dagger}\pa{t}\cdot \phi_{\theta}\pa{t}dt}-\int_{0}^{T_{Delay}}|\phi_{\theta}\pa{t}|^{2}dt.
}}
Considering the projection of $y\pa{t}$ on $\phi_{\bar{\theta}}\pa{t}$ leads to the same $\mathsf{SNR}$ when increasing the delay by a factor of $\beta^{2}$ while decreasing the actuated amplitude by a factor of $\beta$ (assuming $\int_{0}^{T_{Delay}}|\phi_{\theta}\pa{t}|^{2}dt$ increases by a factor of $\beta^{2}$ with the delay, which is a reasonable assumption). On the other hand, based on (\ref{eq:CorrletaionofwheelReflection}), we get that the bias resulting from the projection of $y\pa{t}$ on $\phi_{\theta}\pa{t}$ for $\theta\neq\bar{\theta}$ decreases as the delay increases, which is desired for estimation.
In general, increasing the delay might affect the performance of PyCRA while improving the estimation, and decreasing it may lead to a less accurate estimate of the true sensor measurement. Therefore, the delay should be chosen based on the set of reflected functions as well as on the requirements of the system .
Incorporating a few PyCRA challenges together can significantly improve the latter estimation quality, if the signal reflected from the measured entity remains constant across these tests. The later condition can be easily achieved since PyCRA can issue challenges over several orders of magnitude faster compared to the change in the physical signal as discussed in Section~\ref{sec:discussion}.
The next corollary quantifies the improvement as a function of the number of tests.
\begin{cor}
Assume that $N$ PyCRA challenges are incorporated together, and further assume that the signal reflected from the measured entity remains constant across these tests. Also, assume that the period of time between tests is drawn uniformly, and that the maximal period of time between tests is $L\cdot T_{Delay}$. In this case the SNR of the hypothesis incorporating the true sensor measurement , $\bar{\theta}$, increases by a factor of $N$. In addition, when $N \gg 1$ the effect of the bias for $\bar{\theta}\neq \theta$ decreases to:
{\small\beqn{}
{
\int_{0}^{L\cdot T_{Delay}} y^{\dagger}\pa{t}\cdot \phi_{\theta}\pa{t}dt.
}}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
The increase in the SNR of $\bar{\theta}$ is straightforward. When $N\gg 1$ the offset between different correlations spreads uniformly and therefore, effectively, we get correlation over a period of $L\cdot T_{Delay}$ instead of $T_{Delay}$.
\end{proof}
The following sections describe three case studies of the PyCRA security scheme. The first is an active attack detector for magnetic encoder sensors widely used in automobiles and industrial machineries. The second outlines an algorithm for adding attack resilience in magnetic encoder sensors and the properties that make this resilience feasible. The final case study explores a method for detecting \emph{passive} eavesdropping attacks carried out against RFID systems.
\section{Case Study (1): Detecting Active Spoofing Attacks for Magnetic Encoders}
\label{sec:absattacks}
\tikzstyle{block} = [draw, fill=blue!20, rectangle, minimum height=3em, minimum width=6em]
\tikzstyle{sum} = [draw, fill=blue!20, circle, node distance=1cm]
\tikzstyle{input} = [coordinate]
\tikzstyle{output} = [coordinate]
\tikzstyle{pinstyle} = [pin edge={to-,thin,black}]
Magnetic encoders are active sensors used in a wide array of industrial, robotics, aerospace, and automotive applications. The goal of an encoder is to measure the angular velocity or position of a gear or wheel in order to provide feedback to a motor controller.
The operation of these systems depends heavily on the accuracy and timeliness of the individual encoders. This section describes the basic operation of magnetic encoders in particular and the types of attacks that can be mounted against them.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth]{abs_operation.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:abscircuit}Flow diagram for a typical magnetic encoder: The signal begins as a reflected magnetic wave from a gear. This signal is captured by a pick-up coil or Hall Effect sensor, conditioned into a clean square wave, and finally translated into an angular velocity.}
\vspace{-3mm}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Magnetic Encoders}
\label{sec:sub:speedsensors}
Magnetic encoders rely on magnetic variations to measure the angular velocity of a gear or wheel and are often designed to handle dust, mud, rain, and extreme temperatures without failing.
The goal of each encoder is to provide a signal whose frequency corresponds to the speed of a gear. These signals are conditioned and passed to a motor controller unit which detects if any corrective actions need to be taken.
Typical magnetic encoders operate by generating a magnetic field in the presence of a rotating ferromagnetic \emph{tone ring} or \emph{tone wheel}. This ring has a number of teeth on its edge so that the reflected magnetic wave as observed by the encoder varies over time as a (noisy) sinusoidal wave. By measuring the frequency of this reflected signal over time, each sensor and consequently the motor controller is able to infer the angular velocity of any given gear, wheel, or motor as illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:abscircuit}.
Attacks on magnetic encoders have been studied in \cite{YasserABS} in the context of Anti-lock Braking Systems in automotive vehicles. Both simple spoofing [T2] and advanced spoofing [T3] attacks are shown to influence the vehicle stability. In this case study, we show how PyCRA can detect the existence of such attacks.
\subsection{Constructing the PyCRA-secured Magnetic Encoder}
\label{sec:hardware}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
{
\begin{tabular}{c|c}
\subfloat[ ]{\label{fig:secureSensor}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\columnwidth]{Figure_secureSensor.pdf}
}
&
\subfloat[ ]{\label{fig:systemId}
\includegraphics[width=0.445\columnwidth]{systemId.pdf}
}
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{\label{fig:mag_sensor}(a) PyCRA encoder actuator coil, sensor, and gear setup, (b) Validation of the physical model obtained for the secure sensor. The top figure shows the input fed to the validation phase. The middle figure shows the response, and the bottom figure shows the corresponding error.}
\vspace{-3mm}
\end{figure}
Physically, the proposed secure magnetic encoder sensor consists of two main parts: (i) the front-end containing the actuator and pickup coils responsible for both probing the rotating tone ring and measuring the response, and (ii) the processing backend. Figure \ref{fig:secureSensor} shows the front-end of the sensor used in our evaluation. The actuator coil depicted is much larger than would be required in a commercial product, because it consists of a magnetic core and a hand-wound high-gauge wire. The following is an overview of the main blocks of the sensor.
\subsubsection{Actuator Coil}
The main component required for the secure sensor is the actuator coil. In this work, we use an insulated copper wire wrapped around a ferromagnetic core and driven using a power amplifier.
\subsubsection{Pickup and Filtering}
The pickup (measurement) coil is wrapped around the same ferromagnetic core used for the actuator coil. In order to reduce the effect of noise from other EMI sources within the vehicle body, the output of the pickup coil is connected to a differential amplifier with high common-mode rejection. The output of this differential amplifier is connected to the digital processing backend.
Another security concern of the magnetic encoder is the wires connecting the coils to the digital backend. These wires pose a potential vulnerability, as an attacker can cut them and connect his attack module directly. However, such attacks are already accounted for in many systems as addressed in Assumption A1.
\subsubsection{Processing Elements}
The secure sensor requires enough processing power to perform the necessary computations in real-time. The DSP calculations take place on a high power ARM Cortex (M4 STM32F407) processor, which has ample floating point support. We do not consider any power consumption issues in our design.
\subsection{Obtaining the Sensor Model}
\label{sec:systemID}
The dynamics of the sensor (including the actuator, high gain current amplifier, sensors, and the signal conditioning circuit) are identified using standard system identification methods \cite{ljung1998system}. That is, we applied four different pseudo random binary sequences (PRBS) to the system, collected the output, and then applied subspace system identification techniques in order to build models of increasing complexity \cite{ljung1998system}. Finally we used both whiteness tests and correlation tests to assess the quality of the obtained model \cite{Landaue_Book}.
In order to validate the model, we generated a random sequence similar to those used in the real implementation of the sensor. We fed the same input to both the sensor and the model and recorded the error. Figure \ref{fig:systemId} shows the results of this experiment. The results show that the model accuracy depends on whether the input changes from one to zero or from zero to one. This difference in the response reflects the behavior of the high gain current amplifier which has different spikes depending on the changes of the input.
In our case, we are interested only in the case when the sensor enters the ``silence'' time, i.e. $u(t)$ transitions from 1 to 0. In such cases, Figure \ref{fig:systemId} shows that the model is reasonably accurate with an error in the range of $0.005$ Volts.
\subsection{Testbed}
In order to test the PyCRA-secured magnetic encoder, we constructed a testbed consisting of the proposed secure sensor attached to a Mazda Rx7 tone ring. The tone ring is attached to a DC motor which simulates a rotating wheel. An additional coil is added to simulate the effect of an attacker. The attacker coil is also controlled by a high gain amplifier controlled through a real-time xPC Target system connected to MATLAB.
A Mazda RX7 magnetic encoder sensor is also attached to the same tone ring in order to provide ground truth. The output of this sensor is connected to a MAX9926U evaluation kit which includes an interface capable of converting the raw sinusoidal wave into the encoded square wave as shown in Figure \ref{fig:abscircuit}. The output of the proposed secure sensor as well as the output of the MAX9926U is monitored by the same real-time xPC Target for comparison.
\subsection{Calibration against natural variations}
Sensor modeling is usually done in a controlled environment. However, once the sensor is placed in a testbed, multiple natural variations, mechanical asymmetries, and other environmental factors degrade the accuracy of such models.
To account for these variations, we use a simple learning mechanism to estimate the noise level in the measurements and the deviation between the expected outputs (as per the model) and the actual outputs. Once these parameters are learned, we can set the alarm threshold accordingly.
Results can be further improved by considering online identification-and-calibration of the sensor model.
\subsection{Attack Detection Results for Magnetic Encoders}
We begin with a simple spoofing attack [T2] in which an attacker injects a sinusoidal wave of varying frequency. Spoofing attacks of this nature attempt to overpower the true frequency of the system and force the sensor to track the false frequency (mirroring the simplistic spoofing attack in \cite{humphreys:gps}). In this experiment, the original tone ring frequency is fixed at 71 Hz and the frequency of the attacking coil increases linearly from 60 Hz to just over 400 Hz.
As per our attacker model in Section \ref{sec:attacker_model}, we assume that the attacker attempts to conceal his or her presence (Adversarial goal [G1]). This means that the adversary will be able to detect when the actuator coil is turned off and will, after some time $\tau_{attack}$, temporarily halt the attack.
The stealthiness of the attacker necessitates that the PyCRA detection scheme have high accuracy even when the attacker is quick to react. Figure \ref{fig:raw_signal} shows an example of the random PyCRA challenges and the corresponding observed signal both before and after an attack is present. In this case, the adversary quickly disables the attack after the actuator coil transitions from 1 to 0, lagging only by the small delay $\tau_{attack}$, imperceptible in the figure. We evaluated the PyCRA detection scheme across a range of $\tau_{attack}$ values, $\chi^2$ detection thresholds ($\alpha$), and sampling frequencies ($F_s$). Note that in order to simulate an attacker with 0 ms physical delays (which is physically impossible), we gave the attacker access to the random signal generated by PyCRA so that the attacker can start shutting down his actuators \emph{before} PyCRA generates the physical challenge.
In total, we conducted over 30 experiments on our experimental testbed to validate the robustness of the proposed security scheme. The resulting accuracy with $F_s = 10$ kHz is depicted by the ROC{\footnote{A Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) is a visual aid for evaluating the accuracy of binary classifiers in terms of both true and false positive rates.}} curves in Figure \ref{fig:fixed_roc} for a range of $\alpha$. From this figure it is clear that between $\tau_{attack} = 500$ and 700 $\mu$s is all that is necessary for PyCRA to accurately distinguish attacked signals from normal signals, if $\alpha$ is chosen appropriately. With $\alpha$ set to a predetermined value, we can vary $F_s$ as shown in Figure \ref{fig:detection_all}\footnote{The $F_1$ score is a statistical measure of a binary classifier that measures the classifier accuracy in terms of precision and recall.}. These results show that increasing $F_s$ from 10 kHz to 30 kHz reduces required time for detection to between $\tau_{attack} = 100$ and 200 $\mu$s.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
{
\begin{tabular}{c|c}
\subfloat[ ]{\label{fig:fixed_roc}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\columnwidth]{detectiontime_fixed_10k_ROC.pdf}
}
&
\subfloat[ ]{\label{fig:detection_all}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\columnwidth]{detectiontime_all_f1.pdf}
}
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{\label{fig:detection}(a) Accuracy of attack detection for a simple spoofing attack with sampling rate $F_s = 10 $ kHz and a range of $\tau_{attack}$, (b) Attack detection accuracy as a function of $\tau_{attack}$ for several sampling rates, $F_s$.}
\vspace{-4mm}
\end{figure}
Repeating these experiments for the \emph{advanced spoofing attack} [T3] yields similar results. In fact, there is no fundamental difference between the two in terms of attack detection; this is governed by the dynamics of the attacker's actuator rather than the nature of the attack itself.
It is important to evaluate this detection accuracy (which is our security guarantee) in terms of the physical delay property $\tau_{attack}$ of the attacker model.
In practice, the state-of-the-art in low-dimension, high Q-factor inductive coils that provide enough power to carry out a spoofing attack will have $\tau \gg 200 \mu$s{\footnote{These values were obtained by surveying a range of state-of-the-art, commercially available components.}}. From Figure \ref{fig:detection_all} it is apparent that PyCRA has good performance for this range of practical physical delays.
Moreover, the results we have shown thus far use a relatively low sampling frequency (high end micro controllers can operate in the range of 200 kHz). As illustrated by Figure \ref{fig:detection_all}, higher sampling rates result in reduced attack detection times. However, using low sampling frequencies in our case study serves to illustrate the efficiency of the proposed detection mechanism.
\section{Case Study (2): Resilience to Active Spoofing Attacks for Magnetic Encoders}
\label{sec:absattacks2}
\begin{figure*}
\centering{
\resizebox{0.6\textwidth}{!}{
\includegraphics{Figure_spectra_sweep_10k.pdf}
}
\caption{\label{fig:resilience} A visual tour of the PyCRA resilience scheme against the swept frequency attack. The spectra of the raw signal (top) is compared against those frequencies estimated to be under attack (middle), resulting in the wheel speed estimates shown (bottom).
}
}
\vspace{-6mm}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
{
\begin{tabular}{c|c}
\subfloat[ ]{\label{fig:resilience_roc}
\includegraphics[width=0.37\textwidth]{resilience_ROC.pdf}
}&
\subfloat[ ]{\label{fig:resilience_roc30k}
\includegraphics[width=0.37\textwidth]{resilience_30k_ROC.pdf}
}
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{\label{fig:roc}Accuracy of predicting the attacked frequencies for a swept frequency attack with a range of $\tau_{attack}$ values for different sampling rates (a) $F_s = 10$ kHz, (b) $F_s = 30$ kHz.}
\vspace{-4mm}
\end{figure*}
In order to demonstrate the PyCRA Resilient Estimator, we implement the scheme described in Section \ref{sec:sub:resilient_chi2} and test against both simple spoofing attacks (consisting of a varying sine wave) and more advanced spoofing attacks that attempt to suppress the true tone ring signal.
\subsection{Attack Resilience for Simple Spoofing Attacks} We begin by testing the attack resilient sensor against a simple attack consisting of a single sinusoidal waveform swept across multiple frequencies. We recursively compute a series of complex DFT coefficients from the raw input signal shown in Figure \ref{fig:raw_signal}. The magnitude of these DFT coefficients over time is shown in Figure \ref{fig:resilience} (top). This clearly shows both the true tone ring frequency as well as the swept frequency attack. Second, the errors between the predicted DFT recursions and the measured DFT recursions following every $u(t) = 1\rightarrow 0$ transition are computed in an attempt to capture the spectra of the attacker. Those frequency coefficients with a residual error greater than $\beta$ are said to be under attack, as shown by the white points in Figure \ref{fig:resilience} (middle). Finally, at each point in time the candidate frequencies (obtained by peak detection on the spectra of the raw signal) are compared against the set of frequencies estimated to be under attack to arrive at the final secure frequency estimate, shown in Figure \ref{fig:resilience} (bottom). Note that a traditional encoder sensor would report an erroneous speed as soon as the attack was initiated. The PyCRA sensor, on the other hand, remains stable throughout the entirety of the attack.
As with the attack detection scheme, we must evaluate the ability of PyCRA to correctly identify attacked frequencies as a function of $\tau_{attack}$. In order to do this, we run more than 90 experiments and for each one we compared the known attacker frequencies to the estimated attacker frequencies. The accuracy of this detection is again depicted in the ROC curves shown in Figure \ref{fig:roc}. As expected, a considerably longer time is required to accurately identify the attacked frequencies, with 10 to 15 ms sufficing for most cases.
\begin{figure*}
\centering{
\resizebox{0.65\textwidth}{!}{
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{Figure_spectra_spoofing_10k.pdf}}
}
\captionof{figure}{\label{fig:resilience2} A visual tour of the PyCRA resilience scheme against the spoofing attack. The spectra of the raw signal (top) is compared against those frequencies estimated to be under attack (middle), resulting in the wheel speed estimates shown (bottom). }
\vspace{-4mm}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Attack Resilience against Advanced Spoofing Attacks}
In this section we explore how PyCRA performs in the face of a more advanced spoofing attack---the attacker now attempts to actively suppress the true tone-ring signal by broadcasting a phase-shifted version of the signal and superimposing a spoofed signal of a different frequency.
Again we set the true tone ring frequency to 71 Hz, but now the attacker attempts to spoof a fixed frequency as shown by the spectra in Figure \ref{fig:resilience2} (top). As before, PyCRA successfully identifies the attacked frequencies (Figure \ref{fig:resilience2} middle) and thus identifies the correct tone ring frequency (Figure \ref{fig:resilience2} bottom). Because of the physical delay of the attacker, $\tau_{attack}$, the true tone ring frequency appears when the actuator coil transitions from 0 to 1 with increasing magnitude for larger $\tau_{attack}$. This can be seen in Figure \ref{fig:resilience2} (top) as the low amplitude energy centered at 71 Hz.
We forgo the previous analysis of detection and prediction accuracy as a function of attacker cutoff delay, arguing that the results shown in Figure \ref{fig:roc} apply to advanced spoofing attacks as well.
\section{Case Study (3): Detection of Passive Eavesdropping on RFID}
\label{sec:resultsRFID}
In this section, we discuss the performance of PyCRA when used for detection of passive eavesdropping attacks on active sensors. In this scenario, an adversary \emph{listens} or \emph{records} the same physical signals captured by the sensor. Indeed this type of attack satisfies assumptions A1-A3 described in Section \ref{sec:pycra} and hence it will be useful to extend PyCRA to such cases.
\subsection{Passive Eavesdropping on RFID}
In this section, we use radio-frequency identification (RFID) as an example where successful passive attacks can have severe consequences.
RFID systems are commonly used to control access to physical places and to track the location of certain objects. An RFID system consists of two parts: a reader and a tag. The RFID reader continuously sends a magnetic signal that probes for existing tags in the near proximity. Once a tag enters the proximity of the reader, the tag starts to send its ``unique'' identifier to the reader by modulating the magnetic probe signal.
RFID tags can be classified as either passive or active based on the source of their energy. While passive tags rely on the energy transmitted by an RFID reader in order to power their electronics, active tags have their own power supplies. As a result, active tags can be equipped with computational platforms that run cryptographic and security protocols to mitigate cloning attacks \cite{rfid_secret}. On the other hand, passive tags do not enjoy these luxuries and therefore are more prone to cloning attacks.
Cloning of passive RFID tags can take place in one of two forms. In the first, the attacker uses a \emph{mobile} RFID reader and attempts to place it near the RFID tag. The tag innocently responds to the communication issued by the adversarial reader and sends its unique identifier. The other form of attack carried out against RFID systems is to eavesdrop on the communication between the tag and a legitimate reader.
RFID protective shields and blockers \cite{rfid_overview,rfid_security} are commonly used as countermeasure to the first form of cloning attacks discussed above. Unfortunately, these shields are of no use against the second type of attacks, because the user is obliged to remove the protective shield before using the tag with the \emph{legitimate} RFID reader, at which time an adversary can successfully eavesdrop.
To carry out an eavesdropping attack, a sniffing device must be placed in close proximity to the RFID reader so that it can measure the electromagnetic waves transmitted by the reader and reflected by the tag. In the following results, we show how PyCRA is able to detect the existence of such an attack, allowing the reader to disable communication with the tag before revealing private information.
\begin{figure}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.4\textwidth}
\mbox{}\\[-\baselineskip]
\begin{tabular}{c|c}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:rfid_schematic}
\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{rfid_sys.pdf}
}&
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:rfid_system}
\includegraphics[width=0.41\textwidth]{RFID_testbench.jpg}
}
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.5\textwidth}
\mbox{}\\[-\baselineskip]
\caption{
The schematic used in the RFID eavesdropping case study (a) and corresponding hardware setup (b). The setup contains two low frequency antennas (one for the RFID reader and one for the eavesdropper) along with a Proxmark3 board running the PyCRA detection algorithm. The analog signal is also captured by a digital oscilloscope for visualization
} \label{fig:rfid_system}
\end{minipage}
\vspace{-3mm}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Using PyCRA to Detect Eavesdroppers}
Recall from the physics of electromagnetic waves that antennas placed within close proximity will always affect each other's electrical signals to some degree. This is a fundamental law in physics known as \emph{magnetic coupling} \cite{brauer2006magnetic} and is used in the design of RFID. Therefore this attack satisfies Assumption AD1 described in Section \ref{sec:sniffing} and consequently PyCRA can be used in such cases.
Note that, similar to the physical delays, the magnetic coupling assumption is a fundamental limitation that the attacker cannot overcome. Hence, we can use the PyCRA detection algorithm outlined in Section \ref{sec:pycra} by computing the residual between the model (which assumes magnetic coupling only with the RFID tag) and the sensor output which suffers from magnetic coupling with the eavesdropping antenna.
This is shown in the experimental results in the next subsection.
\subsection{Hardware Setup and Real-time Results}
Figure \ref{fig:rfid_system} shows the hardware setup used to carry out this case-study. In this setup, two identical low frequency RFID antennas are used. The first RFID antenna is used as the \emph{legitimate} RFID reader while the second is used to eavesdrop. We built a PyCRA-enabled RFID reader on top of the open source RFID Proxmark3 board, adding random modulation to the probing signal and constructing the appropriate models as outlined in Section \ref{sec:pycra}.
Figure \ref{fig:RFID_response_normal} (top) shows the received electromagnetic wave of an RFID reader operating in the classical operational mode. In this mode, the RFID reader generates the standard 125KHz sinusoidal wave that is used to communicate with the RFID tag. Figure \ref{fig:RFID_response_normal} (middle) shows the resulting electromagnetic wave when an eavesdropper uses an identical antenna to listen. In this case it is hard to distinguish between the two waves and hence hard to detect the existence of an eavesdropper. This is better illustrated by the residual between the two waves as shown by the residual in Figure \ref{fig:RFID_response_normal} (bottom).
On the other hand, Figures \ref{fig:RFID_response_pycra_noattack} and \ref{fig:RFID_response_pycra} show the result of the same case study when PyCRA is used with and without an eavesdropper present, respectively. In this mode, the PyCRA algorithm occasionally halts the normal operation of the RFID reader and switches to detection mode. In this mode, PyCRA selects randomized periods of time to issue the physical challenges by switching the RFID antenna from on to off and from off to on.
In order to select an appropriate alarm threshold, we first study the effect of the magnetic coupling between the reader and the tag in the absence of an eavesdropper. This is shown in Figure \ref{fig:RFID_response_pycra_noattack} where the alarm threshold is chosen such that no alarm is triggered when the effect of the magnetic coupling---the residual between the ``no tag'' response (top) and the response with a tag (middle)---is within the acceptable range. This acceptable residual range allows for coupling induced by the tag only. Any increase on top of this allowable threshold is then attributed to the existence of an excessive magnetic coupling due to an eavesdropper.
Figure \ref{fig:RFID_response_pycra} (middle) shows the response to the same set of physical challenges when the attacker places an eavesdropping antenna in the proximity of the RFID reader while the tag is also present. Thanks to the physical challenge produced by PyCRA, the magnetic coupling produced by the eavesdropper antenna is now easily detected. This can be shown in Figure \ref{fig:RFID_response_pycra} (bottom) which shows the residuals between the expected output and the measured signal exceeding the alarm threshold.
We recorded over 1 hour of RFID measurements with varying distances of the malicious eavesdropping antenna. Of those experiments where the attacker was close enough to observe the RFID communication, PyCRA successfully detected the existence of an attacker with 100\% accuracy. Intuitively, if the attacker successfully measures the RFID signal, he has consequently removed enough energy from the channel to trigger an alarm.
\begin{figure*}
\hspace{-7.5mm}
\centering
{
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\subfloat[ ]{\label{fig:RFID_response_normal}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.274\textwidth]{Figure_RFID_sine_noAttack.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.274\textwidth]{Figure_RFID_sine_Attack.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.274\textwidth]{Figure_RFID_sine_residual.pdf}\\
\end{tabular}
}&
\subfloat[ ]{\label{fig:RFID_response_pycra_noattack}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.274\textwidth]{Figure_RFID_noTag_noAttack.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.274\textwidth]{Figure_RFID_Tag_noAttack.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.274\textwidth]{Figure_RFID_residual_Tag_noAttack.pdf}\\
\end{tabular}
}&
\subfloat[ ]{\label{fig:RFID_response_pycra}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.274\textwidth]{Figure_RFID_noTag_noAttack.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.274\textwidth]{Figure_RFID_noTag_Attack.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.274\textwidth]{Figure_RFID_residual_noTag_noAttack.pdf}\\
\end{tabular}
}
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{\label{fig:RFID_results} Results of applying PyCRA to detect the existence of an eavesdropper in the proximity of an RFID reader. (a) Results of using standard 125KHz signal for detection. (b) Results of using PyCRA when only an RFID tag is present in the proximity of the
PyCRA-enabled
reader, and (c) Results of using PyCRA in detecting eavesdropping when both an RFID tag and an eavesdropper antenna are present in the proximity of the
PyCRA-enabled
reader. Top figure shows the response to the physical challenges when no eavesdropper is placed in the proximity of the RFID reader. The middle figure shows the response to the physical challenges when (a) an eavesdropper antenna (b) passive tag only (c) passive tag + eavesdropper antenna are placed in the proximity of the reader. Finally, the bottom figure shows the value of the residuals calculated by PyCRA along with the alarm threshold.}
\vspace{-4mm}
\end{figure*}
\section{Physics, Models, Randomness, \& Security}
\label{sec:discussion}
The underlying ideas behind PyCRA utilize accurate mathematical models that capture the physics and dynamics of active sensors. With these models in hand, PyCRA is able to isolate the response of the attacker from the response of the environment when challenged by the proposed secure sensor. The success of the system presented in this paper lends credence to the notion of physical challenge-response authentication as a whole. Section \ref{sec:introduction} made brief mention of several additional sensing modalities where PyCRA can provide improved security. In fact, adaptation of the methods described in this work to these sensors is not difficult---one need only revisit the physical models involved in order to derive a method of probing the physical environment and measuring the environmental response.
The results presented in the previous sections demonstrate the key strengths of PyCRA---namely that it uses fundamental properties of physics (physical delays) along with mathematical models to provided the following security aids (i) timely and accurate detection of external, potentially malicious sources of signal interference, (ii) providing resilience via accurate estimation of malicious spectra, and (iii) accurate detection of passive eavesdropping attacks.
The security guarantees provided by PyCRA depend on two major factors: the underlying physics and the mathematical models. On one hand, physics enforces a fundamental bound on the dynamics of the attacker capabilities and hence enhances the security guarantees (recall results from Figure \ref{fig:detection} showing success rate versus physical delay). As technology evolves, attackers will be able to build better sensors and actuators leading to degraded detection rates, but he or she will never be able to go beyond the limits imposed by physics.
On the other hand, errors in the accuracy of the mathematical model degrade the security guarantees. That is, as the gap between the mathematical model and the underlying sensor physics increases, the attacker gains more room to conceal attacks. For example, scenarios where the physics of the sensor is affected by temperature variations, aging, and so on can increase the gap between the mathematical model and the physics of the sensor. Fortunately, with
advances in sensor technologies (especially in Micro Electrical Micro Mechanical or MEMS based sensors), better models are developed (at design time) in order to increase the performance of these sensors. Moreover, new technologies are continually developed to allow sensors to adapt over temperature and aging variations. For example, new MEMS technologies in sensors equip the sensor with One-Time-Programmable (OTP) memory used to store calibration parameters versus a wide range of temperature variations \cite{yurish2005smart}. These same calibration parameters can be used by PyCRA in order to adapt its model to overcome temperature variations.
Another major factor in the security provided by PyCRA is the amount of randomness used in generating the physical challenges. The relationship between randomness and security guarantees is a classical relationship that appears in most cryptographic security protocols. However, a fundamental difference in this scheme is that PyCRA relies only on private randomness compared to shared randomness in classical cryptographic authentication schemes. This is a consequence of the ``passivity'' property of the measured entity exploited by PyCRA. This in turn eliminates the classical problem of random data distribution (e.g. key distribution) and thus increases the security provided by the proposed system.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
We have presented PyCRA, a physical challenge-response authentication method for active sensors. The driving concept behind PyCRA is that, through random physical stimulation and subsequent behavior analyses, we are able to determine whether or not a sensor is under attack and, in some cases, remain resilient to attacks. This work further describes ways in which the PyCRA scheme can be applied to (1) passive eavesdropping attacks, (2) simple spoofing attacks, and (3) more advanced spoofing attacks. We have demonstrated the effectiveness of PyCRA for three case studies: magnetic encoder attack detection, magnetic encoder attack resilience, and RFID eavesdropping detection. Our results from these case studies indicate that physical challenge-response authentication can accurately and reliably detect and mitigate malicious attacks at the analog sensor level.
Finally, we believe the results discussed in this work lend credence to the notion of physical challenge-response systems in general, advocating its adoption for active sensors in general where secure operation is a critical component. More broadly, PyCRA offers security to a wide array of systems (not just sensors) where inputs are mapped to outputs by well-understood models.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This material is based upon work supported by the NSF under award CNS-1136174. The U.S. Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Governmental purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation thereon. The views and conclusions contained herein are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies or endorsements, either expressed or implied, of NSF or the U.S. Government.
|
\subsection{Corrections to the $\beta$ decay electron and $\bar{\nu}_e$ spectrum for the allowed $\beta$ transitions}
\label{subsecs:allowed}
The $\beta$-decay spectrum shape can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
P_{\bar{\nu}} (E_{\bar{\nu}}, E_0^i, Z) =
K p_e E_e (E_0 - E_e)^2 F(Z,E_e) C(Z,E_e) (1 + \delta(Z,A,E_e)) ~,
\end{equation}
where $K$ is the normalization factor (the function $P$ must be normalized to unity when integrated over $E_e$ and used in eq. (5)).
$p_e E_e (E_0 - E_e)^2$ is the phase space factor, $F(Z, E_e)$ is the Fermi function that takes into account the
effect of the Coulomb field of the daughter nucleus on the outgoing electron, and the shape factor $C(Z,E_e)$ accounts for the energy
or momentum dependence of the nuclear matrix elements. For the allowed decays, $C(Z,E_e) = 1$. Finally, the
function $\delta(Z,A,E_e)$ describes the subdominant corrections to the spectrum shape, to be discussed in
detail below.
\subsubsection{ The Fermi Function}
The Fermi function $F(Z,E_e)$ replaces the plane wave solution for the out-going electron with a Coulomb wave.
It is straightforward to calculate $F$ under the assumption of a point nuclear distribution, which leads to a Fermi
function of the form,
\begin{equation}
F_0 (Z,E_e) = 4 (2 p_e R)^{-2(1 - \gamma)} \left[ \frac{\Gamma(\gamma + i y)}{\Gamma(2 \gamma + 1)} \right]^2
e^{\pi y} ~,
\label{point}
\end{equation}
where $ \gamma = \sqrt{1 - (\alpha Z)^2}$ and $y = \alpha Z E_e/p_e$.
Here $R$ is the cut-off radius, normally taken to be the radius of the nucleus in units of the electron Compton wavelength.
The point Fermi function leads to a logarithmic divergence at
$R=r = 0$ in eq.(\ref{point}).
Of course, for a nucleus with a finite charge radius the solution to the Dirac equation for the wave function of the out-going electron is finite everywhere.
\subsubsection{The Finite Size Corrections}
It is not possible to derive a general and exact correct for the finite size correction to the Fermi function.
For this reason, different approximations have been made in the literature. These involve assumptions about
the nuclear charge $\rho_{CH}(r)$ and weak isovector transition $\rho_W(r)$ densities,
and perturbative expansions in $\alpha Z\left(\frac{ER}{\hbar c}\right)$ and/or in $q^2$ .
Holstein \cite{holstein} derived an analytic expression using a first order expansion $\alpha Z\left(\frac{ER}{\hbar c}\right)$.
The result depends on {\it both} the
charge and weak densities. If the weak and charge densities are assumed to be the same $\rho_W=\rho_{CH}$ the finite size correction can be expressed \cite{friar1} in terms of the first Zemach moment \cite{zemach} $\langle r \rangle_{(2)}$, and is given
in ref.\cite{hayes} as,
\begin{equation}
\delta_{FS} = -\frac{3}{2}\frac{Z\alpha}{\hbar c}\langle r \rangle_{(2)}\left ( E_e-\frac{E_\nu}{27}+\frac{m_e^2c^4}{3E_e}\right )
\label{holFS}
\end{equation}
The Zemach moment,
\begin{equation}
\langle r \rangle_{(2)}=\int d^3r\rho_W(r)\int d^3r\rho_{ch}(s)|\vec{r}-\vec{s}|,
\label{zemach}
\end{equation}
is the first moment of the convoluted nuclear weak isovector transition density and electromagnetic ground state charge densities.
Though the expression in eq. (\ref{holFS}) is {\it exact} to order $\alpha Z$, some assumption must be made about $\rho_W$ and $\rho_{CH}$
in calculating $\langle r \rangle_{(2)}$.
Behrens {\it et al.} \cite{behrens} solved the finite size problem
numerically, including higher order terms in $\alpha Z$, but expanding the weak density $\rho_W$ to first order in $q^2$.
The evaluation proceeds in two steps. First, the singularity at the origin in $F_0(Z,E_e)$ is removed by replacing
it by the function $F(Z,E_e)$ based on the numerical solution to the Dirac equation for the outgoing electron
in a finite size Coulomb potential, and evaluating it at $r=0$
\begin{equation}
F(Z,E_e) = F_0 (Z,E_e) \cdot L_0(Z,E_e) ~.
\end{equation}
The functions $L_0$, as well as $F(Z,E_e)$, are tabulated in \cite{behrens}.
A less accurate, but much simpler analytic form of $F_0 L_0$, accurate to about 1\% for $30 \le Z \le 70$ and $E_e \le$ 8 MeV,
is available in \cite{schenter}.
In the second step, in addition to using $F(Z,E_e)$ in place of $F_0(Z,E_e)$, the finite nuclear size correction needs to be added.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=3.0in]{finsize.ps}
\caption{The finite size correction $\delta_{FS}$ for $Z$ = 46 and maximum electron or $\bar{\nu}_e$ energy 6 MeV
is plotted
versus the electron kinetic energy.
The full line is based on \cite{hayes}, the dashed line on \cite{wilkinson} and the dot-dashed one on \cite{vogel1}.
}
\label{Fig:finsize}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The two expansion methods, in $\alpha Z$ versus $q^2$, lead to numerically similar results for uniform charge and weak density distributions of radius $R$, for which $\langle r \rangle_{(2)}= \frac{36}{35}R$, \cite{friar1}.
In Ref. \cite{hayes}, uniform distributions were assumed and, ignoring constant terms independent of $E_e$, $\delta_{FS}$ becomes,
\begin{equation}
\delta_{FS}^{(1)} = - \frac{8}{5} \frac{Z \alpha R E_e}{\hbar c} \left( 1 + \frac{9}{28} \frac{m_e^2c^4}{E_e^2} \right)
\label{eq:finsize}
\end{equation}
An identical value for $\delta_{FS}$ was obtained for allowed transitions
in ref. \cite{holstein2}. In the latter reference it is noted that the magnitude of the
finite size correction for uniform charge and weak densities is a factor
of 1.3 smaller than that obtained assuming surface densities.
Terms that are higher order in $\alpha Z$
introduce small corrections that scale with $R^2$, $R/E_e$ and matrix elements of the operators $r^2[Y_2 \times \vec{\sigma}]$ and $\vec{\sigma} \times \vec{l}$.
In ref. \cite{wilkinson} the approximation of Behrens {\it et al.}
is expressed in terms of an empirical analytic expression for allowed
Gamow-Teller transitions.
That formula was also applied in the reactor spectrum evaluation in \cite{huber}.
A somewhat different but close formula was obtained in \cite{vogel1}, where an average for a uniform or surface weak density distribution was estimated in terms of the matrix element ratio $\frac{\langle \sigma r^2 \rangle}{\langle \sigma\rangle R^2}$, and the finite size correction written as,
\begin{equation}
\delta_{FS}^{(2)} = -\frac{9}{10} \frac{Z \alpha R E_e}{\hbar c} \frac{\langle \sigma r^2 \rangle}{ \langle \sigma \rangle R^2} .
\end{equation}
For a uniform (surface) distribution $\frac{\langle \sigma r^2 \rangle}{ \langle \sigma \rangle R^2}=3/5 ~(1)$.
Ref. \cite{mueller} followed this form and used $\delta_{FS}^{(2)} = -\frac{9}{10} \frac{Z \alpha R E_e}{\hbar c}$.
In Fig. \ref{Fig:finsize} three of the different forms for
the finite size corrections $\delta_{FS}$ that have been used in the literature for a uniform density are compared.
Only the energy dependent part of $\delta_{FS}$ is plotted; the energy independent component is irrelevant for the normalized
spectra. These differences, as well as the assumptions that must be made in evaluating $\langle r \rangle_{(2)}$, suggest that a large uncertainty needs to be assigned to $\delta_{FS}$ for allowed GT transitions.
\subsubsection{The Radiative Corrections}
The QED corrections of the first order in $\alpha$ to both the electron and $\bar{\nu}_e$ spectra
in the $\beta$ decay have been evaluated in Refs. \cite{sirlin1, sirlin2}.
An earlier version can be found in \cite{batkin}. Only the energy dependent corrections to the
electron and $\bar{\nu}_e$ spectrum are relevant; only they affect the spectrum shape.
They are of the form
\begin{equation}
\delta_{QED}^{\bar{\nu}} = \frac{\alpha}{2 \pi} h(E_e, E_0)~, ~~ \delta_{QED}^e = \frac{\alpha}{2 \pi} g(E_e, E_0)~,
\label{eq:qed}
\end{equation}
where $E_{\bar{\nu}} = E_0 - E_e$ and the functions $h(E_e, E_0)$ and $g(E_e, E_0)$ are defined in \cite{sirlin1,sirlin2}.
We note that for the conversion of the electron spectrum to the $\bar{\nu}_e$ spectrum only the difference
$h(E_e, E_0) - g(E_e, E_0)$ is relevant.
\subsubsection{The Weak Magnetism Correction}
The interaction of the out-going electron with the magnetic moment of the daughter nucleus leads to a
weak magnetism correction.
The form of the correction is determined by the interference of the
magnetic moment distribution of the vector current $\vec{J}_V=\vec{\nabla}\times\vec{\mu}$
with the spin distribution $\vec{\Sigma}$ of the axial current. Thus, there is {\it no} weak magnetism correction to Fermi or
pseudo-scalar ($0^-$) transitions.
In
the non-relativistic approximation the correction depends on nuclear matrix elements of the operators $\vec{\sigma}$
and $\vec{l}$ and for GT transitions has the form \cite{holstein}
\begin{equation}
\delta_{WM} = \frac{4 E_e}{3 g_A M} \left(1 - \frac{m_e^2c^4}{2 E_e^2} \right)
\left[ \frac{ \langle \vec{l} \rangle}{ \langle \vec{\sigma} \rangle}
+ (\mu_p - \mu_n) \right] ~,
\end{equation}
where $\mu_p - \mu_n = 4.7$ is the nucleon isovector magnetic moment.
In principle, the matrix element ratio $\frac{ \langle \vec{l} \rangle}{ \langle \vec{\sigma} \rangle}$ needs to be evaluated separately for each transition. As an approximation,
one can use the truncated orbital current \cite{hayes}
\begin{equation}
\delta_{WM} \approx \frac{4}{3} \frac{\mu_p - \mu_n - 1/2}{g_A M} E_e \left( 1 - \frac{m_e^2c^4}{2 E_e^2}
\right) ~\approx~ 0.5\% E_e/{\rm MeV} ~,
\label{eq:wm}
\end{equation}
An analogous weak magnetism correction, without the relatively small term $m_e^2/2E_e^2$, was suggested in
\cite{vogel1} and used in \cite{mueller,huber}.
In light nuclei it is possible to test the leading order term of weak magnetism correction $\delta_{WM}$ through
its relation to the
decay width of the $M1$ $\gamma$-ray transition for isobaric analog states.
A list of these cases can be found in Ref. \cite{huber},
resulting in an average slope of $0.67 \pm 0.26$\%, in a fair agreement with the above formula. It is impossible, however,
to test $\delta_{WM}$ for the transitions of real interest, i.e. for the $\beta$ decay of fission fragments. The estimate above,
therefore, must be assigned a sizable uncertainty.
The effect of the corrections on the electron and antineutrino spectra is summarized in Fig. \ref{correct}.
Since the spectrum for each fission fragment must be normalized to unity when integrated over all energies,
the corrections increase the aggregate spectrum at some energies and lower it at other energies.
In particular, below half the average end-point energy for all fission fragments, $\overline{E}_0/2$,
the electron (antineutrino) spectrum is increased (decreased).
Above $\overline{E}_0/2$, the electron (antineutrino) spectrum is decreased (increased). The approximate linear form of $\delta_{FS}$ and $\delta_{WM}$ in energy causes the decrease (increase)
above $\overline{E}_0/2$ to also be approximately linear and to have a slope $\mp\frac{1}{2}(\delta_{FS}+\delta_{WM})$.
A change in $\delta_{FS}$ or $\delta_{WM}$ to account for the uncertainties in these corrections
would be directly
reflected in a change in this
slope. This point is important in assessing the statistical significance of the reactor anomaly, to be discussed later.
\
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=2.5in]{corrected2.ps}
\caption{The finite size $\delta_{FS}$ and weak magnetism $\delta_{WM}$ corrections result in an approximately
linear increase (decrease) in the antineutrino (electron) spectrum above half the average end-point energy $\overline{E}_0/2$.
The figure shows the ratio of the spectra with and without these two corrections, using the summation method and the ENDF/B-VII.1 database.
The form of the corrections used here are those given in eqs. (\ref{holFS}) and (\ref{eq:wm}), and the $Z$ and $A$ values involved
are taken from the database.
}
\label{correct}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{THE SHOULDER OR SO-CALLED ``BUMP" IN REACTOR ANTINEUTRINO SPECTRA}
All three recent large reactor experiments, Daya Bay, RENO, and Double Chooz \cite{dayabaybump,seo,crespo}, observed
a feature (or shoulder) in the
experimental spectrum at 4-6 MeV of the prompt positron energy, $E_{prompt}\approx E_\nu+(M_p-M_n-M_e)+2M_e$,
relative to the predicted theoretical evaluation in the Refs. \cite{mueller,huber}. The shoulder
has not been observed in the measured fission electron beta-decay spectra
\cite{Schr2,Schr3,Haag1,Haag}. It was also not observed in the previous test of
the reactor spectrum shape \cite{bugey3}.
An example of the data, from the Daya Bay and RENO experiments,
is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:bump}. In case of Daya Bay, the measured spectrum deviates from the predictions
by more than 2$\sigma$ over the full energy range and by 4$\sigma$ in the range 4-6 MeV.
The other two experiments (RENO and Double Chooz) report similar data and similar significance.
The spectral shape of the shoulder cannot be produced by the
standard $L/E_{\nu}$ neutrino oscillations dependence, independent
of the possible existence of sterile neutrinos. In addition, it is too high in energy
to be produced by antineutrinos emitted from neutron interactions with structural material in the reactor \cite{hayes1} or from the spent fuel. Its origin must be caused by the
reactor fuel $\bar{\nu}_e$ emission.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=2.3in]{bump-dayabay.ps}
\includegraphics[width=2.5in]{RENO-bump.ps}
\caption{(Top) The shoulder (bump) observed in the near detector at Daya Bay \cite{dayabaybump}, arising from
the ratio of the observed spectrum to the predicted.
The blue curve is the ILL prediction \cite{Schr2,Schr3} for $^{235}$U and $^{239,241}$Pu plus
Vogel {\it et al.} \cite{vogel81} for $^{238}$U.
(Bottom) The shoulder observed \cite{seo} in the near detector at RENO.
The predictions are from the Huber-Mueller model \cite{huber, mueller} model, normalized to
the same number of events.
}
\label{fig:bump}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In the context of the present review several questions need to be considered.
What is the origin of this ``bump"? Why was it not observed in the electron
spectrum? Does its existence question expected/predicted reactor spectra in general?
The shoulder could have its
origin in several effects that are not included, or not included accurately, in the reactor spectrum
predictions \cite{mueller,huber}. Many of the important decays are forbidden, so that
their shape factors and sub-dominant corrections might be different than assumed. Alternatively,
the contribution
of $^{238}$U, that is only weakly constrained by the observed electron spectrum
might not be accurate. The harder neutron spectrum in
power reactors may lead to
different fission fragment distributions than in the very thermal ILL reactor used for the electron fission spectra measurements
\cite{Schr2,Schr3,Schr4}.
Finally, the measured electron spectra themselves \cite{Schr2,Schr3,Schr4},
which represent the basis for the antineutrino evaluations \cite{mueller,huber}, might
be incorrect.
The reactor $\bar{\nu}_e$ spectra are composed of $\beta$ decays of hundreds of individual
fission fragments, with $\sim$ 6000 individual decay branches. However, at the relevant
energies, 4-6 MeV of prompt energy, corresponding to $\sim$4.8-6.8 MeV $\bar{\nu}_e$
energy, relatively few ($\sim$ 10-15) transitions determine 40-50\% of the
total spectrum, refs. \cite{sonzogni,sonzogni1,dwyer}, and they are mostly forbidden transitions.
The other more numerous decays that determine the remainder of the spectrum in the bump energy window each contributes less than 2\%.
It is, therefore,
possible that the conversion from
the electron to the high-energy component of antineutrino spectrum involved an inaccuracy that resulted in a shoulder.
Several possible origins of the bump have been identified and investigated by different authors \cite{dwyer, hayes1},
but it was generally concluded that, without further experimental investigation,
it is impossible to determine which, if any or several, of the explanations are correct.
However, several comments are in order, and we summarize the situation here.
Dwyer and Langford \cite{dwyer} used the {\it ab initio} summation method to construct the
electron and antineutrino spectra from the ENDF/B-VII.1 fission yield and decay libraries,
assuming allowed shapes and including the corrections discussed above. They observed that the ENDF/B-VII.1
library predicted a shoulder
or ``bump" very similar to that observed \cite{dayabaybump,seo,crespo}.
In addition, they showed that a corresponding bump was predicted relative to the
original measured \cite{Schr2,Schr3,Schr4} aggregate fission electron spectra.
This explanation would, therefore, suggest that the measured electron spectra are
incomplete, i.e. the shoulder was missed somehow in the measurements.
In the {\it ab initio} summation method the necessary input are the fission yields, and
two standard fission-yields libraries, JEFF-3.1.1 and ENDF/B-VII.1
differ \cite{hayes1} significantly in the
predicted yields of several nuclei dominating the shoulder region.
In particular,
the JEFF-3.1.1 library fission yields does not predict \cite{hayes1} a ``bump" for the Daya Bay or RENO experiments, and agrees
reasonably well with the measured electron spectra.
A recent critical review \cite{sonzogni1} of the ENDF/B-VII.1 yields for $^{235}$U uncovered erroneous yields for $^{86}$Ge
and all of its daughters, and showed that this
error was generating excess of strength in both the predicted electron and antineutrino spectra
at 5-7 MeV. When this problem was corrected, along with other less critical updates to the library,
the predictions of the two databases are considerably closer,
and agree within 6\% at all energies.
Most significantly, neither database (corrected ENDF or JEFF)
now predict a bump relative to the measured $^{235}$U aggregate electron fission spectrum, Fig. \ref{fig:sonzogni}.
Thus, at present, there is no evidence that the original measurements of the electron spectra are the origin of the bump.
An alternate source of the bump might lie with
the conversion of the measured electron spectra to antineutrino spectra, which would point
to the shoulder being
produced by the approximations made for the corrections and/or for the forbidden transitions.
However, this latter possibility can be mostly ruled out,
(see ref. \cite{hayes1}),
by examining the expected change in the bump region of spectrum for different treatments of the forbidden transitions.
For example, three fission fragments that dominate in the bump region, $^{92}$Rb, $^{96}$Y and $^{142}$Cs,
all involve $0^-\rightarrow0^+$ decays and, thus,
have no weak magnetism correction. Since the weak magnetism correction is opposite in sign to the finite size correction, a proper treatment of weak magnetism is important.
There are two $\Delta J=0^-$ operator, one GT and one proportional to the axial charge $\rho_A$, each with different shape factors, $C(E_e)$. Thus, there is considerable uncertainty as to how to treat these transition.
To test this no weak magnetism and no shape correction was applied in one case to these three transitions and.
In the second case no weak magnetism and the shape correction for a purely GT 0$^-$.
The first treatment leads to a small increase in the antineutrino spectrum above about 4 MeV, which is a maximum of 1\% at 8 MeV, while the second leads to a suppression in the energy region of interest. Thus, it was concluded in ref. \cite{hayes1} that
a proper treatment of weak magnetism for forbidden transitions
cannot account for a significant fraction of the shoulder.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics [width=2.5in] {sonzogni-new.ps}
\caption{The ratio of the database predictions to the measured \cite{Schr2,Schr3} electron spectrum for $^{235}$U.
Neither JEFF nor the corrected ENDF/B
database predicts a bump relative to the measured electron spectrum.
Figure reproduced with the permission of A. Sonzogni {\it et al.}}
\label{fig:sonzogni}
\end{figure}
At present, the two most likely sources of the bump seem to be $^{238}$U or the hardness of the neutron spectrum.
In the case of $^{238}$U, there are a few observations worth commenting on.
First, $^{238}$U represents about 12\% of the total fissions at RENO,
compared to 7.6\% and 8.7\% at Daya Bay and Double Chooz, respectively,
and the bump seen at RENO is larger than in the other two experiments.
Also, the $^{238}$U spectrum is considerably harder in energy than that of the other actinides,
which results in $^{238}$U contributing about
24\% (15\%) of the spectrum in the bump region for RENO (Daya Bay).
Second, {\it both} the ENDF/B-VII.1 and JEFF-3.1.1 libraries predict a bump
relative to the $^{238}$U antineutrino spectrum of Mueller \cite{mueller} and of the recent
measurement of
Haag \cite{Haag}, as shown in Fig. \ref{238}.
Thus, without
experiments designed to isolate the contributions from
each actinide to the shoulder, $^{238}$U cannot be ruled out as a significant source of the bump.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics [width=2.5in] {238U.ps}
\caption{The ratio of the JEFF-3.1.1. antineutrino spectrum for $^{238}$U to that of
Mueller \cite{mueller} and Haag \cite{Haag}.
As can be seen,JEFF predicts a bump relative to the predictions of both Mueller and Haag, with the latter bump being the larger. Double Chooz use the Haag $^{238}$U antineutrino spectrum, and JEFF-3.1.1 predicts a bump relative to Double Chooz, see ref. \cite{hayes1}}.
\label{238}
\end{figure}
Finally, the effect of the hardness of reactor neutron spectrum on the
antineutrino spectrum has never been tested directly.
The databases generally predict this to be a small effect.
Nonetheless, the PWR reactors used by Daya
Bay, RENO and Double Chooz are harder in energy than
the thermal spectrum of the ILL reactor, and involve
considerably larger epithermal components.
In the epithermal energy region the fission yield distributions can be resonance dependent \cite{hambsch}.
If epithermal fission is a significant source of the bump, one might expect it
to be most pronounced in $^{239}$Pu, since there the first epithermal fission
resonance at $E_n$=0.32 eV is quite isolated and strong, and it
can account for as much as 25\% of the total plutonium fission
in some pressurized water reactors.
Thus, any experimental
tests of the variation of the yields of the dominant fission fragments
with neutron energy would be very valuable in addressing this issue.
The existence of the ``bump" has little effect \cite{ciara} on the extraction of the neutrino oscillation
parameters from the reactor experiments. In addition, it could be entirely
uncorrelated with the ``reactor anomaly".
However, it raises the very serious question of how well the antineutrino spectra are known,
and suggests that estimated uncertainties at the 1-2\% are too optimistic.
\subsection{First forbidden $\beta$ decays}
\label{subsecs:forbidden}
In the ground states of fission fragments the least bound protons and
the least bound neutrons are often
in states of opposite parity belonging to different oscillator shells. For this reason about
30\% of all $\beta$ decays contributing to the reactor neutrino spectrum are forbidden decays.
The forbidden decays tend to be more prevalent in the higher energy part of the aggregate spectra,
where the phase space advantage wins out over the suppression due to the forbiddenness of the transitions,
the latter nominally scaling with $(pR)^2 \ll 1$.
The selection rules for the first forbidden $\beta$ decays are $\pi_i \pi_f = -1$ and
$\Delta J \le 2$.
In the leading order there are six relevant operators \cite{hayes}, which can be reduced in the number of independent operators by invoking the conserved vector current and relating
operators proportional to $\vec{\nabla}/M\tau$ to the operator $\vec{r}\tau$.
Two of the operators, $\gamma_5$
and $\vec{\alpha}$ involve emission
of the $s_{1/2}$ electrons, and hence the corresponding shape factor $C(Z,E) = 1$,
as is the case for allowed decay. However, the four additional operators involve the emission
of the $p_{1/2}$ state electrons, and $C(Z,E) \ne 1$ in these cases.
The shape factors $C(Z,E)$ for the six first forbidden operators are listed in Table \ref{six}.
\begin{table*}
\caption{The shape factors and leading-order weak magnetism corrections to allowed and first-forbidden decays
from \cite{hayes}. The top panel is for Gamow-Teller transitions. The shape factors for allowed and first-forbidden
Fermi beta decays are shown in the bottom panel.
Nuclear operators $\vec{J}_V$ and $\rho_A$ are proportional to a nucleon
velocity $(p/M_N)$. CVC has been involked to replace them by the analogous
operators proportional to $E_0r$ for $\vec{J}_V$ , and a similar approximation has been made for the $\rho_A$ operators
proporional to $(p/M_N)$.
The weak magnetism correction for $\vec{J}_V$ involves the unknown overlap of very different $1^-$ matrix
elements and is therefore not listed. The nucleon isovector magnetic moment is $\mu_v =4.7$, $M_N$
is the nucleon mass, $g_A$ is the axial vector coupling constant, and $\beta = p_e/E_e$.
}
\vspace{4pt}
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
Classification & $\;\Delta J^\pi\;$ & \; Oper. \; & Shape Factor $C(E_e)$ & \; Fractional Weak Magnetism Correction $\delta_{\mathrm{WM}}(E_e)$\\\hline\hline
Gamow-Teller:&&&&\\
Allowed &$1^+$&$\Sigma\equiv\sigma\tau$&1&$\frac{2}{3}\left[\frac{\mu_v-1/2}{M_Ng_A}\right](E_e\beta^2-E_\nu)$\\
1$^{st}$ F.&$0^-$&$\left[\Sigma,r\right]^{0-}$&$p_e^2+E_\nu^2+2\beta^2E_\nu E_e$&0\\
\!\! 1$^{st}$ F. $\rho_A$ &$0^-$&$\left[\Sigma,r\right]^{0-}$&$\lambda\, E_0^2$&0\\
1$^{st}$ F. &$1^-$&$\left[\Sigma,r\right]^{1-}$&$p_e^2+E_\nu^2-\frac{4}{3}\beta^2E_\nu E_e$&$\;\;\;\;\left[\frac{\mu_v-1/2}{M_Ng_A}\right]\left[\frac{(p_e^2+E_\nu^2)(\beta^2 E_e-E\nu)+2 \beta^2 E_e E_\nu(E_\nu-E_e)/3}{(p_e^2+E_\nu^2-4\beta^2E_\nu E_e/3)}\right]$\\
Uniq. 1$^{st}$ F. &$2^-$&$\left[\Sigma,r\right]^{2-}$&$p_e^2+E_\nu^2$&\,\,$\frac{3}{5}\left[\frac{\mu_v-1/2}{M_Ng_A}\right]\left[\frac{(p_e^2+E_\nu^2)(\beta^2 E_e-E\nu)+2 \beta^2 E_e E_\nu(E_\nu-E_e)/3}{(p_e^2+E_\nu^2)}\right]$\rule{0in}{3.0ex} \\[1.5ex] \hline
Fermi:&&&&\\
Allowed &$0^+$&$\tau$&1&0\\
\!\!\! 1$^{st}$ F. &$1^-$&$r\tau$& $p_e^2+E_\nu^2+\frac{2}{3}\beta^2E_\nu E_e$& 0\\[0.7ex]
1$^{st}$ F. $\vec{J}_V$ &$1^-$&$r\tau$& $E_0^2$& -\\[0.7ex]
\hline
\label{six}
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
In the case of $\Delta J = 2$, the unique first forbidden transition, only one operator can contribute,
and corresponding shape factor is $C(Z,E) = p_e^2 + p_{\nu}^2$. For $\Delta J= 0$ two
operators contribute and for $\Delta J = 1$ three.
In general, the overall shapes factor $C(Z,E)$ of such transitions
depends on the magnitude and sign of the matrix elements of the different forbidden operators contributing
to the transition.
The situation is often even more complicated since $|J_i - J_f| \le \Delta J \le J_i + J_f$ so that
in typical decays of an odd-A or odd-odd nucleus more than one $\Delta J$ contributes.
For the even-even nuclei $J_i = 0$ and only one $\Delta J = J_f$ is relevant in that case
First forbidden $\beta$ decays often exhibit spectra of similar shape to
allowed decays. As pointed in ref. \cite{weidenmuller},
this is likely the case whenever the Coulomb energy of the emitted electrons is much larger
than its total energy at the nuclear radius, $\alpha Z/R \gg E_0/m_e$, with $R$ is expressed in the electron Compton
wavelength units. This limit is often referred to as the $\xi$ approximation, \cite{weidenmuller}.
However, taking as an example the important
decay of $^{92}$Rb with $\alpha Z/R = 19.2$, and $E_0 = 16.8 m_e$, $\alpha Z/R \sim E_0$.
For this and many of the high $Q$-value decays that dominate the aggregate spectra above 5 MeV, the $\xi$ approximation
cannot be used as guidance. Nevertheless,
in the case of $^{92}$Rb, at least, the measured $\beta$ spectrum \cite{rudstam}, dominated by the
$0^- \rightarrow 0^+$ ground state branch, has essentially an allowed shape.
The QED or radiative corrections to the spectrum, $\delta_{QED}$, depend only on the emitted electron
energy. Hence $\delta_{QED}$, defined in the eq. (\ref{eq:qed}),
is the same for forbidden transitions as it is for the allowed decays.
On the other hand, the weak magnetism corrections are operator dependent. They are listed for first forbidden transitions
in ref. \cite{hayes}.
As noted above, $\delta_{WM}$ vanishes for $\Delta J = 0$
operators. In particular, there is no weak magnetism correction for $0^- \rightarrow 0^+$ transitions, and such transitions
represent an important component of the antineutrino spectra, especially at high energy.
The weak magnetism correction also vanishes for the
vector current (Fermi) operator $\vec{r}$, which is one of the operators responsible for the $\Delta J = 1^-$
transitions.
Thus, in the absence of detailed calculations for the structure and combination of the matrix elements determining the
$1^-$ transitions, the form of the weak magnetism correction
that should be used is uncertain.
The finite size correction for the first forbidden $\beta$ decays is a complicated and so far not a satisfactorily
resolved issue. Ideally a simple correction in terms of a formula of $\delta_{FS}$, analogous to that for the allowed
GT decay in the eq. (\ref{eq:finsize}), would be applied to each transition of a given $\Delta J$.
However, as in the case of the weak magnetism corrections, the finite size
correction is operator dependent.
Behrens {\it et al.} \cite{behrens} addressed the problem by introducing corrections to the six basic operators, either in terms of
additional radial integrals that have to be evaluated or as tabulated numerical corrections to the shape factors $C(Z,E)$ \cite{suzuki, zhi}.
In one application \cite{fang}, the first forbidden decays
of $^{136}$Te and $^{140}$Xe were evaluated both using the shell model and QRPA, and
the nuclear finite size found to result in a reduction of the neutrino flux above the 1.8 MeV threshold
of 2-5 \% depending on the $E_0$, but to be operator and $\Delta J$ dependent.
The lack of a comprehensive and/or single
treatment for the nuclear size corrections for forbidden transitions,
and its detailed dependence on the operators determining the transition,
represents an important source of
uncertainty in the aggregate fission antineutrino spectra.
The effect of the forbidden transition operator dependence
on the deduced antineutrino spectrum using the conversion method has been
examined in \cite{hayes}. The measured \cite{Schr2} aggregate electron fission spectrum for $^{235}$U was fit
assuming either all allowed transitions or various combinations of the allowed and forbidden operators listed
in Table \ref{six}.
Excellent fits to the electron spectrum were found in all cases,
indicating that the electron spectrum cannot distinguish between these scenarios.
However,
the different treatments of the forbidden transitions lead
to different antineutrino spectra, both in shape and magnitude
at about the 4\% level.
Two examples, taken from \cite{hayes}, are shown
in Fig.\ref{forbidden}, where in one case all
transitions are assumed to be allowed, while in the second
case the best fit results from about 25\% forbidden
decays.
For the assumption of all allowed transitions,
a systematic increase in the number of antineutrinos
relative to Schreckenbach {\it et al.} \cite{Schr2} of about 2.5\% was seen,
while in the case
that forbidden transitions were included no increase relative
to that reference is found.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=3.0in]{forbidden.ps}
\caption{
The fit to the electron spectrum for $^{235}$U (left) for two
different assumptions on how to treat forbidden transition,
and the ratio of the corresponding antineutrino spectra to
that of Schreckenbach {\it et al.} \cite{Schr2}(right).
The electron spectrum are fit assuming (a) all allowed
GT branches and (b) 25\% forbidden transitions, and both
$\delta_{FS}$ and $\delta_{WM}$ were included. When
folded over the neutrino detection cross section the case for all
allowed (25\% forbidden) transitions results in a 2.5\% (0.06\%)
increase in the number of detectable antineutrinos. Figure taken from \cite{hayes}.}
\label{forbidden}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{DETECTOR REACTION $\bar{\nu}_e + p \rightarrow e^+ + n$}
\input{subsections-5}
\input{bump}
\section{THE REACTOR ANOMALY AND NEW EXPERIMENTS}
\input{anomaly}
\section{UNCERTAINTIES IN THE ANTINEUTRINO SPECTRA}
\input{uncertainties}
\section{SUMMARY AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS}
\input{Summary}
\section*{ACKNOWLEDGMENTS}
Anna Hayes thanks the LDRD program at Los Alamos National Laboratory for partial support for this work.
Petr Vogel thanks the Physics Department at the California Institute of Technology for partial support for this work.
They both thank Jim Friar, Gerry Garvey, Alejandro Sonzogni, Libby McCutchen, Jerry Jungman, and members of the
Daya Bay, Double Chooz, and RENO experimental teams for valuable discussions.
\input{inputref}
\end{document}
\section{INTRODUCTION}
Nuclear reactors are intense, pure, and controllable sources of low energy electron antineutrinos.
They have been frequently, and very successfully, used
in studies of fundamental neutrino properties. They will continue to play this role in the foreseeable
future. It is, therefore,
important to understand the corresponding $\bar{\nu}_e$ flux, its energy distribution, and the associated
uncertainties in as much detail as possible. Here we review the work devoted to this issue.
The existence of neutrinos was suggested by Pauli already in 1930, in order to resolve the then apparent
energy and angular momentum non-conservation
in nuclear beta decay. Yet, the proof that neutrinos are real particles had to wait until 1953-1959, when
Reines and Cowan \cite{Reines,Reines2}
detected the electron antineutrinos
emitted by a nuclear reactor.
That fundamental experiment was the beginning of the field of neutrino exploration using
reactor antineutrinos.
The most important discovery in neutrino physics to-date is the existence of neutrino oscillations and
by consequence the finite, albeit very small, rest mass of the neutrino.
To explore oscillations with the early reactor experiments detectors were placed at distances $L \le 100$ m
\cite{ill,goesgen,rovno,krasnoyarsk1,Declais,bugey,bugey3,sc} and the observed $\bar{\nu}_e$ spectra were
compared with that expected, the latter being based
on the then accepted evaluation. Neutrino oscillations, i.e. variation of the spectrum with the distance
from the reactor, were not observed in these short baseline experiments, in agreement with
our present knowledge of the three-neutrino oscillation phenomenology. Later reactor experiments
\cite{chooz1,pv1,pv2} at larger distances ($\sim$ 1 km)
established an important upper limit for the mixing angle $\theta_{13}$, showing that this mixing angle
is substantially smaller than the other two
mixing angles, $\theta_{12}$ and $\theta_{23}$, the latter being
reasonably well determined at that time. Interpretation of results from these pioneering experiments
was directly dependent on knowledge
of the reactor neutrino flux and spectrum.
More recent, and still running, reactor neutrino experiments \cite{db1,db2,reno,dbch1,dbch2} are
devoted primarily to the determination of the mixing
angle $\theta_{13}$ with the characteristic distance from the reactor of $\sim$ 1 km,
i.e., near the corresponding oscillation minimum.
In order to avoid, or substantially reduce, dependence on
detailed knowledge of the reactor spectrum, these experiments use two essentially identical detectors, with one or more
placed relatively close to the reactors and the
other one (or several) further away. By comparing the signals at two distances it became possible
to determine the oscillation signal corresponding
to the angle $\theta_{13}$ with very good accuracy. The detectors employed in these experiments are substantially larger than those
in the previous generation of experiments and, thus, the statistical
accuracy of the spectrum determination is substantially better. Although not the original
intent, these modern experiments provide a detailed test of the
absolute reactor $\bar{\nu}_e$ flux and energy spectrum, and they raise new questions about our understanding of the expected spectra.
For precision reactor neutrino studies accurate knowledge of the reactor neutrino flux
and spectrum is important. This issue became more pressing with
the reevaluation of the spectra in 2011 in Refs. \cite{mueller,huber}, which resulted in the upward
revision of the expected reactor antineutrino signal by $\sim 6\%$. These revisions suggested
that all above mentioned experiments are missing approximately $6\%$ of the signal,
independent of the distance from the reactor, beginning at $L \ge$ 10 m.
This shortfall has become known as the ``reactor anomaly" and it has been interpreted
\cite{mention} as a possible indication of the existence of an additional, fourth, necessarily sterile, light neutrino of mass $O$(1 eV),
that becomes observable through subdominant mixing with the active neutrinos.
If confirmed, this would be a discovery of fundamental importance. However, the sterile neutrino interpretation
of the anomaly hinges on the accuracy
of the expected reactor neutrino flux.
\section{NUCLEAR REACTORS AS ELECTRON ANTINEUTRINO SOURCES}
Nuclear reactors derive their power from the fission of U and Pu isotopes and
from the radioactive decay of the corresponding fission fragments.
The beta decay of the fragments is the source of the electron antineutrinos.
The total antineutrino spectrum can be expressed as a sum over the spectra for the
dominant fissioning actinides,
\begin{equation}
S(E_{\nu}) = \Sigma_i f_i \left( \frac {dN_i}{dE_{\nu}} \right) ~,
\label{spectrum1}
\end{equation}
where $f_i$ is the number of fissions from actinide $i$ and $dN_i/dE_{\nu}$ is
the cumulative $\bar{\nu}_e$ spectrum of $i$ normalized per fission.
Thus, as a first step, the parameters $f_i$ must be determined, which requires detailed information from the
reactor operator, including the total thermal power and the linear combination of actinides contributing to the power.
The total
reactor thermal energy $W_{th}$ and the parameters $f_i$ are related through
\begin{equation}
W_{th} = \Sigma_i f_i e_i ~,
\end{equation}
where $e_i$ is the effective thermal energy per fission contributed by each actininde $i$.
In power reactors 99.9\% of the power comes from the fission
of $^{235}$U, $^{239}$Pu, $^{241}$Pu and $^{238}$U, and only these isotopes
are considered. The corresponding effective energies per fission are determined from the energy released in fission, minus the energy carried off by the antineutrinos, plus the energy produced by neutron captures on the reactor materials.
The evaluated \cite{james, kopeikin, ma} energies,
$e_i$, are given in Table \ref{energyperfission}. The corresponding estimated uncertainties are 0.25-0.5 \%.
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Transforming the thermal power into the fission rate
(all energies in MeV/fission).
Columns 2-4 are from Ref. \cite{james}.}
\label{energyperfission}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{@{}|l|c|c|c|c|c|@{}}
\hline
Nucleus & Energy from & Without $\nu$ &$E_{TOT}$ including & & \\
& mass excess & & n-captures & $E_{TOT}$ Ref. \cite{kopeikin}&$E_{TOT}$ in Ref.\cite{ma}\\
\hline
$^{235}$U & 202.7$\pm$0.1 & 192.9$\pm$0.5 & 201.7$\pm$0.6 & 201.92$\pm$0.46i&202.36$\pm$0.26\\
$^{238}$U & 205.9$\pm$0.3 & 193.9$\pm$0.8 & 205.0$\pm$0.9 & 205.52$\pm$0.96&205.99$\pm$0.52\\
$^{239}$Pu & 207.2$\pm$0.3 & 198.5$\pm$0.8 & 210.0$\pm$0.9 & 209.99$\pm$0.60&211.12$\pm$0.34\\
$^{241}$Pu & 210.6$\pm$0.3 & 200.3$\pm$0.8 & 212.4$\pm$1.0 & 213.60$\pm$0.65&214.26$\pm$0.33\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
The data for $W_{th}$ are usually available as function of time, while $f_i$, which are
typically expressed as the relative fractions
$f_i/F$, where $F$ is the total number of fissions, are obtained by (often proprietary) simulations.
The neutrino spectrum in eq. (\ref{spectrum1})
can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
S(E_{\nu}) = \frac{W_{th}}{\Sigma_i (f_i/F) e_i} \Sigma_i \frac{f_i}{F} \left( \frac {dN_i}{dE_{\nu}} \right) ~.
\label{spectrum2}
\end{equation}
In writing eq.(\ref{spectrum2}) we are implicitly assuming that long-lived fission fragments not decaying in
equilibrium have been corrected for. This issue is discussed in more detail below.
There can also be contributions to the antineutrinos emitted from the reactor complex from the radioactive spent fuel stored there. This correction,
which involves low-energy antineutrinos, is taken into account in oscillation experiments using inventory information supplied by the power company.
In order to determine the uncertainty in the $\bar{\nu}_e$ spectrum, it is necessary to determine
the uncertainties in $W_{th}$ and in $f_i/F$, as well as their correlations.
The thermal power of a reactor is most accurately determined by temperature measurements in the coolant and
the calculation of water flow rates and the energy balance
around the reactor vessel or steam generator.
It has been estimated, e.g. in Ref. \cite{djurcic} and in the references quoted there, that the total uncertainty can be
as low as $\sim$ 0.5-0.7\%, although more typically values of the order of 2\% are quoted for $W_{th}$,
and government
regulations often allow a safety margin at this higher level.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{burnhist1.ps}
\caption{
The evolution of the fuel composition for a pressurized water reactor over the reactor cycle, from Nieto {\it et al.} \cite{nieto}.
The x-axis, GW-days per metric ton of in-going uranium fuel, is proportional to the number of fissions.
As the fuel enrichment increases, the burn curves to not change significantly, rather the scale on the
x-axis becomes expanded.
}
\label{fig:burnhist}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[width=3.0in]{bowden.ps}
\caption{
The change in the total number of antineutrnos emitted over the course of a reactor fuel cycle for a pressurized water reactor, resulting from the
in-growth of $^{239}$Pu, from Bowden {\it et al.} \cite{bowden}}
\label{fig:signaldrop}
\end{figure}
Fuel management, i.e, fuel recycling and the repositioning of fuel rods within the reactor core, is quite reactor design specific.
For example, CANDU reactors involve frequent recyling of fuel and the fuel composition {$f_i$} is kept close to constant.
In pressurized water reactors, on the other hand, during each reactor cycle, which typically lasts about a year,
the fuel composition is constantly changing; the $^{235}$U is being depleted, Pu is being bred, and
the Pu fission fraction is increasing. Though it represents the vast majority of the fuel, $^{238}$U only contributes
$~\sim10\%$ of the total fission because it is a threshold
fission actinide, and the percentage of fissions
from $^{238}$U varies very slowly.
The fraction of fissions from $^{238}$U depends on the enrichment of the fuel
and on the ratio of the thermal to fast neutron flux, which are two anti-correlated parameters in the reactor design.
Fig. \ref{fig:burnhist} shows the variation in the fuel fission fraction $f_i/F$ as a function of burnup,
GWdays per metric ton of in-going uranium fuel, which is equivalent to number of fissions.
The left panel of this figure is for fresh 2.7\% $^{235}$U fuel. If the fuel enrichment is increased, the shape and magnitudes of the
curves do not
change signifcantly, rather the scale on the x-axis is expanded (right panel of Fig. \ref{fig:burnhist}), e.g.,
the burnup at which the fraction of fissions from $^{239}$Pu overtakes that from $^{235}$U is higher for higher enrichment.
In standard pressurized water reactors,
at the end of each cycle about one-third of the fuel rods (those that have been burned for three cycles) are replaced with fresh fuel,
and the position of many of the remaining partly
burned rods is changed in order to keep the neutron flux across the reactor as close to flat as is possible.
The average fuel
composition as a function of time is simulated by detailed reactor burn codes, that often include a Monte Carlo treatment of the neutron transport.
The codes are normally specific to the reactor in question and checked and fine tuned by comparisons to spent fuel isotopics.
For this reason, operators can quote the
fractions $f_i/F$ to higher accuracy that would be possible by independent untuned simulations, where isotopics of major actinides in spent fuel are reproduced at the $\sim3\%$ level and that of fission fragments considerably less accurately.
The magnitude of $\bar{\nu}_e$ spectra from the fisision
of different actinides are different, the total contribution per fission from
$^{235}$U is about 45\% higher than from $^{239}$Pu
and about 60\% lower than $^{238}$U. Thus, the total antineutrino signal per fission
can change during the reactor burn cycle. However, that variation is relatively small, and the
uncertainty related to the uncertainties in $f_i/F$ is less important
than the uncertainty in the reactor thermal power $W_{th}$.
The typical variation in the antineutrino signal as a function of burnup for a pressurized water reactor is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:signaldrop}.
The data agree quite well with the prediction and the overall effect is an
$\sim$ 10\% decrease of the count rate during a fuel cycle of about 550 days. This decrease, caused by the
changes of the fuel composition, has to be quantitatively accounted
for in oscillation experiments.
Assuming that the reactor power or neutron flux is known independently, this change
can also be used for remote monitoring of the operational
status of a nuclear reactor. The issues determining the expected antineutrino spectra and their uncertainties for a declared burn history are key to the subfield
of so-called ``Applied Antineutrino Physics"
\cite{monitoring}, and they are clearly intimately related to the issues of
this review. However, we will not discuss this application in any detail here.
In fission each actinide nucleus is split into two, usually unequal mass, fragments.
In the case of $^{235}$U, for example, the double hump mass fragment
distribution peaks at A = 94 and 140, respectively. The stable nuclei with those masses are
$^{94}$Zr and $^{140}$Ce that have 98 protons and 136 neutrons
together. The initial system has, however, 92 protons and 142 neutrons. To reach stability,
therefore, six neutrons have to transformed into six protons. That
can be accomplished only by weak interaction $\beta$ decays, in which six
electrons and six electron antineutrinos are emitted. This is a general
result for all reactor fuels; there are $\sim$ 6 $\bar{\nu}_e$ per second emitted per fission, so a typical
reactor emits $\sim 6 \times 10^{20}$ electron antineutrinos per
each GW of the thermal energy power. The cascade of
$\beta$ decays of the fission fragments is a consequence of the general increase
of the neutron to proton ratio with increasing mass. The fission fragments,
with masses near half of the initial nuclear mass, are neutron rich and hence they $\beta$ decay,
with a typical cascade of three decays each.
The $\beta$ decays, the source of the reactor $\bar{\nu}_e$, are not instantaneous;
they have finite lifetimes. As a consequence the
spectrum requires certain time interval from the beginning of the fission process to
reach a steady equilibrium. The time needed to reach equilibrium is
different for $\bar{\nu}_e$ of different energies, typically being shorter for higher energies.
When using the
reactor neutrinos to study neutrino oscillation, the neutrino capture on protons,
$\bar{\nu}_e + p \rightarrow e^+ + n$ is almost exclusively used
for neutrino detection. That reaction has a threshold, in the laboratory frame where the protons are at rest,
$E_{thr} = [( M_n + m_e )^2 - M_p^2]/ 2 M_p$ = 1.806 MeV.
Antineutrinos above this threshold mostly come from nuclei with relatively short half-lives
that reach equilibrium within a few hours.
However, there are some exceptions; there are six
fission fragments with sizable fission yield,
and Q $>$ 1.8 MeV, $^{97}$Zr, $^{132}$I, $^{93}$Y, $^{106}$Ru, $^{144}$Ce, and $^{90}$Sr. The first three of
them reach equilibrium within $\sim$ 10 days,
the next two have half-lives of 367 and 284 days, and $^{90}$Sr has $T_{1/2}$ = 28.8 years and decays into
$^{90}$Y with Q= 2.28 MeV. The effects of nonequilibrium
is discussed in Ref. \cite{kopeikin2}.
For $^{235}$U above $\sim$ 3 MeV of the neutrino energy equilibrium is
reached within one day. However, at the detection threshold it
takes about 100 days to reach 1\% stability. When testing the spectra using shorter
irradiation times it is therefore necessary to correct for such off equilibrium effects.
\section{THEORETICAL DETERMINATION OF THE REACTOR $\bar{\nu}_e$
FLUX AND SPECTRUM}
\label{section-theory}
There are two complementary ways to determine the expected electron antineutrino
spectrum of a nuclear reactor, the {\it `ab initio'} summation and the electron spectrum conversion
methods.
Assuming that the thermal power $W_{th}$, the normalized
fission fractions $f_i/F$, and the energy per fission $e_i$ of each fissioning isotope $i$
are known or determined, the total $\bar{\nu}_e$ spectrum in
eq. (\ref{spectrum2}) requires detailed knowledge of the individual fission spectra
$dN_i/dE_{\nu}$ for each of the four fuels ($^{235}$U, $^{238}$U, $^{239}$Pu,
and $^{241}$Pu).
It is usually assumed that these individual spectra depend only on the nuclear
properties of the
fissioning isotopes and their fission fragments for thermal (0.025 eV) neutron fission in the case of
$^{235}$U, $^{239}$Pu
and $^{241}$Pu, and fast fission for $^{238}$U. This might not be completely
accurate, since the fission fragment yields, i.e. the distribution of the fission fragments, depends to some extent
on the reactor dependent energy shape of the neutron flux.
Keeping this caveat in mind, we next discuss how the spectra $dN_i/dE_{\nu}$ are determined.
In the {\it `ab initio'} approach the aggregate fission antineutrino spectrum is determined by
summing the contributions of all $\beta$-decay branches of all fission
fragments
\begin{equation}
\frac{dN_i}{dE_{\bar{\nu}}} = \Sigma_n Y_n (Z,A,t) \Sigma_{n,i} b_{n,i}(E_0^i)
P_{\bar{\nu}} (E_{\bar{\nu}}, E_0^i, Z) ~,
\label{fun1}
\end{equation}
where $Y_n (Z,A,t)$ is the number of $\beta$ decays of the fragment $Z,A$ at time $t$,
and the label $n$ characterizes each fragment by whether it is in its ground state or an isomeric state.
After sufficient burn time the quantity $Y_n$ converges to the cumulative fission yield and is independent
of time.
Most fission fragments are produced by two mechanisms; first they are produced directly in the fission process with a
so-called independent yield, and second they are produced as the beta-decay daughter of a more
neutron-rich fission fragment of the same mass number.
The sum of the independent and beta-decay production of a fission fragment is its cumulative yield, and, once in equilibrium,
the cumulative yield determines the contribution of a given fragment to aggregate fission antineutrino spectrum.
The branching ratios $b_{n,i}(E_0^i)$ are characterized by the endpoint energies $E_0^i$.
They are normalized to unity, $\Sigma_i b_{n,i}(E_0^i) = 1$, unless the fragment decays by an additional mode other than beta decay.
Finally, the function $P_{\bar{\nu}} (E_{\bar{\nu}}, E_0, Z)$ is the normalized
$\bar{\nu}_e$ spectrum shape for the branch $n,i$. An analogous formula holds for the corresponding aggregate fission
electron spectrum, where $E_{\bar{\nu}}$ in the individual spectra $P$ must be replaced by
$E_e = E_0^i - E_{\bar{\nu}}$, since the nuclear recoil can be neglected within the accuracy considered here.
Fig. \ref{fig:antispect} shows the antineutrino spectrum predicted by the summation method,
using the JEFF-3.1.1 \cite{jeff} database fission fragment yields and the ENDF/B-VII.1 \cite{endf} decay library. The ENDF/B-VII.1
decay library used here is that up-dated in ref. \cite{sonzogni} to improve important issues with the older database pointed out in \cite{fallot}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=3.0in]{neutall-JEFF-tot.ps}
\caption{
The antineutrino spectra for the four actinides determining the total antineutrino flux emitted from reactors.
The fission yields were taken from JEFF-3.1.1 and the decay data,
included the modeled data for unmeasured spectra, from ENDF/B-VII.1.}
\label{fig:antispect}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In applying the summation technique and eq. (\ref{fun1}) several sources of uncertainty arise.
The fission yields $Y_n$ have been evaluated by several international database groups, but for many important fragments the yields
involve large uncertainties. The branching ratios $b_{n,i}$ are also not known for all fragments, and nor are the
quantum numbers (spins and parity) of all of the initial and final states.
The shape of the $\beta$ decay spectrum $P$ is well known for allowed transitions ($\Delta I \le 1,
\pi_i \pi_f = 1)$ transitions. For neutron rich fission fragments all of the allowed transitions are Gamow-Teller transitions, determined by the operator $\sigma\tau$.
However, $\sim30\%$ of the transitions making up the aggregate spectra are known to be so-called first forbidden transitions, $(\Delta I \le 2, \pi_i \pi_f = -1)$,
and involve nuclear structure dependent combinations of several more complicated operators.
In the cases of some first forbidden operators, the spectra involve shapes that are noticeably different from those for allowed transitions,
as described in the subsection \ref{subsecs:forbidden}.
Finally, there are important, albeit small,
corrections to the beta-decay spectra arising from radiative, nuclear finite size, and weak magnetism effects, and these can also depend on the details of the transition,
as described in the subsection.
\ref{subsecs:allowed}.
The difficulties of the {\it `ab initio'} method, and the corresponding uncertainties are described in the next section and
in the section on uncertainties.
The second method of determining the spectra $dN_i/dE_{\nu}$ begins with the experimentally measured
aggregate {\it electron} spectrum associated with the fission of each individual actinide $i$.
The electron spectrum for thermal neutron fission of $^{235}$U, $^{239}$Pu and $^{24 1}$Pu were measured at ILL, Grenoble, France
in 1980's \cite{Schr2,Schr3,Schr4}. The results were republished with a finer grid of electron
energies recently in the Ref \cite{Haag1}. $^{238}$U fissions only with fast neutrons; its electron spectrum was
measured much later at the neutron source FRMII in Garching, Germany \cite{Haag}.
These experimentally determined electron spectra are automatically summed over all
fission fragments and the corresponding
$\beta$-decay branches, so no information on the fission yields and branching ratios is needed.
It is necessary, however, to convert them into the $\bar{\nu}_e$ spectra.
It is also necessary to make the relatively small correction for the fact that the electron spectra were determined before
full equilibrium was reached.
To convert a measured aggregate electron spectrum into an antineutrino spectrum, the spectrum is binned over an energy grid,
with the grid defining a set of virtual end-point energies $E_0^i$.
The total aggregate spectrum is then fitted in terms of the amplitudes $a_i$ for each virtual end-point energies,
$dN_i/dE_{e}=\Sigma_i a_i P(E,E_0^i, Z)$.
In principle, the position of the virtual end-point energies can also be part of the fit.
Thus, the aggregate electron spectra, which have been measured in the energy window ($\sim2-8.5$ MeV),
are described by a sum of virtual $\beta$-decay branches of assumed spectral shapes.
The conversion to the antineutrino
spectrum is then simply accomplished by replacing the energy $E_e$ in each branch by $E_0 - E_{\bar{\nu}}$.
The procedure guaranties that the experimental electron spectrum is well reproduced. It is also
straightforward to test whether the convergence on the number of energy intervals is achieved, which typically requires less than
30 intervals.
However,
the converted $\bar{\nu}_e$ depends to some degree on the assumptions made about the
spectrum shapes $P_i$, whether they correspond to allowed or forbidden transitions, their $Z$ dependence, and the form of the
corrections arising from nuclear finite size and weak magnetism. An example of the uncertainty in the converted spectrum is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:conv}. There can also be some dependence on the endpoint energies $E_0^i$.
To avoid
sizable systematic errors when converting the electron spectrum it is necessary to use the
data bases and evaluate the dependence of the average nuclear charge Z on the endpoint
energy discussed in \cite{huber,vogel07}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=3.0in]{conv-235.ps}
\caption{
The antineutrino spectrum for $^{235}$U derived by converting \cite{huber,Schr2} the measured \cite{Schr2} electron spectrum.
The difference in the two derived spectra arises from differences in the assumptions made about the subdominant
corrections to beta-decay.
The uncertainty in the theoretical form of these corrections, discussed below and summarized in Table \ref {uncert},
are sufficently large that direct experimental measurements will be necessary to determine the correct normalization of
the antineutrino spectra to this accuracy.}
\label{fig:conv}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
A hybrid combination of these two methods has been also used \cite{mueller}, in which equation (\ref{fun1})
is used for the fission fragments and $\beta$-decay branches where experimental data are available.
Both electron and $\bar{\nu}_e$ spectra for this large subset of fission fragments are then evaluated.
The difference between the measured electron spectrum \cite{Schr2,Schr3,Schr4} and the
evaluated partial electron spectrum is then converted into the $\bar{\nu}_e$ spectrum by the fitting procedure.
This hybrid method has the advantage of taking account of the measured properties of a large subset of the fission fragments, and using
experimental data to determine the energy dependence of forbidden transitions and the $Z$ dependence of $P_i$.
In any of the methods, a necessary condition is a good understanding of the shape factors
$P_{\bar{\nu}} (E_{\bar{\nu}}, E_0^i, Z)$ of the individual $\beta$ decays, including
nuclear charge $Z$ and the end-points $E_0^i$, as well as the role of the allowed versus forbidden transitions.
|
\section{About this Note}
This is a companion note to our recent study of the weak convergence properties of constrained ETD algorithms from a theoretical perspective \cite{etd-wkconv}.
Our purpose here is to supplement that theoretical analysis with simulation results, and to illustrate the behavior of some of the ETD algorithms using examples.
We will consider three test problems: two small grid world-like problems and then the larger Mountain Car problem.
As to the algorithms, we will focus on the two variant algorithms in \cite{etd-wkconv} (given by Eqs.~(3.3) and (3.4) respectively in Section 3.2 of \cite{etd-wkconv}), as well as their perturbed versions for the constant-stepsize case (given by Eq.~(3.7) in Section 3.3 of \cite{etd-wkconv}).
These algorithms are constrained ETD algorithms that have biases (cf.\ the discussion in Section 3.2 of \cite{etd-wkconv}), but they are more robust than the unbiased algorithms in practice, as we will also explain later in Section~\ref{sec-2prob} of this note.
We will refer to the two variant algorithms as Variant I and Variant II below.
In what follows, we first describe the two small test problems and illustrate the behavior of the trace iterates (Section~\ref{sec-2prob}).
We then show simulation results of the constrained ETD algorithms just mentioned, for the case of constant stepsize (Section~\ref{sec-conststp}) and for the case of diminishing stepsize (Section~\ref{sec-dimstp}). We use these results in particular to demonstrate some of the convergence properties proved in \cite{etd-wkconv}, and to show that the algorithms are well-behaved despite the high variance issue in off-policy learning.
Finally, we show simulation results on the Mountain Car example for a chosen target policy (Section~\ref{sec-mountaincar}). This is to demonstrate that ETD can be applied beyond small test problems and is a useful method for off-policy learning.
Before proceeding, we would like to clarify that we do not intend this note to be a stand-alone paper.
We will thus use the notation given in \cite{etd-wkconv} without redefining it here.
We will also include very few references -- only those needed in order to clarify some experimental setup or results.
(Please see the paper \cite{etd-wkconv} for important prior works on TD and ETD learning.)
We would also like to mention that we use colors in most of the figures to distinguish between the iterates produced by different algorithms.
Therefore it is better to view the contents of this note on a computer screen than to have them printed out in black and white.
\section{Two Test Problems} \label{sec-2prob}
We now describe two test problems used in our experiments. For these two problems, it is simpler to describe the system dynamics directly in terms of the state transition probabilities, without dealing with actions explicitly. So this is what we are going to do below. (Readers who wish to make the action space explicit may interpret each state transition in our description below as being caused by a distinct action that results in that particular transition with certainty.)
\medskip
\noindent{\bf Problem I:}
Problem I has $6$ states. Let $P_{\pi}$ and $P_{\pi^o}$ be the state transition probability matrices under the target policy $\pi$ and behavior policy $\pi^o$, respectively. These transition matrices are given by
$$ P_{\pi} = \left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0.9 & 0 & 0.1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0.9 & 0 & 0.1 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0.2 & 0.3 & 0.5 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0.1 & 0 & 0.9\\
0.9 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0.1 & 0
\end{array} \right),
\qquad P_{\pi^o} = \left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0\\
0.5 & 0 & 0.5 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0.5 & 0 & 0.5 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0.4 & 0.2 & 0.4 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0.5 & 0 & 0.5\\
0.5 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0.5 & 0 \end{array}
\right).
$$
Their associated transition graphs have the same topology, which is drawn in Figure~\ref{fig-trgrph} (left).
The transition from state $6$ to $1$ has reward $1$; all the other transitions have reward zero.
The rest of the parameters are defined as follows. The discount factors $\gamma(s)$ are state-dependent: $\gamma(1)=0.7$ and $\gamma(s) = 1$ for $s > 1$.
The interest weights $i(s)$ and the $\lambda$-parameters are also state-dependent: $i(s) = 1$ for $s \in \{2, 4, 6\}$ and $i(s) = 0$ otherwise, $\lambda(s) = 0$ for $s \in \{2, 4, 6\}$ and $\lambda(s)=1$ otherwise. Aggregating states into $3$ groups, $\{1, 4\}$, $\{2,3\}$, and $\{5, 6\}$, we assign $3$ binary features to each state to indicate its membership.
We remark that with the above choices of $i$ and $\lambda$, the approximate value function $\phi(s)^\top \theta^*$ of ETD equals exactly the true value function $v_{\pi}(s)$ at $s \in \{2, 4, 6\}$, the three states of interest. This serves as an example to show how one can define state-dependent $i$ and $\lambda$ jointly so that accurate estimates of $v_\pi(s)$ for desired states can be obtained, in spite of capacity limitation in the function approximation architecture.
\begin{figure}[thb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.27\linewidth]{gridworld1} \qquad \qquad \qquad \quad
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{gridworld2}\\*[5pt]
\caption{The transition graphs of two test problems.}
\label{fig-trgrph}
\end{figure}%
\noindent{\bf Problem II:}
Problem II has $21$ states, whose interconnections are depicted in Figure~\ref{fig-trgrph} (right). One state is located at the centre, and the rest of the states split evenly into four groups, indicated by the four loops in Figure~\ref{fig-trgrph}. The topology of the transition graph is the same for the target and behavior policies. We have drawn the transition graph only for the northeast group in Figure~\ref{fig-trgrph} (right); the states in each of the other three groups are arranged in the same manner and have the same transition structure. Given this symmetry, to specify the transition probability matrices $P_{\pi}$ and $P_{\pi^o}$, it suffices to specify the submatrices of $P_{\pi}$ and $P_{\pi^o}$ for the central state and one of the groups.
If we label the central state as state $1$ and the states in the northeast group counterclockwise as states $2$-$6$, the submatrices of $P_{\pi}$, $P_{\pi^o}$ for these states are given by
\begin{align*}
\text{target policy:} & \quad \left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 0.25 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0.2 & 0 & 0.8 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0.2 & 0 & 0.8 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0.2 & 0 & 0.8\\
0.8 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0.2 & 0
\end{array} \right),\\*[0.2cm]
\text{behavior policy:} & \quad
\left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 0.25 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0.5 & 0 & 0.5 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0.5 & 0 & 0.5 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0.5 & 0 & 0.5\\
0.5 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0.5 & 0
\end{array} \right).
\end{align*}
Intuitively speaking, from the central state, the system enters one group of states by moving diagonally in one of the four directions with equal probability. After spending some time in that group, eventually returns to the central state and the process repeats. The behavior policy on average spends more time wandering inside each group than the target policy, while the target policy tends to traverse counterclockwise through the group more quickly.
All the rewards are zero except for the middle state in each group -- for the northeast group, this is the shaded state in Figure~\ref{fig-trgrph} (right). For the two northern groups, their middle state has reward $1$, while for the two southern groups, that reward is $-1$.
The discount factor is $\gamma=0.9$ for all states. The interest weights and $\lambda$-parameters are set to be $\lambda(s)=0$, $i(s) =1$ for all states.
As to features, we aggregate states into $5$ groups, the $4$ groups mentioned earlier and the central state forming its own group, and
we let each state have $5$ binary features indicating its membership.
\medskip
\noindent{\bf Behavior of traces:} We use the next three figures to illustrate the behavior of traces. (Readers who are interested only in the behavior of the $\theta$-iterates of the ETD algorithms may skip this part and go to the subsequent sections directly.) In general, by identifying certain cycle patterns in the transition graphs, one can infer whether the trace iterates $\{(e_t, F_t)\}$ will be unbounded over time almost surely \cite[Section 3.1]{Yu-siam-lstd}.
Figure~\ref{fig-trgrph-cycles} shows a few examples of such cycles in the two test problems just described.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.27\linewidth]{gridworld1-cycles} \qquad \qquad \qquad \quad
\includegraphics[width=0.15\linewidth]{gridworld2-cycles}
\caption{Some cycle patterns in the transition graphs of the test problems.}
\label{fig-trgrph-cycles}
\end{figure}
The left graph in Figure~\ref{fig-trgrph-cycles} is a cycle of two states, $\{4, 4\}$, in the transition graph of Problem I. The edge of the graph is labeled with the importance sampling weight $0.3/0.2$ for the self-transition $4 \to 4$. (For the two test problems the importance sampling weights are simply given by the ratios between the entries of $P_\pi$ and $P_{\pi^o}$.) If we multiply together the importance sampling weight and the discount factor $\gamma(s)$ along this cycle, we get $ \tfrac{0.3}{0.2} \cdot \gamma(4) = \tfrac{0.3}{0.2} > 1$,
while the interest weight $i(4) > 0$ for the only state involved in this cycle. Then from \cite[Prop.\ 3.1]{Yu-siam-lstd} (cf.\ Footnote 3 therein) we can deduce that in Problem I, the follow-on traces $\{F_t\}$ (which is updated according to $F_t = \gamma_t \rho_{t-1} F_{t-1} + i(S_t)$ in this test problem) will be almost surely unbounded.
Similarly, the right graph in Figure~\ref{fig-trgrph-cycles} is a cycle of states in the transition graph of Problem II. It consists of the central state and the northeast group of states. The importance sampling weights for each transition are labeled on the edges of the cycle. Traversing through the cycle once from any starting state, and multiplying together the importance sampling weights and the discount factors of each edge and its destination state, we get
$ \left( \tfrac{0.8}{0.5} \right)^4 \cdot \gamma^6 = \left( \tfrac{0.8}{0.5} \right)^4 \cdot 0.9^6 > 1,$
while at least one of the states in the cycle has a positive interest weight (since all the states are of interest in this problem). Then we can deduce as in the previous case that $\{F_t\}$ will be unbounded almost surely. Hence, the eligibility traces $e_t$ will also be unbounded in this case (because with $\lambda = 0$ in this problem, we have $e_t = F_t \phi(S_t)$).
As another example, suppose in Problem I we let $\lambda = 1$ for all states instead.
The middle graph in Figure~\ref{fig-trgrph-cycles} exhibits a cycle of states in the transition graph in this case. If we multiply together the importance sampling weights and the $\gamma(s), \lambda(s)$ values on each edge and its destination state in this cycle, we get
$\left( \tfrac{0.9}{0.5} \right)^3 \cdot 0.7 > 1$,
while $i(s) \phi(s)$ is nonnegative for all states in the cycle and nonzero for at least one (e.g., state $4$ or $6$). Then it can be deduced by using \cite[Prop.\ 3.1]{Yu-siam-lstd} as before that the eligibility traces $\{e_t\}$ (generated in this case by $e_t = \lambda_t \gamma_t \rho_{t-1} e_{t-1} + i(S_t) \phi(S_t)$) will be almost surely unbounded.
We plotted in the upper left graphs of Figure \ref{fig-trace1} and Figure \ref{fig-trace2} the values of the max-norm $\|(e_t, F_t)\|$ over $8 \times 10^5$ iterations for the two test problems, respectively (the $x$-axis indicates the iteration $t$). One can see the recurring spikes in these graphs and the exceptionally large values of some of these spikes. This is consistent with the unboundedness of $\{(e_t, F_t)\}$ in the two test problems just discussed.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{diste3a} \hfill
\raisebox{11pt}{\includegraphics[width=0.44\linewidth]{diste3b}}
\caption{Statistics of traces for Problem I. See the text for details.} \label{fig-trace1}
\end{figure}%
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{diste4a} \hfill
\raisebox{11pt}{\includegraphics[width=0.44\linewidth]{diste4b}}
\caption{Statistics of traces for Problem II. See the text for details.} \label{fig-trace2}
\end{figure}%
The unboundedness of $\{(e_t, F_t)\}$ tells us that the invariant probability measure $\zeta$ of the Markov chain $\{Z_t\} = \{(S_t, A_t, e_t, F_t)\}$ has an unbounded support.
Despite this unboundedness, $\{(e_t, F_t)\}$ is bounded in probability (see the discussion in~\cite[Appendix A]{etd-wkconv}), and under the invariant distribution $\zeta$, $\mathbb{E}_\zeta \big[ \| (e_0, F_0)\| \big] < \infty$ (see \cite[Theorem 2.3]{etd-wkconv}). The latter relation implies that under the invariant distribution, the probability of $\| (e_0, F_0)\| > x$ decreases as $o(1/x)$ for large $x$.
Since the empirical distribution of $\{Z_t\}$ converges to $\zeta$ almost surely, during a run of many iterations, we expect to see the fraction of traces with $\| (e_t, F_t)\| > x$ drop in a similar way as $x$ increases.
The simulation results shown in the right part of Figures~\ref{fig-trace1}-\ref{fig-trace2} agree with the preceding discussion.
Plotted in those two graphs are fractions of traces with $\|(e_t, F_t)\| > x$ during $8\times 10^5$ iterations of the ETD algorithm (the vertical axis indicates the fraction, and the horizontal axis indicates $x$).
For instance, the fraction of traces with $\|(e_t, F_t)\| > 50$ is less than (abound) $0.02$ for Problem I (Problem II).
It can be seen that despite the recurring spikes in $\|(e_t, F_t)\|$ during the entire run, the fraction of traces with large magnitude $x$ drops sharply with the increase in $x$.
Finally, let us discuss yet another behavior of the traces, in connection with the biased constrained ETD algorithms that we will focus on in the rest of this note.
Although only a small fraction of traces have exceptionally large magnitude,
they can occur in consecutive iterations.
We plotted two histograms in the lower left part of Figures~\ref{fig-trace1}-\ref{fig-trace2} to illustrate this type of behavior.
These histograms concern the excursions of the trajectory $(e_t, F_t)$, $t \geq 0$, outside of the box $\{ x \in \re^{n+1} \mid \| x\| \leq 50\}$.
The x-axis of the histograms indicates how long is such an excursion (i.e., the number of iterations it contains),
and the y-axis indicates how many excursions of length $x$ occurred during the $8\times 10^5$ iterations of the experimental run.
We plotted the histograms for length $x > 10$.
This type of behavior suggests that it is better to apply the biased constrained ETD algorithms instead of the unbiased ones (constrained or unconstrained) in practice.
This is because when traces with large magnitude occur in consecutive iterations, they can result in large changes in the $\theta$-iterates in a short period of time, if little constraint is put on the size of the change $\theta_{t+1} - \theta_t$ at each iteration.
The unbiased ETD algorithms tend to be fragile in practice for this reason, despite their superior asymptotic convergence properties.
The biased algorithms take measures to prevent such abrupt changes in the $\theta$-iterates: for example, Variant I truncates the traces, and Variant II truncates the increments in the $\theta$-iterates. Because the fractions of traces with large magnitude are small, these truncations, with proper choices of threshold parameters, make only a small change in the mean update of ETD (cf.\ the discussion in \cite[Section 3.2]{etd-wkconv}). So the biased algorithms can gain much robustness in performance by paying only a small price of bias.
\section{Simulation Results for the Constant-stepsize Case} \label{sec-conststp}
In this section we show simulation results of the biased constrained ETD algorithms with a constant stepsize, for the two test problems described in the previous section.
Besides the two biased algorithms, Variant I and Variant II, we will also show results for the perturbed versions of these two variants. Our focus will be on the behavior of multiple consecutive $\theta$-iterates and the behavior of a trajectory of $\theta$-iterates or their averaged iterates, under various stepsizes.
In the experiments reported below, the radius parameter $r_B$ for constraining $\theta$ is set to be $r_B=100$ (well above the threshold required by \cite[Lemma 2.1]{etd-wkconv}, which is calculated to be $ r_B > 7.04$ for Problem I and $r_B > 5.20$ for Problem II).
The function $\psi_K$ in the variant algorithms (cf.\ Eq.~(3.2) in \cite{etd-wkconv}) is taken to be the componentwise truncation,
$\psi_K(x) = \min\{K, \max \{ -K, x\}\}$, for $K=50$.
The perturbed versions of the two algorithms use the same $r_B$ and $\psi_K$, and the perturbation variables $\Delta_{\theta,t}^\alpha$ (which are of the same size as $\theta$) are i.i.d.\ normal random variables with zero mean and covariance matrix $(\tfrac{\alpha}{2})^2 I$.
We will also show results of a modified version of ELSTD, which like Variant I also uses $\psi_K$ to truncate the traces $e_t$ in its matrix/vector iterates. The limiting $\theta$ produced by this modified ELSTD is indeed the point that Variant I would converge to in the case of diminishing stepsize. Thus by running this version of ELSTD we can get an estimate of the bias in Variant I. To be concise, in what follows, we will often refer to this modified ELSTD algorithm simply as ELSTD.
To visualize the behavior of the algorithms, instead of plotting the iterates $\theta_t$ themselves, we will calculate and plot the normalized distances between $\theta_t$ and the desired ETD solution $\theta^*$. Here by the normalized distance we mean $|\theta_t - \theta^*|/|\theta^*|$, normalized by $|\theta^*|$, which is nonzero for both test problems. Correspondingly, we will refer frequently to $\delta$-neighborhoods of $\theta^*$ where $\delta$ are multiples of $|\theta^*|$,
such as the $0.1 |\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$ or the $x |\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$ for some $x > 0$.
\subsection{Problem I}
The experiments below compare the behavior of the various algorithms in Problem I, for four different stepsizes: $\alpha = 0.01, 0.002, 0.001, 0.0005$.
First, we did $4$ independent runs of both Variant I and Variant II. Each run lasted for $6\times 10^5$ iterations, during which the same state trajectory is used by both algorithms for all the four stepsizes. We did the same experiments for the perturbed versions of the two variants. To illustrate the steady state behavior, we used only the last $4 \times 10^5$ iterations of each run to obtain the statistics of multiple consecutive iterates shown in Figures~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1b}-\ref{fig-cnst-ex1e} below.
Before proceeding to explain these figures, let us first show an example trajectory from a single run (more trajectories of iterates will be shown later).
Plotted in Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1a} are the normalized distances to $\theta^*$ of the iterates $\theta_t^\alpha$ produced by Variants I and II (top row) and by their perturbed versions (bottom row) in the last $4 \times 10^5$ iterations of one run, for the smallest stepsize $\alpha = 0.0005$ in our experiments.
The dashed lines correspond to the averaged iterates $\bar \theta_t^\alpha$ (where the averaging also starts with the later portion of the run and neglects its initial portion). It can be seen that compared to the original iterates $\theta_t^\alpha$, the averaged iterates $\bar \theta_t^\alpha$ are much less volatile and, in the case of the unperturbed variant algorithms, approach a smaller neighborhood of $\theta^*$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{cfig1g_1} \qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{cfig1g_2}\\*[0.1cm]
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{cfig1f_1} \qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{cfig1f_2}
\caption{Variants I and II without (top) and with (bottom) perturbation ($\alpha = 0.0005$).} \label{fig-cnst-ex1a}
\end{figure}
Another note is that since the algorithms are biased, even if we had used smaller stepsizes, the iterates would not be able to approach an arbitrarily small neighborhood of $\theta^*$. To get an estimate of the degree of bias, we ran the modified ELSTD for $8$ independent runs of $8 \times 10^5$ iterations each. Averaged over the $8$ runs, the mean normalized distance (to $\theta^*$) of the ELSTD final solution was $0.0035$ with standard deviation $0.0017$. Consistently, we see from Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1a} that most iterates of Variants I and II are still outside the $0.005 |\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$, although the averaged iterates $\bar \theta_t^\alpha$ seem to approach a smaller neighborhood. Recall also that Variant~II need not converge at all (cf.\ \cite[Section 3.2]{etd-wkconv}). In our experiments we observed it to behave similarly to Variant I and have a comparable bias (albeit slightly larger than that of Variant I for the two test problems).
We now proceed to explain the details of Figures~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1b}-\ref{fig-cnst-ex1e}, which demonstrate the behavior of multiple consecutive $\theta$-iterates for the four stepsizes:
\begin{figure}[!htb] \centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{cfig1g_1t2} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{cfig1g_2t2}
\caption{Variant I (left) and Variant II (right) without perturbation. The $x$-axis represents the $x |\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$. The $y$-component of a point $(x,y)$ represents the fraction of times (in a single run) that a segment of $100$ consecutive iterates fails to lie entirely inside the $x|\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$. (See the text for more details.)}\label{fig-cnst-ex1b}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{cfig1g_1t3} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{cfig1g_2t3}
\caption{Variant I (left) and Variant II (right) without perturbation. The $x$-axis represents the $x |\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$. The $y$-component of a point $(x,y)$ represents the fraction of times (in a single run) that a segment of $\lfloor \tfrac{1}{\alpha} \rfloor$ consecutive iterates fails to lie entirely inside the $x|\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$. (See the text for more details.)}\label{fig-cnst-ex1c}
\end{figure}%
\medskip
\noindent Figures~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1b}-\ref{fig-cnst-ex1c}: In both figures, the $x$-axis represents the $x|\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$, and the $y$-component of a point $(x,y)$ represents the fraction of times that a certain number of consecutive iterates $\theta_t^\alpha$ fail to lie entirely inside the $x|\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$.
Specifically, for Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1b} we consider every segment of $100$ consecutive iterates, $(\theta_{t}^\alpha, \ldots, \theta_{t+99}^\alpha), t= 0, 1, \ldots$, during each run. Plotted in Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1b} are the fractions of times (during a single run) that such a segment fails to lie entirely inside the $x |\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$.
We then consider segments of $\lfloor \tfrac{1}{\alpha} \rfloor$ consecutive iterates, $\big(\theta_{t}^\alpha, \ldots, \theta^\alpha_{t+\lfloor 1/\alpha \rfloor-1} \big), t = 0, 1, \ldots$. Plotted in Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1c} are the fractions of times (during a single run) that a segment of length $\lfloor \tfrac{1}{\alpha} \rfloor$ fails to lie entirely inside the $x |\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$. (Note that the smaller the stepsize $\alpha$, the longer the segments used to calculate the fractions of times shown in the figure.)
In both figures, for each color and each algorithm, the solid line corresponds to the results from one of the four runs, while the three dashed lines correspond to the results from the other three runs.
It can be seen that the smaller the stepsize, the smaller the neighborhood of $\theta^*$ inside which a trajectory of iterates spends most of its time.
The behavior of multiple consecutive iterates shown in these figures can be compared with the assertions in Theorem~3.4(ii) and Theorem 3.6(i) of \cite{etd-wkconv}.
\medskip
\noindent Figures~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1d}-\ref{fig-cnst-ex1e}: We repeated the same experiments for the perturbed versions of Variants I and II. The results are shown in Figures~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1d}-\ref{fig-cnst-ex1e}, and they show similar behavior of the multiple consecutive iterates generated by these perturbed algorithms. (As in the previous case, in the figures, for each color, the solid lines correspond to the results from one of the four runs, and the dashed lines the other three runs.)
These simulation results can be compared with the assertions in Theorem~3.8 of \cite{etd-wkconv}.
\vfill
\pagebreak
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.46\linewidth]{cfig1f_1t2} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.46\linewidth]{cfig1f_2t2}
\caption{Variant I (left) and Variant II (right) with perturbation. The $x$-axis represents the $x |\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$. The $y$-component of a point $(x,y)$ represents the fraction of times (in a single run) that a segment of $100$ consecutive iterates fails to lie entirely inside the $x|\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$. See the text for more details.}\label{fig-cnst-ex1d}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.46\linewidth]{cfig1f_1t3} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.46\linewidth]{cfig1f_2t3}
\caption{Variant I (left) and Variant II (right) with perturbation. The $x$-axis represents the $x |\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$. The $y$-component of a point $(x,y)$ represents the fraction of times (in a single run) that a segment of $\lfloor \tfrac{1}{\alpha} \rfloor$ consecutive iterates fails to lie entirely inside the $x|\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$. (See the text for more details.)}\label{fig-cnst-ex1e}
\end{figure}
In the rest of this subsection we show more trajectories of iterates from individual runs. The results are plotted in Figures~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1f}-\ref{fig-cnst-ex1i}, and the details of the experiments and our observations from them are as follows.
\medskip
\noindent Figures \ref{fig-cnst-ex1f}-\ref{fig-cnst-ex1g}: In these plots we show the normalized distances (to $\theta^*$) of a trajectory of averaged iterates $\bar{\theta}_t^{\alpha}$ and original iterates $\theta_t^\alpha$, for each algorithm and each stepsize, using the data from one of the experimental runs that produced the previous four figures. Comparing the top rows with the bottom rows in Figures~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1f}-\ref{fig-cnst-ex1g}, the averaged iterates $\bar{\theta}_t^{\alpha}$ are better than $\theta_t^\alpha$ in terms of both the volatility of the iterates and the closeness to the desired solution, especially when the stepsize is relatively large. Comparing the right columns with the left ones in Figures~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1f}-\ref{fig-cnst-ex1g}, it can be seen that Variant II has a larger variance than Variant I (although we have also observed the opposite in other problems not reported in this note). Comparing Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1f} with Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1g}, it can be seen that for the same stepsize, the perturbed algorithms settled inside a larger neighborhood of $\theta^*$ than the unperturbed algorithms did. This suggests that the better asymptotic properties of the perturbed algorithms can be compromised by the noises brought by the perturbation (cf.\ Remark 3.2 at the end of Section 3.3 of \cite{etd-wkconv}), and the unperturbed algorithms may be adequate for practical purposes (cf.\ Remark 4.1 at the end of Section 4.3 in \cite{etd-wkconv}).
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{cfig1g_avtraj1} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{cfig1g_avtraj2}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{cfig1g_traj1} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{cfig1g_traj2}
\caption{Variant I (left) and Variant II (right) without perturbation. Top: averaged iterates $\bar\theta_t^\alpha$; bottom: iterates $\theta_t^\alpha$. Data are from a single run.}\label{fig-cnst-ex1f}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!thb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{cfig1f_avtraj1} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{cfig1f_avtraj2}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{cfig1f_traj1} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{cfig1f_traj2}
\caption{Variant I (left) and Variant II (right) with perturbation. Top: averaged iterates $\bar\theta_t^\alpha$; bottom: iterates $\theta_t^\alpha$. Data are from a single run.}\label{fig-cnst-ex1g}
\end{figure}
\medskip
\noindent Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1h}: In this experiment we compare the transient behavior of the variant algorithms for the four stepsizes using a single run of $10^5$ iterations. All the algorithms start from the same initial condition, and no portion of the run is discarded. ELSTD is also included for comparison: the linear equations formed by ELSTD are solved every 500 iterations to produce the ELSTD curve shown in the figure. It can be seen that ELSTD converges rapidly. With a large stepsize $\alpha = 0.01$, Variants I and II also make quick initial progress, before they start to oscillate in a relatively large neighborhood of $\theta^*$.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{exp1e_traj1b} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{exp1e_traj2b}
\caption{Variant I (left) and Variant II (right) without perturbation. Data are from a single run; ELSTD is also included for comparison.}\label{fig-cnst-ex1h}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.43\linewidth]{cfig1els_1b} \qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.43\linewidth]{cfig1els_2b}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.43\linewidth]{cfig1els_1a} \qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.43\linewidth]{cfig1els_2a}
\caption{Variant I (left) and Variant II (right) without perturbation. Top: averaged iterates $\bar\theta_t^\alpha$; bottom: iterates $\theta_t^\alpha$. Data are from a single run; ELSTD is included in all the cases for comparison.}\label{fig-cnst-ex1i}
\end{figure}
\medskip
\noindent Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1i}: This experiment serves as an example to show that the convergence behavior of the ETD algorithms are not affected when the matrix $C$ associated with ETD is negative semidefinite instead of negative definite (cf.\ \cite[Section 5.1]{etd-wkconv}). In this experiment we let $i(s)=1$ for only two states, $s \in \{2,6\}$ (i.e., removing state $4$ from the original list of states of interest) and we set $i(s)=0$ for the other states. Correspondingly, we set $\lambda(s)=0$ for $s \in \{2,6\}$ and $\lambda(s)=1$ otherwise. Then the $3 \times 3$ matrix $C$ has rank $2$ and becomes negative semidefinite. We ran the unperturbed Variant I and Variant II, initialized at zero, and we also ran ELSTD. The algorithms ran as in the previous cases and none of them had any issues (cf.\ the explanations given in Section 5.1 of \cite{etd-wkconv}). The iterates have higher variances in this case, so in order to obtain iterates that can approach the $0.1|\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$, we used a larger threshold $K=200$ in the function $\psi_K$, as well as smaller stepsizes in this experiment. (The higher variances in this case have nothing to do with the negative semidefiniteness of $C$. Instead it is a consequence of the following fact: here ETD is solving a generalized multistep Bellman equation for the two states $\{2, 6\}$ of interest, and these two states are far apart from each other in the directed transition graph. So compared with the original setting of Problem I, in this case it takes on average more steps to reach any of the states of interest again after visiting either one of them.)
Plotted in Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1i} are the normalized distances to $\theta^*$ of the averaged iterates $\bar \theta_t^\alpha$ and of the original iterates $\theta_t^\alpha$ generated in the later portion of a single run, for four choices of stepsizes. Specifically, to reduce transient effects and focus on the steady state behavior, we first ran all the algorithms for $3\times 10^5$ iterations with the stepsize $0.0005$, and we then continued the run for another $10^6$ iterations with the four different stepsizes indicated in the figure. The averaged iterates shown in the top row of the figure are generated from those later $10^6$ iterations of the run.
It can be seen that overall the behavior of the iterates is similar to what we observed in the previous experiments.
\subsection{Problem II}
We repeated for Problem II the same experiments we did for Problem I.
All the algorithms are tested for five stepsizes: $\alpha = 0.0005, 0.0002, 0.0001, 0.00005, 0.00002$.
First, we did $4$ independent runs of Variants I and II and their perturbed versions.
Each run has $11 \times 10^5$ iterations, and the last $8 \times 10^5$ iterations are used to obtain the statistics of multiple consecutive iterates shown in Figures~\ref{fig-cnst-ex2b}-\ref{fig-cnst-ex2e}, in order to show the stead state behavior of the algorithms. More details are as follows.
\medskip
\noindent Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex2a}: This figure shows an example trajectory from a single run.
Plotted in the figure are the normalized distances to $\theta^*$ of the iterates $\theta_t^\alpha$ generated by the four algorithms for the smallest stepsize $\alpha = 0.00002$.
The dashed lines correspond to the averaged iterates $\bar \theta_t^\alpha$, which, like in the case of Problem I, can be seen to behave better than the original iterates $\theta^\alpha_t$. We ran ELSTD to get an estimate of the degree of bias of Variant I. Averaged over $8$ independent runs of $8 \times 10^5$ iterations each, the mean normalized distance of the ELSTD final solution to $\theta^*$ was $0.043$ with standard deviation $0.003$. So based on Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex2a}, it seems that the iterates generated by Variant I with the stepsize $\alpha = 0.00002$ are not far from the smallest neighborhood that Variant I can reach.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{cfig2f_1} \qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{cfig2f_2}\\*[0.1cm]
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{cfig2d_1} \qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{cfig2d_2}
\caption{Variants I and II without (top) and with (bottom) perturbation ($\alpha = 0.00002$).} \label{fig-cnst-ex2a}
\end{figure}
\medskip
\noindent Figures~\ref{fig-cnst-ex2b}-\ref{fig-cnst-ex2e}: These figures show the behavior of multiple consecutive iterates for the four algorithms with different stepsizes.
For Variants I and II, plotted in Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex2b} are the fractions of times (during a single run) that a segment of length $100$, $(\theta_{t}^\alpha, \ldots, \theta_{t+99}^\alpha)$, fails to lie entirely inside the $x |\theta^*|$-neighborhood, and plotted in Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex2c} are the fractions of times (during a single run) that a segment of length $\lfloor \tfrac{1}{\alpha} \rfloor$, $\big(\theta_{t}^\alpha, \ldots, \theta^\alpha_{t+\lfloor 1/\alpha \rfloor-1} \big)$, fails to lie entirely inside the $x |\theta^*|$-neighborhood.
For the perturbed version of Variant I and Variant II, the same plots are shown in Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex2d} and Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex2e}, respectively.
In all these figures, for each color and each algorithm, the solid lines correspond to the results from one of the four runs, and the dashed lines the other three runs.
The behavior exhibited here is similar to what we observed in the case of Problem I: as the stepsize becomes smaller, the iterates spread out less and the trajectory spends more time inside a smaller neighborhood of $\theta^*$. This can be compared with the assertions in Theorem~3.4(ii) and Theorem~3.6(i) of \cite{etd-wkconv} for Variants I and II, and with the assertions in Theorem~3.8 of \cite{etd-wkconv} for the perturbed versions of these two variants.
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{cfig2f_1t2} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{cfig2f_2t2}
\caption{Variant I (left) and Variant II (right) without perturbation. The $x$-axis represents the $x |\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$. The $y$-component of a point $(x,y)$ represents the fraction of times (in a single run) that a segment of $100$ consecutive iterates fails to lie entirely inside the $x|\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$.}\label{fig-cnst-ex2b}
\end{figure}%
\begin{figure}[!thb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{cfig2f_1t3} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{cfig2f_2t3}
\caption{Variant I (left) and Variant II (right) without perturbation. The $x$-axis represents the $x |\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$. The $y$-component of a point $(x,y)$ represents the fraction of times (in a single run) that a segment of $\lfloor \tfrac{1}{\alpha} \rfloor$ consecutive iterates fails to lie entirely inside the $x|\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$.}\label{fig-cnst-ex2c}
\end{figure}%
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{cfig2d_1t2} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{cfig2d_2t2}
\caption{Variant I (left) and Variant II (right) with perturbation. The $x$-axis represents the $x |\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$. The $y$-component of a point $(x,y)$ represents the fraction of times (in a single run) that a segment of $100$ consecutive iterates fails to lie entirely inside the $x|\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$.} \label{fig-cnst-ex2d}
\end{figure}%
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{cfig2d_1t3} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{cfig2d_2t3}
\caption{Variant I (left) and Variant II (right) with perturbation. The $x$-axis represents the $x |\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$. The $y$-component of a point $(x,y)$ represents the fraction of times (in a single run) that a segment of $\lfloor \tfrac{1}{\alpha} \rfloor$ consecutive iterates fails to lie entirely inside the $x|\theta^*|$-neighborhood of $\theta^*$.}\label{fig-cnst-ex2e}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
In the rest of this subsection we show more trajectories of iterates from individual runs. The details of the experiments are as follows.
\medskip
\noindent Figures \ref{fig-cnst-ex2f}-\ref{fig-cnst-ex2g}: In these two figures we plotted the normalized distances to $\theta^*$ of a trajectory of averaged iterates $\bar{\theta}_t^{\alpha}$ and original iterates $\theta_t^\alpha$, for each algorithm and each stepsize, using the data from one of the runs of the algorithms that produced the previous four figures.
Our observations from these results are the same as those from Figures~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1f}-\ref{fig-cnst-ex1g} in the case of Problem I:
(i) the averaged iterates $\bar{\theta}_t^{\alpha}$ perform better than $\theta_t^\alpha$ in that they vary less and can approach a smaller neighborhood of $\theta^*$;
(ii) the unperturbed algorithms do not seem to have any disadvantages compared with the perturbed algorithms for the same stepsize.
\medskip
\noindent Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex2h}: This experiment compares the transient behavior of the variant algorithms using a single run of $6 \times 10^5$ iterations. All the algorithms start from the same initial condition, no portion of the run is discarded, and ELSTD is also included for comparison. The linear equations formed by ELSTD are solved every 500 iterations to produce the ELSTD curve shown in the figure. It can be seen that ELSTD converges rapidly. The variant algorithms can make fast initial progress too with the largest stepsize $\alpha = 0.0005$, although because of the big stepsize, they quickly start to oscillate in a relatively large neighborhood of $\theta^*$.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{cfig2f_avtraj1} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{cfig2f_avtraj2}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{cfig2f_traj1} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{cfig2f_traj2}
\caption{Variant I (left) and Variant II (right) without perturbation. Top: averaged iterates $\bar\theta^\alpha_t$; bottom: iterates $\theta_t^\alpha$. Data are from a single run.}\label{fig-cnst-ex2f}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{cfig2d_avtraj1} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{cfig2d_avtraj2}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{cfig2d_traj1} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{cfig2d_traj2}
\caption{Variant I (left) and Variant II (right) with perturbation. Top: averaged iterates $\bar\theta^\alpha_t$; bottom: iterates $\theta_t^\alpha$. Data are from a single run.}\label{fig-cnst-ex2g}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{exp2e_longtraj1} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{exp2e_longtraj2}
\caption{Variant I (left) and Variant II (right) without perturbation. Data are from a single run; ELSTD is also included for comparison.}\label{fig-cnst-ex2h}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{Simulation Results for the Diminishing-stepsize Case} \label{sec-dimstp}
In this section we illustrate the behavior of Variant I and Variant II with diminishing stepsize for the two test problems.
As in the previous case, we set the radius parameter $r_B=100$ and use the componentwise truncation function $\psi_K$ with $K=50$ in the two variant algorithms.
For visualizing the behavior of the $\theta$-iterates as well as the behavior of multiple consecutive iterates, we will plot their normalized distances to the desired ETD solution $\theta^*$ as before. Given the close connection between the constant-stepsize case and the diminishing-stepsize case, and given also what we already observed in the former case, the results from the present part of the experiments, to be reported below, turn out to be as expected.
\subsection{Problem I}
In the first experiment, we used five stepsize sequences that decrease at different rates $\beta$,
$$ \alpha_t = \frac{1}{200 + (0.1 \, t)^\beta} \qquad \text{for} \ \ \ \beta \in \{0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 0.9, 1\}.$$
We ran the two algorithms with these five stepsize rules simultaneously for $6 \times 10^5$ iterations, using a common state trajectory.
The results are plotted in Figure~\ref{fig-dim-ex1a}.
ELSTD (modified as in Section~\ref{sec-conststp}) is also included for comparison: the linear equations formed by ELSTD are solved every $500$ iterations to produce the ELSTD curve in the figure.
\begin{figure}[!th]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{cfig1_avtraj1} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{cfig1_avtraj2}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{cfig1_traj1} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{cfig1_traj2}
\caption{Variant I (left) and Variant II (right). Top: averaged iterates $\bar\theta_t$ for the entire run; bottom: iterates $\theta_t$ for the first half of the run. ELSTD is also included for comparison. See the text for details.} \label{fig-dim-ex1a}
\end{figure}
The top row of Figure~\ref{fig-dim-ex1a} shows the normalized distances of the averaged iterates $\bar\theta_t$ for the entire run, and the bottom row shows the normalized distances of the iterates $\theta_t$ for only the first half of the run, in order to have a close-up view of the transient behavior. Comparing the top row with the bottom row, the advantages of the averaged iterates for large stepsizes, especially $\beta=0.3, 0.5$, can be seen. (The use of averaging for $\beta < 1$ is known as Polyak-averaging). We can also see that the iterates $\theta_t$ for $\beta = 0.3$ or $0.5$ did not settle in a small neighborhood of $\theta^*$ like the iterates generated with smaller stepsizes. This can be explained as follows: Even after $t=6 \times 10^5$ iterations, we have $\alpha_t \approx 0.004$ for $\beta=0.3$ and $\alpha_t \approx 0.002$ for $\beta=0.5$, so we can expect the iterates for $\beta = 0.3$ or $0.5$ to behave at best like the iterates with constant stepsize $0.002$ (cf.\ the bottom row of Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex1f}).
The next experiment was designed in accordance with the observation of the relation between the diminishing-stepsize case and the constant-stepsize case just mentioned.
We did $10$ independent runs of $10^6$ iterations each, for the two variant algorithms using two stepsize rules:
$$ \alpha_t = \frac{1}{200 + (5 t)^\beta} \ \ \ \text{for} \ \beta = 0.7, \qquad \text{and} \quad \alpha_t = \frac{1}{200 + (200 \, t)^\beta} \ \ \ \text{for} \ \beta = 0.5. $$
Since we want to test the convergence behavior of the algorithms, in defining the preceding stepsize rules, we have made sure that the stepsize becomes small enough later in the run (at $t=10^6$, $\alpha_t$ is of the order $10^{-5}$ in both cases of $\beta$).
The simulation results are plotted in Figure~\ref{fig-dim-ex1b} and Figure~\ref{fig-dim-ex1c} for $\beta=0.7$ and $\beta=0.5$ respectively. The details are as follows.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{cfig1_Ttraj1a7} \qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{cfig1_Ttraj1b7}\\*[0.1cm]
\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{cfig1_Ttraj2a7} \qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{cfig1_Ttraj2b7}
\caption{Variant I (top) and Variant II (bottom) with $\beta = 0.7$. The bottom portion of each plot on the left is enlarged and shown on the right. The solid curve corresponds to one run, with the $x$-component being $x=\sum_{k=0}^t \alpha_k$ and the $y$-component being the normalized distance of $\theta_t$ to $\theta^*$. (See the text for more details.)}\label{fig-dim-ex1b}
\end{figure}
In Figures~\ref{fig-dim-ex1b}-\ref{fig-dim-ex1c}, plotted in solid lines are the normalized distances (to $\theta^*$) of the iterates from one of the $10$ runs.
Specifically, each solid curve is made up of points $\big(\sum_{k=0}^t \alpha_k, |\theta_t - \theta^*|/|\theta^*| \big)$, $t \geq 0$, from a single run of an algorithm.
In words, the $x$-axis represents a continuous timeline (cf.\ \cite[Section 3.1]{etd-wkconv}), and the $x$-component of a solid curve corresponds to the sum of stepsizes up to an iteration, whereas the $y$-component of the curve corresponds to the normalized distance of that iterate.
The whole curve is plotted on the left side of each figure, with a close-up view of its bottom portion shown on the right side.
To give a rough indication of the values of the decreasing stepsizes themselves,
we colored segments of the solid curves in different colors according to the range of stepsizes in each segment as follows:
$\alpha_t \geq 0.003$ (black), $\alpha_t \in (0.003, 0.002]$ (purple), $\alpha_t \in (0.002, 0.001]$ (brown),
$\alpha_t \in (0.001, 0.0005]$ (blue), $\alpha_t \in (0.0005, 0.0002]$ (green),
$\alpha_t < 0.0002$ (red).
The blue error bars in Figures~\ref{fig-dim-ex1b}-\ref{fig-dim-ex1c} give statistics about the maximal deviation from $\theta^*$ for multiple consecutive iterates from the $10$ experimental runs.
The horizontal positions of these error bars equal positive integers $x$, and for each $x$, the $x$-th error bar is generated as follows.
For each run, the iterates $\theta_t$ are grouped into segments such that the $x$-th segment consists of those $\theta_t$ with $\sum_{k=0}^t \alpha_k \in [x-1, x)$.
So as $x$ increases, the $x$-th segment consists of more and more iterates, but measured with respect to the continuous timeline, all the segments are of length $1$ approximately. We then calculate for each $x \geq 1$ the maximal normalized distance for the $\theta$-iterates in the $x$-th segment of each run, $\max_{\text{$x$-th segment}} |\theta_t - \theta^*|/|\theta^*|$. This gives us $10$ numbers, one for each run. We take the median, min and max of these numbers to form the $x$-th error bar.
In particular, the point with an `$\times$' mark inside the bar is the median, and the lower and upper ends of the bar correspond to the minimum and maximum of the $10$ numbers, respectively.
The simulation results shown in Figures~\ref{fig-dim-ex1b}-\ref{fig-dim-ex1c} can be compared with the assertion in Theorem 3.3 of \cite{etd-wkconv} for Variants I and II with diminishing stepsizes.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{cfig1_Ttraj1a5} \qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{cfig1_Ttraj1b5}\\*[0.1cm]
\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{cfig1_Ttraj2a5} \qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{cfig1_Ttraj2b5}
\caption{Variant I (top) and Variant II (bottom) with $\beta = 0.5$. The bottom portion of each plot on the left is enlarged and shown on the right. The solid curve corresponds to one run, with the $x$-component being $x=\sum_{k=0}^t \alpha_k$ and the $y$-component being the normalized distance of $\theta_t$ to $\theta^*$. (See the text for more details.)}\label{fig-dim-ex1c}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Problem II}
Similar to the previous subsection, in the first experiment for Problem II, we used five stepsize sequences that decrease at different rates $\beta$:
$$ \alpha_t = \frac{1}{2000 + (0.1 \, t)^\beta} \qquad \text{for} \ \ \ \beta \in \{0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 0.9, 1\}.$$
We ran the two algorithms with these five stepsize rules simultaneously for $8 \times 10^5$ iterations, using a common state trajectory.
The results are plotted in Figure~\ref{fig-dim-ex2a}.
ELSTD (modified as in Section~\ref{sec-conststp}) is also included for comparison: the linear equations formed by ELSTD are solved every $500$ iterations to produce the ELSTD curve in the figure. The top row of Figure~\ref{fig-dim-ex1a} shows the normalized distances of the averaged iterates $\bar \theta_t$ for the entire run, and the bottom row shows the normalized distances of the iterates $\theta_t$ only for the first half of the run, in order to have a close-up view of the transient behavior. Once more, for $\beta < 1$, the advantages of averaging can be seen.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{cfig2d0_avtraj1} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{cfig2d0_avtraj2}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{cfig2d0_traj1} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{cfig2d0_traj2}
\caption{Variant I (left) and Variant II (right). Top: averaged iterates $\bar\theta_t$ for the entire run; bottom: iterates $\theta_t$ for the first half of the run. ELSTD is also included for comparison.} \label{fig-dim-ex2a}
\end{figure}
It can be seen that for the three largest stepsize rules ($\beta \in\{ 0.3, 0.5, 0.7\}$), the iterates behaved similarly to each other and did not settle in a small neighborhood of $\theta^*$ like the iterates generated with smaller stepsizes. This can again be understood by relating the situation here to the constant-stepsize case: With $\beta \in\{ 0.3, 0.5, 0.7\}$, the stepsizes decrease rather slowly. Even after $t=8 \times 10^5$ iterations, $\alpha_t$ is between $0.0004$ and $0.0005$ for $\beta=0.3, 0.5$ and about $0.0002$ for $\beta=0.7$.
So we can expect the iterates to behave at best like the iterates with constant stepsize $0.0002$ (cf.\ the bottom row of Figure~\ref{fig-cnst-ex2f}).
In the next experiment, we did $10$ independent runs of $1.6 \times 10^6$ iterations each, for the two variant algorithms using two stepsize rules:
$$ \alpha_t = \frac{1}{2000 + (10 \, t)^\beta} \ \ \ \text{for} \ \beta = 0.7, \qquad \text{and} \quad \alpha_t = \frac{1}{2000 + (4000 \, t)^\beta} \ \ \ \text{for} \ \beta = 0.5. $$
As before we chose these stepsize rules to ensure that the stepsize becomes small enough later in the run (at $t=1.6 \times 10^6$, $\alpha_t$ is about $10^{-5}$ in both cases of $\beta$). The simulation results are plotted in Figure~\ref{fig-dim-ex2b} and Figure~\ref{fig-dim-ex2c} for $\beta=0.7$ and $\beta=0.5$ respectively.
The graphical objects in these figures have the same meanings as those in Figures~\ref{fig-dim-ex1b}-\ref{fig-dim-ex1c} for Problem~I, so we will only describe these objects briefly here.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{cfig2_Ttraj1a7} \qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{cfig2_Ttraj1b7}\\*[0.1cm]
\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{cfig2_Ttraj2a7} \qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{cfig2_Ttraj2b7}
\caption{Variant I (top) and Variant II (bottom) with $\beta = 0.7$. The bottom portion of each plot on the left is enlarged and shown on the right. The solid curve corresponds to one run, with the $x$-component being $x=\sum_{k=0}^t \alpha_k$ and the $y$-component being the normalized distance of $\theta_t$ to $\theta^*$. (See the text for more details.)}\label{fig-dim-ex2b}
\end{figure}
In Figures~\ref{fig-dim-ex2b}-\ref{fig-dim-ex2c}, we plotted in solid lines the normalized distances (to $\theta^*$) of the iterates from one of the $10$ runs. The $x$-axis represents a continuous timeline, and a solid curve is made up of points $\big(\sum_{k=0}^t \alpha_k, |\theta_t - \theta^*|/|\theta^*| \big)$ from a single run of an algorithm. The whole curve is plotted on the left side of each figure, with a close-up view of its bottom portion shown on the right side.
We colored segments of the curves in different colors according to the range of stepsizes in each segment as follows:
$\alpha_t \in (0.0005, 0.0002]$ (purple), $\alpha_t \in (0.0002, 0.0001]$ (brown),
$\alpha_t \in (0.0001, 0.00005]$ (blue), $\alpha_t \in (0.00005, 0.00002]$ (green),
$\alpha_t < 0.00002$ (red).
The blue error bars in the figures show the range of the maximal deviation from $\theta^*$ for multiple consecutive iterates from the $10$ experimental runs. They are formed in the same way as described in the earlier experiment for Problem I (see the descriptions for Figures~\ref{fig-dim-ex1b}-\ref{fig-dim-ex1c} in the previous subsection).
The point with an `$\times$' mark inside the $x$-th error bar is the median, and the lower and upper ends of the error bar are the minimum and maximum, respectively, of the $10$ values of $\max_{\text{$x$-th segment}} |\theta_t - \theta^*|/|\theta^*|$ obtained from the $10$ independent experimental runs.
The simulation results shown in Figures~\ref{fig-dim-ex1b}-\ref{fig-dim-ex1c} can be compared with the assertion in Theorem 3.3 of \cite{etd-wkconv} for the two variant algorithms with diminishing stepsizes.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{cfig2_Ttraj1a5} \qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{cfig2_Ttraj1b5}\\*[0.1cm]
\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{cfig2_Ttraj2a5} \qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{cfig2_Ttraj2b5}
\caption{Variant I (top) and Variant II (bottom) with $\beta = 0.5$. The bottom portion of each plot on the left is enlarged and shown on the right. The solid curve corresponds to one run, with the $x$-component being $x=\sum_{k=0}^t \alpha_k$ and the $y$-component being the normalized distance of $\theta_t$ to $\theta^*$. (See the text for more details.)}\label{fig-dim-ex2c}
\end{figure}
\section{Mountain Car} \label{sec-mountaincar}
In this last set of experiments we test constrained ETD on a larger problem constructed from the Mountain Car problem \cite{SUB}. Mountain Car has continuous state and action spaces. As such it is actually beyond the finite-space model considered in \cite{etd-wkconv}, so the convergence theorems we proved therein for constrained ETD do not extend to the Mountain Car problem. Nevertheless, we observed empirically in our experiments that constrained ETD is well-behaved, and in this section we report some of these simulation results for Variant I with a constant stepsize. (Variant II behaves similarly but with a larger variance for this problem.)
\subsection{Experimental Setup}
We take the dynamics of the Mountain Car problem. The goal is to drive an underpowered car to reach the top of a steep hill.
A state consists of the position $p$ and velocity $v$ of the car, whose values are bounded as $p \in [-1.2, 0.5]$ and $v \in [-0.07, 0.07]$.
The position $0.5$ corresponds to the desired hill top destination, while the position $-\pi/6$ corresponds to the bottom of a valley.
At each state three actions are available: $\{\texttt{back}, \texttt{coast}, \texttt{forward} \}$, designated by $\{-1, 0, 1\}$, respectively.
With $A_t$ denoting the action taken at time $t$ and with $\Pi_{[a,b]}(x) = \max \{a, \min\{b, x\}\}$ for an interval $[a,b]$ and scalar $x$,
the dynamics of the car are defined as
\begin{align*}
v_{t+1} & = \Pi_{[-0.07, \, 0.07]} \big( v_t + 0.001 A_t - 0.0025 \cos(3 p_t) \big), &
p_{t+1} & = \Pi_{[-1.2, \, 0.5]} \big( p_t +v_{t+1} \big),
\end{align*}
except that when $p_{t+1} = - 1.2$, the velocity is reset to zero: $v_{t+1}=0$.
Before the destination $p=0.5$ is reached, the rewards depend only on the action taken and are given by $r(-1)=-1.5$, $r(1)=-1$, and $r(0)=0$.
Once the destination $p=0.5$ is reached, the car enters a rewardless termination state permanently.
We consider undiscounted expected total rewards, so the discount factor $\gamma=1$.
\medskip
\noindent {\bf Target policy:}
The following policy will be our target policy $\pi$ throughout the experiments: at a state $(p,v)$,\vspace*{-0.2cm}
\begin{itemize}
\item if $p < -1$, then take action $0$ (coast);\vspace*{-0.1cm}
\item if $p \geq -1$, then take action $\text{sign}(v)$ unless $|v| \leq 10^{-6}$, in which case take action $\pm 1$ (forward or back) with equal probability.\vspace*{-0.2cm}
\end{itemize}
This is a simple policy but behaves reasonably well. Figure~\ref{fig-valpolicy} (next page) shows the negative value function $-v_\pi$ and its contour map. The values of $v_{\pi}$ shown in this figure are estimated by simulating the policy $200$ times for each starting state $(p,v)$ in a set of $171 \times 141$ points evenly spaced in the position-velocity space $[-1.2, 0.5] \times [-0.07, 0.07]$. In particular, the position (velocity) interval is evenly divided into subintervals of length $0.01$ ($0.001$).
Figure~\ref{fig-policy} above shows the two trajectories that the car can traverse through in the state space if it is initially parked at the bottom of the valley ($p=-\pi/6$) and follows the target policy $\pi$.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{policy}
\caption{Two state trajectories that can occur (with equal probability 0.5) under the target policy for the initial state $(-\tfrac{\pi}{6}, 0)$ (indicated by the marked square). The color of a state indicates the action taken at that state: red for \texttt{back}, blue for \texttt{coast}, and purple for \texttt{forward}.}\label{fig-policy}
\end{figure}
{\samepage
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{estval} \hfill
\raisebox{20pt}{\includegraphics[width=0.54\linewidth]{estvalcontour}}
\caption{$-v_{\pi}$ estimated by simulating $\pi$ (left: 3D view; right: contour map).} \label{fig-valpolicy}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{etd-f4-3b} \quad
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{etd-f4-3a}\\*[0.1cm]
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{elstd-f4-3b} \quad
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{elstd-f4-3a}\\
\caption{Piecewise linear approximation of $-v_{\pi}$ (linear in $(\cos(3p), v)$ on each piece) calculated by Variant I (top) and ELSTD (bottom). Left: 3D view; right: contour map.}\label{fig-car-ex1}
\end{figure}
}
\medskip
\noindent {\bf Behavior policy:} We use a fixed sampling scheme to generate states, actions and transitions for ETD learning. This scheme serves the role of the behavior policy $\pi^o$ and is defined as follows.\vspace*{-0.1cm}
\begin{itemize}
\item At a state $(p,v)$, if $p=0.5$ (the desired destination), then the next state is sampled uniformly from the state space $[-1.2, 0.5]\times[-0.07, 0.07]$.\vspace*{-0.2cm}
\item For $p \not= 0.5$, two things can happen:\\
(1) With probability $0.9$, an action is chosen from the set $\{\texttt{back}, \texttt{coast}, \texttt{forward} \}$ randomly and uniformly, and the next state is determined by the state transition under that action.\\
(2) With probability $0.1$, a random state $(p', v')$ is chosen as the next state. In particular, either the velocity remains the same, $v'=v$, and the position $p'$ is uniformly sampled from the interval $[p, 0.5]$ or $[-1.2, p]$ (each of these two cases happens with probability $0.04$), or $(p',v')$ is uniformly sampled from the state space (this happens with probability $0.02$).\vspace*{-0.1cm}
\end{itemize}
The above scheme of generating data can be viewed as a valid behavior policy by enlarging the action space to include three more actions that correspond to the three different ways of randomly choosing $(p',v')$ described in step (2) above. This defines the importance sampling weights $\pi(s,a)/\pi^o(s,a)$ for the constrained ETD algorithms in the experiments.
It is worth mentioning that in the mathematical framework of off-policy learning, we need not restrict the behavior policy to be a physically feasible policy. Indeed, that would limit the use of off-policy learning in the goal-reaching type of problem such as Mountain Car, since in such problems, to find a policy that is able to reach the goal state can be tantamount to solving the problem itself.
By defining the behavior policy in a broader way, one can apply off-policy learning methods to solving goal-reaching problems, at least in the context where the system dynamics of the problems can be simulated.
\medskip
\noindent {\bf Algorithmic parameters:} We will only show results for Variant I with a constant stepsize, as mentioned earlier.
The following algorithmic parameters are used throughout the experiments:
a constant interest weight $0.5$ and a constant $\lambda = 0.5$ for all states; stepsize $\alpha = 0.003$;
the radius parameter $r_B = 2 \times 10^4$ for constraining $\theta$; and the truncation function $\psi_K$ with $K=50$ as given before.
Since our purpose here is only to demonstrate that ETD can be applied beyond synthetic small problems, we did not optimize over these parameters.
The stepsize we used is relatively large. As in the previous sections, we find that the use of a larger stepsize can make the algorithm progress faster initially, and together with averaging, it can yield useful approximation results in fewer iterations.
\subsection{Simulation Results}
\noindent {\bf First experiment:}
It can be seen from Figure~\ref{fig-valpolicy} (previous page) that $v_\pi$ is discontinuous and can change sharply between certain regions of the state space.
In the first experiment, we partition the position (and velocity) interval into $7$ (and $6$) subintervals to
form $42$ rectangular regions to cover the space $[-1.2, 0.5) \times [-0.07, 0.07]$.
In each region we approximate $v_{\pi}$ by an affine function of $(\cos(3p), v)$; the entire approximation is thus piecewise linear in $(\cos(3p), v)$.
Specifically, to partition the position interval $[-1.2, 0.5)$ and the velocity interval $[-0.07, 0.07]$,
we use the points given in the two vectors below as the mid points:
$$ \text{position:} \ \ (-0.9 \ -0.7 \ -0.5 \ -0.3 \ \ 0 \ \ 0.3), \qquad \text{velocity:} \ \ (-0.05 \ -0.03 \ \ 0 \ \ 0.03 \ \, 0.05).$$
Each of the $42$ regions is the product of two left-closed right-open intervals, except at the boundary of the state space, where the end points of an interval can be included or excluded in order to fill exactly the space $[-1.2, 0.5) \times [-0.07, 0.07]$. For each region, we used these $3$ features, $1$, $\cos(3p)$, and $15v$, to approximate the value function in that region.
The approximate value function obtained by Variant I after a single run of $2 \times 10^6$ effective iterations is shown in the top row of Figure~\ref{fig-car-ex1} (previous page).
Here an \emph{effective iteration} refers to an iteration in which the behavior policy takes an action that could also be taken by the target policy.
Plotted is the approximation corresponding to the averaged iterate $\bar\theta_t^\alpha$ at the end of the run, where the average is taken over the last $10^6$ iterations to avoid transient effects.
We also ran ELSTD (modified as before) in the same run for comparison, and the approximate value function it obtained is plotted in the bottom row of Figure~\ref{fig-car-ex1}.
It can be seen that both algorithms try to approximate $v_{\pi}$, and overall the contours of their approximations roughly match the contour of $v_{\pi}$ in shape (cf.~Figure~\ref{fig-valpolicy}).
\medskip
\noindent {\bf More experiments:} In the subsequent experiments we ran Variant I with features generated by tile-coding \cite{SUB}. This gives piecewise constant approximations of $v_{\pi}$, where the pieces are defined by the title-coding schemes we use. So instead of comparing the ETD approximations to $v_{\pi}$, which has jumps and curvy contours as shown in Figure~\ref{fig-valpolicy}, it seems better to compare the ETD approximations to an approximate solution from a discretized model that has a discretization resolution comparable to the resolution of the tile-coding schemes in the experiments.
Such a discretized model was constructed and it yields the approximate $v_{\pi}$ shown in Figure~\ref{fig-car-mdsol}.
The ETD approximation results for two tile-coding schemes are shown in Figures~\ref{fig-car-ex2}-\ref{fig-car-ex3b}. The details of these figures are as follows.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{mdsol} \hfill
\raisebox{20pt}{\includegraphics[width=0.54\linewidth]{mdsolcontour}}
\caption{Approximate $-v_{\pi}$ from a discretized model (left: 3D view; right: contour map).}\label{fig-car-mdsol}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{etd-f3d-2b} \quad
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{etd-f3d-2a}\\*[0.2cm]
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{elstd-f3d-2b} \quad
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{elstd-f3d-2a}\\
\caption{Piecewise constant approximation of $-v_{\pi}$ calculated by Variant I (top) and ELSTD (bottom) using tile-coding. Left: 3D view; right: contour map.}\label{fig-car-ex2}
\end{figure}
\medskip
\noindent Figure~\ref{fig-car-mdsol}: We first built a discretized finite-state model for the target policy as follows.
We divided the position (velocity) interval evenly into subintervals of length $0.1$ ($0.01$), and thus obtained $270$ rectangular regions in total to fill the space $[-1.2, 0.5) \times [-0.07, 0.07]$. (As in the first experiment, except at the boundaries of the state space, each of these regions is the product of two left-closed right-open intervals.) The states in each region is treated as one aggregate state in the discretized model. To define the transition probabilities between the aggregate states for the target policy, we ran the behavior policy (the sampling scheme described earlier) for $10^7$ iterations, and used those effective iterations to calculate the transition frequencies between the aggregate states. These frequencies are taken to be the transition probabilities in the discretized model, and the per-stage rewards for the model are defined similarly. The Bellman equation for the discretized model is then solved, and the solution is used to define a piecewise constant approximation of $v_\pi$ (constant over each aggregate state).
Figure~\ref{fig-car-mdsol} plots the 3D view and contour map of the resulting approximation, which may be compared with the estimated $v_{\pi}$ shown in Figure~\ref{fig-valpolicy}.
\medskip
\noindent Figure~\ref{fig-car-ex2}: In this experiment a coarse tile-coding scheme is used to generate $78$ overlapping rectangular regions in total to cover the state space. Specifically, a first tiling comprises of $36$ rectangles, which are obtained by dividing the position interval $[-1.2, 0.5)$ and the velocity interval $[-0.07, 0.07]$ unevenly at the following points:
$$ \text{position:} \ \ (-0.9 \ -0.6 \ -0.3 \ \ 0 \ \ 0.3), \qquad \text{velocity:} \ \ (-0.05 \ -0.02 \ \ 0 \ \ 0.02 \ \, 0.05).$$
A second tiling is similarly formed by dividing the position and velocity intervals at these points:
$$ \text{position:} \ \ (-1.0 \ -0.7 \ -0.4 \ -0.1 \ \, 0.2), \qquad \text{velocity:} \ \ (-0.06 \ -0.04 \ -0.01 \ \, 0.01 \ \, 0.03 \ \, 0.06).$$
This tiling comprises of $42$ rectangles (it corresponds to offsetting the first tiling by $(0.2, 0.01)$ and then covering the exposed sides of the state space with extra rectangles).
Correspondingly, we used $36+42=78$ binary features for each state, to indicate the two rectangles containing that state. (As before, each rectangle is taken to be the product of two left-closed right-open intervals except on the boundaries of the state space.)
We ran Variant I and ELSTD with these features for $10^6$ effective iterations. Plotted in the top row of Figure~\ref{fig-car-ex2} is the approximate value function corresponding to the averaged iterate $\bar \theta_t^\alpha$ produced by Variant I at the end of the run. The average here is taken over the last $5\times 10^5$ iterations to reduce transient effects.
The approximation obtained by ELSTD is plotted in the bottom row of Figure~\ref{fig-car-ex2} for comparison.
The resolutions of the two tilings used in this experiment are lower than the resolution used to build the discretized model. Nevertheless, comparing Figure~\ref{fig-car-ex2} with Figure~\ref{fig-car-mdsol}, one can recognize the similarities between the ETD/ELSTD approximations here and the approximate $v_{\pi}$ from the discretized model shown.
\medskip
\noindent Figures~\ref{fig-car-ex3a}-\ref{fig-car-ex3b} (next page): In this experiment we ran Variant I with a finer tile-coding scheme.
Similarly to the previous case, we made two tilings of the state space by dividing the position and velocity intervals unevenly, first at these points:
$$ \text{position:} \ \ (-1.0 \ -0.8 \ -0.6 \ -0.4 \ -0.2 \ \ 0 \ \ 0.2), \qquad \text{velocity:} \ \ (-0.05 \ -0.03 \ -0.01 \ \ 0 \ \ 0.01 \ \, 0.03 \ \, 0.05),$$
and then at these points:
\begin{align*}
\text{position:} \ \ & (-1.1 \ -0.9 \ -0.7 \ -0.5 \ -0.3 \ -0.1 \ \, 0.1 \ \, 0.3), \\
\text{velocity:} \ \ & (-0.06 \ -0.04 \ -0.02 \ \ 0 \ \ 0.01 \ \, 0.02 \ \, 0.04 \ \, 0.06).
\end{align*}
The first (second) tiling comprises of $64$ ($81$) rectangles.
Correspondingly, each state has $64+81=145$ binary features to indicate the two rectangles that contain the state.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{etd-f3c-1} \quad
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{elstd-f3c-1}\\
\caption{Piecewise constant approximation of $-v_{\pi}$ calculated by Variant I (left) and ELSTD (right) using tile-coding.}\label{fig-car-ex3a}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{etd-f3c-2b} \quad
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{etd-f3c-2a}\\*[0.2cm]
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{elstd-f3c-2b} \quad
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{elstd-f3c-2a}\\
\caption{Piecewise constant approximation of $-v_{\pi}$ calculated by Variant I (top) and ELSTD (bottom) using tile-coding. Left: 3D view; right: contour map.}\label{fig-car-ex3b}
\end{figure}
We ran both Variant I and ELSTD with these features.
Figure~\ref{fig-car-ex3a} shows the approximations obtained after $2 \times 10^5$ effective iterations.
As can be seen, Variant I is in the process of building up the approximate value function, while ELSTD generally converges faster.
Figure~\ref{fig-car-ex3b} shows the approximations obtained after $10^6$ effective iterations,
where for Variant I (top row of Figure~\ref{fig-car-ex3b}), plotted is the approximate value function corresponding to the averaged iterate $\bar \theta_t^\alpha$ at the end of the run, with averaging taken over the last $5\times 10^5$ iterations as before to reduce transient effects.
It can be seen that the results from Variant I and ELSTD (bottom row of Figure~\ref{fig-car-ex3b}) are now much closer to each other than in Figure~\ref{fig-car-ex3a}.
Furthermore, both approximations can be compared with the approximate solution from the discretized model shown in Figure~\ref{fig-car-mdsol}.
\clearpage
\bibliographystyle{apa}
\let\oldbibliography\thebibliography
\renewcommand{\thebibliography}[1]{%
\oldbibliography{#1}%
\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
}
{\fontsize{9}{11} \selectfont
|
\section{Introduction}
Special relativity was modified in such a way to keep invariant, in addition to the speed of light, a
minimal length \cite{Amel-Pir, Ameliano1, Ameliano2, Mag-Smol1, Mag-Smol2, KMM} in the order of the Planck
length. The resulting theory is then called Deformed Special Relativity (DSR). The corresponding
coordinate transformation is not linear and it is proved later that it can be constructed by deforming
the Poisson brackets \cite{Ghosh-Pal}. By following the same way, we
showed recently \cite{Bou-Fou} that also the Fock coordinate transformation \cite{Fock},
\begin {equation}
t'={ \gamma \left( t-ux/c^{2} \right) \over \alpha_{R}}, \hskip6mm x'= {\gamma \left(x-ut\right) \over \alpha_{R}},
\hskip6mm y'={ y \over \alpha_{R}}, \hskip6mm z'= {z \over \alpha_{R}},
\end {equation}
where
\begin {equation}
\alpha_{R}= 1 + { 1 \over R } \left[ (\gamma-1)ct - \gamma { u x \over c} \right],
\end {equation}
$R$ being the universe radius and $\gamma=\left(1-u^{2}/c^{2} \right)^{-1/2}$, can be derived from a new
appropriate deformation of the Poisson brackets
\begin {eqnarray}
\{x^{\mu},x^{\nu}\} & = & 0 , \\
\{x^{\mu},p^{\nu}\} & = & -\eta^{\mu\nu}+{1 \over R}\eta^{0 \nu }x^{\mu}, \\
\{p^{\mu},p^{\nu}\} & = & -{1 \over R}\left(p^{\mu}\eta^{0\nu}-p^{\nu}\eta^{\mu 0}\right),
\end {eqnarray}
where $\eta^{\mu\nu} = (+1,-1,-1,-1)$. Here there are $c$ and $R$ which are invariant.
We stress that $c$ is a constant with a dimension of a velocity and it
represents the light speed only in the limit $R \rightarrow \infty$ \cite{Bou-Fou}.
The above brackets allowed us to establish the corresponding momentum transformation
\begin {equation}
E' = \alpha_{R} \gamma \left(E-up_{x} \right) , \ \ p'_{x} = \alpha_{R} \gamma \left(p_{x}-uE/c^{2}\right) ,
\ \ p'_{y} = \alpha_{R} p_{y} , \ \ p'_{z} = \alpha_{R} p_{z} ,
\end {equation}
which keeps invariant the four dimensional contraction $p_{\mu} x^{\mu} $. Contrary to earlier versions
\cite{KMM, Manida}, transformation (6) allows a coherent description of plane waves.
We observe that in the limit $R\rightarrow \infty$, (1) and (6) reduce to the Lorentz
transformations for the coordinates and the energy-momentum vector. We will call relations
(3), (4) and (5) "$R$-Minkowski phase space algebra".
Furthermore, we showed that the following expressions
\begin {equation}
I_{x} \equiv \left( 1 - { ct \over R} \right)^{-2} \eta_{\mu\nu}x^{\mu}x^{\nu}
\end {equation}
and
\begin {equation}
I_{p} \equiv \left( 1 - { ct \over R} \right)^{2} \eta_{\mu\nu}p^{\mu}p^{\nu}
\end {equation}
are invariant under transformations (1) and (6). We also observed that in
the limit $R\rightarrow\infty$, $I_{x}$ and $I_{p}$ reduce to the well-known invariants of
special relativity \cite{Bou-Fou}.
Our goal is to establish a link between the spacetime of Fock's coordinate transformation
and the one of de Sitter. First, we remark that $I_{p}$ is not a Casimir.
In fact, by using (4) and (5) we can check that it does not commute with the $R$-Lorentz
group generators $p^{0}$ and $p^{i}$. In order to construct the first Casimir of
the $R$-algebra, it is necessary to complete relations (3), (4) and (5) with others
between pure rotation,
\begin {equation}
M_{i}=\frac{1}{2}\epsilon_{ijk}J_{jk},
\end {equation}
and boost,
\begin {equation}
\tilde{N}_{i}=J_{0i},
\end {equation}
generators. In (9) and (10), $J_{\mu\nu} \equiv x_{\mu}p_{\nu}-x_{\nu}p_{\mu}$ represents the angular
momentum, ($\mu,\nu,...=0,1,2,3$, $i,j,...=1,2,3$) and $\epsilon_{ijk}$ is the Levi-Civita
antisymmetric tensor $(\epsilon_{123}=1)$. With the help of the above generators, it
is not yet possible to construct the first Casimir. In order to go further, we will follow
the method presented by Magpantay \cite{Mag1, Mag2}, where he developed the physics of the dual kappa
Poincar\'{e} algebra. Then, we will modify expression (10) for boost generator $\tilde{N}_{i}$ in such
a way to make a Casimir construction possible. That's what we will do in the next section. After first
quantization in section 3, we will show that the spacetime of the Fock transformation is identical to
the de Sitter one. Section 4 is devoted to conclusion.
\section{The Casimir construction}
We define new boost generators
\begin {equation}
N_{i} \equiv \tilde{N}_{i}-\frac{1}{2R}\eta_{\mu\nu}x^{\mu}x^{\nu}p_{i}
= x_{0}p_{i} - x_{i}p_{0} - \frac{1}{2R}\eta_{\mu\nu}x^{\mu}x^{\nu}p_{i}
\end {equation}
which reproduce the usual ones in the limit $R\rightarrow \infty$.
We observe that the infinitesimal transformation of any function $O(x^{\mu},p^{\nu})$,
defined as in usual Lorentz transformation
\begin {equation}
\delta O= \{-{1\over2}\omega_{\mu\nu}J^{\mu\nu}, O\},
\end {equation}
is not affected by the additional term of $N_{i}$ with respect to $\tilde{N}_{i}$
because of the antisymmetric feature of the infinitesimal parameters $\omega_{\mu\nu}$.
Deformation (11) is reminiscent of the one proposed in \cite{Mag2}.
The $R$-algebra (3), (4) and (5) must be completed by the following brackets
\begin {eqnarray}
\{N_{i},p_{0}\} & = & -p_{i} + \frac{N_{i}}{R} , \\
\{N_{i},p_{j}\} & = & \eta_{ij} p_{0} - \frac{1}{R} \epsilon_{ijk}M_{k}, \\
\{M_{i},p_{0}\} & = & 0 , \\
\{M_{i},p_{j}\} & = & \epsilon_{ijk}p_{k}, \\
\{M_{i},M_{j}\} & = & \epsilon_{ijk}M_{k}, \\
\{M_{i},N_{j}\} & = & \epsilon_{ijk}N_{k}, \\
\{N_{i},N_{j}\} & = & - \epsilon_{ijk}M_{k},
\end {eqnarray}
which can be checked after a tedious calculation. We point out that relations (5) and (13)-(19)
constitute a particular case of the Bacry L\'{e}vy-Leblond algebras presented in \cite{Cac}.
As the Casimirs are scalars and observing that
\begin {equation}
M_{i}p_{i}= \epsilon_{ijk}x_{j}p_{k}p_{i} = 0,
\end {equation}
the first Casimir $C$ can be constructed by combining $p_{\mu}p^{\mu}$, $M^{i}M^{i}$, $N^{i}N^{i}$,
$M^{i}N^{i}$ and $N^{i}p^{i}$
\begin {equation}
C = p_{\mu}p^{\mu} + \alpha M^{i}M^{i} + \beta N^{i}N^{i} + \gamma N^{i}p^{i} + \lambda M^{i}N^{i},
\end {equation}
where the coefficients $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$ and $\lambda$ must be determined by imposing
to $C$ to commute with all the generators.
At this step, $x^{\mu}$ and $p^{\mu}$ will be substituted by the corresponding operators
$x^{\mu} \longmapsto \hat{x}^{\mu}$ and $p^{\mu} \longmapsto \hat{p}^{\mu} $.
Expression (11) of the generator $N_{i}$ is then ill defined because of the commutation relations
of $\hat{x}^{i}$ with $\hat{p}^{0}$ and $\hat{p}^{i}$. The symmetrization operation compel us to rewrite it as
\begin {equation}
N_{i}=\hat{x}_{0}\hat{p}_{i}-\frac{1}{2}\left( \hat{x}_{i}\hat{p}_{0} +
\hat{p}_{0}\hat{x}_{i} \right) -\frac{1}{2R} \hat{x}_{0}^{2}\hat{p}_{i} +
\frac{1}{4R}\left(\hat{x}^{j}\hat{x}^{j}\hat{p}_{i} +
\hat{p}_{i}\hat{x}^{j}\hat{x}^{j}\right) .
\end {equation}
The Poisson brackets will be replaced by commutators in the following rule
\begin {equation}
\{ \ \}\mapsto \frac{1}{i\hbar}[ \ ].
\end {equation}
The $R$-Minkowski phase space algebra now reads
\begin {eqnarray}
\left[\hat{x}^{\mu},\hat{x}^{\nu}\right] & = & 0 , \\
\left[\hat{x}^{0},\hat{p}^{0}\right] & = & -i\hbar \left(1- {\hat{x}^{0} \over R} \right), \\
\left[\hat{x}^{0},\hat{p}^{i}\right] & = & 0, \\
\left[\hat{x}^{i},\hat{p}^{0}\right] & = & i\hbar {\hat{x}^{i} \over R}, \\
\left[\hat{x}^{i},\hat{p}^{j}\right] & = & -i\hbar \eta^{ij}, \\
\left[\hat{p}^{i},\hat{p}^{j}\right] & = & 0, \\
\left[\hat{p}^{i},\hat{p}^{0}\right] & = & -i\hbar { \hat{p} ^{i}\over R},
\end {eqnarray}
and the resulting $R$-Poincar\'{e} algebra takes the form
\begin {eqnarray}
\left[N_{i},\hat{p}_{0}\right] & = & -i\hbar \hat{p}_{i} + i\hbar \frac{N_{i}}{R} , \\
\left[N_{i},\hat{p}_{j}\right] & = & i\hbar \ \eta_{ij} \hat{p}_{0} - \frac{i\hbar}{R} \epsilon_{ijk}M_{k}, \\
\left[M_{i},\hat{p}_{0}\right] & = & 0 , \\
\left[M_{i},\hat{p}_{j}\right] & = & i\hbar \epsilon_{ijk}\hat{p}_{k}, \\
\left[M_{i},M_{j}\right] & = & i\hbar \epsilon_{ijk}M_{k}, \\
\left[M_{i},N_{j}\right] & = & i\hbar \epsilon_{ijk}N_{k}, \\
\left[N_{i},N_{j}\right] & = & - i\hbar \epsilon_{ijk}M_{k},
\end {eqnarray}
Relations (31)-(37) obtained in the context of the Fock transformation are identical to that presented
in \cite{Mag1, Mag2} within the framework of the dual kappa Poincar\'{e} algebra.
Because of the above relations of commutations, expression (21) of the Casimir $C$ must be symmetrized.
Therefore, we write
\begin {equation}
C = \hat{p}_{\mu}\hat{p}^{\mu} + \alpha M^{i}M^{i} + \beta N^{i}N^{i} +
\frac{\gamma}{2} \left( N^{i}\hat{p}^{i} + \hat{p}^{i}N^{i} \right) +
\frac{\lambda }{2}\left( M^{i}N^{i} + N^{i}M^{i}\right).
\end {equation}
Imposing
\begin {equation}
\left[C,\hat{p}_{0}\right] = 0
\end {equation}
leads to take $\beta = 0$, $\lambda = 0$ and $\gamma = 2/R$. Condition
\begin {equation}
\left[C,\hat{p}^{i}\right] = 0
\end {equation}
gives $\alpha = -1/R^{2}$ and expression (38) turns out to be
\begin {equation}
C = \hat{p}_{0}^{2} - \hat{p}^{i} \hat{p}^{i} - \frac{1}{R^{2}} M^{i}M^{i} + \frac{1}{R} \left( N^{i}\hat{p}^{i} + \hat{p}^{i}N^{i} \right) .
\end {equation}
One can check that
\begin {equation}
\left[C,M^{i}\right] = 0, \ \ \ \ \ \ \left[C,N^{i}\right] = 0 ,
\end {equation}
meaning that expression (41) of $C$ commute with all the generators of the $R$-Lorentz group. Of course,
in the limit $R \rightarrow \infty$, expression (41) reduces to the first Poincar\'{e} Casimir.
Contrary to DSR theory, we note that the Casimir depends on boost and rotation generators.
Identifying $R$ to $1/\kappa$, result (41) is identical to the one obtained by Magpantay \cite{Mag2}
in the context of the dual kappa Poincar\'{e} algebra.
\section{Towards the de Sitter spacetime}
Obviously, the usual representation
\begin {eqnarray}
\hat{x}^{\mu} & = & x^{\mu} , \\
\hat{p}^{\mu} & = & i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{\mu}} ,
\end {eqnarray}
does not work. We can check that the complete algebra (24)-(37) is satisfied if
we adopt the following representation:
\begin {eqnarray}
\hat{x}^{\mu} & = & x^{\mu} , \\
\hat{p}^{0} & = & i\hbar \left( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{0}}- \frac{x^{\mu}}{R} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}}\right), \\
\hat{p}^{i} & = & - i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{i}} .
\end {eqnarray}
We note that expression (46) differs from the one proposed by Magpantay \cite{Mag2}
by an additional term. From (46) and (47), we obtain
\begin {eqnarray}
\hat{p}^{0}\hat{p}^{0}= - \hbar^{2} \left[
\frac{1}{R} \left( -1+\frac{x^{0}}{R} \right)\frac{\partial}{\partial x^{0}} +
\frac{x^{i}}{R^{2}}\frac{\partial}{\partial x^{i}}
+ \left( 1 - \frac{x^{0}}{R} \right)^{2} \frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial \left( x^{0}\right)^{2}}
\right.
\hskip10mm&& \nonumber \\
\left.
- 2 \frac{x^{i}}{R} \left( 1 - \frac{x^{0}}{R} \right) \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{0}} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{i}}
+ \frac{x^{i}x^{j}}{R^{2}} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{i}} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{j}}
\right],
\end {eqnarray}
and
\begin {equation}
\hat{p}^{i} \hat{p}^{i} = - \hbar^{2}\triangle .
\end {equation}
Since
\begin {equation}
M^{i} = \frac{1}{2} \epsilon^{ijk} J^{jk} = \epsilon^{ijk} \hat{x}^{j}\hat{p}^{k},
\end {equation}
and taking into account relation
\begin {equation}
\epsilon^{ijk} \epsilon^{ils} = \delta^{jl}\delta^{ks} - \delta^{js} \delta^{kl},
\end {equation}
we obtain with the use of (28)
\begin {equation}
M^{i}M^{i} = - \hbar^{2} \left[
x^{i} x^{i} \triangle - x^{i}x^{j} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{i}} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{j}}
-2 x^{i} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{i}}
\right].
\end {equation}
Relation (32) allows us to write
\begin {equation}
\hat{p}^{i}N^{i} = N^{i}\hat{p}^{i} + 3i\hbar \hat{p}^{0} .
\end {equation}
Using (22), we get to
\begin {eqnarray}
N^{i} \hat{p}^{i} + \hat{p}^{i} N^{i} = 2N^{i}\hat{p}^{i} + 3i\hbar \hat{p}^{0} \hskip65mm&& \nonumber \\
= - \hbar^{2} \left\{
2 \left[
x^{0} - \frac{1}{2R}\left( \left(x^{0}\right)^{2} - x^{i}x^{i} \right)
\right] \triangle
\right.
\hskip30mm&& \nonumber \\
\left.
+ 2 x^{i} \left[
\left( 1 - \frac{x^{0}}{R}\right)\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial x^{0}\partial x^{i}}
- \frac{x^{j}}{R}\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial x^{j}\partial x^{i}}
\right] \right.
\hskip10mm&& \nonumber \\
\left.
+3 \left[
\left( 1 - \frac{x^{0}}{R}\right)\frac{\partial}{\partial x^{0}} - \frac{x^{i}}{R} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{i}}
\right]
\right\}.
\end {eqnarray}
Substituting (48), (49), (52) and (54) in (41), expression of the first Casimir turns out to be
\begin {equation}
C = - \hbar^{2} \left( 1 - \frac{x^{0}}{R}\right)^{2}
\left(\frac{\partial^{2}}{\left(\partial x^{0}\right)^{2}} - \triangle \right)
- 2 \frac{\hbar^{2}}{R} \left( 1 - \frac{x^{0}}{R}\right) \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{0}} .
\end {equation}
It follows that the Klein-Gordon equation in $R$-spacetime, $C\phi = m^{2}c^{2}\phi$, takes the form
\begin {equation}
\left[ \hbar^{2} \left( 1 - \frac{x^{0}}{R}\right)^{2}
\left(\frac{\partial^{2}}{\left(\partial x^{0}\right)^{2}} - \triangle \right)
+ 2 \frac{\hbar^{2}}{R} \left( 1 - \frac{x^{0}}{R}\right) \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{0}}
+ m^{2}c^{2} \right]\phi = 0 .
\end {equation}
We can check that this relation represents the Klein-Gordon equation in the de Sitter spacetime, known as
\begin {equation}
\left[ \frac{1}{\sqrt{|g|}} \partial_{\mu} \left( \sqrt{|g|} g^{\mu\nu} \partial_{\nu} \right)
+ \frac{m^{2} c^{2}}{\hbar^{2}} \right]\phi = 0 ,
\end {equation}
with the following metric
\begin {equation}
ds^{2} = \frac{1}{\left( 1-x^{0}/R\right)^{2}} \left[ (dx^{o})^{2}-dx^{i}dx^{i}\right].
\end {equation}
This result means that the spacetime of the Fock transformation is the same to the de Sitter one
in its conformal metric. In fact, if we make the following coordinate transformation
\begin {equation}
x^{0} \rightarrow c\tau = x^{0} -R ,
\end {equation}
expression (58) takes the form
\begin {equation}
ds^{2} = \frac{R^{2}}{c^{2}\tau^{2}} \left[ c^{2}d\tau^{2}-dx^{i}dx^{i}\right],
\end {equation}
which is the conformal metric of the de Sitter spacetime \cite{Ib1,Ib2}. Furthermore, expression (60)
indicates that the invariant length $R$ representing the universe radius in the Fock transformation
spacetime is exactly the radius of the embedded hypersurface representing the de Sitter spacetime.
Also, we observe that if we compare (58) with the conformal metric presented in \cite{Ib2},
we deduce that the Hubble constant is equal to $H=c/R$. This observation strongly
reinforces the fact that $R$ is interpreted as the universe radius in the context of the Fock transformation.
These results are expected because of the presence of the parameter $R$ in the theory.
In fact, it is known that in vacuum the radius $R$ induces the presence of the cosmological constant $\Lambda$
since this latter is intimately linked to $R$ by $\Lambda = 3/R^{2}$. But precisely the solutions of Einstein's
equations in presence of the cosmological constant are the de Sitter space. This indicates that
the symmetry group of the model presented here is a de Sitter group \cite{AAMP} and the $R$-Minkowski spacetime
is indeed a de Sitter one.
We would like to add that other authors have already investigated
the de Sitter Special Relativity \cite{GHTWXZ,GHW,GHXZ}. There approach consists in covering the
de Sitter space by Beltrami coordinate patches which allow to express easly the law of inertia since
geodesics are represented by straight worldlines. Other approaches are also presented in \cite{Cac,AAMP}.
Also we mention that Magpantay \cite{Mag2} has shown that the spacetime of the dual DSR
is identical to the one of the de Sitter in planar coordinates. This result is different from ours
since our approach leads straightforwardly to the conformal metric of the de Sitter spacetime.
As indicated in \cite{Ib2}, it is the conformal metric in form (58) which is compatible with
astronomical observations.
\section{ Conclusion}
From the new deformed Poisson brackets which we recently proposed \cite{Bou-Fou} and used
to reproduce the Fock coordinate transformation, we constructed in this paper a complete set
of commutators of generators and the corresponding first Casimir. Unlike in
DSR theory, this Casimir depends on boost and rotation generators. As in \cite{Mag2}, its
construction was made possible thanks to an appropriate redefinition of the boost generators.
After first quantization, we gave a realization of the corresponding deformed algebra and showed
by using the Klein-Gordon equation that the spacetime of the Fock transformation is identical to
the de Sitter one in its conformal metric, which is compatible with the astronomical observations \cite{Ib2}.
As we have seen, the invariant length representing the universe radius in the framework of Fock's
transformation is exactly the radius of the embedded hypersurface representing the de Sitter spacetime.
The same expression for the first Casimir and similar conclusions, with some nuances,
are obtained by Magpantay \cite{Mag2} within the framework of dual DSR. This means that the dual
kappa Poincar\'{e} algebra deals with the Fock transformation.
In the light of the results presented in this work, we strongly suggest that the
analogous of the Lorentz transformation in the Minkowski space is the Fock transformation in the
de Sitter space.
\bigskip
\bigskip
\noindent
{\bf REFERENCES}
\vskip\baselineskip
\begin{enumerate}
\bibitem{Amel-Pir}
G. Amelino-Camelia and T. Piran, Phys. Rev. {\bf D64}, 036005 (2001), arXiv e-print: astro-ph/0008107
\bibitem{Ameliano1}
G. Amelino Camelia, Int. J. Mod. Phys. {\bf D11}, 1643 (2002), arXiv e-print: gr-qc/0210063
\bibitem{Ameliano2}
G. Amelino Camelia, Nature {\bf 418}, 34 (2002), arXiv e-print: gr-qc/0207049
\bibitem{Mag-Smol1}
J. Magueijo and L. Smolin, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 88}, 190403 (2002), arXiv e-print: hep-th/0112090
\bibitem{Mag-Smol2}
J. Magueijo and L. Smolin, Phys. Rev. {\bf D67}, 044017 (2003), arXiv e-print: gr-qc/0207085
\bibitem{KMM}
D. Kimberly, J. Magueijo and J. Medeiros, Phys. Rev. {\bf D70} 084007 (2004), arXiv e-print: gr-qc/0303067
\bibitem{Ghosh-Pal}
S. Ghosh and P. Pal, Phys. Rev. {\bf D75}, 105021 (2007), arXiv e-print: hep-th/0702159
\bibitem{Bou-Fou}
A. Bouda and T. Foughali, Mod. Phys. Lett. {\bf A27}, 1250036 (2012), arXiv e-print: 1204.6397
\bibitem{Fock}
V. Fock, The theory of space, time and gravitation, Pergamon Press, Oxford, London, New York, Paris (1964)
\bibitem{Manida}
S. N. Manida, arXiv e-print: gr-qc/9905046
\bibitem{Mag1}
J. A. Magpantay, Int. J. Mod. Phys. {\bf A25}, 1881 (2010), arXiv e-print: 1011.3662
\bibitem{Mag2}
J. A. Magpantay, Phys. Rev. {\bf D84}, 024016 (2011), arXiv e-print: 1011.3888
\bibitem{Cac}
S. L. Cacciatori, V. Gorini and A. Kamenshchik, Annalen der Physik, {\bf 17} 728 (2008), arXiv e-print: 0807.3009
\bibitem{Ib1}
M. Ibison, J. Math. Phys. {\bf 48}, 122501 (2007), arXiv e-print: 0704.2788
\bibitem{Ib2}
M. Ibison, Electrodynamics with a Future Conformal Horizon, AIP Conf.Proc. 1316:28-42 (2010),
arXiv e-print: 1010.3074 [physics.gen-ph]
\bibitem{AAMP}
R. Aldrovandi, J. P. Beltran Almeida, C. S. O. Mayor and J. G. Pereira, de Sitter Relativity and Quantum Physics,
AIP Conf.Proc. 962:175-184 (2007), arXiv e-print:0710.0610 [gr-qc]
\bibitem{GHTWXZ}
H.-Y. Guo, C.-G. Huang, Y. Tian, H.-T. Wu, Z. Xu and B. Zhou, Class. Quantum Gravi. {\bf 24} 4009 (2007), arXiv e-print: gr-qc/0703078
\bibitem{GHW}
H.-Y. Guo, C.-G. Huang and H.-T. Wu, Phys. Lett. {\bf B663} 270 (2008), arXiv e-print: 0801.1146
\bibitem{GHXZ}
H.-Y. Guo, C.-G. Huang, Z. Xu and B. Zhou, Mod. Phys. Lett. {\bf A19} 1701 (2004), arXiv e-print: hep-th/0311156
\end{enumerate}
\end {document}
|
\section{Introduction}
Figures of merit provide a means of comparing and optimizing astronomical
instruments and surveys. Good figures of merit encapsulate key capabilities,
contain relatively few assumptions, and compute easily with readily accessible
information.
For imaging surveys, the standard figure of merit is \'{e}tendue:
the product of a camera's field of view $\Omega_{\rm fov}$ and
the telescope's collecting area $A$. When comparing sites of
varying image quality, it is common to normalize the \'{e}tendue by the square
of the FWHM of the point spread function
\citep[e.g.,][]{Terebizh:11:TelescopeDesigns}. \'{E}tendue is then
proportional to the time needed to survey a large area of sky to a
specified depth. Notably, it does not matter whether the depth is reached
by a deep single exposure (as from an instrument with large collecting area
but small field of view) or many shallower exposures (as from wide field
cameras on smaller telescopes).
For time-domain astrophysics, however, the depth and temporal sequence
of the exposures (their cadence)
are critical to determine what phenomena are detectable and
amenable to followup observations. A single deep exposure is clearly not
equivalent to many shallower exposures when searching for supernovae, for
instance. A new figure of merit is thus needed to compare the capabilities
of surveys in detecting transient astrophysical events.
One challenge in formulating such a figure of merit is that a given
instrument may execute surveys using a wide range of revisit times.
For a fixed amount of total observing time, changing the time between
revisits to each field also changes the
sky area it is possible to cover in each cadence interval. This choice
then determines the discovery rate that is
possible for various types of transient events.
For ease of comparison, however, we would like a figure of merit that is
independent of the survey strategy implemented. We seek a metric derived
from the fundamentals of the camera, telescope, and site that illuminates
these trades.
\defcitealias{Tonry:11:ATLAS}{T11}
\citet[\citetalias{Tonry:11:ATLAS}]{Tonry:11:ATLAS}
discussed these issues and
proposed a capability metric derived from
the information theory of signal-to-noise accumulation.
It captures many of the relevant features, including
the \'{e}tendue, throughput efficiencies, exposure duty cycle, sky brightness,
and pixel sampling.
Here we propose a new figure of merit for time-domain surveys, the
instantaneous volumetric survey speed, that is motivated specifically by
transient discovery. In Section \ref{sec:speed}, we
define the figure of merit and discuss the issue of spectroscopic
accessibility. In Section \ref{sec:cadence}, we discuss how the related
metric of areal survey rate determines the range of cadences achievable.
In Section \ref{sec:detection}, we extend this methodology to
compute transient detection rates.
We use \textit{cadence} throughout
the paper to mean generically
the actual time sequence of exposures obtained by
a survey, including weather losses and daylight for ground-based surveys.
Survey cadences can thus be irregular or contain
multiple timescales\footnote{For example, the baseline LSST Wide-Fast-Deep
Survey includes a pair of visits separated by $\sim$30 minutes,
with the next revisit three nights later.}.
Our analysis in this paper will focus on strictly \textit{regular}
cadences, in which each field in the survey area is repeatedly
revisited at cadence intervals $\Delta t$. Thus a ``one hour cadence''
indicates that each field is visited throughout the night with separations
of one hour, and then returned to on subsequent nights for further visits
on that same temporal grid.
\section{Speed} \label{sec:speed}
We define the instantaneous
volumetric survey speed $\dot{V}_M$ as the comoving spatial
volume in
which an object of fiducial absolute magnitude $M$ may be detected in a
single exposure with specified signal-to-noise ratio (SNR),
divided by the total time per exposure
(exposure time plus any readout and slew overheads):
\begin{equation}
\dot{V}_M = \frac{\Omega_{\rm fov}}{4\pi}
\frac{V_{\rm c}(z_{\rm lim}(M, t_{\rm exp}))}{t_{\rm exp} + t_{\rm OH}}.
\end{equation}
In this equation, $\Omega_{\rm fov}$ is the camera field of view,
$t_{\rm exp}$ and $t_{\rm OH}$ are the exposure and overhead times, and
$V_{\rm c}(z_{\rm lim})$ is the comoving volume as a function of the
redshift of an object at the detection limit $z_{\rm lim}$. In turn,
$z_{\rm lim}$ depends on the fiducial absolute magnitude $M$ and the limiting
magnitude $m_{\rm lim}$ (and thus $t_{\rm exp}$). We use
the k-correction of a source with constant spectral density per unit
wavelength $f_\lambda$, $K = -2.5
\log_{10}(1/(1+z))$ \citep{Hogg:99:DistanceMeasures}. (Using an analytic
k-correction simplifies the computations and enables generic comparisons.
For true rate estimation, $K$-corrections for specific source
classes should be used when possible.)
This metric
implicitly incorporates many key parameters: the volume depends on
the field of view of the camera and its limiting magnitude. The limiting
magnitude in turn
depends on the telescope aperture and image quality, filter bandpasses and
throughputs, the local sky background, electronics read noise, pipeline
efficiency, etc.\footnote{Obtaining a limiting magnitude representative of the
true distribution of observing conditions, particularly lunar phase and
seeing, is vital for useful comparisons between surveys.}
The time per exposure depends on the configuration and
performance of the readout electronics and telescope systems.
While we have cast this figure of merit in terms of detection of explosive
transients, it is also relevant for studies of photometrically variable
objects. If cosmological corrections are small because the volume probed
is local (due to small $M$ and/or $m_{\rm lim}$), maximizing $\dot{V}_M$ also
maximizes the SNR times the number of background-limited sources observed
per unit time.
We can compare our figure of merit to the capability metric specified
by \citetalias{Tonry:11:ATLAS}. That metric is composed of
fixed values including the
camera field of view, telescope collecting area, telescope throughput, PSF,
sky background, and duty cycle. It then relates these to a
trade space of possible survey parameters,
including the SNR at a given
magnitude, the cadence interval, and the total sky area covered per cadence
interval. However, we can compare the \citetalias{Tonry:11:ATLAS}
survey metric to our instantaneous
survey speed by evaluating the variable right hand side
of Equation 9 of \citetalias{Tonry:11:ATLAS} for a single exposure:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
{\rm FOM} & = \frac{{\rm SNR}^2\,\Omega_{\rm fov}}{t_{\rm exp} + t_{\rm OH}}
10^{0.8 m} \\
& \propto \frac{\Omega_{\rm fov}}{t_{\rm exp} + t_{\rm OH}} (10^{0.2
m_{\rm lim}})^4 \\
& \propto \frac{\Omega_{\rm fov}}{t_{\rm exp} + t_{\rm OH}} d^4
\end{split}
\end{equation}
for a Euclidean volume where $d = 10^{0.2(m-M+5)}$\,pc. In contrast, for
non-cosmological events, $V_{\rm c} \propto d^3$, and thus
\begin{equation}
\dot{V}_M \propto \frac{\Omega_{\rm fov}}{t_{\rm exp} + t_{\rm OH}} d^3.
\end{equation}
So our figure of merit for transient detection scales as
the third power of distance probed, where the \citetalias{Tonry:11:ATLAS}
capability metric derived from SNR accumulation scales as the fourth
power of distance.
Interestingly, selecting $\dot{V}_M$ as the figure of merit implies that
any specific camera has an optimal exposure time for discovering transient
events.
That optimum depends most strongly on the overhead time
between exposures. Intuitively, exposure times that are short compared to
the overhead are inefficient. Exposures that are too long increase the
surveyed volume only through an increased single exposure depth ($V \propto
t_{\rm exp}^\frac{1}{4}$), which is less effective than increasing the areal coverage
of the snapshot ($V \propto t_{\rm exp}$). Given the presence of cosmological
integrals, it is most convenient to find the optimum exposure time
maximizing $\dot{V}_M$ using numerical methods. Figure
\ref{fig:vdot_vs_texp} shows the dependence of $\dot{V}_M$ on $t_{\rm exp}$
and $t_{\rm OH}$ for a specific camera realization.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{fig/vdot_vs_texp.pdf}
\caption{Dependence of $\dot{V}_{-19}$ on $t_{\rm exp}$ for ZTF
\citep{Bellm:14:ZTFHotwired} for fiducial
$t_{\rm OH}$ of 15 and 30 seconds. A longer overhead both decreases the
maximum survey speed achievable and lengthens the optimum exposure time.}
\label{fig:vdot_vs_texp}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
For definiteness, we use a fiducial value of $M=-19$ (characteristic of
Type Ia supernovae) throughout this work. This choice creates some
dependence on cosmology and assumed $k$-correction on the derived value of
$\dot{V}_M$ for the deepest surveys. We use a cosmology with $h=0.704$,
$\Omega_m = 0.272$, $\Omega_\Lambda = 0.728$ \citep{Komatsu:11:WMAP7BAO} as
implemented in the package
\texttt{cosmolopy}\footnote{\url{http://roban.github.io/CosmoloPy/}}.
The total
spatial volume surveyed in a cadence interval (a ``snapshot'')
is proportional to the
number of transients in the snapshot.\footnote{
cf.\ Figures 8.5 and 8.10 of the LSST Science Book
\citep{LSST:09:ScienceBook}.
Strict proportionality requires
that the transients be uniformly distributed throughout the volume
surveyed, which may not be the case for Galactic or local universe
transients, and that confusion does not limit the depth of the exposures as
integration time increases \citepalias[see also][]{Tonry:11:ATLAS}.}
The figure of merit $\dot{V}_M$ thus describes the
capability of a given observing system to trade the volume surveyed against
revisit time.
Maximizing $\dot{V}_M$ when designing a camera thus maximizes its
ability to discover transients at any desired revisit time, subject to the
constraints on cadence intervals that we will discuss in Section \ref{sec:cadence}.
Not all transients are created equal, however. Full scientific
exploitation of a detected transient typically requires additional
photometric and spectroscopic followup. The feasibility of this followup
depends strongly on the apparent magnitude of the transient. A survey
discovering a smaller absolute number of transients may thus be more
productive if those transients are brighter and can be observed with
more readily available moderate-aperture followup telescopes.
Accordingly, we define a modified figure of merit, the
{\em spectroscopically-accessible} volumetric survey speed:
\begin{equation}
\dot{V}_{M, m < s} = f_{\rm spec}(s) \dot{V}_M,
\end{equation}
where $f_{\rm spec}(s)$ is the fraction of the comoving volume producing
transients with apparent magnitudes brighter\footnote{This is equivalent
to using the brighter of the survey's limiting magnitude and $s$ when
computing $z_{\rm lim}$. It assumes that the volume where $m > s$ is not
useful for transient detection. This is an oversimplification, as faint
early detections can provide valuable information for nearby transients later
peaking at brighter apparent magnitudes. However, depending on the cadence,
coaddition of several shallow exposures may fill this role.} than $s$.
We choose $s$ based on the capability of the followup resources available:
$s \approx 21$ is a reasonable limit for observations with
3--5\,m telescopes, while $s \approx 23$ is reasonable for 8--10\,m followup.
This scheme of defining $f_{\rm spec}$ with a sharp cutoff at apparent
magnitude $s$ assumes our priority is to be capable of following up the
faintest (presumably rare) transients. If instead we wish to obtain a
large sample of transient spectra, it will be more useful to weight the
comoving volume integral by the cost (in time) of followup as a
function of apparent
magnitude\footnote{For single-object spectroscopy with fixed target
acquisition time
$t_{\rm ac}$ and fiducial exposure time $t_0$ for objects of apparent
magnitude $m_0$, this weighting is $t_0 10^{0.8 (m- m_0)} + t_{\rm ac}$
divided by the length of the night.}.
This weighting will further emphasize the strengths of the
wide, shallow surveys producing the most bright transients.
Because the sharp cutoff at apparent magnitude $s$ is conceptually simpler,
we use it through the remainder of this work. We use $5\sigma$ limiting
magnitudes throughout.
Table \ref{tab:surveys} lists instrument specifications and the resulting
survey speeds for several major time-domain surveys.
Figure \ref{fig:spec_vdot_by_telescope} shows the impact of the limiting magnitude cut on $\dot{V}_M$
and on the optimal exposure time.
Figure \ref{fig:vdot_vs_obs_mag} shows the
spatial volume surveyed as a function of transient brightness.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig/spec_vdot_by_telescope.pdf}
\caption{Variation in spectroscopically-accessible survey speed with
exposure time for ZTF, DECam, and LSST. Solid red lines show
the volume probed for transients brighter than 21$^{\rm st}$\,mag
($\dot{V}_{-19, m < 21}$), dotted green lines show
$\dot{V}_{-19, m < 23}$, and dashed blue lines show the total volumetric
survey speed ($\dot{V}_{-19}$). Larger aperture telescopes may be less
efficient at detecting bright transients even at short exposure times.
}
\label{fig:spec_vdot_by_telescope}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig/Volume_per_hour_vs_observed_mag.pdf}
\caption{Spatial volume within which transients of absolute magnitude $-19$
may be detected in a one-hour survey snapshot versus the maximum
apparent magnitude $s$ of the detection.
Shaded regions indicate the telescope aperture necessary for spectroscopic
followup.}
\label{fig:vdot_vs_obs_mag}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\input{table_surveys}
\section{Cadence} \label{sec:cadence}
In Section \ref{sec:speed}, we showed the effectiveness of wide, shallow
surveys in detecting spectroscopically-accessible transients. However,
the proportionality between $\dot{V}_M$ and the number of detected
transients breaks down if a survey runs out of new sky to observe. For
modern wide-field surveys, it is easily feasible to observe the entire
visible sky in less than one night. We therefore must consider the relationship
between a survey's {\em areal} survey speed $\dot{\Omega} =
\frac{\Omega_{\rm fov}}{t_{\rm exp} + t_{\rm OH}}$, its latitude $\phi$, and the
possible cadences.
In this section, we consider an idealized and simplified transient survey.
We assume that our survey operates in a single filter bandpass at a single
site\footnote{We treat surveys using multiple telescopes at one or more sites
closely spaced geographically (e.g., ATLAS, Evryscope, PanSTARRS 1 \& 2)
as single
instruments with the combined fields of view of all telescopes. We here
consider only single sites of widely-separated surveys (e.g., ASAS-SN North
and South) because of the additional complexity of treating the field
overlap regions.}
with no weather losses. While observing, we observe the largest
snapshot area ($\Omega_{\rm snap}$) possible in the cadence
interval ($\Delta t$) such that we can observe the entire footprint a
second time in the second epoch. We assume a single exposure time
(optimized for the cadence interval chosen if necessary) and a fixed overhead
between exposures, implying roughly constant slews between each
exposure\footnote{We assume generically that each field is observed only
once per cadence interval, but paired exposures without slews may be
accommodated in this scheme by summing the resulting exposure and overhead
times.}. Finally, we limit our observations in the footprint to times when
the fields are above a specified maximum airmass or zenith angle ($\zeta_{\rm
max}$).
The trade space between survey snapshot area $\Omega_{\rm snap}$ and
cadence interval
$\Delta t$ has two limits. The first is when an instrument sits on
a single field and takes exposures at a rate
limited only by its readout time. In
this case $\Omega_{\rm snap, min} = \Omega_{\rm fov}$ and $\Delta t_{\rm
min} = t_{\rm OH}$.
Surveys operating at this limit are usually driven by specialized
science goals; they are best undertaken by instruments with extremely large
fields of view (such as Pi of the Sky \citep{Burd:05:PioftheSky} or Evryscope
\citep{Law:14:Evryscope})
and/or fast readout time (EM-CCDs or CMOS).
The opposite limit is to maximize the snapshot volume, and hence use the
longest cadence interval possible.
The maximum revisit time ($\Delta t_{\rm max}$)
is set by how long it takes a survey with areal survey speed $\dot{\Omega}$
to cover the entire visible sky area.
The limit of the ``available sky'' thus
depends on the observatory latitude, which determines the length of the
night as well as the rotation rate of new sky into the observable region
above $\zeta_{\rm max}$.
Calculating the limiting cadence interval $\Delta t_{\rm max}$ requires
consideration of several cases. The sky area above the zenith angle cut
$\zeta_{\rm max}$ at any given instant may be divided into a circumpolar region
and a region that will rotate below $\zeta_{\rm max}$ eventually:
\[
\Omega_{\rm inst} = \Omega_{\rm circ} + \Omega_{\rm r}
= 2\pi (1 - \cos \zeta_{\rm max}).
\]
(Depending
on the latitude and $\zeta_{\rm max}$, there may be no circumpolar region or
the entire sky may be circumpolar.) Since the circumpolar region stays
above the zenith angle cut, the rate of change of this instantaneous sky is
\[
\frac{d \Omega_{\rm inst}}{dt} = \frac{d \Omega_{\rm r}}{dt}
\]
The rotation of sky into and out of $\Omega_{\rm r}$ is most easily
calculated by integrating the areal rotation across the
meridian\footnote{Given the sidereal rotation rate $\dot{H}$, $\frac{d
\Omega_{\rm r}}{dt} = \dot{H} (\cos \theta_1 - \cos \theta_2)$, where the
limits of the integration $\theta_1, \theta_2$ are set by the colatitude
$\varphi = 90 - \phi$ and $\zeta_{\rm max}$. If $\varphi >= \zeta_{\rm max}$,
there is no circumpolar area, and the limits of integration are
$\theta_{1,2} = \varphi \pm \zeta_{\rm max}$. Otherwise $\theta_1 = \zeta_{\rm
max} - \varphi$ and $\theta_2 = \varphi + \zeta_{\rm max}$: the length of
the meridian above $\zeta_{\rm max}$ but outside the circumpolar region.
(To simplify the presentation, we restrict to Northern latitudes.)
}.
The total sky area passing above $\zeta_{\rm max}$ in one night is therefore
\[
\Omega_{\rm night} = \Omega_{\rm inst} + \frac{d \Omega_{\rm r}}{dt} \Delta
t_{\rm night}.
\]
Figure \ref{fig:unique_sky_per_night} shows the dependence of the total sky
available per night on observatory latitude.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{fig/unique_sky_per_night.pdf}
\caption{Unique sky area per night above $\zeta_{\rm max} = 60^\circ$ as a
function of observatory latitude. Night lengths are determined for 18$^\circ$
twilight, and the limiting values at the summer and winter solstices are
shown. The cusp near 84$^\circ$ latitude is due to the transition to
24\,hrs of $>18^\circ$ darkness.
\label{fig:unique_sky_per_night}
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The first case of limiting cadences to consider is for instruments capable
of surveying the entire sky in less than a single night. These must have
areal survey rates $\dot{\Omega} > \frac{d \Omega_{\rm r}}{dt}$: they must
be able to survey the sky in the region above $\zeta_{\rm max}$ faster than it
rotates out of the available field. In this case $\Omega_{\rm snap} =
\Omega_{\rm inst}$: we choose a footprint such that at
the end of the first epoch,
the trailing edge has risen to $\zeta_{\rm max}$ to be observed and
the leading edge of the footprint has just
rotated down to $\zeta_{\rm max}$ to be observed in the second epoch.
The limiting cadence interval is thus $\Delta t_{\rm max} = \Omega_{\rm
inst}/\dot{\Omega}$. The remaining check is to ensure that
$\Delta t_{\rm max}$ is less than half of the night length.
In cases where $\dot{\Omega} < \frac{d \Omega_{\rm r}}{dt}$ or it takes
longer than half a night to survey $\Omega_{\rm inst}$, it will take more
than one night to repeat observations of the available sky above
$\zeta_{\rm max}$.
For instruments with $\dot{\Omega}$ greater than
$\frac{d \Omega_{\rm r}}{dt}$ scaled to the nightly sidereal rotation,
the argument is identical to the
sub-night case. We replace $\Omega_{\rm inst}$ by $\Omega_{\rm night}$
averaged over the cadence interval
and restrict the observing time within $\Delta t$ to the times the sun is
down. Given the dependence on night length, $\Omega_{\rm snap,max}$ and
$\Delta t_{\rm max}$ are most conveniently found numerically.
Instruments with $\dot{\Omega}$ slower than the sidereal rotation of
the footprint are unlikely to be used for time domain surveys, so we do not
consider them further.
Figure \ref{fig:areal_survey_rate_vs_rot} plots the areal survey speeds of several cameras against the
footprint rotation rate $\frac{d \Omega_{\rm r}}{dt}$.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{fig/areal_survey_rate_vs_footprint_rotation.pdf}
\caption{Areal survey rates ($\dot{\Omega}$, in deg$^2$ hr$^{-1}$) for
specific surveys.
Overplot colored lines are the rate
of change of sky area above a given zenith angle cut $\zeta_{\rm max}$ as a
function of latitude ($\frac{d \Omega_{\rm r}}{dt}$, in deg$^2$ hr$^{-1}$).
Surveys above a given line can survey faster than the sky rotates within
the footprint defined by $\zeta_{\rm max}$.
\label{fig:areal_survey_rate_vs_rot}
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Figures \ref{fig:snapshot_volume_vs_cadence} and
\ref{fig:accessible_volume_vs_cadence} plot the snapshot volume against the
cadence interval, with and without a cutoff on the transient limiting magnitude.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{fig/Snapshot_volume_vs_cadence.pdf}
\caption{Total snapshot survey volume for $M=-19$ transients
versus cadence interval for several surveys.
Observations begin on the winter solstice.
Filled circles indicate the cadence interval
at which the survey runs out of available sky
above an airmass of 2.5. Below this point the snapshot volume is
simply the survey speed $\dot{V}_M$ times the available observing time.
Above this point we increase the exposure time to reach longer cadence
intervals, at cost of a slower rate of increase in the snapshot volume.
\label{fig:snapshot_volume_vs_cadence}
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{fig/Snapshot_volume_vs_cadence_mlim_lt_21.pdf}
\caption{Same as Figure \ref{fig:snapshot_volume_vs_cadence}, but for
spectroscopically-accessible volume only ($\dot{V}_{M, m < 21}$): we consider only the volume in
which we can detect transients of apparent magnitude brighter than $m =
21$, appropriate for 3--5\,m-class spectroscopic followup. ZTF and ATLAS
will discover more bright transients at any chosen cadence interval than even
LSST.
\label{fig:accessible_volume_vs_cadence}
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
For some cameras, the longest sky-limited cadence interval $\Delta t_{\rm max}$
may be shorter than the transient timescale of interest. For example,
superluminous supernovae (SLSN) may be visible for hundreds of days;
two all-sky surveys with identical depths using a one day and a one week
cadence would thus each discover SLSN at the same rate.
Several modifications of our
baseline survey are possible in this case. A first option is to maintain
the higher cadence, achieving finer sampling of the lightcurve and hence
improved characterization of the lightcurve shape. This may
be scientifically valuable in many cases, although it does not increase the
transient detection rate. A second option is to integrate for longer
exposures than needed to maximize $\dot{V}_M$, as in the sky-limited case
the ``optimal'' exposure time no longer maximizes the number of detected
transients. However, with deeper exposures the additional
transients discovered will be more
challenging to follow up. Survey extensions are also possible: surveys
in other filters or of other programs can productively fill time
before beginning a new epoch.
\section{Detection} \label{sec:detection}
The selection of a specific cadence interval $\Delta t$ sets the volume
$V_{\rm snap}(M)$ within which transients of absolute magnitude $M$ may be detected.
It also imposes a selection effect on the decay timescale of the transients
detected. In particular, events which decay much more quickly than $\Delta
t$ are unlikely to be detected.
Exact computation of detection rates requires detailed modeling of
multi-color lightcurves, detection passbands, cosmological evolution of
event rates, event-to-event variations, and more
\citep[e.g.,][]{Kessler:09:SNANA}.
Our goal in this work is to provide a reasonable comparison of survey
camera capability and broad cadence tradeoffs rather than
a precise estimate of
the rates of specific event types.
Accordingly, we make several simplifying assumptions to enable analytic
integrals.
However, it is straightforward to
extend this methodology to specific event classes by substituting
appropriate lightcurve shapes, k-corrections, evolution of the
rates with redshift, and extinction.
We calculate the yearly detection rate for transients of absolute magnitude
$M$ and rest-frame effective decay timescale $\tau_{\rm eff}$
by integrating over the co-moving volume:
\begin{equation}
N(M,\tau_{\rm eff}, m_{\rm lim}, \Delta t) = \Omega_{\rm snap} \int_0^{z_{\rm lim}(M, m_{\rm lim})} \!
\frac{\mathcal{R}(z)}{1+z} ct_k(M, m_{\rm lim}, \tau_{\rm eff}, z)
\frac{dV}{dz} dz.
\label{eqn:ndets}
\end{equation}
Here $\mathcal{R}(z)$ is the comoving volumetric rate (events Mpc$^{-3}$
yr$^{-1}$); we divide by (1+$z$) due to time dilation.
The survey limiting magnitude determines the depth of the
spatial cone probed, while the choice of cadence interval
$\Delta t$ determines its
angular extent $\Omega_{\rm snap}$.
We calculate the effect of observing cadence on the discovery rate using
the control time $ct_k$. Here $k$ is the
number of consecutive images in which we require a detection.
If a given transient
is detectable in the observer frame above $m_{\rm lim}$
for time $t_{\rm vis}$, given an array of
separations $dt_i$ between $n$ consecutive images of a field, we define $r$ as
the number of intervals where $dt_i < t_{\rm vis}$. Then the control time
is defined by \citet{Zwicky:42:ControlTime} as
\begin{equation}
ct_1(t_{\rm vis}) = \sum_1^r dt_i + (n - r) t_{\rm vis}.
\end{equation}
Using the control time in this manner counts even a single
detection of an event above the limiting magnitude towards the total number
of events discovered ($k=1$).
In modern transient surveys it is common to require
multiple detections of an event before triggering followup in order to
avoid contamination by uncatalogued asteroids and image subtraction
artifacts. We develop here an extension of the $ct_1$ algorithm for $k >
1$ (Algorithm \ref{alg:ctk}).
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Algorithm for computing the control time $ct_k$ from $n$
observations with timestamps $t_i$, requiring $k > 1$ consecutive observations
within the visibility interval $t_{\rm vis}$.}
\label{alg:ctk}
\begin{algorithmic}
\Begin
\For{j:=0}{n-k}
\Begin
\State $dt_j = t_{j+k-1} - t_j$
\If {dt_j > t_{\rm vis}}
\State $ct_j = 0$
\Else
\If {ct_{j-1} = 0 {~\rm \bf or~} j = 0}
\State $ct_j = t_{\rm vis}$
\Else
\State $ct_j = dt_j$
\End
\State $ct_k = \sum_{j=0}^{n-k} ct_j$
\End.
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
We use a simple analytic approximation for the lightcurve shape to simplify
the calculation of the control time. We assume that the transient rises
and falls linearly in magnitude space with characteristic rest-frame timescales
$\tau_{\rm rise}$ and $\tau_{\rm fall}$ days mag$^{-1}$.
Accordingly, the source is visible in the observer frame for
\begin{align}
t_{\rm vis}(M, m_{\rm lim}, \tau_{\rm rise}, \tau_{\rm fall}) & =
( (M - m_{\rm lim}) \tau_{\rm rise} + (M - m_{\rm lim}) \tau_{\rm
fall} ) (1+z) \\
& \equiv (M - m_{\rm lim}) \tau_{\rm eff} (1 + z).
\end{align}
For many explosive transients, $\tau_{\rm fall} >> \tau_{\rm rise}$, so
$\tau_{\rm eff} \approx \tau_{\rm fall}$.
Using these assumptions, we may now compute (idealized) detection
rates for different surveys and cadences. We calculate the detection rates
in a grid of transient peak magnitude $M$ and effective timescale
$\tau_{\rm eff}$ \citep[cf.][]{Kasliwal:11:Thesis}. We use a constant fiducial
volumetric rate density $\mathcal{R}(z) = 3\times10^{-5}$ events
Mpc$^{-3}$ yr$^{-1}$, approximately the local SN Ia rate. As above, we
use the k-correction of a hypothetical $f_\lambda$ standard.
For each cadence interval $\Delta t$, we create a grid of times for a one-year
interval with spacing $\Delta t$. We mask all grid points between
eighteen degree dawn and eighteen degree twilight and use the remainder as
our observation times $t_i$ to compute the control time\footnote{
In reality, various points in the survey footprint
will be surveyed between $t_i$ and $t_i + \Delta t$. This gridded approach
is simple to compute and will be a good approximation if the order in which
the fields are observed is consistent from night to night.
Assessing detection rates for complex pointing schemes and
including weather losses
requires the use of a full survey simulator, which is beyond the scope of
this work.}. As discussed in Section \ref{sec:cadence}, when the desired
cadence interval is longer than the time needed to survey the available sky
above an airmass of 2.5
we increase the exposure time to compensate (cf. Figure
\ref{fig:snapshot_volume_vs_cadence}).
Figure \ref{fig:ptf1day}
shows the detection rate for PTF using a 1 day cadence in the phase space
of transient peak magnitude and effective timescale.
Comparing the predicted numbers of detections at timescales less than a day
to the paucity of fast transients discovered to date
\citep[cf.][]{LSST:09:ScienceBook, Kasliwal:11:Thesis}
emphasizes that any fast transients that
exist must be rare, as current surveys already have some sensitivity to
short-timescale events.
We also could easily invert the calculation to determine the volumetric rate
$\mathcal{R}(z)$ compatible with current nondetections.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{fig/cadence_sensitivity_PTF.pdf}
\caption{
Number of transients detectable in at least two epochs by
PTF using a strict 1 day cadence with no weather losses as a function of
peak absolute magnitude and effective timescale $\tau_{\rm eff}$.
Colors indicate the number of events detected per year assuming all
transients occur at the local SN Ia rate.
Transients in the hashed region are detected at a rate of less than one per
century, while events in the crosshatched region cannot be detected twice
by the specified cadence.}
\label{fig:ptf1day}
\end{figure}
In Figure \ref{fig:ptfvsztf},
we slice Figure \ref{fig:ptf1day} at the fiducial value
of $M = -19$ mag and compare PTF 1 day and 1 hour cadences to ZTF at a 1
hour cadence.
By increasing the raw survey
speed relative to PTF, ZTF can break from the cadence--survey volume trade
space defined by PTF and conduct a survey that is both wide area and high
cadence. Such a survey is required to discover intrinsically
rare, fast-decaying events such as gamma-ray burst afterglows.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{fig/cadence_comp.pdf}
\caption{
Comparison of the number of $M=-19$ transients detectable
by PTF and ZTF as a function of cadence interval
and effective timescale $\tau_{\rm eff}$.
The requirement to detect the transient
in at least two epochs
leads to a sharp drop in the number of events detected below the cadence
interval $\Delta t$.
PTF can increase its sensitivity to (intrinsically rare)
fast transients by observing at a 1
hour cadence rather 1 day cadence, but this decreases the number of slow
transients it detects by an order of magnitude. Thanks to its much
greater survey speed $\dot{V}_{-19}$, ZTF can discover more transients than
PTF at all timescales $\tau_{\rm eff}$ even with a 1 hour cadence. }
\label{fig:ptfvsztf}
\end{figure}
With the ability to estimate the transient detection rate as a function of
cadence, it is then possible to choose a cadence interval to optimize the total
number of detections for one or several source classes.
Figures \ref{fig:ndets_bycadence_20} and \ref{fig:ndets_bycadence_1} show the dependence of the detection rate on
the chosen survey cadence for decay rates $\tau_{\rm eff} = 20$ and 1
days\,mag$^{-1}$.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{fig/nevents_allsurveys_20.pdf}
\caption{Number of $M=-19, \tau_{\rm eff}=20$\,days\,mag$^{-1}$ transients
detected in at least two epochs by various surveys
as a function of cadence interval,
assuming a constant volumetric rate equal
to the local SN Ia rate.
At short cadences ($\Delta t << \tau_{\rm eff}$),
high $\dot{\Omega}$ surveys like ZTF and ATLAS can discover comparable
numbers of transients to deeper surveys like DECam and HSC.
At long cadences ($\Delta t >> \tau_{\rm eff}$), the detection efficiency
of all surveys declines because all but the brightest nearby events decay
too quickly to be observed in a second epoch.
\label{fig:ndets_bycadence_20}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{fig/nevents_allsurveys_1.pdf}
\caption{Number of $M=-19, \tau_{\rm eff}=1$\,day\,mag$^{-1}$ transients
detected in at least two epochs by various surveys.
\label{fig:ndets_bycadence_1}}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
To obtain useful comparisons of transient surveys, it is necessary to look
beyond simple calculations of \'{e}tendue.
We have developed a new means of comparing current and near-term time-domain
surveys: the instantaneous volumetric survey speed.
This metric requires only readily-available information: the camera field of view, exposure and
overhead times, and limiting magnitude. It captures the relationship
between the cadence interval and the survey snapshot volume, which is related
to the discovery rate. The volumetric survey speed is straightforward to
interpret physically, and additionally it implies an optimal integration
time.
A closely-related metric is the areal survey rate, which serves to bound
the achievable cadences for a ground-based survey. Simply put, many modern
time-domain surveys run out of fresh sky to survey, sometimes in a
single night!
Another practical concern is the brightness of the
discovered transients---for science applications requiring spectroscopic
followup, discovering many faint transients is often less valuable than a
finding a few bright ones.
We have developed a basic analytic framework for estimating the
detection rate of transients that evolve at different speeds. By
assessing the influence of the survey parameters and the chosen survey
cadence on the detection rate,
one may optimize the survey cadence for the science of interest and compare
to other surveys.
A complete evaluation of detection rates for specific transient types will
require analysis of actual simulated or realized pointing histories, with
increased fidelity coming at the cost of additional complexity.
LSST's Metrics Analysis Framework \citep{Jones:14:MAF}
provides one such means of performing
quantitative assessments of pointing histories.
Maximizing the transient detection rate does not alone optimize a survey
design. In many cases, there is tension between the need for
well-sampled transient lightcurves and the desire to maximize the
discovery rate.
Practical limits such as the availability of followup resources,
theoretical or systematic limitations, or multiple scientific objectives
may also apply. However, quantitative assessment of these tradeoffs and of the
competitive landscape will strengthen the design of transient surveys.
\acknowledgments
The author thanks Shri Kulkarni, Tom Prince, Eran Ofek, Paul Groot, and the
anonymous referee for conversations and suggestions that improved this work.
\bibliographystyle{yahapj}
|
\section*{Introduction}
A \emph{triple plane} is a finite ramified cover $f \colon X \to
\mathbb{P}^2$ of degree $3$. Let $B \subset \mathbb{P}^2$ be the branch locus of $f$;
then we say that $f$ is a \emph{general} triple plane if the
following conditions are satisfied:
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=1pt, label=\bf{\roman*)}]
\item $f$ is unramified over $\mathbb{P}^2 \backslash B$;
\item $f^*B=2R+R_0$, where $R$ is
irreducible and non-singular and $R_0$ is reduced;
\item $f_{|R} \colon R \to B$ coincides with
the normalization map of $B$.
\end{enumerate}
The aim of this paper is to address the problem of classifying those smooth, projective
surfaces $X$ with $p_g(X)=q(X)=0$ that arise as general triple
planes. We incidentally remark that the corresponding classification problem for
\emph{double} planes is instead easy because, by the results of \cite[\S 22]{BHPV04}, a smooth double cover $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ with $p_g(X)=q(X)=0$ has either a smooth branch locus of degree $2$ (in which case $X$ is isomorphic to a quadric surface $S_2 \subset \mathbb{P}^3$ and $f$ is the projection from a point $p \notin S_2$), or a smooth branch locus of degree $4$ (in which case $X$ is the blow-up of a cubic surface $S_3 \subset \mathbb{P}^3$ at one point $p \in S_3$ and $f$ is the resolution of the projection from $p$).
Some results toward the classification in the triple cover case were obtained by Du Val in
\cite{DuVal33,DuVal35}, where he described those general triple
planes whose branch curve has degree at most $14$. Du Val's papers are
written in the ``classical'', a bit old-fashioned (and sometimes difficult to read)
language and make use of ad-hoc constructions based on synthetic
projective geometry (see Remark \ref{rem:Du-Val-I-V} and Remark \ref{rem:Du-Val-VI} for a outline on Du Val's work). The methods that
we propose here are completely different: in fact, they are a mixture
of adjunction theory and vector bundles techniques, that
allow us to treat the problem in a unified way.
The first cornerstone in our work is the general structure theorem
for triple covers given in \cite{Mi85,CasEk96}. More
precisely, we relate the existence of a triple cover $f \colon X
\to \mathbb{P}^2$ to the existence of a ``sufficiently general"
element $\eta \in H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{E}^{\vee} \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E})$,
where $\mathscr{E}$ is a rank $2$ vector bundle on $\mathbb{P}^2$ such
that $f_* \mathscr{O}_X = \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2} \oplus \mathscr{E}$. Such a bundle is called the
\emph{Tschirnhausen bundle} of the cover, and it turns out that the pair $(\mathscr{E}, \,
\eta)$ completely encodes the geometry of $f$.
Some of the invariants depend directly on $\mathscr{E}$,
for instance, setting $b:=-c_1(\mathscr{E})$ and $h:=c_2(\mathscr{E})$,
the branch curve $B$ has degree $2b$ and contains $3h$ ordinary
cusps as only singularities, see Proposition \ref{branch-locus}.
However the $X$ and $f$ themselves also depend on $\eta$;
we call $\eta$ the \textit{building section} of the cover.
So we can try to study general triple planes with $p_g=q=0$ by analyzing
their Tschirnhausen bundles together with the building sections. In fact, we show that these triple
planes can be classified in (at most) $12$ families, that we call surfaces of type \ref{I}, \ref{II},\ldots, \ref{XII}. We are also able to show that
surfaces of type \ref{I}, \ref{II},\ldots, \ref{VII} actually exist. In the cases
\ref{I}, \ref{II},\ldots, \ref{VI} we rediscover (in the modern language) the
examples described by Du Val. On the other hand, not only the triple
planes of type \ref{VII} (which have sectional genus equal to $6$ and
branch locus of degree $16$) are completely new, but they also provide
explicit counterexamples to a wrong claim made by Bronowski in
\cite{Br42}, see Remark \ref{rmk:Bron}.
A key point in our analysis is the fact that in cases \ref{I}, \ref{II}, \ref{III} the
bundle $\mathscr{E}$ splits as the sum of two line bundles, whereas in the remaining cases
\ref{IV} to \ref{XII} it is indecomposable and it has a resolution of the form
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(1-b)^{b-4} \to
\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(2-b)^{b-2} \to \mathscr{E} \to 0.
\end{equation*}
This shows that $\mathscr{E}(b-2)$ is a so-called
\emph{Steiner bundle} (see \S \ref{subsec:steiner} for more details on this topic), so we can use all the known results about
Steiner bundles in order to get information on $X$. For instance,
in cases \ref{VI} and \ref{VII} the geometry of the triple plane is tightly
related to the existence of \emph{unstable lines} for $\mathscr{E}$, see
\S \ref{subsec:VI}, \ref{subsec:VII}.
The second main ingredient in our classification
procedure is adjunction theory, see \cite{SoV87,Fu90}. For example, if we write $H=f^*L$, where $L \subset \mathbb{P}^2$ is a
general line, we prove that the divisor $D=K_X+2H$ is very ample
(Proposition \ref{prop.K+2H}), so we consider the corresponding adjunction mapping
\begin{equation*}
\varphi_{|K_X+D|} \colon X \to \mathbb{P}(H^0(X, \, \mathscr{O}_X(K_X+D))).
\end{equation*}
Iterating the adjunction process if necessary, we
can achieve further information about the geometry of $X$.
Furthermore, when $b \geq 7$ a more refined analysis of the adjunction map allows us to start the process with $D=H$, see
Remark \ref{rem:H}.
As a by-product of our classification, it turns out that general triple planes
$f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ with sectional genus $0 \leq g(H) \leq 5$
(i.e., those of type \ref{I},\ldots,\ref{VI}) can be realized via an embedding of
$X$ into $\mathbb{G}(1, \, \mathbb{P}^3)$ as a surface of bidegree $(3, \, n)$, such
that the triple covering $f$ is induced by the projection from a
general element of the family of planes of $\mathbb{G}(1, \, \mathbb{P}^3)$ that are
$n$-secant to $X$. In this way, we relate our work to the work of
Gross \cite{G93}, see Remark \ref{rmk:I}, \ref{rmk:II},
\ref{rmk:III}, \ref{rmk:IV}, \ref{rmk:V}, \ref{rmk:VI}. On the other
hand, this is not true for surfaces of type \ref{VII}: here the
only case where the triple cover is induced by an embedding in the
Grassmannian is \ref{VII}.7, where $X$ is a \emph{Reye
congruence}, namely an Enriques surface having bidegree $(3, \, 7)$
in $\mathbb{G}(1, \, \mathbb{P}^3)$, see Remark \ref{rmk:Enriques}.
We have not been able so far to use our method beyond
case \ref{VII}; thus the existence of surfaces of type \ref{VIII} to \ref{XII} is still an open problem. Furthermore, there are some interesting unsettled
questions also in case \ref{VII}, especially regarding the number of
what we call the \emph{unstable conics} for the Tschirnhausen bundle, see \S
\ref{subsec:further-cons} for more details.
\medskip
Let us explain now how this work is organized.
In \S \ref{sec:prel} we set up notation and terminology and we
collect the background material which is needed in the sequel of the
paper. In particular, we recall the theory of triple covers based on
the study of the Tschirnhausen bundle (Theorems \ref{thm triple:1}
and \ref{thm triple:2}) and we state the main results on adjunction
theory for surfaces (Theorem
\ref{adjunction-thm}).
In \S \ref{sec.general} we start the analysis of general triple
planes $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ with $p_g(X)=q(X)=0$. We
compute the numerical invariants (degree of the branch locus, number of its cusps, $K_X^2$, sectional genus) for the surfaces in the $12$
families \ref{I} to \ref{XII} (Proposition
\ref{prop:numerical}) and we describe their Tschirnhausen bundle (Theorem \ref{teo:res}).
Next, \S \ref{sec:class} is devoted to the detailed description of
surfaces of type \ref{I} to \ref{VII}. This
description leads to a complete classification in cases \ref{I} to \ref{VI} (Propositions \ref{prop.TypeI}, \ref{prop.TypeII}, \ref{prop.TypeIII}, \ref{prop.TypeIV}, \ref{prop.TypeV}, \ref{prop.TypeVI}) whereas in case \ref{VII} we provide many examples, leaving only few cases unsolved (Proposition \ref{prop.typeVII}).
Finally, in \S \ref{sec:moduli} we study some moduli problems related to our constructions.
\medskip
Part of the computations in this paper was carried out by using the Computer
Algebra System {\tt Macaulay2}, see \cite{Mac2}. The scripts are
included in the Appendix.
\bigskip
\noindent \textbf{Acknowledgments.}
D. Faenzi and J. Vallès were partially supported by ANR projects GEOLMI ANR-11-BS03-0011
and Interlow ANR-09-JCJC-0097-01.
F. Polizzi was partially supported by
Progetto MIUR di Rilevante Interesse Nazionale \emph{Geometria
delle Variet$\grave{a}$ Algebriche e loro Spazi di Moduli}, by
the \emph{Gruppo di Ricerca Italo-Francese di Geometria Algebrica}
(GRIFGA) and by GNSAGA-INdAM. He thanks the Laboratoire de
Mathématiques et leurs applications de
l'Université de Pau et des Pays de l'Adour for
the invitation and the hospitality.
This project was started in that occasion.
Finally, we are greatly indebted with the referee, whose careful reading, constructive criticisms
and useful observations considerably helped us improving the paper.
\section{Basic material} \label{sec:prel}
\subsection{Notation and conventions}
We work over the field $\mathbb{C}$ of complex numbers. Given a complex
vector space $V$, we write $\mathbb{P}(V)$ for the projective space of
$1$-dimensional quotient spaces of $V$, and $\mathbb{P}^n=\mathbb{P}(\mathbb{C}^{n+1})$.
Similarly, if $\mathscr{E}$ is a locally free sheaf over a scheme, we use $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{E})$ for the projective bundle of its quotients of rank $1$.
We write $\check{\mathbb{P}}(V)$ for $\mathbb{P}(V^\vee)$, so that $\check{\mathbb{P}}^n$ is the projective
space of hyperplanes of $\mathbb{P}^n$. We put $\mathbb{G}(k,\mathbb{P}(V))$ for the
Grassmannian of $(k+1)$-dimensional vector subspaces of $V$.
By ``surface'' we mean a projective, non-singular surface
$S$, and for such a surface $\omega_S=\mathscr{O}_S(K_S)$ denotes the
canonical class, $p_g(S)=h^0(S, \, K_S)$ is the geometric genus,
$q(S)=h^1(S, \, K_S)$ is the
irregularity and $\chi(\mathscr{O}_S)=1-q(S)+p_g(S)$ is the
holomorphic
Euler-Poincaré characteristic. We write
$P_m(S)= h^0(S, \, m K_S)$ for the $m$-th plurigenus of $S$.
If $k \leq n$ are non-negative integers we denote by $S(k, \, n)$ the
rational normal scroll of type $(k, \, n)$ in $\mathbb{P}^{k+n+1}$, i.e. the
image of $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}(k) \oplus \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1} (n))$ by the linear system
given by the tautological relatively
ample line bundle (see
\cite[Lecture 8]{Har92} for more details). A cone over
a rational normal curve $C \subset \mathbb{P}^n$ of degree $n$ may be thought of as the
scroll $S(0, \, n) \subset \mathbb{P}^{n+1}$.
For $n \geq 1$, we write $\mathbb{F}_n$ for the Hirzebruch surface
$\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1} \oplus \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1} (n))$; every divisor in
$\textrm{Pic}(\mathbb{F}_n)$ can be written as $a \mathfrak{c}_0+ b \mathfrak{f}$, where $\mathfrak{f}$
is the fibre of the $\mathbb{P}^1$-bundle map $\mathbb{F}_n \to \mathbb{P}^1$ and $\mathfrak{c}_0$ is
the unique section with negative self-intersection, namely
$\mathfrak{c}_0^2=-n$. Note that the morphism $\mathbb{F}_n \to \mathbb{P}^{n+1}$ associated
with the tautological linear system $|\mathfrak{c}_0+n \mathfrak{f}|$ contracts $\mathfrak{c}_0$
to a point and is an isomorphism outside $\mathfrak{c}_0$, so its image is the
cone $S(0, \, n)$.
For $n=0$, the surface $\mathbb{F}_0$ is isomorphic to $\mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1$;
every divisor in $\textrm{Pic}(\mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1)$ is written as
$a_1L_1+ a_2L_2$, where the $L_i$ are the two rulings.
The blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^2$ at the points $p_1, \ldots, p_k$ is
denoted by $\mathbb{P}^2(p_1, \ldots, p_k)$.
If $\sigma \colon \widetilde{X} \to X$ is the blow-up of a surface $X$ at $k$ points, with exceptional divisors $E_1, \ldots, E_k$, and $L$ is a line bundle on $X$, we will write $L + \sum a_i E_i$ instead of $\sigma^*L + \sum a_i E_i$.
The Chern classes of coherent sheaves on $\mathbb{P}^2$ will usually be written
as integers, namely for a sheaf $\mathscr{E}$ we write $c_i(\mathscr{E})=d_i$, where $d_i \in \mathbb{Z}$ is such that $c_i(\mathscr{E})=d_i(c_1(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(1)))^i$.
If $\mathscr{E}$ is a vector bundle, its dual vector bundle is indicated by $\mathscr{E}^{\vee}$ and its $k$-th symmetric power by $S^k \mathscr{E}$.
We will use basic material and terminology on vector bundles, more
specifically on stable vector bundles on $\mathbb{P}^2$, we refer to \cite{OkSchSp88}.
\subsection{Triple covers and sections of vector bundles}
A \emph{triple cover} is a finite flat morphism $f \colon X \to Y$ of
degree $3$. Our varieties $X$ and $Y$
will be smooth, irreducible projective manifolds.
With a triple cover is associated an exact sequence
\begin{equation} \label{seq:Tsch}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_Y \to f_*\mathscr{O}_X \to \mathscr{E} \to 0,
\end{equation}
where $\mathscr{E}$ is a vector bundle of rank $2$ on $Y$, called the
\emph{Tschirnhausen bundle} of $f$.
\begin{proposition} \label{bir-inv-tr}
The following holds$:$
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=2pt, label=\bf{\roman*)}]
\item \label{p1} $f_*\mathscr{O}_X =\mathscr{O}_Y \oplus \mathscr{E};$
\item \label{p2} $f_* \omega_X =\omega_Y \oplus (\mathscr{E}^{\vee} \otimes \omega_Y);$
\item \label{p3} $f_* \omega_X^2 = S^2 \mathscr{E}^{\vee} \otimes \omega_Y^2$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The trace map yields a splitting of sequence \eqref{seq:Tsch},
hence \ref{p1} follows. Duality for finite flat morphisms implies
$f_*\omega_X= (f_* \mathscr{O}_X)^{\vee} \otimes \omega_Y$, hence we
obtain \ref{p2}. For \ref{p3} see \cite[Lemma 8.2]{Pa89}.
\end{proof}
In order to reconstruct $f$ from $\mathscr{E}$ we need an
extra datum, namely the building section, which is a global section of $S^3
\mathscr{E}^{\vee} \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E}$. Moreover, we can naturally see $X$ as
sitting into the $\mathbb{P}^1$-bundle $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{E}^\vee)$ over $Y$. This is the content of the next two results, see
\cite[Theorem 1.5]{CasEk96}, \cite[Proposition 4]{FS01}, \cite[Theorem 1.1]{Mi85}
\begin{theorem} \label{thm triple:1}
Any triple cover $f \colon X \to Y$ is determined by a rank $2$ vector
bundle $\mathscr{E}$ on $Y$ and a global section $\eta \in H^0(Y, S^3
\mathscr{E}^{\vee} \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E})$, and conversely. Moreover, if
$S^3 \mathscr{E}^{\vee} \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E}$ is globally
generated, a general global section $\eta$ defines a triple cover $f \colon X \to Y$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem} \label{thm triple:2}
Let $ f \colon X \to Y$ be a triple cover.
Then there exists a unique embedding $i \colon X \to
\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{E}^{\vee})$ such that the following diagram commutes$:$
\begin{equation*}
\xymatrix@C-4ex@R-3ex{
X \ar[rrrr]^-{f} \ar[rrd]_-{i} & & & & Y \\
& & \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{E}^{\vee}) \ar[rru]_-{\pi} & & }
\end{equation*}
According to \emph{Theorem \ref{thm triple:1}}, this embedding induces an
isomorphism of $X$ with the zero-scheme $D_0(\eta)\subset \mathbb{P} (\mathscr{E}^\vee)$ of a global section $\eta$ of
the line bundle $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P} (\mathscr{E}^\vee)}(3) \otimes \pi^*( \wedge^2 \mathscr{E})$.
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Adjunction theory} \label{subsec:adjunction theory}
We refer to \cite[Chapter 10]{BeSo95}, \cite[Theorem 1.10]{DES93}, \cite[Theorem 2.5]{LaPa84}, \cite[Proposition 1.5]{So79},\cite[\S 0]{SoV87} for basic material on adjunction theory.
\begin{theorem} \label{adjunction-thm}
Let $X \subset \mathbb{P}^n$ be a smooth surface and $D$ its
hyperplane class. Then $|K_X+D|$ is non-special and has dimension
$N=g(D)+p_g(X)-q(X)-1$. Moreover
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=2pt, label=\bf{\Alph*)}]
\item $|K_X+D|= \emptyset$ if and only if
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=2pt, label=\bf{\arabic*)}]
\item $X \subset \mathbb{P}^n$ is a scroll over a curve of
genus $g(D)=q(X)$ or
\item $X= \mathbb{P}^2$,
$D=\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(1)$ or $D=\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(2)$.
\end{enumerate}
\item If $|K_X+D| \neq \emptyset$ then $|K_X+D|$ is base-point
free. In this case $(K_X+D)^2=0$ if and only if
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=2pt, label=\bf{\arabic*)}]\setcounter{enumii}{2}
\item $X$ is a Del Pezzo surface and $D=-K_X$ $($in particular $X$ is
rational$\,)$ or
\item $X \subset \mathbb{P}^n$
is a conic bundle.
\end{enumerate}
If $(K_X+D)^2>0$ then the adjunction map
\begin{equation*}
\varphi_{|K_X+D|} \colon X \to X_1 \subset \mathbb{P}^N
\end{equation*}
defined by the complete linear system $|K_X+D|$ is birational onto a
smooth surface $X_1$ of degree $(K_X+D)^2$ and blows down precisely the
$(-1)$-curves $E$ on $X$ with $DE=1$, unless
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=2pt, label=\bf{\arabic*)}]\setcounter{enumii}{4}
\item $X=\mathbb{P}^2(p_1, \ldots, p_7), \quad D=6L-\sum_{i=1}^7 2E_i$,
\item $X=\mathbb{P}^2(p_1, \ldots, p_8), \quad D=6L-\sum_{i=1}^7 2E_i -E_8$,
\item $X=\mathbb{P}^2(p_1, \ldots, p_8), \quad D=9L-\sum_{i=1}^8 3E_i$,
\item $X= \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{E})$, where $\mathscr{E}$ is an
indecomposable rank $2$ vector bundle over an elliptic curve and
$D=3B$, where $B$ is an effective divisor on $X$ with $B^2=1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
We can apply Theorem \ref{adjunction-thm} repeatedly, obtaining a
sequence of surfaces and adjunction maps
\begin{equation*}
X =:X_0 \stackrel{\varphi_1}{\longrightarrow} X_1 \stackrel{\varphi_2}{\longrightarrow} X_2
\stackrel{}{\longrightarrow} \cdots \stackrel{}{\longrightarrow} X_{n-1}
\stackrel{\varphi_{n}}{\longrightarrow} X_n \to \cdots
\end{equation*}
At each step we must control the numerical data arising from the
adjunction process. We have
\begin{equation*}
(D_{i+1})^2=(K_{X_i}+D_i)^2, \quad K_{X_{i+1}}D_{i+1}=(K_{X_i}+D_i)K_{X_i}.
\end{equation*}
For the computation of
\begin{equation*}
(K_{X_{i+1}})^2=(K_{X_i})^2+\alpha_i
\end{equation*}
we also need to know the number $\alpha_i$ of \emph{exceptional
lines} on $X_i$, i.e. the number of smooth curves $E \subset X_i$ such that
$K_{X_i}E=E^2=-1,\; ED_{i}=1$. Notice that by the Hodge Index Theorem
(see \cite[Exercise 1.9 p. 368]{H77}) we have
\begin{equation*}
\det \left( \begin{array}{cc} (D_i)^2 & K_{X_i}D_i \\
K_{X_i}D_i & (K_{X_i})^2\\
\end{array} \right) \leq 0
\end{equation*}
and the equality holds if and only if $K_{X_i}$ and $D_i$ are
numerically dependent.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:contracted}
Let $E \subset X_{n-1}$ be a curve contracted by the $n$-th
adjunction map $\varphi_{n} \colon X_{n-1} \to X_n$. Then, setting
$\psi:=\varphi_{n-1} \circ
\varphi_{n-2} \circ \cdots \circ \varphi_1$ and $E^*:=\psi^*E$, we have
\begin{equation*}
(E^*)^2=-1, \quad K_XE^*=-1, \quad DE^*=n.
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Since $E$ is contracted by $\varphi_n$, we have $E^2=-1$,
$K_{X_{n-1}}E=-1$, $D_{n-1}E=1$. The map $\psi$ is
birational, so $(E^*)^2=E^2=-1$. Moreover
\begin{equation*}
\psi_*K_X=K_{X_{n-1}}, \quad \psi_*D = D_{n-1}-(n-1)K_{X_{n-1}}.
\end{equation*}
Applying the projection formula we obtain
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
K_XE^*&=(\psi_*K_X)E=K_{X_{n-1}}E=-1; \\
DE^*&=(\psi_*D)E=(D_{n-1}-(n-1)K_{X_{n-1}})E=n.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Steiner bundles} \label{subsec:steiner}
We collect here some material about coherent sheaves presented by
matrices of linear forms, usually called Steiner sheaves, and more
specifically about those that are locally free (Steiner bundles).
We refer to \cite{ancona-ottaviani:steiner} for basic results on this
topic.
\subsubsection{Steiner sheaves and their projectivization} \label{a}
Let $U$, $V$ and $W$ be finite-dimensional $\mathbb{C}$-vector spaces. Consider the
projective spaces $\mathbb{P}(V)$ and
$\mathbb{P}(U)$, and identify $V$ and $U$ with
$H^0(\mathbb{P}(V), \, \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(V)}(1))$ and $H^0(\mathbb{P}(U), \, \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(U)}(1))$,
respectively.
Any element $\phi \in U \otimes V \otimes W$ gives rise to two maps
\begin{equation} \label{eq:M-N}
W^{\vee} \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(V)}(-1) \xrightarrow{M_\phi} U \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(V)}, \qquad W^{\vee} \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(U)}(-1) \xrightarrow{N_\phi} V \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(U)}.
\end{equation}
Set $\mathscr{F}:= \mathrm{coker} \, M_\phi$.
We say that $\mathscr{F}$ is a {\it Steiner sheaf}, and we denote its projectivization by $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$; this
is a projective bundle precisely when
$\mathscr{F}$ is locally free (and in this case $\dim(U) \geq \dim(V)+\dim(W)-1)$. Let $\mathfrak{p} \colon \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) \to \mathbb{P}(V)$ be the bundle map
and $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\xi)$ be the tautological, relatively ample line
bundle on $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$, so that
\begin{equation*}
H^0(\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}), \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\xi)) \simeq H^0(\mathbb{P}(V),\mathscr{F}) \simeq U.
\end{equation*}
Since $\mathscr{F}$ is a quotient of $U \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(V)}$, we get a natural
embedding
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) \subset \mathbb{P}(U \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(V)}) \simeq \mathbb{P}(V) \times \mathbb{P} (U).
\end{equation*}
The map $\mathfrak{q}$ associated with the linear system $|\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\xi)|$ is just the restriction to $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ of the second
projection from $\mathbb{P}(V) \times \mathbb{P} (U)$. On the other hand, setting $\ell :=
\mathfrak{p}^*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(V)}(1))$, the linear system $|\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\ell)|$ is
naturally associated with the map $ \mathfrak{p}$. In this procedure the roles of $U$ and $V$ can be reversed. In other words,
setting $\mathscr{G} = \mathrm{coker} \,N_\phi$, we get a second Steiner sheaf, this time
on $\mathbb{P}(U)$, and a second projective bundle $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{G})$ with maps
$\mathfrak{p}'$ and $\mathfrak{q}'$ to $\mathbb{P}(U)$ and $\mathbb{P}(V)$, respectively.
So we have two incidence diagrams
\begin{equation*}
\xymatrix@-3ex{
& \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) \ar[dr]^{\mathfrak{q}} \ar[dl]_{\mathfrak{p}} & \\
\mathbb{P}(V) & & \mathbb{P}(U),
} \quad
\xymatrix@-3ex{
& \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{G}) \ar[dr]^{\mathfrak{q}'} \ar[dl]_{\mathfrak{p}'} & \\
\mathbb{P}(U) & & \mathbb{P}(V).
}
\end{equation*}
The link between $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ and $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{G})$ is provided by the
following result.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:P-and-P'}
Let $\phi \in U \otimes V \otimes W$ and set $m=\dim W$.
Then:
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=2pt, label=\bf{\roman*)}]
\item \label{primofatto} the schemes $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ and $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{G})$ are both
identified with the same $m$-fold linear section of $\mathbb{P}(V) \times \mathbb{P}(U)$. Moreover, under this identification, $\mathfrak{q} =\mathfrak{p}'$ and $\mathfrak{p}=\mathfrak{q}';$
\item \label{secondofatto} for any non-negative integer $k$, there are natural isomorphisms
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{p}_*\mathfrak{q}^*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(U)}(k)) \simeq S^k \mathscr{F}, \qquad
\mathfrak{q} _*\mathfrak{p}^*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(V)}(k)) \simeq S^k \mathscr{G}.
\end{equation*}
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Set $M:=M_{\phi}$. By construction, the scheme $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ is defined as the set
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})=\{([v], \, [u]) \in \mathbb{P}(V) \times \mathbb{P} (U) \; | \; u \in \mathrm{coker} \, M(v) \},
\end{equation*}
where $v \colon V \to \mathbb{C}$ (resp. $u \colon U \to \mathbb{C}$) is a $1$-dimensional quotient of $V$ (resp. of $U$) and $M(v) \colon W^\vee \to U$ is the evaluation of $M$ at the point $[v]$.
Now, we get that $u$ is defined on $\mathrm{coker} \, M(v)$ if and only if $u
\circ M(v) = 0$. This clearly amounts to require $(u\circ M(v) )(w) = 0$ for all $w\in W^\vee$, that is $u \otimes v \otimes w (\phi)=0$ for all $w \in W^\vee$.
Summing up, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{PEphi}
\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) = \{([v], \, [u]) \; | \; u \otimes v \otimes w
(\phi)=0 \; \textrm{for all} \; w \in W^\vee\}.
\end{equation}
The same argument works for $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{G})$ by interchanging the roles
of $v$ and $u$, hence $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ and $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{G})$ are
both identified with the same subset of $\mathbb{P}(V) \times \mathbb{P}(U)$.
Since each element $w_i$ of a basis of $W^\vee$ gives a linear
equation of the form $u \otimes v \otimes w_i(\phi)=0$, we have that
$\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ is an $m$-fold linear section (of codimension $m$ or
smaller) of $\mathbb{P}(V) \times \mathbb{P}(U)$.
Note that, in view of the identification above, the map $\mathfrak{p}$ is just
the projection from $\mathbb{P}(V) \times \mathbb{P}(U)$ onto $\mathbb{P}(V)$, restricted to
the set given by \eqref{PEphi}. The same holds for $\mathfrak{q}'$, hence we are
allowed to identify $\mathfrak{p}$ and $\mathfrak{q}'$. Analogously, both $\mathfrak{q}$ and $\mathfrak{p}'$ are
given as projections onto the factor $\mathbb{P}(V)$. We have thus proved \ref{primofatto}.
Now let us check \ref{secondofatto}. For any non-negative integer $k$ we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\mathfrak{q}^*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(U)}(k)) & \simeq \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(k \xi), \\
\mathfrak{p}^*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(V)}(k)) & \simeq (\mathfrak{q}')^*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(V)}(k)) \simeq \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{G})}(k \xi'),
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where $\xi'$ is the tautological relatively ample line
bundle on $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{G})$.
Therefore the claim follows from the canonical isomorphisms
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{p}_*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(k \xi)) \simeq S^k \mathscr{F}, \qquad
\mathfrak{p}'_*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{G})}(k \xi')) \simeq S^k \mathscr{G}.
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{rem:trilinear-form}
We can rephrase the content of Proposition \ref{prop:P-and-P'} by using coordinates as follows. Take bases
\begin{equation*}
\{z_i\}, \, \{x_j \}, \, \{y_k\}
\end{equation*}
for $U$, $V$, $W$, respectively. With respect to these bases, the tensor $\phi \in U \otimes V \otimes W$ will correspond to a trilinear form
\begin{equation*}
\phi = \sum a_{ijk}z_i x_j y_k,
\end{equation*}
for a certain table of coefficients $a_{i j k} \in \mathbb{C}$.
Write $\mathbb{V}$ and $\mathbb{U}$ for the symmetric algebras on $V$ and $U$.
Then $\phi$ induces two linear maps of graded vector spaces:
\begin{equation*}
W^\vee \otimes \mathbb{V}(-1) \to U \otimes \mathbb{V}, \quad
W^\vee \otimes \mathbb{U}(-1) \to V \otimes \mathbb{U},
\end{equation*}
both defined as
\begin{equation*}
w \otimes \Psi \to \bigg(\sum a_{ijk}z_i x_j y_k(w) \bigg) \Psi,
\end{equation*}
where $\Psi$ lies in $\mathbb{V}$ or in $\mathbb{U}$.
The sheafification of these maps gives precisely the two maps of
vector bundles $M_{\phi}$ and $N_{\phi}$ written in \eqref{eq:M-N},
whose defining matrices of linear forms are, respectively:
\begin{equation*}
\bigg(\sum \nolimits_j a_{ijk} x_j \bigg)_{ik} \quad \textrm{and} \quad \bigg(\sum \nolimits_i a_{ijk}z_i \bigg)_{jk}.
\end{equation*}
An important observation is that $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ and $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{G})$ are both
identified with the zero locus of the same set of $m$ bilinear equations
in $\mathbb{P}(V) \times \mathbb{P}(U)$, namely
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})=\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{G})=\left\{(x, \, z) \; \Big\lvert \; \sum \nolimits_{i, \, j} a_{ij1}
z_i x_j=\ldots=\sum\nolimits_{i, \, j} a_{ijm} z_ix_j=0\right\}.
\end{equation*}
This shows that $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})=\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{G})$ is the intersection
of $m$ divisors of bidegree $(1,1)$ in $\mathbb{P}(V) \times \mathbb{P}(U)$. We can
thus write a presentation of the form:
\begin{equation}
\label{prekoszul}
\cdots \to W^\vee \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(V) \times \mathbb{P}(U)}(-1,-1) \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(V) \times \mathbb{P}(U)} \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})} \to 0.
\end{equation}
\end{remark}
We will mostly use this setup when $\mathbb{P}(V)=\mathbb{P}^2$, in order to study
the geometry of a Steiner bundle $\mathscr{F}$ of rank $2$ admitting the resolution
\begin{equation} \label{basic}
0 \to W^\vee \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1) \xrightarrow{M} U \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2} \to \mathscr{F} \to 0,
\end{equation}
and to compare it with the geometry of the sheaf $\mathscr{G}$ obtained by ``flipping'' the tensor $\phi$ as
explained above and whose presentation is
\begin{equation} \label{basic-flipped}
W^\vee \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(U)}(-1) \xrightarrow{N} \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(U)}^3 \to \mathscr{G} \to 0.
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Unstable lines} \label{b}
Let us assume now $\dim V=3$ and consider a Steiner bundle $\mathscr{F}$ of rank $2$ on
$\mathbb{P}^2=\mathbb{P}(V)$. To be consistent with the notation that will appear later, we set
$\dim U = b-2$ and
$\dim W = b-4$, for $b \ge 4$, and
we write $\mathscr{F}_b$ instead of $\mathscr{F}$. The sheafified minimal graded free resolution of $\mathscr{F}_b$ is then
\begin{equation} \label{eq:FF}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)^{b-4} \stackrel{M}{\longrightarrow} \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}^{b-2} \to \mathscr{F}_b \to 0,
\end{equation}
where $M$ is a $(b-2) \times (b-4)$ matrix of linear forms.
\medskip
Given a line $L \subset \mathbb{P}^2$, there is an integer $a$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\mathscr{F}_b|_L = \mathscr{O}_L(a)\oplus \mathscr{O}_L(b-4-a).
\end{equation*}
Since $\mathscr{F}_b$ is globally generated, the same is true for $\mathscr{F}_b|_L$ and so
\begin{equation*}
0 \le a \le b-4.
\end{equation*}
\begin{definition}
A line $L \subset \mathbb{P}^2$ is said to be \emph{unstable} for $\mathscr{F}_b$ if $a=0$, i.e.
\begin{equation*}
\mathscr{F}_b|_L \simeq \mathscr{O}_L\oplus \mathscr{O}_L(b-4).
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
Here are some useful characterizations of unstable lines.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:unstable-line}
The following are equivalent$:$
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=2pt, label=\bf{\roman*)}]
\item \label{u:1} the line $L \subset \mathbb{P}^2$ is unstable line $\mathscr{F}_b;$
\item \label{u:2} the cohomology group $H^0(L, \, \mathscr{F}^{\vee}_b|_L)$ is
non-zero$;$
\item \label{u:3} there is a nonzero global section of $\mathscr{F}_b$ whose
vanishing locus contains $b-4$ points of $L$ $($counted with multiplicity$)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We first prove \ref{u:1} $\Leftrightarrow$ \ref{u:2}. The restriction
$\mathscr{F}_b|_L$ splits, so there is an integer $a$ such
that $\mathscr{F}_b|_L = \mathscr{O}_L(a)\oplus\mathscr{O}_L(b-4-a)$, and since $\mathscr{F}_b$ is
globally generated we have $0 \le a \le b-4$. Condition \ref{u:1}
corresponds to $a=0$ or $a=b-4$, and this clearly implies
\ref{u:2}. Conversely, if \ref{u:2} holds, then $a
\le 0$ or $a \ge b-4$; this implies either $a=0$ or $a=b-4$, hence \ref{u:1} holds.
\bigskip
In order to check \ref{u:2} $\Leftrightarrow$ \ref{u:3}, we
first claim that, given a line $L \subset \mathbb{P}^2$, the restriction map induces an isomorphism
\begin{equation} \label{eq:iso-F}
H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{F}_b) \stackrel{\simeq}{\longrightarrow} H^0(L, \mathscr{F}_b|_L).
\end{equation}
Indeed, looking at \eqref{eq:FF}, we see that we have
\begin{equation*}
H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{F}_b(-1))=H^1(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{F}_b(-1))=0,
\end{equation*}
so our claim follows by taking cohomology in
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \mathscr{F}_b(-1) \to \mathscr{F}_b \to \mathscr{F}_b|_L \to 0.
\end{equation*}
\bigskip
Now let us prove \ref{u:2} $\Rightarrow$ \ref{u:3}.
Assuming \ref{u:2}, we get a short exact sequence
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_L \to \mathscr{F}^{\vee}_b|_L \to \mathscr{O}_L(4-b) \to 0,
\end{equation*}
so by dualizing we have
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_L(b-4) \stackrel{\iota}{\to} \mathscr{F}_b|_L \to \mathscr{O}_L \to 0.
\end{equation*}
Composing $\iota$ with a non-zero map $\mathscr{O}_L \to \mathscr{O}_L(b-4)$, we
obtain a global section of $\mathscr{F}_b|_L$ vanishing at $b-4$ points
counted with multiplicity. Using the isomorphism \eqref{eq:iso-F} we
can lift this section to a global section of
$\mathscr{F}_b$ and we get \ref{u:3}.
Conversely, assume that \ref{u:3} holds.
Then there is a global
section $s$ of $\mathscr{F}_b$ whose vanishing locus $Z$ contains a subscheme
of $L$ of length $b-4$.
Put $Z'=Z\cap L$, so that $Z'$ has length $c \ge b-4$.
Since $H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{F}_b(-1))=0$ it follows that $Z$ contains
no divisors, i.e. it has pure dimension $0$, so we have an exact sequence
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2} \to \mathscr{F}_b \to \mathscr{I}_{Z/\mathbb{P}^2}(b-4) \to 0.
\end{equation*}
Applying $-\otimes_{\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}} \mathscr{O}_L$ to the exact sequence
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \mathscr{I}_{Z/\mathbb{P}^2}(b-4) \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(b-4) \to \mathscr{O}_Z \to 0
\end{equation*}
and using $\mathscr{T}or^{\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}}_1( \mathscr{O}_Z, \, \mathscr{O}_L) \simeq \mathscr{O}_{Z'}$, we get
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{Z'} \to \mathscr{I}_{Z/\mathbb{P}^2} (b-4)|_L \to \mathscr{O}_L(b-4) \to \mathscr{O}_{Z'} \to 0.
\end{equation*}
The image of the middle map is $\mathscr{I}_{Z'/L}(b-4) \simeq \mathscr{O}_L(b-c-4)$, so from the above sequence we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{accorcio}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{Z'} \to \mathscr{I}_{Z/\mathbb{P}^2} (b-4)|_L \to \mathscr{O}_L(b-c-4) \to 0.
\end{equation}
The scheme $Z'$ is $0$-dimensional, so we infer
\begin{equation*}
\mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathscr{O}_L(b-4-c),\mathscr{O}_{Z'}) \simeq H^1(L,\mathscr{O}_{Z'} \otimes \mathscr{O}_L(c-b+4))=0
\end{equation*}
and this means that \eqref{accorcio} splits, i.e.
\begin{equation}
\mathscr{I}_{Z/\mathbb{P}^2}(b-4)|_L \simeq \mathscr{O}_L(b-c-4) \oplus \mathscr{O}_{Z'}.
\end{equation}
Therefore, we have a surjection $\mathscr{F}_b|_L \to \mathscr{O}_L(b-c-4)$. Since
$b-c-4 \le 0$, the dual of this surjection gives a non-zero global section of
$\mathscr{F}_b^\vee|_L$ and the proof is finished.
Note that, since we have now proved $\mathscr{F}_b|_L \simeq \mathscr{O}_L \oplus
\mathscr{O}_L(b-4)$, the existence of a surjection $\mathscr{F}_b|_L \to \mathscr{O}_L(b-c-4)$
actually gives $c=b-4$, i.e. $Z'=Z\cap L$ has length precisely $b-4$.
\end{proof}
The set of unstable lines of $\mathscr{F}_b$ has a
natural structure of subscheme of $\check{\mathbb{P}}^2$, given as follows. First
define the point-line incidence $\mathbb{I}$ in $\mathbb{P}^2 \times \check{\mathbb{P}}^2$ by the
condition that the point lies in the line. One has $\mathbb{I} \simeq
\mathbb{P}(T_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1))$ and $T_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)$ is a Steiner bundle. By Lemma \ref{lem:unstable-line},
a line $L$ is unstable for $\mathscr{F}$ if and only if $H^0(L,\,\mathscr{F}^{\vee}_b|_L)\neq 0$,
i.e., by Serre duality,
if and only if $H^1(L, \,\mathscr{F}_b(-2)|_L)\neq 0$, which happens if and
only if $L$ lies in the support of $R^1\mathfrak{q}_* (\mathfrak{p}^* \mathscr{F}_b (-2) \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{I}})$.
We denote the set of unstable lines, endowed with this scheme structure, by $\mathscr{W}(\mathscr{F}_b)$.
Let us now give a summary of the behaviour of the unstable
lines of $\mathscr{F}_b$ for small values of $b$.
\begin{itemize}
\item[$b=4$.] We have $\mathscr{F}_{4} \simeq \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}^2$, so $\mathscr{W}(\mathscr{F}_4)$ is empty.
\item[$b=5$.] There is an isomorphism $\mathscr{F}_5 \simeq
T_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)$. Therefore $\mathscr{W}(\mathscr{F}_5)=\check{\mathbb{P}}^2$, because $T_{\mathbb{P}^2}$ is a uniform bundle of splitting type $(1, \, 2)$, see \cite[\S 2]{OkSchSp88}.
\item[$b=6$.]
The scheme $\mathscr{W}(\mathscr{F}_6)$ is a smooth conic in $\check{\mathbb{P}}^2$, and the unstable
lines of $\mathscr{F}_6$ are the tangent lines to the dual conic, see
\cite[Proposition 6.8]{DK} and \cite[Proposition 2.2]{Val00b}.
\item[$b=7$.] The
scheme $\mathscr{W}(\mathscr{F}_7)$ is either a set of $6$ points in general linear
position and contained in no conic or consists of a smooth conic in
$\check{\mathbb{P}}^2$, see \cite[Théorème 3.1]{Val00b}. The former case is the
general one, and when it occurs $\mathscr{F}_7$ is a so-called
\emph{logarithmic bundle}. Instead, the latter case occurs if and only
if $\mathscr{F}_7 $ is a so-called \emph{Schwarzenberger bundle}, whose matrix
$M$, up to a linear change of coordinates, has the form
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Schw-7}
M= \ltrans{\left(
\begin{array}{ccccc}
x_0 & x_1 & x_2 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & x_0 & x_1 & x_2 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & x_0 & x_1 & x_2 \\
\end{array}
\right)},
\end{equation}
see \cite[Theorem 3]{faenzi-matei-valles}, \cite[Théorème 3.1]{Val00b}.
\item[$b\ge 8$.]
Unstable lines do not always exist in this range.
The scheme $\mathscr{W}(\mathscr{F}_b)$ is either finite of length $\le b-1$ or consists of a smooth conic in $\check{\mathbb{P}}^2$. In the latter case, $\mathscr{F}_b$ is a Schwarzenberger bundle, whose matrix $M$, up to a linear change of coordinates, is a $(b-2) \times (b-4)$ matrix having the same form as \eqref{eq:Schw-7}.
We can actually state a more precise result, see again \cite[Proposition 3.11 and proof of Theorem 5.3]{ancona-ottaviani:steiner}.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:unstable-b-8}
If $\mathscr{F}_b$ contains a finite number $\alpha_1$
of unstable lines, then $0 \leq \alpha_1 \leq b-1$. More precisely, the following holds.
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=2pt, label=\bf{\roman*)}]
\item If $0 \leq \alpha_1 \leq b-2$ then, up to a linear change of coordinates, the matrix $M$ is of type
\begin{equation*}
M=\ltrans{\left(
\begin{array}{ccc|ccc}
a_{1,1} H_1 & \cdots & a_{1, \alpha} H_{\alpha} & \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & M' \\
a_{b-4,1} H_1 & \cdots & a_{b-4, \alpha} H_{\alpha} & \\
\end{array}
\right)},
\end{equation*}
for some $(b-2-\alpha) \times (b-4)$ matrix $M'$ of linear forms. In this case the unstable lines are given by
\begin{equation*}
H_1=0, \quad H_2=0, \ldots, H_{\alpha_1}=0.
\end{equation*}
\item If $\alpha_1=b-1$ then $\mathscr{F}_b$ is a logarithmic bundle. In this case, the matrix $M$ is of type
\begin{equation*}
M=\ltrans{\left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
a_{1,1} H_1 & a_{1,2}H_2 & \cdots & a_{1, b-2} H_{b-2}\\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots \\
a_{b-4,1} H_1 & a_{b-4,2}H_2 & \cdots & a_{b-4, b-2} H_{b-2}\\
\end{array}
\right)},
\end{equation*}
where $H_1, \ldots, H_{b-2}$ are such that the linear form
\begin{equation*}
H_{b-1} := \sum_{j=1}^{b-2} a_{i,j} H_j
\end{equation*}
does not depend on $i \in \{1, \ldots, b-4\}$. The unstable lines are given by
\begin{equation*}
H_1=0, \quad H_2=0, \ldots, H_{b-1}=0.
\end{equation*}
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\end{itemize}
\begin{remark}
Using Proposition \ref{prop:unstable-b-8}, we can give another proof of
the implication \ref{u:1} $\Rightarrow$ \ref{u:3} in
Lemma \ref{lem:unstable-line}.
Indeed, we can take a basis $s_1,\ldots,s_{b-2}$ of $H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,\,
\mathscr{F}_b)$ such that the homogeneous ideal $I_k$ of the vanishing locus
of $s_k$ is defined by the maximal minors of the matrix obtained by
deleting the $k$-th row of $M$, namely by $b-3$ forms of degree
$b-4$. Assume now that the unstable line $L$ is defined by the
equation $H_i=0$. Then, if $k \neq i$, all the minors defining $I_k$
are divisible by $H_i$, except the one obtained by deleting the $k$-th
and $i$-th rows of $M$; so $s_k$ vanishes at $b-4$ points on $L$.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
In Proposition \ref{prop:unstable-b-8}
we denoted the number of unstable lines of
$\mathscr{F}_b$ by $\alpha_1$. Further on, the notation $\alpha_1$
will be reserved to the number of exceptional lines contracted by the first adjunction map $\varphi_{|K_X + D|} \colon X \to X_1$, see \S
\ref{subsec:adjunction theory}. The reason is that when we consider a
general triple plane $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ whose (twisted)
Tschirnhausen bundle is isomorphic to $\mathscr{F}_b$, with $b \geq
7$, these two numbers are in fact the
same (see \S \ref{subsub:adj}, in particular Proposition \ref{prop:adjunction}).
\end{remark}
\subsection{Criteria for a rank-2 vector bundle to be Steiner}
Here we present two simple criteria to check whether a vector bundle
of rank 2 on $\mathbb{P}^2$ is a Steiner one. Both of them consist in fixing the numerical
data and adding a single cohomology vanishing. In the second one, the
condition is on a zero-dimensional subscheme from which the bundle is
constructed via the Serre correspondence, provided that the
Cayley-Bacharach property is satisfied.
To state the first result, fix an integer $b \ge 4$ and note that, if $\mathscr{F}$ is
a Steiner bundle of type $\mathscr{F}_b$, then
\begin{align} \label{allorasteiner1}
c_1(\mathscr{F})=b-4, \qquad c_2(\mathscr{F})={{b-3}\choose 2}
\end{align}
and $H^i(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{F}(-1))=0$ for all $i$. Likewise, for $b \le 2$
assume that $\mathscr{F}$ fits into
\begin{equation}
\label{costeiner}
0 \to \mathscr{F} \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)^{4-b} \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}^{2-b} \to 0.
\end{equation}
Then, using the
standard convention on binomial coefficients with negative arguments, we see that
\eqref{allorasteiner1} still holds; furthermore, we have $H^i(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(-1))=0$ for
all $i$. Note that $\mathscr{F}$ fits into \eqref{costeiner} if and
only if $\mathscr{F}^\vee(-1)$ is of type $\mathscr{F}_b$.
One may extend the notation $\mathscr{F}_b$ to all $b$ in $\mathbb{Z}$ as a bundle fitting into the long exact sequence
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)^{\max(b-4,0)} \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}^{\max(b-2,0)}
\to \mathscr{F}_b \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)^{\max(4-b,0)} \to
\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}^{\max(2-b,0)} \to 0,
\end{equation*}
where the value $b=3$ corresponds to $\mathscr{F}_3=\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)
\oplus \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}$.
\begin{proposition} \label{Fsteiner}
Fix an integer $b \in \mathbb{Z}$ and let $\mathscr{F}$ be a vector bundle of rank
$2$ on $\mathbb{P}^2$ satisfying \eqref{allorasteiner1}. Then the following holds$:$
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=2pt, label=\bf{\roman*)}]
\item \label{o:1} for $b\ge 4$, the bundle $\mathscr{F}$ is of type $\mathscr{F}_b$ if and only if
$H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{F}(-1))=0$. If this happens, then $\mathscr{F}$ is stable for $b\ge 5;$
\item \label{o:2} for $b\le 2$, the bundle $\mathscr{F}^\vee(-1)$ is of type $\mathscr{F}_b$
if and only if $H^2(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{F}(-1))=0$. If this happens, then $\mathscr{F}$ is stable for $b \le 1;$
\item \label{o:3} for $b=3$, we have $\mathscr{F}\simeq \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1) \oplus
\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}$ if and only if $H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(-1))=0$
or, equivalently, $H^2(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(-1))=0$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
In each case, only one direction needs to be proved. \medskip
\ref{o:1} Let us assume $b\ge 4$ and $H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{F}(-1))=0$ and let us show that
$\mathscr{F}$ is of the form $\mathscr{F}_b$.
First, since $\mathscr{F}$ is locally free of rank $2$ and $c_1(\mathscr{F})=b-4$,
there is the canonical isomorphism
\begin{equation*}
\mathscr{F}^\vee \simeq \mathscr{F}(4-b).
\end{equation*}
Then, for any integer $t \le 2$, by Serre duality we have
\begin{equation}
\label{annullot}
h^2(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(-t))= h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}^\vee(t-3))=h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \,\mathscr{F}(t-b+1))=0,
\end{equation}
because by our assumptions $t-b+1 \le -1$ and already $h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(-1))=0$.
Now, using \eqref{allorasteiner1} and the Riemann-Roch theorem we deduce
$\chi(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(-1))=0$, so $h^1(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(-1)) = 0$ because
we know that $h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(-1)) = h^2(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(-1)) = 0$.
Again by Riemann-Roch, using \eqref{annullot} with $t=2$ we obtain
$h^1(\mathbb{P}^2, \,\mathscr{F}(-2))=b-4$.
Let us look at $h^i(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F})$. First, by using
\eqref{annullot} with $t=0$, we see that this vanishes for $i=2$.
Now take a line $L$ in $\mathbb{P}^2$, tensor with $\mathscr{F}(t)$ the short exact sequence
\begin{equation} \label{usolaretta}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1) \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2} \to \mathscr{O}_{L} \to 0
\end{equation}
and pass to cohomology. Since we proved that $h^1(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(-1))=h^2(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(-2))= 0$, we deduce $h^1(L, \, \mathscr{F}(-1)|_L)=0$. Then, considering the short exact sequence
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \mathscr{F}(t-1)|_L \to \mathscr{F}(t)|_L \to \mathscr{O}_{x} \oplus \mathscr{O}_{x} \to 0
\end{equation*}
and using induction on $t$, we obtain
$h^1(L, \, \mathscr{F}(t)|_L)=0$ for any $t \ge 0$. Therefore we get
$h^1(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F})=0$, that in turn yields, again by Riemann-Roch, $h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F})=b-2$.
\medskip
We can now use Beilinson's theorem, see for instance \cite[Chapter
2, \S 3.1.3]{OkSchSp88}. The Beilinson table of $\mathscr{F}$, displaying the values of $h^j(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{F}(-i))$, is
\begin{table} [H]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c}
$ $ & $\mathscr{F}(-2)$ & $\mathscr{F}(-1)$ & $\mathscr{F}$ \\
\hline $h^2$ & $ 0 $ & $ 0 $ & $ 0 $ \\
\hline $h^1$ & $b-4$ & $ 0 $ & $ 0 $ \\
\hline $h^0$ & $ 0 $ & $ 0 $ & $ b-2$ \\
\end{tabular} \caption{The Beilinson table of $\mathscr{F}$}
\end{center}
\end{table}
This gives in turn the resolution of $\mathscr{F}$
\begin{equation} \label{eq:reso-F}
0 \to H^1(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(-2)) \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1) \to H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}) \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2} \to \mathscr{F} \to 0,
\end{equation}
which has the desired form. In fact, \eqref{eq:reso-F} becomes
\eqref{basic} if we set
\begin{equation} \label{eq:W-U}
W:= H^1(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(-2))^\vee, \quad U := H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}), \quad \mathbb{P}^2 = \mathbb{P}(V).
\end{equation}
The stability of $\mathscr{F}$ for $b\ge 5$ follows from Hoppe's criterion, see \cite[Lemma 2.6]{Hop84}.
\medskip \medskip
\ref{o:2} Assume now $b \le 2$. Set
$\mathscr{F}'=\mathscr{F}^\vee(-1)$ and $b'=6-b$, so that $b'\ge 4$. The Chern classes of$\mathscr{F}'$ are
\begin{equation*}
c_1(\mathscr{F}')=-c_1(\mathscr{F})-2=b'-4, \qquad
c_2(\mathscr{F}')=c_2(\mathscr{F})+c_1(\mathscr{F})+1={b'-3\choose 2}.
\end{equation*}
Using the assumption $H^2(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{F}(-1))=0$ and Serre duality, we get
\begin{equation*}
H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{F}'(-1))=H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{F}^\vee(-2)) \simeq H^2(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{F}(-1))^\vee=0,
\end{equation*}
so by part \ref{o:1} it follows that $\mathscr{F}'$ is a Steiner bundle of the form $\mathscr{F}_{b'}$.
\medskip \medskip
\ref{o:3} Finally, assume $b=3$.
From $H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(-1))=0$ we deduce
$H^2(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(-1))=0$ and conversely, because \eqref{annullot} still holds when $(t, \, b)=(1, \,3)$.
We can now conclude by applying \cite[Lemma 3.3]{FV12} to $\mathscr{F}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition} \label{propsteiner}
Fix integers $b \ge 5$ and $t\ge 0$, and let $Z \subset \mathbb{P}^2$ be a $0$-dimensional, local complete intersection subscheme
of length $l$. Then the following holds$:$
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=2pt, label=\bf{\roman*)}]
\item \label{CB1} a locally
free sheaf $\mathscr{F}$ fitting into
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Z-fit}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2} \xrightarrow{s} \mathscr{F}(t) \to \mathscr{I}_{Z/\mathbb{P}^2}(2t+b-4) \to 0
\end{equation}
exists if and only if $Z$ satisfies the Cayley-Bacharach property with
respect to $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(2t+b-7)$, i.e. for any subscheme $Z' \subset Z$ of
length $l-1$ we have
\begin{equation*}
h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{I}_{Z/\mathbb{P}^2}(2t+b-7))= h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{I}_{Z'/\mathbb{P}^2}(2t+b-7));
\end{equation*}
\item \label{CB2} a locally free sheaf $\mathscr{F}$ as in \ref{CB1} is a Steiner bundle of the form $\mathscr{F}_b$ if and only if
\begin{equation}
\label{Zsteiner}
l = {{b-3}\choose 2}+t(t+b-4), \qquad H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{I}_{Z/\mathbb{P}^2}(t+b-5))=0;
\end{equation}
\item \label{CB3} if \ref{CB1} and \ref{CB2} are satisfied and in addition
$h^1(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{I}_{Z/\mathbb{P}^2}(t+b-7))=1$, then the extension \eqref{eq:Z-fit}
and the proportionality class of the global section $s$ of $\mathscr{F}(t)$ vanishing at $Z$ are uniquely determined by $Z$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The statement \ref{CB1} follows from \cite[Part II, Theorem
5.1.1]{HuyLehn10}.
\medskip
For \ref{CB2}, take $\mathscr{F}$ to be a Steiner bundle of
the form $\mathscr{F}_b$. Then
$c_1(\mathscr{F}(t))=2t+b-4$ and
\begin{equation*}
l=c_2(\mathscr{F}(t))=c_2(\mathscr{F})+c_1(\mathscr{F})+t^2={{b-3}\choose 2}+t(t+b-4).
\end{equation*}
Also, we have $H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,\, \mathscr{F}(-1))=0$, which yields
$H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,\, \mathscr{I}_{Z/\mathbb{P}^2}(t+b-5))=0$.
Conversely, if $Z$ satisfies \eqref{Zsteiner}, then Proposition
\ref{Fsteiner} implies that $\mathscr{F}$ is of the form $\mathscr{F}_b$.
\medskip
For \ref{CB3}, by Serre duality we have
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ext-Z}
\mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathscr{I}_{Z/\mathbb{P}^2}(2t+b-4), \, \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2})^\vee \simeq \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2},\, \mathscr{I}_{Z/\mathbb{P}^2}(2t+b-7)) \simeq H^1(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{I}_{Z/\mathbb{P}^2}(2t+b-7)) \simeq \mathbb{C}.
\end{equation}
Since we are assuming that $\mathscr{F}$ is locally free, the
extension \eqref{eq:Z-fit} has to be non-trivial, and by \eqref{eq:ext-Z} all such non-trivial extensions are equivalent up to a
multiplicative scalar.
\end{proof}
\section{General triple planes with $p_g=q=0$} \label{sec.general}
\subsection{General triple planes}
Given a triple plane $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$, we denote by $H$ the pullback $H:=f^*L$, where $L \subset \mathbb{P}^2$ is a
line. The divisor $H$ is ample, as $L$ is ample and $f$ is finite.
Recall that the Tschirnhausen bundle $\mathscr{E}$ of $f$
is a rank $2$ vector bundle on $\mathbb{P}^2$ such that $f_* \mathscr{O}_X \simeq
\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2} \oplus \mathscr{E}$. Proposition \ref{bir-inv-tr} allows us to relate
the invariants of $X$ and $\mathscr{E}$ as follows.
\begin{proposition} \label{bir-inv}
Let $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ be a triple plane with
Tschirnhausen bundle $\mathscr{E}$. Then we have:
\begin{align*}
p_g(X) & =h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{E}^{\vee}(-3)), \\
q(X) & = h^1(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{E}^\vee(-3)), \\
P_2(X) & = h^0(X, \, 2 K_X)=h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^2 \mathscr{E}^{\vee}(-6)).
\end{align*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{definition} Let $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ be a triple plane and $B \subset
\mathbb{P}^2$ its branch locus. We say that $f$ is a
\emph{general triple plane} if the following conditions are
satisfied$:$
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=2pt, label=\bf{\roman*)}]
\item $f$ is unramified over $\mathbb{P}^2 \backslash B;$
\item $f^*B=2R+R_0$, where $R$ is
irreducible and non-singular and $R_0$ is reduced$;$
\item $f_{|R} \colon R \to B$ coincides with
the normalization map of $B$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
A useful criterion to check that a triple plane is a general one is provided by the following
\begin{proposition}
Let $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ be a triple plane with $X$ smooth. Then either $f$ is general or $f$ is a Galois cover. In the last case, $f$ is totally ramified over a smooth branch locus.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Theorems 2.1 and 3.2]{Tan02}.
\end{proof}
Hence Theorem \ref{thm triple:1} shows that, if $S^3 \mathscr{E}^{\vee} \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E}$ is globally generated, the cover associated with a general section $\eta \in H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{E}^{\vee} \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E})$ is a general triple plane as soon as it is not totally ramified.
Since the curve $R$ is the ramification divisor of $f$ and the
ramification is simple, we have
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Hurwitz-X}
K_X = f^*K_{\mathbb{P}^2}+R=-3H+R.
\end{equation}
Moreover, by \cite[Proposition 4.7 and Lemma 4.1]{Mi85}, we obtain
\begin{proposition} \label{branch-locus}
Let $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ be a general triple plane with Tschirnhausen bundle $\mathscr{E}$ and define
\begin{equation*}
b:=-c_1(\mathscr{E}), \quad h:=c_2(\mathscr{E}).
\end{equation*}
Then the branch curve $B$ has degree $2b$ and contains $3h$
ordinary cusps and no further singularities. Moreover the cusps are
exactly the points where $f$ is totally ramified.
\end{proposition}
Moreover, in view of \cite[Lemma 5.9]{Mi85} and \cite[Corollary 2.2]{CasEk96},
we have the following information on $R$ and $R_0$.
\begin{proposition} \label{RR_0}
The curves $R$ and $R_0$ are both smooth and isomorphic to the normalization of $B$. Furthermore, they are tangent
at the preimages of the cusps of $B$ and they do not meet elsewhere. Finally, the ramification divisor $R$ is very ample on $X$.
\end{proposition}
This allows us to compute the intersection numbers of $R$ and $R_0$ as follows.
\begin{proposition} \label{inters-ram}
We have
\begin{equation} \label{eq:inters-ram}
R^2 = 2b^2 - 3h, \quad RR_0 = 6h, \quad R_0^2= 4b^2 - 12h.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Projection formula yields
\begin{equation*}
R(2R+R_0)=R(f^*B)=(f_*R)B=B^2=4b^2.
\end{equation*}
By Proposition \ref{RR_0} it follows $RR_0=6h$.
So $2R^2=4b^2-RR_0=4b^2-6h$, which gives the first equality.
From $f^*B=2R+R_0$ we deduce $(2R+R_0)^2=3B^2=12 b^2$, so $R_0^2=12b^2-4R^2-4RR_0=4b^2-12h$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary} \label{cor:num-cusps}
We have $3h \geq \frac{2}{3}b^2$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Since the divisor $R$ is very ample, the Hodge Index theorem implies
$R^2R_0^2 \leq (RR_0)^2$ and the claim follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{rmk:Bron}
Proposition \ref{inters-ram} and Corollary \ref{cor:num-cusps} were
already established by Bronowski in \cite{Br42}. Note that the (very) ampleness of $R$ implies $R^2 >0$, that is $3h < 2b^2$. In \cite{Br42}, it is also stated that the stronger inequality $3h \leq b^2$, or
equivalently $R_0^2 \geq 0$, holds. This is actually false, and counterexamples will
be provided by our surfaces of type \ref{VII}, see \S \ref{subsec:VII}. Bronowski's mistake is at page $28$ of his paper, where he assumes that one can find a curve algebraically equivalent to $R_0$ and distinct from
it; of course, when $R_0^2 <0$ such a curve cannot exist.
\end{remark}
\begin{proposition} \label{prop.K+2H}
Let $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ be a general triple plane with $q(X)=0$. If $K_X^2 \neq 8$ then $D:=K_X + 2H$ is very ample.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Since $(2H)^2=12$, by \cite[Theorem 18.5]{Fu90} $D$ is very ample,
unless there exists an effective divisor $Z$ such that $HZ$=1 and
$Z^2=0$. By the projection formula we have
\begin{equation*}
1=HZ=(f^*L)Z=L(f_*Z),
\end{equation*}
hence $f_*Z \subset \mathbb{P}^2$ is a line. On the other hand,
$HZ=1$ implies that the restriction of $f$ to $Z$ is an isomorphism,
so $Z$ is a smooth and irreducible rational curve. Since $Z^2=0$, the surface $X$
is birationally ruled and $Z$ belongs to the ruling. Moreover, all the curves in the ruling are irreducible: in fact, if $Z$ were algebraically equivalent to $Z_1+ Z_2$, then we would obtain
\begin{equation*}
1=HZ = HZ_1+HZ_2,
\end{equation*}
contradicting the ampleness of $H$. Summing up, $X$ is a minimal,
geometrically ruled surface over a smooth curve; since $q(X)=0$, this
curve is isomorphic to $\mathbb{P}^1$, that is $X$ is isomorphic to $\mathbb{F}_n$
for some $n$ and, in particular, $K_X^2=8$.
\end{proof}
When $D=K_X+2H$ is very ample on $X$ we can study the adjunction maps associated with $D$. Using Proposition \ref{prop:contracted}, we obtain
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:phi_n}
Assume $q(X)=0$ and $K_X^2 \neq 8$ and let $\varphi_n \colon X_{n-1} \to X_n$ be the $n$-th adjunction map with respect to the very ample divisor $D=K_X+2H$. Then $\varphi_n$ is an isomorphism when $n$ is even, whereas when $n$ is odd $\varphi_n$ contracts exactly the $(-1)$-curves $E \subset X$ such that $HE=(n+1)/2$.
\end{proposition}
\subsection{The Tschirnhausen bundle in case $p_g=q=0$}
Let $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ be a general triple plane
with Tschirnhausen bundle $\mathscr{E}$ and let $B$ be the branch locus of $f$. Recall that, by
Proposition \ref{branch-locus}, the curve $B$ has degree
$2b$ and contains $3h$ ordinary cusps as only singularities.
\newcounter{cover}
\renewcommand{\thecover}{\textnormal{\Roman{cover}}}
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:numerical}
If $\chi(\mathscr{O}_X)=1$, that is
$p_g(X)=q(X)$, then we have at most the following
possibilities for the numerical invariants $b, \, h, \, K_X^2, \, g(H):$
\begin{table}[H]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c}
Case & $b$ & $h$ & $K_X^2$ & $g(H)$ \\
\hline
\refstepcounter{cover} \thecover \label{I} & $2$ & $1$ & $8$ & $0$\\
\hline
\refstepcounter{cover} \thecover \label{II} & $3$ & $2$ & $3$& $1$ \\
\hline
\refstepcounter{cover} \thecover \label{III} & $4$ & $4$ & $-1$ & $2$\\
\hline
\refstepcounter{cover} \thecover \label{IV} & $5$ & $7$ & $-4$ & $3$\\
\hline
\refstepcounter{cover} \thecover \label{V} & $6$ & $11$ & $-6$ & $4$ \\
\hline
\refstepcounter{cover} \thecover \label{VI} & $7$ & $16$ & $-7$ & $5$ \\
\hline
\refstepcounter{cover} \thecover \label{VII} & $8$ & $22$ & $-7$ & $6$\\
\hline
\refstepcounter{cover} \thecover \label{VIII} & $9$ & $29$ & $-6$ & $7$\\
\hline
\refstepcounter{cover} \thecover
& $10$ & $37$ & $-4$ & $8$\\
\hline
\refstepcounter{cover} \thecover
& $11$ & $46$ & $-1$ & $9$\\
\hline
\refstepcounter{cover} \thecover
& $12$ & $56$ & $3$ & $10$ \\
\hline
\refstepcounter{cover} \thecover \label{XII} & $13$ & $67$ & $8$ & $11$
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Possible numerical invariants for a general triple plane with $\chi(\mathscr{O}_X)=1$}
\end{table}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Using the projection formula we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{eq:HR}
HR=(f^*L)R=L(f_*R)=LB=2b.
\end{equation}
Since $K_X= -3H +R$ and $H^2=3$ it follows $K_X H=2b-9$, hence
$g(H)=b-2$. Using the \emph{formule di corrispondenza}
(cf. \cite[\S V]{Iv70}) we infer
\begin{equation*}
\left \{ \begin{array}{l}
9h+3 = 4b^2 -6b +K_X^2 \\
2h - 4 = b^2 - 3b.
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation*}
Therefore $h = \frac{1}{2}(b^2-3b+4)$ and $b^2 -15b +42 - 2K_X^2=0$.
Imposing that the discriminant of this quadratic equation is
non-negative, we get $K_X^2 \geq -7$; on the
other hand, the Enriques-Kodaira classification and the Miyaoka-Yau inequality imply that any surface with $p_g=q$ satisfies $K_X^2 \leq
9$, see \cite[Chapter VII]{BHPV04}, so $-7 \leq K_X^2 \leq 9$. Now a case-by-case analysis
concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
Note that the previous proof shows that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:c1-c2-E}
c_1(\mathscr{E})=-b, \quad c_2(\mathscr{E})=\frac{1}{2}(b^2-3b+4).
\end{equation}
Moreover, using \eqref{eq:Hurwitz-X}, \eqref{eq:HR} and the first equality in \eqref{eq:inters-ram}, we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{eq:KR}
K_XR = -3HR + R^2 =2b^2-6b-3h.
\end{equation}
From now on, we will restrict ourselves to the case $p_g(X)=q(X)=0$,
that is, in terms of the Tschirnhausen bundle $\mathscr{E}$, we suppose
$h^1(\mathbb{P}^2, \,\mathscr{E})=0$ and $h^2(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{E})=0$.
Furthermore,
we will use without further mention the natural isomorphism
\begin{equation*}
\mathscr{E}^\vee \simeq \mathscr{E}(b).
\end{equation*}
\begin{theorem} \label{teo:res}
Let $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ be a general triple plane with $p_g=q=0$ and let $\mathscr{E}$ be the corresponding Tschirnhausen bundle. With the notation of Proposition \emph{\ref{prop:numerical}}, the following holds$:$
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=2pt, label=\bf{\roman*)}]
\item in case \ref{I}, $\mathscr{E} \simeq \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1) \oplus
\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1);$
\item
in case \ref{II}, $\mathscr{E} \simeq \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1) \oplus \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-2);$
\item
in case \ref{III}, $\mathscr{E} \simeq \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-2) \oplus \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-2);$
\item
in cases \ref{IV} to \ref{XII}, the vector bundle $\mathscr{E}$ is stable and
has a sheafified minimal graded free resolution of the form
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(1-b)^{b-4} \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(2-b)^{b-2} \to \mathscr{E} \to 0.
\end{equation*}
In particular, $\mathscr{E}(b-2)$ is a rank $2$ Steiner bundle on $\mathbb{P}^2$, see \S \emph{\ref{subsec:steiner}}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Setting $\mathscr{F}:= \mathscr{E}(b-2)$, by using \eqref{eq:c1-c2-E} we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{eq:c1-c2-F}
c_1(\mathscr{F})=b-4, \quad c_2(\mathscr{F})= {b-3 \choose 2}.
\end{equation}
Now Proposition \ref{bir-inv} allows us to calculate the cohomology
groups of $\mathscr{F}(-i)$, for $i=0,1,2$. We have
\begin{align}
\label{keyvanishing} & h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(-1)) = h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{E}(b-3))=h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{E}^{\vee}(-3))=p_g(X)=0, \\
\nonumber & h^1(\mathbb{P}^2, \mathscr{F}(-1))=h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{E}(b-3))= h^1(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{E}^{\vee}(-3))=q(X)=0.
\end{align}
Let us now check cases \ref{I} to \ref{III}. By
\eqref{keyvanishing}, we can apply
\cite[Lemma 3.3]{FV12} to $\mathscr{E}(1)$ in cases \ref{I}
and \ref{II}, and to $\mathscr{E}(2)$ in case \ref{III}. The result then
follows. \medskip
In the cases \ref{IV} to \ref{XII}, the conditions
\eqref{eq:c1-c2-F} and \eqref{keyvanishing} say that Proposition
\ref{Fsteiner} applies, so $\mathscr{F}$ is a Steiner bundle of the form
$\mathscr{F}_b$. This gives the desired resolution of $\mathscr{E}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary} \label{cor:Tsch1}
In cases $\ref{I}$ to $\ref{III}$, general triple planes
$f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ do exist and $X$ is a rational surface.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Let us consider case $\ref{I}$. By Theorem \ref{teo:res} we
have $S^3\mathscr{E}^{\vee} \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E} \simeq
\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(1)^4$ which is globally generated, so the triple
cover exists by Theorem \ref{thm triple:1}. Using Proposition
\ref{bir-inv} we obtain
\begin{equation*}
P_2(X)=h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^2\mathscr{E}^{\vee}(-6))=h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \,
\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-4)^3)=0,
\end{equation*}
hence Castelnuovo's Theorem (cf. \cite[Chapter VI, \S 3]{BHPV04}) implies that
$X$ is a rational surface.
The argument in cases \ref{II} and \ref{III} is the same.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The projective bundle associated with a triple plane} \label{sub:proj.bundle}
\subsubsection{Triple planes and direct images}
\label{L}
Let $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ be a general triple plane with
$p_g=q=0$ and Tschirnhausen bundle $\mathscr{E}$. We assume $b \geq 5$ and we write $\mathscr{F}$ as before in order to denote the bundle $\mathscr{E}(b-2)$. Sometimes, if we want to emphasize the role of $b$, we will use the notation $\mathscr{F}_b$ instead of $\mathscr{F}$.
The rest of the notation in this paragraph is borrowed from \S \ref{subsec:steiner}.
As shown in Theorem
\ref{teo:res}, $\mathscr{F}$ is a Steiner bundle of rank $2$. Theorem \ref{thm triple:2} implies that $X$ can be realized as a Cartier divisor in
$\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$, such that the restriction of $\mathfrak{p}\colon \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) \to \mathbb{P}^2$ to $X$ is our covering map $f$.
More precisely, recall that we denote by $\xi$ the tautological
relatively ample line bundle on $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ and by $\ell$ the pull-back
to $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ of a line in $\mathbb{P}^2$. Then the identification
\begin{equation} \label{eq:S3F(6-b)}
S^3 \mathscr{E}^\vee \otimes \wedge ^2 \mathscr{E} \simeq S^3 \mathscr{F} \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(6-b)
\end{equation}
shows that $X$ lies in the complete linear system $|\mathscr{L}|$, with
\begin{equation} \label{eq:linear-L}
\mathscr{L} = \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(3\xi+(6-b)\ell).
\end{equation}
Recall also the notation $U= H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{F})$, and consider the morphism $\mathfrak{q} \colon \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) \to
\mathbb{P}(U)\simeq \mathbb{P}^{b-3}$ associated with $|\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\xi)| \simeq \mathbb{P} (U)$.
Setting
\begin{equation*}
\mathscr{R} := \mathfrak{q} _*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}((6-b)\ell)),
\end{equation*}
the projection formula yields natural identifications
\begin{equation} \label{eq:S3E}
\begin{split}
H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,S^3 \mathscr{E}^\vee \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E}
) & \simeq H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{F}(6-b)) \\
& \simeq H^0(\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}), \, \mathscr{L})\simeq H^0(\mathbb{P}^{b-3}, \,\mathscr{R}(3)).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In order to get information on the sheaf $\mathscr{R}$, it is useful to
consider the Koszul resolution of $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ in $\mathbb{P}(V) \times \mathbb{P}(U)
\simeq \mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^{b-3}$, which is given taking exterior powers
of \eqref{prekoszul}. This reads
\begin{equation}
\label{KOSZUL}
\wedge^\bullet (W^\vee \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^{b-3}}(-1, \, -1 )) \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})} \to 0
\end{equation}
with $W^\vee=H^1(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(-2))$, see Proposition \ref{prop:P-and-P'} and \eqref{eq:W-U}.
We will write $\mathscr{K}_i$ for the image of the $i$-th differential
\begin{equation*}
d_i : (\wedge^i W^\vee) \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^{b-3}}(-i, \, -i) \to
(\wedge^{i-1} W^\vee) \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^{b-3}}(-i+1, \, -i+1)
\end{equation*}
of the complex \eqref{KOSZUL}. Moreover, we will often use the relation
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Riq}
R^i \mathfrak{q} _* (\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^{b-3}}(n_1, \, n_2)) = H^i(\mathbb{P}^2,
\, \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(n_1)) \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{b-3}}(n_2), \quad i \in \mathbb{N}, \; n_1, \, n_2 \in \mathbb{Z}.
\end{equation}
We finally define $Y \subset \mathbb{P}^{b-3}$ as the image of $\mathfrak{q}$; then the support of $\mathscr{R}$ is contained in $Y$.
In \S \ref{subsub:adj} we shall see that, if $b \geq 6$, the morphism $\mathfrak{q} \colon \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) \to
\mathbb{P}^{b-3}$ is
generically injective, so $Y \subset \mathbb{P}^{b-3}$ is a (possibly
singular) irreducible threefold which is generated by the $3$-secant lines to
the canonical curves of genus $g(H)$ representing in $\mathbb{P}^{b-3}$ the net $|H|$ inducing the triple cover.
The threefold $Y$ is defined by the $3\times 3$ minors of the matrix
$N$ appearing in the resolution of $\mathfrak{q} _*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\ell))$, namely
\begin{equation*}
\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{b-3}}(-1)^{b-4} \xrightarrow{N} \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{b-3}}^3 \to
\mathfrak{q}_*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\ell)) \to 0.
\end{equation*}
\subsubsection{Adjunction maps and projective bundles} \label{subsub:adj}
We use the notation of \S \ref{a}. Recall that the canonical line bundle of $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ is
\begin{equation} \label{eq.canPF}
\omega_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})} \simeq \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(-2 \xi + (b-7)\ell),
\end{equation}
see for instance \cite[Ex. 8.4 p. 253]{H77}. The following result provides a link between the adjunction theory and the vector bundles techniques used in this paper.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma.adj}
Let $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ be a general triple
plane with $p_g(X)=q(X)=0$. Then $\mathfrak{q} |_X$ coincides with the first
adjoint map $\varphi_{|K_X + H|} \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^{b-3}$
associated with the ample divisor $H$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $H$ is ample, by Kodaira vanishing theorem we have $h^1(X, \, K_X+H)=h^2(X, \, K_X+H)=0$, so
Riemann-Roch theorem gives $h^0(X, \, K_X+H)=g(H)=b-2$. Therefore it suffices to show that
\begin{equation*}
\omega_X \otimes \mathscr{O}_X(H) \simeq \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\xi)|_X.
\end{equation*}
The adjunction formula, together with \eqref{eq:linear-L}and \eqref{eq.canPF},
yields
\begin{equation*}
\omega_X = (\omega_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})} \otimes \mathscr{L})|_X
\simeq \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\xi-\ell)|_X.
\end{equation*}
Since $\ell|_X = \mathscr{O}_X(H)$, the claim follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{contracts}
The morphism $\mathfrak{q} \colon \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) \to \mathbb{P}^{b-3}$ contracts precisely the negative sections
of the Hirzebruch surfaces of the form $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}|_L)$, where $L$ is an unstable
line of $\mathscr{F}$. Moreover, if $b \ge 6$ then $\mathfrak{q}$ is birational onto its image $Y
\subseteq \mathbb{P}^{b-3}$, which is a birationally ruled threefold of degree ${b-4 \choose 2}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} We first show that $\mathfrak{q}$ contracts the negative sections.
If $L$ is an unstable line of $\mathscr{F}$, then $\mathscr{F}|_L \simeq \mathscr{O}_L \oplus
\mathscr{O}_L(b-4)$, so $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}|_L)$ is isomorphic to the Hirzebruch surface $\mathbb{F}_{b-4}$. The divisor $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\xi)$ cuts on $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}|_L)$ the complete linear system $|\mathfrak{c}_0+(b-4) \mathfrak{f}|$; therefore $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\xi) \cdot \mathfrak{c}_0=0,$ that is $\mathfrak{q}$ contracts $\mathfrak{c}_0$. In particular, this means that the image of $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}|_L)$ via $\mathfrak{q}$ is a cone $S(0, \, b-4) \subset \mathbb{P}^{b-3}$.
Conversely, we now show that $\mathfrak{q}$ is injective on the
complement of the set of negative sections over unstable lines. More precisely, assuming
that $x_1$ and $x_2$ are points of $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ not
separated by $\mathfrak{q}$, we will prove that $x_1$ and $x_2$ lie in one of such sections. In fact, since $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\xi)$ is very ample when
restricted to the fibres of $\mathfrak{p} \colon \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) \to \mathbb{P}^2$, the points
$\mathfrak{p}(x_1)$ and $\mathfrak{p}(x_2)$ are distinct. Let $L$ be the unique line through
$\mathfrak{p}(x_1)$ and $\mathfrak{p}(x_2)$ and let us restrict $\mathfrak{q}$ to $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}|_L)$. If
$L$ were not unstable for $\mathscr{F}$, then $\mathscr{F}|_L\simeq
\mathscr{O}_L(a) \oplus \mathscr{O}_L(b-4-a)$ with $a > 0$ and $b-4-a >0$ (cf. the
proof of Lemma \ref{lem:unstable-line}), and in this situation the restriction of $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\xi)$ to $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}|_L)$ would be very ample, hence $\mathfrak{q}$ would separate
$x_1$ and $x_2$, contradiction. This shows that $L$ is
necessarily an unstable line for $\mathscr{F}$ and that moreover $x_1$ and $x_2$ must both lie on the unique negative section of $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}|_L) \simeq \mathbb{F}_{b-4}$. The same argument also works if $x_1$ and $x_2$ are infinitely near, and this ends the proof of the first statement.
Regarding the second statement, the subscheme $\mathscr{W}(\mathscr{F}_b)$ of
unstable lines has positive codimension in $\check{\mathbb{P}}^2$ for $b \geq 6$, see \S
\ref{b}. Then $\mathfrak{q}$ is birational onto its image $Y \subset \mathbb{P}^{b-3}$, and this in particular says that
$Y$ is a birationally ruled threefold in $\mathbb{P}^{b-3}$ (of course for $b=6$ the
image is the whole $\mathbb{P}^3$).
We can now use \eqref{eq:c1-c2-F} and the Chern equation for $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}_b)$ in order to compute the degree of $Y$, obtaining
\begin{equation*}
\deg Y= \xi^3=\mathfrak{p}^*(c_1(\mathscr{F}_b)^2-c_2(\mathscr{F}_b)) \xi = (b-4)^2-{{b-3}\choose 2}={{b-4}\choose 2}.
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:base-locus}
Let $\mathscr{L} = \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(3 \xi + (6-b) \ell)$ and let $\mathfrak{c}_0$ be the negative section of
the Hirzebruch surface $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}|_L)$, where $L$ is an unstable line for $\mathscr{F}$. If $b \geq 7$, then $\mathfrak{c}_0$ is contained in
the base locus of $|\mathscr{L}|$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By restricting any element of $|\mathscr{L}|$ to $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}|_L)$ we obtain a divisor $\mathscr{L}'$ linearly equivalent to
\begin{equation*}
3(\mathfrak{c}_0 + (b-4) \mathfrak{f})+ (6-b) \mathfrak{f} = 3\mathfrak{c}_0 + (2b-6) \mathfrak{f}.
\end{equation*}
We have $\mathscr{L}' \mathfrak{c}_0 = 3 (4-b) + (2b-6) =6-b$, so if $b \geq 7$ we have
$\mathscr{L}' \mathfrak{c}_0 <0$ and this in turn implies that $\mathfrak{c}_0$ is a component of $\mathscr{L}'$.
Hence $\mathfrak{c}_0$ is contained in every element of the linear system $|\mathscr{L}|$.
\end{proof}
Let us come back now to our general triple planes $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:adjunction}
If $b \geq 7$ then the first adjoint map $\varphi_{|K_X + H|} \colon X
\to \mathbb{P}^{b-3}$ is a birational morphism onto its image $X_1 \subset
\mathbb{P}^{b-3}$. Furthermore, $X_1$ is a smooth surface and $\varphi_{|K_X
+H|}$ contracts precisely the $(-1)$-curves $E$ in $X$ such that
$HE=1$. There is one, and only one, curve with this property for each unstable line of $\mathscr{F}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{contracts} the map $\mathfrak{q} \colon \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) \to \mathbb{P}^{b-3}$ is birational onto its image and contracts precisely the negative sections of
$\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}|_L)$, where $L$ is an unstable line of $\mathscr{F}$; let $E$ be
one of these sections. In view of Lemma \ref{lemma.adj} we have $\varphi_{|K_X + H|}=\mathfrak{q} |_X$, and moreover by Lemma \ref{lem:base-locus} the curve $E$ is contained in $X$, because $X \in |\mathscr{L}|$ by construction (see \S \ref{sub:proj.bundle}).
We have $f = \mathfrak{p}|_{X}$, hence $f|_{E}=\mathfrak{p}|_{E}$ and, since $\mathfrak{p}|_{E} \colon E \to L$ is an isomorphism, by the projection formula we obtain
\begin{equation*}
HE = f^*L \cdot E = L \cdot f_* E = L^2=1.
\end{equation*}
Finally, each Hirzebruch surface $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}|_L)$ contains precisely one negative section,
so we are done.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{rem:H}
When $b \geq 7$, Proposition \ref{prop:adjunction} will allow us to apply the iterated adjunction process described in \S \ref{subsec:adjunction theory} starting from $D=H$, even if $H$ is ample but \emph{not} very ample.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} \label{rem:cubic}
Proposition \ref{prop.TypeV} will show that $\varphi_{|K_X +H|}$ is birational also for $b=6$: more precisely, in this case $X$ is the blow-up at nine points of a cubic surface $S \subset \mathbb{P}^3$, and $\varphi_{|K_X +H|}$ is the blow-down morphism.
In fact, $\mathscr{W}(\mathscr{F}_6)$ is a smooth conic in $\check{\mathbb{P}}^2$,
cf. \S \ref{b}. If $L$ is an unstable line of $\mathscr{F}_6$, namely a line tangent to this conic, we have
$\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}_6|_L)\simeq \mathbb{F}_2$ and $\mathfrak{q} \colon \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) \to \mathbb{P}^3$ contracts the unique negative section of this Hirzebruch surface to a point. The locus of points in $\mathbb{P}^3$
constructed in this way is a twisted cubic $C$, the map
$\mathfrak{q}$ is the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^3$ at $C$ and the nine points that we blow-up in $S$ consist of the subset $S \cap C$.
\end{remark}
\section{The classification in cases \ref{I} to \ref{VII}}
\label{sec:class}
Since all the triple planes considered in the sequel are general, for the sake of brevity the
word \emph{general} will be from now on omitted.
\subsection{Triple planes of type \ref{I}}
In this case the invariants are
\begin{equation*}
K_X^2=8, \quad b=2, \quad h=1, \quad g(H)=0
\end{equation*}
and the Tschirnhausen bundle splits as $\mathscr{E}=\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1) \oplus \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)$.
The existence of these triple planes follows from Corollary
\ref{cor:Tsch1}, whereas Proposition \ref{prop.TypeI} below provides their complete classification.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop.TypeI}
Let $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ be a triple plane of type
\emph{\ref{I}}. Then $X$ is isomorphic to the cubic scroll $S(1, \,
2) \subset \mathbb{P}^4$ and $f$ is the projection of this scroll from a
general line of $\mathbb{P}^4$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By Proposition \ref{RR_0} we know that $R$ is very ample, and by
\eqref{eq:KR} we have $K_XR=-7$. Therefore no multiple of $K_X$ can be
effective and $X$ is a rational surface, as predicted by Corollary
\ref{cor:Tsch1}. The curve $R$ is the normalization of $B$
(Proposition \ref{RR_0}), which is a tricuspidal quartic curve
(Proposition \ref{branch-locus}), hence $g(R)=0$. Then by the first
statement in Theorem \ref{adjunction-thm} we get
\begin{equation*}
\textrm{dim\,}|K_X +R| = g(R)+p_g(X)-q(X)-1 =-1,
\end{equation*}
that is $|K_X+R|= \emptyset$. The condition $K_X^2=8$ implies that the
$X$ is not isomorphic to $\mathbb{P}^2$ so, again by Theorem
\ref{adjunction-thm}, part (A), it must be a rational normal scroll,
with the scroll structure arising from the embedding given by
$|R|$. By the first equality in \eqref{eq:inters-ram} we have $R^2=5$,
and there are two different kind of smooth rational normal scrolls of
dimension $2$ and degree $5$, namely
\begin{itemize}
\item $S(1, \, 4)$, that is $\mathbb{F}_3$ embedded in $\mathbb{P}^6$ via $|\mathfrak{c}_0 + 4\mathfrak{f}|$;
\item $S(2, \, 3)$, that is $\mathbb{F}_1$ embedded in $\mathbb{P}^6$ via $|\mathfrak{c}_0 + 3\mathfrak{f}|$.
\end{itemize}
In the former case, using \eqref{eq:Hurwitz-X} we obtain $H=\mathfrak{c}_0+3
\mathfrak{f}$, which is not ample on $\mathbb{F}_3$; so this case cannot occur.
In the latter case we have $H=\mathfrak{c}_0+2 \mathfrak{f}$, that is very ample and
embeds $\mathbb{F}_1$ in $\mathbb{P}^4$ as a cubic scroll $S(1, \, 2)$. The triple
plane is now obtained by taking the morphism to $\mathbb{P}^2$ associated
with a general net of curves inside $|H|$, which corresponds to the
projection of $S(1, \, 2)$ from a general line of $\mathbb{P}^4$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{rmk:I}
Another description of triple planes of type \ref{I} is the following. Let
$X'$ be the Veronese surface, embedded in the Grassmannian $\mathbb{G}(1, \,
\mathbb{P}^3)$ as a surface of bidegree $(3, \,1)$, see \cite[Theorem 4.1
$(a)$]{G93}. There is a family of $1$-secant planes to $X'$;
projecting from one of these planes, we
obtain a birational model of a triple plane $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$
of type \ref{I} (in fact, $X$
is the blow-up of $X'$ at one point).
\end{remark}
\subsection{Triple planes of type \ref{II}}
In this case the invariants are
\begin{equation*}
K_X^2=3, \quad b=3, \quad h=2, \quad g(H)=1
\end{equation*}
and the Tschirnhausen bundle splits as $\mathscr{E}=\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1) \oplus \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-2)$.
The existence of these triple planes follows from Corollary
\ref{cor:Tsch1}, whereas Proposition \ref{prop.TypeII} below provides their complete classification.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop.TypeII}
Let $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ be a triple plane of type \emph{\ref{II}}. Then
$X$ is isomorphic to a smooth cubic surface $S \subset \mathbb{P}^3$ and
$f$ is the projection of $S$ from a general point of $\mathbb{P}^3$. The
branch locus $B$ is a
sextic plane curve with six cusps lying on a conic.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By Proposition \ref{prop.K+2H}, the divisor $D:=K_X+2H$ is very
ample. Using $K_X H=2b-9=-3$ (see the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:numerical}), we obtain
\begin{equation*}
D^2=(K_X+2H)^2= K_X^2+4K_X H+4H^2=3-12+12 =3,
\end{equation*}
hence the map $\varphi_{|D|} \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^3$
is an isomorphism onto a smooth cubic surface $S$. The statement
about the position of the cusps in the branch locus is a well-known
classical result, see \cite[p.320]{Zar29}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{rmk:II}
Other descriptions of triple planes of type \ref{II} are the following.
\begin{itemize}
\item Let $X'$ be a smooth Del Pezzo surface of degree $5$, embedded
in $\mathbb{G}(1, \, \mathbb{P}^3)$ as a surface of
bidegree $(3, \,2)$, see \cite[Theorem 4.1 $(b)$]{G93}. There is a
family of $2$-secant planes to $X'$; projecting from one of
these planes, we obtain a birational model of a triple plane
$f\colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ of type \ref{II} (in fact, $X$ is the blow-up
of $X'$ at two points).
\item Let $X'$ be a smooth Del Pezzo surface of degree $6$, embedded
in $\mathbb{G}(1, \, \mathbb{P}^3)$ as a surface of
bidegree $(3, \,3)$, see \cite[Theorem 4.1 $(d)$]{G93}. There is a
family of $3$-secant planes to $X'$; projecting from one of
these planes, we obtain a birational model of a triple plane
$f\colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ of type \ref{II} (in fact, $X$ is the blow-up of $X'$ at three points).
\end{itemize}
\end{remark}
\subsection{Triple planes of type \ref{III}}
In this case the invariants are
\begin{equation*}
K_X^2=-1, \quad b=4, \quad h=4, \quad g(H)=2
\end{equation*}
and the Tschirnhausen bundle splits as $\mathscr{E}=\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-2) \oplus \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-2)$.
The existence of these triple planes follows from Corollary
\ref{cor:Tsch1}, whereas Proposition \ref{prop.TypeIII} below provides
their complete classification.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop.TypeIII}
Let $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ be a triple plane of type \emph{\ref{III}}.
Then $X$ is a blow-up at $9$ points $\sigma \colon X \to \mathbb{F}_n$ of
a Hirzebruch surface $\mathbb{F}_n$, with $n \in \{0, \, 1, \, 2, \, 3 \}$,
and
\begin{equation} \label{eq:type-III}
H= 2\mathfrak{c}_0 + (n+3) \mathfrak{f}-\sum_{i=1}^{9} E_i.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By Proposition \ref{prop.K+2H}, the divisor $D:=K_X+2H$ is very ample. We have
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc} D^2 & K_X D \\
K_X D & K_X^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 7 & -3 \\
-3 & -1\\
\end{array} \right),
\end{equation*}
in particular $K_X D<0$ shows that $X$ is a rational surface.
By Serre duality and Kodaira vanishing theorem we have $h^1(X, \, D) = h^1(X, \, -2H)=0$,
and analogously $h^2(X, \, D)=h^0(X, \, -2H)=0$, so by the Riemann-Roch theorem we obtain
\begin{equation*}
h^0(X, \, D)=\chi(X, \, D)=\frac{D(D-K_X)}{2}+ \chi(\mathscr{O}_X)=6.
\end{equation*}
The morphism $\varphi_{|D|} \colon X \to X_1 \subset \mathbb{P}^5$ is an
isomorphism of $X$ onto its image $X_1$, which is a surface of
degree $7$ with $K_{X_1}^2=-1$. Embedded projective varieties of
degree at most $7$ are classified in \cite{Io84}; in particular, the
table at page 148 of that paper shows that $X_1$ is a blow-up at 9
points $\sigma \colon X_1 \to \mathbb{F}_n$, with $n \in \{0, \, 1,
\, 2, \, 3 \}$, and that
\begin{equation*}
D= 2\mathfrak{c}_0 + (n+4) \mathfrak{f}-\sum_{i=1}^{9} E_i.
\end{equation*}
Using $2H=D-K_X$, we obtain \eqref{eq:type-III}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{rmk:III}
When $n=0$, the surface $X$ is the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^1
\times \mathbb{P}^1$ at $9$ points and a birational model of the
triple plane $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ is obtained by
using the curves of bidegree $(2, \, 3)$ passing through these points, since \eqref{eq:type-III} becomes $H= 2L_1+3L_2 - \sum_{i=1}^9 E_i$.
When $n=1$, since $\mathbb{F}_1$ is the blow-up of the plane at one point, we see from \eqref{eq:type-III} that $X$ can be also seen as the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^2$ at $10$ points and that $H= 4L - 2 E_{10} - \sum_{i=1}^9 E_i $.
Another description of triple planes of type \ref{III} is the
following. Let $X'$ be a Castelnuovo surface with $K_{X'}^2=2$,
embedded in $\mathbb{G}(1, \, \mathbb{P}^3)$ as a surface of
bidegree $(3, \,3)$, see \cite[Theorem 4.1 $(e)$]{G93}. There is
a family of $3$-secant planes to $X'$; projecting from one of these
planes, we obtain a birational model of a triple plane $f\colon X
\to \mathbb{P}^2$ of type \ref{III} (in fact, $X$ is the blow-up of $X'$ at
three points).
\end{remark}
\subsection{Triple planes of type \ref{IV}}
In this case the invariants are
\begin{equation*}
K_X^2=-4, \quad b=5, \quad h=7, \quad g(H)=3.
\end{equation*}
By Theorem
\ref{teo:res}, the resolution of
$\mathscr{F}=\mathscr{E}(3)$ is
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2} (-1) \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}^3 \to \mathscr{F} \to 0,
\end{equation*}
hence $\mathscr{F} \simeq T_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)$ and \eqref{eq:S3F(6-b)} implies that
$S^3 \mathscr{E}^{\vee} \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E}$ is isomorphic to $S^3
(T_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)) \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(1)$, which is
globally generated.
By Theorem \ref{thm triple:1} this ensures the existence of triple
planes of type \ref{IV}, whereas Proposition \ref{prop.TypeIV} below
provides their complete classification.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop.TypeIV}
Let $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ be a triple plane of type
\emph{\ref{IV}}. Then$:$
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=2pt, label=\bf{\roman*)}]
\item \label{IV-i} the surface $X$ is isomorphic to the blow-up of
the plane at
a subset $Z$ of $13$ points imposing only $12$ conditions on
quartic curves, and $|H|$ is the complete linear system of quartics
passing through $Z;$
\item \label{IV-ii} $Z$ can be naturally identified with a $0$-dimensional subscheme of $\check{\mathbb{P}}^2$, that we call again $Z$, arising as the zero locus of a global section of $T_{\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(2)$ canonically associated with the building section $\eta \in H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,S^3 \mathscr{E}^{\vee} \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E})$ of the triple plane. Furthermore, the subscheme $Z\subset \check{\mathbb{P}}^2$ determines $\eta$ up to a multiplicative constant.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let us show \ref{IV-i}. By Proposition \ref{prop.K+2H} the divisor
$D:=K_X+2H$ is very ample. Therefore, the first adjunction map
\begin{equation*}
\varphi_1:=\varphi_{|K_X+D|} \colon X \to X_1 \subset
\mathbb{P}^{5}
\end{equation*}
is a birational morphism onto a smooth surface $X_1$. Moreover, the intersection matrix of $X_1$ is
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc} (D_1)^2 & K_{X_1}D_1 \\
K_{X_1}D_1 & (K_{X_1})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 4 & -6 \\
-6 & -4 + \alpha_1\\
\end{array} \right),
\end{equation*}
where $D_1$ and $\alpha_1$ are defined in \S \ref{subsec:adjunction theory}.
In particular $K_{X_1}D_1 <0$ shows that $X_1$ (and so $X$) is a rational surface. We have $g(D_1)=0,$ thus by Theorem \ref{adjunction-thm} the adjoint linear system $|K_{X_1}+D_1|$ has dimension $-1$, i.e. it is empty. By the same result, it follows that the surface $X_1$ is either a
rational normal scroll (and in this case $\alpha_1=12$) or
$\mathbb{P}^2$ (and in this case $\alpha_1=13$). Let us exclude
the former case. There are two types of smooth quartic rational normal scroll surfaces: $S(2, \, 2)$, namely $\mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1$ embedded in
$\mathbb{P}^5$ by $|L_1+ 2 L_2|$, and $S(1, \, 3)$, namely $\mathbb{F}_2$
embedded in $\mathbb{P}^5$ by $|\mathfrak{c}_0 + 3 \mathfrak{f}|$. The equality
$D_1 = 2K_X + 2H$ implies that if $X_1 = \mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1$ we have
\begin{equation*}
2H= 5 L_1 + 6 L_2 - \sum_{i=1}^{12} 2E_i,
\end{equation*}
whereas if $X_1 = \mathbb{F}_2$ we have
\begin{equation*}
2H= 5\mathfrak{c}_0 + 11 \mathfrak{f} - \sum_{i=1}^{12} 2E_i.
\end{equation*}
In both cases we obtain
a contradiction, since $H$ must be a divisor with integer
coefficients.
It follows that $(X_1, \,D_1)=(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(2))$,
hence $\alpha_1=13$ and $\varphi_1$ contracts exactly $13$
exceptional lines, i.e. $X$ is isomorphic to the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^2$
at $13$ points. Therefore we get
\begin{equation*}
X=\mathbb{P}^2(p_1, \ldots, p_{13}), \quad
D=5L-\sum_{i=1}^{13}E_i,
\end{equation*}
which implies $H=4L-\sum_{i=1}^{13}E_i$.
Since $h^0(X, \, \mathscr{O}_X(H))=3$, the points in the set
$Z:=\{p_1, \ldots, p_{13}\}$ impose only $12$ conditions on plane quartic
curves.
\bigskip
We now prove \ref{IV-ii}.
We use the notation of \S \ref{a}, so that the vector bundle $\mathscr{F} \simeq
T_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)$ has a resolution of the form \eqref{basic}, with
the $3$-dimensional vector space $U=H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F})$ being naturally
identified with $V^\vee$. By the results in \S
\ref{sub:proj.bundle}, in this case $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ is the point-line incidence correspondence in
$\mathbb{P}^2 \times \check{\mathbb{P}}^2$, namely a smooth hyperplane section of $\mathbb{P}^2
\times \check{\mathbb{P}}^2$, so we have
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Kos-IV}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(-1, \, -1) \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \check{\mathbb{P}}^2} \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})} \to 0.
\end{equation}
Twisting \eqref{eq:Kos-IV} by $\mathfrak{p}^* (\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(1))=\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(1, \, 0)$, applying the functor $\mathfrak{q}_*$ and using \eqref{eq:Riq} we obtain
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1) \to H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(1)) \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\check{\mathbb{P}}^2} \to \mathfrak{q}_* \big(\mathfrak{p}^*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(1)) \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}) \big) \to 0,
\end{equation*}
so the Euler sequence yields
\begin{equation*}
\mathscr{R} = \mathfrak{q}_*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\ell))=\mathfrak{q}_* \big(\mathfrak{p}^* (\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(1)) \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})} \big) \simeq
T_{\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(-1)
\end{equation*}
and equality \eqref{eq:S3E} implies
\begin{equation*}
H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{E}^{\vee} \otimes \wedge ^2 \mathscr{E} ) =H^0(\check{\mathbb{P}}^2, \, \mathscr{R}(3))= H^0(\check{\mathbb{P}}^2, \, T_{\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(2)).
\end{equation*}
This shows that the building section $\eta$ of our triple plane is naturally associated with a global section of $T_{\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(2)$ that we call $\eta$, too, and whose vanishing locus will be denoted by $Z=D_0(\eta)$. Note that $Z$ is a zero-dimensional subscheme of $\check{\mathbb{P}}^2$ such $\mathrm{length}(Z)=c_2(T_{\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(2))=13$.
Furthermore we have $\mathscr{R}(3)=\mathfrak{q}_* \mathscr{L}$, where $\mathscr{L}=\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(3\xi+\ell)$, and our triple plane $X$ is a smooth divisor in the complete linear system $|\mathscr{L}|$, see \eqref{eq:linear-L}. Since a global section of $\mathscr{L}$ corresponds to a non-zero morphism $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})} \to \mathscr{L}$, we obtain a short exact sequence
\begin{equation} \label{eq:IV-1}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(-3\xi) \to \mathscr{L}(-3\xi) \to \mathscr{O}_X(H) \to 0,
\end{equation}
and so, taking the direct image via $\mathfrak{q}$, we get
\begin{equation} \label{eq:IV-2}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(-3) \to T_{\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(-1) \to \mathscr{I}_{Z/\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(4) \to 0.
\end{equation}
The inclusion $X \simeq \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{O}_X(H)) \hookrightarrow \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$
corresponds to the surjection $\mathscr{L}(-3\xi) \to \mathscr{O}_X(H)$ in
\eqref{eq:IV-1}; then \eqref{eq:IV-2} shows that $X$ can be
identified with $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{I}_{Z/\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(4))$, embedded in in
$\mathbb{P}(T_{\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(-1))$ via the surjection $T_{\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(-1) \to
\mathscr{I}_{Z/\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(4)$.
Hence a model of the triple cover map $f \colon X \to
\mathbb{P}^2$ is the rational map $\check{\mathbb{P}}^2 \dashrightarrow \mathbb{P}^2$ given by the
linear system of (dual) quartics through $Z$. This identifies $X$ with the blow-up of $\check{\mathbb{P}}^2$ at $Z$.
Finally, let us show that the subscheme $Z$ determines
$\eta \in H^0(\check{\mathbb{P}}^2, \, T_{\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(2))$ up to a multiplicative
constant. To this purpose, we use Proposition \ref{propsteiner} with
$t=0$, so we only have to check that
$h^1(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{I}_{Z/\mathbb{P}^2}(4))=1$. But this is clear since
$\chi(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{I}_{Z/\mathbb{P}^2}(4))=-2$ and $h^0(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{I}_{Z/\mathbb{P}^2}(4))=3$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{rmk:IV}
A \emph{Bordiga surface} is a smooth surface of degree $6$ in
$\mathbb{P}^4$, given by the blow up of $\mathbb{P}^2$ at $10$
points embedded by the linear system of plane quartics through them, see
\cite[Capitolo 5]{Ott95}. Then Proposition \ref{prop.TypeIV} shows that a
birational model of a triple plane $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ of type \ref{IV} can be realized as the projection of a Bordiga surface from a $3$-secant line.
Furthermore, contracting one of the exceptional divisors in the Bordiga surface, we obtain a rational surface $X'$ with $K_{X'}^2=0$ that can be embedded
in $\mathbb{G}(1, \, \mathbb{P}^3)$ as a surface of bidegree $(3,
\,4)$, see \cite[Theorem 4.1 $(f)$]{G93}. There is a family of
$4$-secant planes to $X'$; projecting from one of these planes, we
obtain another birational model of a triple plane $f\colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ of type \ref{IV} (in fact,
$X$ is the blow-up of $X'$ at four points).
\end{remark}
\subsection{Triple planes of type \ref{V}}
In this case the invariants are
\begin{equation*}
K_X^2=-6, \quad b=6, \quad h=11, \quad g(H)=4,
\end{equation*}
and by Theorem \ref{teo:res} the twisted Tschirnhausen bundle
$\mathscr{F}$ has a resolution of the form
\begin{equation} \label{eq:M-V}
0 \longrightarrow \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)^2 \stackrel{M}{\longrightarrow} \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}^4 \longrightarrow
\mathscr{F} \longrightarrow 0.
\end{equation}
Since $\mathscr{F}$ is globally generated, it follows that $S^3 \mathscr{E}^\vee \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E}=S^3
\mathscr{F}$ is globally generated, too.
Hence triple planes $f \colon X \to
\mathbb{P}^2$ of type \ref{V} do exist by Theorem \ref{thm triple:1}. The
next result provides their classification.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop.TypeV}
Let $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ be a triple plane of type
\emph{\ref{V}}. Then$:$
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=2pt, label=\bf{\roman*)}]
\item \label{V-1} the surface $X$ is isomorphic to the blow-up
$\mathbb{P}^2(p_1, \ldots, p_{15})$ of $\mathbb{P}^2$ at $15$ points and the
triple plane map is induced by the linear system of plane sextics
singular at $p_1,\ldots,p_6$ and passing through $p_7,\ldots,p_{15};$
\item \label{V-2} the nine points $p_7,\ldots,p_{15}$ consists of
the intersection $S \cap C$, where $S=\mathbb{P}^2(p_1,\ldots,p_6)$ is a cubic surface in $\mathbb{P}^3$, naturally associated with the
building section $\eta \in
H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,S^3 \mathscr{E}^{\vee} \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E})$, whereas $C$ is a twisted cubic such that $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ is the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^3$ at $C$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} Let us show \ref{V-1}.
By Proposition \ref{prop.K+2H} the divisor $D:=K_X+2H$ is very
ample. We have $K_X H=2b-9=3$, and the genus formula yields $g(D)=10$, so by Theorem \ref{adjunction-thm} we deduce that the first adjoint system $|K_X+D|$ has dimension $9$. Therefore the first adjunction map
\begin{equation*}
\varphi_1=\varphi_{|K_X+D|} \colon X \to X_1 \subset
\mathbb{P}^{9}
\end{equation*}
is birational onto its image $X_1$, whose intersection
matrix is
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc} (D_1)^2 & K_{X_1}D_1 \\
K_{X_1}D_1 & (K_{X_1})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 12 & -6 \\
-6 & -6 + \alpha_1\\
\end{array} \right).
\end{equation*}
In particular $K_{X_1}D_1 <0$ shows that $X_1$ (and so $X$) is a rational
surface. Now we consider the
second adjunction map $\varphi_2 \colon X_1 \to X_2 \subset
\mathbb{P}^3$, which is an isomorphism onto its image $X_2$ (Proposition \ref{prop:phi_n}), whose intersection matrix is
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc} (D_2)^2 & K_{X_2}D_2 \\
K_{X_2}D_2 & (K_{X_2})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; -6+\alpha_1 & -12 + \alpha_1 \\
-12 + \alpha_1 & -6 + \alpha_1\\
\end{array} \right).
\end{equation*}
This shows that $X_2$ is a non-degenerate, smooth rational surface in
$\mathbb{P}^3$, hence it is either a quadric surface or a cubic surface. If $X_2$
were a quadric then $(D_2)^2=2$, hence $\alpha_1=8$ and the
intersection matrix would give $(K_{X_2})^2=2$, which is a
contradiction. Therefore $X_2$ is a cubic surface $S$, hence
$\alpha_1=9$.
Moreover $X_1$ is isomorphic to $X_2$, so $X$ is the blow-up of $S$ at $9$ points.
It follows
\begin{equation*}
X=\mathbb{P}^2(p_1, \ldots, p_{15}), \quad D=9L-\sum_{i=1}^{6}3E_i -
\sum_{i=7}^{15} E_j,
\end{equation*}
which implies $H=6L-\sum_{i=1}^{6}2E_i - \sum_{i=7}^{15} E_j$.
\bigskip
We turn to \ref{V-2}. Here we use the approach developed in \S \ref{a}, in particular we consider again the resolution \eqref{basic},
where in this case $U=H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{F})$ is a $4$-dimensional vector space.
Set $\mathbb{P}^3 = \mathbb{P} (U)$.
By Proposition \ref{prop:P-and-P'}, the projective bundle $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$
is the complete intersection of two divisors of bidegree $(1, \, 1)$
in $\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^3$, so the corresponding Koszul resolution is
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Kos-V}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^3}(-2, \, -2) \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^3}(-1, \, -1)^2 \stackrel{d_1} \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^3} \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})} \to 0.
\end{equation}
Twisting \eqref{eq:Kos-V} by $\mathfrak{p}^* (\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(1))= \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^3 }(1, \, 0)$ and splitting it into short exact sequences, we get
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
0 & \longrightarrow \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^3}(-1, \, -2) \longrightarrow \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^3}(0, \, -1)^2 \longrightarrow \widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_1 \longrightarrow 0, \\
0 & \to \widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_1 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^3}(1, \, 0) \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\ell) \to 0,
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where $\widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_1:= \mathscr{K}_1 \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2
\times \mathbb{P}^3}(1, \, 0) $ and $\mathscr{K}_1$ is the image of the
first differential $d_1$ of the Koszul complex, see \S
\ref{L}. Applying the functor $\mathfrak{q}_*$ and using \eqref{eq:Riq}, we infer
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{q}_* \widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_1 = \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^3}(-1)^2, \quad
R^1 \mathfrak{q}_* \widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_1 =0,
\end{equation*}
obtaining
\begin{equation} \label{eq:N-V}
0 \longrightarrow \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^3}(-1)^2 \stackrel{N}{\longrightarrow} \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^3}^3 \longrightarrow \mathfrak{q} _*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\ell)) \longrightarrow 0.
\end{equation}
Hence we can identify $\mathfrak{q}_*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\ell))$ with
$\mathscr{I}_{C/\mathbb{P}^3}(2)$, the ideal sheaf of quadrics in $\mathbb{P}^3$ containing
a twisted cubic $C$, which is precisely the image in $\mathbb{P}^3$ of the
conic parametrizing the unstable lines of $\mathscr{F}$ (Remark \ref{rem:cubic}).
Note that $C$ is given by the vanishing of the
three $2 \times 2$ minors of the matrix of linear forms $N$ appearing
in $\eqref{eq:N-V}$; this matrix coincides
with the one obtained by ``flipping'' the matrix $M$ in \eqref{eq:M-V} as explained in \S \ref{a}, see in particular
Remark \ref{rem:trilinear-form}.
Then
$\mathscr{G}=\mathfrak{q}_*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\ell))$, and by Proposition
\ref{prop:P-and-P'} we infer
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) \simeq \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{G}) \simeq \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{I}_{C/\mathbb{P}^3}(2)),
\end{equation*}
that is, $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ is isomorphic to the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^3$ along the
twisted cubic $C$ and the morphism $\mathfrak{p} \colon \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) \to
\mathbb{P}^2$ is induced by the net $|\mathscr{I}_{C/\mathbb{P}^3}(2)|$.
We also get $\mathscr{R} \simeq \mathfrak{q}_*\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})} \simeq \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^3}$, so \eqref{eq:S3E} yields
\begin{equation*}
H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, S^3 \mathscr{E}^\vee \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E}) = H^0(\mathbb{P}^3, \, \mathscr{R}(3)) = H^0(\mathbb{P}^3, \, \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^3}(3)).
\end{equation*}
This means that the choice of the (proportionality class of the) building section $\eta$ in Theorem
\ref{thm triple:1} is given by the choice of a
cubic surface $S \subset \mathbb{P}^3$. Moreover, from the exact sequence
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(-3\xi + \ell) \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\ell) \to \mathscr{O}_{X}(H) \to 0
\end{equation*}
it follows that $X \simeq \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{O}_{X}(H))$ is the strict transform of
$S$ in $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$.
Also, the triple cover map $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ is associated with
$|\mathscr{O}_{X}(H)|$, so that it is induced on $S$ by the linear system of quadrics
that contain the intersection $S \cap C$. This intersection consists
of $9$ points $p_7,\ldots,p_{15}$. Identifying $S$ with $\mathbb{P}^2(p_1,\ldots,p_6)$
with exceptional divisors $E_1,\ldots,E_6$, we
get thus $9$
exceptional divisors $E_7,\ldots,E_{15}$ on $X$ corresponding to this
intersection, and
\begin{equation*}
H=2H_S-\sum_{j=7}^{15} E_j=6L -\sum_{i=1}^6 2E_i -\sum_{j=7}^{15} E_j.
\end{equation*}
This identifies the sets $\{p_1, \ldots, p_6 \}$ and $\{p_7, \ldots, p_{15} \}$ with those in part \ref{V-1}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{rmk:V}
A birational model of the triple plane $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ is
the projection of a hyperplane section $T$ of a Palatini scroll from a $4$-secant line. In fact, $T$ is a surface of degree $7$ in $\mathbb{P}^4$ and with $K_T^2=-2$ (see \cite[Capitolo
5]{Ott95}), which is isomorphic to $\mathbb{P}^2$ blown-up at $11$ points and
embedded in $\mathbb{P}^4$ by the complete linear system $|6L -
\sum_{i=1}^6 2E_i - \sum_{j=7}^{11} E_j|$. Actually, this is the unique non-degenerate,
rational surface of degree $7$ in $\mathbb{P}^4$, see \cite[Theorems 4 and 6]{Ok84}.
Contracting one of the exceptional divisors $E_j$ in $T$, we obtain a rational surface
$X'$ with $K_{X'}^2=-1$ that can be embedded in $\mathbb{G}(1, \,
\mathbb{P}^3)$ as a surface of bidegree $(3, \,5)$, see
\cite[Theorem 4.1 $(g)$]{G93}. So there is a family of $5$-secant
planes to $X'$; projecting from one of these planes, we obtain a
birational model of a triple plane $f\colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ of type \ref{V} (in fact, $X$ is the
blow-up of $X'$ at five points).
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} \label{rem:Du-Val-I-V}
Triple planes of types \ref{I} to \ref{V} were
previously considered via ``classical" methods by Du
Val in \cite{DuVal33}. For the reader's convenience, let us shortly
describe in modern language and using our notation Du Val's nice
geometric constructions. They use part of the mass of results
on particular rational surfaces proven by nineteenth century algebraic geometers; the classical, a bit old-fashioned monograph on the subject (in Italian)
is \cite{Conf45}, for a modern exposition see
\cite{dolgachev:classical-AG}.
\begin{itemize}
\item[\ref{I})]
We have $g(H)=0$, and from this one sees that the net
$|H|$ is the pull-back of the net of lines $|L|$ in $\mathbb{P}^2$
via the projection of the cubic scroll $S(1, \, 2) \subset
\mathbb{P}^4$ from a general line. The generators of the scroll
become a $\infty^1$ family of lines of index $3$ in $\mathbb{P}^2$,
i.e. such that for a general point of the plane pass three lines of
the family. The envelop of this family is a tricuspidal quartic
curve, namely the branch locus $B$ of the triple plane.
\item[\ref{II})] This time $g(H)=1$, so that the surface $X$ is either
rational or ruled. When $p_g(X)=q(X)=0$ we are in the first case,
and the only possibility for the triple plane is the projection of a
smooth cubic surface $S_3 \subset \mathbb{P}^3$ from an external
point $p$. Then the ramification locus $R$ is given by the
intersection of $S_3$ with the polar hypersurface $P_p (S_3)$, which
is a quadric $Q$. Hence $R$ is a smooth curve of degree $6$ and
genus $4$ in $\mathbb{P}^3$, and the six cusps of the branch locus
$B$ arise from the intersection of $R$ with the second polar of $p$,
which is a plane $\Pi$. In particular, the cusps of $B$ are
contained in the projections of both the curves $Q \cap \Pi$ and
$S_3 \cap \Pi$, namely they are the complete intersection of a conic
and a plane cubic.
\item[\ref{III})] In this case $g(H)=2$, and a surface $X$ with a net of
genus $2$ curves is either a double plane with a branch curve of
order $6$ (i.e., a $K3$ surface) or a rational surface. In the last
case, a detailed analysis of the possible linear systems
representing $X$ on $\mathbb{P}^2$ shows that the only possibility
in order to have a net $|H|$ inducing a triple plane is that $X$ is the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^2$ at $10$ points, so that the curves of $|H|$
corresponds to quartic with one double and nine simple base
points. We recovered by modern methods this result, see Remark
\ref{rmk:III} (since Du Val only works with representative linear
systems on $\mathbb{P}^2$, he does not consider the birational
models of these triple planes arising from linear systems on
$\mathbb{F}_n$). It can be observed that this construction
corresponds to the projection to $\mathbb{P}^2$ of a quartic surface
$S_4 \subset \mathbb{P}^3$, having a double line, from a general
point $p \in S_4$. In fact, $S_4$ is represented on the plane by
quartic curves with one double and $8$ simple base points. On the
surface $S_4$ there is a pencil of conics, corresponding to the
pencil of lines on $\mathbb{P}^2$ through the double base point; in
the triple plane representation, this becomes a family $\infty^1$ of
conics of index $3$, whose envelop is a curve $B$ of degree $8$
with $12$ cusps, which is precisely the branch locus of our triple
plane.
\item[\ref{IV})] In this case we have $g(H)=3$, and a detailed analysis of the
linear systems $|H|$ and $|K_X + H|$ shows that a birational model
of the triple plane is given from the projection of a quintic
surface $S_5 \subset \mathbb{P}^2$ having a double twisted cubic
from a point of the double curve. From this fact one recovers the
plane representation of the linear system $|H|$ as a net of quartics
with thirteen simple base points, and the representation of the
branch curve $B$ as the Jacobian curve of this net. According to
Proposition \ref{prop.TypeIV}, the base points are not in general
position. In fact, eleven of them, say $p_1, \ldots, p_{11}$, can be
taken at random, whereas the remaining two must belong to the
$g_2^1$ of the unique hyperelliptic curve of degree $7$ having nodes
at $p_1, \ldots, p_{11}$.
\item[\ref{V})]
In this case $g(H)=4$, and the assumption $p_g(X)=q(X)=0$
shows that the adjoint linear system $|K_X+H|$ cuts on the general
curve of the net $|H|$ the complete canonical system $|K_X|$. Then
the image of $|H|$ via the first adjoint map $\varphi_{|K_X+H|}
\colon X \to \mathbb{P}^3$ is a net of canonical curves of genus $4$
and degree $6$. So there is precisely one quadric surface containing
each of these curves, and one system of generators of each of these
quadrics traces a system of $\infty^2$ trisecant lines to the image
of $X$, that together define a degree $3$ ``involution" (Du Val,
like his contemporaries, use this term also when dealing with finite
covers of degree $>2$) which gives a birational model of our triple
plane. Pushing this analysis further, it is possible to show that
such a system of trisecant lines is actually the system of chords of
a twisted cubic $C$, and this implies that the net $|H|$ can be
represented on a cubic surface $S \subset \mathbb{P}^3$ by means
of sections by quadrics passing through $C$. Correspondingly, $X$ is
a rational surface that can be represented on the plane by sextic
curves with six double and nine simple base points, the latter
corresponding to the intersections of $S$ with $C$. Part \ref{V-2} of Proposition \ref{prop.TypeV} is a modern rephrasing of
this argument that uses completely different techniques based on
vector bundles. Finally, by using envelops one computes that the
branch locus $B$ of the triple plane has degree $12$; its cusps
arise from the chords of $C$ that are also inflectional tangents of
$S$, and a Schubert calculus computation shows that their number
equals $33$.
\end{itemize}
\end{remark}
\subsection{Triple planes of type \ref{VI}} \label{subsec:VI}
In this case the invariants are
\begin{equation*}
K^2=-7, \quad b=7, \quad h=16, \quad g(H)=5
\end{equation*}
and by Theorem \ref{teo:res} the twisted Tschirnhausen bundle $\mathscr{F}$ has a resolution of the form
\begin{equation} \label{eq:M-VI}
0 \longrightarrow \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)^3 \stackrel{M}{\longrightarrow} \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}^5 \longrightarrow
\mathscr{F} \longrightarrow 0.
\end{equation}
The existence and classification of triple planes of type \ref{VI}
are established in Proposition \ref{prop.TypeVI} below.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop.TypeVI}
Let $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ be a triple plane of type
\emph{\ref{VI}}. Then the following holds$:$
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=2pt, label=\bf{\roman*)}]
\item \label{loga}
the vector bundle $\mathscr{F}$ is a logarithmic bundle associated with $6$
lines in general position in $\mathbb{P}^2;$
\item \label{detcubic} the morphism $\mathfrak{q} \colon \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) \to \mathbb{P}^4$ is
birational onto its image, which is a determinantal cubic threefold
$Y \subset \mathbb{P}^4$, which has exactly six nodes as singularities$;$
\item \label{blowbordiga} the surface $X$ is the blow-up of a Bordiga
surface $X_1 \subset Y$ at the six nodes of $Y$, that belong to
$X_1$.
So $X$ is the blow-up $\mathbb{P}^2$ at $16$ points and the net $|H|$ defining the
triple cover $f$ is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:H-VI}
H=7L - \sum_{i=1}^{10} 2E_i - \sum_{j=11}^{16} E_j.
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}[Proof of \ref{detcubic}]
We use again the approach and notation of \S \ref{subsec:steiner}. We look at the exact
sequence \eqref{basic} and we consider the projective space $\mathbb{P}^4 = \mathbb{P}(U)$, that coincides with the space of global sections of the Steiner bundle $\mathscr{F}$.
By \eqref{basic-flipped}, the $5 \times 3$ matrix $M$ of linear forms presenting $\mathscr{F}$ is naturally associated with a $3 \times 3$ matrix $N$, generically of maximal rank, defining a Steiner sheaf $\mathscr{G}$ over $\mathbb{P}^4$, namely
\begin{equation} \label{eq:twisted-VI}
0 \longrightarrow \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^4}(-1)^3 \stackrel{N}{\longrightarrow} \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^4}^3 \longrightarrow
\mathscr{G} \longrightarrow 0.
\end{equation}
Now recall that the morphism $\mathfrak{q}$ is birational onto its image by Lemma
\ref{contracts}, and that $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{G}) \simeq
\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ by Proposition \ref{prop:P-and-P'}, so that $\mathfrak{q}$ maps $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ to the support of $\mathscr{G}$, which is the determinantal hypersurface $Y \subset \mathbb{P}^4$ defined by $\det(N)=0$.
Note that Porteous formula says that the threefold $Y$ is singular, expectedly at six points, see \cite[Chapter II]{ACGH}.
\end{proof}
\begin{claim} \label{oneclaim}
The surface $X_1 \subset \mathbb{P}^4$, image of the first adjunction
map $\varphi_{|K_X + H|} \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^4$, is a Bordiga surface of degree $6$. It is defined by the vanishing of the maximal minors of a $3 \times
4$ matrix obtained by stacking a row to the transpose of $N$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
By the results of \S \ref{L}, the surface $X$ corresponds to a global section
\begin{equation*}
\eta \in H^0(\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}), \, \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(3\xi-\ell)) \simeq H^0(\mathbb{P}^4,\, \mathscr{R}(3)),
\end{equation*}
where $\mathscr{R}= \mathfrak{q}_*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(-\ell))$.
The idea is to directly relate $\mathscr{R}$ to the sheaf $\mathscr{G}$ appearing in \eqref{eq:twisted-VI} or, equivalently, to the matrix $N$.
By Proposition \ref{prop:P-and-P'} the projective bundle
$\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) $ is a $3$-fold linear section of $\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^4$, i.e.
the complete intersection of three divisors of bidegree $(1, \, 1)$ in
$\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^4$. Tensoring the Koszul resolution \eqref{KOSZUL} of $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}$
inside $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^4}$ with $\mathfrak{p}^*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1))=\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^4}(-1, \, 0)$ and splitting it into short exact sequences, we obtain
\begin{gather}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^4} (-4, \, -3) \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times
\mathbb{P}^4} (-3, \, -2)^3 \to \widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_2 \to 0, \label{eq.VI.1} \\
0 \to \widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_2 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^4} (-2, \, -1)^3
\to \widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_1 \to 0, \label{eq.VI.2} \\
0 \to \widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_1 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^4} (-1, \, 0) \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(-\ell) \to 0 \label{eq.VI.3},
\end{gather}
where $\widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_i:=\mathscr{K}_i \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^4}(-1, \, 0)$ and $\mathscr{K}_i$ denotes the image of the $i$-th differential of the Koszul complex, see \S \ref{sub:proj.bundle}. Applying the functor $\mathfrak{q}_*$ to \eqref{eq.VI.1} and using \eqref{eq:Riq},
we deduce $\mathfrak{q}_*
\widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_2=0$ and we get
\begin{equation} \label{eq.VI.4}
0 \to R^1 \mathfrak{q}_* \widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_2 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^4}(-3)^3 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^4}(-2)^3 \to R^2 \mathfrak{q}_* \widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_2 \to 0.
\end{equation}
By \eqref{eq.VI.3} the sheaf $\widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_1$ injects into
$\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^4}(-1, \, 0)$, so we have $\mathfrak{q}_*
\widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_1=0$. Therefore, applying $\mathfrak{q}_*$ to \eqref{eq.VI.2}, we get
\begin{equation} \label{eq.VI.A}
R^1 \mathfrak{q}_* \widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_2=0, \quad R^1 \mathfrak{q}_* \widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_1\simeq R^2 \mathfrak{q}_*
\widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_2.
\end{equation}
Finally, applying the functor $\mathfrak{q}_*$ to \eqref{eq.VI.3} we infer
\begin{equation} \label{eq.VI.B}
\mathscr{R}=\mathfrak{q}_*(\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(-\ell)) \simeq R^1 \mathfrak{q}_* \widetilde{\mathscr{K}}_1.
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{eq.VI.A} and \eqref{eq.VI.B}, the exact sequence
\eqref{eq.VI.4} becomes
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^4}(-3)^3 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^4}(-2)^3 \to \mathscr{R}\to 0,
\end{equation*}
that can be rewritten as
\begin{equation} \label{eq.VI.5}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^4}^3 \xrightarrow{{}^t N} \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^4}(1)^3 \to \mathscr{R}(3) \to 0.
\end{equation}
Indeed, the self-duality of the Koszul complex implies
\begin{equation*}
\mathscr{R} \simeq \mathscr{G}^\vee \simeq \mathscr{E}xt^1_{\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^4}}(\mathscr{G}(3), \, \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^4}),
\end{equation*}
where the second isomorphisms is Grothendieck duality, see
\cite[Chapter III, Proposition 7.2]{hartshorne:residues-duality}.
Let us consider now a non-zero global section $\eta \colon
\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^4} \to \mathscr{R}(3)$ of $\mathscr{R}(3)$, whose cokernel we denote by
$\mathscr{H}$. The section $\eta$ lifts to a map $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^4} \to
\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^4}(1)^3$, so by \eqref{eq.VI.5} we get an exact sequence
\begin{equation} \label{eq:bordiga}
0 \longrightarrow \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^4}(-3) \longrightarrow \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^4}^4
\stackrel{{}^t (N,\eta)}{\longrightarrow} \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^4}(1)^3 \to \mathscr{H}
\longrightarrow 0.
\end{equation}
The sheaf $\mathscr{H}$ is supported on the surface $X_1 \subset
\mathbb{P}^4$. More precisely, this surface is defined by the vanishing
of the $3 \times 3$ minors of the $3 \times 4$ matrix ${}^t(N,\eta)$ of linear
forms appearing in \eqref{eq:bordiga}, hence it is a Bordiga
surface of degree $6$, see \cite[Capitolo 5]{Ott95}.
\end{proof}
By the results of \S \ref{b} it follows that the bundle $\mathscr{F}$ has either six or infinitely many
unstable lines. Let us give the proof of \ref{blowbordiga} in the former case.
\begin{proof}[Proof of \ref{blowbordiga}]
We assume that $\mathscr{F}$ has six unstable lines.
Using Claim \ref{oneclaim} and Remark \ref{rmk:IV}, we can see $X_1$ as the blow-up
of $\mathbb{P}^2$ at $10$ points, with exceptional divisors
$E_1,\ldots,E_{10}$, embedded in $\mathbb{P}^4$ by the linear system $|4L
-\sum_{i=1}^{10} E_i|$. On the other hand, by Proposition
\ref{prop:adjunction} the first adjoint map
$\varphi:=\varphi_{|K_X+H|} \colon X \to X_1$ is a birational
morphism, contracting precisely the six exceptional divisors
$E_{11}, \ldots, E_{16}$ on $X$ coming from the blow-up of $X_1$
at the six nodes of $Y$. Hence we obtain
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
& K_X = \varphi^* K_{X_1}+ \sum_{j=11}^{16} E_j = \varphi^* \bigg(-3L + \sum _{i=1}^{10} E_i \bigg)+ \sum_{j=11}^{16} E_j \quad \textrm{and} \\
& K_X + H = \varphi^* \mathscr{O}_{X_1}(1) = \varphi^* \bigg(4L - \sum _{i=1}^{10} E_i \bigg),
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
so \eqref{eq:H-VI} follows.
\end{proof}
If, instead, $\mathscr{F}$ has infinitely many unstable lines then it is of Schwarzenberger type. The next result shows that this case cannot occur, proving \ref{loga}
and so completing the proof of Proposition
\ref{prop.TypeVI}.
\begin{claim} \label{twoclaim}
If $\mathscr{F}$ is a Schwarzenberger bundle, then the vanishing locus of any non-zero global section $\eta \in
H^0(\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}), \, \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(3\xi-\ell))$ is a reducible surface. In particular, if $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ is a triple plane of type $\ref{VI}$, then its Tschirnhausen bundle is a logarithmic one.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
If $\mathscr{F}$ is a Schwarzenberger bundle then, up to
a change of coordinates, the matrix $M$ defining it is given by \eqref{eq:Schw-7} and so, using Remark
\ref{rem:trilinear-form}, one easily finds that the matrix $N$ is
\[
N=\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
z_0 & z_1 & z_2 \\
z_1 & z_2 & z_3 \\
z_2 & z_3 & z_4 \\
\end{array}
\right).
\]
The singular locus of $Y$ is the determinantal variety given by the
vanishing of the $2 \times 2$ minors of $N$, and this is
a rational normal curve of degree four $C_4 \subset \mathbb{P}^4$. This
curve is also the base locus of the net $|T_L|$ generated the three determinantal surfaces
$T_i$ defined by the $2\times 2$ minors of the matrix $N_i$ obtained
from $N$ by removing the $i$-th line.
By \cite[Proposition 1.2]{Val00a} we have
\begin{equation} \label{eq:S2-6}
h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^2 \mathscr{F} (-2))=1.
\end{equation}
This global section gives a relative quadric $Q$ in
$|\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(2\xi-2\ell)|$ over $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$.
The morphism $\mathfrak{q} \colon
\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) \to Y$ is the blow-up along $C_4$, and $Q$ is its exceptional
divisor.
The divisor $Q \in |\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(2\xi-2\ell)|$ gives a sheaf map
$\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\xi+\ell) \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(3\xi-\ell)$, which is injective on
global sections.
Since $h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^2 \mathscr{F} (-2))=1$, this gives an inclusion
\begin{equation} \label{eq:inclusion-6}
H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^2 \mathscr{F} (-2)) \otimes H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \,
\mathscr{F}(1)) \subseteq H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{F} (-1)).
\end{equation}
On the other hand, we can compute
\begin{equation} \label{eq:S3-6}
h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F} (1))=12, \quad h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{F} (-1))=12.
\end{equation}
Indeed, the first equality in \eqref{eq:S3-6} is just obtained twisting \eqref{eq:M-VI} by
$\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(1)$ and taking global sections. For the second equality,
we tensor the third symmetric power of the exact sequence
\eqref{eq:M-VI} with $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)$, obtaining
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-4) \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-3)^{15} \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-2)^{45} \xrightarrow{r_1} \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)^{35}
\xrightarrow{r_0} S^3 \mathscr{F}(-1) \to 0.
\end{equation*}
Taking cohomology, we get
\begin{equation*}
H^i(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3\mathscr{F}(-1)) \simeq H^{i+1}(\mathbb{P}^2, \,\ker r_0) \simeq H^{i+2}(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \ker r_1)
\end{equation*}
for all $i$, which implies $H^i(\mathbb{P}^2,S^3\mathscr{F}(-1))=0$ for $i > 0$. Then
\begin{equation*}
h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3\mathscr{F}(-1))=\chi(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3\mathscr{F}(-1))=12.
\end{equation*}
By \eqref{eq:S2-6} and \eqref{eq:S3-6} it follows that the inclusion
in \eqref{eq:inclusion-6} is actually an equality. Geometrically,
this means that any non-zero global section of $S^3 \mathscr{F} (-1)$ vanishes
along the relative quadric $Q$, that is its vanishing locus is the
union of this relative quadric and a relative plane. This proves Claim \ref{twoclaim}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{rmk:VI}
Another way to describe triple planes of type \ref{VI} is the following.
Let $X'$ be the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^2$ at $10$ points, embedded in $\mathbb{G}(1, \, \mathbb{P}^3)$ as a
surface of bidegree $(3, \,6)$ via the complete linear system $|7L -
\sum_{i=1}^{10} 2E_i|$, see \cite[Theorem 4.2 $(i)$]{G93}.
There is a family of $6$-secant planes to $X'$; projecting from
one of these planes, we obtain a birational model of a the triple
plane $f\colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ of type $\mathrm{VI}$ (in fact, $X$ is the blow-up of $X'$ at six points).
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:Du-Val-VI}
Triple planes of types \ref{VI} were previously considered (using
methods of synthetic projective geometry) by Du Val in
\cite[page 72]{DuVal35}. Let us give a short description of his construction.
We have $g(H)=5$, and the assumption $p_g(X)=q(X)=0$ shows that the
adjoint linear system $|K_X+H|$ cuts on the general curve of the net
$|H|$ the complete canonical system $|K_X|$. Then the image of $|H|$
via the first adjoint map $\varphi_{|K_X+H|} \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^4$ is a
net of canonical curves of genus $5$ and degree $10$. There is a
$\infty^2$ system of trisecant lines to these curves, that together
give a degree $3$ ``involution" on the image of $X$. Such trisecant
lines generate a threefold $Y \subset \mathbb{P}^3$, that Du Val recognizes
as a determinantal cubic threefold. At this point, the triple cover is
constructed by blowing up a Bordiga surface $X_1 \subset Y$ at the six
nodes of $Y$, that belong to $X_1$. Part \ref{blowbordiga} of Proposition
\ref{prop.TypeVI} is a modern rephrasing of this argument that uses
completely different techniques based on vector bundles. By using his
remarkable knowledge of ``classical" algebraic geometry, at the end of
his analysis Du Val is also able to identify $X$ as a congruence of
type $(3, \, 6)$ inside $\mathbb{G}(1, \, \mathbb{P}^3)$, see Remark \ref{rmk:VI}.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Triple planes of type \ref{VII}} \label{subsec:VII}
In this case we have
\begin{equation*}
K_X^2=-7, \quad b=8, \quad h=22, \quad g(H)=6
\end{equation*}
and by Theorem \ref{teo:res} the twisted Tschirnhausen bundle $\mathscr{F}$ has a resolution of the form
\begin{equation} \label{eq:M-VII}
0 \longrightarrow \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)^4 \stackrel{M}{\longrightarrow} \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}^6 \longrightarrow
\mathscr{F} \longrightarrow 0.
\end{equation}
By Remark \ref{rem:H}, we can start the adjunction process on $X$ by
using the first adjoint divisor $K_X + H$. According to \S
\ref{subsec:adjunction theory}, we denote by $\alpha_n$ the number of
exceptional curves contracted by the $n$-th adjunction map $\varphi_n
\colon X_{n-1} \to X_n$. Recall that $\alpha_1$, the number of lines
contracted by the first adjunction map, is precisely the
number of unstable lines of the twisted Tschirnhausen bundle $\mathscr{F}$,
see Proposition \ref{prop:adjunction}.
\subsubsection{The occurrences for triple planes of type VII}
\begin{proposition} \label{prop.typeVII}
If $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ is a triple plane of type \emph{\ref{VII}}, then $X$ belongs to the following list. The cases marked with $(*)$ do actually exist.
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\mathbf{(VII.1a)}$] $\alpha_1=1, \, \alpha_2=14:$ $X$ is the blow-up at $15$ points of a Hirzebruch surface $\mathbb{F}_n$, with $n \in \{0, \, 2 \}$, and
\begin{equation*}
H=5\mathfrak{c}_0+ \bigg(\frac{5}{2} n + 6 \bigg) \mathfrak{f} - \sum_{i=1}^{14} 2E_i - E_{15};
\end{equation*}
\item[$\mathbf{(VII.1b) (*)}$] $\alpha_1=1, \, \alpha_2=15:$ $X$ is the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^2$ at $16$ points and
\begin{equation*}
H=8L - \sum_{i=1}^{15}2E_i-E_{16};
\end{equation*}
\item[$\mathbf{(VII.2) (*)}$] $\alpha_1=2:$ $X$ is the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^2$ at $16$ points and
\begin{equation*}
H=9L -\sum_{i=1}^4 3E_i - \sum_{j=5}^{14} 2E_j - \sum_{k=15}^{16} E_k;
\end{equation*}
\item[$\mathbf{(VII.3)(*)}$] $\alpha_1=3:$ $X$ is the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^2$ at $16$ points and
\begin{equation*}
H=10L - 4E_1 -\sum_{i=2}^7 3E_i - \sum_{j=8}^{13} 2E_j - \sum_{k=14}^{16} E_k;
\end{equation*}
\item[$\mathbf{(VII.4a)}$] $\alpha_1=4, \,
\alpha_2=2:$ $X$ is the blow-up of $\mathbb{F}_n$ $($with $n \in \{0, \, 1, \, 2, \, 3 \})$ at $15$ points and
\begin{equation*}
H= 6\mathfrak{c}_0+(3n+8)\mathfrak{f} - \sum_{i=1}^9 3E_i - \sum_{j=10}^{11}2E_j - \sum_{k=12}^{15} E_k;
\end{equation*}
\item[$\mathbf{(VII.4b) (*)}$] $\alpha_1=4, \,
\alpha_2=3:$ $X$ is the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^2$ at $16$ points and
\begin{equation*}
H=10L -\sum_{i=1}^9 3E_i - \sum_{j=10}^{12} 2E_j - \sum_{k=13}^{16} E_k;
\end{equation*}
\item[$\mathbf{(VII.4c)}$] $\alpha_1=4, \,
\alpha_2=4:$ $X$ is the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^2$ at $16$ points and
\begin{equation*}
H=12L -\sum_{i=1}^7 4E_i - 3E_8- \sum_{j=9}^{12} 2E_j-\sum_{k=13}^{16} E_k;
\end{equation*}
\item[$\mathbf{(VII.5a)}$] $\alpha_1=5, \, \alpha_2=0:$ $X$ is the blow-up of
$\mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1$ at $15$ points, and
\begin{equation*}
H=7L_1+7L_2 - \sum_{i=1}^{10} 3E_i - \sum_{j=11}^{15} E_j;
\end{equation*}
\item[$\mathbf{(VII.5b)(*)}$] $\alpha_1=5, \,
\alpha_2=1:$ $X$ is the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^2$ at $16$
points and
\begin{equation*}
H=12L -\sum_{i=1}^6 4E_i - \sum_{j=7}^{10} 3E_j - 2E_{11} -\sum_{k=12}^{16} E_k;
\end{equation*}
\item[$\mathbf{(VII.6)(*)}$] $\alpha_1=6:$
$X$ is the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^2$ at $16$ points and
\begin{equation*}
H=13L -\sum_{i=1}^{10} 4E_i - \sum_{j=11}^{16} E_j;
\end{equation*}
\item[$\mathbf{(VII.7)(*)}$] $\alpha_1=7:$ $X$ is the blow-up of an Enriques surface at $7$ points.
\end{itemize}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We have a birational morphism
\begin{equation*}
\varphi_{|K_X+H|} \colon X \to X_1 \subset \mathbb{P}^5
\end{equation*}
and an intersection matrix
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc} (D_1)^2 & K_{X_1}D_1 \\
K_{X_1}D_1 & (K_{X_1})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 10 & 0 \\
0 & -7+ \alpha_1 \\
\end{array} \right).
\end{equation*}
By Hodge Index Theorem we infer $0 \leq \alpha_1 \leq 7$. Let us consider separately the different cases.\\
$\bullet \, \mathbf{\alpha_1=0.}$ The second adjunction map gives a pair $(X_2, \, D_2)$, such that the intersection matrix on the surface $X_2 \subset \mathbb{P}^5$ is
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
(D_2)^2 & K_{X_2}D_2 \\
K_{X_2}D_2 & (K_{X_2})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 3 & -7 \\
-7 & -7 + \alpha_2\\
\end{array} \right).
\end{equation*}
This gives a contradiction, since a smooth surface of degree $3$ in $\mathbb{P}^5$ is necessarily contained in a hyperplane. Hence the case $\alpha_1=0$ cannot occur.
\bigskip \bigskip
$\bullet \, \mathbf{\alpha_1=1.}$ The second adjunction map gives a pair $(X_2, \, D_2)$, such that the intersection matrix on the surface $X_2 \subset \mathbb{P}^5$ is
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
(D_2)^2 & K_{X_2}D_2 \\
K_{X_2}D_2 & (K_{X_2})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 4 & -6 \\
-6 & -6 + \alpha_2\\
\end{array} \right).
\end{equation*}
A smooth, linearly normal surface of degree $4$ in $\mathbb{P}^5$ is either a rational scroll or the Veronese surface. In the former case we have $(K_{X_2})^2=8$, hence $\alpha_2=14$ and, using the classification of rational scrolls in $\mathbb{P}^5$ (see the proof of Proposition \ref{prop.TypeIV}),
we get $(\textbf{VII.1a})$. In the latter case we have $(K_{X_2})^2=9,$ hence $\alpha_2=15$. This gives ($\textbf{VII.1b}$).
\bigskip \bigskip
$\bullet \, \mathbf{\alpha_1=2.}$ The second adjunction map gives a pair $(X_2, \, D_2)$, such that the intersection matrix on the surface $X_2 \subset \mathbb{P}^5$ is
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
(D_2)^2 & K_{X_2}D_2 \\
K_{X_2}D_2 & (K_{X_2})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 5 & -5 \\
-5 & -5 + \alpha_2\\
\end{array} \right).
\end{equation*}
In particular $X_2$ has degree $5$, hence it must be a Del Pezzo surface. So $(K_{X_2})^2=5$, that is $\alpha_2=10$. This gives ($\textbf{VII.2}$). \bigskip \bigskip
$\bullet \, \mathbf{\alpha_1=3.}$ The second adjunction map gives a pair $(X_2, \, D_2)$, such that the intersection matrix on the surface $X_2 \subset \mathbb{P}^5$ is
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
(D_2)^2 & K_{X_2}D_2 \\
K_{X_2}D_2 & (K_{X_2})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 6 & -4 \\
-4 & -4 + \alpha_2\\
\end{array} \right).
\end{equation*}
The Hodge Index Theorem implies $\alpha_2 \leq 6$. On the other hand, Theorem \ref{adjunction-thm} implies $(K_{X_2}+D_2)^2 \geq 0$, hence $\alpha_2 \geq 6$. It follows $\alpha_2=6$, hence $(K_{X_2}+D_2)^2=0$. So $X_2$ is a conic bundle of degree $6$ and sectional genus $2$ in $\mathbb{P}^5$, containing precisely $6$ reducible fibres because $(K_{X_2})^2=2$. It turns out that $X_2$ is the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^2$ at $7$ points, embedded in $\mathbb{P}^5$ via the linear system
\begin{equation*}
D_2=4L - 2E_1 - \sum_{i=2}^7 E_i,
\end{equation*}
see \cite{Io81}. This is case ($\mathbf{VII.3}$).
\bigskip \bigskip
$\bullet \, \mathbf{\alpha_1=4.}$ The second adjunction map gives a pair $(X_2, \, D_2)$, such that the intersection matrix on the surface $X_2 \subset \mathbb{P}^5$ is
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
(D_2)^2 & K_{X_2}D_2 \\
K_{X_2}D_2 & (K_{X_2})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 7 & -3 \\
-3 & -3 + \alpha_2\\
\end{array} \right).
\end{equation*}
The Hodge Index Theorem implies $\alpha_2 \leq 4$, whereas the condition $(K_{X_2}+D_2)^2 \geq 0$ gives $\alpha_2 \geq 2$; then $2 \leq \alpha_2 \leq 4$.
$\diamond$ If $\alpha_2=2$ then by \cite[p. 148]{Io84} it follows that $X_2$ is the blow-up at $9$ points of $\mathbb{F}_n$, with $n \in \{0, \, 1, \, 2, \, 3 \})$, and that
\begin{equation*}
D_2 = 2\mathfrak{c}_0 + (n+4) \mathfrak{f} - \sum_{i=1}^9 E_i.
\end{equation*}
This is case $(\textbf{VII.4a})$.
$\diamond$ If $\alpha_2=3$ then the third adjunction map gives a pair $(X_3, \, D_3)$ whose intersection matrix is
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
(D_3)^2 & K_{X_3}D_3 \\
K_{X_3}D_3 & (K_{X_3})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 1 & -3 \\
-3 & \alpha_3\\
\end{array} \right).
\end{equation*}
This implies $(X_3, \, D_3)= (\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(1))$, so $\alpha_3 = 9$. This is case $(\textbf{VII.4b})$.
$\diamond$ If $\alpha_2=4$ then $(X_2, \, D_2)$ is as in case $(6)$ of Theorem \ref{adjunction-thm}. This is $(\textbf{VII.4c})$.
\bigskip \bigskip
$\bullet \, \mathbf{\alpha_1=5.}$ The second adjunction map gives a pair $(X_2, \, D_2)$, such that the intersection matrix on the surface $X_2 \subset \mathbb{P}^5$ is
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
(D_2)^2 & K_{X_2}D_2 \\
K_{X_2}D_2 & (K_{X_2})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 8 & -2 \\
-2 & -2 + \alpha_2\\
\end{array} \right).
\end{equation*}
Then the Hodge Index Theorem implies $0 \leq \alpha_2 \leq 2$.
$\diamond$ If $\alpha_2=0$ then the third adjunction map gives a pair $(X_3, \, D_3)$, where $X_3 \subset \mathbb{P}^3$ and whose intersection matrix is
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
(D_3)^2 & K_{X_3}D_3 \\
K_{X_3}D_3 & (K_{X_3})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 2 & -4 \\
-4 & -2 + \alpha_3\\
\end{array} \right).
\end{equation*}
Hence $(X_3, \, D_3)= (\mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1, \, \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1}(1, \, 1))$, so in particular $\alpha_3=10$. This is case $(\textbf{VII.5a})$.
$\diamond$ If $\alpha_2=1$ then the third adjunction map gives a pair $(X_3, \, D_3)$, with $X_3 \subset \mathbb{P}^3$ and whose intersection matrix is
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
(D_3)^2 & K_{X_3}D_3 \\
K_{X_3}D_3 & (K_{X_3})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 3 & -3 \\
-3 & -1 + \alpha_3\\
\end{array} \right).
\end{equation*}
Therefore $X_3= \mathbb{P}^2(p_1, \ldots, p_6)$ is a smooth cubic surface, in particular $\alpha_3=4$ and $D_3= 3L - \sum_{i=1}^6 E_i$. This is case $(\textbf{VII.5b})$.
$\diamond$ If $\alpha_2=2$ then the third adjunction map gives a pair $(X_3, \, D_3)$, with $X_3 \subset \mathbb{P}^3$ and whose intersection matrix is
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
(D_3)^2 & K_{X_3}D_3 \\
K_{X_3}D_3 & (K_{X_3})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 4 & -2 \\
-2 & \alpha_3\\
\end{array} \right).
\end{equation*}
Therefore $X_3$ is a smooth quartic surface, a contradiction because we are assuming $p_g(X)=0$. This case cannot occur.
\bigskip \bigskip
$\bullet \, \mathbf{\alpha_1=6.}$ The second adjunction map gives a pair $(X_2, \, D_2)$, such that the intersection matrix on the surface $X_2 \subset \mathbb{P}^5$ is
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
(D_2)^2 & K_{X_2}D_2 \\
K_{X_2}D_2 & (K_{X_2})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 9 & -1 \\
-1 & -1 + \alpha_2\\
\end{array} \right).
\end{equation*}
Then the Hodge Index Theorem implies $0 \leq \alpha_2 \leq 1$.
$\diamond$ If $\alpha_2=0$ then the third adjunction map gives a pair $(X_3, \, D_3)$, with $X_3 \subset \mathbb{P}^4$ and whose intersection matrix is
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
(D_3)^2 & K_{X_3}D_3 \\
K_{X_3}D_3 & (K_{X_3})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 6 & -2 \\
-2 & -1+\alpha_3\\
\end{array} \right).
\end{equation*}
Then $X_3$ is a smooth surface of degree $6$ and sectional genus $3$ in $\mathbb{P}^4$. Looking at the classification given in \cite{Io81} we see that $X_3$ is a Bordiga surface, see Remark \ref{rmk:IV}, so $\alpha_3=0$ and
\begin{equation*}
D_3=4L - \sum_{i=1}^{10} E_i.
\end{equation*}
This gives case $\textbf{(VII.6)}$.
$\diamond$ If $\alpha_2=1$ then the third adjunction map gives a pair $(X_3, \, D_3)$, with $X_3 \subset \mathbb{P}^4$ and whose intersection matrix is
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
(D_3)^2 & K_{X_3}D_3 \\
K_{X_3}D_3 & (K_{X_3})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 7 & -1 \\
-1 & \alpha_3\\
\end{array} \right).
\end{equation*}
By Hodge Index Theorem we obtain $\alpha_3=0$, hence $(K_{X_3})^2=0$. This is a contradiction, because the unique non-degenerate, smooth rational surface of degree $7$ in $\mathbb{P}^4$ has $K^2=-2$, see Remark \ref{rmk:V}. So this case does not occur.
\bigskip \bigskip
$\bullet \, \mathbf{\alpha_1=7.}$ In this case the intersection matrix on the surface $X_1 \subset \mathbb{P}^5$ is
\begin{equation*}
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
(D_1)^2 & K_{X_1}D_1 \\
K_{X_1}D_1 & (K_{X_1})^2\\
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc} \; 10 & 0 \\
0 & 0 \\
\end{array} \right).
\end{equation*}
The Hodge Index Theorem implies that $K_{X_1}$ is numerically trivial. So $X_1$ is a minimal Enriques surface, and $X$ is the blow-up of $X_1$ at $7$ points. This yields
$\textbf{(VII.7)}$.
\bigskip
The proof of the existence for the cases marked with $(*)$ goes as follows. We first choose
$\alpha_1 \in \{1,\ldots,7\}$. According to Proposition
\ref{prop:adjunction}, we need a rank two Steiner bundle $\mathscr{F}$ on $\mathbb{P}^2$ with a
resolution like \eqref{eq:M-VII} and having precisely $\alpha_1$ distinct unstable
lines. Bundles with these properties are described in Proposition \ref{prop:unstable-b-8}.
Then, we take $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ and we choose a sufficiently general
global section $\eta$ of $\mathscr{L} = \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(3\xi-2\ell)$. We do this by looking directly
at the image $Y$ of $\mathfrak{q} \colon \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) \to \mathbb{P}^5$, namely we consider $\eta$ as a global section of $\mathscr{R}(3)$ via the natural identification given by \eqref{eq:S3E}. In this setting, $Y$ is a scroll of degree $6$ in $\mathbb{P}^5$ defined by the minors of
order $3$ of the $3 \times 4$ matrix of linear forms $N$ over $\mathbb{P}^5$ obtained via the
construction of \S \ref{sub:proj.bundle}, i.e.
\begin{equation*}
\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^5}(-1)^4 \stackrel{N}{\longrightarrow} \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^5}^3,
\end{equation*}
and the zero locus of $\eta$ is a cubic hypersurface of $\mathbb{P}^5$ containing the union of two surfaces $S_1$ and $S_2$ in $Y$, both obtained as the image via $\mathfrak{q}$ of a divisor belonging to $|\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(\ell)|$.
Concretely, $S_1$ and $S_2$ lie in the
net generated by the rows of $N$, i.e. they can be defined by the $2\times 2$ minors of $4\times 2$ matrices obtained taking random linear combinations of these rows.
Now we compute the resolution of the
homogeneous ideal defining $S_1 \cup S_2$ in $\mathbb{P}^5$, we take a general cubic in this ideal and we consider the residual surface $X_1$ in $Y$.
The image of the first adjunction map
\begin{equation*}
\varphi_{|K_X+H|} \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^5
\end{equation*}
is precisely $X_1,$ so that $X$ is the blow-up of $X_1$ at $\alpha_1$ points.
It remains to compute $\alpha_2$, or equivalently $(K_{X_2})^2$. To do
this, we observe that the second adjunction map of $X$ is defined by the restriction to $X_1$ of the linear system $|\mathscr{O}_{Y}(2\xi -\ell)|$, and this in turn coincides with the
restriction to $X_1$ of the linear system generated by the six quadrics in the ideal defining $S_1$.
The image of $X_1$ via this linear system is the surface $X_2$, hence we compute
$(K_{X_2})^2$ by taking the dual of the resolution of the homogeneous
ideal of $X_2$ in the target $\mathbb{P}^5$. All this, together with the verification that
$X_1$ (and hence $X$) is smooth,
is done with the help of \texttt{Macaulay2}.
In the Appendix at the end of the paper we explain in detail how this computer-aided construction is performed.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{rmk:Alexander}
In \cite{Al88}, Alexander showed the existence of a non-special,
linearly normal surface of degree $9$ in $\mathbb{P}^4$, obtained by
embedding the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^2$ at $10$ general points via the very
ample complete linear system
\begin{equation*}
\bigg|13L - \sum_{i=1}^{10} 4 E_i \bigg|.
\end{equation*}
By using LeBarz formula, see \cite[Th\'{e}or\`{e}me 5]{LeB90}, we can see that Alexander
surface has precisely one $6$-secant line. Projecting from this line
to $\mathbb{P}^2$, one obtains a birational model of a general triple cover;
it is immediate to see that this corresponds to case
$\textbf{(VII.6)}$ in Proposition \ref{prop.typeVII}.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} \label{rmk:Enriques}
Let us say something more about case (VII.7). Since $\alpha_1=7$, we
deduce that $\mathscr{F}$ has $7$ unstable lines, hence it is a logarithmic
bundle (see Proposition \ref{prop:unstable-b-8}). In this situation,
the surface $X_1$ is a smooth Enriques surface of degree $10$ and
sectional genus $6$ in $\mathbb{P}^5$, that is a so-called \emph{Fano
model}. Actually, one can check that $X_1$ is contained into the
Grasmannian $\mathbb{G}(1, \, \mathbb{P}^3)$ as a \emph{Reye congruence}, i.e. a
$2$-dimensional cycle of bidegree $(3, \, 7)$, see \cite[Theorem
4.3]{G93}. In particular, $X_1$ admits a family of $7$-secant planes,
and the projection from one of these planes provides a birational
model of the triple cover $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ (in fact, $X$ is the
blow-up of $X_1$ at $7$ points).
For more details about Fano and Reye models, see \cite{Cos83, CV93}.
\end{remark}
\subsubsection{Some further considerations on
triple planes of type VII} \label{subsec:further-cons}
We mentioned in the previous subsection that we are able to construct many, but not all cases of triple planes of type \ref{VII} (see Proposition \ref{prop.typeVII}). We conjecture that the remaining cases do not exist. More precisely, our expectation is that the values of $\alpha_1$ and $\alpha_2$
should necessarily satisfy the rule
\begin{equation*}
\alpha_2={{7-\alpha_1}\choose 2}.
\end{equation*}
Let us explain now what is the geometric evidence beyond our conjecture.
The second adjunction map $\varphi_2 \colon X_1 \to X_2 \subset \mathbb{P}^5$
can be lifted to the map $\zeta \colon \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) \to \mathbb{P}^5$ associated
with the linear system $|\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(2\xi - \ell)|$. Note that
\begin{equation*}
H^0(\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}),\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})}(2\xi - \ell)) \simeq H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,S^2\mathscr{F}(-1))
\simeq \wedge^2 W^\vee,
\end{equation*}
where the last isomorphism is obtained taking global sections in the
second exterior power of the short exact sequence
\begin{equation*}
0 \to W^\vee \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(V)}(-1) \to U \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(V)} \to \mathscr{F} \to 0
\end{equation*}
defining $\mathscr{F}$ (see \eqref{eq:M-N}), namely
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \wedge^2 W^\vee \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-3) \to W^\vee \otimes U \otimes
\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-2) \to S^2U \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1) \to S^2 \mathscr{F}(-1) \to 0.
\end{equation*}
One can show that the projective closure $Y'$ of the image of the map $\zeta \colon \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F}) \dashrightarrow
\mathbb{P}(\wedge^2 W^\vee)$ is contained in the Plücker quadric $\mathbb{G}=\mathbb{G}(1,
\, \mathbb{P}(W^\vee))$ and that $Y'$ is the degeneracy locus of a map on
$\mathbb{G}$ defined by the tensor $\phi \in U \otimes V \otimes W$ considered
in \S \ref{a}. More precisely, denoting by $\mathscr{U}$ the
tautological rank two subbundle on $\mathbb{G}$, once noted that
$H^0(\mathbb{G}, \, \mathscr{U}^\vee)=W$ we see that $\phi$ gives a morphism
\begin{equation*}
V^\vee \otimes \mathscr{U} \to U \otimes \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{G}}.
\end{equation*}
The variety $Y'$ is the vanishing locus of the determinant of this morphism,
so that $Y'$ can be expressed as a complete
intersection of the Plücker quadric and a cubic hypersurface in $\mathbb{P}^5$.
The locus where this
morphism has rank $\le 4$ is contained in the singular locus of $Y'$
and coincides with it for a general choice of $\mathscr{F}$. By Porteous' formula, for such a general choice we expect that $Y'$ has $21$ singular points. One can see that these points are precisely the images of the sections of negative self-intersection of the Hirzebruch surfaces in $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ lying above the smooth
conics in $\mathbb{P}^2$ where $\mathscr{F}$ splits as $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}(1) \oplus
\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}(7)$, once chosen an isomorphism to $\mathbb{P}^1$ (it would be
natural to call these conics \emph{unstable conics}, and the argument above shows that there are
in general $21$ of them).
Also, the indeterminacy locus of $\zeta$ is exactly the union of the
sections of negative self-intersection on the Hirzebruch surfaces
lying above the unstable lines of $\mathscr{F}$. So,
$\alpha_1$ and $\alpha_2$ should depend only on $\mathscr{F}$ and not on $X$,
and moreover $\alpha_1$ should determine $\alpha_2$. However, it
is not clear yet how the number of unstable lines determines the precise number of
unstable conics.
\section{Moduli spaces} \label{sec:moduli}
\def\mathrm{Def}{\mathrm{Def}}
\def\mathrm{Aut}{\mathrm{Aut}}
\def\mathrm{PGL}{\mathrm{PGL}}
\def\mathrm{GL}{\mathrm{GL}}
\def\mathfrak{R}{\mathfrak{R}}
\def\mathfrak{T}{\mathfrak{T}}
\def\mathfrak{M}{\mathfrak{M}}
\def\mathfrak{N}{\mathfrak{N}}
In this section we describe some moduli problems related to our triple planes. For $b \in \{2, \, 3, \, 4 \}$ we set
\begin{equation*}
\mathscr{E}_b:= \begin{cases}
\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1) \oplus \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1) &\mbox{if } b=2 \\
\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1) \oplus \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-2) &\mbox{if } b=3 \\
\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-2) \oplus \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-2) &\mbox{if } b=4,
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
whereas for $b \in \{5, \, 6, \, 7, \, 8\}$ we denote by
$\mathscr{F}_b=\mathscr{E}_b(b-2)$ a rank $2$ Steiner bundle on $\mathbb{P}^2$ having
sheafified minimal graded free resolution of the form
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(1-b)^{b-4} \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(2-b)^{b-2} \to \mathscr{E}_b \to 0.
\end{equation*}
Then, for any $b \in \{2, \ldots, 8\}$, we define two spaces $\mathfrak{N}_b$ and $\mathfrak{M}_b$ as follows:
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{N}_b=\left\{(\mathscr{E}_b,\, \eta) \; \Bigg| \minibox{$\; \eta \in \mathbb{P}
(H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3\mathscr{E}_b^\vee \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E}_b))$ is the building section \\
of a general triple plane with $p_g=q=0$ \\
and Tschirnhausen bundle $\mathscr{E}_b$} \right\} / \simeq
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{M}_b= \left\{(\mathscr{E}_b,\, \eta) \; \Bigg| \minibox{$\; \eta \in \mathbb{P} H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3\mathscr{E}_b^\vee \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E}_b)$ and $D_0(\eta)$ provides
a general triple \\ \; plane with $p_g=q=0$ and Tschirnhausen bundle $\mathscr{E}_b$} \right\} / \sim
\end{equation*}
where we set $(\mathscr{E}_b, \, \eta) \simeq (\mathscr{E}_b', \, \eta')$ if and only if there is an isomorphism $\Psi \colon \mathscr{E} \to \mathscr{E}'$ such that $\Psi^* \eta' = \eta$ and the following diagram commutes
\begin{equation*}
\begin{CD}
\mathscr{E}_b @>{\Psi} >> \mathscr{E}'_b\\
@VVV @VVV\\
\mathbb{P}^2 @> {id}>> \mathbb{P}^2.\\
\end{CD}
\end{equation*}
whereas $(\mathscr{E}_b, \, \eta) \sim (\mathscr{E}_b', \, \eta')$ if and only if there is an isomorphism $\Psi \colon \mathscr{E} \to \mathscr{E}'$ and an automorphism $\lambda \colon \mathbb{P}^2 \to \mathbb{P}^2$ such that $\Psi^* \eta' = \eta$ and the following diagram commutes
\begin{equation*}
\begin{CD}
\mathscr{E}_b @>{\Psi} >> \mathscr{E}'_b\\
@VVV @VVV\\
\mathbb{P}^2 @> {\lambda}>> \mathbb{P}^2.\\
\end{CD}
\end{equation*}
We have $\mathfrak{M}_b = \mathfrak{N}_b/ \mathrm{PGL}_3(\mathbb{C})$, because the equivalence $(\mathscr{E}_b, \, \eta) \simeq (\mathscr{E}_b', \, \eta')$ is obtained from $(\mathscr{E}_b, \, \eta) \sim (\mathscr{E}_b', \, \eta')$ via the natural $\mathrm{PGL}_3(\mathbb{C})$-action on the base. Note that, with the terminology of \cite[Chapter 4]{HuyLehn10}, the
pair $(\mathscr{E}_b, \, \eta)$ consisting of the Tschirnhausen bundle and of
the building section is a \emph{framed sheaf}.
Given a general triple plane $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ branched over a
curve of degree $2b$, by Theorem \ref{thm triple:1} and \ref{teo:res}
we can functorially associate with $(X, \, f)$ a framed sheaf $(\mathscr{E}_b,
\, \eta)$, and conversely. In other words, considering the set of
framed sheaves $(\mathscr{E}_b, \, \eta)$ up to the equivalence relation
$\simeq$ or $\sim$ defined above actually amounts to
consider the set of pairs $(X, \, f)$ up to the corresponding equivalence relation.
Thus, from this point of view, $\mathfrak{M}_b$ can be identified with
the moduli space of the pairs $(X, \, f)$ up to isomorphisms, and
$\mathfrak{N}_b$ with the moduli space of the pairs $(X, \, f)$ up to
\emph{cover} isomorphisms.
In the sequel, we will use interchangeably the above notation $\mathfrak{N}_b$
and $\mathfrak{M}_b$, with $b \in \{2, \ldots, 8\}$, and $\mathfrak{N}_i$
and $\mathfrak{M}_i$, with $i \in \{\ref{I},\ldots,\ref{VII}\}$. In each case, the moduli space
$\mathfrak{N}_b$ can be constructed as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item take the versal deformation space $\mathrm{Def}(\mathscr{E}_b)$ of $\mathscr{E}_b;$
\item stratify $\mathrm{Def}(\mathscr{E}_b)$ in such a way that $H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{E}_b^\vee \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E}_b)$ has constant rank and consider the locally trivial projective bundle over each
stratum whose fibres are given by $\mathbb{P} H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{E}_b^\vee \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E}_b)$;
\item consider the quotient of this projective bundle by the natural action of the group $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathscr{E}_b)$.
\end{itemize}
In order to obtain $\mathfrak{M}_b$, we must further take the quotient of the above moduli space by the natural action of $\mathrm{PGL}_3(\mathbb{C})$. In particular, the expected dimensions of $\mathfrak{N}_b$ and $\mathfrak{M}_b$ will be given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:exp-dim}
\begin{split}
\textrm{exp-dim} \, \mathfrak{N}_b & = \dim \mathrm{Def}(\mathscr{E}_b) + h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{E}_b^\vee \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E}_b) - \dim \mathrm{Aut}(\mathscr{E}_b), \\
\textrm{exp-dim} \, \mathfrak{M}_b & = \dim \mathrm{Def}(\mathscr{E}_b) + h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{E}_b^\vee \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E}_b) - \dim \mathrm{Aut}(\mathscr{E}_b)-8.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
From now on, we will simply write $\mathscr{E}$ instead of $\mathscr{E}_b$ if no confusion can arise.
\subsection{Moduli of triple planes with decomposable
Tschirnhausen bundle}
Let us first consider cases $\textrm{I, II, III}$. Here $\mathscr{E}$ splits
as a sum of two line bundles and it is rigid.
\begin{theorem} \label{primimoduli}
The following holds$:$
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=2pt, label=\bf{\roman*)}]
\item \label{moduli:I} the moduli space $\mathfrak{M}_{\ref{I}}$ consists of a single point$;$
\item \label{moduli:II} the moduli space $\mathfrak{M}_{\ref{II}}$ is
unirational of dimension $7;$
\item \label{moduli:III} the moduli space $\mathfrak{M}_{\ref{III}}$ is
unirational of dimension $12.$
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
As a preliminary step, note that in all these cases the bundle
$S^3 \mathscr{E}^\vee \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E}$ is globally generated. Therefore,
Theorem \ref{thm triple:1} applies and shows that the moduli spaces
$\mathfrak{M}_{\ref{I}}$, $\mathfrak{M}_{\ref{II}}$ and
$\mathfrak{M}_{\ref{III}}$ are obtained as a quotient of a
Zariski dense open subset of $H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,\, S^3 \mathscr{E}^\vee \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E})$
by the action of some linear group, so that all of them are irreducible,
unirational varieties.
Let us check \ref{moduli:I}. In this case, the branch curve $B \subset
\mathbb{P}^2$ is a tricuspidal plane quartic curve, which is
unique up to projective transformations. By a topological monodromy
argument (see \cite[\S 58]{ST80}) and Grauert-Remmert extension
theorem (see \cite[XII.5.4]{SGA1}) this implies that the number of
triple planes of type \ref{I} up to isomorphisms equals the number of
group epimorphisms
\begin{equation*}
\varrho \colon \pi_1(\mathbb{P}^2- B) \to \mathfrak{S}_3
\end{equation*}
up to conjugation in $\mathfrak{S}_3$. Now, it is well-known that
\begin{equation*}
\pi_1(\mathbb{P}^2- B)=\textrm{B}_3(\mathbb{P}^1)= \langle \alpha, \, \beta \; | \; \alpha^3 = \beta^2 = (\beta \alpha)^2 \rangle,
\end{equation*}
see \cite[Chapter 4, Proposition 4.8]{Dim92}, and this group has a unique epimorhism $\varrho$ to
$\mathfrak{S}_3$ up to conjugation. In fact, $\varrho(\alpha)$ must be a $3$-cycle whereas $\varrho(\beta)$
must be a transposition, so we may assume
\begin{equation*}
\varrho(\alpha)=(1 \, 2 \, 3), \quad \varrho(\beta)=(1 \, 2).
\end{equation*}
This proves that $\mathfrak{M}_{\ref{I}}$ consists of a
single point.
\bigskip
Let us now analyze \ref{moduli:II}. Recall that in this case the
branch locus $B \subset \mathbb{P}^2$ is a plane sextic curve with six cusps
lying on the same conic. Each of these curves can be written as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:sextic}
(f_2)^3+(f_3)^2=0,
\end{equation}
where $f_k$ denotes a homogeneous form of degree $k$, and the construction depends on
\begin{equation*}
6+10-1-\dim \, \mathrm{PGL}_3(\mathbb{C})=7
\end{equation*}
parameters. The same monodromy argument used in part
\ref{moduli:I} shows that this also computes the effective dimension $\dim \, \mathfrak{M}_{\ref{II}}$. More precisely, we can see that every fixed curve $B$ of equation $\eqref{eq:sextic}$ is the branch locus of a unique triple cover up to isomorphisms, namely the one whose birational model is provided by the hypersurface
\begin{equation*}
z^3+bz+c=0,
\end{equation*}
where $b=-f_2 /\sqrt[3]{4}$ and $c= f_3 / \sqrt{-27}$. In fact, we have
\begin{equation*}
\pi_1(\mathbb{P}^2-B)=(\mathbb{Z}/2 \mathbb{Z}) \ast (\mathbb{Z}/3 \mathbb{Z}) = \langle \alpha, \, \beta \; | \; \alpha^3 = \beta^2 = 1 \rangle,
\end{equation*}
see \cite[Chapter 4, Proposition 4.16]{Dim92}, and this group has a unique
epimorhism to $\mathfrak{S}_3$ up to conjugation.
\bigskip
We finally look at \ref{moduli:III}, where $\mathscr{E}= \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-2) \oplus \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-2)$. The automorphism group of $\mathscr{E}$ is isomorphic to $\mathrm{GL}_2(\mathbb{C})$.
Moreover
\begin{equation*}
h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{E}^\vee \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E})= h^0 \big(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(2)^4 \big)= 24,
\end{equation*}
hence \eqref{eq:exp-dim} implies
\begin{equation*}
\textrm{exp-dim} \, \mathfrak{M}_{\ref{III}}= 24-4-8=12.
\end{equation*}
This number coincides with the effective dimension $\dim \, \mathfrak{M}_{\ref{III}}$. In fact,
in this case $X$ is the blow-up at $9$ points of $\mathbb{F}_n$, with $n \in \{0, \, 1, \, 2, \, 3\}$.
The stratum of maximal dimension corresponds to the value of $n$ such that $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathbb{F}_n) = H^0(\mathbb{F}_n, \, T_{\mathbb{F}_n})$ has minimal dimension, namely to $n=0$
for which we have
\begin{equation*}
\dim \, \mathfrak{M}_{\ref{III}}= 2 \cdot 9 - \dim \, \mathrm{Aut}(\mathbb{F}_n) = 18 -6 =12.
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
\subsection{Moduli of triple planes with stable
Tschirnhausen bundle}
We now start the analysis of the cases \ref{IV}, \ldots, \ref{VII}, where $\mathscr{E}$ is indecomposable.
Using the notation introduced in \S \ref{sec.general}, we will write $\mathscr{F} = \mathscr{E}(b-2)$, so that $\mathscr{F}$ fits into the short exact sequence
\begin{equation*}
0 \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)^{b-4} \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}^{b-2} \to \mathscr{F} \to 0.
\end{equation*}
Thus $\mathrm{Def}(\mathscr{E}) = \mathrm{Def}(\mathscr{F})$ and
\begin{equation*}
H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{E}^\vee \otimes \wedge ^2 \mathscr{E} ) = H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{F} (6-b)).
\end{equation*}
The vector bundle $\mathscr{F}$ is stable (Theorem \ref{teo:res}), so $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathscr{F}) = \mathbb{C}^*$; its deformation space $\mathrm{Def}(\mathscr{F})$ is described for instance in \cite[Introduction]{Ca02}, and we have
\begin{equation*}
\dim \, \mathrm{Def}(\mathscr{F}) = 3(b-4)(b-2)-1 = (b-1)(b-5).
\end{equation*}
Then \eqref{eq:exp-dim} yields
\begin{equation} \label{eq:exp-dim-irr}
\begin{split}
\dim \, \mathfrak{N}_b= \textrm{exp-dim} \, \mathfrak{N}_b & = (b-1)(b-5) + h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{F} (6-b))-1, \\
\textrm{exp-dim} \, \mathfrak{M}_b & = (b-1)(b-5) + h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{F} (6-b))-9.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Furthermore, the equality $\textrm{exp-dim} \, \mathfrak{M}_b = \dim \, \mathfrak{M}_b$ holds if and only if $\textrm{PGL}_3(\mathbb{C})$ acts on $\mathfrak{N}_b$ with generically finite stabilizer.
\begin{theorem} \label{secondimoduli}
For $i \in \{\ref{IV}, \ref{V}, \ref{VI}\}$ the moduli space $\mathfrak{N}_i$ is rational and irreducible, while
$\mathfrak{M}_i$ is unirational of dimension $\dim \, \mathfrak{N}_i-8,$ where
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=2pt, label=\bf{\roman*)}]
\item $\dim \, \mathfrak{N}_{\ref{IV}}=23;$
\item $\dim \, \mathfrak{N}_{\ref{V}}=24;$
\item $\dim \, \mathfrak{N}_{\ref{VI}}=23.$
\end{enumerate}
Moreover
the moduli space $\mathfrak{N}_{\ref{VII}}$ has at least seven irreducible
components, all unirational of dimension $20$, that are distinguished by the
number $\alpha_1 \in \{1, \ldots, 7\}$ of unstable lines for $\mathscr{F}.$
\end{theorem}
First of all we note that, as in the proof of Theorem \ref{primimoduli}, in cases
$\ref{IV}$ and $\ref{V}$ the bundle
$S^3 \mathscr{E}^\vee \otimes \wedge^2 \mathscr{E} \simeq S^3 \mathscr{F}(6-b)$ is globally
generated.
Indeed, in these cases $b\le 6$ and $\mathscr{F}$ is globally generated, so
the same is true for $S^3 \mathscr{F}$ and for $S^3 \mathscr{F}(6-b)$.
Therefore,
the spaces $\mathfrak{M}_{i}$
and $\mathfrak{N}_{i}$ are irreducible
as soon as the parameter space of the bundle $\mathscr{E}$, or
equivalently of $\mathscr{F}$, is irreducible. Moreover, since
$\mathfrak{N}_{i}$ is an open subset of a projective bundle over such
parameter space, rationality of the latter will imply rationality of
the former, and also unirationality of $\mathfrak{M}_i$.
The proof of Theorem \ref{secondimoduli} is based on a case-by-case analysis, that will be done in
\S \ref{subsec:moduli-IV}, \ref{subsec:moduli-V}, \ref{subsec:moduli-VI}, \ref{subsec:moduli-VII} below. Our strategy is to compute
$\dim \mathfrak{N}_i$ and to show that $\mathrm{PGL}_3(\mathbb{C})$ acts on $\mathfrak{N}_i$ with generically
finite stabilizers for all $i \in \{\ref{IV}, \, \ref{V}, \,\ref{VI}, \, \ref{VII}\}$, to prove that $\mathfrak{N}_i$ is rational and
irreducible for $i \in \{\ref{IV}, \, \ref{V}, \,\ref{VI}\}$, and finally to find at
least $7$ irreducible unirational components of $\mathfrak{N}_{\ref{VII}}$.
\subsubsection{Moduli of triple planes of type \ref{IV}} \label{subsec:moduli-IV}
\begin{proposition}
The moduli space $\mathfrak{N}_{\ref{IV}}$ is an open dense
subset of $\mathbb{P}^{23}$, in particular it is irreducible and
rational. The space $\mathfrak{M}_{\ref{IV}}$ has dimension $15$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Case $\ref{IV}$, i.e. $b=5$, was analyzed in Proposition \ref{prop.TypeIV}.
We have $\mathscr{F} = T_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)$ and a natural identification
\begin{equation*}
H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{F} (1)) = H^0(\check{\mathbb{P}}^2, \, T_{\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(2))=\mathbb{C}^{24}.
\end{equation*}
Set $\mathbb{P}^{23} = \mathbb{P} H^0(\check{\mathbb{P}}^2, \, T_{\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(2))$ and
observe that the bundle $\mathscr{F}$ is rigid, stable and unobstructed, so the
moduli space consists of a single, reduced point. Consequently, the triple cover
$f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$ only depends on the section $\eta \in
H^0(\check{\mathbb{P}}^2, \, T_{\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(2))$ or, better, on its proportionality class $[\eta]$, that lies
in a Zariski dense open subset of $\mathbb{P}^{23}$.
By \eqref{eq:exp-dim-irr} we have $\textrm{exp-dim} \, \mathfrak{M}_{\ref{IV}} =15$.
It remains to show that $\textrm{exp-dim} \,\mathfrak{M}_{\ref{IV}} = \dim \, \mathfrak{M}_{\ref{IV}}$ or, equivalently, that $\mathrm{PGL}_3(\mathbb{C})$
acts on $\mathbb{P}^{23}=\mathbb{P} H^0(\check{\mathbb{P}}^2, \, T_{\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(2))$ with
generically finite stabilizer. Take a generic element $\eta \in \mathbb{P}^{23}$ and let
$Z=D_0(\eta) \subset \check{\mathbb{P}}^2$ be its vanishing locus and $G=G_{\eta} \subset
\mathrm{PGL}_3(\mathbb{C})$ its stabilizer. So $Z$ consists of $13$ reduced points
and we want to show that $G$ is finite. Every homography
in $G$ must preserve $Z$ and hence permute its $13$ points, so we
obtain a group homomorphism
\begin{equation*}
\psi \colon G \to \mathfrak{S}_{13}.
\end{equation*}
If $L \subset \mathbb{P}^2$ is a line, we have
\begin{equation} \label{eq:34}
T_{\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(2) | _L = \mathscr{O}_{L}(3) \oplus \mathscr{O}_L(4).
\end{equation}
Now set $Z':=Z \cap L$ and $c:=\mathrm{length}(Z')$. Arguing as in part \ref{u:3} of Lemma \ref{lem:unstable-line}, we deduce the existence of a surjection $T_{\check{\mathbb{P}}^2}(2) | _L \to \mathscr{O}_L(7-c)$, and using
\eqref{eq:34} this yields $c \leq 4$. So there are no more than $4$
points of $Z$ on a single line, hence the support of
$Z$ contains at least $4$ points in general linear position.
Now, a homography in $\ker \psi$ must fix the subscheme $Z$
pointwise. Since a homography of the plane fixing at least $4$
points in general position is the identity, we have that $\psi$ is
injective. So $G$ is a subgroup of $\mathfrak{S}_{13}$, hence a finite
group.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{Moduli of triple planes of type \ref{V}} \label{subsec:moduli-V}
\begin{proposition}
The moduli space $\mathfrak{N}_{\ref{V}}$ is a Zariski open dense subset of a $\mathbb{P}^{19}$-bundle over $\mathbb{P}^5$, in particular it is rational and irreducible of dimension $24$. The space $\mathfrak{M}_{\ref{V}}$ has dimension $16$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Case \ref{V}, i.e. $b=6$, was analyzed in Proposition \ref{prop.TypeV}.
The bundle $\mathscr{F}=\mathscr{F}_6$ is determined by its set of unstable lines,
which form a smooth conic $\mathscr{W}(\mathscr{F}) \subset \check{\mathbb{P}}^2$, so we can
identify the moduli space of $\mathscr{F}$ with the open subset $\mathscr{U} \subset \mathbb{P}^5$
consisting of smooth conics via the Veronese embedding.
This is the base of our $\mathbb{P}^{19}$-bundle.
Proposition \ref{prop.TypeV} (cf. also
\S \ref{a}) shows that, once
chosen the Tschirnhausen bundle $\mathscr{F}$, we have a $4$-dimensional space
$U=H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{F})$ and a corresponding projective space $\mathbb{P}^3=\mathbb{P}(U)$, together with a fixed twisted
cubic $C \subset \mathbb{P}^3$ such that $\mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ is the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^3$
at $C$. Moreover,
the building sections $\eta$ of the triple plane are in bijection with an
open dense subset of the space of cubic surfaces, in view of the identification
\begin{equation} \label{allcubics}
H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{F}(6-b)) = H^0(\mathbb{P}^3, \, \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^3}(3)) = \mathbb{C}^{20},
\end{equation}
so their proportionality classes belong to an open dense subset of $\mathbb{P}^{19}=\mathbb{P} H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,\, S^3 \mathscr{F}(6-b))$, and our claim about $\mathfrak{N}_{\ref{V}}$ is proven.
Now \eqref{eq:exp-dim-irr} yields $\textrm{exp-dim} \, \mathfrak{M}_{\ref{V}}=16$, so it only remains
to show that $\mathrm{PGL}_3(\mathbb{C})$
acts on the set of pairs $(\mathscr{F}, \, \eta)$ with
generically finite stabilizer. Let $G = G_{(\mathscr{F}, \, \eta)} \subset
\mathrm{PGL}_3(\mathbb{C})$ be the stabilizer of the pair $(\mathscr{F}, \, \eta)$. Then every element
$g \in G$ must fix $\mathscr{F}$, and hence the conic $\mathscr{W}(\mathscr{F})$. By
\cite[p. 154]{FulHa91}, the subgroups of automorphisms of $\mathbb{P}^n$ that preserves a
rational normal curve $C_n$ is precisely $\textrm{PGL}_2(\mathbb{C})$, so $G$
is a subgroup of a copy of $\textrm{PGL}_2(\mathbb{C})$ inside
$\textrm{PGL}_3(\mathbb{C})$. On the other hand, $g$ fixes $\eta \in
H^0(\mathbb{P}^3, \, \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^3}(3))$, hence it fixes the cubic surface $S
\subset \mathbb{P}^3$.
Next, we have seen in Lemma \ref{contracts} (cf. also Remark \ref{rem:cubic})
that the image in $\mathbb{P}^3$ of the negative sections lying above the lines of
$\mathscr{W}(\mathscr{F})$ is precisely the
twisted cubic $C$. The whole construction is therefore $g$-invariant, so $g$ must preserve the intersection $S \cap C$.
Furthermore, the construction giving
rise to the $2\times 3$ matrix $N$ whose $2\times 2$ minors define $C$,
cf. \eqref{eq:N-V}, can be reversed in order to give back the matrix $M$ presenting
$\mathscr{F}$, cf. \eqref{eq:M-V}. Since $M$ is generic, this implies that $N$ and $C$ are generic. In addition, by \eqref{allcubics} we also know that the cubic $S$ corresponding
to the building section $\eta$ can be chosen generically.
In particular, the intersection $S \cap C$ is
reduced for a general choice of our data, i.e. it consists of $9$ distinct points.
Summing up, we get a group homomorphism
\begin{equation*}
\psi \colon G \to \mathfrak{S}_9
\end{equation*}
that must be injective since an element of $\mathrm{PGL}_2(\mathbb{C})$ fixing
at least $3$ distinct points is necessarily the identity.
So $G$ is a subgroup of $\mathfrak{S}_9$, hence a finite group.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{Moduli of triple planes of type \ref{VI}} \label{subsec:moduli-VI}
We denote by $\mathrm{Hilb}_d(\check{\mathbb{P}}^2)$ the Hilbert scheme of $0$-dimensional subschemes of length $d$ of $\check{\mathbb{P}}^2$.
\begin{proposition}
The moduli space $\mathfrak{N}_{\ref{VI}}$ is a Zariski open dense subset of a
$\mathbb{P}^{11}$-bundle over $\mathrm{Hilb}_6(\check{\mathbb{P}}^2)$, in
particular it is a rational variety of dimension $23$. The moduli space $\mathfrak{M}_{\ref{VI}}$
has dimension $15$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Case $\ref{VI}$ was analyzed in Proposition
\ref{prop.TypeVI}. We mentioned in \S \ref{b}, cf. case $b=7$ before
Proposition \ref{prop:unstable-b-8}, that $\mathscr{F}=\mathscr{F}_7$ is a logarithmic
bundle, i.e. it has six unstable lines
which are in general linear position,
and that these six lines in turn uniquely determine $\mathscr{F}$. This identifies
the moduli space of Steiner bundles of type $\mathscr{F}_7$ as an open dense subset $\mathscr{U}$ of the Hilbert scheme of six points of $\check{\mathbb{P}}^2$.
We have a direct image sheaf $\mathscr{R}(3)$, fitting into \eqref{eq.VI.5}, and a natural identification
\begin{equation*}
H^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{F}(6-b))= H^0( \mathbb{P}^4, \,
\mathscr{R}(3)) = \mathbb{C}^{12},
\end{equation*}
see the proof of Claim \ref{oneclaim}. The sheaf $\mathscr{R}(3)$ is supported on a
determinantal cubic threefold $Y \subset \mathbb{P}^4$. In addition, the vanishing
locus of a general global section of $\mathscr{R}(3)$
is a Bordiga surface $X_1 \subset \mathbb{P}^4$ and, moreover, the divisor $X =D_0(\eta) \subset \mathbb{P}(\mathscr{F})$ is the blow-up of $X_1$ at the six nodes of $Y$. Summing up, the proportionality classes $[\eta]$
of building sections of triple covers of
type \ref{VI} lie in a dense open subset of $\mathbb{P}^{11} = \mathbb{P} H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,
\, S^3 \mathscr{F}(6-b))$, and this proves our claim about $\mathfrak{N}_{\ref{VI}}$.
We now consider the moduli space $\mathfrak{M}_{\ref{VI}}$.
First, \eqref{eq:exp-dim-irr} implies $\dim \mathfrak{M}_{\ref{VI}} =15$.
In order to conclude the proof, we must show that
$\mathrm{PGL}_3(\mathbb{C})$
acts on the set of pairs $(\mathscr{F}, \, \eta)$ with
generically finite stabilizer. Let $G = G_{(\mathscr{F}, \, \eta)} \subset
\mathrm{PGL}_3(\mathbb{C})$ be the stabilizer of the pair $(\mathscr{F}, \, \eta)$. Then every element
$g \in G$ must fix $\mathscr{F}$, and hence the set of its six unstable
lines. Consequently, $g$ permutes the corresponding six points in
$\check{\mathbb{P}}^2$, which are in general position. This in turn defines a group homomorphism
\begin{equation*}
\psi \colon G \to \mathfrak{S}_{6},
\end{equation*}
which must be injective since a
homography of the plane that fixes at least $4$ points in general
position is the identity. So $G$ is a subgroup of $\mathfrak{S}_{6}$, hence a finite group.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{Moduli of triple planes of type \ref{VII}} \label{subsec:moduli-VII}
Let us finally consider case \ref{VII},
i.e. $b=8$. We need the following preliminary result.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:S2-8}
Assume $b=8$ and let $\mathscr{F}:=\mathscr{F}_8$ be a Steiner bundle with $\alpha_1$ unstable lines. Then
\begin{equation} \label{eq:geq-alpha}
h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{F}(-2)) \geq \alpha_1.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $L_1,\ldots,L_{\alpha_1}$ be the unstable lines of $\mathscr{F}$.
We can perform the reduction of $\mathscr{F}$ along
such unstable lines,
i.e., a sequence of elementary transformations of $\mathscr{F}$ along the $L_i$, see
\cite[\S 2.7 - 2.8]{DK} and \cite[Proposition 2.1]{Val00b}.
This gives an exact sequence
\begin{equation} \label{eq:reduction-alpha}
0 \to \mathscr{K} \to \mathscr{F} \to \bigoplus_{i=1}^{\alpha_1} \mathscr{O}_{L_i} \to 0,
\end{equation}
where $\mathscr{K}$ is a vector bundle of rank $2$.
From \eqref{eq:reduction-alpha} we get $H^i(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{K}(-1))=0$ for all $i$. Computing Chern classes and
applying Proposition \ref{Fsteiner} to $\mathscr{K}$, we see that $\mathscr{K}$ behaves according to the following table:
\begin{equation}
\label{K}
\begin{tabular}[h]{c||c|c|c|c|c}
$\alpha_1$ & $1, \, 2, \, 3$ & $4$ & $5$ & $6$ & $7$ \\
\hline
$\mathscr{K}$ & $\mathscr{F}_{8-\alpha_1}$ & $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}^2$ & $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)
\oplus \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}$ & $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)^2$ & $\Omega_{\mathbb{P}^2}^1$
\end{tabular}
\end{equation}
Indeed, $\mathscr{K}$ is a Steiner bundle for $\alpha_1=1, \,2,\,3, \,4$ (corresponding
to the cases $b=7, \, 6, \, 5, \, 4$ in Proposition \ref{Fsteiner}).
For $\alpha_1=5$ (the
case $b=3$ in Proposition \ref{Fsteiner}) we have $\mathscr{K} \simeq
\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1) \oplus \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}$. Finally, for $\alpha_1=6, \, 7$ (the cases $b=2, \, 1$ in Proposition
\ref{Fsteiner}) we have that $\mathscr{K}^\vee(-1)$ is a
Steiner bundle respectively of the form $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}^2$ for
$\alpha_1=6$ or $T_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)$ for $\alpha_1=7$, and hence $\mathscr{K} \simeq \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-1)^2$ or $\mathscr{K} \simeq \Omega_{\mathbb{P}^2}^1$.
From Pieri's formulas (cf. \cite[Corollary 2.3.5 p. 62]{W03}) we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{pieri}
\mathscr{F} \otimes S^2 \mathscr{F}(-2) \simeq S^3 \mathscr{F}(-2) \oplus \wedge^2\mathscr{F} \otimes \mathscr{F}(-2) \simeq S^3 \mathscr{F}(-2) \oplus \mathscr{F}(2).
\end{equation}
Also, the fact that $L_i$ is unstable implies
\begin{equation} \label{alpharette}
S^2 \mathscr{F}(-2) |_{L_i} \simeq \mathscr{O}_{L_i}(-2) \oplus \mathscr{O}_{L_i}(2) \oplus \mathscr{O}_{L_i}(6).
\end{equation}
So, tensoring \eqref{eq:reduction-alpha} with $S^2 \mathscr{F}(-2)$ we
get
\begin{equation} \label{eq:reduction-alpha-2}
0 \to \mathscr{K} \otimes S^2 \mathscr{F}(-2) \to S^3 \mathscr{F}(-2) \oplus \mathscr{F}(2) \to \bigoplus_{i=1}^{\alpha_1} \left(
\mathscr{O}_{L_i}(-2) \oplus \mathscr{O}_{L_i}(2) \oplus \mathscr{O}_{L_i}(6) \right) \to 0.
\end{equation}
Twisting \eqref{eq:reduction-alpha} by $\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(2)$ and taking
cohomology we get $H^1(\mathbb{P}^2, \, \mathscr{F}(2))=0$. Now, since we are in characteristic $0$, the stability of $\mathscr{F}$ implies that $S^2 \mathscr{F}^\vee(-1)$ is semistable, of slope $-5$. On the other hand, by Table \eqref{K}, each summand of $\mathscr{K}^\vee$
is semistable (and $\mathscr{K}$ is even stable for $\alpha_1 \ne 3, \, 4, \,5$) of slope between $-3/2$ (for $\alpha_1=1$) and $3/2$
(for $\alpha_1=7$). In any case, all summands of $\mathscr{K}^\vee \otimes S^2
\mathscr{F}^\vee(-1)$ are semistable of strictly negative slope, so using Serre duality we get
\begin{equation*}
H^2(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{K} \otimes S^2 \mathscr{F}(-2)) \simeq H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathscr{K}^\vee \otimes S^2 \mathscr{F}^\vee(-1))^\vee=0.
\end{equation*}
Therefore, taking cohomology in \eqref{eq:reduction-alpha-2} we obtain $H^2(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{F}(-2))=0$ and
a surjection
\begin{equation*}
H^1(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{F}(-2)) \to \bigoplus_{i=1}^{\alpha_1} H^1(L_i, \, \mathscr{O}_{L_i}(-2)) \to 0,
\end{equation*}
which in turn implies $h^1(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{F}(-2)) \geq
\alpha_1$. By Riemann-Roch theorem we have $\chi(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{F}(-2)) = 0$, hence $h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3 \mathscr{F}(-2)) \ge \alpha_1$, that is \eqref{eq:geq-alpha}.
\end{proof}
Let us now state the result concluding the proof of Theorem \ref{secondimoduli}.
\begin{proposition}
The moduli space $\mathfrak{N}_{\ref{VII}}$ has at least seven
connected, irreducible, unirational components, all of dimension $20$, that are distinguished by the number $\alpha_1 \in \{1, \ldots, 7\}$ of unstable lines for $\mathscr{F}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Proposition \ref{prop.typeVII} shows the existence of seven families
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{N}_{\ref{VII}}^1, \ldots, \mathfrak{N}_{\ref{VII}}^7
\end{equation*}
of triple planes, one for each value of the number $\alpha_1 \in \{1,\ldots,7\}$ of unstable lines of $\mathscr{F}$. Such families are pairwise disjoint subsets of $\mathfrak{N}_{\ref{VII}}$, because $\alpha_1$ coincides with the number of
lines contracted by the first adjunction map of $X$, and this number
is an invariant of the triple cover. Moreover, all the cases missing
the star in Proposition \ref{prop.typeVII} have different values of
$\alpha_2$ than the covers belonging to the
$\mathfrak{N}_{\ref{VII}}^{\alpha_1}$. Since also $\alpha_2$ is an invariant of the triple cover, the connected components of $\mathfrak{N}_{\ref{VII}}$ possibly
containing the missing cases are necessarily disjoint from all the $\mathfrak{N}_{\ref{VII}}^{\alpha_1}$. This shows that our seven families actually are seven connected components of $\mathfrak{N}_{\ref{VII}}$.
Let us show now that such connected components are also irreducible and unirational. Consider
the $21$-dimensional (rational) moduli space $\mathrm{M}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(2, \, 4, \, 10)$ of rank-$2$ stable bundles on
$\mathbb{P}^2$ with Chern classes $(4, \, 10)$ and having a Steiner-type
resolution, and let $\mathscr{U}^{\alpha_1} \subset
\mathrm{M}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(2, \, 4, \, 10)$ be the stratum corresponding to
vector bundles having $\alpha_1$ unstable lines.
These strata are irreducible and unirational and their codimension is precisely
$\alpha_1$, see \cite[Theorem 5.6]{ancona-ottaviani:steiner}.
Our computations with {\tt Macaulay2} (cf. Appendix) show that there
exist examples of bundles $\mathscr{F}$ with $\alpha_1$ unstable lines and
satisfying
\begin{equation} \label{eq:S^2=alpha1}
h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3\mathscr{F}(-2))=\alpha_1.
\end{equation}
So, by Proposition \ref{prop:S2-8} and semicontinuity, equality \eqref{eq:S^2=alpha1} holds for the
general member of the stratum $\mathscr{U}^{\alpha_1}$.
Each $\mathfrak{N}_{\ref{VII}}^{\alpha_1}$ has an open dense subset which is an
open dense piece of a $\mathbb{P}^{\alpha_1-1}$-bundle over
$\mathscr{U}^{\alpha_1}$, and as such it is an irreducible, unirational
variety.
For every $\alpha_1 \in \{1, \ldots, 7\}$, using \eqref{eq:S^2=alpha1} we obtain
\begin{equation*}
\dim \, \mathfrak{N}_{\ref{VII}}^{\alpha_1} = \dim \mathscr{U}^{\alpha_1} + h^0(\mathbb{P}^2, \, S^3\mathscr{F}(-2)) -1 = (21- \alpha_1)+ \alpha_1 - 1 = 20.
\end{equation*}
Summing up, every
$\mathfrak{N}_{\ref{VII}}^{\alpha_1}$ is a connected, irreducible, unirational
20-dimensional component of $\mathfrak{N}_{\ref{VII}}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{rmk:moduli-Alexander}
We could also give a geometric interpretation of the equality $\dim
\, \mathfrak{N}_{\mathrm{VII}}^{\alpha_1} =20$ by using in each case the
explicit description of the surface $X$ provided by Proposition
\ref{prop.typeVII}. We will not develop this point here, and we will
limit ourselves to discussing as an example the case $\alpha_1=6$. In
this situation, we know that $X$ is isomorphic to the blow-up at six
points of an Alexander surface of degree $9$ in $\mathbb{P}^4$, see Remark
\ref{rmk:Alexander}. Such points are the intersection of the Alexander
surface with its unique $6$-secant line, and they completely determine
the triple cover map $f \colon X \to \mathbb{P}^2$. So the dimension of the
component $\mathfrak{N}_{\mathrm{VII}}^{6}$ equals the dimension of an open,
dense subset of $S^{10}(\mathbb{P}^2)$, that is $20$.
\end{remark}
\section*{Appendix: The computer-aided construction of triple planes}
Here we explain how we can use the Computer Algebra System {\tt Macaulay2} in order to show the existence of general triple
planes in the cases marked with $(\ast)$ in Proposition \ref{prop.typeVII}.
The computation can be performed either over $\mathbb{Q}$ or over a prime
field (the latter being considerably faster).
\subsection*{The setup for adjunction}
Define the coordinate ring of $\mathbb{P}^2$ and of $\mathbb{P}^{b-3}= \mathbb{P}^5$ needed for
the first adjunction map, together with
a second $\mathbb{P}^5$ (the projectivization of the six-dimensional polynomial ring \verb|V|) that will be the target space for the second adjunction.
\begin{verbatim}
b = 8;
k = QQ;
T = k[x_0..x_2];
S = k[y_0..y_(b-3)];
R = T**S;
V = k[t_0..t_5];
\end{verbatim}
The command {\tt fliptensor} takes as input the matrix $M$ and gives as output the matrix $N$, cf. \S \ref{L}.
\begin{verbatim}
fliptensor := M->(Q = substitute(vars S,R) * (substitute(M,R));
sub((coefficients(Q,(Variables=>{x_0,x_1,x_2})))_1,S));
\end{verbatim}
The $3$-fold scroll $Y\subset \mathbb{P}^5$ is defined by the $3\times 3$
minors of $N$.
The command {\tt twosections} gives back the ideal of the union of two surface
sections $S_1$ and $S_2$ of the scroll $Y$, with
$S_i \in |\mathscr{O}_Y(\ell)|$ and
$\mathscr{O}_Y(\ell)=\mathfrak{p}^*\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(1)$, cf. \S \ref{a} and \S
\ref{L}.
Each of them is defined
by the $2\times 2$ minors of a random submatrix of $N$, obtained by
composing $N$ with a random matrix of scalars.
\begin{verbatim}
twosections := N->(A = random(S^{3:0},S^{3:0});
Nrandom = (transpose(N)*A);
N1 = submatrix(Nrandom, {0,1});
N2 = submatrix(Nrandom, {0,2});
IS1 = minors(2, N1);
IS2 = minors(2, N2);
I12 = intersect(IS1,IS2));
\end{verbatim}
The command {\tt cubicgenerator} takes a random cubic
in the ideal of cubics of $Y$ through $S_1 \cup S_2$, and call $X_1$ the residual surface. This surface is precisely the image of the first adjunction map $\varphi_1 \colon X \to X_1 \subset \mathbb{P}^5$, see the last part of the proof of Proposition \ref{prop.typeVII}.
\begin{verbatim}
cubicgenerator := I12 -> (SU = super basis(3,I12);
cubic = SU*random(S^{rank(source(SU)):0},S^{1:0});
ideal(cubic));
\end{verbatim}
\subsection*{The cases according to the number of unstable lines}
Here we define the Steiner bundle $\mathscr{F}$ by giving its presentation matrix $M$.
More precisely, for any $\alpha_1 \in \{1, \ldots, 7\}$ we define a random Steiner bundle with $\alpha_1$ unstable lines.
\subsubsection*{The cases $1 \leq \alpha_1 \le 6$}
For $1 \leq \alpha_1 \le 6$, we
put random coefficients in the layout of
Proposition \ref{prop:unstable-b-8} in order to define $\mathscr{F}$.
The command
\verb|GenM| takes an integer \verb|a|, picks \verb|a| random linear forms,
multiplies each of them by a column matrix of size $4$ of random
scalars, and stacks them together with a random matrix of linear forms in order to obtain a matrix $M$ of size $4 \times 6$, given as output.
\begin{verbatim}
use T
GenM:=(a)->(
for j from 0 to a-1 do
M_j=((random(T^{1},T^{0}))_(0,0))*random (T^{4:0},T^{1:0});
Mcu = transpose M_0;
for j from 1 to a-1 do Mcu=(Mcu||transpose(M_j));
Mco = (random(T^{6-a:0},T^{4:-1}));
((transpose Mcu) | (transpose Mco)))
\end{verbatim}
We choose $\alpha_1$, define the Steiner sheaf as cokernel of
$M$ and check that
it is locally free of rank $2$.
\begin{verbatim}
for a from 1 to 6 do F_a = coker transpose map(T^{b-4:1},T^{b-2:0},GenM(a))
for a from 1 to 6 do print dim (minors(4,presentation F_a))
\end{verbatim}
The output of this is $0$ in all seven cases, so the sheaves are
locally free.
\subsubsection*{The case $\alpha_1 = 7$}
In this case $\mathscr{F}$ is a logarithmic bundle, so its dual appears as the first syzygy of
the Jacobian map $\nabla f$ of partial derivatives of the product $f$ of the $7$
linear forms that define the $7$ unstable lines. In other words, we
have an exact sequence
\begin{equation*}
0\to \mathscr{F}^\vee \to \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(1)^3 \xrightarrow{\nabla f} \mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(7),
\end{equation*}
cf. for instance \cite[(1.10)]{faenzi-matei-valles}. We choose
these 7 lines
randomly and define $\mathscr{F}$ as the dual of $\ker(\nabla f)$.
\begin{verbatim}
f = 1_T; for j from 1 to 7 do f=f*(random(T^{1},T^{0}))_(0,0)
M=transpose ((res ker diff(vars T,f))).dd_1
MM = map(T^{b-4:1},T^{b-2:0},M);
dim minors(4,MM) == 0
F_7 = coker transpose MM;
\end{verbatim}
We check incidentally that the vanishing $H^0(\mathbb{P}^2,S^2 \mathscr{F}(-2))=0$
and the equality $h^0(\mathbb{P}^2,S^3 \mathscr{F}(-2))=\alpha_1$ hold true
for all values of $\alpha_1$ (this fact was needed in the proof of
Proposition \ref{prop:S2-8} and \ref{prop:S2-8}).
\begin{verbatim}
for a from 1 to 7 do print(
HH^0((sheaf (symmetricPower(2,F_a)))(-2)),
rank HH^0((sheaf (symmetricPower(3,F_a)))(-2)))
\end{verbatim}
The output is $(0, \, a)$ with $a=\alpha_1 \in \{1, \, \ldots, 7 \}$.
\subsection*{Construction of the triple plane}
We take $\mathscr{F}$ and extract the matrices $M$ and $N$.
\begin{verbatim}
for a from 1 to 7 do NN_a = fliptensor(presentation (F_a));
for a from 1 to 7 do IY_a = minors(rank target NN_a,NN_a);
for a from 1 to 7 do singY_a = ideal singularLocus variety IY_a;
\end{verbatim}
Singularity test: the only singular points of $Y$ are $\alpha_1$
points of multiplicity $6$. They all come from the locus where the
matrix $N$ defining $Y$ has rank at most $1$.
\begin{verbatim}
for a from 1 to 7 do I2Y_a = minors(rank (target NN_a)-1,NN_a);
for a from 1 to 7 do print (dim singY_a, degree singY_a)
for a from 1 to 7 do print (dim(singY_a:I2Y_a),degree(singY_a:I2Y_a))
\end{verbatim}
The output of the last command is $(1, \, a)$
where $a=\alpha_1$ goes from $1$ to $7$ in the seven cases, and means that $Y$
is singular precisely at the $a$ double points coming from the $a$
unstable lines.
Define now $X_1$ as a random cubic in the ideal of the union of two
surface sections of $Y$ from $|\mathscr{O}_Y(\ell)|$. Perform a degree,
genus and singularity test.
\begin{verbatim}
for a from 1 to 7 do II12_a = twosections(NN_a);
for a from 1 to 7 do IC3_a = cubicgenerator(II12_a);
for a from 1 to 7 do IX1_a = ((IC3_a + IY_a):II12_a);
for a from 1 to 7 do X1_a = variety(IX1_a);
for a from 1 to 7 do print(dim X1_a, degree X1_a,genera X1_a)
for a from 1 to 7 do (dim singularLocus X1_a)
\end{verbatim}
In all seven cases, the output of the penultimate command is {\tt{(2, 10, \{0, 6, 9\})}}.
which means
that $X$ is a surface of degree $10$ with sectional genera $(0, \, 6, \, 9)$.
The output of the last command is $-\infty$, i.e. $X$ is smooth. This
takes about $15$ minutes on a laptop if performed on a prime field.
\medskip
The second adjunction map of $\varphi_2 \colon X_1 \to X_2 \subset \mathbb{P}^5$ is defined by the restriction to $X_1$ of the linear system $|\mathscr{O}_{Y}(2\xi -\ell)|$, and this in turn coincides with the
restriction to $X_1$ of the linear system generated by the six quadrics in the ideal defining $S_1$, see again the proof of Proposition \ref{prop.typeVII}.
Having this in mind, we can finally compute the ideal of $X_2$ and its canonical sheaf $\omega_{X_2} = \mathscr{O}_{X_2}(K_{X_2})$ in order to find $K_{X_2}^2$.
\begin{verbatim}
for a from 1 to 7 do X2_a = (ker map(S/(IX1_a),V,
gens minors(2,random(S^{2:0},S^{3:0})*NN_a)))
for a from 1 to 7 do omegaX2_a = (Ext^2(X2_a,V^{1:-6}))**(V/(X2_a));
for a from 1 to 7 do print(euler(dual omegaX2_a)-1)
\end{verbatim}
Here is the output of the last command, providing the value of
$K_{X_2}^2$ for all $\alpha_1 = a \in \{1, \ldots, 7\}$:
\begin{verbatim}
9, 5, 2, 0, -1, -1, 0
\end{verbatim}
\bibliographystyle{alpha}
|
\section{Introduction}
The accuracy of experiments testing the quantum properties of larger and larger systems is improving at a fast pace. Quantum superpositions have been directly observed in a large variety of mesoscopic systems, ranging from atoms~\cite{anderson,andrews} to macro-molecules~\cite{9999, 10000,romero}, and optomechanics promises to reach much larger masses~\cite{osc1,osc2,osc3}. This is interesting and important, since it helps answering the question whether the quantum superposition principle, the building block of the theory, holds also at large scales, or breaks down at some point. Moreover, as most quantum technologies rely on the superposition principle being applicable to arbitrarily complex systems, assessing its validity will impact the future directions of technological research.
On the theoretical side, collapse models~\cite{grw, pearleold, qmupl, rep1, rep2, sci} take into account, in a quantitative way, the possibility of a progressive breakdown of quantum linearity when the size and complexity of the system increase. More than this, strong arguments~\cite{gis, Adlerbook} show that they are the only possible way of modifying quantum theory, taking into account such a breakdown. Therefore, testing these models serve as a benchmark for any test of the superposition principle.
According to collapse models, material particles interact with an external classical noise, which induces the collapse of the wave function. The effect is negligible for microscopic systems but, as it scales with the number of particles, macroscopic objects are always well-localised in space. The most complete and well studied model is the Continuous Spontaneous Localization (CSL) model~\cite{csl}, which we will consider in this article together with its non-Markovian (cCSL)~\cite{nonwhite1, nonwhite2} and dissipative (dCSL)~\cite{andrea} extensions.
The CSL model contains two new parameters: $\lambda$, which sets the strength of the interaction with the collapse noise, and $r_C$, which defines the resolution of the collapse process. As for the dCSL model, a third parameter $\kappa$, related to the temperature $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}$ of the collapse noise, is introduced. In the cCSL model instead, the third new parameter is the cut-off frequency $\Omega$, which controls the noise spectrum. Setting a bound on $\lambda$ and $r_C$ (and on $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}$ for dCSL model, and $\Omega$ for the cCSL model) is one of the outputs of experimental tests of the quantum superposition principle.
In the literature, the following values for $\lambda$ and $r_C$ have been suggested. According to Ghirardi, Rimini and Weber~\cite{grw}, $r_C=10^{-7}$m and $\lambda \simeq 10^{-16}$ s$^{-1}$. These values come from the requirement that macroscopic objects must alway be well localized. In~\cite{csl}, slightly different values were proposed: $r_C=10^{-7}$m and $\lambda \simeq 10^{-17}$ s$^{-1}$. Adler, on the other hand, suggested stronger values: $r_C=10^{-7}$m and $\lambda \simeq 10^{-8 \pm 2}$ s$^{-1}$ and $r_C=10^{-6}$m and $\lambda \simeq 10^{-6 \pm 2}$ s$^{-1}$, as a result of the analysis of the process of latent image formation in photography~\cite{ad1}. With reference to the dCSL model, if the collapse noise is associated to some
cosmological field, a reasonable value of the temperature of the noise field is $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}} \simeq 1$ K. For the cCSL model, a reasonable cosmological value for the frequency cut-off is $\Omega \simeq 10^{10} - 10^{11}$ Hz~\cite{bas}.
Upper bounds on the collapse parameters are set by experiments. The direct way of testing them is through interferometric experiments. The best limits of this kind come from matter-wave interferometry performed by Arndt's group~\cite{arbest}, which are reported in Fig.~\ref{exc_csl}. More recently, non interferometric experiments have been pushed forward~\cite{bah, klaus, diosi2}. They all aim at testing a side-effect of the collapse noise: the Brownian motion it induces on the dynamics of any system. Two experimental scenarios of this kind are relevant: cantilevers~\cite{vin}, where the Brownian motion shows up as a violation of the equipartition theorem (an anomalous heating), and X-ray detection~\cite{bea}, where the Brownian motion induces spontaneous photon emission from matter. The relevant bounds are again reported in Fig.~\ref{exc_csl}.
A recent experiment~\cite{kas} succeeded in cooling a cloud of $^{87}$Rb atoms down to pK. This serves as a further test of collapse models, as we will see. The authors of~\cite{kas} analyzed the spontaneous heating induced by a classical stochastic force acting on the cloud~\cite{kasapp}, and set a bound on the heating rate, due to the stochastic diffusion, equal to $20 \pm 30$ pK/s.
Aim of this article is to perform an exact calculation of the predictions of the CSL model for the experiment considered in~\cite{kas}, and compare these predictions with the experimental data. We will set bounds on $\lambda$ and $r_C$ of CSL (as well as on $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}$ of dCSL and $\Omega$ of cCSL). In the case of dCSL we will see that there exist values of $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}$ such that the noise cools the system, not heat it.
Instead of computing the change in the energy due to the collapse noise as done in~\cite{kas}, we will compute the change of the variance in position of the cloud, which is the quantity measured in the experiment. The associated bounds are reported in Figs. 6 and 7. As we will see, these bounds are the strongest in a significant region of the parameter space, as we will discuss in Section IV.
The paper is organized as follows. In section II we describe the experimental setup of~\cite{kas}. In section III we compute the theoretical predictions according to the CSL model. In sections IV and V we study, respectively, the predictions of the non-white and of the dissipative extensions of the CSL model. Finally, in section VI we compare the theoretical predictions with the experimental results, and we derive the upper bounds on the collapse parameters.
\section{Description of the experiment}
A gas of $^{87}$Rb atoms is cooled down to very low temperatures ($T =50_{-30}^{+50}$ pK) by using a ``delta-kick" technique. All the relevant experimental data are summarized in Fig.~\ref{prima}. The gas is initially (t=0) trapped by a harmonic potential with standard deviation in position equal to $56\;\mu$m. The cooling process comprises the following three steps:
\noindent {\it Step 1}: The harmonic trap is removed and the gas evolves freely for a relatively long time, $\Delta t_1 = 1.1 $ s. This allows atoms with the same average momentum to be approximatively at the same distance from the initial localized state of the gas.
\noindent {\it Step 2}: Delta-kick. A Gaussian laser beam interacts with the atoms, the laser-atom interaction being modeled by an external harmonic potential. By choosing the proper harmonic frequency and interaction time, the potential reduces the kinetic energy of the atoms. The interaction lasts for a short time, $\delta t_2 \simeq 35$ ms.
\noindent {\it Step 3}: The gas evolves again freely for a relatively long time, $\Delta t_3= 1.8 $ s. The position variance of the gas is then measured, from which the temperature of the gas is inferred.
\begin{comment}
\begin{table}[tb]
\footnotesize
\caption{Experimental values of the work described in~\cite{kas}. $T_{\text{in}}$ is the initial temperature, $T_{\text{fin}}$ is the minimum temperature achieved. $ \Delta \hat{\mathbf{x}}_t:=\sqrt{\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_t - \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}} \rangle_{t}^{2}}$ is the standard deviation at time $t$. The values of $\tau_p$ and $\Delta \hat{\mathbf{x}}_{t_2}$ are those which minimize the final standard deviation.}
\label{experiment}
\centering
\vspace{0.3cm}
\begin{tabular}{ *{9}{|c} }
\toprule
\hline
{$\Delta \hat{\mathbf{x}}_{0}$($\mu$m)} & {$\Delta \hat{\mathbf{x}}_{t_2}$ ($\mu$m)} &{$T_{\text{in}}$ (pK)} & {$T_{\text{fin}}$(pK)} & {$t_1$(ms)} &{$\tau_p$(ms)} &{$t_2$(ms)} \\
\midrule
\hline
$56$ & $120 \pm 40$ & $ 1600 $& $ 50_{-30}^{+50}$ & $1100$ & $35 $ & $1800$ \\
\hline
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\end{comment}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Immagine52.png}
\caption{Graphical representation of the experiment reported in~\cite{kas}. For each step, the relevant experimental data are given.}
\label{prima}
\end{figure}
The delta-kick frequency $\omega$ plays a critical role in the analysis. An estimation of $\omega$ is given in Eq.~(103) of~\cite{kasapp} through a classical calculation. If the initial position and velocity of the atoms are uncorrelated, the frequency becomes:
\begin{equation}\label{omkas}
\omega=\sqrt{\frac{1}{\delta t_{\text{\tiny{min}}}}\left(\frac{1}{\Delta t_3}+(1-\gamma^2)\frac{1}{\Delta t_1}\right)}
\end{equation}
with $\gamma^2=0.017$ and $\delta t_{\text{\tiny{min}}}\approx 34$ ms is the time when the gas reaches the minimum spread in position (obtained in~\cite{kas} through a fit of the experimental data). Inserting all numerical values, we obtain: $\omega \approx 6.53$ rad/s.
As a confirmation of this prediction, we verified that, for all the values of $\omega$ outside the range 6-7 rad/s, the predicted increase of the variance $\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{ t_3}$ is in contradiction with the experimental data even for $\lambda=0$, i.e. even for ordinary quantum mechanics. Therefore, $\omega$ should lay within that interval. Then, we divided the interval 6-7 rad/s in ten parts, and computed which of the ten values of $\omega$ gives the weakest bounds on $\lambda$ and $r_C$; the result is $\omega=6.7$ rad/s. Since we can not estimate the error associated to $\omega$, we take a conservative attitude, and choose this value for the following calculations.
In Fig.~$3$ of~\cite{kas}, the experimental data are shown. However, the only experimental value, explicitly reported together with error-bars, is the minimum value of the position standard deviation, $120^{+40}_{-40} \, \mu$m, detected at delta-kick time of $\delta t_2 = 35$ ms, and shown in the inset of our Fig.~\ref{pos-taup}. This is the experimental value we will use in section VI to compute the bounds on the collapse parameters.
\section{Expansion of the gas according to the CSL model}
We compute the time evolution of the variance in position, as well as the increase of energy of the gas, during the cooling process described in the previous section, according to the CSL model. The effect of CSL is to increase the temperature of the gas, and consequently its spread in position.
The master equation of the CSL model has the well-known Lindblad form~\cite{Lindblad, GKS, Breuer,csl}:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{cslmasteq}
\frac{d\hat{\rho}(t)}{dt} &=& -\frac{i}{\hbar} \left [\hat{H},\hat{\rho} (t) \right]+ \int d\mathbf{y} \, \Bigl[ \mathbb{L} (\mathbf{y}) \hat{\rho} (t) \mathbb{L}^{\dagger} (\mathbf{y}) \nonumber\\
\nonumber\\
&-&\frac{1}{2} \left \{\mathbb{L}^{\dagger} (\mathbf{y})\mathbb{L} (\mathbf{y}),\hat{\rho} (t) \right\} \Bigr].
\end{eqnarray}
where the Hamiltonian is:
\begin{equation}
\label{harmonic}
\hat{H} =\sum_{\alpha = 1}^{N} \, \hat{H}_{\alpha}:= \sum_{\alpha= 1}^{N} \left(\frac{\hat{\mathbf{p}}_\alpha}{2m} + \frac{1}{2} m \omega^2 \hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\alpha}^{2}\right).
\end{equation}
and the Lindblad operators $\mathbb{L} (\mathbf{y})$, for an $N$-atom system, are~\cite{csl, pearle}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{lcsl}
\mathbb{L}(\mathbf{y}) &=& \sum_{\alpha= 1}^{N} \hat{L}_{\alpha} (\mathbf{y}):= \sqrt{\frac{\lambda A^{2}}{\pi^{3/2}r_{C}^{3}}}\sum_{\alpha= 1}^{N} e^{-\frac{\left \lvert \hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\alpha} - \mathbf{y} \right\rvert^2}{2 r_{C}^{2}}},\\
\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{\sqrt{\lambda A^{2}8\pi^{3/2}r_{C}^{3}}}{(2\pi\hbar)^{3}}\sum_{\alpha=1}^{N}\int d\mathbf{Q}\,e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot(\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\alpha}-\mathbf{y})}\, e^{-\frac{r_{C}^{2}}{2 \hbar^{2}} \mathbf{Q}^2 },\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $A=87$ is the number of nucleons of each Rubidium atom, $\lambda$ and $r_C$ are the CSL parameters, and $\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\alpha}$ the position operator of the $\alpha$-th atom. In the second line of Eq.~\eqref{lcsl} we performed a Fourier transform which simplifies the structure of the master equation in Eq.~\eqref{cslmasteq} and will highlight the connection with the non-Markovian and dissipative master equations. By inserting the second line of Eq.~\eqref{lcsl} in Eq.~\eqref{cslmasteq} and performing the integration over $\mathbf y$ one obtains:
\begin{equation}
\label{cslmasteq2}
\begin{split}
&\frac{d\hat{\rho}(t)}{dt}=-\frac{i}{\hbar}\left[\hat{H},\hat{\rho}(t)\right]+\frac{\lambda A^{2}r_{C}^{3}}{(\sqrt{\pi}\hbar)^{3}}\sum_{\alpha,\beta=1}^{N}\,\int d\mathbf{Q}\,e^{-\frac{r_{C}^{2}}{\hbar^{2}}\mathbf{Q}^{2}} \\
&\times\left(e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\alpha}}\hat{\rho}(t)e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\beta}}-\frac{1}{2}\left\{ \,e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\beta}}\,e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\alpha}},\hat{\rho}(t)\right\} \right).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Given a generic observable $\hat{O}$, the equation for its expectation value $\langle \hat{O} \rangle_t \equiv \textrm{Tr}\{\hat{\rho} (t) \hat{O}\}$ is:
\begin{equation}
\label{cslaverage}
\begin{split}
&\frac{d \langle \hat{O} \rangle_t}{dt} = -\frac{i}{\hbar} \textrm{Tr} \left\{\hat{\rho} (t) \left[\hat{O}, \hat{H}\right] \right\} +\frac{\lambda A^{2}r_{C}^{3}}{(\sqrt{\pi}\hbar)^{3}} \\
&\times\sum_{\alpha,\beta=1}^{N}\,\int d\mathbf{Q}\,e^{-\frac{r_{C}^{2}}{\hbar^{2}}\mathbf{Q}^{2}}\left\{ \textrm{Tr}\left(\hat{\rho}(t)e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\beta}}Oe^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\alpha}}\right)\right. \\
&\left.-\frac{1}{2}\textrm{Tr}\left(\hat{\rho}(t)\left\{ O,e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\beta}}\,e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\alpha}}\right\} \right)\right\}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We are interested in the case where $\hat{O}$ can be written as the sum of single-atom observables $\hat{O}_\gamma$,
\begin{equation}
\label{ourop}
\hat{O} = \sum_{\gamma=1}^{N} \, \hat{O}_\gamma.
\end{equation}
In such a case, it is easy to show that when the term $O_{\gamma}$ of the sum in Eq.~\eqref{ourop} is considered, only the Lindblad terms of Eq.~\eqref{cslaverage} with indices $\alpha=\beta=\gamma$ give a non-vanishing contribution. This, together with the fact that the Hamiltonian is separable, allows to reduce the $N$-atom problem to the single-atom case, \textit{i.e.} we can consider the equation
\begin{equation}
\label{cslaverage2}
\begin{split}
&\frac{d \langle \hat{O}_\gamma \rangle_t}{dt} =-\frac{i}{\hbar} \textrm{Tr} \left[\hat{\rho} (t) \left[\hat{O}_\gamma, \hat{H}_\gamma\right] \right] +\frac{\lambda A^{2}r_{C}^{3}}{(\sqrt{\pi}\hbar)^{3}} \\
& \times\int d\mathbf{Q}\,e^{-\frac{r_{C}^{2}}{\hbar^{2}}\mathbf{Q}^{2}}\textrm{Tr}\left[\hat{\rho}(t)\left(e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\gamma}}O_{\gamma}e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\gamma}}-O_{\gamma}\right)\right].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The quantities we need to compute are: the average position variance
\begin{equation}
\label{defposvar}
\langle \hat{\mathbf{X}}^2 \rangle_t \equiv \frac{1}{N} \sum_{\gamma = 1}^{N} \, \left( \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\gamma}^{2} \rangle_t - \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\gamma}\rangle_{t}^{2} \right),
\end{equation}
the average momentum variance
\begin{equation}
\label{defmomvar}
\langle \hat{\mathbf{P}}^2\rangle_t \equiv \frac{1}{N} \sum_{\gamma = 1}^{N} \, \left( \langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\gamma}^{2} \rangle_t - \langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\gamma}\rangle_{t}^{2} \right)
\end{equation}
and the average position-momentum correlation
\begin{equation}
\label{defcorr}
\langle \hat{\mathbf{X}} \hat{\mathbf{P}} + \hat{\mathbf{P}} \hat{\mathbf{X}} \rangle_t \equiv \frac{1}{N} \sum_{\gamma = 1}^{N} \, \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\gamma}\hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\gamma}+\hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\gamma}\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\gamma} \rangle_t.
\end{equation}
Since all atoms are identical and are in the same initial state, the average quantities simply correspond to the expectation values for a single atom, which is what we will focus on, in the following. Taking $\hat{O}_\gamma=\hat{\mathbf{x}},\, \hat{\mathbf{p}} $ in Eq.~\eqref{cslaverage2}, it is straightforward to prove that
\begin{equation}
\label{posmomaverage}
\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\rangle_{t} = \langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}\rangle_{t} = 0
\end{equation}
i.e. CSL does not affect the average motion in position and momentum of the atoms. However, the same is not true for the standard deviations. In fact, taking $\hat{O}_\gamma=\hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2}, \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}$ in Eq.~\eqref{cslaverage2}, one finds that:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{x2manyder}
\frac{d \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2} \rangle_t}{dt} & = & \frac{1}{m} \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}} \cdot \hat{\mathbf{p}}+ \hat{\mathbf{p}} \cdot \hat{\mathbf{x}}\rangle_t, \\
\label{p2harm}
\frac{d \langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2} \rangle_t}{dt} & = & \frac{ 3 \lambda A^2 \hbar^2}{2 r_{c}^{2}} - m\omega^2 \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}} + \hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}\rangle_t.
\end{eqnarray}
In a similar way, one can show that the position-momentum correlation satisfies the equation:
\begin{equation}
\label{xpharmonic}
\frac{d \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}+\hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}} \rangle_t}{dt} = \frac{2}{m} \langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\rangle_t -2 m \omega^2 \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2} \rangle_{t}.
\end{equation}
\\
The set of first order differential equations~\eqref{x2manyder}--\eqref{xpharmonic} can be solved exactly, the solution being:
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2}\rangle_{t}&=&\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2}\rangle_{t_{0}}+\frac{1}{2\omega m}\Bigl[\mathcal{B}(\omega) \sin\left(2\omega (t-t_0)\right)- \label{x2sol} \\
&& \mathcal{A}(\omega) \left(1- \cos\left(2\omega (t -t_0)\right) \right) \Bigr], \nonumber\\
\nonumber\\
\langle\hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\rangle_{t}&=&\langle\hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\rangle_{t_{0}}+m\omega^{2} \mathcal{C}(\omega)(t-t_{0})-\frac{m\omega}{2} \Bigl[ \mathcal{B}(\omega) \label{p2sol}\\
&\times& \sin\left(2\omega (t-t_0)\right)-\mathcal{A}(\omega) \left(1- \cos\left(2\omega (t -t_0)\right) \right)\Bigr]\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}+\hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}\rangle_{t}&=&\mathcal{A}(\omega)\sin \left(2\omega (t-t_0)\right)+\label{xpsol}\\
&+& \mathcal{B}(\omega)\cos\left(2\omega (t-t_0)\right)+ \mathcal{C}(\omega),\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where the real parameters $\mathcal{A}(\omega),\,\mathcal{B}(\omega),\,\mathcal{C}(\omega),$ are fixed by the initial conditions of the system at the initial time $t= t_0$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{A}(\omega)&=&m\omega\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2}\rangle_{t_{0}}-\frac{\langle\hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\rangle_{t_{0}}}{m\omega}, \nonumber \\
\mathcal{B}(\omega)&=&\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}+\hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}\rangle_{t_{0}}-\mathcal{C}(\omega), \nonumber\\
\nonumber\\
\mathcal{C}(\omega)&=&\frac{3\lambda A^{2}\hbar^{2}}{2 mr_{C}^{2}\omega^{2}}
\end{eqnarray}
The free evolution (i.e. without the harmonic trap) for $\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2}\rangle_{t}$, $\langle\hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\rangle_{t}$ and $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}+\hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}} \rangle_t$ can be obtained by taking the limit $\omega\rightarrow 0$ in Eqs.~\eqref{x2sol}, \eqref{p2sol} and \eqref{xpsol}. In such a case we have:
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2}\rangle_{t}&=&\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2}\rangle_{t_{0}}+\frac{\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}+\hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}\rangle_{0}}{m}(t-t_{0})+ \label{x2free} \\
&+&\frac{\langle\hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\rangle_{t_{0}}}{m^{2}}(t-t_{0})^{2}+\frac{\lambda A^{2}\hbar^{2}}{2m^{2}r_{C}^{2}}(t-t_{0})^{3},\nonumber\\
\nonumber\\
\langle\hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\rangle_{t}&=&\langle\hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\rangle_{t_{0}}+\frac{3\lambda A^{2}\hbar^{2}}{2r_{C}^{2}}(t-t_{0}),\label{p2free}
\end{eqnarray}
and for the correlation
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}+\hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}\rangle_{t}&=&\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}+\hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}\rangle_{t_0}+\label{xpfree}\\
&+&\frac{2\langle\hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\rangle_{t_{0}}}{m}(t-t_{0})+\frac{3\lambda A^{2}\hbar^{2}}{2mr_{C}^{2}}(t-t_{0})^{2}.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{comment}
In a typical delta-kick experiment~\cite{kas}, the harmonic potential is turned on for a small time $\tau_p \ll t_1$, where $t_1$ is the time of free evolution of the system before the turning on of the harmonic potential. In order to compute the position variance at the end of the experiment, we solve the dynamics separately for each step of cooling process, and we impose the continuity of the average of any observable (at least, of the observables of interests for this work) in the turned points, \textit{i.e.}, when the harmonic potential is suddenly turned on and when it's suddenly turned off.
Let us consider a gas initially trapped at time $t=0$, with initial conditions given by $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2}\rangle_{0}$, $\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\rangle_{0}$ and $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}} \hat{\mathbf{p}}\rangle_{0}$. Then, the trap is suddenly removed, and the gas start to freely expand, according to Eq.~\eqref{freeeqs}. The free expansion lasts for a time $t_1$, when the harmonic potential is suddenly turned on. The gas starts to evolve according to Eq.~\eqref{harmeqs1}. The initial conditions for the harmonic evolution are given in Eq.~\eqref{harmeqs2} imposing the continuity with the free evolution, \textit{i.e.}, $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2}\rangle_{t_1}$, $\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\rangle_{t_1}$ and $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}} \hat{\mathbf{p}}\rangle_{t_1}$ in Eq.~\eqref{harmeqs2} which are given by Eq.~\eqref{freeeqs}. At the time $t = t_1 + \tau_p$ the harmonic potential is suddenly turned off, and the gas freely evolves according to
Eq.~\eqref{freeeqs}. The initial conditions for the second (and last) free evolution are given by Eq.~\eqref{harmeqs1} for continuity.
At time $t= t_2$ the position variance of the gas is measured. The position variance can be written as
\end{comment}
Given the above equations, we can easily compute the evolution of $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2} \rangle_{t}$ during the experiment. From $t=0$ to $t=t_1$ the system evolves freely ($\omega=0$) accordingly to Eqs.~\eqref{x2free}--\eqref{xpfree}; from $t=t_1$ to time $t=t_2$ it evolves harmonically as described in Eqs.~\eqref{x2sol}--\eqref{xpsol} and then again freely up to time $t= t_3$. Imposing the continuity condition during the whole process, one arrives at the final result:
\begin{equation}
\label{posvart2}
\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{ t_3} = \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{ t_3}^{\text{\tiny{QM}}} + \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{ t_3}^{\text{\tiny{CSL}}} ,
\end{equation}
where $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{t}^{\text{\tiny{QM}}}$ is the value of the position variance according to the standard Schr\"odinger evolution, and $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{t}^{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}$ is the modification induced by CSL. The first term has the form
\begin{eqnarray}\label{posvart2qm}
\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{ t_3}^{\text{\tiny{QM}}} &=& A^{\text{\tiny{QM}}} (\omega,t_1,t_3,\delta t_2
\\
\nonumber\\
&+& B^{\text{\tiny{QM}}} (\omega,t_1,t_3,\delta t_2) \cos (2\omega \delta t_2)\nonumber\\
\nonumber\\
&+& C^{\text{\tiny{QM}}} (\omega,t_1,t_3,\delta t_2) \sin (2\omega \delta t_2),\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where we defined the following quantity:
\begin{widetext}
\begin{subequations}
\label{parqm}
\begin{align}
&A^{\text{\tiny{QM}}} = \frac{\left[\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2 \rangle_{0} + \left( \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{0} m^2 + \langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2 \rangle_{0} t_{1}^{2}\right)\omega^2\right] \left[1 +\left( t_3 - t_2 \right)^2 \omega^2\right] }{2 m^2 \omega^2}; \\
& B^{\text{\tiny{QM}}} = - \frac{\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2 \rangle_{0} - \left[\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{0} m^2 +\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2 \rangle_{0}\left( \left( t_3 -t_2\right)^2 + 4 t_1 \left( t_3 - t_2\right) + t_{1}^{2} \right)\right]\omega^2 }{2 m^2 \omega^2} + \notag \\
&\frac{ \left(\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{0} m^2 + \langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2 \rangle_{0}t_{1}^{2} \right) \left( t_3 - t_2 \right)^2 \omega^2}{2 m^2};\\
& C^{\text{\tiny{QM}}} = \frac{\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2 \rangle_{0} \left( t_2-\tau_p\right) - \left[\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{0} m^2 + \langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2 \rangle_{0} t_1 ( t_2 - \tau_p) \right] \left( t_3 - t_2\right)\omega^2 }{\omega m^2}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
The CSL contribution is given by
\begin{equation}\label{posvart2csl}
\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{ t_3}^{\text{\tiny{CSL}}} = \frac{\lambda A^2 \hbar^2}{r_{C}^{2} 8 m^2 \omega^3} \Bigl [A^{\text{\tiny{CSL}}} (\omega,t_1,t_3,\delta t_2) + B^{\text{\tiny{CSL}}} (\omega,t_1,t_3,\delta t_2) \cos (2\omega \delta t_2) + C^{\text{\tiny{CSL}}} (\omega,t_1,t_3,\delta t_2) \sin (2\omega \delta t_2)\Bigr]
\end{equation}
with
\begin{subequations}
\label{parcsl}
\begin{align}
&A^{\text{\tiny{CSL}}} =6 \omega t_3 + 2 \omega^3 \left[t_{2}^3 + 2 t_{3}^{3} + t_{1}^{3} - 3 t_{3}^{2} t_{2}\right]+ 2 t_{1}^{3} \left( t_3 - t_2\right)^2 \omega^5; \\
& B^{\text{\tiny{CSL}}} = -2 \omega \left[3 ( t_3 -\delta t_2) + \omega^2 t_1 (2 t_{1}^{2} - 3 ( t_3 -\delta t_2)^2) +\omega^4 t_{1}^{3} ( t_3 -t_2)^2 \right]; \\
& C^{\text{\tiny{CSL}}} = 3 +3 \omega^2 \left[ ( t_3-t_2)^2-2 ( t_3-\delta t_2)^2\right]+ 2\omega^4 t_{1}^{2}( t_3-t_2)(3 t_3 -t_1 - 3\delta t_2).
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
\end{widetext}
We can see that the CSL contribution $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{ t_3}^{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}$ to the final variance is independent from the initial state of the gas (contrary to $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{ t_3}^{\text{\tiny{QM}}}$) and depends, in a rather complicated way, only on the relevant times of the experiment ($t_1$, $\delta t_2=t_2-t_1$, $t_3$) and the frequency $\omega$ of the delta-kick.
\\
In Fig.~\ref{pos-taup} we plot the final position variance $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{t_3}$ as a function of the delta-kick time $\delta t_2$. To highlight the CSL effect, we computed the quantum-mechanical prediction and the CSL predictions for three different values of $\lambda$ and at fixed $r_C=10^{-7}$ m.
As we can see, for small $\lambda$ the quantum-mechanical predictions, compatible with the experimental data, are recovered. For larger values of $\lambda$ the variance $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{t_3}$ increases, till it disagrees with the experimental data. This is the expected behavior: the larger $\lambda$, the stronger the Brownian fluctuations and the larger the spread of the cloud.
Similarly, in Fig.~\ref{kin-taup} we plot the average energy of the gas at the end of the process as a function of $\delta t_2 $, for different values of $\lambda$ and again at fixed $r_C=10^{-7}$ m. We see that the cooling effect is maximum when the delta-kick last for $\delta t_2\approx 20$ ms, leading to a theoretical kinetic energy of $E \approx 10^{-34}$ J, corresponding to a temperature of order $T \approx 10$ pK. This theoretical value is compatible with the experimental value $T_{min} = 50_{-30}^{+50}$ pK measured in ~\cite{kas}. We also note that the heating effect due to CSL becomes significant for $\lambda \geq 10^{-7} \, \text{s}^{-1}$, leading to an energy increase greater than $ 5 \times 10^{-33}$ J, which is about $5$ times greater than the value of the energy increase measured during the experiment ($(4\pm6)\times 10^{-34}$ J).
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{plot5data}
\caption{Position's standard deviation $\Delta (x) \equiv \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{t_3}^{1/2}$ at the detector (time $t = t_3$) as a function of the delta-kick time $\delta t_2$, for three different values of the collapse rate $\lambda$. For each curve, we fixed $r_C = 10^{-7}$ m. The inset shows the curves near the minimum value detected in~\cite{kas}, $\Delta (x)_{\text{\tiny EXP}} = 120^{+40}_{-40} \mu$m, indicated by the black bars. The black dotted line shows the quantum-mechanical predictions. The red and blue points represent the experimental data deducted from Fig.~$3$ in~\cite{kas}.}
\label{pos-taup}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{kinenergy-taup}
\caption{Kinetic energy $E \equiv \langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2 \rangle_{t_3}/ 2m $ at the detector (time $t = t_3$) as a function of the delta-kick time $\delta t_2$, for three different values of the collapse rate $\lambda$. For each curve, we fixed $r_C = 10^{-7}$ m. The inset shows the minimum of the curves, which is $E \sim 10^{-34}$J, corresponding to a temperature $T \simeq 10$ pK, for $\delta t_2 \approx 20$ ms. The black dotted line shows the quantum-mechanical predictions.}
\label{kin-taup}
\end{figure}
\section{Expansion of the gas according to the non-white CSL model}\label{color}
We now consider the predictions of CSL with a non-white noise (cCSL) on the expansion of the gas.
The (single particle) cCSL master equation~\cite{nonwhite1, nonwhite2}, to the first perturbative order in $\lambda$, is~\footnote{Here we report only the single-atom master equation because, similarly to the case of white noise CSL model, we only need to focus on single-atom observables in order to describe the gas.}:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{ro_non-white}
\frac{d\rho\left(t\right)}{dt} &=& -\frac{i}{\hbar}\left[H,\rho\left(t\right)\right]-\lambda8\pi^{3/2}r_{C}^{3}A^{2}\int_{0}^{t}ds \,f\left(s\right)\\
\nonumber\\
&\times&\int d\mathbf{Q}\tilde{g}(\mathbf{Q})\tilde{g}(-\mathbf{Q})\left[e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}},\left[e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}(-s)},\rho\left(t\right)\right]\right]\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation}\label{g_k}
\tilde{g}(\mathbf{Q})=\frac{1}{\left(2\pi\hbar\right)^{3/2}}e^{-\frac{\mathbf{Q}^{2}r_{C}^{2}}{2\hbar^{2}}},
\end{equation}
the function $f\left(s\right)$ is the time correlation function of the non-white noise, and $\hat{\mathbf{x}}(-s)$ is the position operator in the interaction picture, evolved backwards to the time $-s$:
\begin{equation}
\hat{\mathbf{x}}(-s)=e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}H s}\,\hat{\mathbf{x}}\,e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}H s}.
\end{equation}
In the white noise limit the correlation function $f(s)$ becomes a Dirac-delta and the standard CSL master equation~\eqref{cslmasteq2} with $N=1$ is recovered.
From Eq.~\eqref{ro_non-white} it is easy to derive the evolution equation for a generic operator $O$:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{non-white}
\frac{d\langle \hat{O}\rangle _{t}}{dt} &=& -\frac{i}{\hbar}\langle [\hat{O},\hat{H}]\rangle _{t}-\lambda8\pi^{3/2}r_{C}^{3} A^{2}\int_{0}^{t}ds f\left(s\right)\\
\nonumber\\
&\times&\int d\mathbf{Q}\tilde{g}(\mathbf{Q})\tilde{g}(-\mathbf{Q})\langle [[\hat{O},\,e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}}],\,e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}(-s)}]\rangle _{t}. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
This non-Markovian master equation cannot be solved exactly for a general non-white noise. We can proceed as follows, noting that any realistic correlation function has a cut-off time $\tau$ (to which a frequency cut-off $\Omega$ corresponds). When $\tau$ is much smaller than the typical timescales of the system, the new dynamics is expected to be indistinguishable from the white-noise case. We will assess for which values of $\tau$ the white noise limit is recovered. More precisely we are interested in determining when we can approximate:
\begin{equation}\label{approx}
e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}(-s)}\simeq e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}}.
\end{equation}
Given the harmonic Hamiltonian in Eq.~\eqref{harmonic}, the position operator in the interaction picture evolves as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{x_int_pic}
\hat{\mathbf{x}}\left(-s\right)=\cos\left(\omega s\right)\hat{\mathbf{x}}-\frac{\sin\left(\omega s\right)}{m\omega}\hat{\mathbf{p}}
\end{equation}
which implies
\begin{equation} \label{eq:hrty}
e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}(-s)}=e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\cos(\omega s)\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}}\,e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\frac{\sin(\omega s)}{m\omega}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}}\,e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\frac{\sin(2\omega s)}{4m\omega}\mathbf{Q}^{2}}.
\end{equation}
We perform the analysis under the assumption that
\begin{equation}
\label{nwcond0}
\tau \ll t\simeq 10^{-2}\;\textrm{s},
\end{equation}
which is the order of magnitude of the delta-kick time. This assumption is necessary in order to obtain conditions, which depend only on the noise cut-off $\tau$ and not on the time $t$ of evolution. Then, according to Eq.~\eqref{eq:hrty}, the approximation in Eq.~\eqref{approx} is fulfilled when:
\begin{equation}
\label{nwcond1}
\omega \tau\ll1 \;\;\;\Rightarrow\;\;\; \tau\ll \omega^{-1}\simeq 0,94 \textrm{s},
\end{equation}
and:
\begin{equation}
\label{nwcond2}
\frac{|\mathbf{Q}||\mathbf{p}_{max}|\tau}{\hbar m} \ll 1\;\;\;\Rightarrow\;\;\; \tau\ll 10^{3} \left( \frac{r_C}{1 \textrm{m}}\right) \textrm{s},
\end{equation}
and also:
\begin{equation}
\label{nwcond3}
\frac{ \tau}{2m \hbar}\mathbf{Q}^{2}\ll1\;\;\;\Rightarrow\;\;\;\tau\ll 10^{9} \left( \frac{r_{C}^{2}}{1 \textrm{m}^2}\right) \textrm{s},
\end{equation}
where $m=1,44\times10^{-25}$ Kg is the Rb mass, the maximum momentum is $|\mathbf{p}_{max}|=\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}\right\rangle +\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle^{1/2}\simeq 10^{-29}$ Kg m/s (we took $\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}\rangle =0$ and $\langle E\rangle =\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}/2m\right\rangle \simeq10^{-32}$ J) and $|\mathbf{Q}|\leq \hbar/r_{C}$, which is imposed by the Gaussian factors $\tilde{g}(\mathbf{Q})$ defined in Eq.~\eqref{g_k}.
Given the assumption in Eq.~\eqref{nwcond0}, the condition in Eq.~\eqref{nwcond1} is always fulfilled, as well as conditions in Eqs.~\eqref{nwcond2} and \eqref{nwcond3}, as long as $r_C \geq 10^{-5}$ m. On the other hand, for $r_C \leq 10^{-5}$ m, the strongest bound comes from the conditions in Eqs.~\eqref{nwcond2} and~\eqref{nwcond3}.
Under these conditions, the evolution equation for a generic operator $O$ becomes:
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{d\langle \hat{O}\rangle _{t}}{dt} &=& -\frac{i}{\hbar}\langle [\hat{O},\hat{H}]\rangle _{t}-\frac{\lambda8\pi^{3/2}r_{C}^{3} A^{2}\tilde{f}(0)}{2}\\
\nonumber\\
&\times&\int d\mathbf{Q}\tilde{g}(\mathbf{Q})\tilde{g}(-\mathbf{Q})\langle [[\hat{O},\,e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}}],\,e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}}]\rangle _{t}\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation}
\tilde{f}(\omega):=\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}f(s)e^{i\omega s}ds
\end{equation}
and where we assumed $f(s)=f(-s)$ and used the fact that for $t>\tau$
\begin{equation}
\int_{0}^{t}ds f\left(s\right)\simeq \int_{0}^{\infty}ds f\left(s\right)=\frac{1}{2}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}ds f\left(s\right)=\frac{\tilde{f}(0)}{2}.
\end{equation}
Therefore, under the assumption Eq.~\eqref{nwcond0} and when conditions Eq.~\eqref{nwcond2} and Eq.~\eqref{nwcond3} are fulfilled, the non-white noise case is well approximated by the white-noise case discussed in the previous section, with the replacement $\lambda \rightarrow \lambda \tilde{f}(0)/2$.
A more detailed analysis is possible for a system with spatial extension smaller than $r_C$. In our case $\left \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \right \rangle^{1/2} \approx 50 \, \mu\textrm{m}$, implying that the approximation holds for $r_C \geq 10^{-4}$ m. Imposing this condition on the Gaussian factors $\tilde{g}(\mathbf{Q})$ defined in Eq.~\eqref{g_k} gives $|\mathbf{Q}|\leq \hbar/r_{C}$, which guarantees that we can expand the exponentials in the second line of Eq.~\eqref{non-white} as $e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}}\simeq 1-\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}$, leading to
\begin{equation}
\sum_{i,j=1}^{3}\left(\frac{1}{\hbar^2}\int d\mathbf{Q}\tilde{g}(\mathbf{Q})\tilde{g}(-\mathbf{Q})Q_{i}Q_{j}\right)\langle [[\hat{O},\,\hat{x}_{i}],\,\hat{x}_{j}(-s)]\rangle _{t}.
\end{equation}
The integration over $\mathbf{Q}$ gives the factor
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{\hbar^2}\int d\mathbf{Q}\tilde{g}(\mathbf{Q})\tilde{g}(-\mathbf{Q})Q_{i}Q_{j}=\frac{\delta_{ij}}{2^{4}\pi^{3/2}r_{C}^{5}}
\end{equation}
and therefore Eq.~\eqref{non-white} becomes
\begin{eqnarray}\label{masteqnonwhite}
\frac{d\langle \hat{O}\rangle _{t}}{dt} &=& -\frac{i}{\hbar}\langle [\hat{O},\hat{H}]\rangle _{t}-\frac{\lambda A^{2}}{2 r_{C}^{2}}\int_{0}^{t}ds f\left(s\right)\;\;\\
\nonumber\\
&\times&\sum_{j=1}^{3}\langle [[\hat{O},\,\hat{x}_{j}],\,\hat{x}_{j}(-s)]\rangle _{t}. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
An explicit calculation is also possible, if we take a specific expression for the noise correlator, e.g.:
\begin{equation}
\label{f}
f (s) = \frac{1}{2\tau} e^{-\abs{s}/\tau}.
\end{equation}
which, in the limit $\tau \rightarrow 0$, reduces to a Dirac delta.
From Eq.~\eqref{masteqnonwhite} it is easy to see that the dynamical equations for $\hat{\mathbf{x}}$ and $\hat{\mathbf{p}}$ are not modified by the noise. Similarly, for $\hat{\mathbf{x}}^2$ we have:
\begin{equation}
\label{x2nonwhite}
\frac{d\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2\right\rangle _{t}}{dt} = \frac{\left\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}} \hat{\mathbf{p}} + \hat{\mathbf{p}}\hat{\mathbf{x}} \right\rangle_{t}}{m}.
\end{equation}
From Eq.~\eqref{masteqnonwhite}, it is also straightforward obtain the following equations:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{xppxnonwhite}
\frac{d\left\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}} \hat{\mathbf{p}} + \hat{\mathbf{p}}\hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle _{t}}{dt} &=& \frac{2\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2\right\rangle _{t}}{m} - 2 m \omega^2 \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2\right\rangle _{t} \nonumber\\
\nonumber\\
&+& \frac{3 \lambda A^2 \hbar^2}{m r_{C}^{2}}\int_{0}^{t} ds \, \frac{e^{-\frac{s}{\tau}} \sin (s \omega)}{2 \omega \tau};\\\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{equation}
\label{p2nonwhite}
\frac{d\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2\right\rangle _{t}}{dt}= -m\omega^2 \left\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}} \hat{\mathbf{p}} + \hat{\mathbf{p}}\hat{\mathbf{x}} \right \rangle_{t} + \frac{3 \lambda A^2 \hbar^2}{2 r_{C}^{2}}\int_{0}^{t} ds \, \frac{e^{-\frac{s}{\tau}} \cos (s \omega)}{2 \tau}.
\end{equation}
The system of Eqs.~\eqref{x2nonwhite}, \eqref{xppxnonwhite} and \eqref{p2nonwhite} can be solved exactly. The solution of Eq.~\eqref{xppxnonwhite} is:
\begin{widetext}
\begin{equation}
\label{xppxnonwhite2}
\left\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}} \hat{\mathbf{p}} + \hat{\mathbf{p}}\hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle _{t} = \left\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}} \hat{\mathbf{p}} + \hat{\mathbf{p}}\hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle _{0} \cos (2 \omega t)+ \left ( \frac{\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2\right\rangle _{0}}{m \omega} - m \omega \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2\right\rangle _{0}\right) \sin(2 \omega t)+ \frac{3 \lambda A^2 \hbar^2}{2\omega m r_{C}^{2}} \int_{0}^{t} ds g(s) \sin (2\omega (t-s)),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{g}
g (x) = \int_{0}^{x} dy \, \frac{e^{-\frac{y}{\tau}} \cos(\omega y)}{2\tau} + \frac{e^{-\frac{x}{\tau}} \sin(\omega x)}{2\omega\tau}.
\end{equation}
Using Eq.~\eqref{xppxnonwhite2} in Eqs.~\eqref{x2nonwhite} and \eqref{p2nonwhite} we get the related solutions:
\begin{equation}
\label{x2nonwhite2}
\begin{split}
&\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2\right\rangle _{t} = \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2\right\rangle _{0} + \frac{1}{2 m \omega}\left [\sin(2 \omega t) \left\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}} \hat{\mathbf{p}} + \hat{\mathbf{p}}\hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle _{0} - \left ( \frac{\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2\right\rangle _{0}}{m \omega} - m \omega \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2\right\rangle _{0}\right) (1 -\cos (2\omega t)) \right] \\
& + \frac{3 \lambda A^2 \hbar^2}{2\omega m^2 r_{C}^{2}} \int_{0}^{t} ds_2\int_{0}^{s_2} ds_1 \, g(s_1) \sin (2\omega (s_2-s_1));
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{p2nonwhite2}
\begin{split}
&\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2\right\rangle _{t} = \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2\right\rangle _{0} - \frac{m \omega}{2}\left [\sin(2 \omega t) \left\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}} \hat{\mathbf{p}} + \hat{\mathbf{p}}\hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle _{0} - \left ( \frac{\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2\right\rangle _{0}}{m \omega} - m \omega \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2\right\rangle _{0}\right) (1 -\cos (2\omega t)) \right] \\
& + \ \frac{3 \lambda A^2 \hbar^2}{2 r_{C}^{2}}\left[ \int_{0}^{t} ds_2\int_{0}^{s_2} ds_1 \left( \frac{e^{-\frac{s_1}{\tau}} \cos(\omega s_1)}{2\tau} -\omega g(s_1) \sin (2\omega (s_2-s_1)) \right) \right ].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{widetext}
From a direct computation of the function ~\eqref{g}, it is possible to note that, if $\tau \omega \ll 1$ and $\tau \ll t$, then the solutions Eqs.~\eqref{xppxnonwhite2}, \eqref{x2nonwhite2} and \eqref{p2nonwhite2} are practically indistinguishable from Eqs.~\eqref{x2sol}, \eqref{p2sol} and \eqref{xpsol} derived in the white noise case. In the experiment under consideration, we have $\omega = 6.7$ rad/s and $t = \delta t_2\approx 35$ ms. The white noise limit is therefore a good approximation for any noise with cut-off $\tau \leq 10^{-3}$s.
In the free evolution limit $\omega \to 0$, Eqs.~\eqref{x2nonwhite2}, \eqref{xppxnonwhite2} and \eqref{p2nonwhite2} reduce to:
\begin{equation}
\label{p2nonwhite2free}
\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2\right\rangle _{t} = \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2\right\rangle _{0} + \frac{3\lambda A^2 \hbar^2}{2 r_{C}^2} \left [ t - \tau \left(1 - e^{-\frac{t}{\tau}} \right) \right];
\end{equation}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{xppxnonwhite2free}
\left\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}} \hat{\mathbf{p}} + \hat{\mathbf{p}}\hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle _{t} &=& \left\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}} \hat{\mathbf{p}} + \hat{\mathbf{p}}\hat{\mathbf{x}} \right\rangle_{0} + \frac{2\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2\right\rangle _{0}t}{m} \\
\nonumber\\
&+&\frac{3\lambda A^2 \hbar^2 }{2 m r_{C}^2} \left [ t^2- \tau t \left(1 - e^{-\frac{t}{\tau}}\right)\right];\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{p2nonwhite2free}
&&\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2\right\rangle _{t} = \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2\right\rangle _{0} + \frac{\left\langle\hat{\mathbf{x}} \hat{\mathbf{p}} + \hat{\mathbf{p}}\hat{\mathbf{x}} \right\rangle_{0} t}{m} + \frac{\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2\right\rangle _{0} t^2}{ m^2}\\
\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{3\lambda A^2 \hbar^2}{m^2 r_{C}^2} \left [\frac{t^3}{6} - \frac{t \tau}{2}\left(\frac{1}{2}+ e^{-\frac{t}{\tau}}\right) +\frac{\tau^3}{2}\left(1 - e^{-\frac{t}{\tau}}\right)\right].\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
In this case the white noise limit is recovered when $\tau \ll t$. The free time evolution is $t \approx 1$s, which implies $\tau \leq 10^{-2}$s.
To conclude, we can safely say that the bounds we obtain for the CSL model shown in Fig.~\ref{exc_csl} hold also for a more general and realistic non-white noise extension of the model if
\begin{equation}
\tau\leq10^{-3}\,\textrm{s}\quad \Longrightarrow \quad \Omega\geq10^{3}\,\textrm{Hz}
\end{equation}
for $r_{C}\geq10^{-5}\,\textrm{m}$,
\begin{equation}
\tau\ll 10^{3} \left( \frac{r_C}{1 \textrm{m}}\right)\,\textrm{s} \quad \Longrightarrow \quad \Omega\gg10^{-3}\left(\frac{1\textrm{m}}{r_{C}}\right)\,\textrm{Hz}\;\;
\end{equation}
for $10^{-6}\leq r_{C}\leq10^{-5}\,\textrm{m}$,
\begin{equation}
\tau\ll10^{9}\left(\frac{r_{C}^{2}}{1\textrm{m}^{2}}\right)\,\textrm{s} \quad \Longrightarrow \quad \Omega\gg10^{-9}\left(\frac{1\textrm{m}^{2}}{r_{C}^{2}}\right)\,\textrm{Hz}\;\;
\end{equation}
for $r_{C}\leq10^{-6}\,\textrm{m}$. Taking into account that typical cosmological cut-offs are of order $10^{10}-10^{11}$ Hz, our analysis shows that for $r_C \geq 10^{-10}$ m and for a typical cosmological collapse noise, the cCSL predictions (therefore also the upper bounds) are indistinguishable from the standard CSL predictions.
\section{Expansion of the gas according to the dCSL model}
Another possible way of generalizing the CSL model is offered by the dCSL model~\cite{andrea}, which includes dissipative effects in the dynamics, to tame the energy increase. More precisely, a finite temperature is associated to the collapse-noise, and every physical system slowly thermalizes to that temperature.
If the noise has a cosmological origin, a temperature of $\sim 1$K is expected, meaning that in general the energy of material objects should actually decrease, not increase as predicted by CSL. Since the effect we are discussing in this paper is directly related to the energy increase, a dissipative modification of CSL is expected to change the bounds on the collapse parameters. This is what we will consider now.
In the dCSL model, the Lindblad operators $\mathbb{L} (\mathbf{y})$ are defined as follows:
\begin{equation}
\label{ldcsl}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{L} (\mathbf{y}) = &\frac{\sqrt{\lambda A^{2}8\pi^{3/2}r_{C}^{3}}}{(2\pi\hbar)^{3}} \sum_{\alpha = 1}^{N} \int d\mathbf{Q} \, e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q} (\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{\alpha} - \mathbf{y})} \times \\
&e^{-\frac{r_{C}^{2}}{\hbar^2}\left \lvert (1+k)\mathbf{Q} + 2k \hat{\mathbf{P}}_{\alpha}\right\rvert},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where the new parameter
\begin{equation}\label{k}
k=\frac{\hbar^2}{8 m k_B T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}} r_{C}^{2}},
\end{equation}
controls the temperature $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}$ of the collapse noise. In the limit $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}} \rightarrow \infty$ ($k \rightarrow 0$), the standard CSL Lindblad operators of Eq.~\eqref{lcsl} are recovered.
As in the case of the standard CSL model, it is easy to prove that for a gas of non-interacting atoms, the problem can be reduced to the study of single-atom observables.
The dCSL model master equation for a single atom trapped in an harmonic potential is given by Eq.~\eqref{cslmasteq}, with $\mathbb{L}$ defined as in Eq.~\eqref{ldcsl} and with $N=1$. After performing an integration over the variable $\mathbf y$ we arrive at~\cite{andrea}:
\begin{equation}
\label{dCSL}
\begin{split}
&\frac{d\hat{\rho}}{dt} = -\frac{i}{\hbar} \left[ \frac{\hat{\mathbf{p}}^2}{2m} + \frac{1}{2} m \omega^2 \hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2}, \hat{\rho} \right] + \frac{\lambda A^2 r_{C}^{3}}{(\sqrt{\pi}\hbar)^3}\\
& \int d^3 Q \, \Bigl( e^{\frac{i}{\hbar} \mathbf{Q}\cdot \hat{\mathbf{x}}} L(\mathbf{Q}, \hat{\mathbf{p}}) \hat{\rho} (t) L(\mathbf{Q}, \hat{\mathbf{p}}) e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar} \mathbf{Q} \cdot \hat{\mathbf{x}}} \\
& -\frac{1}{2} \left \{ L^2(\mathbf{Q}, \hat{\mathbf{p}}), \hat{\rho} \right \} \Bigr),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{LdCSL}
L(\mathbf{Q}, \hat{\mathbf{p}}) = e^{-\frac{r_{C}^{2}}{2\hbar^2} \left \lvert(1+k)\mathbf{Q} + 2k\hat{\mathbf{p}} \right\rvert^2}.
\end{equation}
With the help of the above equation, we can easily derive the equation for the variance in position:
\begin{equation}
\label{x2dCSL}
\begin{split}
&\frac{d \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_t}{dt} = \frac{1}{m} \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}} + \hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}} \rangle_t - \frac{\lambda A^{2}r_{C}^{3}}{2(\sqrt{\pi}\hbar)^{3}}\\
&\times \int d^3 Q \, \textrm{Tr} \left\{ \hat{\rho} [[\hat{\mathbf{x}}^2,L(\mathbf{Q},\hat{\mathbf{p}})], L(\mathbf{Q}, \hat{\mathbf{p}})] \right\}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
After a long but straightforward calculation, one finds that
\begin{equation}
\label{x2dCSL1}
\begin{split}
& [[\hat{\mathbf{x}}^2,L(\mathbf{Q},\hat{\mathbf{p}})], L(\mathbf{Q}, \hat{\mathbf{p}})] = \\
&-\frac{8k^{2}r_{C}^{4}}{\hbar^{2}}\left[(1+k)\mathbf{Q}_{j}+2k\hat{\mathbf{p}}_{j}\right]^{2}L^{2}(\mathbf{Q},\hat{\mathbf{p}}).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Using Eq.~\eqref{x2dCSL1} in Eq.~\eqref{x2dCSL}, and performing the trace over the momentum eigenvectors, the following integration appears:
\begin{equation}
\label{x2dCSL2}
\begin{split}
&\int d^{3}Q\,\int d^{3}p\,\left[(1+k)\mathbf{Q}+2k\mathbf{p}\right]^{2}e^{-\frac{r_{C}^{2}}{\hbar^{2}}\left[(1+k)\mathbf{Q}+2k\mathbf{p}\right]^{2}}\times \\
&\times \hat{\rho}(p,p,t)=\frac{3}{2}\left(\frac{\sqrt{\pi}}{1+k}\right)^{3}\left(\frac{\hbar}{r_{C}}\right)^{5} \\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Collecting all results, we get:
\begin{equation}
\label{x2dCSL3}
\frac{d \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_t}{dt} = \frac{1}{m} \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}} + \hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}} \rangle_t +\frac{6\lambda A^{2}r_{C}^{2}k^{2}}{\left(1+k\right)^{3}}.
\end{equation}
Note that for $k \to 0$ Eq.~\eqref{x2manyder} is recovered.
In order to solve Eq.~\eqref{x2dCSL3} we need to find $ \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}} + \hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}} \rangle_t$. The equation for $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}} \rangle_t$ is:
\begin{equation}
\label{xpdcsl}
\begin{split}
&\frac{d \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}} \cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}} \rangle_t}{dt} = \frac{1}{m} \langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2 \rangle_t -m\omega^{2}\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2}\right\rangle _{t}+ \frac{\lambda A^{2}r_{C}^{3}}{(\sqrt{\pi}\hbar)^{3}}\\
&\int d^3 Q \,\Bigl( \textrm{Tr} \left\{ e^{\frac{i}{\hbar} \mathbf{Q} \cdot \hat{\mathbf{x}}} L(\mathbf{Q}, \hat{\mathbf{p}}) \hat{\rho} (t) L(\mathbf{Q}, \hat{\mathbf{p}}) e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar} \mathbf{Q} \cdot \hat{\mathbf{x}}} \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot \hat{\mathbf{p}}\right\}\\
& -\frac{1}{2} \textrm{Tr} \left\{ \left \{ L^2(\mathbf{Q}, \hat{\mathbf{p}}), \hat{\rho} \right \} \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot \hat{\mathbf{p}}\right\} \Bigr)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Using the ciclycity of the trace together with
\begin{equation}
e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q} \cdot \hat{\mathbf{x}}}\,\hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}\,e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\mathbf{Q} \cdot \hat{\mathbf{x}}}=\hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot(\hat{\mathbf{p}}+\mathbf{Q})
\end{equation}
we can rewrite the trace as
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
& \textrm{Tr} \left\{ e^{\frac{i}{\hbar} \mathbf{Q} \cdot \hat{\mathbf{x}}} L(\mathbf{Q}, \hat{\mathbf{p}}) \hat{\rho} (t) L(\mathbf{Q}, \hat{\mathbf{p}}) e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar} \mathbf{Q} \cdot \hat{\mathbf{x}}} \hat{\mathbf{x}} \cdot \hat{\mathbf{p}}\right\}-\\
&-\frac{1}{2} \textrm{Tr} \left\{ \left \{ L^2(\mathbf{Q}, \hat{\mathbf{p}}), \hat{\rho} \right \} \hat{\mathbf{x}} \cdot \hat{\mathbf{p}}\right\} =\\
&=\textrm{Tr}\left\{\hat{\rho}(t)L(\mathbf{Q},\hat{\mathbf{p}})\hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\mathbf{Q}L(\mathbf{Q},\hat{\mathbf{p}})\right\}-\\
&-\frac{1}{2}\textrm{Tr}\left\{\hat{\rho}(t)\left[\left[\hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}},L(\mathbf{Q},\hat{\mathbf{p}})\right],L(\mathbf{Q},\hat{\mathbf{p}})\right]\right\}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The term in the last line gives no contribution since the double commutator is zero. The integration over $\mathbf{Q}$ of the other term can be rewritten as follows:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\int d^{3}Q\,\textrm{Tr}\left\{\hat{\rho}(t)L(\mathbf{Q},\hat{\mathbf{p}})\hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\mathbf{Q}L(\mathbf{Q},\hat{\mathbf{p}})\right\}= \\
& =\frac{1}{2}\int d^{3}Q\,\textrm{Tr}\left\{L^{2}(\mathbf{Q},\hat{\mathbf{p}})\hat{\rho}\hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\mathbf{Q}\right\}\\
& +\frac{1}{2}\int d^{3}Q\,\textrm{Tr}\left\{L^{2}(\mathbf{Q},\hat{\mathbf{p}})\hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\mathbf{Q}\hat{\rho}\right\},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\\
and expanding the trace over the momentum eigenstates we get
\\
\\
\\
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\nonumber
&=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=1}^{3}\int d^{3}p\left(\int d^{3}QL^{2}(\mathbf{Q},\mathbf{p})Q_{j}\right)\langle\mathbf{p}|\left(\hat{\rho}\hat{x}_{j}\right)|\mathbf{p}\rangle \\
&+\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=1}^{3}\int d^{3}p\left(\int d^{3}QL^{2}(\mathbf{Q},\mathbf{p})Q_{j}\right)\langle\mathbf{p}|\left(\hat{x}_{j}\hat{\rho}\right)|\mathbf{p}\rangle.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Considering that
\begin{equation}
\int d^{3}QL^{2}(\mathbf{Q},\mathbf{p})Q_{j}=-\frac{2kp_{j}}{\left(1+k\right)}\left(\frac{\hbar\sqrt{\pi}}{\left(1+k\right)r_{C}}\right)^{3},
\end{equation}
\\
the dCSL contribution to Eq.~\eqref{xpdcsl} is
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\frac{\lambda A^{2}r_{C}^{3}}{2(\sqrt{\pi}\hbar)^{3}}\int d^{3}Q\,\textrm{Tr}\Bigl(\hat{\rho}(t)L(\mathbf{Q},\hat{\mathbf{p}})\hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\mathbf{Q}L(\mathbf{Q},\hat{\mathbf{p}})\Bigr)=\\
&=-\frac{\lambda A^{2}k}{\left(1+k\right)^{4}}\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}+\hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle _{t}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
So, the equation for $\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}\right\rangle _{t}$ is:
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}\right\rangle _{t}}{dt}=\frac{1}{m}\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle _{t}-m\omega^{2}\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2}\right\rangle _{t}-\frac{\lambda A^{2}k}{\left(1+k\right)^{4}}\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}+\hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle _{t}
\end{equation}
which implies that:
\begin{equation}
\label{xppxdcsl}
\begin{split}
&\frac{d\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}+\hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle _{t}}{dt}=\frac{2}{m}\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle _{t}-2m\omega^{2}\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2}\right\rangle _{t} \\
&-\frac{2\lambda A^{2}k}{\left(1+k\right)^{4}}\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}+\hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle _{t}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The last equation we need is that for the momentum variance $\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle _{t}$. This has been already derived in~\cite{andrea}:
\begin{equation}
\label{dCSLp2}
\frac{d\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle _{t}}{dt} = -m\omega^2 \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}+\hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle _{t} - \chi\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle _{t} + \chi \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle _{as},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{chidCSL}
\chi := \frac{4k\lambda A^2}{(1+k)^5} , \qquad \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle _{as}:= \frac{3\hbar^2}{8 k r_{C}^{2}}.
\end{equation}
In the limit of free evolution (\textit{i.e.} $\omega \to 0$), the solutions of Eqs.~\eqref{x2dCSL3}, \eqref{xppxdcsl} and \eqref{dCSLp2} are:
\begin{widetext}
\begin{subequations}
\label{dcslfree}
\begin{align}
&\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2}\right\rangle _{t} = \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2}\right\rangle _{t_0} +\frac{ 2(\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle _{t_0} - \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle _{as})}{m^2 (B-\chi)} \left(\frac{1-e^{-\chi (t-t_0)}}{\chi} - \frac{1-e^{-B(t-t_0)}}{B}\right) + \left( \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}+\hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle _{t_0} - \frac{2 \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle _{as}}{m B} \right) \times \notag \\
&\times \frac{1-e^{-B(t-t_0)}}{m B}+ \left(\alpha+ \frac{2 \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle _{as}}{m^2 B}\right)(t-t_0) \label{x2dcslfree}; \\
&\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}+\hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle _{t} = \frac{2 ( \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle_{t_0} - \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle_{as})}{m(B-\chi)} \left (e^{-\chi (t-t_0)} - e^{-B(t-t_0)} \right) + \frac{2 m\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle_{as}}{m B} + e^{-B(t-t_0)}\times \notag \\
&\times \left( \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}}+\hat{\mathbf{p}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle_{t_0}- \frac{8 m \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle_{as}}{B} \right) \label{xppxdcslfree}; \\
&\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle_{t} = \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle_{as} + e^{-\chi (t-t_0)}\left(\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle_{t_0} -\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2}\right\rangle_{as}\right) \label{p2dcslfree},
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
\end{widetext}
where $B := \frac{1+k}{2} \chi$ and $\alpha := \frac{6\lambda A^{2}r_{C}^{2}k^{2}}{\left(1+k\right)^{3}}$.
We should study also the case of an harmonically trapped atom ($\omega \neq 0$). The system of Eqs.~\eqref{x2dCSL3}, \eqref{xppxdcsl} and \eqref{dCSLp2} can still be solved exactly. However, the solutions are too complicated and of little practical use. In fact, the duration of the delta-kick is much shorter than the free evolution and, as shown in the Appendix, the dCSL effects during the delta-kick can be neglected and safely be replaced by the standard quantum mechanical evolution.
We can now derive the position variance $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{t_3}$ at the final time $t_3$ as predicted by the dCSL model. During steps 1 and 3 of the experiment (free expansion of the gas) we use the exact solutions given in Eqs.~\eqref{x2dcslfree}, \eqref{xppxdcslfree} and \eqref{p2dcslfree}, while during step 2 (the delta-kick) we use the quantum mechanical solution for an harmonic oscillator. In a similar way, one can compute the time evolution of the average kinetic energy. We do not report explicitly the final formula for $ \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{t_3}$ since it is very long and does not help in getting any insight on the physics.
In Fig.~\ref{pos-temp} and Fig.~\ref{kin-temp} the minimum values of the final position variance and of the average kinetic energy are plotted as a function of the noise temperature $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}$ for different values of $\lambda$, while keeping $r_C=10^{-7}$m, and for fixed values of the delta-kick time (we took the values of $\delta t_2$ which maximize the delta-kick effects). We can see that in both cases the effect of dissipation is to reduce the increase of the variance and of the energy due to the CSL noise. In particular, for the values of $r_C$ and $\lambda$ here considered, when $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}< 10^{-7}$ K the effect of the noise is negligible and the predictions are practically equivalent to the standard quantum ones. In the range $10^{-7} \textrm{ K}<T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}< 10^{-6} \textrm{ K}$ the noise effects are present but are reduced by dissipation. When $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}> 10^{-6} \textrm{ K}$ the effects of dissipation become negligible and the predictions are indistinguishable from the $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}=+\infty$ case (CSL).
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{posstandarddeviation-temp}
\caption{Position's standard deviation $\Delta (x) \equiv \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{t_3}^{1/2}$ at the detector (time $t = t_3$) as a function of the CSL noise temperature $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}$, for three different values of the collapse rate $\lambda$. For each curve, we fixed $r_C = 10^{-7}$ m and the delta-kick time $\delta t_2 = 35$ ms, which corresponds to the smallest measured value (black point in Fig.~\ref{pos-taup}). We plot also the quantum-mechanical value for comparison. }
\label{pos-temp}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{kinenergy-temp}
\caption{Kinetic energy $E \equiv \langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^2 \rangle_{t_3}/ 2m $ at the detector (time $t = t_3$) as a function of the CSL noise temperature $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}$, for three different values of the collapse rate $\lambda$. For each curve, we fixed $r_C = 10^{-7}$ m and $\delta t_2 = 20$ ms, associated to the theoretical minimum of the momentum standard deviation (see Fig.~\ref{kin-taup}). We plot also the quantum-mechanical value for comparison.}
\label{kin-temp}
\end{figure}
\subsection{dCSL model with boost}
The dCSL model is not Galilei invariant, since the noise selects a preferred reference frame, the one where it is at rest. In the previous section, we implicitly considered the situation where the lab reference frame was at rest with respect to the noise. This is unlikely. If the noise has a cosmological origin, then much likely it is at rest with the cosmic frame, with respect to which the Earth moves. In this section we analyse the case where the collapse noise is moving with some velocity $\mathbf{u}$ with respect to the laboratory system.
The master equation for the boosted dCSL model has the same structure as that in Eq.~\eqref{dCSL} with $L(\mathbf{Q}, \hat{\mathbf{p}})$ in Eq.~\eqref{LdCSL} replaced by:
\begin{equation}\label{LdCSLbst}
L(\mathbf{Q},\hat{\mathbf{p}},\mathbf{u}) = e^{-\frac{r_{C}^{2}}{2\hbar^2} \left \lvert(1+k)\mathbf{Q} + 2k(\hat{\mathbf{p}}-m\mathbf{u}) \right\rvert^2}.
\end{equation}
It is convenient to introduce the boosted momentum operator:
\begin{equation}\label{p_bst}
\hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\mathbf{u}}:=\hat{\mathbf{p}}-m\mathbf{u}
\end{equation}
which allows to rewrite the boosted dCSL master equation as
\begin{equation}\label{masterboost}
\frac{d\hat{\rho}}{dt} = \left.\frac{d\hat{\rho}^{\text{\tiny dCSL}}}{dt}\right|_{\hat{\mathbf{p}}
\rightarrow\hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\mathbf{u}}}-\frac{i}{\hbar}\left[\hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\mathbf{u}}\cdot\mathbf{u},\hat{\rho}\right]
\end{equation}
where the first term is the master equation of the dCSL as given by Eq.~\eqref{dCSL}, with $\hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\mathbf{u}}$ in place of $\hat{\mathbf{p}}$. Note that $\hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\mathbf{u}}$ has the same commutation relations as $\mathbf p$. The equation for the time evolution of a generic operator $O$ is:
\begin{equation}\label{operatorboost}
\frac{d\left\langle O\right\rangle _{t}}{dt}= \left.\frac{d\left\langle O\right\rangle _{t}^{\text{\tiny dCSL}}}{dt}\right|_{\hat{\mathbf{p}}
\rightarrow\hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\mathbf{u}}}-\frac{i}{\hbar}\left\langle \left[O,\hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\mathbf{u}}\cdot\mathbf{u}\right]\right\rangle _{t}
\end{equation}
where $\left\langle O\right\rangle^{\text{\tiny dCSL}}_{t}$ is the expectation value of the operator $O$ given by the dCSL dynamics without boost, again with $\hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\mathbf{u}}$ in place of $\hat{\mathbf{p}}$. Therefore, we can now write the equations for the expectation values $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle _{t}$, $\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\mathbf{u}}^2 \rangle _{t}$ and $\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\cdot \hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\mathbf{u}}+\hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\mathbf{u}}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle_{t}$ using the results already derived for the dCSL model without boost; we only need to compute the extra commutator of Eq.~\eqref{operatorboost}.
Actually, to get a good estimate of the effect of the boost, it is sufficient to analyze the equations for $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}} \rangle _{t}$ and $\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}} \rangle _{t}$, instead of those for the variances, which are much more complicated. The first equation can be easily derived, while the second one involves lengthier calculations, which however are analogue to those carried out in the previous section, when deriving the equation for $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}} \cdot\hat{\mathbf{p}} \rangle_t$. The final result is:
\begin{equation}\label{x_u}
\frac{d\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle _{t}}{dt}=\frac{\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\mathbf{u}}\right\rangle _{t}}{m}+\mathbf{u},\;\;\;\;\;\;
\frac{d\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\mathbf{u}}\right\rangle _{t}}{dt}=-B\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}_{\mathbf{u}}\right\rangle _{t},
\end{equation}
where $B$ is the parameter defined after Eq.~\eqref{p2dcslfree}.
The solution of this system of equations for a free gas ($\omega=0$) with initial average position $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}} \rangle _{t_0}$ and initial average momentum $\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}} \rangle _{t_0}$, written in terms of the real momentum $\hat{\mathbf{p}}$, are:
\begin{equation}\label{x_usol}
\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle _{t} = \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\right\rangle _{t_0} + \mathbf{u}(t-t_0) + \left( \frac{\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}\right\rangle _{t_0}}{m} - \mathbf{u} \right) \frac{1-e^{-B(t-t_0)}}{B};
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{p_usol}
\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}\right\rangle _{t} = \left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}\right\rangle _{t_0}e^{-B(t-t_0)} + m\mathbf{u}\left( 1-e^{-B(t-t_0)}\right);
\end{equation}
We can now argue as follows. The change of the average position of the gas must be smaller than the measured standard deviation, as in~\cite{kas} no significant variation to the average position of the center-of-mass of the cloud was observed. From Eq.~\eqref{x_usol}, taking into account that for the experiment considered here $\left\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}\right\rangle _{t_0} = 0$ and $t-t_0 \approx 3$ s, and that for any value of the parameters of the dCSL model $B (t-t_0) \ll 1$, we can safely say that
\begin{equation}
\label{ubound}
\frac{1}{2} \left \lvert \mathbf{u} \right \rvert B (t-t_0)^2\leq 1 \, \mu\text{m}.
\end{equation}
where $B = 2 \lambda A^2 k/(1+k)^4$. Considering, for example, the standard values for the dCSL parameters $\lambda=10^{-17}$ s$^{-1}$, $r_C=10^{-7}$ m and $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}=1$ K, we obtain the bound:
\begin{equation}
\left \lvert \mathbf{u} \right \rvert \leq 10^{13} \, \text{m} \, \text{s}^{-1}.
\end{equation}
From cosmological arguments~\cite{arbest} a possible value of the noise boost is $\left \lvert \mathbf{u} \right \rvert = 10^7$ m$\textit{s}^{-1}$. Using this value in Eq.~\eqref{ubound} an exclusion plot in the parametric space $\lambda - r_C$ is found, as shown in Fig.~\ref{exc_boost}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{exc_boost}
\caption{Exclusion plot for the boosted dCSL model, considering a boost with $\left \lvert \mathbf{u} \right \rvert = 10^7$ m$\textit{s}^{-1}$ for four different values of the dCSL temperature $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}$.}
\label{exc_boost}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion: comparison with experimental data and bounds on the collapse parameters}
We now discuss the bounds on the collapse parameters against the experiment here considered. We compare the position's standard deviation, computed for each particular model, with the experimental value $\Delta (x)_{\text{\tiny{EXP}}} = 120_{-40}^{+40} \, \mu$m reported in~\cite{kas}; we refer to this value since it is the only one with explicit error bars associated to it.
Assuming that this value is distributed according to a normal distribution with mean value $ \mu=120\, \mu$m and $\sigma=40\, \mu$m, then $\Delta (x) \in [42;198] \, \mu$m with a confidence level of 95\%
The exclusion plots in Fig.~\ref{exc_csl} and Fig.~\ref{exc_dcsl} show which points in the parameters space predict a CSL-induced position's standard deviation outside the considered range (with a $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}$ dependence in the dCSL case).
We start with analysing the CSL model. As shown in Eq.~\eqref{posvart2csl}, the increase of the position variance at the final time $t=t_3$ due to the CSL noise is:
\begin{equation}
\label{spreadcsl}
\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{t_3}^{\text{\tiny{CSL}}} = \frac{\lambda}{r_{C}^{2}} K
\end{equation}
where $K$ is a function of the initial state of the gas, the times $t_1, \delta t_2, t_3$ and the frequency $\omega$ of the external harmonic potential, but otherwise contains no dependence on the CSL parameters. By inserting the numerical values, we arrive at the bound:
\begin{equation}
\frac{\lambda}{r_{C}^{2}} < 5 \times 10^6 \,\textrm{m}^{-2}\textrm{s}^{-1}.
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{exc_csl}
\caption{Exclusion plot for the CSL model. The red region shows the excluded area, according to the analysis here performed. The picture shows also the bounds coming from matter-wave interferometry~\cite{arbest}, cantilevers~\cite{vin}, heating effect on Bose-Einstein Condensates (BECs)~\cite{pearle}, and spontaneous X-rays emission~\cite{bea}. The black points and bars represents the reference values proposed by GRW ~\cite{grw} and Adler~\cite{ad1}.}
\label{exc_csl}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{exc_dcsl.png}
\caption{Exclusion plot for the dCSL model. The red area represents the excluded region for the CSL model ($T = \infty$) and for any dCSL model with noise temperatures $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}} > 10^6$ K (due to the finite parametric region considered). Bounds for dCSL for three different noise temperatures are also represented: in yellow the case with $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}} = 1$ K, in green that for $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}} = 10^{-6}$ K, and in brown $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}} = 10^{-12}$ K. The black points and bars represents the parametric values proposed by GRW ~\cite{grw} and Adler~\cite{ad1}.}
\label{exc_dcsl}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[scale=0.72]{devrc}
\caption{Position's standard deviatio of the gas at the detector (time $t = t_3$), as a function of $r_C$. Four different curves are represented, each corresponding to a different value of the noise temperature $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}$. In each case, $\lambda = 10^{-3.5}$ s$^{-1}$ and $\delta t_2 = 35$ ms. For $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}} = 10^{-12}$ K, an insignificant numerical error appears in the interval $10^{-4.4}$ m $<r_C< 10^{-3.7}$ m, due to very small values of the position's standard deviation. No numerical instabilities appear outside this interval. The experimental value $120_{-40}^{+40} \,\mu$m is indicated by the dashed black lines in the inset.}
\label{devrc}
\end{figure}
This result is in agreement with the plot in Fig.~\ref{exc_csl}, where a comparison with bounds coming from other relevant experiments is shown. As one can see, the bound is better than that coming from matter-wave interferometry~\cite{arbest} and that related to BECs~\cite{pearle} while, for $r_C\leq 10^{-7}$, it is beaten only by X-rays experiments~\cite{bea}. Here a comment is at order. As shown in~\cite{adlerrama, dirk}, CSL predictions for spontaneous photon emission are very sensitive to the type of noise and, when a frequency cut-off is introduced in its spectrum, the CSL effect is significantly decreased. In particular, for X-ray detection, any cutoff smaller than $10^{18}$ Hz washes the effect away. Since typical cut-offs of cosmological spectra are significantly smaller than $10^{18}$ Hz~\cite{bas}, and assuming that the CSL noise has the properties of a typical cosmological random background, then one expects bounds related to spontaneous X-ray emission not to play a significant role. On the other hand, our result is robust against changes in the noise. As shown in Sec.~\ref{color}, providing $r_C \geq 10^{-7}$ m, for any cutoff larger than $10^6$ Hz (which is the case of cosmological noises), the effect is equivalent to that of the standard CSL model.
The situation si different for the dCSL model. The result is reported in Fig.~\ref{exc_dcsl}, for three different temperatures of the noise: $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}= 1, 10^{-6}, 10^{-12}$ K. As one can see, the smaller the temperature, the smaller the exclusion region. The reason is that dissipation reduces the Brownian motion fluctuations of the atoms, therefore also the extra spread of the position variance predicted by CSL.
The case $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}= 10^{-12}$ is significant. In fact, a noise temperature of the order of 1 picokelvin is lower than the system's temperature, and the dissipative dynamics cools the system, reducing its position and momentum spread. For this reason, the excluded area in the parameter spaces it is fundamentally different from the other, high-temperature situations.
Also the shape of the curve for $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}=10^{-12}$ K is different from the other cases. This can be better seen in Fig.~\ref{devrc} where, for fixed $T_{\text{\tiny{CSL}}}$ and $\lambda=10^{-3.5}$ s$^{-1}$, the final position variance $\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 \rangle_{t_3}$ is plotted as function of $r_C$.
To conclude, the bounds on the CSL parameters coming from the experiment in~\cite{kas} are among the strongest so far analysed, stronger than direct tests based on matter-wave interferometry. They are robust against changes in the spectrum of the noise, so in this sense they are the strongest for $r_C < 10^{-7}$ m. They become weaker when dissipation is included, still remaining strong down to very small temperatures.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
MB, SD and AB wish to thank H. Ulbricht for several discussions on the topic. They acknowledge financial support from the University of Trieste. In addition, all authors acknowledge financial support from INFN.
\begin{comment}
We consider a gas composed by $N$ non interacting particles with Hamiltonian
\begin{equation}
\label{freeham}
\hat{H} = \sum_{i = 1}^{N} \frac{\hat{\mathbf{p}}_i}{2m}.
\end{equation}
We want to calculate the average position variance
\begin{equation}
\label{x2}
\hat{\mathbf{x}}^2 = \frac{1}{N}\sum_{i = 1}^{N} \hat{\mathbf{x}}_{i}^{2},
\end{equation}
where $\hat{\mathbf{x}}_{i}$ is the position operator for the $i$-th particle.
Given the CSL master equation Eq.~\eqref{csl1quant}, the corresponding equation for a generic observable $\hat{O}$ is:
\begin{equation}
\label{cslaverage}
\begin{split}
&\frac{d \langle \hat{O} \rangle_t}{dt} = \frac{-i}{\hbar} \textrm{Tr} \left[\hat{\rho} (t) \left[\hat{O}, \hat{H}\right] \right] \\
& - \frac{\gamma}{2 m_{0}^{2}} \int d^3 x \sum_{j,k = 1}^{N} \, \textrm{Tr} \left \{ \hat{\rho}(t) \left[ \left[\hat{O}, g (\hat{\mathbf{x}}_j - \mathbf{x}) \right], g (\hat{\mathbf{x}}_k - \mathbf{x}) \right] \right \},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\langle \hat{O} \rangle_t \equiv \textrm{Tr}[\hat{\rho} (t) \hat{O}]$. From Eq.~\eqref{cslaverage} we can easily see that if the observable $\hat{O}$ is a single particle observable $\hat{O}_n$, for the $n$-th particle, in Eq.~\eqref{cslaverage} appears only $n$-th particle operators, since the Hamiltonian in Eq.~\eqref{freeham} is separable:
\begin{equation}
\label{cslaverage2}
\begin{split}
&\frac{d \langle \hat{O}_n \rangle_t}{dt} = \frac{-i}{\hbar} \textrm{Tr} \left[\hat{\rho} (t) \left[\hat{O}_n, \hat{H}_n\right] \right] \\
& -\frac{\lambda A^2}{2} \int d^3 x \, \textrm{Tr} \left \{ \hat{\rho}(t) \left[ \left[\hat{O}_n, g (\hat{\mathbf{x}}_n - \mathbf{x}) \right], g (\hat{\mathbf{x}}_n - \mathbf{x}) \right] \right \},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Therefore, from now on, we can go on focusing only on single particle operators.
Taking $\hat{O}=\hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2}$, one finds that:
\begin{equation}
\label{x2manyder}
\frac{d \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2} \rangle_t}{dt} = \frac{1}{m} \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}} \cdot \hat{\mathbf{p}}+ \hat{\mathbf{p}} \cdot \hat{\mathbf{x}}\rangle_t.
\end{equation}
If we consider the position-momentum correlation operator, than, using Eq.~\eqref{cslaverage2} we note that
\begin{equation}
\label{xpmanyder}
\frac{d \langle (\hat{\mathbf{x}} \hat{\mathbf{p}}) \rangle_t}{dt} = \frac{1}{m} \langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2} \rangle_t.
\end{equation}
In fact, the contribution from the CSL part to Eq.~\eqref{xpmanyder} is null, due to the following identity:
\begin{equation}
\label{xpmanycsl}
\begin{split}
&\left[g (\hat{\mathbf{x}} - \mathbf{x}), \left[ g (\hat{\mathbf{x}} - \mathbf{x}), \hat{\mathbf{x}} \cdot \hat{\mathbf{p}} \right] \right] \\
& = \hat{\mathbf{x}} \cdot \left [g (\hat{\mathbf{x}} - \mathbf{x}), \left[ g (\hat{\mathbf{x}} - \mathbf{x}), \hat{\mathbf{p}}\right] \right] \\
& \propto \hat{\mathbf{x}} \cdot \left [g (\hat{\mathbf{x}} - \mathbf{x}), g (\hat{\mathbf{x}} - \mathbf{x}) (\hat{\mathbf{x}} - \mathbf{x}) \right] = 0
\end{split}
\end{equation}
It is known that the CSL localization in space causes an energy increase~\cite{rep1}.
\begin{equation}
\label{energyincrease}
\frac{d \langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2} \rangle_t}{dt} = \frac{ 3 \lambda A^2 \hbar^2}{2 r_{c}^{2}}.
\end{equation}
So, if we use Eq.~\eqref{energyincrease} in Eq.~\eqref{xpmanyder}, and again in Eq.~\eqref{x2manyder}, we can find the following results:
\begin{subequations}
\label{freeeqs}
\begin{align}
&\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2} \rangle_{t} = \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}^{2}\rangle_{0} + \frac{2 \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\hat{\mathbf{p}} \rangle_{0} - i\hbar}{m}t + \notag \\
& \frac{\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2} \rangle_{0} t^2}{m^2} + \frac{\lambda A^2\hbar^2 t^3}{6 r_{C}^{2} m^2}; \label{x2free} \\
&\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2} \rangle_{t} = \langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2} \rangle_{0} + \frac{\lambda A^2 \hbar^2 t}{2 r_{C}^{2}}; \label{p2free} \\
&\langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\hat{\mathbf{p}} \rangle_{t} = \langle \hat{\mathbf{x}}\hat{\mathbf{p}} \rangle_{0} + \frac{\langle \hat{\mathbf{p}}^{2} \rangle_{0} t}{m} + \frac{\lambda A^2 \hbar^2 t^2}{4 r_{C}^{2} m}. \label{xpfree}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
\end{comment}
|
\section{Introduction\label{sec:intro}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\setcounter{figure}{0}
\setcounter{table}{0}
\setcounter{footnote}{1}
The relations between
vacuum expectation values (VEVs) of Higgs fields
and Lagrangian parameters can be obtained from the effective
potential \cite{Coleman:1973jx}-\cite{Ford:1992mv}. It
is also a useful tool to understand
vacuum stability \cite{Casas:1994qy}-\cite{DiLuzio:2015iua}.
The effective potential $V(\phi)$ is equal to the tree-level potential,
plus the sum of one-particle-irreducible connected vacuum graphs, computed using
field-dependent masses and couplings.
In the Standard Model the full one and two loop
contributions to the effective potentials have been computed
in ref.~\cite{Ford:1992pn}, with the 3-loop leading contributions involving the strong
and Yukawa couplings found in ref.~\cite{Martin:2013gka}, and the 4-loop part at leading
order in QCD in ref.~\cite{Martin:2015eia}. In supersymmetry, the 2-loop effective potential has been found for a general theory in ref.~\cite{Martin:2001vx},
and specialized to the case of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM)
in ref.~\cite{Martin:2002iu}, with partial results previously given in
refs.~\cite{Hempfling:1993qq,Zhang:1998bm,Espinosa:1999zm,Espinosa:2001mm,Degrassi:2001yf,Brignole:2001jy,Brignole:2002bz}
In ref.~\cite{Martin:2013gka}, it was noted that there are two related
problems involving the mass square of the Goldstone boson ($G$) in
Standard Model. One
is when $G$ is negative. Due to the
appearance of logarithms of $G$, $V_{\rm eff}$ is complex. Thus it
appears to suffer from an instability \cite{Weinberg:1987vp}
although no physical instability is present. The
second problem occurs as $G\rightarrow 0$, where
the effective potential suffers from a logarithmic singularity at three
loop order and power law singularity after that \cite{Martin:2013gka}.
Even though the first problem can
be avoided by dropping the
imaginary term by hand and the second problem is
not too severe for numerical
analysis, a way to avoid them using resummation was given
in \cite{Martin:2014bca,Elias-Miro:2014pca}; see also
\cite{Patel:2011th,Pilaftsis:2015cka,Pilaftsis:2015bbs}.
In practice these methods can be applied
to any other model in which Goldstone radiative
corrections lead to terms with IR problems
in the effective potential.
In this paper, we analyze this problem for the 2-loop MSSM effective
potential, which also suffers from the same problem when the neutral
($G^0$) and charged ($\Gpm$) Goldstone bosons are close to zero or
negative at a particular value of renormalization scale $Q$. In the case
of the MSSM, the neutral and charged Goldstone boson squared masses are
distinct, and there are two minimization conditions, arising from the
first derivatives of the effective potential ($V_{\rm eff}$) with
respect to the two real neutral Higgs degrees of freedom, denoted $v_u$
and $v_d$ in this paper. These minimization conditions both have
singularities when $G^0$ and $\Gpm$ tend to zero, and have imaginary
parts when they are negative. In this paper we show how these problems
of principle are avoided by the resummation procedure, so that working
consistently at 2-loop order the Goldstone boson squared masses do not
appear at all in the minimization conditions. In practice, the numerical
effect of the resummation turns out to be very small for almost all
choices of the renormalization scale. We illustrate this with a
numerical example.
\section{Effective potential of the MSSM\label{sec:MSSM}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\setcounter{figure}{0}
\setcounter{table}{0}
\setcounter{footnote}{1}
The scalar potential of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model
are very much sensitive to higher order corrections,
so the minimization conditions for
the scalar potential also depend very
significantly on radiative corrections. The complete
2-loop effective potential of the MSSM has been given in
\cite{Martin:2001vx,Martin:2002iu}. We follow those works for
conventions and notations, in particular for the Lagrangian parameters
(also as specified in \cite{Martin:1997ns}) and mixing parameters, and for
1-loop and 2-loop integral functions.
Also, we follow the notation of using the name
of a particle to represent its squared mass in formulas,
for example
\beq
Z &=& \frac{1}{2} (g^2 + g'^2) (v_u^2 + v_d^2),
\qquad\quad
W \>=\> \frac{1}{2} g^2 (v_u^2 + v_d^2),
\\
t &=& y_t^2 v_u^2 ,
\qquad\quad
b \>=\> y_b^2 v_d^2 ,
\qquad\quad
\tau \>=\> y_\tau^2 v_d^2 .
\eeq
The MSSM effective potential can be written as
\beq
V_{\rm eff} &=& V^{(0)} + \Delta V,
\label{Veff}
\\
\Delta V&=& {1\over 16 \pi^2}V^{(1)}
+{1\over (16 \pi^2)^2}V^{(2)}
+{1\over (16 \pi^2)^3}V^{(3)}
+ \ldots
,
\eeq
where $V^{(0)}$ is the tree-level MSSM effective potential, expressed as
\beq
V^{(0)} =
(|\mu|^2 + m^2_{H_u}) v_u^2 + (|\mu|^2 + m^2_{H_d}) v_d^2
- 2 b v_u v_d
+{1\over 8}(g^2 + \gp^2) (v_u^2 - v_d^2)^2.
\eeq
Here $\mu$, the Higgs supersymmetric mass parameter,
can have an arbitrary phase.
The Higgs fields also have soft supersymmetry-breaking
squared-mass running parameters $m_{H_u}^2$, $m_{H_d}^2$, and $b$.
The first two of these are definitely real,
and by convention $b$ is taken to be real at the renormalization
scale $Q$ at which the effective potential is to be minimized. There
are two gauge-eigenstate complex scalar doublet Higgs fields
$H_u = (H_u^+, H_u^0 )$ and $H_d = (H_d^0, H_d^- )$. The electrically
neutral components have VEVs $v_u$ and $v_d$, which are taken to be
real and positive by convention. In general, $V^{(0)}$ also contains
a constant vacuum energy term, necessary for renormalization group invariance
\cite{Einhorn:1982pp,Kastening:1991gv,Bando:1992np},
but we do not include it here because it plays no
direct role in the following.
The gauge-eigenstate fields can be expressed in terms
of the tree-level squared-mass
eigenstate fields as
\beq
\pmatrix
{H_u^0 \cr H_d^0}
&=& \pmatrix{v_u \cr v_d}
+ {1\over \sqrt{2}} { R}_\alpha \pmatrix{h^0 \cr H^0}
+ {i\over \sqrt{2}} { R_{\beta_0}} \pmatrix{G^0 \cr A^0}
\eeq
and
\beq
\pmatrix{H_u^+ \cr H_d^{-*}}
= {R}_{\beta_\pm} \pmatrix{G^+ \cr H^+},
\eeq
$G^0$ and $\Gpm$ are Nambu-Goldstone
fields, and $h^0$, $H^0$, $A^0$, and $\Hpm$ are
the Higgs tree-level mass eigenstate fields,
and $v_u$ and $v_d$ are the classical fields on which the masses and couplings
entering the effective potential depends.
The orthogonal matrices that accomplish the squared-mass diagonalizations are written
\beq
R_{\beta_0} &=& \pmatrix{s_{\beta_0} & c_{\beta_0} \cr -c_{\beta_0} & s_{\beta_0}},
\qquad\qquad
R_{\beta_\pm} \>=\> \pmatrix{s_{\beta_\pm} & c_{\beta_\pm}
\cr -c_{\beta_\pm} & s_{\beta_\pm}},
\\
R_\alpha &=& \pmatrix{c_\alpha & s_\alpha \cr -s_\alpha & c_\alpha},
\eeq
where we use the abbreviations $c_{\beta_0} = \cos(\beta_0)$ and
$s_{\beta_0} = \sin(\beta_0)$, etc. In the following,
we also write, for example,
$s_{2\alpha}$ and $c_{2\alpha}$ for $\sin(2\alpha)$ and
$\cos(2\alpha)$, respectively.
Unlike the case in the ordinary Standard Model, the squared masses
of the charged and neutral
Goldstone bosons in the MSSM are not equal at tree level.
They are given by
\beq
G^0 &=& |\mu|^2 + {1\over 2} (m_{H_u}^2 + m_{H_d}^2)
- {1\over 2} \Big \{ \bigl [m_{H_u}^2 - m_{H_d}^2 +
\frac{(g^2 + g'^2)}{2} (v_u^2 - v_d^2) \bigr ]^2 + 4 b^2\Big\}^{1/2} ,
\phantom{xxxx}
\label{eq:G0noexp}
\\
\Gpm &=& |\mu|^2 + {1\over 2} (m_{H_u}^2 + m_{H_d}^2) +
{g^2\over4} (v_u^2 + v_d^2)
\nonumber \\&&
- {1\over 2} \Big\{ \bigl [m_{H_u}^2 - m_{H_d}^2 + {g'^2\over 2}
(v_u^2 - v_d^2) \bigr ]^2 + (2b+ g^2 v_u v_d)^2\Big\}^{1/2} .
\label{eq:Gpnoexp}
\eeq
The tree-level squared masses of the other Higgs fields are:
\beq
A^0 &=& |\mu|^2 + {1\over 2} (m_{H_u}^2 + m_{H_d}^2)
+ {1\over 2} \Big\{ \bigl [m_{H_u}^2 - m_{H_d}^2 +
{(g^2 + g'^2)\over 2} (v_u^2 - v_d^2) \bigr ]^2 + 4 b^2 \Big \}^{1/2}
,
\phantom{xxx}
\\
\Hpm &=& |\mu|^2 + {1\over 2} (m_{H_u}^2 + m_{H_d}^2) +
{g^2\over4} (v_u^2 + v_d^2)
\nonumber \\&&
+ {1\over 2} \Big\{ \bigl [m_{H_u}^2 - m_{H_d}^2 +
{g'^2\over 2} (v_u^2 - v_d^2) \bigr ]^2 + (2b+ g^2 v_u v_d)^2\Big \}^{1/2}
,
\\
h^0 &=& |\mu|^2 + {1\over 2} (m_{H_u}^2 + m_{H_d}^2) +
{(g^2 + g'^2)\over 4} (v_u^2 + v_d^2)
\nonumber \\&&
- {1\over 2} \Big\{ \bigl [
m_{H_u}^2 - m_{H_d}^2 + (g^2 + g'^2) (v_u^2 - v_d^2)\bigr ]^2
+(2b + (g^2 + g'^2) v_u v_d )^2\Big \}^{1/2}
,
\\
H^0 &=& |\mu|^2 + {1\over 2} (m_{H_u}^2 + m_{H_d}^2)
+ {(g^2 + g'^2)\over 4} (v_u^2 + v_d^2)
\nonumber \\&&
+ {1\over 2} \Big\{ \bigl [
m_{H_u}^2 - m_{H_d}^2 + (g^2 + g'^2) (v_u^2 - v_d^2)]^2
+(2 b + (g^2 + g'^2) v_u v_d)^2\Big \}^{1/2}.
\eeq
The minimization conditions of the full effective potential can be written as
\beq
{1\over 2v_u}{\frac{\partial V_{\rm eff}}{\partial v_u}} &=&
{1\over 2v_d}{\frac{\partial V_{\rm eff}}{\partial v_d}} = 0 .
\eeq
We define $\delta_u$ and $\delta_d$ by
\beq
\delta_u &=& \frac{1}{2 v_u} \frac{\partial}{\partial v_u} \Delta V,
\\
\delta_d &=& \frac{1}{2 v_d} \frac{\partial}{\partial v_d} \Delta V,
\eeq
so that at the minimum of the full effective potential
\beq
|\mu|^2+m_{H_u}^2-b{v_d\over v_u}+{(g^2+g'^2)\over 4} (v_u^2 - v_d^2) &=&
-\delta_u
,
\label{eq:deltau}
\\
|\mu|^2+m_{H_d}^2-b{v_u\over v_d}+{(g^2+g'^2)\over 4} (v_d^2 - v_u^2) &=&
-\delta_d
.
\label{eq:deltad}
\eeq
The minimum of the effective
potential is not a minimum of the tree-level potential. For
this reason, the angles
$\beta_0$ and $\beta_\pm$ for the rotations in the
pseudo-scalar and charged Higgs sector are distinct
from each other, and are also different from the angle
$\beta$ defined by
\beq
\tan \beta \equiv v_u/v_d .
\eeq
Hence it is possible to write an exact relation between
$\beta_0$ and $\beta$
\beq
\cot(2\beta_0) &=& \cot(2\beta) + \frac{\delta_d-\delta_u}{2b} .
\label{eq:cot2beta0}
\eeq
An approximate relation can be obtained by expanding
in terms of $\delta_u$ and $\delta_u$:
\beq
\tan\beta_0 &=& \tan\beta +{\delta_u-\delta_d\over b} s_\beta^2
+{(\delta_u-\delta_d)^2 \over 8b^2} s_{2\beta}^3 + \ldots \>
\eeq
Similar relations between $\beta_{\pm}$ and $\beta$ can be achieved in a
similar manner, and give the same result with the
replacement of $b$ by $b+g^2 v_uv_d/2$:
\beq
\cot(2\beta_{\pm}) &=& \cot(2\beta) + {\delta_d-\delta_u\over 2b+g^{2}v_uv_d},
\\
\tan\beta_{\pm} &=& \tan\beta+{\delta_u-\delta_d\over b+g^{2}v_uv_d/2}
s_\beta^2
+{(\delta_u-\delta_d)^2 \over 8(b+g^{2}v_uv_d/2)^2}s_{2\beta}^3 + \ldots \>
.
\label{eq:tanbetapm}
\eeq
Substituting eqs.~(\ref{eq:deltau}) and (\ref{eq:deltad})
in eqs.~(\ref{eq:G0noexp}) and (\ref{eq:Gpnoexp})
and expanding
in $\delta_u$ and $\delta_d$,
\beq
G^0 &=& - \delta_u s_\beta^2 - \delta_d c_\beta^2
- {(\delta_u -\delta_d)^2 \over 8b} s_{2\beta}^3
+ \ldots
,
\\
\Gpm &=& - \delta_u s_\beta^2 - \delta_d c_\beta^2
- {(\delta_u -\delta_d)^2 \over 8(b+g^{2}v_uv_d/2)}s_{2\beta}^3
+ \ldots
.
\eeq
Thus, at the minimum of the full 2 loop effective potential of MSSM, the
tree-level masses of the Goldstone bosons are not zero, but can be
considered to be of 1-loop order, and unlike the situation in
the Standard Model they are not exactly the same, with the difference
between them being effectively of 2-loop order, with an additional mass
suppression when $b$ is large, as well as a $1/\tan^3\beta$ suppression.
\section{Expansion of
the 2-loop MSSM effective potential for small $G^0$, $G^\pm$
\label{sec:renormalized}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\setcounter{figure}{0}
\setcounter{table}{0}
\setcounter{footnote}{1}
In this section we consider the leading contributions to the effective potential
in an expansion in small $G^0$, $G^\pm$ in the MSSM.
In the \DRbarprime scheme the one loop order correction
to the MSSM potential can be written as
\beq
V^{(1)}(G^0,\Gpm) &=& V^{(1)}(0,0)+f(G^0) + 2f(\Gpm),
\label{eq:expV1}
\eeq
where the 1-loop integral function is defined as
\beq
f(x) &=& {x^2 \over 4} (\overline{\ln} x - 3/2),
\eeq
with
\beq
\overline{\ln}(x) = \ln(x/Q^2)
\eeq
where $Q$ is the renormalization scale. In eq.~(\ref{eq:expV1}),
$f(G^0) + 2f(\Gpm)$ is the Goldstone bosons
contribution and the terms independent of $G^0$ and $\Gpm$ are
\beq
V^{(1)}(0,0) &=& f(h^0) + f(H^0) + f(A^0) + 2 f(H^\pm)
+ 2 \sum_{\tilde f} n_{\tilde f} f(\tilde f)
- 2 \sum_{i=1}^{4} f(\tilde N_i)
- 4 \sum_{i=1}^{2} f(\tilde C_i)
\nonumber \\ &&
- 16 f (\tilde g)
- 12 f(t) - 12 f(b) - 4 f(\tau)
+ 3 f(Z) + 6 f(W) ,
\eeq
where the sfermions are called $\tilde f$, with $n_{\tilde f} = 3$ for squarks
and 1 for sleptons.
At the two loop order, we find it convenient to expand
for small $G^0$ and $G^\pm$, neglecting
quadratic terms, in the form
\beq
V^{(2)}(G^0,\Gpm) &=&
V^{(2)}(0,0) + {1\over 2} A(G^0) \Delta_1^0+A(\Gpm) \Delta_1^{\pm}+
{1\over 2} \Omega^0 G^0 + \Omega^{\pm} \Gpm + \ldots ,
\eeq
where $\Delta_1^0$, $\Delta_1^{\pm}$, $\Omega^0$, and
$\Omega^\pm$ do not depend on $G^0$ or $G^\pm$, and
\beq
A(x) &=& x (\overline{\ln} x - 1).
\label{eq:defA}
\eeq
The expressions for $V^{(1)}(0,0)$
and $V^{(2)}(0,0)$ can be obtained by taking $G^0,\Gpm=0$
in every expression that contributes to $V^{(1)}$ and
$V^{(2)}$ in ref.~\cite{Martin:2001vx}. We prefer to write in this way because
we want to deal with the Goldstone
bosons separately. The logarithmic terms $G^0\overline{\ln} G^0$ and $G^\pm\overline{\ln} G^\pm$ are
included in $A(G^0)$ and $A(\Gpm)$. The ellipses represent terms
in higher order of $G^0$ and $G^\pm$.
To obtain the expressions for $\Delta_1^0$, $\Delta_1^{\pm}$, $\Omega^0$, and
$\Omega^\pm$, we first expand the 2-loop integral functions defined in
ref.~\cite{Martin:2001vx} that involve scalars:
\beq
f_{SSS}(G,x,y) &=& f_{SSS}(0,x,y)+ P_{SS}(x,y) A(G) + R_{SS}(x,y) G + {\cal O} (G^2),
\\
f_{SS}(G,x) &=& A(x) A(G),
\\
f_{FFS}(x,y,G) &=& f_{FFS}(x,y,0)+ P_{FF}(x,y) A(G) + R_{FF}(x,y) G + {\cal O} (G^2),
\\
f_{\overline{FF}S}(x,y,G) &=& f_{\overline{FF}S}(x,y,0)+ P_{\overline{FF}}(x,y) A(G) + R_{\overline{FF}}(x,y) G + {\cal O} (G^2),
\\
f_{SSV}(G,x,y) &=& f_{SSV}(0,x,y)+ R_{SV} (x,y) G +{\cal O} (G^2),
\\
F_{VS}(x,G) &=& 3 A(x) A(G),
\\
F_{VVS}(x,y,G) &=& F_{VVS}(x,y,0)+ P_{VV}(x,y) A(G) + R_{VV}(x,y) G +{\cal O} (G^2).
\eeq
For the $P$ and $R$ functions defined in this way, we find:
\beq
P_{SS}(x,y) &=& \frac {A(x)-A(y)}{x-y},
\\
P_{SS}(x,x) &=& 1+ A(x)/x,
\\
P_{FF}(x,y) &=& -2 \Big[\frac {xA(x)-yA(y)}{x-y}\Big] ,
\\
P_{FF}(x,x) &=& -2 x - 4 A(x),
\\
P_{\overline{FF}}(x,y) &=& -2 P_{SS}(x,y),
\\
P_{VV}(x,y) &=& 3 P_{SS}(x,y),
\eeq
and
\beq
R_{SS}(x,y) &=& \Big \{(x+y)^2 + 2 A(x) A(y) - 2x A(x) -2y A(y)
\nonumber \\ &&
+ (x+y)I(0,x,y)\Big \}/(x-y)^2
\\
R_{SS}(x,x) &=& -3 - 2 A(x)/x - A(x)^2/2 x^2
\\
R_{FF}(x,y) &=&
-\Big [ (x+y) \Big \{2 A(x) A(y) - 2 x A(x) -2 y A(y) +(x+y)^2\Big \}
\nonumber \\ &&
+ 2 (x^2+y^2) I(0,x,y)\Big ]/(x-y)^2
\\
R_{FF}(x,x) &=& 8x + 2A(x) + 2A(x)^2/x
\\
R_{\overline{FF}}(x,y) &=& -2 R_{SS}(x,y)
\\
R_{VV}(x,y) &=&
{1 \over 4 x y (x-y)^2}\Big [3 A(x) A(y) \Big\{x^2+y^2+ 6 x y\Big\} - 24 x y\Big \{x A(x) +y A(y)\Big \}
\nonumber \\ &&
+14 x y (x^2+y^2) + 20 x^2 y^2 - 3(x-y)^2\Big \{x I(0,0,x)+y I(0,0,y)\Big \}
\nonumber \\ &&
+ 3(x+y)^3 I(0,x,y) \Big ]
\\
R_{VV}(0,x) &=& {11\over 4} + {3\over x} I(0,0,x)- {9 A(x) \over 2 x}
\\
R_{SV}(x,y) &=&
{1\over y} \Big \{3(x+y) I(0,x,y)-3 x I(0,0,x) + 3 A(x) A(y) + 2 x y +y^2\Big \}
\\
R_{SV}(x,0) &=& -x+6 A(x)
\eeq
Expressions for $I(0,x,y)$ and $I(0,0,x)$ in the notation of the present paper
in terms of logarithms and dilogarithms
can be found in
equation (2.26)-(2.28) of \cite{Martin:2001vx}. The expansion of these
functions in terms of small $G^0$ and $G^\pm$ also
can be obtained from eqs.~(2.29)-(2.31) of the same reference.
[Although they are not needed for the MSSM as discussed in this paper,
for the \MSbar scheme, we find instead for the expansions of the
relevant functions defined in eqs.~(4.17) and (4.18) of
ref.~\cite{Martin:2001vx} the results:
\beq
f_{VS}(x,G) &=& 3 A(x) A(G) + 2 x A(G),
\\
f_{VVS}(x,y,G) &=& f_{VVS}(x,y,0)+ p_{VV}(x,y) A(G) + r_{VV}(x,y) G +{\cal O} (G^2),
\eeq
where
\beq
p_{VV}(x,y) &=& P_{VV}(x,y)+2,
\\
r_{VV}(x,y) &=& R_{VV}(x,y)-1.
\eeq
These could be useful for example in non-supersymmetric two-Higgs doublet models.
The other functions do not differ between the \MSbar and \DRbarprime schemes.]
Hence, one can write the
expressions for $\Delta_1^0$, $\Delta_1^\pm$, $\Omega^0$, and $\Omega^\pm$
in terms of the functions defined above. For the MSSM, we find:
\beq
\Delta_1^0 &=&
(\lambda_{G^0A^0h^0})^2 P_{SS}(A^0,h^0)
+(\lambda_{G^0A^0H^0})^2 P_{SS}(A^0,H^0)
+(\lambda_{G^0G^0h^0})^2 P_{SS}(0,h^0)
\nonumber \\&&
+(\lambda_{G^0G^0H^0})^2 P_{SS}(0,H^0)
+2|\lambda_{G^0G^+H^-}|^2 P_{SS}(0,H^+)
\nonumber \\&&
+\sum_{\tilde f,\tilde f'}n_{\tilde f}|\lambda_{G^0\tilde f\tilde f'^*}|^2 P_{SS}(\tilde f,\tilde f')
+{1\over 2}\lambda_{G^0G^0h^0h^0} A(h^0)
+{1\over 2}\lambda_{G^0G^0H^0H^0} A(H^0)
\nonumber \\&&
+{1\over 2}\lambda_{G^0G^0A^0A^0} A(A^0)
+\lambda_{G^0G^0\Hp\Hm} A(\Hp)
+\sum_{\tilde f}n_{\tilde f}\lambda_{G^0G^0\tilde f\tilde f^*} A(\tilde f)
\nonumber \\&&
+6|Y_{t\overline tG^0}|^2 P_{FF}(t,t)
+6 t (Y_{t\overline tG^0})^2 P_{\overline{FF}}(t,t)
\nonumber \\&&
+6|Y_{b\overline bG^0}|^2 P_{FF}(b,b)
+ 6 b (Y_{b\overline bG^0})^2 P_{\overline{FF}}(b,b)
\nonumber \\&&
+2|Y_{\tau\overline{\tau}G^0}|^2 P_{FF}(\tau,\tau) + 2 \tau(Y_{\tau\overline{\tau}G^0})^2 P_{\overline{FF}}(\tau,\tau)
\nonumber \\&&
+\sum_{i,j=1}^{2}\Big\{2|Y_{\Ci^+\Cj^-G^0}|^2 P_{FF}(\Ci,\Cj)
+2\sqrt {\Ci\Cj} {\rm Re}[Y_{\Ci^+\Cj^-G^0}Y_{\Cj^+\Ci^-G^0}] P_{\overline{FF}}(\Ci,\Cj)\Big\}
\nonumber \\&&
+\sum_{i,j=1}^{4}\Big\{|Y_{\Ni\Nj G^0}|^2 P_{FF}(\Ni,\Nj)
+\sqrt {\Ni\Nj}{\rm Re}[(Y_{\Ni\Nj G^0})^2] P_{\overline{FF}}(\Ni,\Nj)\Big\}
\nonumber \\&&
+{3g^2 \over 2}A(W) + {3(g^2+\gp^2)\over 4}A(Z)
\eeq
\beq
\Omega^0 &=&
(\lambda_{G^0A^0h^0})^2 R_{SS}(A^0,h^0)
+(\lambda_{G^0A^0H^0})^2 R_{SS}(A^0,H^0)
+(\lambda_{G^0G^0h^0})^2 R_{SS}(0,h^0)
\nonumber \\&&
+(\lambda_{G^0G^0H^0})^2 R_{SS}(0,H^0)
+2|\lambda_{G^0G^+H^-}|^2 R_{SS}(0,H^+)
+\sum_{\tilde f,\tilde f'}n_{\tilde f}|\lambda_{G^0\tilde f\tilde f'^*}|^2 R_{SS}(\tilde f,\tilde f')
\nonumber \\&&
+6|Y_{t\overline tG^0}|^2 R_{FF}(t,t)
+6 t (Y_{t\overline tG^0})^2 R_{\overline{FF}}(t,t)
\nonumber \\&&
+6|Y_{b\overline bG^0}|^2 R_{FF}(b,b)
+6 b (Y_{b\overline bG^0})^2 R_{\overline{FF}}(b,b)
\nonumber \\&&
+2|Y_{\tau\overline{\tau}G^0}|^2 R_{FF}(\tau,\tau) + 2 \tau(Y_{\tau\overline{\tau}G^0})^2 R_{\overline{FF}}(\tau,\tau)
\nonumber \\&&
+\sum_{i,j=1}^{2}\Big\{ 2|Y_{\Ci^+\Cj^-G^0}|^2 R_{FF}(\Ci,\Cj)
+2\sqrt {\Ci\Cj} {\rm Re}[Y_{\Ci^+\Cj^-G^0}Y_{\Cj^+\Ci^-G^0}] R_{\overline{FF}}(\Ci,\Cj)\Big\}
\nonumber \\&&
+\sum_{i,j=1}^{4}\Big\{|Y_{\Ni\Nj G^0}|^2 R_{FF}(\Ni,\Nj)
+\sqrt {\Ni\Nj} {\rm Re}[(Y_{\Ni\Nj G^0})^2] R_{\overline{FF}}(\Ni,\Nj)\Big\}
\nonumber \\&&
+{g^2 + \gp^2 \over 4} \Big \{(\calpha\cbetaO+\salpha\sbetaO)^2 R_{SV}(H^0,Z) + (\salpha\cbetaO-\calpha\sbetaO)^2 R_{SV}(h^0,Z)\Big\}
\nonumber \\&&
+{g^2 \over 2} \Big \{(\cbetaO\cbetapm+\sbetaO\sbetapm)^2R_{SV}(0,W)+(\sbetaO\cbetapm-\cbetaO\sbetapm)^2 R_{SV}(\Hpm,W)\Big\}
\eeq
\beq
\Delta_1^{\pm} &=&
|\lambda_{h^0\Gp\Hm}|^2 P_{SS}(h^0,\Hp)
+|\lambda_{A^0\Gp\Hm}|^2 P_{SS}(A^0,\Hp)
+|\lambda_{H^0\Gp\Hm}|^2 P_{SS}(H^0,\Hp)
\nonumber \\&&
+|\lambda_{h^0\Gp\Gm}|^2 P_{SS}(0,h^0)
+|\lambda_{H^0\Gp\Gm}|^2 P_{SS}(0,H^0)
+|\lambda_{G^0G^+H^-}|^2 P_{SS}(0,H^+)
\nonumber \\&&
+\sum_{\tilde f,\tilde f'}n_{\tilde f} |\lambda_{\Gp\tilde f\tilde f'^*}|^2 P_{SS}(\tilde f,\tilde f')
+\lambda_{\Gp\Hp\Gm\Hm} A(\Hp)
+{1\over 2}\lambda_{H^0H^0\Gp\Gm} A(H^0)
\nonumber \\&&
+{1\over 2}\lambda_{h^0h^0\Gp\Gm} A(h^0)
+{1\over 2}\lambda_{A^0A^0\Gp\Gm} A(A^0)
+\sum_{\tilde f}n_{\tilde f}\lambda_{\Gp\Gm\tilde f\tilde f^*} A(\tilde f)
\nonumber \\&&
+3\Big \{|Y_{\overline tb\Gp}|^2+|Y_{\overline bt\Gm}|^2\Big \} P_{FF}(t,b)
+6 Y_{\overline tb\Gp} Y_{\overline bt\Gm}\sqrt{t b} P_{\overline{FF}}(t,b)
\nonumber \\&&
+|Y_{\overline \tau\nu_{\tau} \Gm}|^2 P_{FF}(0,\tau)
+\sum_{i=1}^{2}\sum_{j=1}^{4}\Big[\Big \{|Y_{\Ci^+\Nj G^-}|^2+|Y_{\Ci^-\Nj G^+}|^2\Big \} P_{FF}(\Ci,\Nj)
\nonumber \\&&
+2 {\rm Re}[Y_{\Ci^+ \Nj G^-}Y_{\Ci^-\Nj G^+}] \sqrt {\Ci\Nj} P_{\overline{FF}}(\Ci,\Nj)\Big]
\nonumber \\&&
+{3g^2\over 2} A(W) + {3(g^2-\gp^2)^2 \over 4(g^2+\gp^2)}A(Z)
\nonumber \\&&
+ {g^2 \gp^2 \over2(g^2+\gp^2)} (\cbetapm v_d+ \sbetapm v_u)^2 \Big\{g^2 P_{VV}(0,W)+ \gp^2 P_{VV}(W,Z)\Big\}
\eeq
\beq
\Omega^{\pm} &=&
|\lambda_{h^0\Gp\Hm}|^2 R_{SS}(h^0,\Hp)
+|\lambda_{A^0\Gp\Hm}|^2 R_{SS}(A^0,\Hp)
+|\lambda_{H^0\Gp\Hm}|^2 R_{SS}(H^0,\Hp)
\nonumber \\&&
+|\lambda_{h^0\Gp\Gm}|^2 R_{SS}(0,h^0)
+|\lambda_{H^0\Gp\Gm}|^2 R_{SS}(0,H^0)
+|\lambda_{G^0G^+H^-}|^2 R_{SS}(0,H^+)
\nonumber \\&&
+\sum_{\tilde f,\tilde f'}n_{\tilde f} |\lambda_{\Gp\tilde f\tilde f'^*}|^2 R_{SS}(\tilde f,\tilde f')
+3\Big \{|Y_{\overline tb\Gp}|^2+|Y_{\overline bt\Gm}|^2\Big \} R_{FF}(t,b)
\nonumber \\&&
+6 Y_{\overline tb\Gp} Y_{\overline bt\Gm} \sqrt{t b} R_{\overline{FF}}(t,b)
+|Y_{\overline \tau\nu_{\tau} \Gm}|^2 R_{FF}(0,\tau)
\nonumber \\&&
+\sum_{i=1}^{2}\sum_{j=1}^{4}\Big[\Big \{|(Y_{\Ci^+\Nj G^-}|^2+|Y_{\Ci^-\Nj G^+}|^2\Big \} R_{FF}(\Ci,\Nj)
\nonumber \\&&
+2 {\rm Re}[Y_{\Ci^+\Nj G^-}Y_{\Ci^-\Nj G^+}] \sqrt {\Ci\Nj} R_{\overline{FF}}(\Ci,\Nj)\Big]
+{(g^2-\gp^2)^2 \over4 (g^2+\gp^2)} R_{SV}(0,Z)
\nonumber \\&&
+ {g^2\over 4}\Big\{(\calpha\cbetapm+\salpha\sbetapm)^2 R_{SV}(H^0,W)+(\salpha\cbetapm-\calpha\sbetapm)^2 R_{SV}(h^0,W)
\nonumber \\&&
+(\sbetaO\cbetapm-\cbetaO\sbetapm)^2 R_{SV}(A^0,W)+(\cbetaO\cbetapm+\sbetaO\sbetapm)^2 R_{SV}(0,W) \Big\}
\nonumber \\&&
+ {g^2 \gp^2 \over2(g^2+\gp^2)} (\cbetapm v_d+ \sbetapm v_u)^2 \Big\{g^2 R_{VV}(0,W)+ \gp^2 R_{VV}(W,Z)\Big\}
.
\eeq
All of the associated couplings appearing above
are taken from Section II of
ref.~\cite{Martin:2004kr}, using the following coefficients:
\beq
&k_{uh^0} = k_{d H^0} = \calpha,\qquad\qquad&
k_{uH^0} = -k_{d h^0} = \salpha,
\\
&k_{uG^0} = k_{d A^0} = i\sbetaO,\qquad\qquad&
k_{uA^0} = -k_{d G^0} = i\cbetaO,
\\
&k_{uG^+} = k_{d H^+} = \sbetapm,\qquad\qquad&
k_{uH^+} = -k_{d G^+} = \cbetapm .
\eeq
At higher loop orders, the singularities in the effective potential as
$G^0, G^\pm \rightarrow 0$ are derived from diagrams consisting of
chains of $\ell-1$ one-loop subdiagrams connected by $\ell-1$ Goldstone
boson propagators, as shown in figure \ref{fig:chains}.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.94\linewidth,angle=0]{figure_chains.eps}
\begin{minipage}[]{0.98\linewidth}
\caption{\label{fig:chains} The leading contribution at fixed loop order
to the effective potential
as $G^0, G^\pm \rightarrow 0$ comes from vacuum diagrams with chains
of $\ell-1$ one-loop subdiagrams involving heavy particles
connected by $\ell-1$ Goldstone
boson propagators.}
\end{minipage}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In general, the grey blobs in the figure
represent 1-particle irreducible subdiagrams,
but the leading contribution as $G^0, G^\pm \rightarrow 0$
at any fixed loop order $\ell$ comes when
these are 1-loop subdiagrams. (Beyond the leading order as
$G^0, G^\pm \rightarrow 0$
at a fixed loop order, one must include other diagrams.)
The calculation of this class of diagrams, treating the gray blobs
as constant squared-mass insertions, then reduces down to a 1-loop
integration, as described in
refs.~\cite{Martin:2014bca,Elias-Miro:2014pca}. For
$G^0,\Gpm$ much less than the squared-mass scale of the blobs, the
contributions to
$V_{\rm eff}$ from these classes of diagrams can be written as
\beq
\frac{1}{16 \pi^2} \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{1}{n!} \left [
(\Delta^0)^n
f^{(n)}(G^0) + 2 (\Delta^\pm)^n
f^{(n)}(\Gpm) \right ] + \ldots
\label{eq:Veffone}
\eeq
where $n = \ell-1$ with $\ell$ denoting the loop order, and
$f^{(n)}(G)$ is the $n$th derivative, with
\beq
f^{(1)}(G) &=& A(G)/2,
\\
f^{(2)}(G) &=& \overline{\ln}(G)/2
\\
f^{(n)}(G) &=& \frac{1}{2} (-1)^{n-1} (n-3)!\> G^{2-n}\qquad\quad \mbox{(for $n\geq 3$)},
\eeq
and the $\Delta$'s result from the integrations over heavy 1-particle irreducible subdiagrams. The charged and neutral Goldstone bosons
$G^0$ and $\Gpm$ have distinct loop expansions for these subdiagram quantities:
\beq
\Delta^0 &=& \frac{1}{16\pi^2} \Delta^0_1 + \frac{1}{(16\pi^2)^2} \Delta^0_2 + \ldots\>
\\
\Delta^\pm &=& \frac{1}{16\pi^2} \Delta^\pm_1 +
\frac{1}{(16\pi^2)^2} \Delta^\pm_2 + \ldots\>
\eeq
In the following, we consider only the leading terms in small
$G^0$ and $G^\pm$ at each loop order,
hence the 2-loop contributions $\Delta^0_2$ and $\Delta^\pm_2$ and higher orders
can be neglected. The contributions $\Delta^0_1$ and $\Delta^\pm_1$ are given above,
as they can be read off of the known 2-loop results
[the $n=1$ term in eq.~(\ref{eq:Veffone})].
From these, we can predict the
leading logarithmic singularities in the 3-loop effective potential (before resummation)
as $G^0, G^\pm \rightarrow 0$, corresponding to the $n=2$ term in eq.~(\ref{eq:Veffone}):
\beq
V^{(3)} &=&
\frac{1}{4} (\Delta_1^0)^2\>\overline{\ln}(G^0)
\>+\> \frac{1}{2} (\Delta_1^\pm)^2\>\overline{\ln}(G^\pm) + \ldots.
\eeq
where the ellipses means terms finite as $G^0, G^\pm \rightarrow 0$. The $\overline{\ln}(G^0)$
and $\overline{\ln}(G^\pm)$ terms here can be eliminated, along with the leading 2-loop order terms proportional to $G^0 \overline{\ln}(G^0)$
and $G^\pm \overline{\ln}(G^\pm)$, by the resummation described below.
\section{Resummation of leading Goldstone contributions in MSSM\label{sec:resum}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\setcounter{figure}{0}
\setcounter{table}{0}
\setcounter{footnote}{1}
One can now sum the contributions to $V_{\rm eff}$
indicated in eq.~(\ref{eq:Veffone}) to all loop orders, with the result
\beq
\frac{1}{16 \pi^2} f(G^0 + \Delta^0)
+ \frac{2}{16 \pi^2} f(G^\pm + \Delta^\pm) + \ldots \>
\label{eq:resumleading}
\eeq
We have checked that at the minimum of the effective
potential, $G^0 + \frac{1}{16\pi^2} \Delta^0_1 = 0$ and
$G^\pm + \frac{1}{16\pi^2} \Delta^\pm_1 = 0$, up to terms
of 2-loop order, so that eq.~(\ref{eq:resumleading}) is 0 and has vanishing
first derivatives there, up to terms of 3-loop order.
Therefore, if the effective potential $V_{\rm eff}$ has been obtained
at loop order $\ell$, then the corresponding
resummed effective potential can be expressed as
\beq
\widehat{V}_{\rm eff}
&=&
V_{\rm eff} + \frac{1}{16 \pi^2} \left [
f(G^0 + \Delta^0) - \sum_{n=0}^{\ell-1}
\frac{(\Delta^0)^n}{n!}
f^{(n)}(G^0) \right ]
\nonumber \\&&
+ \frac{2}{16 \pi^2} \left [
f(G^\pm + \Delta^\pm) - \sum_{n=0}^{\ell-1}
\frac{(\Delta^\pm)^n}{n!}
f^{(n)}(G^\pm) \right ] .
\label{eq:resumgen}
\eeq
After expanding this equation, there are no terms
involving $G^0\overline{\ln} G^0$ and $G^\pm\overline{\ln} G^\pm$ at 2-loop order.
The contributions of the different terms involving the Goldstone
bosons in the 2-loop contribution
were given in the previous section. From these, we find that the
resummed MSSM effective potential through 2-loop order can be
written from eq.~(\ref{eq:resumgen}) as
\beq
\widehat{V}_{\rm eff} &=& V^{(0)} +
\frac{1}{16 \pi^2} \left [V^{(1)}(0,0) +
f(G^0 + \Delta^0) +2f(G^\pm + \Delta^\pm)\right ]
\nonumber \\&&
+\frac{1}{(16 \pi^2)^2} \left [V^{(2)}(0,0)
+{1\over 2} \Omega^0 G^0 + \Omega^\pm \Gpm \right] ,
\label{eq:Veffresummed}
\eeq
where 2-loop order terms of order $G^2$ have been neglected, as they cannot affect the minimization conditions at 2-loop order.
In summary, one replaces the 1-loop Goldstone contributions by functions with arguments shifted by the $\Delta$'s, and sets the Goldstone boson contributions at
2-loop order to 0, with additional 2-loop
terms linear in $G^0$ and $G^\pm$ (but with no logarithms of them). The last terms are
necessary for the minimization conditions described in the next section.
\section{Minimization conditions for the resummed MSSM effective potential\label{sec:min}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\setcounter{figure}{0}
\setcounter{table}{0}
\setcounter{footnote}{1}
\subsection{Minimization conditions with Goldstone boson resummation\label{sec:minresum}}
In this section, we consider the minimization condition of the resummed
effective potential, obtained by requiring the vanishing of the derivatives with
respect to $v_u$ and $v_d$ of $\widehat{V}_{\rm eff}$
in eq.~(\ref{eq:Veffresummed}). We note first that the 1-loop Goldstone terms have
no effect,
because at the minimum of $\widehat{V}_{\rm eff}$,
\beq
f'(G^0 + \Delta^0) &=& 0 ,
\qquad\>\>\>
f'(G^\pm + \Delta^\pm) \>=\> 0 ,
\eeq
up to terms of 3-loop order, due to the vanishing of the arguments as noted above.
The derivatives of $V^{(1)}(0,0)$ and $V^{(2)}(0,0)$ can be obtained from the
expressions in ref.~\cite{Martin:2001vx,Martin:2002iu}.
The remaining contribution comes from the terms proportional to
$\Omega^0 G^0$ and $\Omega^\pm G^\pm$
in eq.~(\ref{eq:Veffresummed}). In these terms, if the derivatives do not act on the
Goldstone boson squared masses, then
the result will be proportional to $G^0$ or $G^\pm$,
and thus is of order 3-loop order, and can be consistently neglected. We therefore only
need the derivatives of $G^0$ and $G^\pm$ with respect to $v_u$ and $v_d$,
and keeping only the terms independent of $\delta_u$ and $\delta_d$ when expanded in terms of them. For these derivatives, we find:
\beq
{1\over 2v_u}{\frac{\partial G^0}{\partial v_u}} &=&
{1\over 2v_u}{\frac{\partial G^\pm}{\partial v_u}} \>=\>
-{1\over 2v_d}{\frac{\partial G^0}{\partial v_d}} \>=\>
-{1\over 2v_d}{\frac{\partial G^\pm}{\partial v_d}} \>=\>
-\frac{1}{4}(g^2 + g'^2)c_{2 \beta}.
\eeq
Hence, we find that the minimization conditions can be written as
eqs.~(\ref{eq:deltau})-(\ref{eq:deltad}) with:
\beq
\delta_u &=& \frac{1}{16\pi^2} \widehat \Delta_u^{(1)} +
\frac{1}{(16\pi^2)^2} \widehat \Delta_u^{(2)}
,
\label{eq:deltauexp}
\\
\delta_d &=& \frac{1}{16\pi^2} \widehat \Delta_d^{(1)} +
\frac{1}{(16\pi^2)^2} \widehat \Delta_d^{(2)}
,
\label{eq:deltadexp}
\eeq
where
\beq
\widehat \Delta_u^{(1)} &=& \frac{1}{2 v_u} \frac{\partial}{\partial v_u}
V^{(1)}(0,0)
,
\label{eq:dV100du}
\\
\widehat \Delta_d^{(1)} &=& \frac{1}{2 v_d} \frac{\partial}{\partial v_d}
V^{(1)}(0,0)
,
\label{eq:dV100dd}
\\
\widehat \Delta_u^{(2)} &=& \frac{1}{2 v_u} \frac{\partial}{\partial v_u}
V^{(2)}(0,0)\>
- \frac{1}{8}(g^2 + g'^2)
c_{2\beta}
\left ( \Omega^0 + 2 \Omega^\pm \right ),
\label{eq:dV200uu}
\\
\widehat \Delta_d^{(2)} &=& \frac{1}{2 v_d} \frac{\partial}{\partial v_d}
V^{(2)}(0,0)
\>
+ \frac{1}{8}(g^2 + g'^2) c_{2\beta}
\left (\Omega^0 + 2 \Omega^\pm \right ) .
\label{eq:dV200dd}
\eeq
In words, this means that one can simply minimize the two-loop
effective potential with all Goldstone boson squared masses replaced by 0,
provided that one then includes extra terms
in the 2-loop order part of the minimization condition that are
proportional to the quantities $\Omega^0$ and $\Omega^\pm$ provided
in the previous section.
Explicitly, we find
\beq
\widehat \Delta_u^{(1)} &=& \frac{1}{2 v_u} \Biggl [
\frac{1}{2} A(h^0)\frac{\partial h^0}{\partial v_u} +
\frac{1}{2} A(H^0)\frac{\partial H^0}{\partial v_u} +
\frac{1}{2} A(A^0)\frac{\partial A^0}{\partial v_u} +
A(H^\pm)\frac{\partial H^\pm}{\partial v_u}
\nonumber \\ &&
+\sum_{\tilde f}n_{\tilde f}A(\tilde f)\frac{\partial \tilde f}{\partial v_u}
-\sum_{i=1}^{4}A(\tilde N_i)\frac{\partial \tilde N_i}{\partial v_u}
-2\sum_{i=1}^{2}A(\tilde C_i)\frac{\partial \tilde C_i}{\partial v_u}
-6 A(t) \frac{\partial t}{\partial v_u}
\nonumber \\ &&
+\frac{3}{2} A(Z) \frac{\partial Z}{\partial v_u}
+3 A(W)\frac{\partial W}{\partial v_u} \Biggr ] ,
\\
\widehat \Delta_d^{(1)} &=& \frac{1}{2 v_d} \Biggl [
\frac{1}{2} A(h^0)\frac{\partial h^0}{\partial v_d} +
\frac{1}{2} A(H^0)\frac{\partial H^0}{\partial v_d} +
\frac{1}{2} A(A^0)\frac{\partial A^0}{\partial v_d} +
A(H^\pm)\frac{\partial H^\pm}{\partial v_d}
\nonumber \\ &&
+\sum_{\tilde f}n_{\tilde f}A(\tilde f)\frac{\partial \tilde f}{\partial v_d}
-\sum_{i=1}^{4}A(\tilde N_i)\frac{\partial \tilde N_i}{\partial v_d}
-2\sum_{i=1}^{2}A(\tilde C_i)\frac{\partial \tilde C_i}{\partial v_d}
-6 A(b) \frac{\partial b}{\partial v_d}
\nonumber \\ &&
-2 A(\tau) \frac{\partial \tau}{\partial v_d}
+\frac{3}{2} A(Z) \frac{\partial Z}{\partial v_d}
+3 A(W)\frac{\partial W}{\partial v_d} \Biggr ].
\eeq
while the 2-loop contributions are straightforward to evaluate using eqs.~(\ref{eq:dV200uu}) and (\ref{eq:dV200dd})
but rather lengthy. In general, the partial derivatives of mixing angles and
squared masses, needed for finding the derivatives and thus the minimization conditions for effective potentials, can be derived in
the following manner. Consider diagonal squared mass matrices given by
\beq
M_D^2 &=& U M^2 U^\dagger
\eeq
where $M^2$ is a gauge-eigenstate squared mass matrix and $U$ is a unitary matrix.
The derivatives of the diagonal entries of $M_D^2$, which are the squared mass eigenvalues, with respect to any parameter $x$ on which they depend, can be found
by doing
\beq
\frac{\partial}{\partial x}(M_D^2)_{ii} = \left [ U\frac{\partial M^2}{\partial x} U^\dagger\right ]_{ii} ,
\eeq
with no sum on the repeated index $i$.
In order to calculate the derivatives of the two-loop effective potential one will
also need the derivatives of the mixing angles found in the unitary matrices denoted $U$.
Those can be found by
\beq
\frac{\partial}{\partial x}U &=& A U,
\eeq
where the matrix $A$ has elements
\beq
A_{ij} &=&
\left \{ \begin{array}{ll}
\Bigl[ U\frac{\partial M^2}{\partial x} U^\dagger\Bigr ]_{ij}/\left [(M_D^2)_{ii}-(M_D^2)_{jj}\right ], \qquad\quad (i \not= j),
\\[3pt]
\qquad\qquad\quad
0
\qquad\qquad \qquad\qquad \qquad\qquad (i =j),
\end{array}
\right.
\eeq
with again no summation on repeated indices.
One needs derivatives with respect to both the VEVs, $x=v_u, v_d$.
The preceding minimization conditions do not involve $G^0$ or $G^\pm$ at all,
but do include the quantities $b$, $\mu$, $m^2_{H_u}$, and $m^2_{H_d}$ through
the mixing angles $\alpha$, $\beta_0$, $\beta_\pm$ which enter the Higgs couplings
to other particles and the squared masses of the other Higgs states, $h^0$,
$H^0$, $A^0$, and $H^\pm$. One can now choose to eliminate any two of
the parameters $b$, $\mu$, $m^2_{H_u}$, and $m^2_{H_d}$
using the minimization conditions, by expanding in $\delta_u$ and $\delta_d$.
(This is analogous to eliminating the
negative Higgs squared mass quantity $m^2$ in the Standard Model case,
as explained in section IV of ref.~\cite{Martin:2014bca}.) This has the practical
advantage that the effective potential minimization conditions
can then be solved numerically without iteration.
\subsection{Reexpansion to eliminate $m^2_{H_u}$ and $m^2_{H_d}$\label{sec:reexpandhat}}
For example, working at the minimum of the effective potential, one can choose to
eliminate $m^2_{H_u}$ and $m^2_{H_d}$. To do so, it is convenient to define modified
tree-level Higgs squared masses:
\beq
\widehat A^0 &=& 2 b/s_{2 \beta},
\\
\widehat H^\pm &=& \widehat A^0 + W,
\\
\widehat H^0, \widehat h^0 &=&
\frac{1}{2} \left [\widehat A^0 + Z \pm \sqrt{
(\widehat A^0 + Z)^2 - 4 \widehat A^0 Z c_{2\beta}^2 } \right ] ,
\label{eq:defineh0hat}
\eeq
in terms of which the full tree-level squared masses
appearing in the formulas above can be expanded for small
$\delta_u$, $\delta_d$:
\beq
A^0 &=& \widehat A^0 - \delta_u c_\beta^2 - \delta_d s_\beta^2 + \ldots,
\\
H^\pm &=& \widehat H^\pm - \delta_u c_\beta^2 - \delta_d s_\beta^2 + \ldots,
\\
h^0 &=& \widehat h^0 - \frac{1}{2} (\delta_u + \delta_d) +
(\delta_u - \delta_d) c_{2 \beta}
\frac{(\widehat A^0 - Z)}{2(\widehat H^0 - \widehat h^0)}
+ \ldots ,
\\
H^0 &=& \widehat{H}^0 - \frac{1}{2} (\delta_u + \delta_d) +
(\delta_d - \delta_u) c_{2 \beta}
\frac{(\widehat A^0 - Z)}{2(\widehat H^0 - \widehat h^0)}
+ \ldots .
\eeq
We have already seen in eqs.~(\ref{eq:cot2beta0})-(\ref{eq:tanbetapm})
how to write exact expressions or
expansions for the mixing angles $\beta_0$ and $\beta_\pm$
in terms of the angle $\beta$ and the
radiative corrections $\delta_u$ and $\delta_d$.
Similarly, we find that
\beq
\cot(2\alpha) &=& \cot(2\widehat \alpha)
+\frac{\delta_d - \delta_u}{2 b + (g^2 + g'^2) v_u v_d},
\eeq
where
\beq
\cot(2\widehat\alpha) &=&
\left(\frac{\widehat A^0 - Z}{\widehat A^0 + Z}\right )
\cot(2\beta).
\eeq
Thus, all of the parameters of the Higgs sector,
namely the squared masses $h^0$, $H^0$, $A^0$, $H^\pm$
and the angles $\beta_0$, $\beta_\pm$, and $\alpha$
in the effective minimization condition
formulas above can be expanded (in $\delta_u$, $\delta_d$) about
the modified tree-level values
$\widehat h^0$, $\widehat H^0$, $\widehat A^0$, $\widehat H^\pm$,
$\widehat \alpha$, and $\beta$, which do not depend explicitly on
$m^2_{H_u}$ or $m^2_{H_d}$. After doing this expansion,
the quantities involving $\delta_u$ and $\delta_d$ from the 1-loop terms
can be grouped with the 2-loop terms, and higher-order terms can be neglected
consistently as 3-loop order.
Then solving for $m^2_{H_u}$ and $m^2_{H_d}$ at the minimum of the effective potential
can be done without iteration.
The results of the reexpansion described above can be summarized as follows.
In the expressions for
$\Delta^{(1)}_u$, $\Delta^{(1)}_d$, $\Delta^{(2)}_u$, and $\Delta^{(2)}_d$
found in eqs.~(\ref{eq:dV100du})-(\ref{eq:dV200dd}) above, one makes the replacements:
\beq
(h^0, H^0, A^0, H^\pm) &\rightarrow&
(\widehat h^0, \widehat H^0, \widehat A^0, \widehat H^\pm) ,
\label{eq:replacehHAHphat}
\\
\alpha &\rightarrow& \widehat \alpha,
\\
\beta_0,\> \beta_\pm &\rightarrow& \beta.
\eeq
One then should add the following extra terms to the 2-loop parts:
\beq
\widehat \Delta^{(2)}_u &\rightarrow& \widehat \Delta^{(2)}_u
- \frac{1}{16} (g^2 + g'^2) \biggl \{
2 c_{2\beta}
\left [\widehat\Delta^{(1)}_u c_\beta^2 + \widehat\Delta^{(1)}_d s_\beta^2 \right ]
\overline{\ln}(\widehat A^0)
\nonumber \\ &&
+\left [ (1 + 2 c_{2 \widehat\alpha}) + s_{2 \widehat\alpha}\, c_\beta/s_\beta \right ]
\Bigl [
\widehat\Delta^{(1)}_u + \widehat\Delta^{(1)}_d -
(\widehat\Delta^{(1)}_u - \widehat\Delta^{(1)}_d)
\frac{\widehat A^0 - Z}{\widehat H^0 - \widehat h^0} c_{2\beta}
\Bigr ] \overline{\ln}(\widehat h^0)
\nonumber \\ &&
+\left [ (1 - 2 c_{2 \widehat\alpha}) - s_{2 \widehat\alpha}\, c_\beta/s_\beta \right ]
\Bigl [
\widehat\Delta^{(1)}_u + \widehat\Delta^{(1)}_d +
(\widehat\Delta^{(1)}_u - \widehat\Delta^{(1)}_d)
\frac{\widehat A^0 - Z}{\widehat H^0 - \widehat h^0} c_{2\beta}
\Bigr ] \overline{\ln}(\widehat H^0)
\biggr \}
\nonumber \\ &&
- \frac{1}{4} \left [ g^2 (1 + 2 c_\beta^2) + g'^2 c_{2\beta} \right ]
\left [\widehat\Delta^{(1)}_u c_\beta^2 + \widehat\Delta^{(1)}_d s_\beta^2 \right ]
\overline{\ln}(\widehat H^+)
\nonumber \\ &&
+ \frac{1}{8} (\widehat\Delta^{(1)}_u -\widehat\Delta^{(1)}_d) \Bigl \{
-(g^2 + g'^2) s_{2\beta}^2 A(\widehat A^0)/\widehat A^0
+[g^2 c_{2\beta}/s_\beta^2 - 2 g'^2 ]
s_{2\beta}^2 A(\widehat H^+)/\widehat H^+
\nonumber \\ &&
+ (g^2 + g'^2) (2 s_{2\widehat \alpha} - c_{2\widehat\alpha}\, c_\beta/s_\beta)
(s_{2\widehat \alpha}^2/s_{2\beta}) [A(\widehat H^0) - A(\widehat h^0)]/(\widehat H^0 + \widehat h^0)
\Bigr \}
,
\\
\widehat\Delta^{(2)}_d &\rightarrow& \widehat\Delta^{(2)}_d
+ \frac{1}{16} (g^2 + g'^2) \biggl \{
2 c_{2\beta}
\left [\widehat\Delta^{(1)}_u c_\beta^2 + \widehat\Delta^{(1)}_d s_\beta^2 \right ]
\overline{\ln}(\widehat A^0)
\nonumber \\ &&
-\left [ (1 - 2 c_{2 \widehat\alpha}) + s_{2 \widehat\alpha}\, s_\beta/c_\beta \right ]
\Bigl [\widehat\Delta^{(1)}_u + \widehat\Delta^{(1)}_d -
(\widehat\Delta^{(1)}_u - \widehat\Delta^{(1)}_d)
\frac{\widehat A^0 - Z}{\widehat H^0 - \widehat h^0} c_{2\beta}
\Bigr ] \overline{\ln}(\widehat h^0)
\nonumber \\ &&
-\left [ (1 + 2 c_{2 \widehat\alpha}) - s_{2 \widehat\alpha}\, s_\beta/c_\beta \right ]
\Bigl [\widehat\Delta^{(1)}_u + \widehat\Delta^{(1)}_d +
(\widehat\Delta^{(1)}_u - \widehat\Delta^{(1)}_d)
\frac{\widehat A^0 - Z}{\widehat H^0 - \widehat h^0} c_{2\beta}
\Bigr ] \overline{\ln}(\widehat H^0)
\biggr \}
\nonumber \\ &&
- \frac{1}{4} \left [ g^2 (1 + 2 s_\beta^2) - g'^2 c_{2\beta} \right ]
\left [\widehat\Delta^{(1)}_u c_\beta^2 + \widehat\Delta^{(1)}_d s_\beta^2 \right ]
\overline{\ln}(\widehat H^+)
\nonumber \\ &&
+ \frac{1}{8} (\widehat\Delta^{(1)}_u -\widehat\Delta^{(1)}_d) \Bigl \{
(g^2 + g'^2) s_{2\beta}^2 A(\widehat A^0)/\widehat A^0
+[g^2 c_{2\beta}/c_\beta^2 + 2 g'^2 ]
s_{2\beta}^2 A(\widehat H^+)/\widehat H^+
\nonumber \\ &&
- (g^2 + g'^2) (2 s_{2\widehat \alpha} + c_{2\widehat\alpha}\, s_\beta/c_\beta)
(s_{2\widehat \alpha}^2/s_{2\beta}) [A(\widehat H^0) - A(\widehat h^0)]/(\widehat H^0 + \widehat h^0)
\Bigr \} .
\label{eq:replaceDelta2dhat}
\eeq
Then one can solve for $m^2_{H_u}$ and $m^2_{H_d}$ realizing the minimum of the effective potential using eqs.~(\ref{eq:deltau})-(\ref{eq:deltad}),
without iteration.
\subsection{Reexpansion to eliminate $\mu$ and $b$\label{sec:reexpandbar}}
Alternatively, one could choose to eliminate $|\mu|^2$ and $b$. Then,
the corresponding results for the tree-level mixing angles are:
\beq
\tan(2\beta_0) &=& \tan(2 \beta) \left [
1 + \frac{\delta_d - \delta_u}{m^2_{H_d} - m^2_{H_u} + Z c_{2 \beta} }
\right ] ,
\\
\tan(2\beta_\pm) &=& \tan(2 \beta) \left [
1 + \frac{\delta_d - \delta_u}{m^2_{H_d} - m^2_{H_u} + (Z-W) c_{2 \beta} }
\right ] ,
\\
\tan(2 \alpha) &=& \tan(2\overline \alpha) +
(\delta_d - \delta_u) \left [
\frac{\tan(2\beta)}{
m^2_{H_d} - m^2_{H_u} + 2 Z c_{2 \beta}} \right ],
\eeq
where one defines
\beq
\tan(2 \overline \alpha) &=& \tan(2 \beta) \left [
\frac{m^2_{H_d} - m^2_{H_u}}{
m^2_{H_d} - m^2_{H_u} + 2 Z c_{2 \beta}} \right ],
\eeq
and one can expand the tree-level Higgs squared masses around the modified tree-level
values defined by:
\beq
\overline A^0 &=& (m^2_{H_u} - m^2_{H_d})/c_{2 \beta} - Z,
\\
\overline H^\pm &=& (m^2_{H_u} - m^2_{H_d})/c_{2 \beta} - Z + W,
\\
\overline H^0, \overline h^0 &=&
\frac{1}{2} \left [\overline A^0 + Z \pm \sqrt{
(\overline A^0 + Z)^2 - 4 \overline A^0 Z c_{2 \beta}^2}\, \right ] ,
\label{eq:definehHbar}
\eeq
with the results:
\beq
A^0 &=& \overline A^0 + p_u \delta_u + p_d \delta_d
+ \ldots ,
\\
H^\pm &=& \overline H^\pm + p_u \delta_u + p_d \delta_d
+ \ldots ,
\\
h^0 &=& \overline h^0
+ \left [\delta_u \left (s_\beta^2 \,\overline H^0 + p_u \overline h^0\right )
+ \delta_d \left (c_\beta^2 \,\overline H^0 + p_d \overline h^0\right )
\right ]/(\overline h^0 - \overline H^0) + \ldots ,
\\
H^0 &=& \overline H^0
+ \left [\delta_u \left (s_\beta^2 \,\overline h^0 + p_u \overline H^0\right )
+ \delta_d \left (c_\beta^2 \,\overline h^0 + p_d \overline H^0\right )
\right ]/(\overline H^0 - \overline h^0) + \ldots ,
\phantom{xxx}
\eeq
where
\beq
p_u &=& s_\beta^2 (1 + 2 c_\beta^2)/c_{2\beta},
\\
p_d &=& -c_\beta^2 (1 + 2 s_\beta^2) /c_{2\beta}.
\eeq
Then the effective potential minimization conditions
can be expanded in $\delta_u$, $\delta_d$ about
the modified tree-level values
$\overline h^0$, $\overline H^0$, $\overline A^0$, $\overline H^\pm$,
$\overline \alpha$, and $\beta$, which do not depend explicitly on
$b$ or $\mu$. After doing these expansions,
the quantities involving $\delta_u$ and $\delta_d$ from the 1-loop terms
can be grouped with the 2-loop terms, and higher-order terms can be neglected
consistently as 3-loop order.
The reexpansion described above can be implemented as follows.
In the expressions for
$\Delta^{(1)}_u$, $\Delta^{(1)}_d$, $\Delta^{(2)}_u$, and $\Delta^{(2)}_d$
found in eqs.~(\ref{eq:dV100du})-(\ref{eq:dV200dd}) above, one makes the replacements:
\beq
(h^0, H^0, A^0, H^\pm) &\rightarrow&
(\overline h^0, \overline H^0, \overline A^0, \overline H^\pm) ,
\label{eq:replacehHAHpbar}
\\
\alpha &\rightarrow& \overline \alpha,
\\
\beta_0,\> \beta_\pm &\rightarrow& \beta.
\eeq
One then should add the following extra terms to the 2-loop parts:
\beq
\widehat \Delta^{(2)}_u &\rightarrow& \widehat \Delta^{(2)}_u
+
\frac{1}{8}(g^2 + g'^2) c_{2\beta}
\left [\widehat \Delta^{(1)}_u p_u + \widehat \Delta^{(1)}_d p_d \right ]
\overline{\ln}(\overline A^0)
+ \frac{g^2 + g'^2}{8(\overline H^0 - \overline h^0)} \biggl \{
\nonumber \\ &&
-\left \{ [1 + 2 c_{2 \overline\alpha}] + s_{2 \overline\alpha} c_\beta/s_\beta \right \}
\Bigl [\widehat \Delta^{(1)}_u (s_\beta^2 \overline H^0 + p_u \overline h^0)
+ \widehat \Delta^{(1)}_d (c_\beta^2 \overline H^0 + p_d \overline h^0)
\Bigr ] \overline{\ln}(\overline h^0)
\nonumber \\ &&
+ \left \{ [1 - 2 c_{2 \overline\alpha}] - s_{2 \overline\alpha} c_\beta/s_\beta \right \}
\Bigl [\widehat \Delta^{(1)}_u (s_\beta^2 \overline h^0 + p_u \overline H^0)
+ \widehat \Delta^{(1)}_d (c_\beta^2 \overline h^0 + p_d \overline H^0)
\Bigr ] \overline{\ln}(\overline H^0) \biggr \}\phantom{xxx}
\nonumber \\ &&
+ \frac{1}{4} \left [ g^2 (1 + 2 c_\beta^2) + g'^2 c_{2\beta} \right ]
\left [\widehat \Delta^{(1)}_u p_u + \widehat \Delta^{(1)}_d p_d \right ]
\overline{\ln}(\overline H^+)
\nonumber \\ &&
+ \frac{1}{8} \left (\widehat \Delta^{(1)}_d - \widehat \Delta^{(1)}_u \right )
\Bigl \{
(g^2 + g'^2) s_{2 \beta}^2 A(\overline A^0)/\overline A^0
+ [2 g'^2 s_{2\beta}^2- 4 g^2 c_\beta^2 c_{2\beta}]
A(\overline H^+)/\overline H^+
\nonumber \\ &&
+ (g^2 + g'^2) [2 s_{2\overline \alpha}- c_{2\overline \alpha} c_\beta/s_\beta]
(s_{2\overline \alpha} c_{2\overline \alpha}/c_{2\beta})
[A(\overline h^0) - A(\overline H^0)]/(\overline H^0 + \overline h^0)
\Bigr \}
,
\\
\widehat \Delta^{(2)}_d &\rightarrow& \widehat \Delta^{(2)}_d
-\frac{1}{8}(g^2 + g'^2) c_{2\beta}
\left [\widehat \Delta^{(1)}_u p_u + \widehat \Delta^{(1)}_d p_d \right ]
\overline{\ln}(\overline A^0)
+ \frac{g^2 + g'^2}{8(\overline H^0 - \overline h^0)} \biggl \{
\nonumber \\ &&
-\left \{ [1 - 2 c_{2 \overline\alpha}] + s_{2 \overline\alpha} s_\beta/c_\beta \right \}
\Bigl [\widehat \Delta^{(1)}_u (s_\beta^2 \overline H^0 + p_u \overline h^0)
+ \widehat \Delta^{(1)}_d (c_\beta^2 \overline H^0 + p_d \overline h^0)
\Bigr ] \overline{\ln}(\overline h^0)
\nonumber \\ &&
+ \left \{ [1 + 2 c_{2 \overline\alpha}] - s_{2 \overline\alpha} s_\beta/c_\beta \right \}
\Bigl [\widehat \Delta^{(1)}_u (s_\beta^2 \overline h^0 + p_u \overline H^0)
+ \widehat \Delta^{(1)}_d (c_\beta^2 \overline h^0 + p_d \overline H^0)
\Bigr ] \overline{\ln}(\overline H^0) \biggr \}\phantom{xxx}
\nonumber \\ &&
+ \frac{1}{4} \left [ g^2 (1 + 2 s_\beta^2) - g'^2 c_{2\beta} \right ]
\left [\widehat \Delta^{(1)}_u p_u + \widehat \Delta^{(1)}_d p_d \right ]
\overline{\ln}(\overline H^+)
\nonumber \\ &&
+ \frac{1}{8} \left (\widehat \Delta^{(1)}_u - \widehat \Delta^{(1)}_d \right )
\Bigl \{
(g^2 + g'^2) s_{2 \beta}^2 A(\overline A^0)/\overline A^0
+ [2 g'^2 s_{2\beta}^2 + 4 g^2 s_\beta^2 c_{2\beta}]
A(\overline H^+)/\overline H^+
\nonumber \\ &&
+ (g^2 + g'^2) [2 s_{2\overline \alpha}+ c_{2\overline \alpha} s_\beta/c_\beta]
(s_{2\overline \alpha} c_{2\overline \alpha}/c_{2\beta})
[A(\overline h^0) - A(\overline H^0)]/(\overline H^0 + \overline h^0)
\Bigr \} .
\label{eq:replaceDelta2dbar}
\eeq
Then one can solve for $b$ and $|\mu|^2$ using
eqs.~(\ref{eq:deltau})-(\ref{eq:deltad}),
without iteration.
\section{Singularities and spurious imaginary parts
for small and negative $h^0$\label{sec:hsingularities}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\setcounter{figure}{0}
\setcounter{table}{0}
\setcounter{footnote}{1}
It should be noted that there are also singularities in the effective
potential for $h^0 \rightarrow 0$, and in fact these are formally more
severe than the singularities coming from $G^0, G^\pm \rightarrow 0$.
This can be seen, for example, from the diagrams shown in Figure
\ref{fig:hsingularities}, which involve only the $h^0$ field. The
contribution of the 2-loop diagram to the effective potential is:
\beq
V^{(2)}_{\mbox{\small Fig.~\ref{fig:hsingularities}(a)}} &=&
-\frac{1}{12} (\lambda_{h^0h^0h^0})^2 I(h^0,h^0,h^0)
\\
&=&
\frac{1}{12}(\lambda_{h^0h^0h^0})^2 h^0\left [
\frac{15}{2} - 3 \sqrt{3} {\rm Ls}_2 - 6 \overline{\ln}(h^0)
+ \frac{3}{2} \overline{\ln}^2(h^0) \right ],
\eeq
where ${\rm Ls}_2 = -\int_0^{2\pi/3} dx\>{\rm ln}[2 \sin(x/2)] =
0.6766277376\ldots.$ This contribution is finite as $h^0 \rightarrow 0$,
but derivatives of it have a squared logarithm singularity. At 3-loop order,
the contribution shown in Figure \ref{fig:hsingularities} has the form
\beq
V^{(3)}_{\mbox{\small Fig.~\ref{fig:hsingularities}(b)}} &=&
\frac{1}{16} (\lambda_{h^0h^0h^0})^4
\left (
\frac{5}{3} - 2 \zeta(3) - 2 \sqrt{3} {\rm Ls}_2 [1 + \overline{\ln}(h^0)]
- \overline{\ln}^2(h^0) + \frac{1}{3} \overline{\ln}^3 (h^0)
\right ),\phantom{xxx}
\eeq
with a cubic logarithmic singularity even before taking derivatives,
and other diagrams leading to quadratic logarithmic singularities. For
contributions at $L$-loop order, we expect contributions with leading
singularities of the form
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth,angle=0]{figure_hsingularities.eps}
\begin{minipage}[]{0.98\linewidth}
\caption{\label{fig:hsingularities}
Diagrams that give the
most singular behavior as $h^0\rightarrow 0$
for the minimization condition of the effective potential,
at 2-loop order (a)
and 3-loop order (b).}
\end{minipage}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\beq
V^{(L)} &\propto& (\lambda_{h^0h^0h^0})^{2L-2}\, \overline{\ln}^L(h^0)/(h^0)^{L-3}
\eeq
as $h^0 \rightarrow 0$. Note that the reason these singularities are
more severe than for the Goldstone case is because of the absence of
triple Goldstone boson couplings. Furthermore, unlike diagrams involving
Goldstone bosons, such diagrams have
no larger mass scale with respect to which one can expand for small
$h^0$. Other diagrams involving $h^0$ will involve $W$ and $Z$, which
have smaller physical masses than $h^0$, so an expansion in small $h^0$
may not be appropriate. Methods for resumming non-Goldstone light boson
singularities have been discussed in ref.~\cite{Elias-Miro:2014pca}.
Another way of doing a resummation is by taking advantage of the
renormalization group, by simply choosing a scale $Q$ where $h^0$ is
positive, and not too far from the physical squared mass. As illustrated
by the example in the next section, this is generally possible, and will
be a sensible choice of renormalization scale from the point of view of
perturbative expansions for other physical quantities. (However, note
that with such a choice, the Goldstone boson squared masses could still
easily be negative or 0, so that before resummation of the $G^0$ and $G^\pm$
contributions the effective
potential would be complex or singular at its minimum.) The reexpansions
described in subsection \ref{sec:reexpandhat} or \ref{sec:reexpandbar}
can also be used to eliminate the problems with $h^0 \leq 0$.
\section{Numerical example\label{sec:numerical}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\setcounter{figure}{0}
\setcounter{table}{0}
\setcounter{footnote}{1}
The impact of the resummations described in this paper is typically
numerically extremely small, at least for the minimization of the
effective potential, unless one has chosen a renormalization scale where
$G^0$ or $G^\pm$ or $h^0$ vanishes exactly. To illustrate this, we consider a
benchmark MSSM model with input parameters (with mass scales chosen large enough to
clearly avoid all present bounds from the Large Hadron Collider, and to
be roughly compatible with the $h^0$ physical mass near 125
GeV, with $\tan\beta$ near 25) at $Q_{0} = 2000$ GeV:
\beq
&&
v_u = \mbox{172.1 GeV},\>\>\>\>\>\> v_d = \mbox{6.88 GeV},
\label{eq:inputsvuvd}
\\
&&
m^2_{H_u} = -(\mbox{1500 GeV})^2,\>\>\>\>\>\> m^2_{H_d} = (\mbox{2000 GeV})^2,
\label{eq:inputsm2Hum2Hd}
\\
&&
g = 0.6362,\>\>\>\> g' = 0.3636,\>\>\>\> g_3 = 1.018,
\\
&&
y_t = 0.785,\>\>\>\> y_b = 0.296,\>\>\>\> y_\tau = 0.256,
\\
&&
M_1 = \mbox{500 GeV},\>\>\>\>
M_2 = \mbox{1000 GeV},\>\>\>\>
M_3 = \mbox{2500 GeV},
\\
&&
a_t = -\mbox{3000 GeV},\>\>\>\>
a_b = -\mbox{2000 GeV},\>\>\>\>
a_\tau = -\mbox{1000 GeV},
\\
&&
m^2_{Q_{3}} = (\mbox{2000 GeV})^2,\>\>
m^2_{u_{3}} = (\mbox{2100 GeV})^2,\>\>
m^2_{d_{3}} = (\mbox{2400 GeV})^2,
\\
&&
m^2_{L_{3}} = (\mbox{2200 GeV})^2,\>\>
m^2_{e_{3}} = (\mbox{2000 GeV})^2,
\\
&&
m^2_{Q_{1,2}} =
m^2_{u_{1,2}} =
m^2_{d_{1,2}} = (\mbox{3000 GeV})^2,
\\
&&
m^2_{L_{1,2}} = (\mbox{2400 GeV})^2,\>\>
m^2_{e_{1,2}} = (\mbox{2200 GeV})^2.
\label{eq:inputsm2e12}
\eeq
Then, we find that the (real part) of the 2-loop MSSM effective potential as
given in ref.~\cite{Martin:2002iu} is minimized for
\beq
\mu = \mbox{1516.44446868 GeV},
\>\>\>\>\>
b = (\mbox{522.793413744 GeV})^2
.
\label{eq:inputsmub}
\eeq
Then we run the input parameters of
eqs.~(\ref{eq:inputsvuvd})-(\ref{eq:inputsmub}) from $Q_0$ to a new
renormalization scale $Q$, and require the potential to be minimized
again, both using the original method of ref.~\cite{Martin:2002iu} and
then with the resummation methods of the present paper.
First, shown in Figure \ref{fig:hGQ} are the values obtained for
$\overline{\mbox{sqrt}}(G^0)$ and $\overline{\mbox{sqrt}}(G^\pm)$ and
$\overline{\mbox{sqrt}}(h^0)$
at the minimum of the effective potential, as a function of $Q$,
where the function
\beq
\overline{\mbox{sqrt}}(x) = x/\sqrt{|x|}
\eeq
is used in order to plot masses while keeping information about the
sign of the squared mass, while avoiding imaginary numbers.
Due to the influence of very heavy squarks, these tree-level masses
are seen to run very quickly. The Goldstone boson masses
are visually indistinguishable from each other, and are slightly lower than the
tree-level mass of $h^0$. All three are negative for $Q < 1849$ GeV,
and deviate very far from 0 (in the case of $G^0$ and $G^\pm$) and
125 GeV (in the case of $h^0$). In contrast, the modified tree-level
masses $\widehat h^0$ and $\overline h^0$ both remain nearly constant near
89 GeV (and are visually indistinguishable from each other on the graph).
For this reason, a perturbative expansion about either one of these tree-level
definitions, obtained by the re-expansions of the previous section,
could be preferred at least formally.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{minipage}[]{0.44\linewidth}
\begin{flushleft}
\includegraphics[width=0.92\linewidth,angle=0]{hGQ.eps}
\end{flushleft}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[]{0.54\linewidth}
\caption{\label{fig:hGQ} The dependences of tree-level masses
on the renormalization scale, for the Goldstone bosons $G^0, G^\pm$ (solid blue line) and
the lightest neutral Higgs bosons $h^0$ (long-dashed red line).
The modified tree-level values $\widehat h^0$ and $\overline h^0$,
defined by eqs.~(\ref{eq:defineh0hat}) and (\ref{eq:definehHbar}),
are visually indistinguishable from each other and are nearly constant, and are
shown as the short-dashed green line. In each case,
$\overline{\mbox{sqrt}}(m^2)$ is plotted.
The input parameters are defined by 2-loop renormalization group running
starting from eqs.~(\ref{eq:inputsvuvd})-(\ref{eq:inputsmub}) at $Q_0 = 2000$ GeV.
}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
The numerical values of $\tan\beta_0$ and $\tan\beta_\pm$ at the minimum of the potential
are compared to the running value of $\tan\beta \equiv v_u/v_d$ in Figure
\ref{fig:tanbetaQ}. The values of $\tan\beta_0$ and $\tan\beta_\pm$ are visually
indistinguishable in the figure, but both deviate significantly from $\tan\beta$,
which runs slowly from its nominal value near 25 at $Q_0 = 2000$ GeV.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{minipage}[]{0.44\linewidth}
\begin{flushleft}
\includegraphics[width=0.92\linewidth,angle=0]{tanbetaQ.eps}
\end{flushleft}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[]{0.54\linewidth}
\caption{\label{fig:tanbetaQ} The dependences of $\tan\beta = v_u/v_d$,
the tree-level neutral pseudoscalar Higgs mixing parameter $\tan\beta_0$,
and the charged Higgs mixing parameter $\tan\beta_\pm$, as a function of the
renormalization scale $Q$ at which the 2-loop effective potential is minimized.
The input parameters are defined by running
(\ref{eq:inputsvuvd})-(\ref{eq:inputsmub}) starting from $Q_0 = 2000$ GeV.
}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
Despite the large deviations of $G^0$ and $G^\pm$ and $h^0$ from their
physical values, the 2-loop effective potential minimization results are
very stable. This is shown in Figure \ref{fig:mubQ}, which shows the
ratios of the values obtained for $\mu_{\rm min}(Q)/\mu_{\rm run}(Q)$
and $b_{\rm min}(Q)/b_{\rm run}(Q)$, where ``run" means obtained by
running the MSSM 2-loop renormalization group equations
\cite{Martin:1993zk,Yamada:1994id,Jack:1994kd,Jack:1994rk} starting from
$Q_0$ with inputs from eqs.~(\ref{eq:inputsvuvd})-(\ref{eq:inputsmub}),
while ``min" means all of the inputs are run to $Q$ and then the
effective potential minimization conditions are used to find $\mu$ and
$b$ directly at that scale. The closeness of these ratios to 1 as $Q$ is
varied is a test of the robustness of the approximations used.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth,angle=0]{muQ.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth,angle=0]{bQ.eps}
\begin{minipage}[]{0.98\linewidth}
\caption{\label{fig:mubQ} The dependence of the ratio of
$\mu_{\rm min}/\mu_{\rm run}$
(left panel) and $b_{\rm min}/b_{\rm run}$ (right panel)
on the renormalization scale $Q$.
Here ``run" means obtained by 2-loop renormalization group running starting from $Q_0 = 2000$ GeV
with inputs from
(\ref{eq:inputsvuvd})-(\ref{eq:inputsmub}), while ``min" means obtained by applying the
effective potential minimization conditions directly at $Q$.
The thinnest (green) lines are obtained with $V_{\rm eff}$
found in ref.~\cite{Martin:2002iu}.
The next thinnest (red) lines were obtained in the same way, but with
$G^0 = G^\pm = 0$ set by hand.
The thicker (blue) lines were obtained with the resummed
effective potential using eqs.~(\ref{eq:deltauexp})-(\ref{eq:dV200dd})
in eqs.~(\ref{eq:deltau})-(\ref{eq:deltad}).
The thickest (black) lines were obtained by further re-expanding the minimization conditions to eliminate $\mu$ and $b$ in the radiative correction part
as described in section \ref{sec:reexpandbar}.
}
\end{minipage}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Four different version of the minimization conditions are compared in Figure \ref{fig:mubQ}. First,
the thinnest (green) lines show the results obtained
using the real part of the original $V_{\rm eff}$ found in
ref.~\cite{Martin:2002iu}.
By definition, the thinnest (green) curves run through 1 at $Q= Q_0 = 2000$ GeV.
We note that although these curves have singularities at $G^0=0$ and $G^\pm=0$,
in practice these singularities are too mild to show up on the plots even for
very fine grids for the data (here we used an increment of 50 MeV for $Q$ in the
vicinities of $G^0=0$, $G^\pm=0$, and $h^0=0$).
There are visible kinks near $Q = 1823$ GeV, corresponding to the
scale at which $h^0$ crosses through 0, as discussed in the previous section.
The next thinnest (red) lines show what would be obtained if one simply sets
$G^0$ and $G^\pm$ to 0 by hand in the effective potential before minimization.
The thicker (blue) line shows the result obtained from the resummed effective potential
minimization, using eqs.~(\ref{eq:deltauexp})-(\ref{eq:dV200dd})
in eqs.~(\ref{eq:deltau})-(\ref{eq:deltad}).
Finally, the thickest (black) lines show the results obtained after the reexpansion
of the effective potential minimization conditions to eliminate the dependence of
the loop correction part on the parameters $\mu$ and $b$, using eqs.~(\ref{eq:replacehHAHpbar})-(\ref{eq:replaceDelta2dbar}).
This allows the effective potential minimization conditions to be implemented without iteration, and eliminates the possibility of
kinks and singularities where $G^0$, $G^\pm$, and $h^0$ run through 0.
We see that in all cases the dependence on $Q$ for each of the ratios
shown in Figure \ref{fig:mubQ}
is extremely mild, well under 0.1\% in all cases, despite the large
magnitudes and $Q$ dependences of the $G^0$, $G^\pm$, and $h^0$ squared masses.
Furthermore, the different ways of implementing the minimization conditions
agree well with each other, again to better than 0.1\%.
Similar results are shown in Figure \ref{fig:m2HQ} for the determination of
$m^2_{H_u}$ and $m^2_{H_d}$ from the other parameters.
In this case, the thickest (black) line is obtained by reexpanding the resummed effective potential to eliminate the dependence on $m^2_{H_u}$ and $m^2_{H_d}$ in the radiative
correction part of the minimization conditions,
using eqs.~(\ref{eq:replacehHAHphat})-(\ref{eq:replaceDelta2dhat}),
allowing them to be implemented without
iteration. Again, in all cases the scale dependences are very mild, and the agreement between different methods of implementing the minimization conditions is excellent.
Therefore, while conceptually important,
and practically convenient, the resummation and reexpansion does not seem
to have a significant numerical effect for the minimization condition.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth,angle=0]{m2HuQ.eps}~~
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth,angle=0]{m2HdQ.eps}
\begin{minipage}[]{0.98\linewidth}
\caption{\label{fig:m2HQ} As in figure \ref{fig:mubQ}, but for $m^2_{H_u}$ and
$m^2_{H_d}$. Here,
the thickest (black) line is obtained by reexpanding the resummed effective potential to eliminate the dependence on $m^2_{H_u}$ and $m^2_{H_d}$ in the radiative
correction part of the minimization conditions,
as described in section \ref{sec:reexpandhat}
}
\end{minipage}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Outlook\label{sec:outlook}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\setcounter{figure}{0}
\setcounter{table}{0}
\setcounter{footnote}{1}
In this paper we have showed how to resum the Goldstone boson
contributions to the MSSM effective potential and its minimization
conditions. Although the numerical impact on the minimization conditions
is very small compared to the results obtained by minimizing the
non-resummed effective potential, or simply setting $G^0$ and $G^\pm$ to 0
by hand, there is a practical benefit in that one can then
reexpand the minimization conditions to
implement them consistently at 2-loop order
without iteration.
In addition, the resummation and reexpansions described here can be
systematically applied to other calculations, for example the pole
masses of the ordinary Higgs bosons. The existence of a Standard
Model-like Higgs boson with mass near 125 GeV provides an opportunity to
confront models with data. There has been a tremendous effort to compute
the physical mass $M_{h^0}$ using self-energy diagrammatic methods
\cite{Haber:1990aw}-\cite{Hahn:2015gaa}, the approximation based on
second derivatives of the effective potential
\cite{Hempfling:1993qq,Carena:1995wu,Zhang:1998bm,Espinosa:1999zm,
Espinosa:2000df,Espinosa:2001mm,Degrassi:2001yf,
Brignole:2001jy,Brignole:2002bz,Martin:2002wn,
Dedes:2002dy,Dedes:2003km,Goodsell:2014bna,Dreiner:2014lqa,Goodsell:2015ira,
Goodsell:2016udb},
and effective field theory
with renormalization group resummation methods
\cite{Haber:1993an}-\cite{Vega:2015fna}. (For a recent review of these
approaches, see \cite{Draper:2016pys}.) The methods described here will
allow a full 2-loop self-energy diagrammatic calculation of the pole
mass $M_{h^0}$, using modified tree-level Higgs couplings and masses
that do not differ greatly from their physical values, while using VEVs
that minimize the full 2-loop effective potential. (Note that the
resummations described above do not attempt to address the singularities
in the second derivatives of the effective potential, which are
sometimes used to approximate the $h^0$ pole mass. Instead, the momentum
dependence of the self-energy diagrams should be kept in order to find
the true pole mass.) The results above can also serve as examples
for other models with non-minimal Higgs sectors, such as the MSSM
extended by a singlet, or non-supersymmetric two Higgs
doublet models.
\noindent {\it Acknowledgments:} This work was supported in part by the
National Science Foundation grant number PHY-1417028.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Although the Standard Model (SM) of particle physics is supported by a
vast amount of experimental evidences, it is also known to be
incomplete due to its lack of solution for two central problems of
modern physics: neutrino masses and the dark matter (DM) of the
universe. Several SM extensions aiming at a common explanation for
these two issues have been put forward in recent years. The scotogenic
model, proposed by Ernest Ma in \cite{Ma:2006km}, constitutes one of
the most attractive proposals. In this model, the SM particle content
is enlarged with the introduction of a second scalar doublet and $N_N$
(with $N_N \geq 2$) singlet fermions, all charged under a
$\mathbb{Z}_2$ parity. This discrete symmetry forbids the usual
tree-level contribution to neutrino masses, which are induced at the
1-loop level, and gives rise to a stable state, a weakly-interacting
dark matter candidate. The phenomenology of this model has been
studied in great detail, see
\cite{Ma:2006fn,Kubo:2006yx,Hambye:2006zn,Sierra:2008wj,Suematsu:2009ww,Gelmini:2009xd,Adulpravitchai:2009gi,Aoki:2010tf,Ahn:2012cga,Schmidt:2012yg,Ma:2012if,Kashiwase:2012xd,Kashiwase:2013uy,Toma:2013zsa,Racker:2013lua,Klasen:2013jpa,Ho:2013hia,Ho:2013spa,Vicente:2014wga,Faisel:2014gda,Molinaro:2014lfa,Chowdhury:2015sla},
and several theoretical aspects have been discussed in the recent
literature, such as renormalization group running effects
\cite{Bouchand:2012dx,Merle:2015gea,Merle:2015ica} as well as new
model building directions
\cite{Ma:2008ym,Adulpravitchai:2009re,Ma:2013yga,Ma:2014eka,Yu:2016lof,Ahriche:2016cio}.
In this work we will concentrate on a simple extension~\footnote{See
\cite{Restrepo:2013aga} for a general classification of scotogenic
models leading to radiative neutrino masses and viable dark matter
candidates.} of the minimal setup introduced in \cite{Ma:2006km}:
the singlet-triplet scotogenic model \cite{Hirsch:2013ola}. In this
variant of the scotogenic model, the fermion sector includes the
$SU(2)_L$ triplet $\Sigma$, which can mix with the singlet fermions
via the vacuum expectation value (VEV) of a real scalar, $\Omega$,
also triplet under $SU(2)_L$. The most relevant features of the
minimal model, radiative neutrino masses and a stable dark matter
candidate, are kept in this variant, while the singlet-triplet mixing
allows one to \emph{interpolate} between pure singlet DM
\cite{Ma:2006km} and pure triplet DM \cite{Ma:2008cu}, when the dark
matter candidate is fermionic. This leads to a richer phenomenology,
in particular to better prospects in direct DM detection experiments
\cite{Hirsch:2013ola}.
Lepton flavor violation (LFV) is one of the most important probes of
models with extended lepton sectors. In fact, precision high-intensity
experiments are sensitive to the existence of new physics at very high
energies, which makes flavor physics a powerful discovery tool, as
demonstrated by its central role in the making of the Standard
Model. Furthermore, very promising experimental projects in the search
for LFV will begin their operation in the near future. In addition to
the planned upgrade for the MEG experiment, which will improve its
sensitivity to $\mu \to e \gamma$ branching ratios as low as $6 \cdot
10^{-14}$ \cite{Baldini:2013ke}, other new experiments will also join
the effort. Among them, one can highlight the Mu3e
experiment~\cite{Blondel:2013ia}, which will look for the 3-body decay
$\mu \to 3 \, e$, as well as a plethora of experiments looking for
$\mu-e$ conversion in nuclei, like Mu2e
\cite{Carey:2008zz,Glenzinski:2010zz,Abrams:2012er}, DeeMe
\cite{Aoki:2010zz}, COMET \cite{Cui:2009zz,Kuno:2013mha} and
PRISM/PRIME \cite{Barlow:2011zza}, in all cases with spectacular
sensitivity improvements compared to previous experiments. This
remarkable multi-channel experimental effort in the search for LFV
encourages detailed LFV studies in specific neutrino mass models.
We study LFV in the singlet-triplet scotogenic model, in the spirit of
previous works for the singlet \cite{Toma:2013zsa} and triplet
\cite{Chao:2012sz} models~\footnote{See also \cite{Chowdhury:2015sla}
for a general study of LFV in scotogenic models with higher
$SU(2)_L$ representations.}. We will show that the model contains
large regions of parameter space with observable LFV rates and hence
will be probed in the near round of LFV experiments. Furthermore, we
will explore some aspects of the LFV phenomenology of the model, such
as the relative weight of the dipole operators with respect to other
contributions to the LFV amplitudes, and determine that the most
promising experimental perspectives are found for the LFV 3-body
decays $\mu \to 3 \, e$ and for coherent $\mu-e$ conversion in nuclei.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: in Sec. \ref{sec:model}
we introduce the model whereas in Sec. \ref{sec:LFV} we review the
current experimental situation in the search for LFV and obtain
approximate expressions for the observables of
interest. Sec. \ref{sec:pheno} contains our phenomenological analysis
of the model. Finally, we summarize our results and draw our
conclusions in Sec. \ref{sec:conclusions} and present additional
analytical results in appendices \ref{app:LFVlag} and
\ref{app:LFVobs}.
\section{The model}
\label{sec:model}
We consider the singlet-triplet scotogenic model introduced in
\cite{Hirsch:2013ola}. The matter content of the model, as well as the
charge assignment under $SU(2)_L$, $U(1)_Y$ and $\mathbb{Z}_2$, is
shown in Table \ref{tab:MatterModel}. The quark sector, not included
in this table, is SM-like and has $\mathbb{Z}_2 = +1$. The new fields
beyond the SM particle content include two fermions: the singlet $N$
and the triplet $\Sigma$, both with vanishing hypercharge and odd
under the discrete $\mathbb{Z}_2$. Regarding the new scalars, these
are the doublet $\eta$, also odd under $\mathbb{Z}_2$, and the real
triplet $\Omega$. The $SU(2)_L$ doublets $\phi$ and $\eta$ can be
decomposed as
\begin{equation}
\phi = \left( \begin{array}{c}
\phi^+ \\
\phi^0
\end{array} \right) \, , \quad \eta = \left( \begin{array}{c}
\eta^+ \\
\eta^0
\end{array} \right) \, ,
\end{equation}
and can be identified with the usual SM Higgs doublet and a new
\emph{inert} doublet. Regarding the $SU(2)_L$ triplets, $\Sigma$ and
$\Omega$, they are decomposed using the standard $2 \times 2$ matrix
notation as
\begin{equation}
\Sigma = \left( \begin{array}{cc}
\frac{\Sigma^0}{\sqrt{2}} & \Sigma^+ \\
\Sigma^- & -\frac{\Sigma^0}{\sqrt{2}}
\end{array} \right) \, , \quad \Omega = \left( \begin{array}{cc}
\frac{\Omega^0}{\sqrt{2}} & \Omega^+ \\
\Omega^- & -\frac{\Omega^0}{\sqrt{2}}
\end{array} \right) \, . \label{eq:triplets}
\end{equation}
\begin{table}[!t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c||c|c||c|c|}
\hline
& \multicolumn{3}{|c||}{Standard Model} & \multicolumn{2}{|c||}{Fermions} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{Scalars} \\
\cline{2-8}
& $L$ & $e$ & $\phi$ & $\Sigma$ & $N$ & $\eta$ & $\Omega$ \\
\hline
generations & 3 & 3 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\
$SU(2)_L$ & 2 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 1 & 2 & 3 \\
$U(1)_Y$ & -1/2 & -1 & 1/2 & 0 & 0 & 1/2 & 0 \\
$\mathbb{Z}_2$ & $+$ & $+$ & $+$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $+$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Matter content and charge assignment of the singlet-triplet
scotogenic model.}
\label{tab:MatterModel}
\end{table}
With the charge assignment in Table \ref{tab:MatterModel}, the most
general $\mathrm{SU(3)_c \otimes SU(2)_L \otimes U(1)_Y}$, Lorentz and
$\mathbb{Z}_2$ invariant Yukawa Lagrangian is given by
\begin{equation}
- \mathcal{L}_Y = Y_e^{\alpha \beta}\,\overline{L}_{\alpha} \, \phi \, e_{\beta} + Y_{N}^\alpha \, \overline{L}_{\alpha} \, \tilde{\eta} \, N + Y_{\Sigma}^\alpha \, \overline{L}_{\alpha} \, \tilde{\eta} \, \Sigma + Y_{\Omega} \, \overline{\Sigma} \, \Omega \, N + \text{h.c.} \, . \label{eq:yukawa}
\end{equation}
Here we indicate the flavor indices $\alpha,\beta=1,2,3$ explicitly
and denote $\tilde{\eta} = i\sigma_2 \eta^{*}$, as usual. Gauge
contractions are omitted for the sake of clarity. The $\Sigma$ and $N$
fermions have Majorana mass terms,
\begin{equation}
- \mathcal{L}_M =
\frac{1}{2} \, M_\Sigma \, \overline{\Sigma}^{c} \Sigma
+ \frac{1}{2} \, M_N \, \overline{N}^{c} N
+ \text{h.c.} \, . \label{eq:mass}
\end{equation}
Finally, the scalar potential can be written as~\footnote{The
Lagrangian in Eqs. \eqref{eq:yukawa}, \eqref{eq:mass} and
\eqref{eq:scpot} differs from the one in Ref.~\cite{Hirsch:2013ola}
in two details: (i) some redundant terms in the scalar potential
have been removed and the remaining ones have been renamed, and (ii)
some couplings and mass terms have been normalized differently. The
$SU(2)_L$ triplets $\Sigma$ and $\Omega$ also have a different
normalization, see Eq.~\eqref{eq:triplets}.}
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal V &=& -m_{\phi}^2 \phi^\dagger \phi + m_{\eta}^2 \eta^\dagger \eta + \frac{\lambda_1}{2} \left( \phi^\dagger \phi \right)^2 + \frac{\lambda_2}{2} \left( \eta^\dagger \eta \right)^2 + \lambda_3 \left( \phi^\dagger \phi \right)\left( \eta^\dagger \eta \right) \nonumber \\
&+& \lambda_4 \left( \phi^\dagger \eta \right)\left( \eta^\dagger \phi \right) + \frac{\lambda_5}{2} \left[ \left(\phi^\dagger \eta \right)^2 + \text{h.c.} \right] - \frac{m_\Omega^2}{2} \, \Omega^\dagger \Omega \nonumber \\
&+& \frac{\lambda^{\Omega}_1}{2} \left( \phi^\dagger \phi \right) \left( \Omega^\dagger \Omega\right) + \frac{\lambda^{\Omega}_2}{4} \, (\Omega^\dagger \Omega )^2 + \frac{\lambda^{\eta}}{2} \left( \eta^\dagger \eta \right) \left( \Omega^\dagger \Omega\right) \nonumber \\
&+& \mu_1 \, \phi^\dagger \, \Omega \, \phi + \mu_2 \, \eta^\dagger \, \Omega \, \eta \, . \label{eq:scpot}
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Symmetry breaking and scalar sector}
\label{subsec:scalar}
We will assume that the scalar potential in Eq. \eqref{eq:scpot} is
such that
\begin{equation}
\langle \phi^0 \rangle = \frac{v_\phi}{\sqrt{2}} \, , \quad \langle \Omega^0 \rangle = v_\Omega \, , \quad \langle \eta^0 \rangle = 0 \, , \label{eq:vevs}
\end{equation}
with $v_\phi, v_\Omega \ne 0$. These vacuum expectation values (VEVs)
are determined by means of the minimization conditions
\begin{eqnarray}
t_\phi &=& -m_\phi^2 \, v_\phi + \frac{1}{2} \lambda_1 v_\phi^3 + \frac{1}{2} \lambda_1^\Omega v_\phi v_\Omega^2 - \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \, v_\phi v_\Omega \, \mu_1 = 0 \, , \label{eq:tad1} \\
t_\Omega &=& -m_\Omega^2 \, v_\Omega + \lambda_2^\Omega v_\Omega^3 + \frac{1}{2} \lambda_1^\Omega v_\phi^2 v_\Omega - \frac{1}{2 \sqrt{2}} v_\phi^2 \, \mu_1 = 0 \, , \label{eq:tad2}
\end{eqnarray}
where $t_i \equiv \frac{\partial \mathcal V}{\partial v_i}$ is the
tadpole of $v_i$. The VEVs $v_\phi$ and $v_\Omega$ break the
electroweak symmetry and induce masses for the gauge bosons,
\begin{eqnarray}
m_W^2 &=& \frac{1}{4} \, g^2 \left( v_\phi^2 + 4 \, v_\Omega^2 \right) \, , \label{eq:mW} \\
m_Z^2 &=& \frac{1}{4} \left(g^2 + g'^2 \right) v_\phi^2 \, .
\end{eqnarray}
We note that the triplet VEV $v_\Omega$ contributes to the $W$ boson
mass, thus receiving constraints from electroweak precision tests. We
estimate that this VEV cannot be larger than about $4.5$ GeV (at $3
\sigma$).
The scalar spectrum of the model contains the $\mathbb{Z}_2$-even
scalars $\phi^0$, $\Omega^0$, $\phi^\pm$ and $\Omega^\pm$, and the
$\mathbb{Z}_2$-odd scalars $\eta^0$ and $\eta^\pm$. In the basis
$\text{Re} \left( \phi^0\, ,\, \Omega^0 \right)$, the mass matrix for
the $\mathbb{Z}_2$-even neutral scalars is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{M}_S^2 &=& \left(\begin{array}{cc}
-m_\phi^2 + \frac{3}{2} \lambda_1 v_\phi^2 + \frac{1}{2} \lambda_1^\Omega v_\Omega^2 - \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} v_\Omega \, \mu_1
& \lambda^\Omega_1 v_\phi v_\Omega - \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} v_\phi \, \mu_1 \\
\lambda^\Omega_1 v_\phi v_\Omega - \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} v_\phi \, \mu_1
& -m_\Omega^2 + \frac{1}{2} \lambda^\Omega_1 v_\phi^2 + 3 \lambda^\Omega_2 v_\Omega^2
\end{array}\right) \, .
\end{eqnarray}
The lightest of the $S$ mass eigenstates, $S_1 \equiv h$, can be
identified with the SM Higgs boson with a mass $m_h \simeq 126$ GeV
recently discovered at the LHC, whereas the heaviest mass eigenstate,
$S_2$, is a new heavy Higgs boson not present in the SM. Regarding the
$\mathbb{Z}_2$-even charged scalars, their mass matrix in the basis
$\left( \phi^\pm\, ,\, \Omega^\pm \right)$ takes the form
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{M}_{H^\pm}^2 &=& \left(\begin{array}{cc}
-m_\phi^2 + \frac{1}{2} \lambda_1 v_\phi^2 + \frac{1}{2} \lambda^\Omega_1 v_\Omega^2 + \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} v_\Omega \, \mu_1 + \frac{1}{4} g^2 v_\phi^2 \xi_{W^\pm}
& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} v_\phi \, \mu_1 - \frac{1}{2} g^2 v_\phi v_\Omega \xi_{W^\pm} \\
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} v_\phi \, \mu_1 - \frac{1}{2} g^2 v_\phi v_\Omega \xi_{W^\pm}
& -m_\Omega^2 + \frac{1}{2} \lambda^\Omega_1 v_\phi^2 + \lambda^\Omega_2 v_\Omega^2 + g^2 v_\Omega^2 \xi_{W^\pm}
\end{array}\right) \, . \nonumber \\
\end{eqnarray}
One of the $H^\pm$ mass eigenstates is the Goldstone boson that
becomes the longitudinal component of the $W$ boson, whereas the other
is a physical charged scalar. In what concerns the $\mathbb{Z}_2$-odd
scalars $\eta^{0,\pm}$, we first express the neutral $\eta^0$ field in
terms of its CP-even and CP-odd components as
\begin{equation}
\eta^0 = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left( \eta^R + i \, \eta^I\right) \, .
\label{eq:defetaRI}
\end{equation}
The conservation of the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry implies that the
$\eta^{R,I,\pm}$ fields do not mix with the rest of scalars. Their
masses are given by~\footnote{Although we provide analytical
expressions for the masses in full generality, our analysis will
assume CP conservation in the scalar sector, allowing us to consider
that $\eta^R$ and $\eta^I$ do not mix.}
\begin{eqnarray}
m_{\eta^R}^2 &=& m_{\eta}^2 + \frac{1}{2}\left(\lambda_3 + \lambda_4 + \lambda_5 \right) v_\phi^2 + \frac{1}{2}\lambda^\eta v_\Omega^2 - \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \, v_\Omega \, \mu_2 \, \\
m_{\eta^I}^2 &=& m_{\eta}^2 + \frac{1}{2}\left(\lambda_3 + \lambda_4 - \lambda_5 \right) v_\phi^2 + \frac{1}{2}\lambda^\eta v_\Omega^2 - \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \, v_\Omega \, \mu_2 \, \\
m_{\eta^{\pm}}^2 &=& m_{\eta}^2 + \frac{1}{2}\lambda_3 v_\phi^2 + \frac{1}{2}\lambda^\eta v_\Omega^2 + \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \, v_\Omega \, \mu_2 \, .
\end{eqnarray}
We point out that the mass difference between the neutral $\eta$
scalars is controlled by the $\lambda_5$ coupling,
$m_{\eta^R}^2-m_{\eta^I}^2 = \lambda_5 \, v_\phi^2$, and thus vanishes
if $\lambda_5 = 0$. This will be relevant for the generation of
neutrino masses, as shown in Sec.~\ref{subsec:numass}.
Finally, we emphasize that the vacuum in Eq. \eqref{eq:vevs} breaks
$SU(2)_L \otimes U(1)_Y \to U(1)_Q$ but preserves the $\mathbb{Z}_2$
discrete symmetry. As we will discuss below, this gives rise to the
existence of a stable neutral particle which may play the role of the
dark matter of the universe.
\subsection{Neutrino masses}
\label{subsec:numass}
Before discussing neutrino masses we must comment on the
$\mathbb{Z}_2$-odd neutral fermions. The $\mathbb{Z}_2$-odd fields
$\Sigma^0$ and $N$ get mixed by the Yukawa coupling $Y_\Omega$ and the
non-zero VEV $v_\Omega$. In the basis $\left( \Sigma^0, N \right)$,
their Majorana mass matrix takes the form
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}_\chi = \left(\begin{array}{cc} M_\Sigma & Y_\Omega v_\Omega \\
Y_\Omega v_\Omega & M_N \end{array}\right) \, .
\end{equation}
The mass eigenstates $\chi_{1,2}$ are determined by the $2\times2$
orthogonal matrix $V(\alpha)$,
\begin{equation}
\left(\begin{array}{c}\chi_1\\ \chi_2\end{array}\right) = \left( \begin{array}{cc}
\cos \alpha & \sin \alpha \\
-\sin \alpha & \cos \alpha
\end{array} \right) \, \left(\begin{array}{c} \Sigma^0\\ N\end{array}\right) = V(\alpha)\left(\begin{array}{c} \Sigma^0\\ N\end{array}\right),
\end{equation}
such that
\begin{equation}
\tan(2\alpha) = \frac{2 \, Y_\Omega v_\Omega}{M_\Sigma - M_N} \, .
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{figs/numass}
\caption{1-loop neutrino masses in the singlet-triplet scotogenic
model. Here $\eta^0 \equiv \left( \eta^R, \eta^I \right)$ and $\chi
\equiv \left( \chi_1, \chi_2 \right)$.}
\label{fig:numass}
\end{figure}
The singlet-triplet scotogenic model generates Majorana neutrino
masses at the 1-loop level. This is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:numass},
which actually includes four loop diagrams, since $\eta^0 \equiv
\left( \eta^R, \eta^I \right)$ and $\chi \equiv \left( \chi_1, \chi_2
\right)$. The resulting neutrino mass matrix can be written
as~\footnote{We correct this expression by including a factor of $1/2$
missing in \cite{Hirsch:2013ola}.}
\begin{eqnarray}
(\mathcal{M}_\nu)_{\alpha\beta}&=&\sum_{\sigma=1}^2\left(\frac{ih_{\alpha \sigma}}{\sqrt{2}}\right)\left(\frac{-ih_{\beta \sigma}}{\sqrt{2}}\right)\left[I(M_{\chi_\sigma}^2,m_{\eta^R}^2)-I(M_{\chi_\sigma}^2,m_{\eta^I}^2)\right] \nonumber \\
&=&\sum_{\sigma=1}^2 \frac{h_{\alpha \sigma} \, h_{\beta \sigma} \, M_{\chi_\sigma}}{2 \, (4\pi)^2} \left[\frac{m_{\eta^R}^2\ln\left(\frac{M_{\chi_\sigma}^2}{m_{\eta^R}^2}\right)}{M_{\chi_\sigma}^2-m_{\eta^R}^2}
-\frac{m_{\eta^I}^2\ln\left(\frac{M_{\chi_\sigma}^2}{m_{\eta^I}^2}\right)}{M_{\chi_\sigma}^2-m_{\eta^I}^2}\right] \, , \label{eq:mnu}
\end{eqnarray}
where $h$ is a $3 \times 2$ matrix defined as
\begin{equation}
h=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
\frac{Y_\Sigma^1}{\sqrt{2}} & Y_N^1 \\
\frac{Y_\Sigma^2}{\sqrt{2}} & Y_N^2 \\
\frac{Y_\Sigma^3}{\sqrt{2}} & Y_N^3
\end{array}\right) \cdot V^T(\alpha) \, ,
\end{equation}
and $I(m_1^2,m_2^2)$ is a Passarino-Veltman function evaluated in the
limit of zero external momentum. We note that $m_{\eta^R}^2 =
m_{\eta^I}^2$ leads to vanishing neutrino masses due to an exact
cancellation between the $\eta^R$ and $\eta^I$ loops. This was indeed
expected, since $m_{\eta^R}^2 = m_{\eta^I}^2$ implies $\lambda_5 = 0$
and a definition of a conserved lepton number would be possible in
this case. Furthermore, this justifies the choice $\lambda_5 \ll 1$,
which is natural in the sense of 't Hooft~\cite{'tHooft:1979bh}, given
that the limit $\lambda_5 \to 0$ increases the symmetry of the model.
It proves convenient to write the neutrino mass matrix in
Eq.~\eqref{eq:mnu} as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:mnumat}
\mathcal{M}_\nu = h \, \Lambda \, h^T \, ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\Lambda = \left( \begin{array}{cc}
\Lambda_1 & 0 \\
0 & \Lambda_2
\end{array} \right) \, , \quad \Lambda_\sigma = \frac{M_{\chi_\sigma}}{2 \, (4\pi)^2} \left[\frac{m_{\eta^R}^2\ln\left(\frac{M_{\chi_\sigma}^2}{m_{\eta^R}^2}\right)}{M_{\chi_\sigma}^2-m_{\eta^R}^2}
-\frac{m_{\eta^I}^2\ln\left(\frac{M_{\chi_\sigma}^2}{m_{\eta^I}^2}\right)}{M_{\chi_\sigma}^2-m_{\eta^I}^2}\right] \, .
\end{equation}
A neutrino mass matrix as the one in Eq.~\eqref{eq:mnumat} formally
resembles that obtained in the standard type-I seesaw with two
generations of right-handed neutrinos. In this case we can make use of
an adapted Casas-Ibarra parameterization
\cite{Casas:2001sr,Ibarra:2003up} to obtain an expression for the
Yukawa matrix $h$,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:CI}
h = U^\ast \, \sqrt{\widehat{\mathcal{M}}_\nu} \, R \, \sqrt{\Lambda}^{-1} \, .
\end{equation}
Here $R$ is a $3 \times 2$ complex matrix such that $R R^T =
\mathbb{I}_{3}$, where $\mathbb{I}_{3}$ is the $3 \times 3$ unit
matrix, and the neutrino mass matrix is diagonalized as
\begin{equation}
U^{T} \, \mathcal{M}_\nu \, U=\widehat{\mathcal{M}}_\nu\equiv
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
m_1 & 0 & 0\\
0 & m_2 & 0\\
0 & 0 & m_3
\end{array}
\right) \, ,
\label{eq:mnudiag}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:PMNS}
U=
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
c_{12}c_{13} & s_{12}c_{13} & s_{13}e^{i\delta} \\
-s_{12}c_{23}-c_{12}s_{23}s_{13}e^{-i\delta} &
c_{12}c_{23}-s_{12}s_{23}s_{13}e^{-i\delta} & s_{23}c_{13} \\
s_{12}s_{23}-c_{12}c_{23}s_{13}e^{-i\delta} &
-c_{12}s_{23}-s_{12}c_{23}s_{13}e^{-i\delta} & c_{23}c_{13}
\end{array}
\right)
\end{equation}
is the PMNS (Pontecorvo-Maki-Nakagawa-Sakata) matrix. Here $c_{ij} =
\cos \theta_{ij}$, $s_{ij} = \sin \theta_{ij}$ and $\delta$ is the
CP-violating Dirac phase~\footnote{In general, Eq. \eqref{eq:PMNS}
could also include an additional Majorana phase. However, this will
not be considered in this paper.}. Similarly to the type-I seesaw
with two right-handed neutrinos, the singlet-triplet scotogenic model
predicts a vanishing mass for the lightest neutrino. It has, however,
enough freedom to accommodate both neutrino spectra, Normal Hierarchy
(NH) and Inverted Hierarchy (IH), and the form of the complex $R$
matrix introduced in Eq.~\eqref{eq:CI} depends on this
choice~\cite{Ibarra:2003up},
\begin{eqnarray}
R &=& \left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & 0 \\ \cos \gamma & \sin \gamma
\\ -\sin \gamma & \cos \gamma
\end{array} \right) \quad \text{\bf for NH} \quad (m_1 = 0) \, , \\
R &=& \left( \begin{array}{cc}
\cos \gamma & \sin \gamma \\
-\sin \gamma & \cos \gamma \\
0 & 0
\end{array} \right) \quad \text{\bf for IH} \quad (m_3 = 0) \, .
\end{eqnarray}
We can finally make use of the previous expressions and write the
Yukawa couplings $h$ in terms of the PMNS matrix $U$, the eigenvalues
$m_i$ and the complex angle $\gamma$. In case of NH, one obtains
\begin{eqnarray}
h_{\alpha 1} &=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{\Lambda_1}} \left( \cos \gamma \, \sqrt{m_2} \, U_{\alpha 2}^\ast - \sin \gamma \, \sqrt{m_3} \, U_{\alpha 3}^\ast \right) \, , \label{eq:hfirst} \\
h_{\alpha 2} &=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{\Lambda_2}} \left( \sin \gamma \, \sqrt{m_2} \, U_{\alpha 2}^\ast + \cos \gamma \, \sqrt{m_3} \, U_{\alpha 3}^\ast \right) \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
whereas for IH one finds
\begin{eqnarray}
h_{\alpha 1} &=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{\Lambda_1}} \left( \cos \gamma \,
\sqrt{m_1} \, U_{\alpha 1}^\ast - \sin \gamma \, \sqrt{m_2} \,
U_{\alpha 2}^\ast \right) \, ,\\ h_{\alpha 2} &=&
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\Lambda_2}} \left( \sin \gamma \, \sqrt{m_1} \,
U_{\alpha 1}^\ast + \cos \gamma \, \sqrt{m_2} \, U_{\alpha 2}^\ast
\right) \, . \label{eq:hlast}
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Dark matter}
\label{subsec:DM}
The lightest state charged under the conserved $\mathbb{Z}_2$ parity
is stable and hence, if electrically neutral, it constitutes a
standard weakly-interacting dark matter candidate. Therefore, in what
concerns dark matter, the singlet-triplet scotogenic model contains
two distinct scenarios: (i) scalar dark matter, when the candidate is
the lightest neutral $\eta$ state, $\eta_R$ or $\eta_I$, and (ii)
fermion dark matter, when the candidate is $\chi_1$, the lightest
$\chi$ state. Even though we will not be concerned about dark matter
in this paper, we find it worth summarizing the main features of these
two scenarios:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Scalar dark matter:} In this case the dark matter
phenomenology resembles that of the inert doublet model
\cite{Deshpande:1977rw} (see also
\cite{Diaz:2015pyv,Queiroz:2015utg,Garcia-Cely:2015khw} for some
recent works on dark matter in the inert doublet model). Since in
this scenario dark matter production in the early universe is driven
by gauge interactions, there is no direct relation with LFV (driven
by Yukawa interactions).
\item {\bf Fermion dark matter:} This scenario presents some of the
most interesting features of the singlet-triplet scotogenic model
\cite{Hirsch:2013ola}. The phenomenology dramatically depends on the
nature of the dark matter candidate. In the two extreme cases this
can be a pure $SU(2)_L$ singlet (when $\chi_1 \equiv N$) or a pure
$SU(2)_L$ triplet (when $\chi_1 \equiv \Sigma$), while in general it
will be an admixture of these two gauge eigenstates. When $\chi_1$
is mostly singlet, the dark matter phenomenology is determined by
Yukawa interactions and one expects a direct link between dark
matter and LFV, as in the minimal scotogenic model
\cite{Vicente:2014wga}. In contrast, the DM phenomenology of a
mostly triplet dark matter candidate is driven by the known gauge
interactions. This case has little impact on LFV and predicts a dark
matter candidate with a mass of about $\sim 2.7$ TeV in order to
reproduce the observed dark matter relic density. The parameter
$Y_\Omega$, which determines the $N-\Sigma$ mixing, interpolates
between these two cases, in a way completely analogous to DM in
R-parity conserving supersymmetry.
\end{itemize}
\section{LFV observables}
\label{sec:LFV}
\subsection{Current experimental situation and future projects}
\label{subsec:expLFV}
No observation of a flavor violating process involving charged leptons
has ever been made. This has been used by many experiments to set
strong limits on the most relevant LFV observables, usually translated
into stringent bounds on the parameter space of many new physics
models. In what concerns the radiative decay $\ell_\alpha \to
\ell_\beta \gamma$, the experimental search is led by the MEG
collaboration. This experiment searches for the process $\mu \to e
\gamma$ and recently announced the limit $\text{BR}(\mu \to e \gamma)
< 5.7 \cdot 10^{-13}$ \cite{Adam:2013mnn}, about four times more
stringent than the previous bound obtained by the same
collaboration. The 3-body LFV decay $\mu \to 3 \, e$ was also searched
for long ago by the SINDRUM experiment \cite{Bellgardt:1987du}, which
obtained the limit $\text{BR}(\mu \to 3 \, e) < 1.0 \cdot 10^{-12}$,
still not improved by any experiment after almost 30 years. Another
$\mu-e$ LFV process of interest due to the existing bounds is $\mu-e$
conversion in nuclei. Among the experiments involved in this search we
may mention SINDRUM II, which searched for $\mu-e$ conversion in
muonic gold and obtained the impressive limit CR($\mu- e, {\rm Au}$)
$< 7\times 10^{-13}$~\cite{Bertl:2006up}. Finally, the current
experimental limits for $\tau$ lepton observables are less stringent,
with branching ratios bounded to be below $\sim 10^{-8}$.
In addition to the active LFV searches, some of them with planned
upgrades, several promising upcoming experiments will join the effort
in the next few years~\footnote{See
\cite{Bernstein:2013hba,Mihara:2013zna,Signorelli:2013kla} for
recent reviews.}. The MEG collaboration has announced plans for
upgrades which will allow this experiment to reach a sensitivity to
branching ratios as low as $6 \cdot 10^{-14}$
\cite{Baldini:2013ke}. Significant improvements are also expected for
$\tau$ observables from searches in B factories
\cite{Aushev:2010bq,Bevan:2014iga}, although the expected
sensitivities are still less spectacular than those for $\mu$
observables. Regarding the new projects, the most promising ones are
expected in searches for $\mu \to 3 \, e$ and $\mu-e$ conversion in
nuclei. The Mu3e experiment, which plans to start data taking soon,
announces a sensitivity for $\mu \to 3 \, e$ branching ratios of the
order of $\sim 10^{-16}$ \cite{Blondel:2013ia}. In case no discovery
is made, this would imply an impressive improvement of the current
bound by $4$ orders of magnitude. Regarding $\mu-e$ conversion in
nuclei, the competition will be shared by several experiments, with
expected sensitivities for the conversion rate ranging from $10^{-14}$
to an impressive $10^{-18}$. These include Mu2e
\cite{Carey:2008zz,Glenzinski:2010zz,Abrams:2012er}, DeeMe
\cite{Aoki:2010zz}, COMET \cite{Cui:2009zz,Kuno:2013mha} and, in the
long term, the future PRISM/PRIME \cite{Barlow:2011zza}.
Finally, even though in this paper we concentrate on low-energy
processes, we emphasize that colliders can also play a relevant role
in the search for LFV. For instance, there is currently an intriguing
hint at CMS for Higgs boson LFV decays into $\tau \mu$
\cite{Khachatryan:2015kon}. This anomaly seems to require an
explanation based on an extended scalar sector (see
e.g. \cite{Sierra:2014nqa,Dorsner:2015mja}), in principle not related
to the problem of neutrino masses, and cannot be accommodated in the
model under investigation. For reference, in Tab.~\ref{tab:sensi} we
collect present bounds and expected sensitivities for the most popular
low-energy LFV observables.
\begin{table}[tb!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
LFV Process & Present Bound & Future Sensitivity \\
\hline
$\mu \rightarrow e \gamma$ & $5.7\times 10^{-13}$~\cite{Adam:2013mnn} & $6\times 10^{-14}$~\cite{Baldini:2013ke} \\
$\tau \to e \gamma$ & $3.3 \times 10^{-8}$~\cite{Aubert:2009ag}& $ \sim3\times10^{-9}$~\cite{Aushev:2010bq}\\
$\tau \to \mu \gamma$ & $4.4 \times 10^{-8}$~\cite{Aubert:2009ag}& $ \sim3\times10^{-9}$~\cite{Aushev:2010bq} \\
$\mu \rightarrow e e e$ & $1.0 \times 10^{-12}$~\cite{Bellgardt:1987du} & $\sim10^{-16}$~\cite{Blondel:2013ia} \\
$\tau \rightarrow \mu \mu \mu$ & $2.1\times10^{-8}$~\cite{Hayasaka:2010np} & $\sim 10^{-9}$~\cite{Aushev:2010bq} \\
$\tau^- \rightarrow e^- \mu^+ \mu^-$ & $2.7\times10^{-8}$~\cite{Hayasaka:2010np} & $\sim 10^{-9}$~\cite{Aushev:2010bq} \\
$\tau^- \rightarrow \mu^- e^+ e^-$ & $1.8\times10^{-8}$~\cite{Hayasaka:2010np} & $\sim 10^{-9}$~\cite{Aushev:2010bq} \\
$\tau \rightarrow e e e$ & $2.7\times10^{-8}$~\cite{Hayasaka:2010np} & $\sim 10^{-9}$~\cite{Aushev:2010bq} \\
$\mu^-, \mathrm{Ti} \rightarrow e^-, \mathrm{Ti}$ & $4.3\times 10^{-12}$~\cite{Dohmen:1993mp} & $\sim10^{-18}$~\cite{PRIME} \\
$\mu^-, \mathrm{Au} \rightarrow e^-, \mathrm{Au}$ & $7\times 10^{-13}$~\cite{Bertl:2006up} & \\
$\mu^-, \mathrm{Al} \rightarrow e^-, \mathrm{Al}$ & & $10^{-15}-10^{-18}$ \\
$\mu^-, \mathrm{SiC} \rightarrow e^-, \mathrm{SiC}$ & & $10^{-14}$~\cite{Natori:2014yba} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Current experimental bounds and future sensitivities for the most important LFV observables.}
\label{tab:sensi}
\end{table}
\subsection{Approximate expressions for the observables}
\label{subsec:approxLFV}
We use the {\tt FlavorKit} \cite{Porod:2014xia} functionality of {\tt
SARAH}
\cite{Staub:2008uz,Staub:2009bi,Staub:2010jh,Staub:2012pb,Staub:2013tta}
for the analytical computation of the LFV Wilson coefficients and
observables. This allows us to automatically obtain complete
analytical results for the LFV observables as well as robust numerical
routines to be combined with {\tt SPheno}
\cite{Porod:2003um,Porod:2011nf}. For the conventions used in this
paper, the definition of the relevant LFV operators and the generic
expressions for the LFV observables we refer to Appendices
\ref{app:LFVlag} and \ref{app:LFVobs}. Even though we will make use of
the complete analytical results for the numerical exploration of the
phenomenology of the model, we find it convenient to present simple
approximate expressions for the observables of interest.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{figs/diag-1}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{figs/diag-2}
\caption{Photon penguin diagrams leading to the dominant Wilson
coefficients $K_1^L$ and $K_2^R$.}
\label{fig:diags}
\end{figure}
Our numerical analysis reveals that the LFV phenomenology is mainly
driven by two Wilson coefficients, both generated by photon penguin
diagrams: the monopole $K_1^L$ and the dipole $K_2^R$. Box diagrams
also lead to sizable contributions, mainly to the Wilson coefficients
$A_{LL}^V$, $B_{LL}^V$ and $C_{LL}^V$, but we have found them to be
always subdominant compared to the photonic monopole and dipole
contributions. Therefore, we can obtain simple approximate expressions
for the LFV observables in terms of only $K_1^L$ and $K_2^R$.
The most relevant photon penguin diagrams in the singlet-triplet
scotogenic model are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:diags}. The diagram with
the neutral fermions $\chi \equiv \left( \chi_1, \chi_2 \right)$
running in the loop is common to the scotogenic model
\cite{Toma:2013zsa}, whereas the diagram with the charged $\Sigma^-$
state is only present in the singlet-triplet variant. This difference
has an impact on the phenomenology, as we will see below. Let us first
consider the dipole coefficient $K_2^R$, which induces the radiative
LFV decay $\ell_\alpha \to \ell_\beta \gamma$. It can be written as
\begin{equation}
K_2^R = \frac{1}{16 \pi^2} \left( D^0 + D^- \right) \, ,
\end{equation}
where the contributions from the two diagrams in Fig. \ref{fig:diags}
are approximately given by
\begin{align}
D^0 =& \, \frac{1}{2 \, m_{\eta^+}^2} \times \nonumber \\
\bigg[ & \left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\cos\alpha\sin\alpha\left(\left( Y_\Sigma^i \right)^\ast Y_{N}^j + \left( Y_N^i \right)^\ast Y_{\Sigma}^j \right)+\frac{1}{2}\left( Y_\Sigma^i \right)^\ast Y_{\Sigma}^j \cos^2\alpha+\left( Y_N^i \right)^\ast Y_{N}^j \sin^2\alpha \right) \, F_2(\xi_1) \nonumber \\
+ & \left( \frac{-1}{\sqrt{2}}\cos\alpha\sin\alpha\left(\left( Y_\Sigma^i \right)^\ast Y_{N}^j +\left( Y_N^i \right)^\ast Y_{\Sigma}^j \right)+\frac{1}{2} \left( Y_\Sigma^i \right)^\ast Y_{\Sigma}^j \sin^2\alpha+\left( Y_N^i \right)^\ast Y_{N}^j \cos^2\alpha \right) \, F_2(\xi_2) \bigg] \, , \label{eq:D0} \\
D^- =& - \frac{1}{2 \, m_{\eta^0}^2} \, \left( Y_\Sigma^i \right)^\ast Y_{\Sigma}^j \, G_2(\rho) \, . \label{eq:Dm}
\end{align}
Similarly, the monopole coefficient $K_1^L$ can be split as
\begin{equation}
K_1^L = \frac{1}{16 \pi^2} \left( M^0 + M^- \right) \, ,
\end{equation}
and the two contributions from the penguin diagrams in
Fig. \ref{fig:diags} are given by
\begin{align}
M^0 =& \, - \frac{1}{6 \, m_{\eta^+}^2} \times \nonumber \\
\bigg[ & \left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\cos\alpha\sin\alpha\left(\left( Y_\Sigma^i \right)^\ast Y_{N}^j + \left( Y_N^i \right)^\ast Y_{\Sigma}^j \right)+\frac{1}{2}\left( Y_\Sigma^i \right)^\ast Y_{\Sigma}^j \cos^2\alpha+\left( Y_N^i \right)^\ast Y_{N}^j \sin^2\alpha \right) \, F_1(\xi_1) \nonumber \\
+ & \left( \frac{-1}{\sqrt{2}}\cos\alpha\sin\alpha\left(\left( Y_\Sigma^i \right)^\ast Y_{N}^j +\left( Y_N^i \right)^\ast Y_{\Sigma}^j \right)+\frac{1}{2} \left( Y_\Sigma^i \right)^\ast Y_{\Sigma}^j \sin^2\alpha+\left( Y_N^i \right)^\ast Y_{N}^j \cos^2\alpha \right) \, F_1(\xi_2) \bigg] \, , \label{eq:M0} \\
M^- =& \, \frac{1}{6 \, m_{\eta^0}^2} \, \left( Y_\Sigma^i \right)^\ast Y_{\Sigma}^j \, G_1(\rho) \, . \label{eq:Mm}
\end{align}
Here we have defined
\begin{equation}
\xi_i = \frac{m_{\chi_i}^2}{m_{\eta^+}^2} \, , \quad \rho = \frac{m_{\chi^-}^2}{m_{\eta^0}^2} \, ,
\end{equation}
and used $m_{\eta^R}^2 \simeq m_{\eta^I}^2 \equiv
m_{\eta^0}^2$. Finally, the loop functions appearing in these
expressions are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
F_1(x) &=& \frac{2-9x+18x^2-11x^3+6x^3 \log x}{6(1-x)^4} \, , \\
G_1(x) &=& \frac{-16+45x-36x^2+7x^3+6(3x-2) \log x}{6(1-x)^4} \, , \\
F_2(x) &=& \frac{1-6x+3x^2+2x^3-6x^2 \log x}{6(1-x)^4} \, , \\
G_2(x) &=& \frac{2+3x-6x^2+x^3+6x \log x}{6(1-x)^4} \, .
\end{eqnarray}
We find that in the limit $M_\Sigma \to \infty$ our analytical results
are in good agreement with those obtained in the scotogenic model
\cite{Toma:2013zsa}~\footnote{Notice that the loop functions have been
renamed with respect to \cite{Toma:2013zsa}.}. Finally, we emphasize
that the numerical results discussed in the next Section are based on
the full 1-loop evaluation of the LFV observables and not on these
approximate expressions, only presented to gain insight.
\section{Phenomenological analysis}
\label{sec:pheno}
Our phenomenological analysis uses a {\tt SARAH}-generated {\tt
SPheno} \cite{Porod:2003um,Porod:2011nf} module for the numerical
evaluation of the LFV observables. We solve the tadpole equations for
the squared mass terms $m_H^2$ and $m_\Omega^2$ and use an adapted
Casas-Ibarra parameterization for neutrino masses to compute the
Yukawa couplings $Y_N$ and $Y_\Sigma$. For this purpose, the results
of the global fit to neutrino oscillation data \cite{Forero:2014bxa}
will be used. Furthermore, given the little impact on the LFV
phenomenology, we fix the following parameters in the scalar
potential,
\begin{align}
\lambda_{2,3,4} = \lambda_{1,2}^\Omega = \lambda^\eta = 0.1 \, &, \quad \lambda_5 = 10^{-8} \ , \label{eq:par1} \\
\mu_1 = 50 \, \text{GeV} \, &, \quad \mu_2 = 1 \, \text{TeV} \, . \label{eq:par2}
\end{align}
We have explicitly checked that these parameters only affect the LFV
observables indirectly, due to their influence on the scalar
spectrum~\footnote{The parameter $\lambda_5$ does indeed have a strong
impact on the LFV observables, but only due to the scaling of the
Yukawa couplings, $Y_N$ and $Y_\Sigma$, induced via the neutrino
mass relation in Eq. \eqref{eq:mnu}. All our numerical results have
been obtained with $\lambda_5 = 10^{-8}$, except those for the
$\tau$ lepton observables, obtained with $\lambda_5 = 10^{-10}$.}.
The large value chosen for the trilinear coupling $\mu_2$ ensures the
conservation of the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry up to high energy scales
\cite{Merle:2016scw}. We also fix $v_\Omega = 1$ GeV. This choice
leads to a negligible deviation from $\rho = 1$, thus respecting
limits from electroweak precision data. Finally, the doublet VEV
$v_\phi$ is fixed so that $m_W$ is correctly obtained, see
Eq. \eqref{eq:mW}, and the quartic coupling $\lambda_1$ so that the
lightest CP-even state in the model has a mass compatible with that of
the recently discovered Higgs boson. This leaves us with four free
model parameters,
\begin{equation*}
Y_\Omega \, , \quad m_\eta^2 \, , \quad M_N \, , \quad M_\Sigma \, ,
\end{equation*}
as well as the usual free choices in the implementation of the
Casas-Ibarra parameterization: the $R$ matrix angle $\gamma$, the
Dirac CP-violating phase $\delta$ and Normal/Inverted Hierarchy for
the light neutrino spectrum.
\subsection*{General predictions of the model}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{figs/contour_MEG}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{figs/contour_MEEE} \\
\vspace*{0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{figs/contour_CrAl}
\caption{Contours of BR($\mu \to e \gamma$), BR($\mu \to 3 \, e$) and
CR($\mu - e, {\rm Al}$) in the $m_\eta$-$M_N$ plane. Figures
obtained with fixed $Y_\Omega = 0.1$ and $M_\Sigma = 500$ GeV, see
text for more details.}
\label{fig:contours}
\end{figure}
We will now explore some aspects of the LFV phenomenology of the
singlet-triplet scotogenic model. First of all,
Fig. \ref{fig:contours} shows contours of BR($\mu \to e \gamma$)
(upper left panel), BR($\mu \to 3 \, e$) (upper right panel) and
CR($\mu - e, {\rm Al}$) (lower panel) in the $m_\eta$-$M_N$ plane,
obtained with the setup introduced above and the choices $Y_\Omega =
0.1$, $M_\Sigma = 500$ GeV, $\gamma = \delta = 0$, normal hierarchy
for the light neutrino spectrum and taking best-fit values for the
neutrino oscillation parameters. The first conclusion one can draw
from this figure is that the singlet-triplet scotogenic model will be
probed in the next round of LFV experiments: one easily finds
parameter points where the three observables, BR($\mu \to e \gamma$),
BR($\mu \to 3 \, e$) and CR($\mu - e, {\rm Al}$), are within the reach
of the MEG and Mu3e experiments, respectively. In fact, the particular
choice of parameters made in this figure rules out low $M_N$ values
($\lesssim 400$ GeV) as they would imply a too large $\mu \to e
\gamma$ rate, in conflict with the current bound set by the MEG
experiment. In the case of $\mu \to 3 \, e$, the spectacular Mu3e
sensitivity to branching ratios as low as $\sim 10^{-16}$ would allow
one to probe the complete $m_\eta$-$M_N$ plane explored in
Fig. \ref{fig:contours}, with mass values up to the TeV scale and even
higher in some cases. This also happens for $\mu-e$ conversion in
Aluminum. In this observable, however, a strong cancellation takes
place for a narrow band of the $m_\eta$-$M_N$ plane, where the
resulting negligible conversion rates cannot be probed in the near
future. Qualitatively similar results are found for $\mu-e$ conversion
rates in other nuclei, where analogous cancellations take place as
well.
Figure \ref{fig:contours} also shows that in the long term the
processes $\mu \to 3 \, e$ and $\mu-e$ conversion in nuclei will be
more stringent than $\mu \to e \gamma$. Currently, only the MEG
experiment sets relevant constraints in the explored $m_\eta$-$M_N$,
ruling out a small portion with low $M_N$ values, while the current
bounds for $\mu \to 3 \, e$ and $\mu-e$ conversion in nuclei do not
imply any relevant restrictions. Given the expected experimental
sensitivities in the search for these two observables, this fact will
certainly change in the future. We find that the reach of experiments
such as Mu3e (in case of $\mu \to 3 \, e$) and Mu2e or COMET (in case
of $\mu-e$ conversion in nuclei), clearly supersedes that of MEG, even
after the planned upgrade.
Before moving to the discussion of the BR($\mu \to e \gamma$)/BR($\mu
\to 3 \, e$) ratio, we would like to make some additional comments
about Figure \ref{fig:contours}. We have explicitly checked that our
numerical results reproduce the expected decoupling behavior, namely
that all LFV observables go to zero when $m_\eta$ and $M_{N,\Sigma}$,
the masses of the particles involved in their generation, go to
infinity. However, this is not completely apparent when looking at
Figure \ref{fig:contours}. There are two reasons for this: (i) some
regions of parameter space lead to cancellations among diagrams that
strongly reduce some of the Wilson coefficients (see below for
details), and (ii) the fit to neutrino oscillation data that leads to
an increase in the Yukawa couplings when $m_\eta$ or $M_{N,\Sigma}$
increase.
\subsection*{The $\text{BR}\boldsymbol{(\mu \to 3 \, e)}\boldsymbol{/}\text{BR}\boldsymbol{(\mu \to e \gamma)}$ ratio}
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|cc}
\hline
\hline
& {\bf Point 1} & {\bf Point 2} \\
\hline
$Y_\Omega$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ \\
$m_\eta^2$ [GeV$^2$] & $2.5 \cdot 10^5$ & $2.5 \cdot 10^{5}$ \\
$M_N$ [GeV] & $500$ & $500$ \\
$M_\Sigma$ [GeV] & $800$ & $300$ \\
\hline
BR($\mu \to e \gamma$) & $4.7 \cdot 10^{-13}$ & $1.3 \cdot 10^{-15}$ \\
BR($\mu \to 3 \, e$) & $3.2 \cdot 10^{-15}$ & $6.1 \cdot 10^{-15}$ \\
CR($\mu- e, {\rm Al}$) & $1.1 \cdot 10^{-15}$ & $5.4 \cdot 10^{-14}$ \\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Benchmark points, parameter values and LFV observables. In
addition to the four input values in this table, we take the
parameter choices in Eqs. \eqref{eq:par1} and \eqref{eq:par2}, use
$\gamma = 0$, best-fit values for the neutrino oscillation
parameters, as obtained in \cite{Forero:2014bxa}, normal hierarchy
for the light neutrino spectrum and $\delta = 0$. }
\label{tab:benchmark}
\end{table}
We also observe in Fig. \ref{fig:contours} that for most points in the
selected $m_\eta$-$M_N$ plane, one obtains BR($\mu \to e \gamma$)
$\gg$ BR($\mu \to 3 \, e$). However, this is not a general prediction
of the model, as we proceed to discuss now. Let us consider the
benchmark points in Table \ref{tab:benchmark}. The results for the LFV
observables have been obtained making the same choices as for
Fig. \ref{fig:contours}, but using specific values for $m_\eta^2$,
$M_N$ and $M_\Sigma$. First, we observe that the ratio
\begin{equation}
R_{\mu e} = \frac{\text{BR}(\mu \to 3 \, e)}{\text{BR}(\mu \to e \gamma)} \, ,
\end{equation}
can vary by orders of magnitude between different benchmark points
just by changing a single parameter, $M_\Sigma$. In fact, while {\bf
point 1} predicts LFV rates within the reach of future experiments
searching for $\mu \to e \gamma$, $\mu \to 3 \, e$ and $\mu-e$
conversion in nuclei, {\bf point 2} leads to a BR($\mu \to e \gamma$)
below the foreseen MEG sensitivity and can only be probed by $\mu \to
3 \, e$ and $\mu-e$ conversion in nuclei experiments. Moreover, we
note that only BR($\mu \to e \gamma$) varies substantially between
point 1 and point 2, with a decrease of more than two orders of
magnitude, while the other $\mu-e$ flavor violating observables are
slightly larger in point 2.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{figs/cancellation}
\caption{BR($\mu \to e \gamma$) as a function of $M_N$ for fixed
values $Y_\Omega = 0.1$, $m_\eta^2 = 2.5 \cdot 10^5$ GeV$^2$ and
$M_\Sigma = 500$ GeV. The purple dots display the total branching
ratio, whereas the pink and blue dots show partial results obtained
with only the $D^0$ and $D^-$ contributions, respectively.}
\label{fig:cancellation}
\end{figure}
The strong dependence of the $\mu \to e \gamma$ rate on $M_\Sigma$ can
be understood as follows. When $M_\Sigma < M_N$, as in point 2, one
expects the dominant LFV Feynman diagrams to be those with triplet
fermions, $\Sigma^0$ and $\Sigma^-$, running in the loop. Furthermore,
when the mixing between singlet and triplet fermions is small ($\alpha
\simeq 0$) one of the neutral $\chi$ states is mainly composed of
$\Sigma^0$ and is mass degenerate with the charged $\chi^- \equiv
\Sigma^-$. In this case, a cancellation between the $D^0$ and $D^-$
contributions in Eqs. \eqref{eq:D0} and \eqref{eq:Dm} takes
place. Using these equations, it is straightforward to show that for
$\alpha \simeq 0$, the fermion triplet loops lead to $K_2^R \propto
F_2 \left( \xi_1 \right) - 2 \, G_2 \left( \rho \right)$, both loop
functions being positive. Therefore, one naturally expects to find
parameter points where this cancellation in the dipole coefficient is
effective, leading to a reduction in the $\mu \to e \gamma$ rate.
This is explicitly shown in Fig. \ref{fig:cancellation}, where we plot
our numerical results for BR($\mu \to e \gamma$) as a function of
$M_N$ for the fixed values $Y_\Omega = 0.1$, $m_\eta^2 = 2.5 \cdot
10^5$ GeV$^2$ and $M_\Sigma = 500$ GeV. The purple dots display the
total branching ratio, whereas the pink and blue dots show partial
results obtained with only the $D^0$ and $D^-$ contributions,
respectively. This figure has been obtained by allowing the neutrino
oscillation parameters to vary randomly within the preferred $3 \,
\sigma$ ranges found by the global fit of \cite{Forero:2014bxa}, which
explains the spread of the points. We observe that the $D^0$ and $D^-$
contributions approach a common value for large $M_N$ values, whereas
the total branching ratio drops. This is due to the abovementioned
cancellation in the $\Sigma^0$-$\Sigma^-$ loops. For low $M_N$ values
the singlet contributions to $D^0$ dominate and the cancellation in
the triplet contributions is not relevant. However, as $M_N$ increases
and the $N$ contribution to $D^0$ gets smaller, the cancellation in
the triplet contributions becomes visible. We point out that a similar
cancellation in the monopole coefficient takes place, again due to the
relative sign between $M^0$ and $M^-$, see Eqs. \eqref{eq:M0} and
\eqref{eq:Mm}. However, typically this cancellation has little impact
on the LFV observables which receive contributions from the monopole
operator due to the interplay with the other contributions
(e.g. dipole).
\subsection*{LFV $\tau$ decays}
So far we have concentrated on $\mu-e$ violating processes. Now we
turn our attention towards LFV processes involving the $\tau$
lepton. Given the worse experimental limits, these can only be
phenomenologically relevant when they have rates much larger than
those for the $\mu$ lepton. For example, in the benchmark points 1 and
2 presented above one finds branching ratios for the radiative decays
$\tau \to \ell_\alpha \gamma$, with $\ell_\alpha = e, \mu$, in the $\sim
10^{-13}-10^{-12}$ ballpark, clearly below the expected experimental
sensitivity in the near future.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{figs/gamma300}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{figs/gamma800}
\caption{BR($\ell_\alpha \to \ell_\beta \gamma$) as a function of the
$R$ matrix angle $\gamma$ for $M_\Sigma = 300$ GeV (left) and
$M_\Sigma = 800$ GeV (right). The color code is as follows:
$(\alpha,\beta) = (2,1)$ in blue, $(\alpha,\beta) = (3,1)$ in red
and $(\alpha,\beta) = (3,2)$ in black. See text for more details.}
\label{fig:gamma}
\end{figure}
The results shown in Tab. \ref{tab:benchmark} for points 1 and 2 were
obtained with a vanishing $R$ matrix angle $\gamma$. This parameter
has a direct impact on the Yukawa couplings $Y_N$ and $Y_\Sigma$, see
Eqs. \eqref{eq:hfirst} - \eqref{eq:hlast}, and can lead to
cancellations in the amplitudes of specific flavor violating
transitions. This is illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:gamma}, where we
show our numerical results for BR($\ell_\alpha \to \ell_\beta \gamma$)
as a function of the $R$ matrix angle $\gamma$ (assumed to be real for
simplicity) for $M_\Sigma = 300$ GeV (on the left) and $M_\Sigma =
800$ GeV (on the right). The rest of the parameters are fixed to the
same values as in points 1 and 2, with the exception of a smaller
$\lambda_5$ coupling ($\lambda_5 = 10^{-10}$) in order to increase the
resulting Yukawa couplings and get larger LFV rates. We see in these
figures that even though most points are experimentally excluded due
to a $\mu \to e \gamma$ rate above the MEG bound, for certain $\gamma$
values a strong cancellation takes place, leading to a tiny BR($\mu
\to e \gamma$) and BR($\tau \to e \gamma) \sim 10^{-9}-10^{-8}$
within reach of B factories.
Therefore, we conclude that the singlet-triplet scotogenic model can
also be probed via $\tau$ observables. However, the scenarios that
would be experimentally explored in this way are not generic and
require a certain level of tuning in the Yukawa parameters in order to
suppress the $\mu \to e$ rates.
\section{Summary and conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusions}
We have investigated the lepton flavor violating phenomenology of the
singlet-triplet scotogenic model, a well-motivated scotogenic neutrino
mass model in which neutrinos acquire their masses at the 1-loop
level. The same symmetry that forbids the tree-level generation of
neutrino masses stabilizes a weakly-interacting dark matter candidate,
thus providing a natural solution for another fundamental problem of
current physics.
Our main findings can be summarized as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item The model will be probed in the next generation of LFV
experiments. In fact, we have found that parts of the parameter
space are already ruled out by $\mu \to e \gamma$ searches. This of
course depends on the value of the $\lambda_5$ parameter, which sets
the global size of the Yukawa parameters and is expected to be
naturally small due to its crucial role in the violation of lepton
number.
\item Currently, the most stringent LFV bound on the model is the one
set by the MEG experiment on BR($\mu \to e \gamma$). However, this
will soon change due to the impressive expected sensitivity in the
incoming experiments. Experiments such as Mu3e (searching for $\mu
\to 3 \, e$) and Mu2e or COMET (searching for $\mu-e$ conversion in
nuclei) will soon probe larger portions of the parameter space of
the model.
\item The operators with the largest contributions to the LFV
amplitudes are the monopole and dipole ones. These are induced by
photon penguin diagrams with scotogenic states running in the
loop. Box diagrams have a subdominant role.
\item One naturally finds points of the parameter space with BR($\mu
\to 3 \, e$), CR($\mu-e$, Nucleus) $\gg$ BR($\mu \to e
\gamma$). This is caused by cancellations in the dipole coefficient
which take place when the dominant contributions are generated by
$\Sigma^0$-$\Sigma^-$ loops. When this happens, MEG is usually
unable to constrain the model.
\item The singlet-triplet scotogenic model can also be probed via
$\tau$ observables, but the scenarios where these have values close
to the current or near future sensitivities require a certain tuning
of the Yukawa parameters. Nevertheless, this can be achieved by
properly choosing the $\gamma$ angle of the Casas-Ibarra matrix $R$.
\end{itemize}
Finally, there are other ways to probe the parameter space of the
singlet-triplet scotogenic model. As already explained, scotogenic
models have a potential interplay between DM physics and LFV in
scenarios with fermionic DM. In this case, the application of LFV
bounds combined with the Planck result for the DM relic density and
contraints from direct DM detection experiments (an attractive feature
of the singlet-triplet scotogenic model), would help obtaining very
stringent constraints on the model and, eventually, ruling out large
fractions of the parameter space. Regarding collider phenomenology,
the $\Sigma$ and $\Omega$ triplets can be pair-produced in Drell-Yan
processes at the LHC. In case of the $\Sigma$ fermions, their
subsequent decays lead to final states including DM particles, hence
to signatures with missing energy, in a way analogous to the standard
R-parity conserving supersimmetric signals
\cite{vonderPahlen:2016cbw}. These interesting possibilities are left
for future work.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors are grateful to J. W. F. Valle and R. Lineros for fruitful
discussions. AV is also grateful to A. Merle, M. Platscher and
N. Rojas for discussions about the singlet-triplet scotogenic model
and collaboration in related projects. Work supported by the Spanish
grants FPA2014-58183-P, Multidark CSD2009-00064, SEV-2014-0398
(MINECO) and PROMETEOII/2014/084 (Generalitat Valenciana). PR was
founded by CONACYT becas en el extranjero CVU 468534. AV acknowledges
financial support from the ``Juan de la Cierva'' program (27-13-463B-
731) funded by the Spanish MINECO.
|
\section*{Abstract}
This study develops an equation for describing three-dimensional membrane
transformation through proliferation of its component cells regulated by
morphogen density distributions on the membrane. The equation is developed in
a two-dimensional coordinate system mapped on the membrane, referred to as the
membrane coordinates. When the membrane expands, the membrane coordinates
expand in the same manner so that the membrane is invariant in the
coordinates. In the membrane coordinate system, the transformation of membrane
is described with a time-derivative equation for metric tensors. By defining
relationships between morphogen density distributions and the direction and
rate of cell division, trajectories of membrane transformation are obtained in
terms of the morphogen distributions. An example of the membrane
transformation is shown numerically.
\section{Introduction}
Arthropods have diverse morphologies \citep{regier10:arthropods}. Those
morphologies are made by molting; new epidermis can have significantly
different shape from the old ones through morphogen-regulated proliferation
and/or apotosis of the component cells \citep{warren13:develop}. While
understandings of gene networks for the regulation have been accumulating
rapidly, it is still not clear how the three-dimensional morphologies of
epidermis are generated by morphogen distributions on it. For efficient
investigation on the mechanism underlying this process, this study develops an
equation for metric dynamics describing three-dimensional transformation of a
membrane (corresponding to the new epidermis) through proliferation of its
component cells regulated by morphogen density distributions on it. A unit
element in this equation, referred to as the metric-dynamics equation, is a
(sufficiently) small domain of a membrane, which still has many cells. In this
sense, numerical calculation of the metric-dynamics equation may be more
efficient than the approaches explicitly describing cell divisions.
This paper is structured as follows. Section 2 derives the metric-dynamics
equation. Section 3 numerically shows development of a horn-like structure, as
an application example. Section 4 discusses strong and weak points of the
equation.
\section{Derivations of metric-dynamics equation}
We assume three-dimensional Euclidean coordinate system $\mathbf{R}= ( X, Y,
Z)^T$ and a membrane sheet expressed as a two-dimensional flat plane $Z = 0$.
On the plane, we map a two-dimensional coordinate system $\mathbf{r}= ( x,
y)^T$. When the membrane sheet shrinks, expands and/or be bent, this
coordinate system also changes in the same manner, so that in this membrane
coordinates the membrane sheet is invariant. Thus, any point in the membrane
coordinate system does not change its position through the dynamics. In other
words, in this coordinate system cell division is not followed by growth of
the divided cells.
\subsection{Metric tensor based on cellular distance}
The membrane is expressed as \ $\mathbf{R} ( \mathbf{r}) = ( X ( \mathbf{r}),
Y ( \mathbf{r}), Z ( \mathbf{r}))^T$. We assume that $\mathbf{R} ( \mathbf{r})
= ( x, y, 0)^T$ holds at the initial state. As cell proliferation proceeds, $(
X ( \mathbf{r}), Y ( \mathbf{r}))^T$ deviates from $( x, y)^T$, and \ $Z (
\mathbf{r})$ deviates form the flat plane $Z ( \mathbf{r}) = 0$.
We assume that in coordinate system $\mathbf{R}$ the average cell of any
small (but still sufficiently large for having many cells) region on the
membrane is isotropic and its diameter is equal to a positive constant
$\sigma$ ($\ll 1$), i.e., isometric embedding. Then, the number $\Delta l$ of
cells penetrated by the line segment between $\mathbf{R}$ and $\mathbf{R}+
\Delta \mathbf{R}$ on the membrane is expressed as $| \Delta \mathbf{R} | /
\sigma$ with an additional isotropic-scaling of axes. Then a cellular distance
$\sigma \Delta l$ can be expressed with the corresponding two points
$\mathbf{r}$ and $\mathbf{r}+ \Delta \mathbf{r}$ as
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma^2 \Delta l^2 & = & a \Delta x^2 + 2 a b \Delta x \Delta y + c \Delta
y^2 \nonumber\\
& = & \left(\begin{array}{c}
\Delta x\\
\Delta y
\end{array}\right)^T \left(\begin{array}{cc}
a & b\\
b & c
\end{array}\right) \left(\begin{array}{c}
\Delta x\\
\Delta y
\end{array}\right) \nonumber\\
& = & \Delta \mathbf{r}^T \mathbf{G} \Delta \mathbf{r} \nonumber\\
& = & \Delta \mathbf{r}^T \mathbf{W}^T \mathbf{W} \Delta \mathbf{r}
\end{eqnarray}
by choosing appropriate coefficients $a, b$, and $c$, where a symmetric matrix
$\mathbf{G}=\mathbf{W}^T \mathbf{W}$ is the metric tensor at $\mathbf{r}$, and
$\mathbf{W}$ is its Cholesky decomposition.
With the metric, we introduce a two-dimensional locally geodesic coordinates
$\tilde{\mathbf{r}}$ around an arbitrary point $\hat{\mathbf{r}}$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{\mathbf{r}} - \hat{\mathbf{r}} & = & \mathbf{W} \left[ ( \mathbf{r}-
\hat{\mathbf{r}}) + \frac{1}{2} \left(\begin{array}{c}
( \mathbf{r}- \hat{\mathbf{r}})^T \tmmathbf{\Gamma}^x ( \mathbf{r}-
\hat{\mathbf{r}})\\
( \mathbf{r}- \hat{\mathbf{r}})^T \tmmathbf{\Gamma}^y ( \mathbf{r}-
\hat{\mathbf{r}})
\end{array}\right) \right], \nonumber\\
\mathbf{r}- \hat{\mathbf{r}} & = & \mathbf{W}^{- 1} ( \tilde{\mathbf{r}} -
\hat{\mathbf{r}}) - \frac{1}{2} \left(\begin{array}{c}
{}[ \mathbf{W}^{- 1} ( \tilde{\mathbf{r}} - \hat{\mathbf{r}})]^T
\tmmathbf{\Gamma}^x [ \mathbf{W}^{- 1} ( \tilde{\mathbf{r}} -
\hat{\mathbf{r}})] + \ldots\\
{}[ \mathbf{W}^{- 1} ( \tilde{\mathbf{r}} - \hat{\mathbf{r}})]^T
\tmmathbf{\Gamma}^y [ \mathbf{W}^{- 1} ( \tilde{\mathbf{r}} -
\hat{\mathbf{r}})] + \ldots
\end{array}\right),
\end{eqnarray}
with $\tmmathbf{\Gamma}^x$ and $\tmmathbf{\Gamma}^y$ that contain Christoffel
symbols of the second kind,
\begin{eqnarray}
\tmmathbf{\Gamma}^x & = & \left(\begin{array}{cc}
\Gamma^x_{x x} & \Gamma^x_{x y}\\
\Gamma^x_{x y} & \Gamma^x_{y y}
\end{array}\right), \nonumber\\
\tmmathbf{\Gamma}^y & = & \left(\begin{array}{cc}
\Gamma^y_{x x} & \Gamma^y_{x y}\\
\Gamma^x_{x y} & \Gamma^x_{y y}
\end{array}\right), \nonumber\\
\Gamma^k_{j i} & = & \sum_m \frac{1}{2} G^{- 1}_{k m} \left( \frac{\partial
G_{i m}}{\partial x_j} + \frac{\partial G_{j m}}{\partial x_i} -
\frac{\partial G_{j i}}{\partial x_m} \right),
\end{eqnarray}
where $G^{- 1}_{k m}$ is $( k, m)$ component of $\mathbf{G}^{- 1}$ and $G_{i
m}$ is $( i, m)$ component of $\mathbf{G}$.
Then in coordinate system $\tilde{\mathbf{r}}$ the average cell is isotropic
with constant diameter in the neighborhood of $\hat{\mathbf{r}}$, where
$\sigma^2 \Delta l^2 = | \Delta \tilde{\mathbf{r}} |^2$ holds. From Eqs. (2)
we see at an arbitrary position $\hat{\mathbf{r}}$
\begin{eqnarray}
\nabla_{\tilde{\mathbf{r}}} \mathbf{r} & = & \tilde{\nabla}
\mathbf{r}=\mathbf{W}^{- 1}, \nonumber\\
\nabla_{\mathbf{r}} \tilde{\mathbf{r}} & = & \nabla \tilde{\mathbf{r}}
=\mathbf{W},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\tilde{\nabla}$ and $\nabla$ mean $\nabla_{\tilde{\mathbf{r}}}$ and
$\nabla_{\mathbf{r}}$, respectively.
\subsection{Membrane transformation induced by morphogen distribution}
We assume two types of morphogens: $\alpha$ and $\eta$. Their density
distributions on the membrane are described in $\mathbf{r}$, as $\alpha (
\mathbf{r})$ and $\eta ( \mathbf{r})$. Morphogens $\alpha$ and $\eta$ control
directed and non-directed cell division, respectively. For $\alpha$, we assume
that directed cell division occurs in the direction of gradient of $\alpha$ in
coordinate system $\tilde{\mathbf{r}}$, denoted by $\tilde{\nabla}
\tilde{\alpha}$, with its rate proportional to $b ( \tilde{\nabla}
\tilde{\alpha})$. For $\eta$, the rate of non-directed division is assumed to
be proportional to $\eta ( \mathbf{r})$.
Then from time $t$ to $t' = t + \Delta t$, $\Delta \tilde{\mathbf{r}}$ changes
into $\Delta \tilde{\mathbf{r}}'$, satisfying
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta \tilde{\mathbf{r}}' & = & \left[ \mathbf{I}+ \left( c_{\alpha} b ( |
\tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\alpha} |) \frac{\tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\alpha}
\tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\alpha}^T}{| \tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\alpha} |^2} +
c_{\eta} \eta \mathbf{I} \right) \Delta t \right] \Delta \tilde{\mathbf{r}}
\\
& = & [ \mathbf{I}+\mathbf{A} \Delta t] \Delta \tilde{\mathbf{r}} \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
with proportionality coefficients $c_{\alpha}$ and $c_{\eta}$, where $(
\mathbf{r})$ is omitted. Without loss of generality, we assume that $\alpha (
\mathbf{r})$ and $\eta ( \mathbf{r})$ are scaled so that $c_{\alpha} =
c_{\eta} = 1$. The cellular distance between $\mathbf{r}$ and $\mathbf{r}+
\Delta \mathbf{r}$ at $t' = t + \Delta t$ is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma^2 \Delta l'^2 & = & \Delta \tilde{\mathbf{r}}'^T \Delta
\tilde{\mathbf{r}}' = \Delta \tilde{\mathbf{r}}^T [ \mathbf{I}+\mathbf{A}
\Delta t]^T [ \mathbf{I}+\mathbf{A} \Delta t] \Delta \tilde{\mathbf{r}} .
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Metric dynamics in membrane coordinate system}
To express Eq. (6) in the membrane coordinate system, we express density
distribution of $\alpha$ in coordinate system $\tilde{\mathbf{r}}$ as
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{\alpha} ( \tilde{\mathbf{r}}) & = & \frac{\alpha ( \mathbf{r})}{\|
\mathbf{W} \|} = \frac{\alpha ( \mathbf{W}^{- 1} \tilde{\mathbf{r}} +
\ldots)}{\| \mathbf{W} \|},
\end{eqnarray}
which gives a relationship
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\alpha} = \nabla_{\tilde{\mathbf{r}}} \tilde{\alpha} &
= & \nabla_{\tilde{\mathbf{r}}} \frac{\alpha ( \mathbf{W}^{- 1}
\tilde{\mathbf{r}} + \ldots)}{\| \mathbf{W} \|} = \frac{1}{\| \mathbf{W} \|}
\nabla_{\tilde{\mathbf{r}}} \mathbf{r}^T \nabla_{\mathbf{r}} \alpha =
\frac{1}{\| \mathbf{W} \|} \mathbf{W}^{- 1 T} \nabla \alpha .
\end{eqnarray}
Here we assume that
\begin{eqnarray}
b ( | \tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\alpha} |) & = & \| \mathbf{G} \| |
\tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\alpha} |^2,
\end{eqnarray}
which gives a simple result as follows. Substituting Eqs. (8) and (9) into Eq.
(5) gives
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbf{A} & = & \mathbf{W}^{- 1 T} \nabla \alpha \nabla \alpha^T
\mathbf{W}^{- 1} + \eta \mathbf{I},
\end{eqnarray}
which upon substitution into Eq. (6) gives
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma^2 \Delta l'^2 & = & \Delta \mathbf{r}^T \mathbf{W}^T [ ( 1 + 2 \eta
\Delta t) \mathbf{I}+ 2\mathbf{W}^{- 1 T} \nabla \alpha \nabla \alpha^T
\mathbf{W}^{- 1} \Delta t + O ( \Delta t^2)] \mathbf{W} \Delta \mathbf{r}
\nonumber\\
& = & \Delta \mathbf{r}^T [ ( 1 + 2 \eta \Delta t) \mathbf{G}+ 2 \nabla
\alpha \nabla \alpha^T \Delta t + O ( \Delta t^2)] \Delta \mathbf{r}
\nonumber\\
& = & \Delta \mathbf{r}^T [ \mathbf{G}+ 2 ( \eta \mathbf{G}+ \nabla \alpha
\nabla \alpha^T) \Delta t + O ( \Delta t^2)] \Delta \mathbf{r} \nonumber\\
& = & \Delta \mathbf{r}^T \mathbf{G}' \Delta \mathbf{r}.
\end{eqnarray}
Therefore, the time derivative of metric $\mathbf{G}$ is obtained as
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{d\mathbf{G}}{d t} & = & \lim_{\Delta t \rightarrow 0}
\frac{\mathbf{G}' -\mathbf{G}}{\Delta t} = 2 \eta \mathbf{G}+ 2 \nabla
\alpha \nabla \alpha^T .
\end{eqnarray}
From this equation, the time derivative of linear cell density $q (
\mathbf{e}) = \sqrt{\mathbf{e}^T \mathbf{G}\mathbf{e}}$, which is the
multiplication of $\sigma$ by the number of cells penetrated by unit vector
$\mathbf{e}$ in coordinate system $\mathbf{r}$, is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{d q ( \mathbf{e})^2}{d t} & = & \mathbf{e}^T \frac{d\mathbf{G}}{d t}
\mathbf{e}= 2\mathbf{e}^T [ \eta \mathbf{G}+ \nabla \alpha \nabla \alpha^T]
\mathbf{e}, \\
\frac{d q ( \mathbf{e})}{d t} & = & \frac{1}{q ( \mathbf{e})} \mathbf{e}^T [
\eta \mathbf{G}+ \nabla \alpha \nabla \alpha^T] \mathbf{e}.
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Solution of metric-dynamics equation}
Solving Eq. (12) gives the metric and linear cell density after cell
proliferation from time $t = 0$ to an arbitrary $t = \tau$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbf{G} ( \tau) & = & e^{2 \eta \tau} \left[ \int_0^{\tau} 2 \nabla
\alpha \nabla \alpha^T e^{- 2 \eta t} \tmop{dt} +\mathbf{G}_0 \right], \\
q^2 ( \mathbf{e}, \tau) & = & \mathbf{e}^T \mathbf{G} ( \tau) \mathbf{e}.
\end{eqnarray}
with $\mathbf{G}_0 =\mathbf{G} ( 0)$. If $\eta$ and $\nabla \alpha$ is
constant along time, Eq. (15) is simplified into
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbf{G} ( \tau) & = & \left\{ \begin{array}{lll}
\left[ \mathbf{G}_0 + \frac{\nabla \alpha \nabla \alpha^T}{\eta} \right]
\exp ( 2 \eta \tau) - \frac{\nabla \alpha \nabla \alpha^T}{\eta} &
\tmop{for} & \eta \neq 0\\
\mathbf{G}_0 + 2 \tau \nabla \alpha \nabla \alpha^T & \tmop{for} & \eta =
0.
\end{array} \right.
\end{eqnarray}
To see the shape of the membrane given by Eq. (17), we consider that $\alpha (
\mathbf{r})$ is expressed in coordinate system $\mathbf{R}$ as a
two-dimensional surface $\mathbf{R}_{\alpha} = ( x, y, \alpha (
\mathbf{r}))^T$. Then distance between the two points on the surface,
$\mathbf{R}_{\alpha}$ and $\mathbf{R}_{\alpha} + \Delta \mathbf{R}_{\alpha}$
(corresponding to $\mathbf{r}$ and $\mathbf{r}+ \Delta \mathbf{r}$), can be
expressed as
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma^2 \Delta l_{\alpha}^2 & = & \Delta x^2 + \Delta y^2 + | \nabla
\alpha^T \Delta \mathbf{r} |^2, \nonumber\\
& = & \Delta \mathbf{r}^T \left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0\\
0 & 1
\end{array}\right) \Delta \mathbf{r}+ \Delta \mathbf{r}^T \nabla \alpha
\nabla \alpha^T \Delta \mathbf{r} \nonumber\\
& = & \Delta \mathbf{r}^T [ \mathbf{I}+ \nabla \alpha \nabla \alpha^T]
\Delta \mathbf{r},
\end{eqnarray}
which gives
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbf{G}_{\alpha} & = & \mathbf{I}+ \nabla \alpha \nabla \alpha^T .
\end{eqnarray}
Thus, the membrane may have a similar shape to that of $\mathbf{R}_{\alpha}$.
Especially, $\mathbf{G}_0 = 2 \tau \mathbf{I}$ gives $\mathbf{G} ( \tau)
=\mathbf{G}_{\alpha}$. Even for \ $\mathbf{G}_0 \neq 2 c_{\alpha} \tau
\mathbf{I}$, a sufficiently large $| \nabla \alpha |$ allows $\mathbf{G} (
\tau) \approx 2 c_{\alpha} \tau \mathbf{G}_{\alpha}$.
\subsection{Modification by other morphogens}
Here we assume that distributions of $\alpha$ and $\eta$ are constant along
time in the membrane coordinate system. In order to modify the basic membrane
structure formed by morphogens $\alpha$ and $\eta$, we introduce additional
morphogens $\beta$ and $\theta$. Morphogens $\beta$ and $\theta$ curve and
twist the basic structure, respectively, as explained below.
First, $\beta$ accelerates the rate of directed cell division in one side of
the basic structure, and suppresses that in the other side, which can be
realized by introducing an increasing function of $[ \tilde{\nabla}
\tilde{\alpha}^T \tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\beta}]_{t = 0} = \| \mathbf{G}_0 \|^{-
1} \nabla \alpha^T \mathbf{G}_0^{- 1} \nabla \beta$, denoted by $g ( [
\tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\alpha}^T \tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\beta}]_{t = 0})$, \
into Eq. (5) as
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta \tilde{\mathbf{r}}' & = & [ \mathbf{I}+ ( g ( [ \tilde{\nabla}
\tilde{\alpha}^T \tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\beta}]_{t = 0}) \tilde{\nabla}
\tilde{\alpha} \tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\alpha}^T + \eta \mathbf{I}) \Delta t]
\Delta \tilde{\mathbf{r}} .
\end{eqnarray}
For simplicity, we choose $g ( [ \tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\alpha}^T
\tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\beta}]_{t = 0}) = \exp ( [ \tilde{\nabla}
\tilde{\alpha}^T \tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\beta}]_{t = 0})^2$. (Curving can also
be realized by acceleration/suppression of non-directed cell division, by
multiplying $\eta \mathbf{I}$ by $[ \tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\alpha}^T
\tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\beta}]_{t = 0}$.)
Second, $\theta$ rotates the direction of directed cell division by $\theta$
in the initial geodesic coordinate system (i.e., rotation of $\tilde{\nabla}
\tilde{\alpha} = \| \mathbf{W} \|^{- 1} \mathbf{W}^{- 1 T} \nabla \alpha$ by
$\theta$ in $\tilde{\mathbf{r}}$ at $t = 0$), which further transforms Eq.
(20) into
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta \tilde{\mathbf{r}}' & = & [ \mathbf{I}+ O ( \Delta t^2)] \Delta
\tilde{\mathbf{r}} \\
& & + ( \exp ( [ \tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\alpha}^T \tilde{\nabla}
\tilde{\beta}]_{t = 0})^2 [ \mathbf{W}^{- 1 T} \tilde{\tmmathbf{\Theta}}
\nabla \alpha] [ \mathbf{W}^{- 1 T} \tilde{\tmmathbf{\Theta}} \nabla
\alpha]^T + \eta \mathbf{I}) \Delta t \Delta \tilde{\mathbf{r}} \nonumber\\
& = & [ \mathbf{W}+ ( \exp ( \| \mathbf{G}_0 \|^{- 1} \nabla \alpha^T
\mathbf{G}_0^{- 1} \nabla \beta)^2 \mathbf{W}^{- 1 T}
\tilde{\tmmathbf{\Theta}} \nabla \alpha \nabla \alpha^T
\tilde{\tmmathbf{\Theta}}^T + \eta \mathbf{W}) \Delta t + O ( \Delta t^2)]
\Delta \mathbf{r} \nonumber\\
& = & [ \mathbf{W}+ ( \mathbf{W}^{- 1 T} \mathbf{a}\mathbf{a}^T + \eta
\mathbf{W}) \Delta t + O ( \Delta t^2)] \Delta \mathbf{r}, \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbf{a} & = & \exp ( \| \mathbf{G}_0 \|^{- 1} \nabla \alpha^T
\mathbf{G}_0^{- 1} \nabla \beta) \tilde{\tmmathbf{\Theta}} \nabla \alpha,
\nonumber\\
\tilde{\tmmathbf{\Theta}} & = & \mathbf{W}_0^T
\tmmathbf{\Theta}\mathbf{W}_0^{- 1 T}, \nonumber\\
\tmmathbf{\Theta} & = & \left(\begin{array}{cc}
\cos \theta & \sin \theta\\
- \sin \theta & \cos \theta
\end{array}\right),
\end{eqnarray}
and $\mathbf{W}_0^T \mathbf{W}_0 =\mathbf{G}_0$. Then we obtain,
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma^2 \Delta l'^2 & = & \Delta \mathbf{r}^T [ \mathbf{G}+ 2 ( (
\mathbf{a}\mathbf{a}^T + \eta \mathbf{G}) \Delta t) + O ( \Delta t^2)]
\Delta \mathbf{r}, \\
\frac{d\mathbf{G}}{d t} & = & 2\mathbf{a}\mathbf{a}^T + 2 \eta \mathbf{G},
\\
\mathbf{G} ( \tau) & = & \left\{ \begin{array}{lll}
\left[ \mathbf{G}_0 + \frac{\mathbf{a}\mathbf{a}^T}{\eta} \right] \exp ( 2
\eta \tau) - \frac{\mathbf{a}\mathbf{a}^T}{\eta} & \tmop{for} & \eta \neq
0\\
\mathbf{G}_0 + 2 \tau \mathbf{a}\mathbf{a}^T & \tmop{for} & \eta = 0.
\end{array} \right.
\end{eqnarray}
The above formulation uses $\tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\alpha}$ and $\tilde{\nabla}
\tilde{\beta}$ at $t = 0$ for the modification. We can also use
$\tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\alpha}$ and $\tilde{\nabla} \tilde{\beta}$ at each
time $t$ instead (i.e., removing the subscript `0' from $\mathbf{G}_0$ and
$\mathbf{W}_0$ in Eqs. (22)), which might be easier to realize in biological
systems. However, this choice gives more complicated equation than Eq. (25).
In the beginning of subsection 2.1 we assume that at $t = 0$ the membrane is
flat, $\mathbf{R} ( \mathbf{r}) = ( X ( \mathbf{r}), Y ( \mathbf{r}), Z (
\mathbf{r}))^T = ( x, y, 0)^T$, which implies $\mathbf{G}_0 =\mathbf{I}$ for
all $\mathbf{r}$. Even if $\mathbf{G}_0$ varies along $\mathbf{r}$, i.e., the
membrane is not flat at the initial state, Eqs. (23-25) are unchanged.
\section{Numerical calculation of membrane transformation}
\begin{figure}[h]
(a) \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ (b) \ \ \ \ \ \ \
\resizebox{6cm}{6cm}{\includegraphics{horn14_double_out1_test1g10ddddd2_tw2_1.ps}}
\ \
\resizebox{6cm}{6cm}{\includegraphics{horn14_double_out1_test1g10ddddd2_tw2_2.ps}}
\caption{Transformation of a flat membrane through cell proliferation
regulated by morphogens. Parameters are $\tau = 0.6$, $d_a = 1,
\sigma_{\alpha} = 0.5 , c_{\alpha} = 30, c_{\beta} = - 0.15$, and
$c_{\theta} = 0.02$. (a) and (b) show the same membrane seen from different
perspectives.}
\end{figure}
We show an example of numerical calculation of membrane transformation. For
given density distributions of $\alpha$, $\eta$, $\beta$, $\theta$, and the
initial metric $\mathbf{G}_0$, we can calculate $\mathbf{G} ( \tau)$. The
membrane structure $\mathbf{R} ( \mathbf{r}) = ( X ( \mathbf{r}), Y (
\mathbf{r}), Z ( \mathbf{r}))^T$ at $t = \tau$ can be calculated by solving
\begin{eqnarray}
\lim_{| \Delta \mathbf{r} | \rightarrow \tmmathbf{0}} \left[ \frac{|
\mathbf{R} ( \mathbf{r}+ \Delta \mathbf{r}) -\mathbf{R} ( \mathbf{r})
|^2}{\Delta \mathbf{r}^T \mathbf{G} ( \tau) \Delta \mathbf{r}} \right] & = &
1
\end{eqnarray}
with Eq. (25). In this example, for $\alpha$ we assume a distribution
\begin{eqnarray}
\alpha ( \mathbf{r}) & = & c_{\alpha} \left[ \exp \left( - \frac{|
\mathbf{r}- ( d_{\alpha}, 0)^T |^2}{2 \sigma_{\alpha}^2} \right) + \exp
\left( - \frac{| \mathbf{r}- ( - d_{\alpha}, 0)^T |^2}{2 \sigma_{\alpha}^2}
\right) \right],
\end{eqnarray}
which have two peaks for a sufficiently large $d_{\alpha}$. For the other
morphogens, we assume
\begin{eqnarray}
\eta ( \mathbf{r}) & = & 0 \nonumber\\
\beta ( \mathbf{r}) & = & c_{\beta} y \nonumber\\
\theta ( \mathbf{r}) & = & \left\{ \begin{array}{lll}
c_{\theta} & \tmop{for} & x > 0\\
- c_{\theta} & \tmop{for} & x < 0
\end{array} \right.
\end{eqnarray}
For efficiency in solving Eq. (26), we assume a bending elasticity of the
membrane, and a weak water pressure from inside of the membrane (i.e., a
constant outward pressure in parallel with the normal vector at each point on
the membrane). Figure 1 shows a transformed membrane structure for
$\mathbf{G}_0 =\mathbf{W}_0 =\mathbf{I}$ (i.e., the initial membrane is flat),
$\tau = 0.6$, $d_a = 1, \sigma_{\alpha} = 0.5 , c_{\alpha} = 30,
c_{\beta} = - 0.15$, and $c_{\theta} = 0.02$.
\section{Discussion}
As the initial metric $\mathbf{G}_0$ can vary along $\mathbf{r}$ for the
metric-dynamics equation, Eq. (25), the membrane transformation can be
repeatedly applied to the same membrane by resetting morphogen distributions
while keeping $\mathbf{G} ( \tau)$ (like as repeated molting of arthropods),
which can generate various complex structures. Our approach may be more
efficient than models describing cell-level dynamics, because the number of
vertices required for describing the membrane may be smaller. On the other
hand, a weak point of our approach is that we have to define relationships
between the local properties of morphogen distributions (e.g., gradients) and
the manners of local membrane extensions. Cell-based approaches can examine
the validity of those relationships and improve them.
\bibliographystyle{/home/itoh9/pop-ecol}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{Sect_Introduction}
For a long time, globular clusters have been considered to be simple, spherical, and isotropic systems. However, it is well known that several factors contribute to their evolution, causing their properties to be far from this simple approximation. In particular, the effects of the external tidal field, of pressure anisotropy, and of rotation are particularly important in shaping their kinematical properties. In the present work, we focus on the first two ingredients, and we explore their role during the entire life of globular clusters.
The presence of radially-biased pressure anisotropy in globular clusters may be interpreted both as a signature of their formation through violent relaxation \citep{Lynden-Bell1967} and as a product of their dynamical evolution. The role of violent relaxation in globular clusters has been explored by a number of numerical studies \cite[for example, see][among many others]{Aarseth1988,Vesperini1996,McMillan2007}. Recently, by analysing the results of several numerical simulations, \cite{Vesperini2014} have studied the dynamics of a cluster in the phase of violent relaxation, and showed that radially-biased anisotropy naturally arises during this process. They point out that, after having experienced violent relaxation, isolated systems are characterised by isotropy in the centre and increasing radially-biased anisotropy in the outer parts \citep[see also][]{VanAlbada1982,Trenti2005}; for systems that evolve in a tidal field, anisotropy reaches a maximum and then decreases again, with the outermost regions being isotropic.
Pioneering numerical investigations have shown that pressure anisotropy becomes important during the evolution of the clusters, even when the initial conditions are spherical and isotropic \citep{Henon1971a,SpitzerHart1971,SpitzerShull1975}. \cite{Spitzer1987} showed that during their evolution, isolated globular clusters develop a structure composed by two distinct regions: an isotropic core, and a radially anisotropic halo of stars. An explanation for this is that stars are scattered from the centre in the halo on radial orbits, as a consequence of the gravothermal instability which is thought to be responsible for the core collapse \citep{Lynden-Bell1967,Lynden-BellWood1968,SpitzerShapiro1972}. Simulations taking into account stars with different masses by \cite{GierszHeggie1996} confirmed this picture, showing that the post-collapse evolution and anisotropy profile are self-similar, with the system being more anisotropic at larger distances from the centre.
Simulations taking into account the presence of an external tidal field have unveiled two possible scenarios for the development of pressure anisotropy, depending on the strength of the tidal field. On the one hand, \cite{GierszHeggie1997} and \cite{TakahashiLeeInagaki1997} showed that during the collapse phase and shortly after the cluster is isotropic in the centre, and increasingly radially anisotropic at larger radii. As the evolution proceeds, the external tidal field has the effect of suppressing the anisotropy, and the system eventually becomes fully isotropic. This happens for two main reasons: first, mass loss has the effect of exposing the deeper parts of the systems, where deviations from isotropy are more modest \citep{GierszHeggie1997}; second, the tidal torque induces isotropy in the velocity dispersion of the outer regions of the cluster, as described by \cite{OhLin1992} and \cite{Pontzen2015}. On the other hand, other sets of numerical simulations \citep[for example][and many others]{Takahashi1997,AarsethHeggie1998,TakahashiLee2000,BaumgardtMakino2003} have shown that during their evolution clusters remain basically isotropic everywhere, except for the outermost parts, where tangentially biased anisotropy is present, due to the fact that stars on radial orbits are preferentially lost as effect of the interaction with the tidal field. Recently, \cite{Sollima2015} presented two simulations in which different flavours of anisotropy develop, pointing out that the type of anisotropy arising during the evolution of the system is related to the strength of the tidal field acting on it. As also shown by \cite{Tiongco2016}, clusters that are originally tidally underfilling develop a significant amount of radial anisotropy, while those that are initially filling their Roche volume remain basically isotropic throughout their evolution.
Recently, it has become feasible to measure anisotropy in the very central regions of nearby clusters \citep[i.e., typically within $100\arcsec$ from the centre, see][]{Watkins2015}, with the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). In the near future, data from the Global Astrometric Interferometer for Astrophysics (Gaia), will enable us to obtain such measurements in a large number of clusters \citep{PancinoGAIA2013,Sollima2015}, and for stars located especially in their outer regions, where the effects described above can be observed and discriminated.
Given the complexity of this picture, and to be able to analyse the data in the best possible way, it is crucial to have at our disposal adequate models to describe the different states in the dynamical evolution of globular clusters, in order to give an accurate representation of their observed properties. The instantaneous properties of these stellar systems are well described by relatively simple distribution function based models, defined with few assumptions. Spherical, isotropic, and non-rotating King models \citep{Michie1963,King1966} have been widely used to describe Galactic globular clusters \citep[see for example][]{MLvdM2005,ZBV2012}. Non-rotating Wilson models, having a different truncation prescription with respect to King models, have also proven to be adequate to reproduce especially the outermost slope of the surface brightness profiles of some clusters \citep{MLvdM2005}. In some cases, to explain the observed kinematic properties of clusters \citep{Sollima2009,ZBV2012,Ibata2013,BVBZ2013}, it is necessary to consider anisotropic models, such as those introduced by \cite{Michie1963} and \cite{BertinTrenti2003}, or rotating models, such as those by \cite{Wilson1975} and \cite{VB2012}. Moreover, when the effects of mass segregation cannot be neglected, multi-mass models \citep{DaCostaFreeman1976,GunnGriffin1979} are necessary to properly describe Galactic globular clusters \citep{PryorMeylan1993,Sollima2012,Sollima2015}.
In this study we will perform a comparative investigation between a family of distribution function based dynamical models, recently proposed by \cite{GielesZocchi2015}, and an $N$-body simulation performed by \cite{AlexanderGieles2012}, which offers a representation of the entire dynamical evolution of an idealised star cluster. Such a family of dynamical models is characterised by a parametrised truncation prescription, and a variable degree of radially-biased pressure anisotropy. Their flexibility makes these models particularly suitable for studying the evolution of the main structural and kinematical properties of a star cluster in the presence of a mild tidal perturbation. In principle, these models allow also for the presence of multiple mass components, but, in the present study, we will consider only the simple single-component case, as appropriate for the comparison with an equal-mass $N$-body model.
Our purpose is to assess whether these models may be used to describe collisional stellar systems in different dynamical states, and thus to define a parametric evolutionary sequence of well-posed dynamical equilibria, which may also be used as a tool to characterise the entire dynamical evolution of a star cluster in a simplified, yet physically motivated, way. This idea has been already explored, in the past, starting with \cite{Prata1971}, who proposed a method to calculate the dynamical evolution of star clusters by means of a sequence of King models. \cite{Chernoff1986} studied the pre-collapse phase of evolution of clusters and the influence of tidal heating on their relaxation, and later \cite{Chernoff1987} traced the evolution of clusters to core collapse and tidal disruption by means of a three-parameter series of King models. \cite{Wiyanto1985} compared the evolution of King models by using the isotropised orbit-averaged Fokker-Planck equation, and \cite{Vesperini1997} proposed a comparison to the results of numerical simulations with a broad range of initial conditions. In this framework, the present work expands this investigation by introducing two additional elements of interest: the presence of anisotropy and a certain degree of freedom in the definition of the truncation prescription. Moreover, with respect to the previous studies, we extend our analysis to the entire life of a star cluster, by considering also the post-collapse evolution until final dissolution in the tidal field.
The paper is organised as follows: in Section~\ref{Sect_Models} we introduce the models, and in Section~\ref{Sect_Simulations} we illustrate the main properties of the simulations we consider in our analysis. In Section~\ref{Sect_FittingMethods} we describe the fitting method we adopted, and in Section~\ref{Sect_Results} we show and discuss our results. Our conclusions are presented in Section~\ref{Sect_Conclusion}. Finally, Appendix~\ref{App_residuals} provides a more quantitative comparison between relevant quantities for the models and for the simulation.
\section{Dynamical models}
\label{Sect_Models}
We consider the family of spherical dynamical models presented by \cite{GielesZocchi2015}. In the following, we will refer to these models as \textsc{limepy} models, from the name of the code that is used to calculate them\footnote{The \textsc{limepy} (Lowered Isothermal Model Explorer in PYthon) code is available from \url{https://github.com/mgieles/limepy}}. The distribution function, depending on the specific energy $E$ and angular momentum $J^2$, is
\begin{equation}
f(E,J^2) = A \, \exp \left(-\frac{J^2}{2 r_{\rm a}^2 s^2}\right) E_\gamma \left(g, \dfrac{\phi(r_{\rm t})-E}{s^2}\right) \ ,
\label{Eq_DF_Limepy}
\end{equation}
for $E<\phi(r_{\rm t})$, with $r_{\rm t}$ the truncation radius, and $0$ otherwise. We recall that the energy can be expressed as $E = v^2/2 + \phi(r)$, where $\phi$ is the specific potential and $v$ is the velocity, and the angular momentum as $J^2 = r^2 v^2_{\rm t}$, where we used the tangential component of the velocity $v_{\rm t}$, and the radius $r$, indicating the distance from the centre of the system. In equation~(\ref{Eq_DF_Limepy}) we have introduced the function
\begin{align}
E_\gamma(g, x) =
\begin{cases}
\exp(x) & g=0 \\
\displaystyle\exp(x) \frac{\gamma(g, x)}{\Gamma(g)} & g>0,
\end{cases}
\label{eq:eg}
\end{align}
where $\gamma(g, x)$ is the lower incomplete gamma function, and $\Gamma(g)$ is the gamma function \citep[for properties of these functions, see][]{EgammaModels,AbramowitzStegun}.
To identify one model within the family, it is necessary to specify the values of three parameters:
\begin{itemize}
\item $W_0$ is the central dimensionless potential, and sometimes it is referred to as the \textit{concentration parameter} of the model. This parameter is used as a boundary condition to solve the Poisson equation, and it determines the shape of the radial profiles of some relevant quantities;
\item the \textit{anisotropy radius} $r_{\rm a}$ is related to the amount of anisotropy present in the system. The smaller it is, the more anisotropic is the model. In the limit $r_{\rm a} \rightarrow \infty$, the models become isotropic; in practice, a configuration may be safely considered isotropic if the anisotropy radius is larger than the truncation radius $r_{\rm t}$;
\item the \textit{truncation parameter} $g$ sets the sharpness of the truncation in energy: the larger it is, the more extended the models are, and the less abrupt the truncation is. When considering the isotropic version of the models, $g=0$ corresponds to the \citet{Woolley1954} models, $g=1$ to the \citet{King1966} models, and $g=2$ to the non-rotating \citet{Wilson1975} models. Depending on the value of $W_0$, there exists a maximum value of $g$ that is allowed to consider when finite models are needed: for $g\lesssim2.1$ the models are finite for all the values of $W_0$, but for low values of $W_0$ larger values of $g$ are also acceptable \citep[see fig.~4 of][]{GielesZocchi2015}.
\end{itemize}
It is important to note that a model with given values of $W_0$ and $g$ becomes more extended when the value of $r_{\rm a}$ is decreased. The same effect is obtained when $g$ is increased, keeping $W_0$ and $r_{\rm a}$ fixed. This causes a degeneracy in the parameter space when fitting models only to surface brightness or number density profiles: without information on the three-dimensional kinematics of a system, it is impossible to disentangle the two effects \citep[for a discussion, see also][]{ZBV2012}.
In addition, it is necessary to specify two scales, that are related to $A$ and $s$, which represent a mass density in the phase space and a velocity scale; in particular, for models with high concentration, $s$ is approximately equal to the one-dimensional velocity dispersion in the centre of the system. These scales naturally define also a radial scale. In this way, the velocity, radial, and mass units are defined, so that every property of the model can be expressed in these terms.
We note that these three physical units are not independent, and that two of them fully specify the free scales of the models \citep[for details, see][]{GielesZocchi2015}. In fitting these models to data, it is useful to consider the mass scale and the radial scale as fitting parameters, so we will consider these as the physical scales in the remainder of this paper.
Starting from the distribution function of equation~(\ref{Eq_DF_Limepy}), we can calculate several quantities that are useful to describe a stellar system, and that are normally used when comparing models to observations. In particular, we consider in the following the mass density $\rho$ and the radial and tangential components of the velocity dispersion $\sigma_{\rm r}$ and $\sigma_{\rm t}$ \citep[for a definition, see][]{GielesZocchi2015,BT1987}; we will also use $\sigma$, defined from the two components of the velocity dispersion ($\sigma^2 = \sigma_{\rm r}^2 + \sigma_{\rm t}^2$).
These models are isotropic in the centre, radially anisotropic in the intermediate part, and isotropic again near the truncation radius\footnote{The shape of this profile is a consequence of the definition of the distribution function. Near the truncation radius, the models behave like polytropes and are isotropic \citep[for a more detailed explanation, see also Sect.~2.1.5 of][]{GielesZocchi2015}.} $r_{\rm t}$. This property is particularly interesting when using them to describe globular clusters because, as outlined in Section~\ref{Sect_Introduction}, radial anisotropy is expected to develop in the intermediate parts of these systems during the early stages of their evolution, while the innermost and outermost parts are expected to be isotropic because of relaxation processes and tidal effects, respectively. The degree of anisotropy of the configurations may be characterised, as usual, by means of a local or a global diagnostics. In the present analysis, we will adopt the following definition of the anisotropy parameter:
\begin{equation}
\beta = 1 - \frac{\sigma^2_{\rm t}}{2 \sigma^2_{\rm r}} \ ,
\label{Eq_beta}
\end{equation}
such that a positive value of $\beta$ indicates radial anisotropy, a negative value tangential anisotropy, and $\beta = 0$ isotropy. In addition, we will also adopt the global quantity introduced by \citet{PolyachenkoShukhman1981}
\begin{equation}
\kappa = \frac{2 K_{\rm r}}{K_{\rm t}} \ ,
\label{Eq_kappa}
\end{equation}
where $K_{\rm r}$ and $K_{\rm t}$ are the radial and tangential components of the kinetic energy, respectively. Isotropy is characterised by $\kappa = 1$, radial anisotropy by $\kappa > 1$ and tangential anisotropy by $\kappa < 1$. An anisotropic model is stable against radial orbit instability if it satisfies the criterion introduced by \citet{PolyachenkoShukhman1981}, $\kappa < 1.7 \pm 0.25$: all the models considered in this paper satisfy this criterion and are therefore stable against radial orbit instability.
Two of the main simplifications of these models are the assumptions of spherical symmetry and the absence of rotation. For real globular clusters it may be important to relax these assumptions, in order to give a realistic representation of their structure and dynamics. For the purpose of this study, however, we choose to rely on these assumptions, especially in consideration of properties of the reference $N$-body model we wish to analyse (which is spherical and non-rotating). The focus of our investigation is indeed the role of pressure anisotropy, and \textsc{limepy} models, especially by virtue of their parameters $g$ and $r_{\rm a}$, are the ideal framework to quantify the deviations from isotropy in velocity space emerging during the life of a star cluster, and to describe their evolution in the presence of an external tidal field.
\section{Numerical simulations}
\label{Sect_Simulations}
We consider the results of a simulation published in \citet{AlexanderGieles2012}, and run with Aarseth's \textsc{nbody6} \citep{MakinoAarseth1992, Aarseth1999, Aarseth2003}. The starting configuration of the simulation is a cluster composed of $N = 65\,536$ stars with the same mass, distributed according to a \cite{Plummer1911} spherical model. The simulation does not include primordial binaries, nor a central black hole. The system is assumed to be on a circular orbit in a weak tidal field generated by a point-mass galaxy; initially, the ratio of the Jacobi radius to the half-mass radius for the cluster is set to $r_{\rm J}/r_{\rm h} = 100$.
The units used in this paper are the conventional H\'{e}non\ $N$-body units: $G = M = -4 \, \mathcal{E} = 1$ \citep{Henon1971}, where $G$, $M$, and $\mathcal{E}$ denote the gravitational constant, the total initial mass, and the total energy, respectively. The equations of motion are solved in a reference frame that co-rotates with the orbit of the cluster. The model is initially in virial equilibrium, such that the virial radius $r_{\rm v}=-GM^2/(2U)=1$, where $U$ is the gravitational energy. Stars are removed from the simulation once they reach $r > 2 \, r_{\rm J}$ and the simulation is run until complete dissolution, which is defined as $N<100$, and occurs at approximately $t = 6 \times 10^6$ $N$-body times.
The evolution of the cluster is driven by two-body relaxation, three-body binaries, and the interaction with the tidal field. The effects of stellar evolution are not taken into account. After undergoing core collapse, roughly at $t = 1.25 \times 10^4$ $N$-body times, the system expands until it fills its Roche-volume. Although Roche-filling is not clearly defined, at $t \sim 3\times10^5$ $N$-body times $r_{\rm h} \gtrsim 0.13 \, r_{\rm J}$, from which moment the ratio $r_{\rm h}/r_{\rm J}$ remains roughly constant.
Here, we consider 21 snapshots of this evolving system, with the aim of determining their dynamical properties. We select ten snapshots before core collapse, equally spaced in time with intervals of $10^3$ $N$-body times, and eleven snapshots after core collapse, with a time spacing of $5 \times 10^4$ $N$-body times. This choice is motivated by the need of accurately sampling the entire life of the cluster with a limited number of snapshots. The first snapshot we consider is at $10^3$ $N$-body times, and the last one is at $5.5 \times 10^5$ $N$-body times, just before the complete dissolution of the system\footnote{All snapshots are available from the Gaia Challenge Wiki page: \url{http://astrowiki.ph.surrey.ac.uk/dokuwiki}}. For each particle, the complete set of coordinates in phase space are available: the three spatial coordinates $(x, y, z)$, and the three velocity coordinates $(v_x, v_y, v_z)$. Table~\ref{Tab_True_Properties} lists some properties of these snapshots.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption[Properties of the considered snapshots.]{Properties of the considered snapshots. For each snapshot, identified by a label in the first column, we list the time at which it was taken, $t$, the total mass of the stars that are bound to the cluster $M$, the half-mass radius $r_{\rm h}$, the Jacobi radius $r_{\rm J}$, and the logarithm of the relaxation time at the half-mass radius at that moment, $\tau_{\rm rh}$. All the quantities are expressed in H\'{e}non\ $N$-body units; the horizontal line separates snapshots taken before (also indicated with the string ``pre-CC'') and after core collapse.}
\label{Tab_True_Properties}
\begin{tabular}{cccccc}
\hline\hline
Snapshot & $t$ & $M$ & $r_{\rm h}$ & $r_{\rm J}$ & $\log \tau_{\rm rh}$ \\
\hline
pre-CC 1 & 1 $\times10^3$ & 1.000 & 0.775 & 77.992 & 2.842 \\
pre-CC 2 & 2 $\times10^3$ & 0.999 & 0.770 & 77.983 & 2.838 \\
pre-CC 3 & 3 $\times10^3$ & 0.999 & 0.767 & 77.966 & 2.835 \\
pre-CC 4 & 4 $\times10^3$ & 0.997 & 0.771 & 77.935 & 2.838 \\
pre-CC 5 & 5 $\times10^3$ & 0.996 & 0.779 & 77.889 & 2.845 \\
pre-CC 6 & 6 $\times10^3$ & 0.993 & 0.783 & 77.823 & 2.847 \\
pre-CC 7 & 7 $\times10^3$ & 0.989 & 0.791 & 77.718 & 2.854 \\
pre-CC 8 & 8 $\times10^3$ & 0.985 & 0.818 & 77.614 & 2.875 \\
pre-CC 9 & 9 $\times10^3$ & 0.979 & 0.843 & 77.456 & 2.893 \\
pre-CC 10 & 1 $\times10^4$ & 0.973 & 0.875 & 77.280 & 2.916 \\
\hline
1 & 5 $\times10^4$ & 0.712 & 2.87 & 70.793 & 3.638 \\
2 & 1 $\times10^5$ & 0.565 & 3.98 & 65.538 & 3.813 \\
3 & 1.5 $\times10^5$ & 0.461 & 5.09 & 61.394 & 3.940 \\
4 & 2 $\times10^5$ & 0.383 & 5.58 & 57.786 & 3.970 \\
5 & 2.5 $\times10^5$ & 0.314 & 5.97 & 54.215 & 3.981 \\
6 & 3 $\times10^5$ & 0.248 & 6.18 & 50.472 & 3.966 \\
7 & 3.5 $\times10^5$ & 0.189 & 6.07 & 46.263 & 3.911 \\
8 & 4 $\times10^5$ & 0.139 & 5.22 & 41.896 & 3.764 \\
9 & 4.5 $\times10^5$ & 0.089 & 4.96 & 36.393 & 3.664 \\
10 & 5 $\times10^5$ & 0.048 & 4.01 & 29.958 & 3.436 \\
11 & 5.5 $\times10^5$ & 0.015 & 2.77 & 20.712 & 3.037 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
As mentioned before, stars are removed from the simulation when they reach a distance of $2 \, r_{\rm J}$ from the centre of the cluster: this means that every snapshot contains stars that are located outside the Jacobi radius and that are not bound to the system. Moreover, during the evolution of the cluster, it is possible to identify a population of stars having energy in excess of the escape energy of the cluster, $E_{\rm crit} = - (3/2) GM/r_{\rm J}$: the escape time for these stars can be very long, and therefore they are not instantly ejected \cite[these stars are also called potential escapers, e.g., see][]{FukushigeHeggie2000}. The dynamical models introduced above are designed to describe a system of bound stars, and therefore we consider in our analysis only the stars that have energy below the critical energy for escape. A discussion on the dynamical properties of potential escapers, and on the effects they have on the observable properties of clusters will be presented in a separate paper \citep[Claydon et al., in preparation; see also][]{Kuepper2010}. Moreover, in order to simplify the analysis, we decided to neglect the binaries that formed in the cluster. This choice does not have an impact on our results, because the number of binaries is always very small with respect to the total number of stars in the cluster (with 15 binaries, Snapshot 1 is the one containing the largest number of binaries).
\section{Fitting methods}
\label{Sect_FittingMethods}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{fig1.ps}
\caption{Projections of the posterior probability distribution on the planes determined by every pair of parameters (see Section~\ref{Sect_FittingMethods} for the list of fitting parameters, and Section~\ref{Sect_Models} for their description). The plots show the results of the fit carried out with \textsc{emcee} on snapshot number 5 after core collapse, at $t \sim 2.5\times10^5$ $N$-body times. Contours are shown at 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2 sigma. The red lines and the red dot mark the values of the half-mass radius and of the total mass of the cluster at that time. Histograms representing the marginalised posterior probability distribution of each parameter are also shown.}
\label{Fig_contours}
\end{figure*}
When binning data points to calculate a radial profile to be compared to theoretical predictions, information is lost that could be used to further constrain the models \citep[e.g.][]{Watkins2013}. Here we apply a discrete fitting technique to distribution function based models, using the fact that a distribution function is indeed a probability function. The comparison we propose is the first step towards applying this to observational data of globular clusters: in the case presented here the procedure is simple, due to the fact that the data we have are complete (i.e., we know all the coordinates of each star in phase space) and without observational errors.
With this approach, we do not have to build ``observational'' profiles by binning data in order to compare them with the widely used projected density and velocity dispersion profiles that can be calculated from the models. Instead we take advantage of the fact that we know the 6 coordinates of every star in phase space exactly, and we can therefore easily calculate the probability of finding a star in that position by calculating the value assumed by the distribution function of equation~(\ref{Eq_DF_Limepy}) for a given model. To do this, we compute the energy and the angular momentum of each star from its phase space coordinates; to calculate the energy, we interpolate the model potential at the position of the star.
In our fitting procedure, we use a Bayesian approach to determine the posterior probability distribution of the model parameters $\Theta$, given the data $\textbf{\emph{x}}$. The posterior probability density is given by:
\begin{equation}
p(\Theta|\textbf{\emph{x}}) = \frac{p(\Theta) p(\textbf{\emph{x}}|\Theta)}{p(\textbf{\emph{x}})} \ ,
\end{equation}
where $p(\Theta)$ is the prior distribution, $p(\textbf{\emph{x}}|\Theta)$ is the likelihood function, and $p(\textbf{\emph{x}})$ is the evidence, and is basically a normalisation. In this case, the data is a set of $N_{*}$ points in phase space, given by the spatial and velocity coordinates of all the stars in a snapshot.
The likelihood function is expressed as
\begin{equation}
p(\textbf{\emph{x}}|\Theta) = \prod_{i=1}^{N_{*}} \Lambda_i(\textbf{\emph{x}}_i|\Theta) \ ,
\label{Eq_Lambda}
\end{equation}
which is the product of individual likelihood functions calculated for every star in the sample. A first obvious definition for the likelihood of individual stars is therefore exactly the distribution function:
\begin{equation}
\Lambda_i = \frac{f(\textbf{\emph{x}}_i|\Theta)}{\Lambda_0} \ ,
\end{equation}
where the parameters $\Theta$ are the 5 quantities that are necessary to identify a specific model in the \textsc{limepy} family (namely, $W_0$, $g$, $r_{\rm a}$, $M$, and $r_{\rm h}$, which were introduced in Section~\ref{Sect_Models}), and $\textbf{\emph{x}}_i$ is the set of phase space coordinates for the $i$-th star. The normalisation constant $\Lambda_0$ has been included such that $\int {\rm d}^3 \textbf{\emph{r}} \, {\rm d}^3 \textbf{\emph{v}} \, \Lambda_i = 1$. We recall that our definition of the model is such that $\int {\rm d}^3 \textbf{\emph{r}} \, {\rm d}^3 \textbf{\emph{v}} \, f = M$, therefore in this case $\Lambda_0 = M$.
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption[Best-fit parameters.]{Best-fit parameters. For each snapshot, identified by a label in the first column, we list the values of the best-fit parameters and of the errors, as identified by the median and 16\% and 84\% percentiles of the marginalised posterior probability distribution. Columns from 2 to 7, respectively, are as follows: the concentration parameter $W_0$, the truncation parameter $g$, the mass of the cluster $M$, the half-mass radius $r_{\rm h}$, the ratio of the anisotropy radius to the half-mass radius $r_{\rm a}/r_{\rm h}$, the logarithm of the total mass of stars in the background $\log M_{\rm bg}$. All the quantities are expressed in H\'{e}non\ $N$-body units; the horizontal line separates snapshots taken before and after core collapse.}
\label{Tab_BF_Param}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
\hline\hline
Snapshot & $W_0$ & $g$ & $M$ & $r_{\rm h}$ & $r_{\rm a}/r_{\rm h}$ & $\log M_{\rm bg}$ \\
\hline
pre-CC 1 & 4.06 $\pm$ $^{0.05}_{0.06}$ & 2.57 $\pm$ 0.02 & 0.997 $\pm$ 0.003 & 0.771 $\pm$ 0.002 & 3.14 $\pm$ 0.11 & -4.2 $\pm$ 0.2 \\
pre-CC 2 & 4.99 $\pm$ 0.03 & 2.33 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.998 $\pm$ 0.003 & 0.750 $\pm$ 0.002 & 2.50 $\pm$ 0.04 & -6.8 $\pm$ $^{1.3}_{1.1}$ \\
pre-CC 3 & 5.65 $\pm$ 0.03 & 2.10 $\pm$ $^{0.02}_{0.01}$ & 0.995 $\pm$ 0.003 & 0.746 $\pm$ 0.003 & 2.31 $\pm$ 0.03 & -5.3 $\pm$ $^{0.7}_{1.7}$ \\
pre-CC 4 & 6.22 $\pm$ 0.02 & 1.89 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.989 $\pm$ 0.003 & 0.737 $\pm$ 0.003 & 2.20 $\pm$ 0.03 & -6.8 $\pm$ $^{1.3}_{1.2}$ \\
pre-CC 5 & 6.61 $\pm$ 0.02 & 1.74 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.987 $\pm$ $^{0.003}_{0.002}$ & 0.742 $\pm$ 0.003 & 2.09 $\pm$ $^{0.02}_{0.03}$ & -6.8 $\pm$ $^{1.3}_{1.2}$ \\
pre-CC 6 & 6.98 $\pm$ 0.02 & 1.62 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.987 $\pm$ 0.002 & 0.743 $\pm$ 0.003 & 2.00 $\pm$ 0.02 & -6.8 $\pm$ $^{1.3}_{1.1}$ \\
pre-CC 7 & 7.31 $\pm$ 0.02 & 1.54 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.977 $\pm$ 0.003 & 0.745 $\pm$ 0.003 & 1.93 $\pm$ 0.02 & -6.7 $\pm$ $^{1.3}_{1.2}$ \\
pre-CC 8 & 7.61 $\pm$ 0.02 & 1.47 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.983 $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.768 $\pm$ 0.004 & 1.83 $\pm$ 0.02 & -6.7 $\pm$ 1.3 \\
pre-CC 9 & 8.02 $\pm$ 0.02 & 1.42 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.968 $\pm$ $^{0.009}_{0.003}$ & 0.793 $\pm$ 0.005 & 1.69 $\pm$ 0.02 & -4.9 $\pm$ $^{0.5}_{1.0}$ \\
pre-CC 10 & 8.44 $\pm$ 0.02 & 1.40 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.971 $\pm$ 0.002 & 0.841 $\pm$ 0.005 & 1.52 $\pm$ $^{0.02}_{0.03}$ & -6.7 $\pm$ 1.3 \\
\hline
1 & 12.22 $\pm$ 0.07 & 1.24 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.722 $\pm$ 0.003 & 2.778 $\pm$ 0.010 & 1.01 $\pm$ 0.04 & -6.6 $\pm$ 1.2 \\
2 & 10.74 $\pm$ 0.04 & 1.08 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.570 $\pm$ 0.002 & 3.972 $\pm$ $^{0.022}_{0.021}$ & 1.15 $\pm$ 0.03 & -6.8 $\pm$ 1.2 \\
3 & 11.37 $\pm$ 0.05 & 1.07 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.461 $\pm$ 0.002 & 4.959 $\pm$ 0.025 & 1.38 $\pm$ 0.04 & -6.7 $\pm$ 1.2 \\
4 & 10.28 $\pm$ 0.05 & 0.93 $\pm$ $^{0.02}_{0.04}$ & 0.382 $\pm$ 0.002 & 5.584 $\pm$ $^{0.040}_{0.038}$ & 1.85 $\pm$ $^{0.07}_{0.08}$ & -4.3 $\pm$ 0.3 \\
5 & 10.19 $\pm$ 0.05 & 0.93 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.313 $\pm$ 0.001 & 5.922 $\pm$ 0.037 & 2.89 $\pm$ $^{0.22}_{0.18}$ & -4.7 $\pm$ $^{0.3}_{0.4}$ \\
6 & 11.75 $\pm$ 0.08 & 0.97 $\pm$ 0.02 & 0.249 $\pm$ 0.001 & 6.093 $\pm$ $^{0.039}_{0.040}$ & 3.57 $\pm$ $^{0.53}_{0.37}$ & -4.7 $\pm$ $^{0.3}_{0.4}$ \\
7 & 9.88 $\pm$ 0.05 & 0.75 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.187 $\pm$ 0.001 & 5.980 $\pm$ $^{0.038}_{0.040}$ & 40.8 $\pm$ $^{\infty}_{26.6}$ & -4.3 $\pm$ 0.2 \\
8 & 9.42 $\pm$ 0.06 & 0.77 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.136 $\pm$ 0.001 & 5.182 $\pm$ $^{0.056}_{0.055}$ & 72.1 $\pm$ $^{\infty}_{44.0}$ & -6.5 $\pm$ 1.3 \\
9 & 10.53 $\pm$ 0.10 & 0.86 $\pm$ 0.02 & 0.088 $\pm$ 0.001 & 4.871 $\pm$ $^{0.053}_{0.052}$ & 38.8 $\pm$ $^{\infty}_{23.1}$ & -6.7 $\pm$ 1.2 \\
10 & 10.35 $\pm$ 0.13 & 0.81 $\pm$ 0.03 & 0.048 $\pm$ 0.001 & 4.017 $\pm$ $^{0.061}_{0.062}$ & 38.4 $\pm$ $^{\infty}_{23.4}$ & -6.8 $\pm$ 1.2 \\
11 & 8.60 $\pm$ 0.18 & 0.48 $\pm$ 0.05 & 0.016 $\pm$ 0.001 & 2.798 $\pm$ $^{0.096}_{0.100}$ & 63.7 $\pm$ $^{\infty}_{48.1}$ & -6.7 $\pm$ 1.2 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
This formulation, however, has some problems. As stated in equation~(\ref{Eq_DF_Limepy}), the distribution function vanishes when $E\geq\phi(r_{\rm t})$, therefore whenever we have a single star that does not fulfil this requirement $p(\textbf{\emph{x}}|\Theta) = 0$, from equation~(\ref{Eq_Lambda}). This hard cut-off is perhaps not realistic, because the models may not be perfect: to take this into account, therefore, we decided to allow for the possibility of having a non-zero number of stars in the system that cannot be described by the best-fit \textsc{limepy} model. To do this, we decided to add a constant background to the model, so that the likelihood is always non-zero, even for combinations of model parameters that correspond to the case described above:
\begin{equation}
\Lambda_i = \left[f(\textbf{\emph{x}}_i|W_0,g,r_{\rm a},M,r_{\rm h}) + \frac{M_{\rm bg}}{V_{*}} \right] \frac{1}{\Lambda_0} \ .
\label{Eq_Lambda_i}
\end{equation}
The second term in the equation represents the mass density of a uniform background of stars with total mass $M_{\rm bg}$ that extends on the entire volume in the phase space that is occupied by the stars, $V_{*}$. The normalisation constant is now given by
\begin{equation}
\Lambda_0 = M + M_{\rm bg} \ .
\end{equation}
We consider $M_{\rm bg}$ to be another fitting parameter, which represents the number of stars that are not described by the \textsc{limepy} models defined in equation~(\ref{Eq_DF_Limepy}): the smaller it is, the better the model reproduces the data. The total number of fitting parameters is therefore 6, and $\Theta = \lbrace W_0,g,r_{\rm a},M,r_{\rm h}, M_{\rm bg} \rbrace$. We point out that although we know the total number of stars in each snapshot, we are not using this information in the computation of the mass $M$. This is the reason why in principle it would possible to determine all the best-fit parameters by considering only a subset of the stars, and why it could be possible to obtain a best-fit value of the mass larger than the true one calculated from the snapshot.
For the parameters, we choose to use uniform priors over the following ranges: $4\!<\!W_0\!<\!15$, $0.3\!<\!g\!<\!2.1$, $0.001\!<\!M\!<\!1.5$, $0.2\!<\!r_{\rm h}\!<\!15$, $-1\!<\!\log r_{\rm a}\!<\!3.7$, and $-8.5\!<\!\log M_{\rm bg}\!<\!-1$. We consider $\log r_{\rm a}$ as a fitting parameter instead of $r_{\rm a}$ in order to have an uninformative prior for this parameter since it can span several orders of magnitude. We also consider a logarithmic value to fit on $M_{\rm bg}$, because it usually assumes very small values.
We use a Markov chain Monte Carlo fitting technique to explore the parameter space and to efficiently sample the posterior probability distribution for the parameters above. We use \textsc{emcee} \citep{emcee_paper}, a \textsc{python} implementation of Goodman \& Weare's affine invariant Markov chain Monte Carlo ensemble sampler\footnote{\textsc{emcee} is available online at \url{https://github.com/dfm/emcee}}. Typically, we consider 200 walkers, each of which takes 1000 steps in parameter space. The fact that \textsc{limepy} models are very fast to solve allows us to carry out this fitting procedure for each snapshot in $\sim 2$ hours. We initialise the walkers by putting them all in a sphere in parameter space, with a spread of $\Theta_i \times 10^{-3}$ around the starting value we chose for each parameter $\Theta_i$.
In Fig.~\ref{Fig_contours} we show the 2d-projections of the posterior probability distribution on the planes determined by every pair of parameters that we obtained as a result of the fit carried out with \textsc{emcee} for the snapshot number 5 after core collapse, taken at $t = 2.5 \times 10^5$ $N$-body times. From Fig.~\ref{Fig_contours} we can see that there is a slight degeneracy between the truncation parameter and the anisotropy radius, that is also observed for the other snapshots considered. Indeed, when considering the extent of the model, increasing $g$ or decreasing $r_{\rm a}$ have the same effect as increasing the truncation radius. Also shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig_contours} are the histograms representing the marginalised posterior probability distribution for each parameter.
Typically, convergence is obtained after a burn-in phase of about 150 steps. We ran the same fit multiple times to ensure that by changing the initial position of the walkers the result did not change. This is necessary because in some cases it could happen that walkers starting in a certain position of the parameter space get momentarily trapped in a local maximum of the likelihood, and they eventually converge only after a very long time (more than 1000 steps). We also tried to spread the walkers in the parameter space in different ways, which also had no detectable change in the final result.
Finally, we wish to perform a detailed comparison between the \textsc{limepy} models and the more commonly adopted isotropic \cite{King1966} models. To do this, we carry out an additional fit to all the snapshots, by imposing the value of $g = 1$, corresponding to the truncation prescription of King models, and by considering $r_{\rm a} = \infty$, to have isotropic models. In this case, we are therefore left with only 4 fitting parameters: $\Theta = \lbrace W_0,M,r_{\rm h}, M_{\rm bg} \rbrace$. We present the results relative to this approach in Section~\ref{Sect_Results_3}.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig2.eps}
\caption{Contours of the density of stars $N(E,J^2)$ in the plane identified by the energy $E$ and angular momentum $J$, expressed in H\'{e}non\ $N$-body units. Each panel corresponds to a given snapshot, with labels listed in Table~\ref{Tab_True_Properties}. The red lines refer to the distribution of the stars, as calculated for stars in the $N$-body snapshots; solid and dashed black lines are the contours of the best-fit \textsc{limepy} and King model,respectively. The contours shown enclose 25\%, 50\%, 75\%, and 97\% of the total mass of the cluster at each moment; in the case of Snapshot 9 we omit the contour corresponding to 97\% of the mass, and for Snapshot 11 we show the contours enclosing 10\% and 15\% of the total mass. Each panel in the figure has a different range in energy, to better show the agreement between the models and the snapshots.}
\label{Fig_densityEJ}
\end{figure*}
\section{Results and discussion}
\label{Sect_Results}
We describe here the main results of our analysis. In Sect.~\ref{Sect_Results_0} we propose a phase space comparison of best-fit models and data from the simulation, in Sect.~\ref{Sect_Results_1} we compare the radial profiles of moments of the distribution function defining the family of \textsc{limepy} models to the data from the snapshots under consideration, in Sect.~\ref{Sect_Results_2} we discuss the evolution of the values of best-fit parameters in time, and in Sect.~\ref{Sect_Results_3} we compare the results obtained with \textsc{limepy} models to those obtained with King models.
Table~\ref{Tab_BF_Param} lists the values of the best-fit parameters and the respective errors. The best-fit value is identified by taking the median value of the correspondent marginalised posterior probability distribution, and the errors correspond to the 16\% and 84\% percentiles; different values for the upper and lower error are obtained when the distribution is not symmetric. We decide to consider here the ratio of the anisotropy radius to the half-mass radius, $r_{\rm a}/r_{\rm h}$, instead of the absolute value of $r_{\rm a}$, to better represent the amount of anisotropy relative to the specific structure of the system. We compute this ratio for all the steps and for all the walkers, and then we compute the median and the 16\% and 84\% percentiles of this marginalised distribution. Note that we do not fit on the ratio $r_{\rm a}/r_{\rm h}$ because the value of $r_{\rm h}$ for a model is obtained only after the model has been calculated and therefore using this as a fitting parameter would require several iterations, and would be computationally expensive.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig3.eps}
\caption{Mass density profile of the cluster at different times. Each panel corresponds to a given snapshot, with labels listed in Table~\ref{Tab_True_Properties}. Density and radial coordinate are expressed in H\'{e}non\ $N$-body units. Solid lines represent the density profiles $\rho$ calculated from the best-fit \textsc{limepy} models, the red dots those calculated from the data; error bars are also shown. Grey lines indicate the profiles calculated for 200 models randomly selected among those explored by the \textsc{emcee} chains. Dashed lines indicate the best-fit King model profiles. The top left panel corresponds to the sample of stars used as initial condition to start the simulation, and generated from a Plummer model: the dotted line in this panel represents the Plummer model theoretical density profile, and the red dots the profile calculated by binning the stars.}
\label{Fig_dens}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig4.eps}
\caption{Velocity dispersion profile of the cluster at different times. Each panel corresponds to a given snapshot, with labels listed in Table~\ref{Tab_True_Properties}. Velocity dispersion and radial coordinate are expressed in H\'{e}non\ $N$-body units. Solid lines represent the velocity dispersion profiles $\sigma$ calculated from the best-fit \textsc{limepy} models, the red dots those calculated from the data; error bars are also shown. Grey lines indicate the profiles calculated for 200 models randomly selected among those explored by the \textsc{emcee} chains. Dashed lines indicate the best-fit King model profiles. The top left panel corresponds to the sample of stars used as initial condition to start the simulation, and generated from a Plummer model: the dotted line in this panel represents the Plummer model theoretical velocity dispersion profile, and the red dots the profile calculated by binning the stars.}
\label{Fig_disp}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig5.eps}
\caption{Anisotropy profile of the cluster at different times. Each panel corresponds to a given snapshot, with labels listed in Table~\ref{Tab_True_Properties}. The radial coordinate is expressed in H\'{e}non\ $N$-body units. Solid lines represent the anisotropy profiles $\beta$ calculated from the best-fit \textsc{limepy} models, the red dots those calculated from the data; error bars are also shown. Grey lines indicate the profiles calculated for 200 models randomly selected among those explored by the \textsc{emcee} chains. Dashed lines indicate the best-fit King model profiles. The top left panel corresponds to the sample of stars used as initial condition to start the simulation, and generated from a Plummer model: the dotted line in this panel represents the initial anisotropy profile, showing that the initial condition is isotropic, and the red dots the profile calculated by binning the stars.}
\label{Fig_anis}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Phase space assessment}
\label{Sect_Results_0}
As we pointed out in the previous section, we applied a discrete fitting method to determine the best-fit parameters of the models. On the one side, this is very useful, because it allows us to retain all the information the data can provide. On the other side, however, it is not easy to visualise the goodness of a fit. Therefore, to explore the agreement between the best-fit models and the numerical simulation under consideration, we have performed a detailed comparison in phase space, which is accessible, once again, by virtue of the full dynamical information provided by the synthetic data at our disposal. As appropriate for the description of any spherical (anisotropic) stellar system, we refer to the partition $(E,J^2)$ and we consider the density $N(E,J^2)$, such that $M=\int {\rm d} E \, {\rm d}J^2 N(E,J^2)$, where $M$ is the total mass of the cluster. We have calculated such a density both from selected snapshots of our reference $N$-body model, and from the corresponding best-fit \textsc{limepy} and King models \citep[by means of a sampling of the distribution function with Monte Carlo techniques, with $10^6$ particles; for details, see][]{GielesZocchi2015}.
Figure~\ref{Fig_densityEJ} shows the contours of the density of stars $N(E,J^2)$ in the plane identified by energy and angular momentum. Each panel in the figure corresponds to a given snapshot (as indicated in the plots; see also Table~\ref{Tab_True_Properties}). We decided to represent here only some of the available snapshots, to highlight the most significant variations associated with the main stages of evolution of the cluster. Red lines refer to the actual distribution of the stars of each snapshot, solid black lines are the contours of the best-fit \textsc{limepy} model, and dashed black lines those of the best-fit King model for each snapshot. The contours shown enclose 25\%, 50\%, 75\%, and 97\% of the total mass of the cluster at each moment. In the case of Snapshot 9 we omit the contour corresponding to 97\% of the mass, and for Snapshot 11 we show the contours enclosing 10\% and 15\% of the total mass, because at this stage the cluster contains too few stars, and the contours enclosing larger fraction of the mass have highly irregular shape. Each panel in the figure has a different range in energy, to better show the agreement between the models and the snapshots.
Unlike the radial profiles we discuss in Sect.~\ref{Sect_Results_1}, here we take into account the stars discretely, as we did in the fitting procedure. Moreover, the density $N(E,J^2)$ provides a more direct comparison between the quantities that are used in the fitting procedure: indeed, energy and angular momentum represent the way the phase space coordinates are accounted for in the distribution function. For the models, the energy is calculated by considering the potential of the model as a function of the distance to the centre of the cluster. When considering the $N$-body snapshots, we calculate the energy of each star by using the value of the true potential energy of the stars in the cluster, as calculated from the snapshots. When fitting the models to the snapshot we do not consider the true potential of the cluster, because we only want to consider the 6-dimensional coordinates of the phase space for each star. In this respect, Fig.~\ref{Fig_densityEJ} is an opportunity to test how well the model potential describes the actual cluster potential.
We wish to emphasise that the overall agreement is particularly good, not only in the proximity of the maximum of the distribution of the synthetic data in phase space, but also within the lower density regions, in which the behaviour of the simulation particles is captured very well by the \textsc{limepy} best-fit distribution function. The comparison with King models is particularly instructive, as it results that, especially in the proximity of the core collapse, they offer a very approximate description of the $N$-body simulation (see Sect.~\ref{Sect_Results_3} for further discussion).
\subsection{Comparison of radial profiles}
\label{Sect_Results_1}
Driven by similar motivations, we have also calculated the three-dimensional density, velocity dispersion, and anisotropy profiles for the simulation snapshots by binning the data in spherical shells containing an equal number of particles. The number of stars in each bin (and the total number of bins) varies for different snapshots, and it has been chosen in order to have profiles that are both rich and accurate (the number of stars per bin varies from $\approx$ 1000 for the early snapshots to $\approx$ 100 for the late ones).
Figures~\ref{Fig_dens}, \ref{Fig_disp}, and \ref{Fig_anis} show the density, velocity dispersion, and anisotropy profiles, respectively, for the same snapshots illustrated in Fig.~\ref{Fig_densityEJ}. The solid lines represent the profiles calculated from the best-fit \textsc{limepy} models, the red dots are the ones calculated from the data. Error bars are also shown, but in some cases they are not visible, because they have a size smaller than that of the dots. We also show, as grey lines, the profiles calculated for 200 models randomly selected among those explored by the \textsc{emcee} walkers in the post burn-in phase: this is to give an idea of the uncertainty in the best-fit models and corresponding profiles. The scales of the plots are the same for all the snapshots, to make it easier to compare how the profiles are changing with the evolution of the cluster. In each panel, a dashed line reproduces the best-fit King model profile for each quantity: we postpone a discussion on these models, and on the comparison to the results obtained with the \textsc{limepy} models, to Section~\ref{Sect_Results_3}.
The top left panel in each of these figures corresponds to the sample of stars generated from the spherical and isotropic \cite{Plummer1911} model used as initial condition to start the simulation. The dotted lines represent the quantities calculated directly from the equations defining the model. We also overplot the profiles calculated by binning the data generated from the model, in a similar way as we did for the other snapshots.
\subsubsection{Density and velocity dispersion profiles}
When looking at different snapshots, we notice immediately that before core collapse the density increases in the centre, and then it decreases, as a function of time,
because of expansion and mass loss driven by two-body relaxation (see Fig. ~\ref{Fig_dens}).
As illustrated by the grey lines in the figure, the largest uncertainties on the best-fit profiles are found in the innermost parts, for the latest snapshots. This is due to the fact that, with time, the cluster becomes less concentrated, and less stars are found in its centre: the models are therefore less constrained in that radial range, while for the rest of the profile all the models overlap, and the differences from one another are very small. We point out that the best-fit \textsc{limepy} models are able to reproduce the density profiles remarkably well, out to their outermost parts, for all the considered snapshots.
It is immediately clear, from a comparison of the different panels, that after an initial expansion in the pre-collapse phase, the truncation radius becomes smaller as time passes. The truncation appears to be more shallow (large $g$) at the beginning, and it becomes steeper (small $g$) during the evolution, as particularly evident when inspecting the density profiles in Fig.~\ref{Fig_dens}.
By inspecting Fig.~\ref{Fig_disp}, we notice that also the velocity dispersion first increases, in the pre-collapse phase, and then decreases in time. The \textsc{limepy} models seem to be adequate in reproducing the profiles calculated from the data, even though there are some discrepancies at large radii. Indeed, we note that the velocity dispersion profiles of the best-fit models at early times underestimate in the outer parts the ones calculated from the snapshots, while at later times they overestimate them. This is particularly evident in the very final stages of evolution, from snapshots 7 onwards. The shape of the profiles also changes, becoming overall more shallow.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig6_1.eps} \quad
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig6_2.eps}
\caption{Time evolution of best-fit truncation and anisotropy parameters. On the left we show the evolution of $g$, on the right of the ratio of anisotropy radius to half-mass radius $r_{\rm a}/r_{\rm h}$. Orange dots with error bars represent the best-fit values obtained for the parameters for each snapshot (see Table~\ref{Tab_BF_Param}); an orange line connecting the dots has been added to better show the trend. Moreover, we mark with red pentagons the values corresponding to the snapshots whose relevant profiles are reproduced in Figs.~\ref{Fig_densityEJ}--\ref{Fig_anis}. In the right panel we exclude snapshots 7 to 11 after core collapse, because the cluster at that point is essentially isotropic. The vertical dotted lines indicate the moment of core collapse.}
\label{Fig_g_ra}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Anisotropy profiles}
\label{Sect_Results_1_anis}
In Fig.~\ref{Fig_anis} we show the anisotropy profiles for the cluster at different times. As stated in Section~\ref{Sect_Simulations} and shown in the first panel of the figure, the initial conditions of the cluster are isotropic. Then, the anisotropy profile changes significantly in time, and its evolution can be divided into two parts, separated by the core collapse.
In the pre-collapse phase, the cluster develops an increasingly large degree of radial anisotropy: it appears to be isotropic in the centre and radially anisotropic in the outer parts. As time passes, the width of the profile increases, its maximum rises in value, and moves outwards. The development of radial anisotropy is related to the fact that, during the early evolution, stars are scattered outside the core in radial orbits, and this process contributes to increase the radial component of the velocity dispersion.
After core collapse, the degree of anisotropy decreases. The profiles are isotropic close to the truncation radius, beyond the region characterised by radial anisotropy, the extent of which decreases in time, until the entire cluster becomes again isotropic. This happens as a result of two main effects. First, mass loss through dynamical processes, which is enhanced by the presence of the tidal field with respect to an isolated case, is removing the outer, more radially anisotropic layers of the cluster \citep{GierszHeggie1997}. Second, the tidal torque induces isotropy in the velocity dispersion of the outer regions of the cluster \citep{OhLin1992}.
We notice that the anisotropy profile calculated by binning the stars in snapshot 6 is not very different from the one calculated for snapshot 7, but at this point the selected best-fit models make the transition from the modestly anisotropic to the fully isotropic regime (this is particularly evident when inspecting the values of the ratio $r_{\rm a}/r_{\rm h}$ listed in Table~\ref{Tab_BF_Param}): this transition happens at approximately the same time at which the cluster becomes tidally filling (i.e., when $r_{\rm h}/r_{\rm J} \sim 0.13$, as stated in Section~\ref{Sect_Simulations}).
By inspecting Fig.~\ref{Fig_anis}, it is particularly evident that, especially for the earlier snapshots, there appears to be a discrepancy between the best-fit models and the data in proximity of the peak of the anisotropy profile, with the model overestimating the degree of anisotropy (see also Appendix~\ref{App_residuals} for a more detailed discussion). The exploration of the behaviour of the models in the phase space (see Sect.~\ref{Sect_Results_0}) offers partial reassurance on this point, as it helps clarifying the origin of the presence of the anisotropy in the velocity space, in connection with the role of angular momentum. In fact, especially immediately after core collapse (see panels corresponding to Snapshots 1, 2, 3 in Fig.~\ref{Fig_densityEJ}), the most significant discrepancy in phase space between the $N$-body simulation and the best-fit \textsc{limepy} models can be identified in the region corresponding to stars with relatively high energy and low angular momentum. In such a regime, \textsc{limepy} models tend to favour even slightly lower values of $J$ (i.e., the black contours are lower than the red ones), which is directly linked to the tangential velocity component $v_{\rm t}$, which, in turn, determines a systematically higher value of radially-biased anisotropy, as illustrated in $\beta$ radial profiles in the corresponding panels of Fig.~\ref{Fig_anis}. In the pre-collapse phase, such a behaviour is still present, although to a smaller extent, while the regime in which the discrepancy between \textsc{limepy} models and the simulation seems to be more significant is at very low energies (i.e., very bound stars) with intermediate to high values of angular momentum; in this case the interpretation is less straightforward as the behaviour of the models with respect to the simulations is mixed.
We recall that the anisotropy is the most uncertain quantity among the ones considered here. Indeed, this is evident when looking at the size of the error bars for the points in the profile, as compared to those obtained for the density and velocity dispersion profiles. We point out that the characterisation of the anisotropy profile in the final stages of evolution is particularly challenging with respect to the initial snapshots, because of the relatively weak deviations from isotropy and because of the reduced number of particles in the simulation. A quantitative discussion about comparison of the radial profiles, as resulting from best-fit models and the reference $N$-body simulation, of the observables discussed in this section is presented in Appendix~\ref{App_residuals}.
\subsection{Evolution of model parameters}
\label{Sect_Results_2}
\subsubsection{Anisotropy and tides}
It is particularly interesting to inspect the evolution of the anisotropy radius $r_{\rm a}$ and the truncation parameter $g$, because their behaviour gives us some insights on the role played by radially-biased anisotropy and tides in determining the internal dynamics of the cluster. Fig.~\ref{Fig_g_ra} shows the evolution of these two parameters.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig7_1.eps} \quad
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig7_2.eps} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig7_3.eps} \quad
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig7_4.eps}
\caption{Time evolution of best-fit values for some relevant quantities. On the left, we show the ratio of best-fit values (see Table~\ref{Tab_BF_Param}) to the true values obtained directly from the snapshots (see Table~\ref{Tab_True_Properties}) for the mass $M$ (top panel) and for the half-mass radius $r_{\rm h}$ (bottom panel). The bottom right panel shows the ratio of the truncation radius $r_{\rm t}$ of the best-fit \textsc{limepy} models to the true value of the Jacobi radius of the cluster. Orange dots represent the values of the ratios obtained for each snapshot; error bars are also shown. In these panels, the dashed lines mark the position of the unity. The top right panel shows the evolution of the values of the anisotropy parameter $\kappa$ as computed from the snapshot and as calculated for the best-fit \textsc{limepy} models, indicated with black and orange dots, respectively. Moreover, in each panel we mark with red pentagons the values corresponding to the snapshots whose relevant profiles are reproduced in Figs.~\ref{Fig_densityEJ}--\ref{Fig_anis}. The vertical dotted lines indicate the moment of core collapse.}
\label{Fig_properties}
\end{figure*}
As shown in the left panel in the figure, the truncation parameter $g$ decreases in time, from $\sim 2.5$ down to $\sim 0.5$. This behaviour reflects the fact that, during the evolution, the role of tides becomes more important in shaping the structure of the cluster, which is progressively filling its Roche volume, with the truncation being more abrupt at the end of the evolution. We recall here that a value of $g = 0$ corresponds to models with the same truncation prescription as \cite{Woolley1954} models, $g = 1$ to models with the same truncation as \cite{King1966} models, and $g = 2$ to models with the same truncation as \cite{Wilson1975} models. Observational studies \citep[e.g.,][]{MLvdM2005} seem to indicate that the preferred truncation prescription is Wilson-like (i.e. $g=2$). A possible interpretation of this is that a large fraction of Galactic globular clusters are still in the early phases of evolution. If clusters formed dense (i.e. high ratio of $r_{\rm J}/r_{\rm h}$), they spend roughly the first half of their evolution expanding towards their tidal bound \citep{GielesHeggieZhao2011}. As long as the ratio $r_{\rm t}/r_{\rm h} \gtrsim 10$, King models ($g=1$) are unable to describe the outer parts of the cluster \citep{Baumgardt2010}, and this may be why Wilson models ($g=2$) are preferred in the study by \cite{MLvdM2005}. We note that a direct comparison between the value of $g$ of the equal-mass models in this study and real globular clusters should be done with caution, because the $N$-body model discussed here reaches much higher central densities in core collapse than real clusters with a mass spectrum, and it does not capture the effect of mass segregation. Also, we only considered the bound stars, and this choice likely leads to smaller values of $g$ because between $0.8r_{\rm J}$ and $r_{\rm J}$ most stars are energetically unbound. And finally, we find that $g$ decreases when the cluster reaches core collapse, which in real globular clusters can take much longer because of the effect of primordial binaries \citep[][]{VesperiniChernoff1994,Trenti2007}, stellar evolution, and stellar-mass black holes \citep{BreenHeggie2013}.
In the right panel of Fig.~\ref{Fig_g_ra} we show the evolution of the ratio of the anisotropy radius to the half-mass radius, $r_{\rm a}/r_{\rm h}$, as we did in Table~\ref{Tab_BF_Param}. The variation of the values of this ratio captures well the two phases of the evolution described in Section~\ref{Sect_Results_1_anis}: in the pre-collapse phase, the values of $r_{\rm a}/r_{\rm h}$ decrease (i.e., the portion of the cluster characterised by radial anisotropy increases), and after core collapse it progressively increases in time (i.e. the cluster becomes more isotropic).
By inspecting Table~\ref{Tab_BF_Param}, it is clear that there appears to be a sharp transition in the values of this ratio between $3 \times 10^5$ and $3.5 \times 10^5$ $N$-body times. This happens because at that point the cluster becomes isotropic and, as mentioned in Section~\ref{Sect_Models}, the anisotropy radius needs to be larger than the truncation radius, in order to have an isotropic model. In the figure we do not show the values of $r_{\rm a}/r_{\rm h}$ for the snapshots from 7 to 11, because their best-fit models are isotropic, and the values of this ratio become extremely large with respect to those represented there.
\subsubsection{True properties of the cluster}
We have the unique possibility of comparing the results of the fit with the true properties of the stellar system. Fig.~\ref{Fig_properties} shows the comparison of the values of some relevant quantities derived from the fit to those calculated from the snapshots. Orange points and lines represent the values obtained from the best-fit \textsc{limepy} models, and error bars are always plotted; red pentagons mark the cases for which the radial profiles have been shown in Figs.~\ref{Fig_densityEJ}--\ref{Fig_anis}.
The left panels in the figure show the ratio of the mass (top) and half-mass radius (bottom) obtained as best-fit for the models to the true values listed in Table~\ref{Tab_True_Properties}; for comparison, a ratio of unity is represented by a dashed line in the plots. The best-fit values are within 4\% of the real values for both quantities. Except for the last snapshot, the best-fit half-mass radii are usually smaller than the true values, while for the mass sometimes we obtain values slightly larger than the true ones. It is interesting to note that we formally do not have any ``observational error'' in the data, so the discrepancy observed between the best-fit values and the real ones suggests that the models are not perfect in reproducing the simulations, even though they offer a good representation of their principal properties.
Some other quantities, that are not fitting parameters but can be calculated from the models, can be compared to their true values calculated from the snapshots. The top right panel of Fig.~\ref{Fig_properties} shows the evolution in time of the values of $\kappa$ (for a definition, see equation~\ref{Eq_kappa}). The black dots are the true values, the orange and red dots are the ones calculated for the best-fit models. We recall that for the models considered here the anisotropy radius $r_{\rm a}$ is monotonically related to the parameter $\kappa$, that indicates the amount of anisotropy present in the system: to smaller values of $r_{\rm a}$ correspond larger values of $\kappa$, and the system is more anisotropic. By inspecting the figure, it is clear that the models overestimate the anisotropy content of the snapshots, as already noted when discussing the anisotropy profiles of Fig.~\ref{Fig_anis}. The value of $\kappa$ calculated from the simulation is smaller than 1 for two snapshots towards the end of the simulation: the models do not allow for the presence of tangentially biased anisotropy, and therefore are incapable of reproducing these values. We note that, however, the values of $\kappa<1$ are probably due to the noise around isotropy, due to the relative low number of particles left in the simulation, that is also observed in the anisotropy profiles of Fig.~\ref{Fig_anis}.
The bottom right panel of Fig.~\ref{Fig_properties} shows the ratio of the truncation radius $r_{\rm t}$ calculated from the model to the true value of the Jacobi radius for each snapshot. In the pre-collapse phase, initially the models underpredict the values of the tidal radius, then they increasingly overpredict it: just before core collapse, the tidal radius calculated for the best-fit model is more than twice larger than the Jacobi radius of the cluster at that time. After core collapse, except for the first snapshot, for which we find a value of $r_{\rm t}$ that is compatible with the tidal radius of the cluster, we always obtain a value of the truncation radius roughly corresponding to 80\% of the tidal radius. We note that this could be related to the fact that the outermost bound star in each snapshot is usually located at around 80\% of the tidal radius \citep{Kuepper2010}.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption[Best-fit King model parameters.]{Best-fit parameters for King models. For each snapshot, identified by a label in the first column, we list the values of the best-fit parameters. Columns from 2 to 5, respectively, are as follows: the concentration $W_0$, the mass of the cluster $M$, the half-mass radius $r_{\rm h}$, the logarithm of the total mass of stars in the background $\log M_{\rm bg}$.}
\label{Tab_BF_Param_King}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline\hline
Snapshot & $W_0$ & $M$ & $r_{\rm h}$ & $\log M_{\rm bg}$ \\
\hline
pre-CC 1 & 7.00 & 1.140 & 1.026 & -2.21 \\
pre-CC 2 & 7.32 & 1.139 & 1.030 & -2.03 \\
pre-CC 3 & 7.55 & 1.157 & 1.084 & -1.93 \\
pre-CC 4 & 7.75 & 1.166 & 1.093 & -1.79 \\
pre-CC 5 & 7.98 & 1.209 & 1.182 & -1.71 \\
pre-CC 6 & 8.23 & 1.235 & 1.260 & -1.63 \\
pre-CC 7 & 8.37 & 1.246 & 1.301 & -1.54 \\
pre-CC 8 & 8.53 & 1.261 & 1.363 & -1.49 \\
pre-CC 9 & 8.74 & 1.260 & 1.408 & -1.42 \\
pre-CC 10 & 9.00 & 1.331 & 1.589 & -1.38 \\
\hline
1 & 9.34 & 0.953 & 5.087 & -2.07 \\
2 & 9.54 & 0.667 & 5.573 & -2.78 \\
3 & 10.03 & 0.498 & 6.059 & -3.22 \\
4 & 9.86 & 0.390 & 5.893 & -3.82 \\
5 & 10.08 & 0.313 & 5.964 & -4.59 \\
6 & 11.57 & 0.251 & 6.230 & -4.59 \\
7 & 10.29 & 0.182 & 5.634 & -6.82 \\
8 & 9.81 & 0.133 & 4.875 & -6.78 \\
9 & 10.79 & 0.087 & 4.628 & -6.83 \\
10 & 10.65 & 0.047 & 3.774 & -6.81 \\
11 & 8.32 & 0.014 & 2.275 & -6.68 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Comparison with King models}
\label{Sect_Results_3}
The family of \textsc{limepy} models introduced in Section~\ref{Sect_Models} turns out to be a good choice to represent the cluster in the different phases of its evolution. The flexibility given by the truncation parameter, with respect to, for example, the most commonly used \cite{King1966} models, allows us to reproduce in a reasonable way the main properties of the system, especially near the truncation radius.
For a more detailed comparison, we carried out fits with isotropic King models (by using \textsc{limepy} with $g = 1$, and $r_{\rm a} = \infty$), and we list the best-fit parameters in Table~\ref{Tab_BF_Param_King}. We also indicate the best-fit profiles for King models with dashed lines in Figs.~\ref{Fig_densityEJ}--\ref{Fig_anis}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig8.eps}
\caption{Time evolution of the best-fit concentration parameter $W_0$. Orange dots represent the best-fit values obtained from the fit to each snapshot by means of \textsc{limepy} models, and green squares those obtained when considering isotropic King models. A line connecting the points has been added to better show the trend. As done in the previous figures, in the case of \textsc{limepy} models we mark with red pentagons the values corresponding to the snapshots whose relevant profiles are reproduced in Figs.~\ref{Fig_densityEJ}--\ref{Fig_anis}. The vertical dotted line indicates the moment of core collapse.}
\label{Fig_W0}
\end{figure}
King models generally provide a worse fit with respect to anisotropic \textsc{limepy} models, especially for the early snapshots. In particular, the largest discrepancies with respect to the profiles calculated from the simulations are observed at small and large radii. King models generally underpredict the density and the velocity dispersion in the centre; in the outermost parts of the cluster, they underpredict the density, and they overpredict the velocity dispersion. Also, they usually have a smaller truncation radius with respect to the Jacobi radius of the cluster. These shortcomings of the King models may be easily interpreted in light of the assessment in phase space conducted in Sect.~\ref{Sect_Results_0}. In fact, especially in the proximity of the core collapse (e.g., see panels corresponding to Snapshots pre-CC10, 1, 2 of Fig.~\ref{Fig_densityEJ}), when radial anisotropy is the strongest (see Fig.~\ref{Fig_properties} top-right panel), unsurprisingly, isotropic equilibria fail to describe the interplay between energy and angular momentum, particularly at low values of $J^2$. Such a discrepancy affects both the central and the outer parts of the cluster, since, at low energies, best-fit King models tend to favour values of $J^2$ which are too high (i.e., dashed contours are much higher than the red ones), while, at higher energies the role of angular momentum is missed altogether (i.e., the dashed contours stops too early). This behaviour in phase space has immediate impact on the slopes of the velocity moments, both at small and large radii.
As expected, the best representation of the cluster is obtained, with these models, for the late snapshots: we note that the \textsc{limepy} models have best-fit truncation parameters $g$ close to 1 at these times, and the cluster is mainly characterised by isotropy. We notice that King models have a limited range of $r_{\rm J}/r_{\rm h} \lesssim 7.5$, hence they will never be able to describe clusters that are deeply embedded in the tidal field \citep{Baumgardt2010}, as it happens in the first stages of the evolution of the cluster analysed here.
Figure~\ref{Fig_W0} shows the time evolution of the best-fit values of the concentration parameter $W_0$ for \textsc{limepy} and King models, represented with orange (red) and green points, respectively. In both cases, the values of this parameter are increasing in the pre-collapse phase, and for King models the values are always larger than for \textsc{limepy} models. After core collapse, the values obtained for \textsc{limepy} models are decreasing, with some scatter, while those for King models are initially roughly constant and then, in correspondence of the last snapshots, show an oscillatory behaviour, with a range of values which is comparable to the one obtained for \textsc{limepy} models. On this note, we wish to emphasise that, even if the numerical values are comparable, the scale of central concentration traced by the $W_0$ parameter in the case of \cite{King1966} models is different from the one associated with the \textsc{limepy} models, especially in view of the role played by the truncation parameter $g$. We also point out that the values of $W_0$ obtained for the King models in the pre-collapse phase are larger than those obtained in previous studies \citep[see for example][]{Chernoff1986}: this apparent discrepancy is most likely due to the very underfilled initial state of the $N$-body model.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig9.eps}
\caption{Evolution of the values of the mass $M$ and half-mass radius $r_{\rm h}$ of the cluster: in time, the evolution goes from left to right. Black dots, connected by the black dashed line, represent the true values obtained from the snapshots. Orange dots represent the best-fit values obtained from the fit by means of \textsc{limepy} models, and green squares those obtained when considering isotropic King models. As done in the previous figures, in the case of \textsc{limepy} models we mark with red pentagons the values corresponding to the snapshots whose relevant profiles are reproduced in Figs.~\ref{Fig_densityEJ}--\ref{Fig_anis}. We note that the apparently unphysical increase of the total mass in the pre-collapse phase, as traced by the evolution of the values resulting from the fit with King models, is a particularly crucial shortcoming of such interpretative framework.}
\label{Fig_comparison_King}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{Fig_comparison_King} shows the evolution of the mass and of the half-mass radius of the cluster, as compared to the values obtained from the King and \textsc{limepy} models. In the figure, the evolution goes from left to right (decreasing mass in time). We note that King models usually overestimate the mass of the cluster. They also initially overestimate and then underestimate the half-mass radius. The discrepancy is larger for the first part of the evolution, as clearly shown in the figure, especially in the pre-collapse phase, where the best-fit mass increases with time. \cite{GielesHeggieZhao2011} estimated that roughly 2/3 of the Milky Way globular clusters are still in the early expansion phase of their evolution. Our results suggests therefore that isotropic King models are applicable to only 1/3 of the Galactic globular cluster population.
It is remarkable that the simple \textsc{limepy} models used here are able to reproduce the key properties of the snapshots at all stages, in a much more satisfactory way than is possible with King models. The opportunity to describe the snapshots selected in this study by means of a single family of dynamical models with a variable degree of anisotropy is particularly convenient, especially because it allows us to characterise the entire evolution of the stellar system within a single, well-posed dynamical framework. In addition, since the family of \textsc{limepy} models smoothly converges to the family of \cite{King1966} models in the limit of the absence of anisotropy, the comparison between these two frameworks is correctly-set and particularly insightful.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{Sect_Conclusion}
We propose a first application of a recently proposed family of models \citep[the \textsc{limepy} models,][]{GielesZocchi2015} to fit several snapshots of a direct $N$-body simulation, spanning the entire life of a star cluster, with the aim of testing the applicability of simple models to describe the dynamics of star clusters.
The \textsc{limepy} models include a parameter, $g$, that determines the sharpness of the spatial truncation, and another parameter, $r_{\rm a}$, that regulates the presence of radially biased pressure anisotropy. The flexibility of these models allows us to study different phases in the life of a globular cluster, and to explore the role of tides and anisotropy in time. Indeed, by looking at the evolution of the best-fit values of these parameters we obtain information about the dynamical evolution of the cluster. The parameter $g$ decreases in time, indicating that the truncation becomes steeper and more abrupt due to the effect of the external tidal field. The anisotropy radius $r_{\rm a}$ decreases in the pre-collapse phase, and then increases in time, showing how a cluster that in the early phases of its evolution developed radial anisotropy later evolves towards an isotropic configuration.
The models appear to be adequate in reproducing the radial profiles of the main observables, such as the density, the velocity dispersion, and the anisotropy profiles, when compared to the ones calculated by binning the stars in the snapshots. The evolution of anisotropy is well reproduced, in time, by these models, even if in the earliest snapshots the model profiles overpredict the ones obtained by binning stars in the snapshots.
The best-fit values obtained for the mass and the half-mass radius of the cluster are in satisfactory agreement with the true values characterising the snapshots. The truncation radius of the models does not accurately reproduce the position of the tidal radius of the cluster in the pre-collapse phase. After core collapse, it usually has a value that corresponds to 80\% of the tidal radius of the cluster. The possibility to compare the results of the fits to the true values of some relevant quantities is particularly important to determine how well these models can reproduce these stellar systems, and to highlight the possible presence of systematic biases, which should be properly taken into account when the distribution function based models are applied to the interpretation of observational data of Galactic globular clusters.
The results of this investigation are also useful to put limits on the amount of radial anisotropy that can be expected for globular clusters evolving in a tidal field. This is particularly important for studies of line-of-sight velocity dispersion profiles of Galactic globular clusters. The presence of radially-biased anisotropy in the outer parts of these stellar systems causes the central projected velocity dispersion to be larger than the corresponding isotropic case. A similar effect could be due to other factors, such as for example the presence of an intermediate-mass black hole \citep[see for example][and references therein]{ZGHB2015}. Determining the degree of anisotropy present in a cluster is therefore important to determine if an intermediate-mass black hole is present in its centre, and to quantify its mass.
Here we used a discrete fitting technique to fit models to the snapshots, in order to use all the information provided by the data, without degrading it by binning stars to create radial profiles of the quantities under consideration. This technique is promising, and we plan to extend it to fit on real data. To do this, we will need to take into account the fact that observed globular clusters appear projected on the plane of the sky, and each measurement comes with an associated error that should have the proper treatment in a fit. This aspect is crucial, especially in consideration of the forthcoming astrometric information which will be provided for many Galactic globular clusters by the mission Gaia; in this respect, the subsequent step in our programme will be to include in our framework a treatment of the measurement errors which will allow us to make the most of the upcoming era of ``precision astrometry''.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We thank Antonio Sollima for comments on an earlier version of the manuscript, and the anonymous referee for constructive feedback. AZ acknowledges financial support from the Royal Society (Newton International Fellowship). MG acknowledges the European Research Council (ERC-StG-335936) and the Royal Society for financial support. ALV is grateful to Douglas Heggie for thought-provoking conversations, and to the Royal Commission for the Exhibition of 1851 for financial support. This project was initiated during the Gaia Challenge (\url{http://astrowiki.ph.surrey.ac.uk/dokuwiki}) meeting in 2013 (University of Surrey) and further developed in the follow-up meeting in 2014 (MPIA in Heidelberg).
\bibliographystyle{mn2e}
|
\section{Introduction}
Differential privacy \cite{DworkMNS06} is a formal mathematical standard for protecting individual-level privacy in statistical data analysis. In its simplest form, (pure) differential privacy is parameterized by a real number $\varepsilon > 0$, which controls how much ``privacy loss''\footnote{The privacy loss is a random variable which quantifies how much information is revealed about an individual by a computation involving their data; it depends on the outcome of the computation, the way the computation was performed, and the information that the individual wants to hide. We discuss it informally in this introduction and define it precisely in Definition \ref{defn:PrivLoss} on page \pageref{defn:PrivLoss}.} an individual can suffer when a computation (i.e., a statistical data analysis task) is performed involving his or her data.
One particular hallmark of differential privacy is that it degrades smoothly and predictably under the \emph{composition} of multiple computations. In particular, if one performs $k$ computational tasks that are each $\varepsilon$-differentially private and combines the results of those tasks, then the computation as a whole is $k\varepsilon$-differentially private. This property makes differential privacy amenable to the type of modular reasoning used in the design and analysis of algorithms: When a sophisticated algorithm is comprised of a sequence of differentially private steps, one can establish that the algorithm as a whole remains differentially private.
A widely-used relaxation of pure differential privacy is \emph{approximate} or $(\varepsilon, \delta)$-differential privacy \cite{DworkKMMN06}, which essentially guarantees that the probability that any individual suffers privacy loss exceeding $\varepsilon$ is bounded by $\delta$. For sufficiently small $\delta$, approximate $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-differential privacy provides a comparable standard of privacy protection as pure $\varepsilon$-differential privacy, while often permitting substantially more useful analyses to be performed.
Unfortunately, there are situations where, unlike pure differential privacy, approximate differential privacy is not a very elegant abstraction for mathematical analysis, particularly the analysis of composition. The ``advanced composition theorem'' of Dwork, Rothblum, and Vadhan \cite{DworkRV10} (subsequently improved by \cite{KairouzOV15,MurtaghV16}) shows that the composition of $k$ tasks which are each $(\varepsilon, \delta)$-differentially private is $ (\approx\!\!\sqrt{k}\varepsilon, \approx\!\!k\delta)$-differentially private. However, these bounds can be unwieldy; computing the tightest possible privacy guarantee for the composition of $k$ arbitrary mechanisms with differing $(\varepsilon_i, \delta_i)$-differential privacy guarantees is $\#\mathsf{P}$-hard \cite{MurtaghV16}! Furthermore, these bounds are not tight even for simple and natural privacy-preserving computations. For instance, consider the mechanism which approximately answers $k$ statistical queries on a given database by adding independent Gaussian noise to each answer. Even for this basic computation, the advanced composition theorem does not yield a tight analysis.\footnote{In particular, consider answering $k$ statistical queries on a dataset of $n$ individuals by adding noise drawn from $\mathcal{N}(0,(\sigma/n)^2)$ independently for each query. Each individual query satisfies $(O(\sqrt{\log(1/\delta)}/\sigma),\delta)$-differential privacy for any $\delta>0$. Applying the advanced composition theorem shows that the composition of all $k$ queries satisfies $(O(\sqrt{k} \log(1/\delta)/\sigma),(k+1)\delta)$-differential privacy for any $\delta>0$. However, it is well-known that this bound can be improved to $(O(\sqrt{k \log(1/\delta)}/\sigma),\delta)$-differential privacy.}
Dwork and Rothblum \cite{DworkR16} recently put forth a different relaxation of differential privacy called \emph{concentrated differential privacy}. Roughly, a randomized mechanism satisfies concentrated differentially privacy if the privacy loss has small mean and is subgaussian. Concentrated differential privacy behaves in a qualitatively similar way as approximate $(\varepsilon, \delta)$-differential privacy under composition. However, it permits sharper analyses of basic computational tasks, including a tight analysis of the aforementioned Gaussian mechanism.
Using the work of Dwork and Rothblum \cite{DworkR16} as a starting point, we introduce an alternative formulation of the concept of concentrated differential privacy that we call ``zero-concentrated differential privacy'' (zCDP{} for short). To distinguish our definition from that of Dwork and Rothblum, we refer to their definition as ``mean-concentrated differential privacy'' (mCDP{} for short). Our definition uses the R\'{e}nyi divergence between probability distributions as a different method of capturing the requirement that the privacy loss random variable is subgaussian.
\subsection{Our Reformulation: Zero-Concentrated Differential Privacy}
As is typical in the literature, we model a dataset as a multiset or tuple of $n$ elements (or ``rows'') in $\mathcal{X}^n$, for some ``data universe'' $\mathcal{X}$, where each element represents one individual's information. A (privacy-preserving) computation is a randomized algorithm $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$, where $\mathcal{Y}$ represents the space of all possible outcomes of the computation.
\begin{defn}[Zero-Concentrated Differential Privacy (zCDP{})]
A randomised mechanism $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ is $(\xi,\rho)$-zero-concentrated differentially private (henceforth $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{}) if, for all $x,x' \in \mathcal{X}^n$ differing on a single entry and all $\alpha \in (1,\infty)$, \begin{equation}\dr{\alpha}{M(x)}{M(x')} \leq \xi + \rho \alpha,\label{eqn:IIP-Renyi} \end{equation} where $\dr{\alpha}{M(x)}{M(x')}$ is the $\alpha$-R\'enyi divergence\footnote{R\'enyi divergence has a parameter $\alpha \in (1,\infty)$ which allows it to interpolate between KL-divergence ($\alpha \!\to\! 1$) and max-divergence ($\alpha \!\to\! \infty$). It should be thought of as a measure of dissimilarity between distributions. We define it formally in Section \ref{sec:Renyi}. Throughout, we assume that all logarithms are natural unless specified otherwise --- that is, base $e \approx 2.718$. This includes logarithms in information theoretic quantities like entropy, divergence, and mutual information, whence these quantities are measured in \emph{nats} rather than in \emph{bits}.} between the distribution of $M(x)$ and the distribution of $M(x')$.
We define $\rho$-zCDP{} to be $(0,\rho)$-zCDP{}.\footnote{For clarity of exposition, we consider only $\rho$-zCDP{} in the introduction and give more general statements for $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{} later. We also believe that having a one-parameter definition is desirable.}
\end{defn}
Equivalently, we can replace \eqref{eqn:IIP-Renyi} with \begin{equation}\ex{}{e^{(\alpha-1)Z}} \leq e^{(\alpha-1)(\xi + \rho \alpha)},\label{eqn:GDP-MGF}\end{equation} where $Z = \privloss{M(x)}{M(x')}$ is the privacy loss random variable:
\begin{defn}[Privacy Loss Random Variable] \label{defn:PrivLoss}
Let $Y$ and $Y'$ be random variables on $\Omega$. We define the \emph{privacy loss random variable between $Y$ and $Y'$} -- denoted $Z=\privloss{Y}{Y'}$ -- as follows. Define a function $f : \Omega \to \mathbb{R}$ by $f(y) = \log(\pr{}{Y=y}/\pr{}{Y'=y})$.\footnote{Throughout we abuse notation by letting $\pr{}{Y=y}$ represent either the probability mass function or the probability density function of $Y$ evaluated at $y$. Formally, $\pr{}{Y=y}/\pr{}{Y'=y}$ denotes the Radon-Nikodym derivative of the measure $Y$ with respect to the measure $Y'$ evaluated at $y$, where we require $Y$ to be absolutely continuous with respect to $Y'$, i.e. $Y \ll Y'$.} Then $Z$ is distributed according to $f(Y)$.
\end{defn}
Intuitively, the value of the privacy loss $Z = \privloss{M(x)}{M(x')}$ represents how well we can distinguish $x$ from $x'$ given only the output $M(x)$ or $M(x')$. If $Z>0$, then the observed output of $M$ is more likely to have occurred if the input was $x$ than if $x'$ was the input. Moreover, the larger $Z$ is, the bigger this likelihood ratio is. Likewise, $Z<0$ indicates that the output is more likely if $x'$ is the input. If $Z=0$, both $x$ and $x'$ ``explain'' the output of $M$ equally well.
A mechanism $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ is $\varepsilon$-differentially private if and only if $\pr{}{Z>\varepsilon}=0$, where $Z = \privloss{M(x)}{M(x')}$ is the privacy loss of $M$ on arbitrary inputs $x,x' \in \mathcal{X}^n$ differing in one entry.
On the other hand, $M$ being $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-differentially private is equivalent, up to a small loss in parameters, to the requirement that $\pr{}{Z>\varepsilon}\leq \delta$.
In contrast, zCDP{} entails a bound on the \emph{moment generating function} of the privacy loss $Z$ --- that is, $\ex{}{e^{(\alpha-1)Z}}$ as a function of $\alpha-1$. The bound \eqref{eqn:GDP-MGF} implies that $Z$ is a \emph{subgaussian} random variable\footnote{A random variable $X$ being subgaussian is characterised by the following four equivalent conditions \cite{Rivasplata12}. (i) $\pr{}{|X-\ex{}{X}|>\lambda} \leq e^{-\Omega(\lambda^2)}$ for all $\lambda>0$. (ii) $\ex{}{e^{t(X-\ex{}{X})}} \leq e^{O(t^2)}$ for all $t \in \mathbb{R}$. (iii) $\ex{}{(X-\ex{}{X})^{2k}} \leq O(k)^k$ for all $k \in \mathbb{N}$. (iv) $\ex{}{e^{c(X-\ex{}{X})^2}} \leq 2$ for some $c>0$.} with small mean. Intuitively, this means that $Z$ resembles a Gaussian distribution with mean $\xi+\rho$ and variance $2\rho$. In particular, we obtain strong tail bounds on $Z$. Namely \eqref{eqn:GDP-MGF} implies that $$\pr{}{Z>\lambda+\xi+\rho} \leq e^{-\lambda^2/4\rho}$$ for all $\lambda>0$.\footnote{We only discuss bounds on the upper tail of $Z$. We can obtain similar bounds on the lower tail of $Z=\privloss{M(x)}{M(x')}$ by considering $Z'=\privloss{M(x')}{M(x)}$.}
Thus zCDP{} requires that the privacy loss random variable is concentrated around zero (hence the name). That is, $Z$ is ``small'' with high probability, with larger deviations from zero becoming increasingly unlikely. Hence we are unlikely to be able to distinguish $x$ from $x'$ given the output of $M(x)$ or $M(x')$. Note that the randomness of the privacy loss random variable is taken only over the randomnesss of the mechanism $M$.
\subsubsection{Comparison to the Definition of Dwork and Rothblum}
For comparison, Dwork and Rothblum \cite{DworkR16} define \emph{$(\mu,\tau)$-concentrated differential privacy} for a randomized mechanism $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ as the requirement that, if $Z=\privloss{M(x)}{M(x')}$ is the privacy loss for $x,x'\in \mathcal{X}^n$ differing on one entry, then $$\ex{}{Z} \leq \mu \qquad\text{and}\qquad \ex{}{e^{(\alpha-1)(Z-\ex{}{Z})}} \leq e^{(\alpha-1)^2\frac12\tau^2}$$ for all $\alpha \in \mathbb{R}$. That is, they require both a bound on the mean of the privacy loss and that the privacy loss is tightly concentrated around its mean.
To distinguish our definitions, we refer to their definition as \emph{mean-concentrated differential privacy} (or mCDP{}).
Our definition, zCDP{}, is a \emph{relaxation} of mCDP{}. In particular, a $(\mu,\tau)$-mCDP{} mechanism is also $(\mu-\tau^2/2,\tau^2/2)$-zCDP{} (which is tight for the Gaussian mechanism example), whereas the converse is not true. (However, a partial converse holds; see Lemma \ref{lem:IIPtoCDP}.)
\subsection{Results}
\subsubsection{Relationship between zCDP{} and Differential Privacy} \label{sec:GDP-DP-relationship}
Like Dwork and Rothblum's formulation of concentrated differential privacy, zCDP{} can be thought of as providing guarantees of $(\varepsilon, \delta)$-differential privacy \emph{for all} values of $\delta > 0$:
\begin{prop} \label{prop:CDPtoDP-intro}
If $M$ provides $\rho$-zCDP{}, then $M$ is $(\rho+2\sqrt{\rho\log(1/\delta)},\delta)$-differentially private for any $\delta>0$.
\end{prop}
We also prove a slight strengthening of this result (Lemma \ref{lem:CDPtoDP2}). Moreover, there is a partial converse, which shows that, up to a loss in parameters, zCDP{} is equivalent to differential privacy with this $\forall \delta>0$ quantification (see Lemma \ref{lem:DPtoCDP}).
There is also a direct link from pure differential privacy to zCDP{}:
\begin{prop} \label{prop:PDPtoCDP-intro}
If $M$ satisfies $\varepsilon$-differential privacy, then $M$ satisfies $(\frac12 \varepsilon^2)$-zCDP{}.
\end{prop}
Dwork and Rothblum \cite[Theorem 3.5]{DworkR16} give a slightly weaker version of Proposition \ref{prop:PDPtoCDP-intro}, which implies that $\varepsilon$-differential privacy yields $(\frac12 \varepsilon (e^\varepsilon-1))$-zCDP{}; this improves on an earlier bound \cite{DworkRV10} by the factor $\frac12$.
We give proofs of these and other properties using properties of R\'{e}nyi divergence in Sections \ref{sec:Renyi} and \ref{sec:DP}.
Propositions \ref{prop:CDPtoDP-intro} and \ref{prop:PDPtoCDP-intro} show that zCDP{} is an intermediate notion between pure differential privacy and approximate differential privacy. Indeed, many algorithms satisfying approximate differential privacy do in fact also satisfy zCDP{}.
\subsubsection{Gaussian Mechanism} \label{sec:Gaussian-intro}
Just as with mCDP{}, the prototypical example of a mechanism satisfying zCDP{} is the \emph{Gaussian mechanism}, which answers a real-valued query on a database by perturbing the true answer with Gaussian noise.
\begin{defn}[Sensitivity]
A function $q : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathbb{R}$ has \emph{sensitivity} $\Delta$ if for all $x, x' \in \mathcal{X}^n$ differing in a single entry, we have $|q(x) - q(x')| \le \Delta$.
\end{defn}
\begin{prop}[Gaussian Mechanism] \label{prop:gaussian-mech}
Let $q : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathbb{R}$ be a sensitivity-$\Delta$ query. Consider the mechanism $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathbb{R}$ that on input $x$, releases a sample from $\mathcal{N}(q(x), \sigma^2)$. Then $M$ satisfies $(\Delta^2/2\sigma^2)$-zCDP{}.
\end{prop}
We remark that either inequality defining zCDP{} --- \eqref{eqn:IIP-Renyi} or \eqref{eqn:GDP-MGF} --- is exactly tight for the Gaussian mechanism for all values of $\alpha$. Thus the definition of zCDP{} seems tailored to the Gaussian mechanism.
\subsubsection{Basic Properties of zCDP} \label{sec:BasicProperties}
Our definition of zCDP{} satisfies the key basic properties of differential privacy. Foremost, these properties include smooth degradation under composition, and invariance under postprocessing:
\begin{lem}[Composition] \label{lem:Composition-intro}
Let $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ and $M' : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Z}$ be randomized algorithms. Suppose $M$ satisfies $\rho$-zCDP{} and $M'$ satisfies $\rho'$-zCDP{}. Define $M'' : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y} \times \mathcal{Z}$ by $M''(x) = (M(x),M'(x))$. Then $M''$ satisfies $(\rho+\rho')$-zCDP{}.
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}[Postprocessing] \label{lem:Postprocessing-intro}
Let $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ and $f : \mathcal{Y} \to \mathcal{Z}$ be randomized algorithms. Suppose $M$ satisfies $\rho$-zCDP{}. Define $M' : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Z}$ by $M'(x) = f(M(x))$. Then $M'$ satisfies $\rho$-zCDP{}.
\end{lem}
These properties follow immediately from corresponding properties of the R\'enyi divergence outlined in Lemma \ref{lem:Renyi}.
We remark that Dwork and Rothblum's definition of mCDP{} is not closed under postprocessing; we provide a counterexample in Appendix \ref{app:pp-mcdp}. (However, an arbitrary amount of postprocessing can worsen the guarantees of mCDP{} by at most constant factors.)
\subsubsection{Group Privacy} \label{sec:IntroGroupPrivacy}
A mechanism $M$ guarantees \emph{group privacy} if no small group of individuals has a significant effect on the outcome of a computation (whereas the definition of zCDP{} only refers to individuals, which are groups of size $1$). That is, group privacy for groups of size $k$ guarantees that, if $x$ and $x'$ are inputs differing on $k$ entries (rather than a single entry), then the outputs $M(x)$ and $M(x')$ are close.
Dwork and Rothblum \cite[Theorem 4.1]{DworkR16} gave nearly tight bounds on the group privacy guarantees of concentrated differential privacy, showing that a $(\mu=\tau^2/2, \tau)$-concentrated differentially private mechanism affords $(k^2\mu \cdot (1 + o(1)), k\tau \cdot (1 + o(1)))$-concentrated differential privacy for groups of size $k = o(1/\tau)$. We are able to show a group privacy guarantee for zCDP{} that is exactly tight and works for a wider range of parameters:
\begin{prop} \label{prop:group-intro}
Let $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfy $\rho$-zCDP{}. Then $M$ guarantees $(k^2\rho)$-zCDP{} for groups of size $k$ --- i.e. for every $x, x' \in \mathcal{X}^n$ differing in up to $k$ entries and every $\alpha \in (1, \infty)$, we have
\[\dr{\alpha}{M(x)}{M(x')} \le (k^2\rho) \cdot \alpha.\]
\end{prop}
In particular, this bound is achieved (simultaneously for all values $\alpha$) by the Gaussian mechanism. Our proof is also simpler than that of Dwork and Rothblum; see Section \ref{sec:GroupPrivacy}.
\subsubsection{Lower Bounds}
The strong group privacy guarantees of zCDP{} yield, as an unfortunate consequence, strong lower bounds as well. We show that, as with pure differential privacy, zCDP{} is susceptible to information-based lower bounds, as well as to so-called packing arguments \cite{HardtT10,McGregorMPRTV10, De12}:
\begin{thm} \label{thm:LB-intro}
Let $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfy $\rho$-zCDP{}. Let $X$ be a random variable on $\mathcal{X}^n$. Then $$I\left(X;M(X)\right) \leq \rho \cdot n^2,$$ where $I(\cdot;\cdot)$ denotes the mutual information between the random variables (in nats, rather than bits). Furthermore, if the entries of $X$ are independent, then $I(X;M(X)) \leq \rho \cdot n$.
\end{thm}
Theorem \ref{thm:LB-intro} yields strong lower bounds for zCDP{} mechanisms, as we can construct distributions $X$ such that, for any accurate mechanism $M$, $M(X)$ reveals a lot of information about $X$ (i.e.~$I(X;M(X))$ is large for any accurate $M$).
In particular, we obtain a strong separation between approximate differential privacy and zCDP{}. For example, we can show that releasing an accurate approximate histogram (or, equivalently, accurately answering all point queries) on a data domain of size $k$ requires an input with at least $n=\Theta(\sqrt{\log k})$ entries to satisfy zCDP{}. In contrast, under approximate differential privacy, $n$ can be \emph{independent} of the domain size $k$ \cite{BeimelNS13}! In particular, our lower bounds show that ``stability-based'' techniques (such as those in the propose-test-release framework \cite{DworkL09}) are not compatible with zCDP{}.
Our lower bound exploits the strong group privacy guarantee afforded by zCDP{}. Group privacy has been used to prove tight lower bounds for pure differential privacy \cite{HardtT10,De12} and approximate differential privacy \cite{SteinkeU15b}. These results highlight the fact that group privacy is often the limiting factor for private data analysis. For $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-differential privacy, group privacy becomes vacuous for groups of size $k=\Theta(\log(1/\delta)/\varepsilon)$. Indeed, stability-based techniques exploit precisely this breakdown in group privacy.
As a result of this strong lower bound, we show that any mechanism for answering statistical queries that satisfies zCDP{} can be converted into a mechanism satisfying pure differential privacy with only a quadratic blowup in its sample complexity. More precisely, the following theorem illustrates a more general result we prove in Section \ref{sec:CDPvsPDP}.
\begin{thm} Let $n \in \mathbb{N}$ and $\alpha \geq 1/n$ be arbitrary. Set $\varepsilon=\alpha$ and $\rho=\alpha^2$.
Let $q : \mathcal{X} \to [0,1]^k$ be an arbitrary family of statistical queries.
Suppose $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to [0,1]^k$ satisfies $\rho$-zCDP{} and $$\ex{M}{\|M(x)-q(x)\|_\infty} \leq \alpha$$ for all $x \in \mathcal{X}^n$.
Then there exists $M' : \mathcal{X}^{n'} \to [0,1]^k$ for $n'=5n^2$ satisfying $\varepsilon$-differential privacy and $$\ex{M'}{\|M'(x)-q(x)\|_\infty} \leq 10\alpha$$ for all $x \in \mathcal{X}^{n'}$.
\end{thm}
For some classes of queries, this reduction is essentially tight. For example, for $k$ one-way marginals, the Gaussian mechanism achieves sample complexity $n=\Theta(\sqrt{k})$ subject to zCDP{}, whereas the Laplace mechanism achieves sample complexity $n=\Theta(k)$ subject to pure differential privacy, which is known to be optimal.
For more details, see Sections \ref{sec:LowerBounds} and \ref{sec:CDPvsPDP}.
\subsubsection{Approximate zCDP{}}
To circumvent these strong lower bounds for zCDP{}, we consider a relaxation of zCDP{} in the spirit of approximate differential privacy that permits a small probability $\delta$ of (catastrophic) failure:
\begin{defn}[Approximate Zero-Concentrated Differential Privacy (Approximate zCDP{})]
A randomized mechanism $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ is $\delta$-approximately $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{} if, for all $x,x' \in \mathcal{X}^n$ differing on a single entry, there exist events $E$ (depending on $M(x)$) and $E'$ (depending on $M(x')$) such that $\pr{}{E} \geq 1-\delta$, $\pr{}{E'} \geq 1-\delta$, and $$\forall \alpha \in (1,\infty) \qquad \dr{\alpha}{M(x)|_{E}}{M(x')|_{E'}} \leq \xi + \rho \cdot \alpha \qquad \wedge \qquad \dr{\alpha}{M(x')|_{E'}}{M(x)|_{E}} \leq \xi + \rho \cdot \alpha,$$ where $M(x)|_{E}$ denotes the distribution of $M(x)$ conditioned on the event $E$. We further define $\delta$-approximate $\rho$-zCDP{} to be $\delta$-approximate $(0,\rho)$-zCDP{}.
\end{defn}
In particular, setting $\delta=0$ gives the original definition of zCDP{}. However, this definition unifies zCDP{} with approximate differential privacy:
\begin{prop}
If $M$ satisfies $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-differential privacy, then $M$ satisfies $\delta$-approximate $\frac12 \varepsilon^2$-zCDP{}.
\end{prop}
Approximate zCDP{} retains most of the desirable properties of zCDP{}, but allows us to incorporate stability-based techniques and bypass the above lower bounds. This also presents a unified tool to analyse a composition of zCDP{} with approximate differential privacy; see Section \ref{sec:ApproxCDP}.
\subsection{Related Work}
Our work builds on the aforementioned prior work of Dwork and Rothblum \cite{DworkR16}.\footnote{Although Dwork and Rothblum's work only appeared publicly in March 2016, they shared a preliminary draft of their paper with us before we commenced this work. As such, our ideas are heavily inspired by theirs.} We view our definition of concentrated differential privacy as being ``morally equivalent'' to their definition of concentrated differential privacy, in the sense that both definitions formalize the same concept.\footnote{We refer to our definition as ``zero-concentrated differential privacy'' (zCDP{}) and their definition as ``mean-concentrated differential privacy'' (mCDP{}). We use ``concentrated differential privacy'' (CDP{}) to refer to the underlying \emph{concept} formalized by both definitions.} (The formal relationship between the two definitions is discussed in Section \ref{sec:CDP-DR}.)
However, the definition of zCDP{} generally seems to be easier to work with than that of mCDP{}. In particular, our formulation in terms of R\'{e}nyi divergence simplifies many analyses.
Dwork and Rothblum prove several results about concentrated differential privacy that are similar to ours. Namely, they prove analogous properties of mCDP{} as we prove for zCDP{} (cf.~Sections \ref{sec:GDP-DP-relationship}, \ref{sec:Gaussian-intro}, \ref{sec:BasicProperties}, and \ref{sec:IntroGroupPrivacy}). However, as noted, some of their bounds are weaker than ours; also, they do not explore lower bounds.
Several of the ideas underlying concentrated differential privacy are implicit in earlier works. In particular, the proof of the advanced composition theorem of Dwork, Rothblum, and Vadhan \cite{DworkRV10} essentially uses the ideas of concentrated differential privacy. Their proof contains analogs of Propositions \ref{lem:Composition-intro}, \ref{prop:CDPtoDP-intro}, and \ref{prop:PDPtoCDP-intro},.
We also remark that Tardos \cite{Tardos03} used R\'{e}nyi divergence to prove lower bounds for cryptographic objects called \emph{fingerprinting codes}. Fingerprinting codes turn out to be closely related to differential privacy \cite{Ullman13,BunUV14,SteinkeU14}, and Tardos' lower bound can be (loosely) viewed as a kind of privacy-preserving algorithm.
\subsection{Further Work}
We believe that concentrated differential privacy is a useful tool for analysing private computations, as it provides both simpler and tighter bounds. We hope that CDP{} will be prove useful in both the theory and practice of differential privacy.
Furthermore, our lower bounds show that CDP{} can really be a much more stringent condition than approximate differential privacy. Thus CDP{} defines a ``subclass'' of all $(\varepsilon, \delta)$-differentially private algorithms. This subclass includes most differentially private algorithms in the literature, but not all --- the most notable exceptions being algorithms that use the propose-test-release approach \cite{DworkL09} to exploit low local sensitivity.
This ``CDP{} subclass'' warrants further exploration. In particular, is there a ``complete'' mechanism for this class of algorithms, in the same sense that the exponential mechanism \cite{McSherryT07,BlumLR08} is complete for pure differential privacy? Can we obtain a simple characterization of the sample complexity needed to satisfy CDP{}? The ability to prove stronger and simpler lower bounds for CDP{} than for approximate DP may be useful for showing the limitations of certain algorithmic paradigms. For example, any differentially private algorithm that only uses the Laplace mechanism, the exponential mechanism, the Gaussian mechanism, and the ``sparse vector'' technique, along with composition and postprocessing will be subject to the lower bounds for CDP{}.
There is also room to examine how to interpret the zCDP{} privacy guarantee. In particular, we leave it as an open question to understand the extent to which $\rho$-zCDP{} provides a stronger privacy guarantee than the implied $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-DP guarantees (cf.~Proposition \ref{prop:CDPtoDP-intro}).
In general, much of the literature on differential privacy can be re-examined through the lens of CDP{}, which may yield new insights and results.
\section{R\'enyi Divergence} \label{sec:Renyi}
Recall the definition of R\'enyi divergence:
\begin{defn}[{R\'enyi Divergence \cite[Equation (3.3)]{Renyi61}}]
Let $P$ and $Q$ be probability distributions on $\Omega$. For $\alpha \in (1,\infty)$, we define the \emph{R\'enyi divergence of order $\alpha$ between $P$ and $Q$} as
\begin{align*}
\dr{\alpha}{P}{Q} =& \frac{1}{\alpha-1} \log \left( \int_\Omega P(x)^\alpha Q(x)^{1-\alpha} \mathrm{d} x \right) \\=& \frac{1}{\alpha-1} \log \left( \ex{x \sim Q}{ \left(\frac{P(x)}{Q(x)}\right)^\alpha} \right) \\=& \frac{1}{\alpha-1} \log \left( \ex{x \sim P}{ \left(\frac{P(x)}{Q(x)}\right)^{\alpha-1}} \right),
\end{align*}
where $P(\cdot)$ and $Q(\cdot)$ are the probability mass/density functions of $P$ and $Q$ respectively or, more generally, $P(\cdot)/Q(\cdot)$ is the Radon-Nikodym derivative of $P$ with respect to $Q$.\footnote{If $P$ is not absolutely continuous with respect to $Q$ (i.e. it is not the case that $P \ll Q$), we define $\dr{\alpha}{P}{Q}=\infty$ for all $\alpha \in [1,\infty]$.}
We also define the KL-divergence $$\dr{1}{P}{Q} = \lim_{\alpha \to 1} \dr{\alpha}{P}{Q} = \int_\Omega P(x) \log \left(\frac{P(x)}{Q(x)}\right) \mathrm{d}x$$ and the max-divergence $$\dr{\infty}{P}{Q} = \lim_{\alpha \to \infty} \dr{\alpha}{P}{Q} = \sup_{x \in \Omega} \log \left(\frac{P(x)}{Q(x)}\right) .$$
\end{defn}
Alternatively, R\'enyi divergence can be defined in terms of the privacy loss (Definition \ref{defn:PrivLoss}) between $P$ and $Q$: $$e^{(\alpha-1)\dr{\alpha}{P}{Q}} = \ex{Z\sim\privloss{P}{Q}}{e^{(\alpha-1)Z}}$$ for all $\alpha \in (1,\infty)$. Moreover, $\dr{1}{P}{Q} = \ex{Z\sim\privloss{P}{Q}}{Z}$.
We record several useful and well-known properties of R\'enyi divergence. We refer the reader to \cite{vanErvenH14} for proofs and discussion of these (and many other) properties. Self-contained proofs are given in Appendix \ref{app:Renyi}.
\begin{lem} \label{lem:Renyi}
Let $P$ and $Q$ be probability distributions and $\alpha \in [1,\infty]$.
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Non-negativity:} $\dr{\alpha}{P}{Q} \geq 0$ with equality if and only if $P=Q$.
\item \emph{Composition:} Suppose $P$ and $Q$ are distributions on $\Omega \times \Theta$. Let $P'$ and $Q'$ denote the marginal distributions on $\Omega$ induced by $P$ and $Q$ respectively. For $x \in \Omega$, let $P'_x$ and $Q'_x$ denote the conditional distributions on $\Theta$ induced by $P$ and $Q$ respectively, where $x$ specifies the first coordinate. Then $$\dr{\alpha}{P'}{Q'} + \min_{x \in \Omega} \dr{\alpha}{P'_x}{Q'_x} \leq \dr{\alpha}{P}{Q} \leq \dr{\alpha}{P'}{Q'} + \max_{x \in \Omega} \dr{\alpha}{P'_x}{Q'_x}.$$
In particular if $P$ and $Q$ are product distributions, then the R\'enyi divergence between $P$ and $Q$ is just the sum of the R\'enyi divergences of the marginals.
\item \emph{Quasi-Convexity:} Let $P_0, P_1$ and $Q_0, Q_1$ be distributions on $\Omega$, and let $P = tP_0 + (1-t)P_1$ and $Q = tQ_0 + (1-t)Q_1$ for $t \in [0, 1]$. Then $\dr{\alpha}{P}{Q} \le \max\{\dr{\alpha}{P_0}{Q_0}, \dr{\alpha}{P_1}{Q_1}\}$. Moreover, KL divergence is convex: $$\dr{1}{P}{Q} \leq t \dr{1}{P_0}{Q_0}+(1-t)\dr{1}{P_1}{Q_1}.$$
\item \emph{Postprocessing:} Let $P$ and $Q$ be distributions on $\Omega$ and let $f : \Omega \to \Theta$ be a function. Let $f(P)$ and $f(Q)$ denote the distributions on $\Theta$ induced by applying $f$ to $P$ or $Q$ respectively. Then $\dr{\alpha}{f(P)}{f(Q)} \leq \dr{\alpha}{P}{Q}$.
Note that quasi-convexity allows us to extend this guarantee to the case where $f$ is a randomized mapping.
\item \emph{Monotonicity:} For $1 \leq \alpha \leq \alpha' \leq \infty$, $\dr{\alpha}{P}{Q} \leq \dr{\alpha'}{P}{Q}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\subsection{Composition and Postprocessing}
The following lemma gives the postprocessing and (adaptive) composition bounds (extending Lemmas \ref{lem:Composition-intro} and \ref{lem:Postprocessing-intro}).
\begin{lem}[Composition \& Postprocessing] \label{lem:CompositionPostprocessing}
Let $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ and $M' : \mathcal{X}^n \times \mathcal{Y} \to \mathcal{Z}$. Suppose $M$ satisfies $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{} and $M'$ satisfies $(\xi',\rho')$-zCDP{} (as a function of its first argument). Define $M'' : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Z}$ by $M''(x) = M'(x,M(x))$. Then $M''$ satisfies $(\xi+\xi',\rho+\rho')$-zCDP{}.
\end{lem}
The proof is immediate from Lemma \ref{lem:Renyi}. Note that, while Lemma \ref{lem:CompositionPostprocessing} is only stated for the composition of two mechanisms, it can be inductively applied to analyse the composition of arbitrarily many mechanisms.
\subsection{Gaussian Mechanism}
The following lemma gives the R\'enyi divergence between two Gaussian distributions with the same variance.
\begin{lem} \label{lem:NormalDivergence}
Let $\mu, \nu, \sigma \in \mathbb{R}$ and $\alpha \in [1,\infty)$. Then $$\dr{\alpha}{\mathcal{N}(\mu,\sigma^2)}{\mathcal{N}(\nu,\sigma^2)} = \frac{\alpha(\mu - \nu)^2}{2\sigma^2}$$
\end{lem}
Consequently, the Gaussian mechanism, which answers a sensitivity-$\Delta$ query by adding noise drawn from $\mathcal{N}(0,\sigma^2)$, satisfies $\left(\frac{\Delta^2}{2\sigma^2}\right)$-zCDP{} (Proposition \ref{prop:gaussian-mech}).
\begin{proof}
We calculate
\begin{align*}
\exp \bigl((\alpha-1)&\dr{\alpha}{\mathcal{N}(\mu,\sigma^2)}{\mathcal{N}(\nu,\sigma^2)}\bigr) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi\sigma^2}}\int_\mathbb{R} \exp \left(-\alpha \frac{(x-\mu)^2}{2\sigma^2} - (1-\alpha) \frac{(x - \nu)^2}{2\sigma^2} \right) \mathrm{d}x\\
=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi\sigma^2}}\int_\mathbb{R} \exp \left(-\frac{(x - (\alpha\mu + (1-\alpha)\nu))^2 - (\alpha\mu + (1-\alpha)\nu)^2 + \alpha \mu^2 + (1-\alpha)\nu^2}{2\sigma^2} \right) \mathrm{d}x\\
=& \ex{x \sim \mathcal{N}(\alpha\mu + (1-\alpha)\nu,\sigma^2)}{ \exp \left( -\frac{-(\alpha\mu + (1-\alpha)\nu)^2 + \alpha \mu^2 + (1-\alpha)\nu^2}{2\sigma^2}\right) }\\
=& \exp \left(\frac{\alpha(\alpha-1)(\mu - \nu)^2}{2\sigma^2}\right).
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
For the multivariate Gaussian mechanism, Lemma \ref{lem:NormalDivergence} generalises to the following.
\begin{lem} \label{lem:NormalDivergenceMulti}
Let $\mu, \nu \in \mathbb{R}^d$, $\sigma \in \mathbb{R}$, and $\alpha \in [1,\infty)$. Then $$\dr{\alpha}{\mathcal{N}(\mu,\sigma^2 I_d)}{\mathcal{N}(\nu,\sigma^2 I_d)} = \frac{\alpha\|\mu - \nu\|_2^2}{2\sigma^2}$$
\end{lem}
Thus, if $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathbb{R}^d$ is the mechanism that, on input $x$, releases a sample from $\mathcal{N}(q(x), \sigma^2 I_d)$ for some function $q : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathbb{R}^d$, then $M$ satisfies $\rho$-zCDP{} for \begin{equation}\rho = \frac{1}{2\sigma^2} \sup_{x,x' \in \mathcal{X}^n \atop \text{differing in one entry}} \|q(x)-q(x')\|_2^2 .\end{equation}
\section{Relation to Differential Privacy} \label{sec:DP}
We now discuss the relationship between zCDP{} and the traditional definitions of pure and approximate differential privacy. There is a close relationship between the notions, but not an exact characterization.
For completeness, we state the definition of differential privacy:
\begin{defn}[Differential Privacy (DP) \cite{DworkMNS06,DworkKMMN06}]
A randomized mechanism $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfies $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-differential privacy if, for all $x,x' \in \mathcal{X}$ differing in a single entry, we have $$\pr{}{M(x) \in S} \leq e^\varepsilon \pr{}{M(x') \in S} + \delta$$ for all (measurable) $S \subset \mathcal{Y}$. Further define $\varepsilon$-differential privacy to be $(\varepsilon,0)$-differential privacy.
\end{defn}
\subsection{Pure DP versus zCDP{}}
Pure differential privacy is exactly characterized by $(\xi, 0)$-zCDP{}:
\begin{lem}
A mechanism $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfies $\varepsilon$-DP if and only if it satisfies $(\varepsilon,0)$-zCDP{}.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $x,x' \in \mathcal{X}^n$ be neighbouring. Suppose $M$ satisfies $\varepsilon$-DP. Then $\dr{\infty}{M(x)}{M(x')} \leq \varepsilon$. By monotonicity, $$\dr{\alpha}{M(x)}{M(x')} \leq \dr{\infty}{M(x)}{M(x')} \leq \varepsilon = \varepsilon + 0 \cdot \alpha$$ for all $\alpha$. So $M$ satisfies $(\varepsilon,0)$-zCDP{}.
Conversely, suppose $M$ satisfies $(\varepsilon,0)$-zCDP{}. Then $$\dr{\infty}{M(x)}{M(x')} = \lim_{\alpha \to \infty} \dr{\alpha}{M(x)}{M(x')} \leq \lim_{\alpha \to \infty} \varepsilon + 0 \cdot \alpha = \varepsilon.$$ Thus $M$ satisfies $\varepsilon$-DP.
\end{proof}
We now show that $\varepsilon$-differential privacy implies $(\frac12\varepsilon^2)$-zCDP{} (Proposition \ref{prop:PDPtoCDP-intro}).
\begin{prop} \label{prop:EpsSquared}
Let $P$ and $Q$ be probability distributions on $\Omega$ satisfying $\dr{\infty}{P}{Q} \leq \varepsilon$ and $\dr{\infty}{Q}{P} \leq \varepsilon$. Then $\dr{\alpha}{P}{Q} \leq \frac12 \varepsilon^2 \alpha$ for all $\alpha>1$.
\end{prop}
\begin{rem}
In particular, Proposition \ref{prop:EpsSquared} shows that the KL-divergence $\dr{1}{P}{Q} \le \frac{1}{2}\varepsilon^2$. A bound on the KL-divergence between random variables in terms of their max-divergence is an important ingredient in the analysis of the advanced composition theorem \cite{DworkRV10}. Our bound sharpens (up to lower order terms) and, in our opinion, simplifies the previous bound of $\dr{1}{P}{Q} \le \frac{1}{2}\varepsilon(e^{\varepsilon}-1)$ proved by Dwork and Rothblum \cite{DworkR16}.
\end{rem}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{prop:EpsSquared}.]
We may assume $\frac12 \varepsilon \alpha \leq 1$, as otherwise $\frac12 \varepsilon^2 \alpha > \varepsilon$, whence the result follows from monotonicity. We must show that $$e^{(\alpha-1)\dr{\alpha}{P}{Q}} = \ex{x \sim Q}{\left(\frac{P(x)}{Q(x)}\right)^\alpha} \leq e^{\frac12 \alpha(\alpha-1)\varepsilon^2}.$$
We know that $e^{-\varepsilon} \leq \frac{P(x)}{Q(x)} \leq e^{\varepsilon}$ for all $x$. Define a random function $A : \Omega \to \{e^{-\varepsilon},e^\varepsilon\}$ by $\ex{A}{A(x)}={\frac{P(x)}{Q(x)}}$ for all $x$. By Jensen's inequality, $$\ex{x \sim Q}{\left(\frac{P(x)}{Q(x)}\right)^{\alpha}} = \ex{x \sim Q}{\left(\ex{A}{A(x)}\right)^{\alpha}} \leq \ex{x \sim Q}{\ex{A}{A(x)^\alpha}} = \ex{A}{A^\alpha},$$ where $A$ denotes $A(x)$ for a random $x \sim Q$. We also have $\ex{A}{A} = \ex{x \sim Q}{\frac{P(x)}{Q(x)}}=1$. From this equation, we can conclude that $$\pr{A}{A=e^{-\varepsilon}} = \frac{e^\varepsilon-1}{e^\varepsilon-e^{-\varepsilon}} \qquad \text{and} \qquad \pr{A}{A=e^{\varepsilon}} = \frac{1-e^{-\varepsilon}}{e^\varepsilon-e^{-\varepsilon}}.$$
Thus
\begin{align*}e^{(\alpha-1)\dr{\alpha}{P}{Q}} \leq& \ex{A}{A^\alpha}\\
=& \frac{e^\varepsilon-1}{e^\varepsilon-e^{-\varepsilon}} \cdot e^{-\alpha\varepsilon} + \frac{1-e^{-\varepsilon}}{e^\varepsilon-e^{-\varepsilon}} \cdot e^{\alpha\varepsilon}\\
=&\frac{(e^{\alpha\varepsilon}-e^{-\alpha\varepsilon}) - (e^{(\alpha-1)\varepsilon}-e^{-(\alpha-1)\varepsilon})}{e^\varepsilon-e^{-\varepsilon}}\\
=& \frac{\sinh(\alpha\varepsilon)-\sinh((\alpha-1)\varepsilon)}{\sinh(\varepsilon)}.
\end{align*}
The result now follows from the following inequality, which is proved in Lemma \ref{lem:HyperTrigIneq}. $$0 \leq y < x \leq 2 \implies \frac{\sinh(x)-\sinh(y)}{\sinh(x-y)} \leq e^{\frac12 xy}.$$
\end{proof}
\subsection{Approximate DP versus zCDP{}}
The statements in this section show that, up to some loss in parameters, zCDP{} is equivalent to a family of $(\varepsilon, \delta)$-DP guarantees for all $\delta > 0$.
\begin{lem} \label{lem:CDPtoDP}
Let $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfy $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{}. Then $M$ satisfies $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-DP for all $\delta>0$ and $$\varepsilon = \xi + \rho + \sqrt{4\rho \log(1/\delta)}.$$
\end{lem}
Thus to achieve a given $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-DP guarantee it suffices to satisfy $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{} with $$\rho = \left( \sqrt{\varepsilon-\xi+\log(1/\delta)}-\sqrt{\log(1/\delta)}\right)^2 \approx \frac{(\varepsilon-\xi)^2}{4\log(1/\delta)}.$$
\begin{proof}
Let $x,x' \in \mathcal{X}^n$ be neighbouring. Define $f(y) = \log(\pr{}{M(x)=y}/\pr{}{M(x')=y})$. Let $Y\sim M(x)$ and $Z=f(Y)$. That is, $Z=\privloss{M(x)}{M(x')}$ is the privacy loss random variable.
Fix $\alpha\in(1,\infty)$ to be chosen later.
Then $$\ex{}{e^{(\alpha-1)Z}}=\ex{Y \sim M(x)}{\left(\frac{\pr{}{M(x)=Y}}{\pr{}{M(x')=Y}}\right)^{\alpha-1}}=e^{(\alpha-1)\dr{\alpha}{M(x)}{M(x')}} \leq e^{(\alpha-1)(\xi+\rho\alpha)}.$$
By Markov's inequality $$\pr{}{Z>\varepsilon} = \pr{}{e^{(\alpha-1) Z} > e^{(\alpha-1)\varepsilon}} \leq \frac{\ex{}{e^{(\alpha-1) Z}}}{e^{(\alpha-1)\varepsilon}} \leq e^{(\alpha-1)(\xi+\rho\alpha-\varepsilon)}.$$ Choosing $\alpha = (\varepsilon - \xi + \rho)/2\rho > 1$ gives $$\pr{}{Z>\varepsilon} \leq e^{-(\varepsilon - \xi - \rho)^2/4\rho} \leq \delta.$$
Now, for any measurable $S \subset \mathcal{Y}$,
\begin{align*}
\pr{}{M(x) \in S} =& \pr{}{Y \in S}\\
\leq& \pr{}{Y \in S \wedge Z \leq \varepsilon} + \pr{}{Z > \varepsilon} \\
\leq& \pr{}{Y \in S \wedge Z \leq \varepsilon} + \delta\\
=& \int_{\mathcal{Y}} \pr{}{M(x)=y} \cdot \mathbb{I}(y \in S) \cdot \mathbb{I}(f(y) \leq \varepsilon) \ \mathrm{d}y + \delta\\
\leq& \int_{\mathcal{Y}} e^\varepsilon \pr{}{M(x')=y} \cdot \mathbb{I}(y \in S) \ \mathrm{d}y + \delta\\
=& e^\varepsilon \pr{}{M(x') \in S} + \delta.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
Lemma \ref{lem:CDPtoDP} is not tight. In particular, we have the following refinement of Lemma \ref{lem:CDPtoDP}, the proof of which is deferred to the appendix (Lemma \ref{lem:RenyiToED}).
\begin{lem} \label{lem:CDPtoDP2}
Let $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfy $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{}. Then $M$ satisfies $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-DP for all $\delta>0$ and $$\varepsilon = \xi+\rho+\sqrt{4\rho\cdot\log(\sqrt{\pi \cdot \rho} / \delta)}.$$
Alternatively $M$ satisfies $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-DP for all $\varepsilon\geq\xi+\rho$ and $$\delta = e^{-(\varepsilon-\xi-\rho)^2/4\rho} \cdot \min \left\{ \begin{array}{l} \sqrt{\pi \cdot \rho} \\ \frac{1}{1+(\varepsilon-\xi-\rho)/2\rho} \\ \frac{2}{1+\frac{\varepsilon-\xi-\rho}{2\rho} + \sqrt{\left(1+\frac{\varepsilon-\xi-\rho}{2\rho}\right)^2+\frac{4}{\pi \rho}}} \end{array} \right..$$
\end{lem}
Note that the last of three options in the minimum dominates the first two options. We have included the first two options as they are simpler.
Now we show a partial converse to Lemma \ref{lem:CDPtoDP}, which is proved in the appendix (Lemma \ref{lem:DPtoCDP-app}).
\begin{lem} \label{lem:DPtoCDP}
Let $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfy $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-DP for all $\delta>0$ and \begin{equation} \varepsilon = \hat \xi +\sqrt{\hat \rho\log(1/\delta)}\label{eqn:DP-first}\end{equation} for some constants $\hat \xi, \hat \rho \in [0,1]$. Then $M$ is $\left(\hat \xi-\frac{1}{4} \hat \rho+5\sqrt[4]{\hat \rho}, \frac{1}{4} \hat \rho\right)$-zCDP{}.
\end{lem}
Thus zCDP{} and DP are equivalent up to a (potentially substantial) loss in parameters and the quantification over all $\delta$.
\section{Zero- versus Mean-Concentrated Differential Privacy} \label{sec:CDP-DR}
We begin by stating the definition of mean-concentrated differential privacy:
\begin{defn}[Mean-Concentrated Differential Privacy (mCDP{}) \cite{DworkR16}]
A randomized mechanism $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfies $(\mu,\tau)$-mean-concentrated differential privacy if, for all $x,x' \in \mathcal{X}^n$ differing in one entry, and letting $Z = \privloss{M(x)}{M(x')}$, we have $$\ex{}{Z} \leq \mu$$ and $$ \ex{}{e^{\lambda\left(Z-\ex{}{Z}\right)}} \leq e^{\lambda^2 \cdot \tau^2 / 2} $$ for all $\lambda \in \mathbb{R}$.
\end{defn}
In contrast $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{} requires that, for all $\alpha \in (1,\infty)$, $\ex{}{e^{(\alpha-1)Z}} \leq e^{(\alpha-1)(\xi+\rho\alpha)}$, where $Z\sim\privloss{M(x)}{M(x')}$ is the privacy loss random variable.
We now show that these definitions are equivalent up to a (potentially significant) loss in parameters.
\begin{lem} \label{lem:CDPtoIIP}
If $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfies $(\mu,\tau)$-mCDP{}, then $M$ satisfies $(\mu-\tau^2/2,\tau^2/2)$-zCDP{}.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
For all $\alpha\in(1,\infty)$,
$$\ex{}{e^{(\alpha-1)Z}} = \ex{}{e^{(\alpha-1)(Z-\ex{}{Z})}} \cdot e^{(\alpha-1)\ex{}{Z}} \leq e^{(\alpha-1)^2 \tau^2 /2} \cdot e^{(\alpha-1)\mu} = e^{(\alpha-1)(\mu-\tau^2/2 + \tau^2/2 \cdot \alpha)}.$$
\end{proof}
\begin{lem} \label{lem:IIPtoCDP}
If $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfies $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{}, then $M$ satisfies $(\xi+\rho,O(\sqrt{\xi+2\rho}))$-mCDP{}.
\end{lem}
The proof of Lemma \ref{lem:IIPtoCDP} is deferred to the appendix.
Thus we can convert $(\mu,\tau)$-mCDP{} into $(\mu-\tau^2/2,\tau^2/2)$-zCDP{} and then back to $(\mu, O(\sqrt{\mu+\tau^2/2}))$-mCDP{}. This may result in a large loss in parameters, which is why, for example, pure DP can be characterised in terms of zCDP{}, but not in terms of mCDP{}.
We view zCDP{} as a relaxation of mCDP{}; mCDP{} requires the privacy loss to be ``tightly'' concentrated about its mean and that the mean is close to the origin. The triangle inequality then implies that the privacy loss is ``weakly'' concentrated about the origin. (The difference between ``tightly'' and ``weakly'' accounts for the use of the triangle inequality.)
On the other hand, zCDP{} direcly requires that the privacy loss is weakly concentrated about the origin. That is to say, zCDP{} gives a subgaussian bound on the privacy loss that is centered at zero, whereas mCDP{} gives a subgaussian bound that is centered at the mean and separately bounds the mean.
There may be some advantage to the stronger requirement of mCDP{}, either in terms of what kind of privacy guarantee it affords, or how it can be used as an analytic tool. However, it seems that for most applications, we only need what zCDP{} provides.
\section{Group Privacy} \label{sec:GroupPrivacy}
In this section we show that zCDP{} provides privacy protections to small groups of individuals.
\begin{defn}[zCDP{} for Groups]
We say that a mechanism $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ provides $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{} for groups of size $k$ if, for every $x,x' \in \mathcal{X}^n$ differing in at most $k$ entries, we have $$\forall \alpha \in (1,\infty) \qquad \dr{\alpha}{M(x)}{M(x')} \leq \xi + \rho \cdot \alpha.$$
\end{defn}
The usual definition of zCDP{} only applies to groups of size $1$. Here we show that it implies bounds for all group sizes. We begin with a technical lemma.
\begin{lem}[Triangle-like Inequality for R\'enyi Divergence]
Let $P$, $Q$, and $R$ be probability distributions. Then \begin{equation}\dr{\alpha}{P}{Q} \leq \frac{k\alpha}{k\alpha-1}\dr{ \frac{k\alpha-1}{k-1}}{P}{R} + \dr{k\alpha}{R}{Q}\label{eqn:DivTri}\end{equation} for all $k,\alpha \in (1,\infty)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $p=\frac{k\alpha-1}{\alpha(k-1)}$ and $q=\frac{k\alpha-1}{\alpha-1}$. Then $\frac{1}{p}+\frac{1}{q}=\frac{\alpha(k-1) + (\alpha-1)}{k\alpha-1}=1$.
By H\"older's inequality,
\begin{align*}
e^{(\alpha-1)\dr{\alpha}{P}{Q}}=& \int_\Omega P(x)^\alpha Q(x)^{1-\alpha} \mathrm{d}x\\
=& \int_\Omega P(x)^\alpha R(x)^{-\alpha} \cdot R(x)^{\alpha-1} Q(x)^{1-\alpha} \cdot R(x) \mathrm{d}x\\
=& \ex{x \sim R}{ \left(\frac{P(x)}{R(x)}\right)^\alpha \cdot \left(\frac{R(x)}{Q(x)}\right)^{\alpha-1}}\\
\leq& \ex{x \sim R}{ \left(\frac{P(x)}{R(x)}\right)^{p\alpha}}^{1/p} \cdot \ex{x \sim R}{\left(\frac{R(x)}{Q(x)}\right)^{q(\alpha-1)}}^{1/q}\\
=& e^{(p\alpha-1)\dr{p\alpha}{P}{R} /p} \cdot e^{q(\alpha-1)\dr{q(\alpha-1)+1}{R}{Q} /q}.
\end{align*}
Taking logarithms and rearranging gives $$\dr{\alpha}{P}{Q} \leq \frac{p\alpha-1}{p(\alpha-1)}\dr{p\alpha}{P}{R} + \dr{q(\alpha-1)+1}{R}{Q}.$$
Now $p\alpha=\frac{k\alpha-1}{k-1}$, $q(\alpha-1)+1=k\alpha$, and $$\frac{~~\frac{p\alpha-1}{p(\alpha-1)}~~}{~~\frac{k\alpha}{k\alpha-1}~~} = \frac{p\alpha-1}{p\alpha} \cdot \frac{k\alpha-1}{k(\alpha-1)} = \frac{\frac{k\alpha-1}{k-1}-1}{~\frac{k\alpha-1}{k-1}~} \cdot \frac{k\alpha-1}{k(\alpha-1)} = \frac{k\alpha-1 -k + 1}{k\alpha-1} \cdot \frac{k\alpha-1}{k(\alpha-1)} =1,$$ as required.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop} \label{prop:GroupPrivacy}
If $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfies $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{}, then $M$ gives $(\xi \cdot k \sum_{i=1}^k \frac{1}{i}, \rho \cdot k^2)$-zCDP{} for groups of size $k$.
\end{prop}
Note that $$\sum_{i=1}^k \frac{1}{i} = 1+\int_1^k \frac{1}{\lceil x \rceil} \mathrm{d}x \leq 1+\int_1^k \frac{1}{ x } \mathrm{d}x = 1 + \log k.$$
Thus $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{} implies $(\xi\cdot O(k \log k), \rho \cdot k^2)$-zCDP{} for groups of size $k$.
The Gaussian mechanism shows that $k^2\rho$ is the optimal dependence on $\rho$. However, $O(k \log k)\xi$ is not the optimal dependence on $\xi$: $(\xi,0)$-zCDP{} implies $(k\xi,0)$-zCDP{} for groups of size $k$.
\begin{proof}
We show this by induction on $k$. The statement is clearly true for groups of size $1$. We now assume the statement holds for groups of size $k-1$ and will verify it for groups of size $k$.
Let $x,x' \in \mathcal{X}^n$ differ in $k$ entries. Let $\hat x \in \mathcal{X}^n$ be such that $x$ and $\hat x$ differ in $k-1$ entries and $x'$ and $\hat x$ differ in one entry.
Then, by the induction hypothesis, $$\dr{\alpha}{M(x)}{M(\hat x)} \leq \xi \cdot (k-1) \sum_{i=1}^{k-1} \frac{1}{i} + \rho \cdot (k-1)^2 \cdot \alpha$$ and, by zCDP{}, $$\dr{\alpha}{M(\hat x)}{M(x')} \leq \xi + \rho \cdot \alpha$$ for all $\alpha\in(1,\infty)$.
By \eqref{eqn:DivTri}, for any $\alpha\in(1,\infty)$,
\begin{align*}
\dr{\alpha}{M(x)}{M(x')} \leq& \frac{k\alpha}{k\alpha-1}\dr{ \frac{k\alpha-1}{k-1}}{M(x)}{M(\hat x)} + \dr{k\alpha}{M(\hat x)}{M(x')}\\
\leq& \frac{k\alpha}{k\alpha-1}\left( \xi \cdot (k-1) \sum_{i=1}^{k-1} \frac{1}{i} + \rho \cdot (k-1)^2 \cdot \frac{k\alpha-1}{k-1} \right) + \xi + \rho \cdot k\alpha\\
=& \xi \cdot \left( 1 + \frac{k\alpha}{k\alpha-1} (k-1) \sum_{i=1}^{k-1} \frac{1}{i} \right) + \rho \cdot \left( \frac{k\alpha}{k\alpha-1} (k-1)^2 \frac{k\alpha-1}{k-1} + k\alpha \right)\\
=& \xi \cdot \left( 1 + \frac{k\alpha}{k\alpha-1} (k-1) \sum_{i=1}^{k-1} \frac{1}{i} \right) + \rho \cdot k^2 \cdot \alpha\\
\leq& \xi \cdot \left( 1 + \frac{k}{k-1} (k-1) \sum_{i=1}^{k-1} \frac{1}{i} \right) + \rho \cdot k^2 \cdot \alpha\\
=& \xi \cdot k \sum_{i=1}^{k} \frac{1}{i} + \rho \cdot k^2 \cdot \alpha,
\end{align*}
where the last inequality follows from the fact that $\frac{k\alpha}{k\alpha-1}$ is a decreasing function of $\alpha$ for $\alpha>1$.
\end{proof}
\section{Lower Bounds} \label{sec:LowerBounds}
In this section we develop tools to prove lower bounds for zCDP{}. We will use group privacy to bound the mutual information between the input and the output of a mechanism satisfying zCDP{}. Thus, if we are able to construct a distribution on inputs such that any accurate mechanism must reveal a high amount of information about its input, we obtain a lower bound showing that no accurate mechanism satisfying zCDP{} can be accurate for this data distribution.
We begin with the simplest form of our mutual information bound, which is an analogue of the bound of \cite{McGregorMPRTV10} for pure differential privacy:
\begin{prop} \label{prop:MutualInformation}
Let $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfy $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{}. Let $X$ be a random variable in $\mathcal{X}^n$. Then $$I( X ; M(X) ) \leq \xi \cdot n (1+\log n) + \rho \cdot n^2,$$ where $I$ denotes mutual information (measured in nats, rather than bits).
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
By Proposition \ref{prop:GroupPrivacy}, $M$ provides $(\xi \cdot n \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{i}, \rho \cdot n^2)$-zCDP{} for groups of size $n$. Thus $$\dr{1}{M(x)}{M(x')} \leq \xi \cdot n \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{i} + \rho \cdot n^2 \leq \xi \cdot n (1+\log n) + \rho \cdot n^2$$ for all $x,x' \in \mathcal{X}^n$.
Since KL-divergence is convex,
\begin{align*}
I( X ; M(X) ) =& \ex{x \leftarrow X}{\dr{1}{M(x)}{M(X)}}\\
\leq& \ex{x \leftarrow X}{\ex{x' \leftarrow X}{\dr{1}{M(x)}{M(x')}}}\\
\leq& \ex{x \leftarrow X}{\ex{x' \leftarrow X}{\xi \cdot n (1+\log n) + \rho \cdot n^2}}\\
=& \xi \cdot n (1+\log n) + \rho \cdot n^2.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
The reason this lower bound works is the strong group privacy guarantee --- even for groups of size $n$, we obtain nontrivial privacy guarantees.
While this is good for privacy it is bad for usefulness, as it implies that even information that is ``global'' (rather than specific to a individual or a small group) is protected. These lower bounds reinforce the connection between group privacy and lower bounds \cite{HardtT10,De12,SteinkeU15b}.
In contrast, $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-DP is not susceptible to such a lower bound because it gives a vacuous privacy guarantee for groups of size $k=O(\log(1/\delta)/\varepsilon)$. This helps explain the power of the propose-test-release paradigm.
Furthermore, we obtain even stronger mutual information bounds when the entries of the distribution are independent:
\begin{lem} \label{lem:MutualInformation}
Let $M : \mathcal{X}^{m} \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfy $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{}. Let $X$ be a random variable in $\mathcal{X}^m$ with independent entries. Then $$I \left( X ; M(X) \right) \leq (\xi+\rho) \cdot m ,$$ where $I$ denotes mutual information (measured in nats, rather than bits).
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
First, by the chain rule for mutual information, $$I(X; M(X)) = \sum_{i \in [m]} I(X_i ; M(X) | X_{1 \cdots i-1}),$$
where
\begin{align*}
I(X_i ; M(X) | X_{1 \cdots i-1}) =& \ex{x \leftarrow X_{1 \cdots i-1}}{I(X_i | X_{1 \cdots i-1} = x; M(X) | X_{1 \cdots i-1} = x)}\\
=& \ex{x \leftarrow X_{1 \cdots i-1}}{I(X_i; M(x,X_{i \cdots m}))},
\intertext{by independence of the $X_i$s.}
\intertext{We can define mutual information in terms of KL-divergence:}
I(X_i; M(x,X_{i \cdots m}))
=& \ex{y \leftarrow X_i}{\dr{1}{M(x,X_{i \cdots m}) | X_i=y}{M(x,X_{i \cdots m})}} \\
=& \ex{y \leftarrow X_i}{\dr{1}{M(x,y,X_{i+1 \cdots m})}{M(x,X_{i \cdots m})}}.
\end{align*}
By zCDP{}, we know that for all $x \in \mathcal{X}^{i-1}$, $y,y' \in \mathcal{X}$, and $z \in \mathcal{X}^{m-i}$, we have $$\dr{1}{M(x,y,z)}{M(x,y',z)} \leq \xi + \rho.$$
Thus, by the convexity of KL-divergence, $$\dr{1}{M(x,y,X_{i+1 \cdots m})}{M(x,X_{i \cdots m})} \leq \xi+\rho$$ for all $x$ and $y$. The result follows.
\end{proof}
More generally, we can combine dependent and independent entries as follows.
\begin{thm} \label{thm:MixLB}
Let $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfy $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{}. Take $n=m \cdot \ell$. Let $X^1, \cdots, X^m$ be independent random variables on $\mathcal{X}^\ell$. Denote $X=(X^1, \cdots, X^{m}) \in \mathcal{X}^n$. Then $$I\left(X;M(X)\right) \leq m \cdot \left( \xi \cdot \ell (1+\log \ell) + \rho \cdot \ell^2 \right),$$ where $I$ denotes the mutual information (measured in nats, rather than bits).
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
By Proposition \ref{prop:GroupPrivacy}, $M$ provides $(\xi \cdot \ell \sum_{i=1}^\ell \frac{1}{i}, \rho \cdot \ell^2)$-zCDP{} for groups of size $\ell$.
Thus \begin{equation}\dr{1}{M(x_1, \cdots, x_i, \cdots, x_m)}{M(x_1, \cdots, x_i', \cdots, x_m)} \leq \xi \cdot \ell \sum_{i=1}^\ell \frac{1}{i} + \rho \cdot \ell^2 \leq \xi \cdot \ell (1+\log \ell) + \rho \cdot \ell^2 \label{eqn:KLgroup}\end{equation} for all $x_1, \cdots, x_m, x_i' \in \mathcal{X}^\ell$.
By the chain rule for mutual information, $$I(X; M(X)) = \sum_{i \in [m]} I(X_i ; M(X) | X_{1 \cdots i-1}),$$
where
\begin{align*}
I(X_i ; M(X) | X_{1 \cdots i-1}) =& \ex{x \leftarrow X_{1 \cdots i-1}}{I(X_i | X_{1 \cdots i-1} = x; M(X) | X_{1 \cdots i-1} = x)}\\
=& \ex{x \leftarrow X_{1 \cdots i-1}}{I(X_i; M(x,X_{i \cdots m}))},
\intertext{by independence of the $X_i$s.}
\intertext{We can define mutual information in terms of KL-divergence:}
I(X_i; M(x,X_{i \cdots m}))
=& \ex{y \leftarrow X_i}{\dr{1}{M(x,X_{i \cdots m}) | X_i=y}{M(x,X_{i \cdots m})}} \\
=& \ex{y \leftarrow X_i}{\dr{1}{M(x,y,X_{i+1 \cdots m})}{M(x,X_{i \cdots m})}}.
\end{align*}
By \eqref{eqn:KLgroup} and the convexity of KL-divergence, $$\dr{1}{M(x,y,X_{i+1 \cdots m})}{M(x,X_{i \cdots m})} \leq \xi \cdot \ell (1+\log \ell) + \rho \cdot \ell^2$$ for all $x$ and $y$. The result follows.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Example Applications of the Lower Bound}
We informally discuss a few applications of our information-based lower bounds to some simple and well-studied problems in differential privacy.
\paragraph{One-Way Marginals}
Consider $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ where $\mathcal{X}=\{0,1\}^d$ and $\mathcal{Y}=[0,1]^d$. The goal of $M$ is to estimate the attribute means, or one-way marginals, of its input database $x$: $$M(x) \approx \overline{x} = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i \in [n]} x_i.$$
It is known that this is possible subject to $\varepsilon$-DP if and only if $n=\Theta(d/\varepsilon)$ \cite{HardtT10,SteinkeU15b}. This is possible subject to $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-DP if and only if $n=\tilde{\Theta}(\sqrt{d\log(1/\delta)}/\varepsilon)$, assuming $\delta \ll 1/n$ \cite{BunUV14,SteinkeU15b}.
We now analyze what can be accomplished with zCDP{}. Adding independent noise drawn from $\mathcal{N}(0,d/2n^2\rho)$ to each of the $d$ coordinates of $\overline{x}$ satisfies $\rho$-zCDP{}. This gives accurate answers as long as $n \gg \sqrt{d/\rho}$.
For a lower bound, consider sampling $X_1 \in \{0,1\}^d$ uniformly at random. Set $X_i=X_1$ for all $i \in [n]$. By Proposition \ref{prop:MutualInformation}, $$I(X ; M(X) ) \leq n^2 \rho$$ for any $\rho$-zCDP{} $M : (\{0,1\}^d)^n \to [0,1]^d$. However, if $M$ is accurate, we can recover (most of) $X_1$ from $M(X)$, whence $I(X ; M(X) ) \geq \Omega(d)$.
This yields a lower bound of $n \geq \Omega(\sqrt{d/\rho})$, which is tight up to constant factors.
\paragraph{Histograms (a.k.a.~Point Queries)}
Consider $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$, where $\mathcal{X}=[T]$ and $\mathcal{Y}=\mathbb{R}^T$. The goal of $M$ is to estimate the histogram of its input: $$ M(x)_t \approx h_t(x) = |\{i \in [n] : x_i = t\}|$$
For $\varepsilon$-DP it is possible to do this if and only if $n = \Theta(\log(T)/\varepsilon))$; the optimal algorithm is to independently sample $$M(x)_t \sim h_t(x) + \mathsf{Laplace}(2/\varepsilon).$$ However, for $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-DP, it is possible to attain sample complexity $n = O(\log(1/\delta)/\varepsilon)$ \cite[Theorem 3.13]{BeimelNS13, BunNS16}.
Interestingly, for zCDP{} we can show that $n=\Theta(\sqrt{\log(T)/\rho})$ is sufficient and necessary:
Sampling $$M(x)_t \sim h_t(x) + \mathcal{N}(0,1/\rho)$$ independently for $t \in [T]$ satisfies $\rho$-zCDP{}. Moreover, $$\pr{}{\max_{t \in [T]} \left| M(x)_t - h_t(x) \right| \geq \lambda} \leq T \cdot \pr{}{|\mathcal{N}(0,1/\rho)| > \lambda} \leq T \cdot e^{-\lambda^2\rho/2}.$$ In particular $\pr{}{\max_{t \in [T]} \left| M(x)_t - h_t(x) \right| \geq \sqrt{\log(T/\beta)/\rho}} \leq \beta$ for all $\beta>0$. Thus this algorithm is accurate if $n \gg \sqrt{\log(T)/\rho}$.
On the other hand, if we sample $X_1 \in [T]$ uniformly at random and set $X_i=X_1$ for all $i \in [n]$, then $I(X;M(X)) \geq \Omega(\log T)$ for any accurate $M$, as we can recover $X_1$ from $M(X)$ if $M$ is accurate. Proposition \ref{prop:MutualInformation} thus implies that $n \geq \Omega(\sqrt{\log(T)/\rho})$ is necessary to obtain accuracy.
This gives a strong separation between approximate DP and zCDP{}.
\paragraph{Randomized Response and the Exponential Mechanism}
Consider $M : \{\pm 1\}^n \to \{\pm 1\}^n$ where the goal is to maximize $\langle x , M(x) \rangle$ subject to $\rho$-zCDP{}.
One solution is randomized response \cite{Warner65}: Each output bit $i$ of $M$ is chosen independently with $$\pr{}{M(x)_i=x_i} = \frac{e^\varepsilon}{e^\varepsilon+1}.$$ This satisfies $\varepsilon$-DP and, hence, $\frac12 \varepsilon^2$-zCDP{}. And $\ex{}{\langle x, M(x) \rangle} = n (e^\varepsilon-1)/(e^\varepsilon+1) = \Theta(n \varepsilon)$.
Alternatively, we can independently choose the output bits $i$ according to $$M(x)_i = \mathrm{sign}\left( \mathcal{N}(x_i, \sqrt{2}/\rho) \right),$$ which satisfies $\rho$-zCDP{}.
Turning our attention to lower bounds: Let $X \in \{\pm 1\}^n$ be uniformly random. By Lemma \ref{lem:MutualInformation}, since the bits of $X$ are independent, we have $I(X; M(X)) \leq \rho \cdot n$ for any $\rho$-zCDP{} $M$. However, if $M$ is accurate, we can recover part of $X$ from $M(X)$ \cite{BunSU16}, whence $I(X;M(X)) \geq \Omega(n)$.
Randomized response is a special case of the exponential mechanism \cite{McSherryT07,BlumLR08}. Consequently this can be interpreted as a lower bound for search problems.
\paragraph{Lower Bounds with Accuracy}
The above examples can be easily discussed in terms of a more formal and quantitative definition of accuracy. In particular, we consider the histogram example again:
\begin{prop}
If $M : [T]^n \to \mathbb{R}^T$ satisfies $\rho$-zCDP{} and $$\forall x \in [T]^n \qquad \ex{M}{\max_{t \in [T]} \big| M(x)_t - h_t(x) \big|} \leq \alpha n,$$ then $n \geq \Omega(\sqrt{\log(\alpha^2 T)/\rho \alpha^2})$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $m=1/10\alpha$ and $\ell=n/m$. For simplicity, assume that both $m$ and $n$ are integral.
Let $X_1, X_2, \cdots, X_m \in [T]^\ell$ be independent, where each $X_i$ is $\ell$ copies of a uniformly random element of $[T]$. By Theorem \ref{thm:MixLB}, \begin{equation}I(X;M(X)) \leq \rho \cdot m \cdot \ell^2 = 10 \rho \alpha n^2,\label{eqn:Iupper}\end{equation} where $X = (X_1, \cdots, X_m) \in \mathcal{X}^n$.
However, \begin{align*} I(X;M(X)) \geq& I(f(X);g(M(X))) \\=& H(f(X))-H(f(X)|g(M(X))) \\=& H(X) - H(X|f(X))-H(f(X)|g(M(X)))\end{align*} for any functions $f$ and $g$, where $H$ is the entropy (in nats). In particular, we let $$f(x)= \{t \in T : \exists i \in [n] ~~ x_i = t\} \qquad \text{and} \qquad g(y) = \{t \in T : y_t \geq 5 \alpha n\}.$$
Clearly $H(X)=m \log T$. Furthermore, $H(X|f(X)) \leq m \log m$, since $X$ can be specified by naming $m$ elements of $f(X)$, which is a set of at most $m$ elements.
If \begin{equation}\max_{t \in [T]} \big| M(X)_t - h_t(X) \big| < 5\alpha, \label{eqn:AccEvent}\end{equation} then $g(M(X))$ contains exactly all the values in $X$ --- i.e. $f(X)=g(M(X))$. By Markov's inequality, \eqref{eqn:AccEvent} holds with probability at least $4/5$.
Now we can upper bound $H(f(X)|g(M(X)))$ by giving a scheme for specifying $f(X)$ given $g(M(X))$. If \eqref{eqn:AccEvent} holds, we simply need one bit to say so. If \eqref{eqn:AccEvent} does not hold, we need one bit to say this and $m \log_2 T$ bits to describe $f(X)$. This gives $$H(f(X)|g(M(X))) \leq \log 2 + \pr{}{f(X) \ne g(M(X))} \cdot m \log T.$$
Combining these inequalities gives $$I(X;M(X)) \geq m \log T - m \log m - \log 2 - \frac{1}{5} m \log T \geq \frac{4}{5} m \log (T m^{-5/4}) - 1 \geq \Omega(\log(\alpha^{1.25} T)/\alpha).$$
Combining this with \eqref{eqn:Iupper} completes the proof.
\end{proof}
We remark that our lower bounds for zCDP{} can be converted to lower bounds for mCDP{} using Lemma \ref{lem:CDPtoIIP}.
\section{Obtaining Pure DP Mechanisms from zCDP{}} \label{sec:CDPvsPDP}
We now establish limits on what more can be achieved with zCDP{} over pure differential privacy. In particular, we will prove that any mechanism satisfying zCDP{} can be converted into a mechanism satisfying pure DP with at most a quadratic blowup in sample complexity. Formally, we show the following theorem.
\begin{thm} \label{thm:CDPtoPDP}
Fix $n \in \mathbb{N}$, $n' \in \mathbb{N}$, $k \in \mathbb{N}$ $\alpha>0$, and $\varepsilon>0$. Let $q : \mathcal{X} \to \mathbb{R}^k$ and let $\|\cdot\|$ be a norm on $\mathbb{R}^k$. Assume $\max_{x \in \mathcal{X}} \|q(x)\| \leq 1$.
Suppose there exists a $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{} mechanism $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathbb{R}^k$ such that for all $x \in \mathcal{X}^n$, $$\ex{M}{\|M(x)-q(x)\|} \leq {\alpha}.$$
Assume $\xi \leq \alpha^2$, $\rho \leq \alpha^2$, and $$n' \geq \frac{4}{\varepsilon\alpha} \left( \rho \cdot n^2 + \xi \cdot n \cdot (1 + \log n) + 1 \right).$$
Then there exists a $(\varepsilon,0)$-differentially private $M' : \mathcal{X}^{n'} \to \mathbb{R}^k$ satisfying $$\ex{M'}{\|M'(x)-q(x)\|} \leq 10\alpha$$ and $$\pr{M'}{\|M'(x)-q(x)\| > 10\alpha + \frac{4}{\varepsilon n'} \log\left(\frac{1}{\beta}\right)} \leq \beta$$ for all $x \in \mathcal{X}^{n'}$ and $\beta>0$.
\end{thm}
Before discussing the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:CDPtoPDP}, we make some remarks about its statement:
\begin{itemize}
\item Unfortunately, the theorem only works for families of statistical queries $q : \mathcal{X} \to \mathbb{R}^k$. However, it works equally well for $\|\cdot\|_\infty$ and $\|\cdot\|_1$ error bounds.
\item If $\xi=0$, we have $n' = O(n^2 \rho / \varepsilon \alpha)$. So, if $\rho$, $\varepsilon$, and $\alpha$ are all constants, we have $n'=O(n^2)$. This justifies our informal statement that we can convert any mechanism satisfying zCDP{} into one satisfying pure DP with a quadratic blowup in sample complexity.
\item Suppose $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathbb{R}^k$ is the Gaussian mechanism scaled to satisfy $\rho$-zCDP{} and $\|\cdot\| = \|\cdot\|_1/{k}$. Then $$\alpha = \ex{}{\|M(x)-q(x)\|} = \Theta\left(\sqrt{\frac{k}{\rho n^2}}\right).$$ In particular, $n=\Theta(\sqrt{k/\rho\alpha^2})$.
The theorem then gives us a $\varepsilon$-DP $M' : \mathcal{X}^{n'} \to \mathbb{R}^k$ with $\ex{}{\|M'(x)-q(x)\|} \leq O(\alpha) $ for $$n' = \Theta\left(\frac{n^2 \rho }{ \varepsilon \alpha}\right) = \Theta\left(\frac{k}{\alpha^3 \varepsilon}\right).$$
However, the Laplace mechanism achieves $\varepsilon$-DP and $\ex{}{\|M'(x)-q(x)\|} \leq \alpha $ with $n=\Theta(k/\alpha\varepsilon)$.
This example illustrates that the theorem is not tight in terms of $\alpha$; it loses a $1/\alpha^2$ factor here. However, the other parameters are tight.
\item The requirement that $\xi, \rho \leq \alpha^2$ is only used to show that \begin{equation}\max_{x \in \mathcal{X}^{n'}} \min_{\hat x \in \mathcal{X}^n} \|q(x)-q(\hat x)\| \leq 2\alpha \label{eqn:MaxMinSubSamp}\end{equation} using Lemma \ref{lem:SubSampAcc}. However, in many situations \eqref{eqn:MaxMinSubSamp} holds even when $\xi,\rho \gg \alpha^2$.
For example, if $n \geq O(\log(k)/\alpha^2)$ or even $n \geq O(VC(q)/\alpha^2)$ then \eqref{eqn:MaxMinSubSamp} is automatically satisfied.
The technical condition \eqref{eqn:MaxMinSubSamp} is needed to relate the part of the proof with inputs of size $n$ to the part with inputs of size $n'$.
Thus we can restate Theorem \ref{thm:CDPtoPDP} with the condition $\xi, \rho \leq \alpha^2$ replaced by \eqref{eqn:MaxMinSubSamp}. This would be more general, but also more mysterious.
\end{itemize}
Alas, the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:CDPtoPDP} is not constructive. Rather than directly constructing a mechanism satisfying pure DP from any mechanism satisfying zCDP{}, we show the contrapositive statement: any lower bound for pure DP can be converted into a lower bound for zCDP{}. Pure DP is characterized by so-called packing lower bounds and the exponential mechanism.
We begin by giving a technical lemma showing that for any output space and any desired accuracy we have a ``packing'' and a ``net:''
\begin{lem} \label{lem:PackNet}
Let $(\mathcal{Y},d)$ be a metric space. Fix $\alpha>0$. Then there exists a countable $T \subset \mathcal{Y}$ such that both of the following hold.
\begin{itemize}
\item (Net:) Either $T$ is infinite or for all $y' \in \mathcal{Y}$ there exists $y \in T$ with $d(y,y') \leq \alpha$.
\item (Packing:) For all $y,y' \in T$, if $y \ne y'$, then $d(y,y')>\alpha$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Consider the following procedure for producing $T$.
\begin{itemize}
\item Initialize $A\leftarrow\mathcal{Y}$ and $T\leftarrow\emptyset$.
\item Repeat:
\begin{itemize}
\item If $A=\emptyset$, terminate.
\item Pick some $y \in A$.
\item Update $T \leftarrow T \cup \{y\}$.
\item Update $A\leftarrow\{y' \in A : d(y',y) > \alpha\}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
This procedure either terminates giving a finite $T$ or runs forever enumerating a countably infinite $T$.
(Net:) If $T$ is infinite, we immediately can dispense the first condition, so suppose the procedure terminates and $T$ is finite. Fix $y' \in \mathcal{Y}$. Since the procedure terminates, $A=\emptyset$ at the end, which means $y'$ was removed from $A$ at some point. This means some $y \in T$ was added such that $d(y',y) \leq \alpha$, as required.
(Packing:) Fix $y \ne y' \in T$. We assume, without loss of generality, that $y$ was added to $T$ before $y'$. This means $y'$ was not removed from $A$ when $y$ was added to $T$. In particular, this means $d(y',y)>\alpha$.
\end{proof}
It is well-known that a net yields a pure DP algorithm:
\begin{lem}[Exponential Mechanism \cite{McSherryT07,BlumLR08}] \label{lem:ExpMech}
Let $\ell : \mathcal{X}^n \times T \to \mathbb{R}$ satisfy $|\ell(x,y) - \ell(x',y)| \leq \Delta$ for all
$x,x' \in \mathcal{X}^n$ differing in one entry and all $y \in T$. Then, for all $\varepsilon>0$, there exists an $\varepsilon$-differentially private $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to T$ such that $$\pr{M}{\ell(x,M(x)) \leq \min_{y \in T} \ell(x,y) + \frac{2\Delta}{\varepsilon}\log\left(\frac{|T|}{\beta}\right)} \geq 1-\beta $$ and $$\ex{M}{\ell(x,M(x))} \leq \min_{y \in T} \ell(x,y) + \frac{2\Delta}{\varepsilon} \log |T|$$ for all $x \in \mathcal{X}^n$ and $\beta>0$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} The mechanism is defined by
$$\pr{M}{M(x)=y} = \frac{e^{-\ell(x,y) \varepsilon/2\Delta}}{\sum_{y' \in T} e^{-\ell(x,y) \varepsilon/2\Delta}}. $$
The analysis can be found in \cite[Theorems 3.10 and 3.11]{DworkR14} and \cite[Lemma 7.1]{BassilyNSSSU16}.
\end{proof}
We also show that a packing yields a lower bound for zCDP{}:
\begin{lem} \label{lem:PackLB}
Let $(\mathcal{Y},d)$ be a metric space and $q : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ a function. Let $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ be a $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{} mechanism satisfying $$\pr{M}{d(M(x),q(x)) > \alpha/2} \leq \beta$$ for all $x \in \mathcal{X}^n$.
Let $T \subset \mathcal{Y}$ be such that $d(y,y')>\alpha$, for all $y, y' \in T$ with $y \ne y'$. Assume that for all $y \in T$ there exists $x \in \mathcal{X}^n$ with $q(x)=y$.
Then $$(1-\beta)\log|T| - \log 2 \leq \xi \cdot n (1+\log n) + \rho \cdot n^2.$$
\end{lem}
In particular, if $\xi=0$, we have $$n \geq \sqrt{\frac{(1-\beta)\log|T|-\log 2}{\rho}}= \Omega(\sqrt{\log|T|/\rho}).$$
\begin{proof}
Let $q^{-1} : T \to \mathcal{X}^n$ be a function such that $q(q^{-1}(y))=y$ for all $y \in T$. Define $f : \mathcal{Y} \to T$ by $$f(y) = \underset{y' \in T}{\mathrm{argmin}}~ d(y,y')$$ (breaking ties arbitrarily). Then $$\pr{M}{f(M(q^{-1}(y)))=y} \geq 1-\beta$$ for all $y\in T$, as $\pr{M}{d(M(q^{-1}(y)),y)>\alpha/2} \leq \beta$ and $d(y',y)>\alpha$ for all $y' \in T \setminus \{y\}$.
Let $Y$ be a uniformly random element of $T$ and let $X=q^{-1}(Y)$. By the data processing inequality and Proposition \ref{prop:MutualInformation}, $$I(Y; f(M(q^{-1}(Y))))=I(q(X);f(M(X))) \leq I(X;M(X)) \leq \xi \cdot n (1+\log n) + \rho \cdot n^2.$$
However, $\pr{}{f(M(q^{-1}(Y)))=Y}\geq 1-\beta$. Denote $Z=f(M(q^{-1}(Y)))$ and let $E$ be the indicator of the event that $Z=Y$. We have
$$I(Y;Z) = H(Y) - H(Y|Z)= H(Y) - H(Y,E|Z)= H(Y) - H(Y|E,Z) - H(E|Z).$$
Clearly $H(Y)=\log|T|$ and $H(E|Z) \leq H(E) \leq \log 2$. Moreover,
\begin{align*}
H(Y|E,Z) =& \ex{e \leftarrow E}{H(Y|Z,E=e)}\\
=& \pr{}{Y=Z} \cdot 0 + \pr{}{Y \ne Z} \cdot H(Y|Z,Y \ne Z)\\
\leq& \beta \cdot H(Y).
\end{align*}
Thus $$I(Y;Z) \geq \log|T| - \log 2 - \beta \log|T|.$$
The result now follows by combining inequalities.
\end{proof}
We need one final technical lemma:
\begin{lem} \label{lem:SubSampAcc}
Let $q : \mathcal{X} \to \mathbb{R}^k$ satisfy $\max_{x \in \mathcal{X}} \|q(x)\| \leq 1$, where $\|\cdot\|$ is some norm. Let $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathbb{R}^k$ satisfy $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{} and $$\ex{M}{\|M(x)-q(x)\|} \leq \alpha $$ for all $x \in \mathcal{X}^n$.
For all $n'$, $$\max_{x \in \mathcal{X}^{n'}} \min_{\hat x \in \mathcal{X}^n} \|q(\hat x) - q(x)\| \leq 2\alpha + \sqrt{2(\xi+\rho)}.$$
\end{lem}
The proof of Lemma \ref{lem:SubSampAcc} is deferred to the appendix.
Now we can combine Lemmas \ref{lem:PackNet}, \ref{lem:ExpMech}, \ref{lem:PackLB}, and \ref{lem:SubSampAcc} to prove Theorem \ref{thm:CDPtoPDP}:
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:CDPtoPDP}]
Apply Lemma \ref{lem:PackNet} with $\mathcal{Y} = \left\{q(x) = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i \in [n]} q(x_i) : x \in \mathcal{X}^n \right\} \subset \mathbb{R}^k$ and $d$ being the metric induced by the norm to obtain $T \subset \mathcal{Y}$:
\begin{itemize}
\item (Net:) Either $T$ is infinite or for all $y' \in \{q(x) : x \in \mathcal{X}^n \} \subset \mathbb{R}^k$ there exists $y \in T$ with $\|y-y'\| \leq 4\alpha$.
\item (Packing:) For all $y,y' \in T$, if $y \ne y'$, then $\|y-y'\|>4\alpha$.
\end{itemize}
By Markov's inequality $$\pr{M}{\|M(x)-q(x)\| > 2\alpha} \leq \frac12.$$
Thus, by Lemma \ref{lem:PackLB}, $$\frac12 \log|T| - \log 2 \leq \xi \cdot n (1+\log n) + \rho \cdot n^2.$$
This gives an upper bound on $|T|$. In particular, $T$ must be finite.
Let $M' : \mathcal{X}^{n'} \to \mathbb{R}^k$ be the exponential mechanism (Lemma \ref{lem:ExpMech}) instantiated with $T$ and $\ell(x,y) = \|y-q(x)\|$. We have $$\pr{M}{\|M(x)-q(x)\| \leq \min_{y \in T} \| y-q(x)\| + \frac{4}{\varepsilon n'}\log\left(\frac{|T|}{\beta}\right)} \geq 1-\beta $$ and $$\ex{M}{\|M(x)-q(x)\|} \leq \min_{y \in T} \| y-q(x)\| + \frac{4}{\varepsilon n'} \log |T|$$ for all $x \in \mathcal{X}^{n'}$.
For $x \in \mathcal{X}^{n'}$, by the Net property and Lemma \ref{lem:SubSampAcc},
\begin{align*}
\min_{y \in T} \| y-q(x)\| \leq& \min_{y \in T} \min_{y' \in \mathcal{Y}} \| y - y' \| + \|y' - q(x)\|\\
=& \min_{y' \in \mathcal{Y}} \left(\left(\min_{y \in T}\| y - y' \|\right) + \|y' - q(x)\|\right)\\
\leq& \min_{y' \in \mathcal{Y}} \left(4\alpha + \|y' - q(x)\|\right)\\
=& \min_{\hat x \in \mathcal{X}^n} \left(4\alpha + \|q(\hat x) - q(x)\|\right)\\
\leq& 4\alpha + 2\alpha + \sqrt{2(\xi+\rho)}.
\end{align*}
Furthermore,
$$\frac{4}{\varepsilon n'} \log |T| \leq \frac{8}{\varepsilon n'} \left( \xi \cdot n (1+\log n) + \rho \cdot n^2 + \log 2\right)\leq 2 \alpha.$$
The theorem now follows by combining inequalities.
\end{proof}
\section{Approximate zCDP{}} \label{sec:ApproxCDP}
In the spirit of approximate DP, we propose a relaxation of zCDP{}:
\begin{defn}[Approximate zCDP{}] \label{defn:ApproxRDP}
A randomised mechanism $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ is $\delta$-approximately $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{} if, for all $x,x' \in \mathcal{X}^n$ differing on a single entry, there exist events $E=E(M(x))$ and $E'=E'(M(x'))$ such that, for all $\alpha \in (1,\infty)$, $$ \dr{\alpha}{M(x)|_E}{M(x')|_{E'}} \leq \xi + \rho \cdot \alpha ~~~~~ \text{and} ~~~~~ \dr{\alpha}{M(x')|_{E'}}{M(x)|_{E}} \leq \xi + \rho \cdot \alpha$$ and $\pr{M(x)}{E} \geq 1- \delta$ and $\pr{M(x')}{E'} \geq 1-\delta$.
\end{defn}
Clearly $0$-approximate zCDP{} is simply zCDP{}. Hence we have a generalization of zCDP{}. As we will show later in this section, $\delta$-approximate $(\varepsilon,0)$-zCDP{} is equivalent to $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-DP. Thus we have also generalized approximate DP. Hence, this definition unifies both relaxations of pure DP.
Approximate zCDP{} is a three-parameter definition which allows us to capture many different aspects of differential privacy. However, three parameters is quite overwhelming. We believe that use of the one-parameter $\rho$-zCDP{} (or the two-parameter $\delta$-approximate $\rho$-zCDP{} if necessary) is sufficient for most purposes.
It is easy to verify that the definition of approximate zCDP{} satisfies the following basic properties.
\begin{lem}[Composition \& Postprocessing] \label{lem:CompPost-ApproxGDP}
Let $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ and $M' : \mathcal{X}^n \times \mathcal{Y} \to \mathcal{Z}$ be randomized algorithms. Suppose $M$ satisfies $\delta$-approximate $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{} and, for all $y \in \mathcal{Y}$, $M'(\cdot,y) : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Z}$ satisfies $\delta'$-approximate $(\xi',\rho')$-zCDP{}. Define $M'' : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Z}$ by $M''(x)=M'(x,M(x))$. Then $M''$ satisfies $(\delta+\delta'-\delta \cdot \delta')$-approximate $(\xi+\xi',\rho+\rho')$-zCDP{}.
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}[Tradeoff]
Suppose $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfies $\delta$-approximate $(\xi,0)$-zCDP{}. Then $M$ satisfies $\delta$-approximate $\xi$-zCDP{} and $\delta$-approximate $\frac12 \xi^2$-zCDP{}.
\end{lem}
However, the strong group privacy guarantees of Section \ref{sec:GroupPrivacy} no longer apply to approximate zCDP{} and, hence, the strong lower bounds of Section \ref{sec:LowerBounds} also no longer hold. Circumventing these lower bounds is part of the motivation for considering approximate zCDP{}.
However, approximate zCDP{} is not necessarily the only way to relax zCDP{} that circumvents our lower bounds:
Proving the group privacy bound requires ``inflating'' the parameter $\alpha$: Suppose $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfies $\rho$-zCDP{} and $x,x' \in \mathcal{X}^n$ differ on $k$ entries. To prove $\dr{\alpha}{M(x)}{M(x')} \leq k^2\rho \alpha$, the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:GroupPrivacy} requires a bound on $\dr{k\alpha}{M(x'')}{M(x''')}$ for $x'',x''' \in \mathcal{X}^n$ differing on a single entry.
Consider relaxing the definition of zCDP{} to only require the bound \eqref{eqn:IIP-Renyi} or \eqref{eqn:GDP-MGF} to hold when $\alpha \leq m$:
\begin{defn}[Bounded zCDP{}] \label{def:BoundedCDP}
We say that $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfies $m$-bounded $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{} if, for all $x,x' \in \mathcal{X}^n$ differing in only one entry and all $\alpha \in (1,m)$, $\dr{\alpha}{M(x)}{M(x')} \leq \xi + \rho \cdot \alpha$.
\end{defn}
This relaxed definition may also be able to circumvent the group privacy-based lower bounds, as our group privacy proof would no longer work for groups of size larger than $m$. We do not know what group privacy guarantees Definition \ref{def:BoundedCDP} provides for groups of size $k \gg m$. This relaxed definition may be worth exploring, but is beyond the scope of our work.
\subsection{Approximate DP Implies Approximate zCDP{}}
We can convert approximate DP to approximate zCDP{} using the following lemma.
First we define a approximate DP version of the randomized response mechanism:
\begin{defn}
For $\varepsilon \geq 0$ and $\delta \in [0,1]$, define $\tilde{M}_{\varepsilon,\delta}: \{0,1\} \to \{0,1\} \times \{\bot,\top\}$ by
\begin{align*}
\pr{}{\tilde{M}_{\varepsilon,\delta}(b)=(b,\top)} =& \delta, &
\pr{}{\tilde{M}_{\varepsilon,\delta}(b)=(1-b,\top)} =& 0,\\
\pr{}{\tilde{M}_{\varepsilon,\delta}(b)=(b,\bot)} =& (1-\delta) \frac{e^\varepsilon}{1+e^\varepsilon}, &
\pr{}{\tilde{M}_{\varepsilon,\delta}(b)=(1-b,\bot)} =& (1-\delta) \frac{1}{1+e^\varepsilon}
\end{align*}
for both $b \in \{0,1\}$.
\end{defn}
The above mechanism is ``complete'' for approximate DP:
\begin{lem}[{\cite{KairouzOV15}, \cite[Lemma 3.2]{MurtaghV16}}] \label{lem:KOV-MV}
For every $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-DP $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ and all $x_0,x_1 \in \mathcal{X}^n$ differing in one entry, there exists a randomized $T : \{0,1\} \times \{\bot,\top\} \to \mathcal{Y}$ such that $T(\tilde{M}_{\varepsilon,\delta}(b))$ has the same distribution as $M(x_b)$ for both $b \in \{0,1\}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{cor} \label{cor:DPtoApproxGDP}
If $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfies $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-DP, then $M$ satisfies $\delta$-approximate $(\varepsilon,0)$-zCDP{}, which, in turn, implies $\delta$-approximate $(0,\frac12 \varepsilon^2)$-zCDP{}.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Fix neighbouring $x_0,x_1 \in \mathcal{X}^n$. Let $T : \{0,1\} \times \{\bot,\top\} \to \mathcal{Y}$ be as in Lemma \ref{lem:KOV-MV}.
Now we can write $M(x_b) = T(\tilde{M}_{\varepsilon,\delta}(b))$ for $b \in \{0,1\}$. Define events $E_0$ and $E_1$ by $$ E_b \equiv \left[\tilde{M}_{\varepsilon,\delta}(b) \in \{0,1\} \times \{\bot\} \right]. $$
By definition, for both $b \in \{0,1\}$, $\pr{\tilde{M}_{\varepsilon,\delta}(b)}{E_b} = 1-\delta$ and $$M(x_b)|_{E_b} = T\left(\tilde{M}_{\varepsilon,\delta}(b)|_{\tilde{M}_{\varepsilon,\delta}(b) \in \{0,1\} \times \{\bot\}}\right) = T(\tilde{M}_{\varepsilon,0}(b)).$$
We have $\dr{\infty}{\tilde{M}_{\varepsilon,0}(b)}{\tilde{M}_{\varepsilon,0}(1-b)} \leq \varepsilon$ for both $b \in \{0,1\}$. By postprocessing and monotonicity, this implies $$\dr{\alpha}{M(x_b)|_{E_b} }{M(x_{1-b})|_{E_{1-b}} } \leq \varepsilon$$ for both $b \in \{0,1\}$ and all $\alpha \in (1,\infty)$. Thus we have satisfied the definition of $\delta$-approximate $(\varepsilon,0)$-zCDP{}.
Applying Proposition \ref{prop:EpsSquared} shows that this also implies $\delta$-approximate $(0,\frac12 \varepsilon^2)$-zCDP{}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Approximate zCDP{} Implies Approximate DP}
\begin{lem} \label{lem:ApproxGDPtoDP}
Suppose $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ satisfies $\delta$-approximate $(\xi,\rho)$-zCDP{}. If $\rho=0$, then $M$ satisfies $(\xi,\delta)$-DP. In general, $M$ satisfies $(\varepsilon,\delta+(1-\delta)\delta')$-DP for all $\varepsilon\geq\xi+\rho$, where $$\delta' = e^{-(\varepsilon-\xi-\rho)^2/4\rho} \cdot \min \left\{ \begin{array}{l} 1 \\ \sqrt{\pi \cdot \rho} \\ \frac{1}{1+(\varepsilon-\xi-\rho)/2\rho} \\ \frac{2}{1+\frac{\varepsilon-\xi-\rho}{2\rho} + \sqrt{\left(1+\frac{\varepsilon-\xi-\rho}{2\rho}\right)^2+\frac{4}{\pi \rho}}} \end{array} \right..$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Fix neighbouring $x,x' \in \mathcal{X}^n$ and let $E$ and $E'$ be the events promised by definition \ref{defn:ApproxRDP}. We can assume, without loss of generality that $\pr{}{E}=\pr{}{E'}=1-\delta$.
Fix $S \subset \mathcal{Y}$. Then
\begin{align*}
\pr{}{M(x) \in S}
=& \pr{}{M(x) \in S \mid E} \cdot \pr{}{E} + \pr{}{M(x) \in S \mid \neg E} \cdot \pr{}{\neg E}\\
\leq& \pr{}{M(x) \in S \mid E} \cdot (1-\delta) + \delta,\\
\pr{}{M(x') \in S} =& \pr{}{M(x') \in S \mid E'} \cdot \pr{}{E'} + \pr{}{M(x') \in S \mid \neg E'} \cdot \pr{}{\neg E'}\\
\geq& \pr{}{M(x') \in S \mid E'} \cdot (1-\delta).
\end{align*}
Firstly, if $\rho=0$, then $$\pr{}{M(x) \in S \mid E} \leq e^\xi \pr{}{M(x') \in S \mid E'}$$
and $$\pr{}{M(x) \in S} \leq \pr{}{M(x) \in S \mid E} \cdot (1-\delta) + \delta \leq e^\xi \pr{}{M(x') \in S \mid E'} \cdot (1-\delta) + \delta \leq e^\xi \pr{}{M(x') \in S} + \delta,$$ which proves the first half of the lemma.
Secondly, by Lemma \ref{lem:RenyiToED} (cf.~Lemma \ref{lem:CDPtoDP}), for all $\varepsilon \geq \xi+\rho$, $$\pr{}{M(x) \in S \mid E} \leq e^\varepsilon \pr{}{M(x') \in S \mid E'} + e^{-(\varepsilon-\xi-\rho)^2/4\rho} \cdot \min \left\{ \begin{array}{l} 1 \\ \sqrt{\pi \cdot \rho} \\ \frac{1}{1+(\varepsilon-\xi-\rho)/2\rho} \\ \frac{2}{1+\frac{\varepsilon-\xi-\rho}{2\rho} + \sqrt{\left(1+\frac{\varepsilon-\xi-\rho}{2\rho}\right)^2+\frac{4}{\pi \rho}}} \end{array} \right..$$
Thus $$\pr{}{M(x) \in S} \leq e^\varepsilon \pr{}{M(x') \in S} + \delta + (1-\delta) \cdot e^{-(\varepsilon-\xi-\rho)^2/4\rho} \cdot \min \left\{ \begin{array}{l} 1 \\ \sqrt{\pi \cdot \rho} \\ \frac{1}{1+(\varepsilon-\xi-\rho)/2\rho} \\ \frac{2}{1+\frac{\varepsilon-\xi-\rho}{2\rho} + \sqrt{\left(1+\frac{\varepsilon-\xi-\rho}{2\rho}\right)^2+\frac{4}{\pi \rho}}} \end{array} \right..$$
\end{proof}
\subsection{Application of Approximate zCDP{}}
Approximate zCDP{} subsumes approximate DP. A result of this is that we can apply our tightened lemmas to give a tighter version of the so-called advanced composition theorem \cite{DworkRV10}.
Note that the following results are subsumed by the bounds of Kairouz, Oh, and Viswanath \cite{KairouzOV15} and Murtagh and Vadhan \cite{MurtaghV16}. However, these bounds may be extended to analyse the composition of mechanisms satisfying CDP{} with mechanisms satisfying approximate DP. We believe that such a ``unified'' analysis of composition will be useful.
Applying Corollary \ref{cor:DPtoApproxGDP}, Lemma \ref{lem:CompPost-ApproxGDP}, and Lemma \ref{lem:ApproxGDPtoDP} yields the following result.
\begin{cor}
Let $M_1, \cdots, M_k : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ and let $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}^k$ be their composition. Suppose each $M_i$ satisfies $(\varepsilon_i,\delta_i)$-DP. Set $\rho = \frac12 \sum_i^k \varepsilon_i^2$. Then $M$ satisfies $$\left(\varepsilon, 1-(1-\delta')\prod_i^k (1-\delta_i)\right)\text{-DP}$$ for all $\varepsilon \geq \rho$ and $$\delta' = e^{-(\varepsilon-\rho)^2/4\rho} \cdot \min \left\{ \begin{array}{l} 1 \\ \sqrt{\pi \cdot \rho} \\ \frac{1}{1+(\varepsilon-\rho)/2\rho} \\ \frac{2}{1+\frac{\varepsilon-\rho}{2\rho} + \sqrt{\left(1+\frac{\varepsilon-\rho}{2\rho}\right)^2+\frac{4}{\pi \rho}}} \end{array} \right..$$
\end{cor}
A slight restatement is the following
\begin{cor}
Let $M_1, \cdots, M_k : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ and let $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}^k$ be their composition. Suppose each $M_i$ satisfies $(\varepsilon_i,\delta_i)$-DP. Set $\varepsilon^2 = \frac12 \sum_i^k \varepsilon_i^2$. Then $M$ satisfies $$\left(\varepsilon^2+2\lambda\varepsilon, 1-(1-\delta')\prod_i^k (1-\delta_i)\right)\text{-DP}$$ for all $\lambda \geq 0$ and $$\delta' = e^{-\lambda^2} \cdot \min \left\{ \begin{array}{l} 1 \\ \sqrt{\pi} \cdot \varepsilon \\ \frac{1}{1+\lambda/\varepsilon} \\ \frac{2}{1+\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon} + \sqrt{\left(1+\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon}\right)^2+\frac{4}{\pi \varepsilon^2}}} \end{array} \right..$$
\end{cor}
Finally, by picking the second term in the minimum and using $1-\prod_i(1-\delta_i) \leq \sum_i \delta_i$, we have the following simpler form of the lemma.
\begin{cor}
Let $M_1, \cdots, M_k : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}$ and let $M : \mathcal{X}^n \to \mathcal{Y}^k$ be their composition. Suppose each $M_i$ satisfies $(\varepsilon_i,\delta_i)$-DP. Then $M$ satisfies $$\left(\frac12\|\varepsilon\|_2^2+\sqrt{2}\lambda\|\varepsilon\|_2, \sqrt{\frac{\pi}{2}} \cdot \|\varepsilon\|_2 \cdot e^{-\lambda^2} + \| \delta \|_1 \right)\text{-DP}$$ for all $\lambda \geq 0$. Alternatively $M$ satisfies $$\left(\frac12\|\varepsilon\|_2^2+\sqrt{2\log(\sqrt{\pi/2} \cdot \|\varepsilon\|_2/\delta')}\cdot\|\varepsilon\|_2,\delta' + \| \delta \|_1 \right)\text{-DP}$$ for all $\delta' \geq 0$.
\end{cor}
In comparison to the composition theorem of \cite{DworkRV10}, we save modestly by a constant factor in the first term and, in most cases $\sqrt{\pi/2} \|\varepsilon\|_2 < 1$, whence the logarithmic term is an improvement over the usual advanced composition theorem.
\addcontentsline{toc}{section}{Acknowledgements}
\paragraph{Acknowledgements}
We thank Cynthia Dwork and Guy Rothblum for sharing a preliminary draft of their work with us. We also thank Ilya Mironov, Kobbi Nissim, Adam Smith, Salil Vadhan, and the Harvard Differential Privacy Research Group for helpful discussions and suggestions.
\addcontentsline{toc}{section}{References}
\bibliographystyle{alpha}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
Multiple orthogonal polynomials are polynomials of one variable which are defined by orthogonality conditions with respect to several different weights. The general definition requires two sets of functions defined on the real axis $\mathbb{R}$:
\begin{equation*}
\textbf{w}_1=(w_{1,1},\ldots, w_{1,p}), \qquad \textbf{w}_2=(w_{2,1},\ldots, w_{2,q}),
\end{equation*}
where $p,q \in\mathbb{N}=\{1,2,3,\ldots\}$
and two multi-indices
$$\textbf{n}_1=(n_{1,1},\ldots, n_{1,p}) \in \mathbb{Z}_+^{p}, \qquad \textbf{n}_2=(n_{2,1},\ldots, n_{2,q}) \in \mathbb{Z}_+^{q},$$
where $\mathbb{Z}_+=\mathbb{N} \cup \{ 0 \}$. Following the usual vector notation, we set
$$|\textbf{n}_1|:=\sum_{i=1}^p n_{1,i},\qquad |\textbf{n}_2|:=\sum_{i=1}^q n_{2,i}.$$
It is assumed that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:multindexcond}
|\textbf{n}_1|=|\textbf{n}_2|+1,
\end{equation}
and each function $w_{1,i}w_{2,j}$, $i=1,\ldots,p$, $j=1,\ldots,q$ is a weight function on $\mathbb{R}$. Following \cite{DK,Sorokin94}, we have the following definitions.
\begin{definition}\label{def:MMOP}
Let $A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,1}, \ldots, A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,p}$ be a system of $p$ polynomials.
They are called mixed type multiple orthogonal polynomials with respect to the pair of multi-indices $(\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2)$ and the two vectors $\textbf{w}_1$ and $\textbf{w}_2$ if the following conditions hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item [$(\textrm i )$] $\deg A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,j}\leq n_{1,j}-1,$ \textrm{for $j=1,\ldots,p$, not all identically equal to zero (when $\deg A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,j}=-1$ we assume that $ A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,j} \equiv 0$)},
\item [$(\textrm {ii} )$]
the linear form of these polynomials
\begin{equation}\label{def:Qn1}
Q_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2}(x):=\sum_{i=1}^p A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,i}(x)w_{1,i}(x)
\end{equation}
satisfies the orthogonality conditions
\begin{equation}\label{eq:orthocond}
\int Q_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2}(x)x^jw_{2,k}(x)\ud x=0, ~\textrm{for $k=1,\ldots,q$ and $j=0,1,\ldots,n_{2,k}-1$}.
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
When $q=1$, the polynomials $A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,1}, \ldots, A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,p}$ are called type I multiple orthogonal polynomials, if $p=1$, the polynomial $A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,1}$ is called a type II multiple orthogonal polynomial. The standard orthogonality corresponds to the case $p=q=1$. Hence, the function $Q_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2}$ defined in \eqref{def:Qn1} admits a type I linear combination (with respect to $\textbf{n}_1$ and $\textbf{w}_1$), but satisfies type II orthogonality conditions (with respect to $\textbf{n}_2$ and $\textbf{w}_2$).
The equations \eqref{eq:orthocond} are a linear homogeneous system of $|\textbf{n}_2|$ equations for the $|\textbf{n}_1|$ unknown coefficients of the polynomials $A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,1},\ldots, A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,p}$. Due to the assumption \eqref{eq:multindexcond}, there is always a non-zero solution.
\begin{definition}
A pair of multi-indices $(\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2)$ is called \textit{normal}, if every solution to conditions $(\textrm{i})-(\textrm{ii})$ satisfies $\deg A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,j}=n_{1,j}-1,~j=1,\ldots,p$. If every pair of multi-indices $(\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2) \in \mathbb{Z}_+^{p} \times \mathbb{Z}_+^{q}$ is normal, we say that the pair $(\textbf{w}_1,\textbf{w}_2)$ is \textit{perfect}.
\end{definition}
For a normal pair of indices, it is easy to verify that the polynomials $A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,j}$, $j=1,\ldots,p$ are unique up to a constant factor.
From Definition \ref{def:MMOP}, it is clear that the roles of two vectors $\textbf{w}_1$ and $\textbf{w}_2$ are not symmetric. One could also swap their roles, which leads to the following notion of duality \cite{DS94}.
\begin{definition}\label{def:dualMOP}
Let $$\textbf{e}_j=(0,\ldots,0,1,0,\ldots,0)$$ be the $j$-th standard unit vector with $1$ on the $j$-th entry. Given a pair of multi-indices $(\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2)$ satisfying \eqref{eq:multindexcond}, the polynomials $B_{\textbf{n}_2+\textbf{e}_i,\textbf{n}_1-\textbf{e}_j,1}, \ldots, B_{\textbf{n}_2+\textbf{e}_i,\textbf{n}_1-\textbf{e}_j,q}$ are dual to the polynomials $A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,1}, \ldots, A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,p}$ if they are mixed type multiple orthogonal polynomials with respect to the pair of multi-indices $(\textbf{n}_2+\textbf{e}_i,\textbf{n}_1-\textbf{e}_j)$ and the two vectors $\textbf{w}_2$ and $\textbf{w}_1$ for some $\textbf{e}_i \in \mathbb{Z}_+^q$ and $\textbf{e}_j \in \mathbb{Z}_+^p$.
\end{definition}
Hence, if we define the following function similar to \eqref{def:Qn1}
\begin{equation}\label{def:Pn1}
P_{\textbf{n}_2+\textbf{e}_i,\textbf{n}_1-\textbf{e}_j}(x):=\sum_{k=1}^q B_{\textbf{n}_2+\textbf{e}_i,\textbf{n}_1-\textbf{e}_j,k}(x)w_{2,k}(x),
\end{equation}
it satisfies the orthogonality conditions
\begin{equation}
\int P_{\textbf{n}_2+\textbf{e}_i,\textbf{n}_1-\textbf{e}_j}(x)x^l w_{1,k}(x) \ud x =0
\end{equation}
for $k=1,\ldots,p$ and
$$l=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
0,1,\ldots,n_{1,k}-1, & \hbox{if $ k \neq j$,} \\
0,1,\ldots,n_{1,j}-2, & \hbox{if $ k = j$.}
\end{array}
\right.
$$
This, together with \eqref{def:Qn1}, also implies that
\begin{equation}
\int Q_{\textbf{r},\textbf{s}}(x)P_{\textbf{n}_2+\textbf{e}_i,\textbf{n}_1-\textbf{e}_j}(x) \ud x=0, ~\textrm{if $\textbf{r} \leq \textbf{n}_1-\textbf{e}_j$ or $\textbf{s} \geq \textbf{n}_2+\textbf{e}_i$},
\end{equation}
where the inequalities for multi-indices are understood in a componentwise manner.
If the pair of weights $(\textbf{w}_1,\textbf{w}_2)$ is perfect, so is the pair $(\textbf{w}_2,\textbf{w}_1)$; see \cite[Proposition 2.1]{FMM13}. Hence, for a normal pair of indices, the dual polynomials are also unique up to a multiplicative constant.
As a generalization of orthogonal polynomials, multiple orthogonal polynomials originated from Hermite-Pad\'{e} approximation in the context of irrationality and transcendence proofs in number theory. They are further developed in
approximation theory (cf. \cite{Apt98,WVA06} and references therein) and have played an important role nowadays in the studies of stochastic models (e.g. random matrix theory, non-intersecting paths, etc.) arising from mathematical physics;
cf. \cite{Kui10a,Kui10b} and references therein.
There are various families of multiple orthogonal polynomials which extend the classical orthogonal polynomials (cf. \cite{ABVAN03} and \cite[Chapter 23]{Ismail}). The aim of this paper, however, is to investigate mixed type multiple orthogonal polynomials associated with non-classical weights, namely, the modified Bessel functions. Our motivation is twofold:
On the one hand, although the polynomials orthogonal with respect to the modified Bessel functions in the usual sense do not exhibit nice properties as the classical ones, the associated multiple orthogonal polynomials indeed have some interesting properties, and remarkably, they are all closely related to some stochastic models. The type I and type II multiple orthogonal polynomials associated with the modified Bessel functions of the second kind were introduced and studied in \cite{CD00,CCVA08,CVA2001,VAY00,ZP}. Their connections to the products of independent Ginibre matrices have been revealed recently in \cite{Kuijlaars-Zhang14,Zhang13}. For the the modified Bessel functions of the first kind, the associated type I and type II multiple orthogonal polynomials were introduced and studied in \cite{CD00,CouVan03,CouVan03b,KuiRom10}. These polynomials are of significant assistance in establishing local universality in non-intersecting Bessel paths \cite{KMW09}; see also \cite{DKRZ12} for the case of mixed type. The difference between the present paper and those aforementioned is that the system of weight functions considered here is also of `mixed' type. One vector $(\omega_{\mu,a},\omega_{\mu+1,a})$ is defined in terms of scaled modified Bessel function of the first kind $I_\mu$ and $I_{\mu+1}$, while the other vector $(\rho_{\nu,b},\rho_{\nu+1,b})$ is defined in terms of scaled modified Bessel function of the second kind $K_\nu$ and $K_{\nu+1}$.
On the other hand, these mixed type multiple orthogonal polynomials arise naturally in recent studies of products of two coupled random matrices \cite{AS15,Liu16}. More precisely, let us consider, in a simple case, two independent matrices $A$ and $B$ of size $n\times M$ ($M\geq n$) with i.i.d. standard complex Gaussian entries. We then define two random matrices
\begin{equation}\label{eq:X1andX2}
X_1:=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(A-i\sqrt{\tau}B),\qquad X_2:=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(A^*-i\sqrt{\tau}B^*), \qquad 0< \tau < 1,
\end{equation}
where the superscript $^*$ stands for the conjugate transpose. Clearly, the matrices $X_1$ and $X_2$ are not independent anymore. It was shown in \cite{AS15} that the squared singular values of $X_1X_2$ form a determinantal point process with correlation kernel
\begin{equation}\label{def:Kn}
K_n(x,y) = \sum_{k=0}^{n-1} \mathcal{Q}_k(x) \mathcal{P}_k(y),
\end{equation}
where for each $k = 0, 1, \ldots$, $\mathcal{Q}_k$ belongs to the linear span of certain functions built from scaled modified Bessel functions of the first kind, while $\mathcal{P}_k$ belongs to the linear span of certain functions built from scaled modified Bessel functions of the second kind in such a way that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:biortho}
\int_0^{\infty} \mathcal{Q}_k(x) \mathcal{P}_j(x) \ud x = \delta_{j,k}.
\end{equation}
It comes out that the biorthogonal functions $\mathcal{Q}_k$ and $\mathcal{P}_k$ can be interpreted as the linear forms of our mixed type multiple orthogonal polynomials with specified parameters. In this case, some properties of $\mathcal{Q}_k$ and $\mathcal{P}_k$ have already been established in \cite{AS15}, but without noting the multiple orthogonality and the mixed type orthogonal polynomials. This connection also holds if the pair $(X_1,X_2)$ is distributed according to a coupled two-matrix matrix model introduced in \cite{Liu16}. We will come back to this issue at the end of this paper.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. The precise definitions of the modified Bessel functions are given in Section \ref{sec:MBF}, where we also collect some of their basic properties for later use.
After fixing some notations used throughout this paper in Section \ref{sec:MMOP}, we show in Section \ref{sec:normality}
that the corresponding mixed type multiple orthogonal polynomials are uniquely determined except for a constant factor.
This mainly follows from the facts that both vectors form algebraic Chebyshev (AT) systems (actually, Nikishin systems),
which are already known for special cases \cite{CouVan03,VAY00}, and can be easily extended to general situations.
We include a proof based on the criteria established in \cite{CouVan03}. We then turn to the special case that each multi-index
is on or close to the diagonal. Basic properties of the polynomials as well as the dual polynomials, and their linear forms are
investigated, which include explicit formulas, integral representations,
differential properties (Section \ref{sec:expli formula}), limiting forms (Section \ref{sec:limitingform}) and recurrence
relations (Section \ref{sec:recurrence rel}). We finally explain how our mixed type multiple orthogonal polynomials are related
to products of two coupled random matrices in a general setting \cite{Liu16}. This connection particularly implies a Riemann-Hilbert (RH)
characterization of the correlation kernel, which provides an alternative way for further asymptotic analysis.
\section{Modified Bessel functions}\label{sec:MBF}
\subsection{Modified Bessel functions of the first kind}
The modified Bessel function of the first kind $I_\mu$ (see \cite[Section 10.25]{DLMF}) is defined by
\begin{equation}\label{def:I}
I_{\mu}(z)=\left(\frac{z}{2}\right)^\mu\sum_{k=0}^\infty\frac{(z^2/4)^k}{k!\Gamma(\mu+k+1)}, \quad \mu\in\mathbb{R},
\end{equation}
which is analytic in the complex plane with a cut along the negative real axis, and is a real positive function for $\mu>-1$ and $z>0$. The function $I_\mu$ satisfies the modified Bessel's equation
\begin{equation}\label{def:MBequation}
z^2\frac{\ud^2 u}{\ud z^2}+z\frac{\ud u}{\ud z}-(z^2+\mu^2)u=0.
\end{equation}
Some basic properties of $I_\mu$ that are relevant to this paper include:
\begin{itemize}
\item recurrence relations (see \cite[Equation 10.29.1]{DLMF}):
\begin{align}
I_{\mu-1}(z)-I_{\mu+1}(z) & =\frac{2\mu}{z}I_{\mu}(z), \label{eq:recurI1}\\
I_{\mu-1}(z)+I_{\mu+1}(z) & = 2I_{\mu}'(z) \label{eq:recurI2};
\end{align}
\item asymptotic behavior (see \cite[Equations 10.30.1 and 10.40.1]{DLMF}):
\begin{align}
I_{\mu}(z)&\sim\left(\frac{z}{2}\right)^\mu/\Gamma(\mu+1),\quad z\to 0, \quad \mu>-1,
\\
I_{\mu}(z)&= \frac{e^z}{\sqrt{2 \pi z}}\left(1+O\left(\frac{1}{z}\right)\right),\quad z\to \infty,
\quad |\arg z|<\frac{\pi}{2}. \label{eq:asyI2}
\end{align}
\end{itemize}
We now define scaled modified Bessel functions of the first kind $\omega_{\mu,a}$ $(\mu>-1,a>0)$ as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{def:omega}
\omega_{\mu,a}(x)=x^{\frac{\mu}{2}}I_{\mu}(2a\sqrt{x}), \quad x>0.
\end{equation}
Note that $\omega_{\mu,a}(x)$ is positive over the positive real axis. In view of \eqref{eq:recurI1}--\eqref{eq:asyI2}, it is readily seen that the functions $\omega_{\mu,a}$ satisfy
\begin{align}
\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x) & = x \omega_{\mu-1,a}(x)-\frac{\mu}{a}\omega_{\mu,a}(x), \label{eq:recuromega1}\\
\omega_{\mu+1,a}'(x) & = a \omega_{\mu,a}(x), \label{eq:recuromega2}
\end{align}
and have the asymptotic behavior:
\begin{align}
\omega_{\mu,a}(x)&\sim (ax)^\mu/\Gamma(\mu+1),\quad x\to 0, \label{eq:asyomega1}
\\
\omega_{\mu,a}(x)&\sim \frac{x^{\frac{2\mu-1}{4}}e^{2a\sqrt{x}}}{2\sqrt{\pi a}},\quad x\to +\infty. \label{eq:asyomega2}
\end{align}
The recurrence relation \eqref{eq:recuromega1} particularly implies that $\omega_{\mu+m,a}$ can be expanded in terms of $\omega_{\mu,a}$ and $\omega_{\mu+1,a}$. Recall that the generalized hypergeometric function $_p F_q$ is defined by
\begin{equation}\label{def:hypergeo}
{\; }_p F_q \left({a_1,\ldots, a_p \atop b_1,\ldots,b_q} \Big{|} z \right)=\sum_{k=0}^\infty \frac{(a_1)_k\cdots (a_p)_k}{(b_1)_k \cdots (b_q)_k}\frac{z^k}{k!}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pochammer}
(a)_k=\frac{\Gamma(a+k)}{\Gamma(a)}=a(a+1)\cdots(a+k-1)
\end{equation}
being the Pochhammer symbol. We have
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:omegahigh}
For any integer $m\geq 0$, it follows that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:recuromegam}
\omega_{\mu+m,a}(x)=a^{-m} r_{m,\mu}(a^2 x)\omega_{\mu,a}(x)+a^{1-m}s_{m,\mu}(a^2 x)\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x)
\end{equation}
where $ r_{0,\mu}(x)=1$, $ s_{0,\mu}(x)=0$, and for $m\geq 1$,
\begin{align}
r_{m,\mu}(x)&=-(-i)^mx^{m/2}h_{m-2,\mu+2}((2\sqrt{x}i)^{-1}) \nonumber \\
&=(-1)^m(\mu+2)_{m-2}{\; }_2 F_3 \left({-(m-2)/2,-(m-3)/2 \atop \mu+2,-m+2,1-m-\mu} \Big{|} 4x \right)x \nonumber \\
&=(-1)^m\sum_{j=0}^{\lfloor (m-2)/2 \rfloor}\binom{m-j-2}{j}(\mu+j+2)_{m-2j-2}x^{j+1}, \label{def:rmmu}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
s_{m,\mu}(x)&=(-i)^{m-1}x^{(m-1)/2}h_{m-1,\mu+1}((2\sqrt{x}i)^{-1}) \nonumber \\
&=(-1)^{m-1}(\mu+1)_{m-1}{\; }_2 F_3 \left({-(m-1)/2,-(m-2)/2 \atop \mu+1,-m+1,1-m-\mu} \Big{|} 4x \right) \nonumber \\
&=(-1)^{m+1}\sum_{j=0}^{\lfloor (m-1)/2 \rfloor}\binom{m-j-1}{j}(\mu+j+1)_{m-2j-1}x^{j}. \label{def:smmu}
\end{align}
Here, the functions $h_{m,\mu}$ are Lommel polynomials (see \cite[Sections 9.6--9.73]{Watson66}\footnotemark[2]) and $\lfloor x \rfloor=\max\{n\in\mathbb{Z}:n\leq x\}$ stands for the integer part of $x$.
\end{proposition}
\footnotetext[2] {In the notation $R_{m,\mu}$ of \cite{Watson66}, one has $h_{m,\mu}(x)=R_{m,\mu}(1/x)$.}
\begin{proof}
For the special case $a=1$, the relation \eqref{eq:recuromegam} is proved in \cite[Lemma 5]{CouVan03}, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:reca=1}
\omega_{\mu+m,1}(x)= r_{m,\mu}(x)\omega_{\mu,1}(x)+s_{m,\mu}(x)\omega_{\mu+1,1}(x)
\end{equation}
with $ r_{0,\mu}(x)=1$, $ s_{0,\mu}(x)=0$, and for $m\geq 1$, $r_{m,\mu}(x)$ and $s_{m,\mu}(x)$
are given by \eqref{def:rmmu} and \eqref{def:smmu}, respectively.
This, together with the fact that
$$\omega_{\mu,1}(a^2x)=a^{\mu}\omega_{\mu,a}(x)$$
gives us \eqref{eq:recuromegam}.
This completes the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:omegahigh}.
\end{proof}
The Lommel polynomials $h_{m,\mu}$ satisfy the difference equation
$$h_{m+1,\mu}(x)=2x(m+\mu)h_{m,\mu}(x)-h_{m-1,\mu}(x)$$
with initial conditions $h_{-1,\mu}(x)=0$, $h_{0,\mu}(x)=1$, and have the hypergeometric representation (for $m>1$)
$$h_{m,\mu}(x)=(\mu)_m(2x)^m{\; }_2 F_3 \left({-m/2,-(m-1)/2 \atop \mu,-m,1-m-\mu} \Big{|} -1/x^2 \right);$$
see \cite[Chapter VI.6]{Chihara}.
The proof of \eqref{eq:reca=1} in \cite{CouVan03} relies on the facts that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:recuJ}
J_{\mu+m}(x)=h_{m,\mu}(1/x)J_{\mu}(x)-h_{m-1,\mu+1}(1/x)J_{\mu-1}(x)
\end{equation}
and
$$I_{\mu}(x)=e^{-(\mu \pi i)/2}J_{\mu}(xi),\quad x>0,$$
with $J_{\mu}$ being the Bessel function of the first kind (cf. \cite[Section 10.2]{DLMF}).
\subsection{Modified Bessel functions of the second kind}
The modified Bessel functions of the second kind $K_\nu$ (see \cite[Section 10.25]{DLMF}) are also known as Macdonald functions. $K_\nu$ and $I_\nu$ are two linearly independent solutions of \eqref{def:MBequation} (with $\mu$ replaced by $\nu$). Like $I_\nu(z)$, $K_{\nu}(z)$ is also analytic in the complex plane with a cut along the negative real axis, and is a real positive function for $\nu>-1$ and $z>0$.
Some basic properties of $K_\nu$ that are relevant to this paper include:
\begin{itemize}
\item integral representations of Mellin-Barnes type (see \cite[Equation 10.32.13]{DLMF}):
\begin{equation}\label{eq:KMellin}
K_\nu(z)=\frac{(z/2)^\nu}{4 \pi i}\int_{c-i\infty}^{c+i\infty}\Gamma(t)\Gamma(t-\nu)\left(\frac{z}{2}\right)^{-2t}\ud t, \end{equation}
for $c>\max\{\Re \nu, 0\}$ and $|\arg z|<\pi$;
\item recurrence relations (see \cite[Equation 10.29.1]{DLMF}):
\begin{align}
K_{\nu-1}(z)-K_{\nu+1}(z) & =-\frac{2\nu}{z}K_{\nu}(z), \label{eq:recurK1}\\
K_{\nu-1}(z)+K_{\nu+1}(z) & = -2K_{\nu}'(z) \label{eq:recurK2};
\end{align}
\item asymptotic behavior (see \cite[Equations 10.30.2, 10.30.3 and 10.40.2]{DLMF}):
\begin{align}
K_{\nu}(z)&\sim\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
2^{\nu-1}\Gamma(\nu)z^{-\nu}, & \hbox{$z\to 0$, $~\Re\nu>0$,} \\
-\ln z, & \hbox{$z\to 0$, $~\nu=0$,}
\end{array}
\right.
\\
K_{\nu}(z)& = \sqrt{\frac{\pi}{2z}}e^{-z}\left(1+O\left(\frac{1}{z}\right)\right),\quad z\to \infty, \quad |\arg z|<\frac{3\pi}{2}. \label{eq:asyK2}
\end{align}
\end{itemize}
We then define scaled modified Bessel functions of the second kind $\rho_{\nu,b}$ $(\nu>0,b>0)$ as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{def:rho}
\rho_{\nu,b}(x)=x^{\frac{\nu}{2}}K_{\nu}(2b\sqrt{x}), \quad x>0.
\end{equation}
The function $\rho_{\nu,b}(x)$ is positive over the positive real axis. By \eqref{eq:KMellin}--\eqref{eq:asyK2}, it follows that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:rhoMellin}
\rho_{\nu,b}(x)=\frac{b^{-\nu}}{4 \pi i}\int_{c-i\infty}^{c+i\infty}\Gamma(t)\Gamma(t+\nu)\left(b^2 x\right)^{-t}\ud t, \quad c>0.
\end{equation}
satisfy the recurrence relations
\begin{align}
\rho_{\nu+1,b}(x) & = x \rho_{\nu-1,b}(x)+\frac{\nu}{b}\rho_{\nu,b}(x), \label{eq:recurrho1}\\
\rho_{\nu+1,b}'(x) & = -b \rho_{\nu,b}(x), \label{eq:recurrho2}
\end{align}
and have the asymptotic behavior:
\begin{align}
\rho_{\nu,b}(x)&\sim \frac{\Gamma(\nu)}{2b^\nu},\quad x\to 0, \label{eq:asyrho1}
\\
\rho_{\nu,b}(x)&\sim \left(\frac{\pi}{4b}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}x^{\frac{2\nu-1}{4}}e^{-2b\sqrt{x}},\quad x\to +\infty. \label{eq:asyrho2}
\end{align}
A result similar to Proposition \ref{prop:omegahigh} holds for $\rho_{\nu,b}$.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:rhohigh}
For any integer $m\geq 0$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:rhohighrecu}
\rho_{\nu+m,b}(x)=(-b)^{-m} r_{m,\nu}(b^2 x)\rho_{\nu,b}(x)+(-b)^{1-m}s_{m,\nu}(b^2 x)\rho_{\nu+1,b}(x),
\end{equation}
where $ r_{0,\nu}(x)=1$, $ s_{0,\nu}(x)=0$, and for $m\geq 1$, the functions $r_{m,\nu}$ and $s_{m,\nu}$ are given by \eqref{def:rmmu} and \eqref{def:smmu}, respectively.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Since $\rho_{\nu,1}(b^2x)=b^{\nu}\rho_{\nu,b}(x)$, it is sufficient to prove \eqref{eq:rhohighrecu} for the case that $b=1$, which is similar to the proof of \eqref{eq:reca=1}.
If $b=1$, by \eqref{def:rho} and setting $y=2\sqrt{x}$, we could rewrite \eqref{eq:rhohighrecu} as
$$
K_{\nu+m}(y)=\left(-\frac{2}{y}\right)^{m} r_{m,\nu}\left(\frac{y^2}{4}\right)K_{\nu}(y)+
\left(-\frac{2}{y}\right)^{m-1}s_{m,\nu}\left(\frac{y^2}{4}\right)K_{\nu+1}(x).
$$
From \cite[Equation 10.27.8]{DLMF}, we note that
$$K_\nu(y)=\frac{\pi i}{2}e^{\nu \pi i/2}H_{\nu}^{(1)}(iy), \qquad x>0,$$
where $H_{\nu}^{(1)}(y)$ is the Bessel function of the third kind (see \cite[Section 10.2]{DLMF}). Hence, we further have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:recuH1}
H_{\nu+m}^{(1)}(iy)=\left(\frac{2i}{y}\right)^{m} r_{m,\nu}\left(\frac{y^2}{4}\right)H_{\nu}^{(1)}(iy)+
\left(\frac{2i}{y}\right)^{m-1}s_{m,\nu}\left(\frac{y^2}{4}\right)H_{\nu+1}^{(1)}(iy).
\end{equation}
Since $H_{\nu}^{(1)}$ satisfies the same three-term recurrence relation as $J_{\nu}$ (see \cite[Equation 10.6.1]{DLMF}),
it is then readily seen from \eqref{eq:recuJ} that \begin{equation}\label{eq:recuH}
H_{\nu+m}^{(1)}(iy)=-h_{m-2,\nu+2}(-i/y)H_{\nu}^{(1)}(iy)+h_{m-1,\nu+1}(-i/y)H_{\nu+1}^{(1)}(iy).
\end{equation}
Comparing \eqref{eq:recuH1} with \eqref{eq:recuH} gives us \eqref{eq:rhohighrecu} with $b=1$.
This completes the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:rhohigh}.
\end{proof}
\section{Mixed type multiple orthogonal polynomials associated with the modified Bessel functions}
\label{sec:MMOP}
With $\omega_{\mu,a}$ and $\rho_{\nu,b}$ defined in \eqref{def:omega} and \eqref{def:rho}, we set two vectors of functions
\begin{equation}\label{def:MBweights}
\textbf{w}_1=(\omega_{\mu,a},\omega_{\mu+1,a}), \qquad \textbf{w}_2=(\rho_{\nu,b},\rho_{\nu+1,b}).
\end{equation}
Given a pair of multi-indices $(\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2)\in\mathbb{Z}_+^2 \times \mathbb{Z}_+^2$ satisfying \eqref{eq:multindexcond}, we will study mixed type multiple orthogonal polynomials with respect to $(\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2)$ and the system of weights $(\textbf{w}_1,\textbf{w}_2)$ over $(0,\infty)$ under the conditions that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:paracond}
\mu>-1,\qquad \nu>0, \qquad b>a>0.
\end{equation}
By Definition \ref{def:MMOP}, we look for a vector of polynomials $(A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,1}, A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,2})$ such that
$$\deg A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,j}\leq n_{1,j}-1,~~~~j=1,2,$$
and satisfies the orthogonality conditions
\begin{multline}\label{eq:orthoQ1}
\int_0^\infty (A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,1}(x)\omega_{\mu,a}(x)+A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,2}(x)\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x))x^j\rho_{\nu,b}(x)\ud x \\
=\int_0^\infty Q_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2}(x)x^j\rho_{\nu,b}(x)\ud x
=0, ~~\textrm{$j=0,1,\ldots,n_{2,1}-1$}
\end{multline}
and
\begin{multline}\label{eq:orthoQ2}
\int_0^\infty (A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,1}(x)\omega_{\mu,a}(x)+A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,2}(x)\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x))x^j\rho_{\nu+1,b}(x)\ud x \\
=\int_0^\infty Q_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2}(x)x^j\rho_{\nu+1,b}(x)\ud x
=0, ~~\textrm{$j=0,1,\ldots,n_{2,2}-1$.}
\end{multline}
The vector of dual polynomials $(B_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,1}, B_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,2})$ and their linear form $P_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2}$ are then defined similarly according to Definition \ref{def:dualMOP} and \eqref{def:Pn1}. Note that the assumptions \eqref{eq:paracond} ensure that all the relevant integrals are well-defined; see the asymptotic behavior of $\omega_{\mu,a}$ and $\rho_{\nu,b}$ given in \eqref{eq:asyomega1}--\eqref{eq:asyomega2} and \eqref{eq:asyrho1}--\eqref{eq:asyrho2}, respectively.
In what follows, we first deal with uniqueness of the polynomials and show that they are indeed unique up to a multiplicative factor. Then, we will focus on the special case that each multi-index is on or close to the diagonal. For that purpose, the following notations will be used throughout this paper. For each $ m \in \mathbb{Z}_+$, we set
\begin{equation}
\textbf{m}=\left(\lfloor \frac{m}{2} \rfloor+1, \lfloor \frac{m-1}{2} \rfloor+1\right)
=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\left( \frac{m}{2}+1, \frac{m}{2}\right), & \hbox{ $m$ even,} \\
\left( \frac{m+1}{2}, \frac{m+1}{2}\right), & \hbox{ $m$ odd,} \end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
Hence, $|\textbf{m}|=m+1$. We then define, for each $n\in\mathbb{N}$,
\begin{align}
&A_{n,i}(x)=A_{\textbf{n},\textbf{n-1},i}(x)=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
A_{\left( \frac{n+1}{2}, \frac{n+1}{2}\right),\left( \frac{n+1}{2}, \frac{n-1}{2}\right),i}(x), & \hbox{$n$ odd,} \\
A_{\left( \frac{n}{2}+1, \frac{n}{2}\right),\left( \frac{n}{2}, \frac{n}{2}\right),i}(x), & \hbox{$n$ even,}
\end{array}
\right.
~~ i=1,2, \label{def:An}\\
& Q_n(x) \nonumber \\
&=A_{n,1}(x)\omega_{\mu,a}(x)+A_{n,2}(x)\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x) \label{def:QnNotation} \\
&=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
A_{\left( \frac{n+1}{2}, \frac{n+1}{2}\right),\left( \frac{n+1}{2}, \frac{n-1}{2}\right),1}(x)\omega_{\mu,a}(x)+A_{\left( \frac{n+1}{2}, \frac{n+1}{2}\right),\left( \frac{n+1}{2}, \frac{n-1}{2}\right),2}(x)\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x), & \hbox{ $n$ odd,} \\
A_{\left( \frac{n}{2}+1, \frac{n}{2}\right),\left( \frac{n}{2}, \frac{n}{2}\right),1}(x)\omega_{\mu,a}(x)+A_{\left( \frac{n}{2}+1, \frac{n}{2}\right),\left( \frac{n}{2}, \frac{n}{2}\right),2}(x)\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x), & \hbox{ $n$ even,}
\end{array}
\right. \nonumber
\end{align}
and similarly,
\begin{align}
B_{n,i}(x)&=B_{\textbf{n},\textbf{n-1},i}(x), ~~ i=1,2, \label{def:Bn}\\
P_n(x)&=B_{n,1}(x)\rho_{\nu,b}(x)+B_{n,2}(x)\rho_{\nu+1,b}(x) \label{def:PnNotation}.
\end{align}
To emphasize the dependence of parameters $\mu,\nu,a,b$, we will occasionally write
\begin{equation}\label{eq:notations}
\begin{aligned}
A_{n,i}(x)&=A_{n,i}^{\mu,\nu,a,b}(x),\qquad Q_n(x)=Q_n^{\mu,\nu,a,b}(x),
\\
B_{n,i}(x)&=B_{n,i}^{\mu,\nu,a,b}(x), \qquad P_n(x)=P_n^{\mu,\nu,a,b}(x).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\section{Normality}\label{sec:normality}
The main result of this section is the following theorem:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:nomality}
Let $\textbf{w}_1$ and $\textbf{w}_2$ be two vectors of scaled modified Bessel functions given in \eqref{def:MBweights}. We have that any pair of multi-indices $(\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2)\in\mathbb{Z}_+^2 \times \mathbb{Z}_+^2$ is normal, and the vector of mixed type multiple orthogonal polynomials $(A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,1}, A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,2})$ is uniquely determined except for a constant factor. Furthermore, the function $Q_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2}$ has $|\textbf{n}_2|$ sign changes on $(0,\infty)$.
\end{theorem}
The essential issue in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:nomality} is that both $\textbf{w}_1$ and $\textbf{w}_2$ form the so-called algebraic Chebyshev (AT) systems (cf. \cite[Section 23.1.2]{Ismail}, \cite{NikSor}), which we recall now.
\begin{definition}\label{def:AT}
A system of $m$ real-valued continuous functions $(w_1,\ldots,w_m)$ defined on the interval $\Delta\subset \mathbb{R}$ forms an AT system for the multi-index $\textbf{n}=(n_1,\ldots,n_m)\in\mathbb{Z}_+^m$ if for any choice of polynomials
$p_{1}(x),\ldots,p_m(x)$ with $\deg p_i\leq n_j-1$, the function
\[ \sum_{i=1}^m p_i(x)w_i(x) \]
has at most $|\textbf{n}|-1$ zeros on $\Delta$. If this is true for all $\textbf{n}\in\mathbb{Z}_+^m$, we have an AT system on $\Delta$.
\end{definition}
If a system of weight functions forms an AT system, the associated type I and type II multiple orthogonal polynomials exist uniquely, up to a multiplicative constant; cf. \cite[Section 23.1.2]{Ismail}.
For a system of functions consisted of two members $(w_1,w_2)$, the following theorem gives a sufficient condition that
$(w_1,w_2)$ forms an AT system, which is adapted from \cite[Theorems 2 and 3]{CouVan03}.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:CouVan}
Let $w_1$ and $w_2$ be two functions defined on the real interval $\Delta_1$ with $w_1(x)>0$ and $w_2(x)>0$ for $x\in\Delta_1$. Suppose that there exist two measures $\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2$ on $\Delta_2$, a real interval with $\overset{\circ}{\Delta}_1 \cap \overset{\circ}{\Delta}_2=\emptyset$, such that
\begin{align}
\frac{w_2(x)}{w_1(x)}&=\int_{\Delta_2}\frac{\ud \sigma_1(t)}{x-t}, \label{eq:Nikishin} \\
\frac{w_1(x)}{w_2(x)}&=x\int_{\Delta_2}\frac{\ud \sigma_2(t)}{x-t} \label{eq:Nikishin2}.
\end{align}
Then, $(w_1,w_2)$ forms an AT system on $\Delta_1$, provided both $\supp(\sigma_1)$ and $\supp(\sigma_2)$ contain an infinite number of points.
\end{theorem}
A system of functions $(w_1,w_2)$ defined on $\Delta_1$ such that the ratio $w_2/w_1$ can be written as a Markov function for a measure $\sigma_1$ on $\Delta_2$ \eqref{eq:Nikishin} with $\overset{\circ}{\Delta}_1 \cap \overset{\circ}{\Delta}_2=\emptyset$ is called a Nikishin system (with 2 functions), due to the first description by Nikishin \cite{Niki82}. The proof of Theorem \ref{thm:CouVan} in \cite{CouVan03} is direct and relies on determinantal identities for structured matrices. Indeed, the condition \eqref{eq:Nikishin} ensures that $(w_1,w_2)$ forms an AT system for every $(n,m)\in\mathbb{N}^2$ with $m\leq n+1$, while $\eqref{eq:Nikishin2}$ implies that $(w_1,w_2)$ forms an AT system for every $(n,m)\in\mathbb{N}^2$ with $ n \leq m$, which together yields the assertion. The perfectness of a Nikishin system of two functions was also proved in \cite{BLOP92,DK} based on Hermite-Pad\'{e} approximation.
We are now ready to prove Theorem \ref{thm:nomality}.
\paragraph{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:nomality}}
We show that both $(\omega_{\mu,a},\omega_{\mu+1,a})$ and $(\rho_{\nu,b},\rho_{\nu+1,b})$ form AT systems, which are already known for the special cases $a=1$ and $b=1$ \cite{CouVan03,VAY00}. We follow the idea in \cite{CouVan03}.
For the pair $(\omega_{\mu,a},\omega_{\mu+1,a})$, let $\{j_{\nu,n}\}_{n=1}^\infty$ be the $n$-th positive zero of the Bessel function of the first kind $J_\nu$. It is shown in \cite[Theorem 4.7]{IsmailKel79} that
\begin{equation*}\label{eq:IsmKel}
z^{(\nu-\mu)/2}\frac{I_{\mu}(\sqrt{z})}{I_{\nu}(\sqrt{z})}=-2\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{j_{\nu,n}^{\nu+1-\mu}J_\mu(j_{\nu,n})}
{(z+j_{\nu,n}^2)J'_\nu(j_{\nu,n})},\quad \mu>\nu>-1,\quad |\arg z|<\pi.
\end{equation*}
This, together with the definition of $\omega_{\mu,a}$ given in \eqref{def:omega}, implies that
\begin{multline}\label{eq:rationomega1}
\frac{\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x)}{\omega_{\mu,a}(x)}=\sqrt{x}\frac{I_{\mu+1}(2a\sqrt{x})}{I_{\mu}(2a\sqrt{x})}
\\
=-x\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{J_{\mu+1}(j_{\mu,n})}
{(ax+j_{\mu,n}^2/(4a))J'_\mu(j_{\mu,n})}
=x\int_{-\infty}^{0}\frac{\ud \sigma_1(t)}{x-t},
\end{multline}
where
$$\sigma_1=-\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{J_{\mu+1}(j_{\mu,n})}
{aJ'_\mu(j_{\mu,n})}\delta_{-\frac{j_{\mu,n}^2}{4a^2}}$$
is a discrete measure on $(-\infty,0]$ built from a linear combination of Dirac measures on the points $-j_{\mu,n}^2/4a^2$. On the other hand, it is readily seen from \eqref{eq:recuromega1} and \eqref{eq:rationomega1} that
\begin{multline}\label{eq:rationomega2}
\frac{\omega_{\mu,a}(x)}{\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x)}=\frac{\mu+1}{ax}+\frac{1}{x}\frac{\omega_{\mu+2,a}(x)}{\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x)}
\\=\frac{\mu+1}{a}\frac{1}{x}-\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{J_{\mu+2}(j_{\mu+1,n})}
{(ax+j_{\mu+1,n}^2/(4a))J'_{\mu+1}(j_{\mu+1,n})}
= \int_{-\infty}^{0}\frac{\ud \sigma_2(t)}{x-t},
\end{multline}
where
$$\sigma_2=\frac{\mu+1}{a}\delta_0-\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{J_{\mu+2}(j_{\mu+1,n})}
{aJ'_{\mu+1}(j_{\mu+1,n})}\delta_{-\frac{j_{\mu+1,n}^2}{4a^2}}.$$
For the pair $(\rho_{\nu,a},\rho_{\nu+1,a})$, we make use of the following formula (see \cite{Grosswald} and \cite{Ismail77}):
$$ z^{-1/2}\frac{K_{\nu-1}(\sqrt{z})}{K_\nu(\sqrt{z})}=\frac{2}{\pi^2}\int_0^\infty \frac{1}{(z+t)(J_\nu^2(\sqrt{t})+Y_{\nu}^2(\sqrt{t}))t}\ud t,\quad \nu>0,\quad |\arg z|<\pi,
$$
where
$$Y_{\nu}(z)=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{J_\nu(z)\cos(\nu \pi)-J_{-\nu}(z)}{\sin(\nu\pi)}, & \hbox{$\nu \neq 0,\pm1,\pm2,\ldots$, } \\
\left.\frac{1}{\pi}\frac{\partial J_\nu (z)}{\partial \nu}\right|_{\nu=n}+\left.\frac{(-1)^n}{\pi}\frac{\partial J_\nu (z)}{\partial \nu}\right|_{\nu=-n}, & \hbox{$\nu=n=0,\pm1,\pm2,\ldots$,}
\end{array}
\right.
$$
is the Bessel function of the second kind (Weber's Function); see \cite[Section 10.2]{DLMF}. Thus, by \eqref{def:rho}, it follows that
\begin{multline}\label{eq:ratiorho1}
\frac{\rho_{\nu,b}(x)}{\rho_{\nu+1,b}(x)}=\frac{K_{\nu}(2b\sqrt{x})}{\sqrt{x}K_{\nu+1}(2b\sqrt{x})}
=\frac{4b}{\pi^2}\int_0^\infty \frac{1}{(4b^2 x+t)(J_{\nu+1}^2(\sqrt{t})+Y_{\nu+1}^2(\sqrt{t}))t}\ud t
\\=\frac{1}{b \pi^2}\int_0^\infty \frac{1}{(x+t)(J_{\nu+1}^2(2b\sqrt{t})+Y_{\nu+1}^2(2b\sqrt{t}))t}\ud t =\int_{-\infty}^{0}\frac{\ud \sigma_3(t)}{x-t},
\end{multline}
where we have made use a change of variable $t=4b^2t$ in the third equality and
$$\ud \sigma_3 =-\frac{\ud t}{b \pi^2(J_{\nu+1}^2(2b\sqrt{-t})+Y_{\nu+1}^2(2b\sqrt{-t}))t}$$
is a continuous measure on $(-\infty,0]$. This, together with \eqref{eq:recurrho1}, also implies that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ratiorho2}
\frac{\rho_{\nu+1,b}(x)}{\rho_{\nu,b}(x)}=x\frac{\rho_{\nu-1,b}(x)}{\rho_{\nu,b}(x)}+\frac{\nu}{b}
=x\left(\frac{\rho_{\nu-1,b}(x)}{\rho_{\nu,b}(x)}+\frac{\nu}{bx}\right)
=x\int_{-\infty}^{0}\frac{\ud \sigma_4(t)}{x-t},
\end{equation}
where
$$\ud \sigma_4 =-\left(\frac{1}{b \pi^2(J_{\nu}^2(2b\sqrt{-t})+Y_{\nu}^2(2b\sqrt{-t}))t}-\frac{\nu}{b}\delta_0\right) \ud t$$
is a measure on $(-\infty,0]$ with both a continuous part and a discrete part.
Combining \eqref{eq:rationomega1}--\eqref{eq:ratiorho2} and Theorem \ref{thm:CouVan}, we conclude that both $(\omega_{\mu,a},\omega_{\mu+1,a})$ and $(\rho_{\nu,b},\rho_{\nu+1,b})$ form AT systems on $(0,\infty)$. Theorem \ref{thm:nomality} then follows from this conclusion, as shown in \cite{FMM13}, where
the matrix of measures $\ud \textbf{S}:=\textbf{w}_2^T\textbf{w}_1\ud x$ is called an AT matrix measure. For the convenience of the readers, we include the proof here.
To show that the function $Q_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2}$ has $|\textbf{n}_2|$ sign changes on $(0,\infty)$, we first observe from \eqref{eq:orthoQ1} and \eqref{eq:orthoQ2} that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:orthoThmNor}
\int_0^\infty (p_1(x)\rho_{\nu,b}(x)+p_2(x)\rho_{\nu+1,b}(x))Q_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2}(x)\ud x=0
\end{equation}
for any polynomials $p_i$ with $\deg p_i\leq n_{2,i}-1$, $i=1,2$. Suppose that $Q_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2}$
changes sign at the $k$ points $\{x_1,\ldots,x_k\}\in(0,\infty)$. If $k<|\textbf{n}_{2}|$, it is always possible to find
a multi-index $\textbf{n}_3=(n_{3,1},n_{3,2})$ such that $|\textbf{n}_3|=k$, $n_{3,1}<n_{2,1}$ and $n_{3,2}\leq n_{2,2}$.
Consider the interpolation problem that the function
$$P(x)=q_1(x)\rho_{\nu,b}(x)+q_2(x)\rho_{\nu+1,b}(x), ~~\deg q_1=n_{3,1}, ~~
\deg q_2=n_{3,2}-1,$$
satisfies the interpolation conditions
$$P(x_i)=0, ~~i=1,\ldots, k; \qquad P(x_0)=1, ~~ \textrm{for some other point $x_0\in\mathbb(0,+\infty)$}.$$
Since $(\rho_{\nu,b},\rho_{\nu+1,b})$ is an AT system for the multi-index $\textbf{n}_3+\textbf{e}_1=(n_{3,1}+1,n_{3,2})$, this interpolation problem has a unique solution. Furthermore, $P$ has exactly $k$ sign changes at the same points as $Q_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2}$ and has no other sign changes on $(0,\infty)$. Thus, the function $P(x)Q_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2}(x)$ does not change sign on $(0,\infty)$ and
$$\int_0^\infty P(x)Q_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2}(x) \ud x \neq 0,$$ which contradicts \eqref{eq:orthoThmNor}. As a consequence, $k\geq |\textbf{n}_2|$. Note that $(\omega_{\mu,a},\omega_{\mu+1,a})$ also forms an AT system for $\textbf{n}_1$, it then follows from Definition \ref{def:AT} that $Q_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2}$ has at most $|\textbf{n}_1|-1=|\textbf{n}_2|$ zeros. We therefore conclude that $k=|\textbf{n}_2|$.
For the normality, we suppose that there exists $i\in\{1,2\}$ such that $\deg A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,i}<n_{1,i}-1$.
Then $Q_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2}$ would have at most $|\textbf{n}_1|-2=|\textbf{n}_2|-1$ zeros, since $(\omega_{\mu,a},\omega_{\mu+1,a})$ is an AT system for any multi-index $\textbf{n}_1-\textbf{e}_i$, which is again a contradiction.
This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:nomality}
\qed
\paragraph{}
Due to the facts \eqref{eq:rationomega2} and \eqref{eq:ratiorho2}, the polynomials $ A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,1}$ and $ A_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,2}$ can also be interpreted as mixed type multiple orthogonal polynomials with respect to a pair of Nikishin systems \cite{Sorokin94}. It has been shown in \cite{FL11a,FL11b} that Nikishin systems are perfect under various mild constraints on the measures, however, the results therein do not apply directly in the present case.
Finally, we point out that one could easily conclude results similar to Theorem \ref{thm:nomality} for the vector of polynomials $(B_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,1}, B_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2,2})$ and the function $P_{\textbf{n}_1,\textbf{n}_2}$ by duality.
\section{Explicit formulas}\label{sec:expli formula}
From this section on, we will focus on the mixed type multiple orthogonal polynomials and their linear forms under the condition that each multi-index is on or close to the diagonal and investigate their properties. Recall the notations introduced at the end of Section \ref{sec:MMOP}, we start with an explicit formula for $Q_n$.
\subsection{Explicit formulas for $Q_n$, $A_{n,1}$ and $A_{n,2}$}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:Qnexpli}
For $n\geq 1$ and $x>0$, we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:Qnexpli}
Q_n(x)
&=\frac{\det
\begin{pmatrix}
\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1) & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+2) & \cdots & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n) \nonumber \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots \\
\Gamma(\mu+\nu+n) & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+n+1) & \cdots & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+2n) \nonumber \\
\omega_{\mu,a}(x) & \frac{b^2-a^2}{a}\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x) & \cdots & \left(\frac{b^2-a^2}{a}\right)^n\omega_{\mu+n,a}(x)
\end{pmatrix} }{\prod_{k=0}^{n-1}k!\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+k)} \nonumber \\
&=(-1)^n\sum_{j=0}^n \binom{n}{j}\frac{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n)}{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+j)}\left(\frac{a^2-b^2}{a}\right)^j \omega_{\mu+j,a}(x).
\end{align}
Alternatively, the following integral representations for $Q_n$ holds:
\begin{align}\label{eq:intofQn}
Q_n(x)&=(-1)^n\frac{(\mu+\nu+1)_n}{a^\mu} \nonumber \\
&~~ \times \frac{1}{2\pi
i}\int_{c-i\infty}^{c+i\infty}{\; }_2 F_1 \left({ -n, t+\mu \atop \mu+\nu+1} \Big{|} 1-\frac{b^2}{a^2} \right)
\frac{\Gamma(t+\mu)}{\Gamma(1-t)} \sin\left(\pi \left(t+\mu+\frac{1}{2}\right)\right)(a^2 x)^{-t} \ud t
\nonumber \\
&=(ax)^\mu \Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n)n!
\nonumber \\
&~~ \times\oint_{\Sigma}{\; }_0 F_1 \left({ - \atop t+\mu+1} \Big{|} a^2x \right)
\frac{\Gamma(t-n)[(b^2-a^2)x]^t}{\Gamma(t+1)\Gamma(t+\mu+\nu+1)\Gamma(t+\mu+1)} \ud t,
\end{align}
where $c>1$ and $\Sigma$ is a closed contour that encircles $0, 1, \ldots, n$ once in the positive direction.
Furthermore, one has
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Qnderivative}
\frac{\ud}{\ud x}Q_n^{\mu+1,\nu,a,b}(x)=aQ_n^{\mu,\nu,a,b}(x).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By \eqref{def:An}--\eqref{def:QnNotation} and \eqref{eq:orthoQ1}--\eqref{eq:orthoQ2}, we need to verify the right hand side of \eqref{eq:Qnexpli} belongs to the linear span of $\{\omega_{\mu,a}(x),x\omega_{\mu,a}(x),\ldots, x^{\lfloor \frac{n}{2}\rfloor}\omega_{\mu,a}(x),\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x),x\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x),\ldots, \\
x^{\lfloor \frac{n-1}{2}\rfloor}\omega_{\mu,a}(x)\}$ and satisfies the orthogonality conditions
\begin{equation*}
\int_0^\infty Q_n(x)(p_1(x)\rho_{\nu,b}(x)+p_2(x)\rho_{\nu+1,b}(x))\ud x=0,
\end{equation*}
for any polynomial $p_{i}(x)$, $i=1,2$, with $\deg{p_1}\leq \lfloor \frac{n-1}{2}\rfloor$ and $\deg{p_2}\leq \lfloor \frac{n-2}{2}\rfloor$. The key observations here are, on account of Propositions \ref{prop:omegahigh} and \ref{prop:rhohigh},
\begin{align}
&\textrm{Span}\{\omega_{\mu,a}(x),\ldots, x^{\lfloor \frac{n}{2}\rfloor}\omega_{\mu,a}(x),\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x),\ldots,
x^{\lfloor \frac{n-1}{2}\rfloor}\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x)\} \nonumber \\
&\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad=\textrm{Span}\{\omega_{\mu,a}(x),\ldots, \omega_{\mu+n,a}(x)\},\label{eq:spanequv1}\\
&\textrm{Span}\{\rho_{\nu,b}(x),\ldots, x^{\lfloor \frac{n-1}{2}\rfloor}\rho_{\nu,b}(x),\rho_{\nu+1,b}(x),\ldots,
x^{\lfloor \frac{n-2}{2}\rfloor}\rho_{\nu+1,b}(x)\} \nonumber \\
&\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad\qquad \qquad=\textrm{Span}\{\rho_{\nu,b}(x),\ldots, \rho_{\nu+n-1,b}(x)\}.
\label{eq:spanequv2}
\end{align}
Hence, by normality, it is equivalent to check
\begin{equation}\label{eq:spanspace}
Q_n(x)\in\textrm{Span}\{\omega_{\mu,a}(x),\ldots, \omega_{\mu+n,a}(x)\},
\end{equation}
and satisfies the conditions
\begin{equation}\label{eq:orthocondQnequiv}
\int_0^\infty Q_n(x)\rho_{\nu+j,b}(x)\ud x=0, \qquad j=0,1,\ldots,n-1.
\end{equation}
The condition \eqref{eq:spanspace} follows directly from the determinantal representation in \eqref{eq:Qnexpli} and the fact that $b>a>0$. To show \eqref{eq:orthocondQnequiv}, we note the following definite integral involving both $I_\mu$ and $K_\nu$:
\begin{multline*}
\int_0^{\infty}x^{-\lambda}I_{\mu}(ax)K_{\nu}(bx)\ud x =\frac{a^\mu \Gamma(\frac{1-\lambda+\mu+\nu}{2})\Gamma(\frac{1-\lambda-\nu+\mu}{2})}{2^{\lambda+1}\Gamma(\mu+1)b^{-\lambda+\mu+1}}\\
\times {\; }_2 F_1 \left({\frac{1-\lambda+\mu+\nu}{2},\frac{1-\lambda-\nu+\mu}{2} \atop \mu+1} \Big{|} \frac{a^2}{b^2} \right)
\end{multline*}
for $\Re(\mu+1-\lambda\pm\nu)>0$ and $b>a$; see \cite[Equation 5, Page 676]{Tables}. This tells us that
\begin{multline}\label{eq:intomegarho}
\int_0^\infty \omega_{\mu+i,a}(x)\rho_{\nu+j,b}(x)\ud x=\int_0^\infty x^{\frac{\mu+\nu+i+j}{2}}I_{\mu+i}(2a\sqrt{x})
K_{\nu+j}(2b\sqrt{x})\ud x
\\ =\frac{a^{\mu+i}b^{\nu+j}\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+i+j)}{2(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+\nu+1+i+j}},\qquad i,j\in\mathbb{Z}_+.
\end{multline}
Thus,
\begin{align}
&\int_0^\infty \det \begin{pmatrix}
\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1) & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+2) & \cdots & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n) \nonumber \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots \\
\Gamma(\mu+\nu+n) & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+n+1) & \cdots & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+2n) \nonumber \\
\omega_{\mu,a}(x) & \frac{b^2-a^2}{a}\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x) & \cdots & \left(\frac{b^2-a^2}{a}\right)^n\omega_{\mu+n,a}(x)
\end{pmatrix}\rho_{\nu+j,b}(x)\ud x \nonumber \\
&=\frac{a^\mu b^{\nu+j}}{2(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+\nu+1+j}} \nonumber \\
& ~~ \qquad \qquad \times \det \begin{pmatrix}
\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1) & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+2) & \cdots & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n) \nonumber \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots \\
\Gamma(\mu+\nu+n) & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+n+1) & \cdots & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+2n) \nonumber \\
\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+j) & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+2+j) & \cdots & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n+j)
\end{pmatrix} \nonumber \\
&=0 \nonumber
\end{align}
for $j=0,1,\ldots,n-1$, which gives us \eqref{eq:orthocondQnequiv}. By expanding the matrix along the last row and evaluating the associated minors we obtain the second equality in \eqref{eq:Qnexpli}.
To show the Mellin-Barnes integral representation of $Q_n$ in \eqref{eq:intofQn}, we start with the formula
$$I_{\mu}(x)=\left(\frac{x}{2}\right)^\mu \frac{1}{2\pi i}
\int_{c-i\infty}^{c+i\infty}\frac{\Gamma(t)
\sin\left(\pi \left(t+\frac{1}{2}\right)\right)}{\Gamma(1+\mu-t)}\left(\frac{x^2}{4}\right)^{-t}\ud t, \qquad c>0,$$
which can be easily verified with the help of the residue theorem and \eqref{def:I}. Combining this formula and
\eqref{def:omega}, we obtain by a change of variable that
\begin{equation}
\omega_{\mu+j,a}(x)=a^{-\mu-j}\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{c-i\infty}^{c+i\infty}
\frac{\Gamma(t+\mu+j)\sin\left(\pi \left(t+\mu+j+\frac{1}{2}\right)\right)}{\Gamma(1-t)}\left(a^2 x\right)^{-t}\ud t,
\end{equation}
for $j=0,1,\ldots,n$, and $c>-\mu-j>1$. This, together with \eqref{eq:Qnexpli}, implies that
\begin{align*}
&Q_n(x)
\\&=\frac{(-1)^n}{a^\mu}\frac{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n)}{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1)}\frac{1}{2\pi i} \\
&~~ \times \int_{c-i\infty}^{c+i\infty} \sum_{j=0}^n \frac{(-n)_j(t+\mu)_j\Gamma(t+\mu)}
{j!(\mu+\nu+1)_j\Gamma(1-t)}\left(\frac{a^2-b^2}{a^2}\right)^j
\sin\left(\pi \left(t+\mu+\frac{1}{2}\right)\right)
\left(a^2 x\right)^{-t}\ud t \\
&=(-1)^n\frac{(\mu+\nu+1)_n}{a^\mu} \nonumber \\
&~~ \times \frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{c-i\infty}^{c+i\infty}{\; }_2 F_1 \left({ -n, t+\mu \atop \mu+\nu+1} \Big{|} 1-\frac{b^2}{a^2} \right)
\frac{\Gamma(t+\mu)}{\Gamma(1-t)} \sin\left(\pi \left(t+\mu+\frac{1}{2}\right)\right)(a^2 x)^{-t} \ud t.
\end{align*}
For the second equality in \eqref{eq:intofQn}, we note the following series expansion of $\omega_{\mu+j,a}$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:expanomega}
\omega_{\mu+j,a}(x)=x^{\frac{\mu+j}{2}}I_{\mu+j}(2a\sqrt{x})
=(ax)^{\mu+j}\sum_{k=0}^\infty\frac{(a^2x)^k}{k!\Gamma(\mu+j+k+1)}, \end{equation}
which follows from $\eqref{def:I}$. Inserting this expansion into \eqref{eq:Qnexpli}, it is readily seen that
\begin{align}\label{eq:Qnintproof1}
Q_n(x)&=(-1)^n\sum_{j=0}^n \binom{n}{j}\frac{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n)}{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+j)}\left(\frac{a^2-b^2}{a}\right)^j \sum_{k=0}^\infty\frac{(ax)^{\mu+j}(a^2x)^k}{k!\Gamma(\mu+j+k+1)} \nonumber
\\
&=(-1)^n(ax)^\mu\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n) \nonumber \\
&\qquad \qquad \times \sum_{k=0}^\infty\frac{(a^2x)^k}{k!}\sum_{j=0}^n\frac{(-n)_j}{j!}\frac{[(b^2-a^2)x]^j}
{\Gamma(\mu+j+k+1)\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+j)}.
\end{align}
An easy calculation with the aid of the residue theorem shows that
\begin{multline}\sum_{j=0}^n\frac{(-n)_j}{j!}\frac{[(b^2-a^2)x]^j}
{\Gamma(\mu+j+k+1)\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+j)}\\
=(-1)^nn!\oint_{\Sigma}\frac{\Gamma(t-n)[(b^2-a^2)x]^t}{\Gamma(t+1)\Gamma(t+\mu+k+1)\Gamma(t+\mu+\nu+1)}\ud t,
\end{multline}
where $\Sigma$ is a closed contour encircling $0, 1, \ldots, n$ once in the positive direction.
Substituting the above formula into \eqref{eq:Qnintproof1}, we obtain by interchanging the summation and integral that
\begin{align*}\label{eq:Qnintproof2}
Q_n(x)&=(ax)^\mu\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n)n! \nonumber \\
&\qquad \times\oint_{\Sigma}\frac{\Gamma(t-n)[(b^2-a^2)x]^t}{\Gamma(t+1)\Gamma(t+\mu+\nu+1)\Gamma(t+\mu+1)} \sum_{k=0}^\infty\frac{(a^2x)^k}{k!(t+\mu+1)_k}\ud t \\
&=(ax)^\mu \Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n)n! \\ &\qquad \times\oint_{\Sigma}\frac{\Gamma(t-n)((b^2-a^2)x)^t}{\Gamma(t+1)\Gamma(t+\mu+\nu+1)\Gamma(t+\mu+1)}{\; }_0 F_1 \left({ - \atop t+\mu+1} \Big{|} a^2x \right) \ud t,
\end{align*}
as required.
Finally, the differential property \eqref{eq:Qnderivative} follows directly from \eqref{eq:Qnexpli} and \eqref{eq:recuromega2}.
This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:Qnexpli}.
\end{proof}
We next come to the explicit formulas for the mixed type multiple orthogonal polynomials $A_{n,1}$ and $A_{n,2}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:expAn}
With the polynomials $A_{n,i}$, $i=1,2$ defined in \eqref{def:An}, we have, for $n\geq 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:explAn1}
A_{n,1}(x)=(-1)^n\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n)\sum_{i=0}^{\lfloor\frac{n}{2}\rfloor}a_{i,n}x^i,
\end{equation}
where
$$a_{i,n}=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{1}{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1)}, & \hbox{$i=0$,} \\
a^{2i}\sum_{j=2i}^n\binom{n}{j}\binom{j-i-1}{i-1}\frac{(\mu+i+1)_{j-2i}}{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+j)}
\left(\frac{b^2-a^2}{a^2}\right)^j, & \hbox{$i\geq 1$,}
\end{array}
\right.
$$
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:explAn2}
A_{n,2}(x)=(-1)^{n+1}\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n)a\sum_{i=0}^{\lfloor\frac{n-1}{2}\rfloor}\tilde a_{i,n}x^i,
\end{equation}
where
$$\tilde a_{i,n}=\sum_{j=2i+1}^n\binom{n}{j}\binom{j-i-1}{i}\frac{(\mu+i+1)_{j-2i-1}}{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+j)}
\left(\frac{b^2-a^2}{a^2}\right)^j,\qquad i\geq 0.
$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}From \eqref{eq:Qnexpli} and Proposition \ref{prop:omegahigh}, it is readily seen that
\begin{multline*}
Q_n(x)=(-1)^n\sum_{j=0}^n \binom{n}{j}\frac{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n)}{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+j)}\left(\frac{a^2-b^2}{a}\right)^j
\\
\times\left(a^{-j} r_{j,\mu}(a^2 x)\omega_{\mu,a}(x)+a^{1-j}s_{j,\mu}(a^2 x)\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x)\right).
\end{multline*}
This, together with \eqref{def:QnNotation}, implies that
\begin{align*}
A_{n,1}(x)&=(-1)^n\sum_{j=0}^n \binom{n}{j}\frac{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n)}{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+j)}\left(\frac{a^2-b^2}{a^2}\right)^j
r_{j,\mu}(a^2 x), \\
A_{n,2}(x)&=(-1)^n a \sum_{j=0}^n \binom{n}{j}\frac{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n)}{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+j)}\left(\frac{a^2-b^2}{a^2}\right)^j
s_{j,\mu}(a^2 x).
\end{align*}
The formulas \eqref{eq:explAn1} and \eqref{eq:explAn2} then follow from substituting \eqref{def:rmmu} and \eqref{def:smmu} into the above two equations and rearranging the expansions.
This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:expAn}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Explicit formulas for $P_n$, $B_{n,1}$ and $B_{n,2}$}
There are similar explicit formulas for the dual functions $P_n$, $B_{n,1}$ and $B_{n,2}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:Pnexpli}
For $n\geq 1$ and $x>0$, we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:Pnexpli}
P_n(x)
&=c_n\frac{\det
\begin{pmatrix}
\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1) & \cdots & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+n) & \rho_{\nu,b}(x) \nonumber \\
\Gamma(\mu+\nu+2) & \cdots & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+n+1)& \frac{b^2-a^2}{b}\rho_{\nu+1,b}(x) \nonumber \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots \\
\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n) & \cdots &\Gamma(\mu+\nu+2n) & \left(\frac{b^2-a^2}{b}\right)^n\rho_{\nu+n,b}(x)
\end{pmatrix}}{\prod_{k=0}^{n-1}k!\Gamma(\mu+\nu+k+1)} \nonumber \\
&=(-1)^n\frac{2(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+\nu+1}}{a^\mu b^\nu n!}\sum_{j=0}^n \binom{n}{j}\left(\frac{a^2-b^2}{b}\right)^j\frac{\rho_{\nu+j,b}(x)}{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+j)} ,
\end{align}
where $$c_n=\frac{2(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+\nu+1}}{a^\mu b^\nu \Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n)n!}.$$
Alternatively, the following Mellin-Barnes integral representation for $P_n$ holds:
\begin{multline}\label{eq:intofPn}
P_n(x)=(-1)^n\frac{(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+\nu+1}}{a^\mu b^{2\nu}\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1)n!} \\ \times\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{c-i\infty}^{c+i\infty}{\; }_2 F_1 \left({ -n, t+\nu \atop \mu+\nu+1} \Big{|} 1-\frac{a^2}{b^2} \right)\Gamma(t)
\Gamma(t+\nu) (b^2 x)^{-t} \ud t
\end{multline}
with $c>0$ and $x>0$.
Furthermore, one has
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Pnderivative}
\frac{\ud}{\ud x}P_n^{\mu,\nu+1,a,b}(x)=-bP_n^{\mu,\nu,a,b}(x)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:orthoPQ}
\int_0^\infty Q_n(x)P_m(x)\ud x=\delta_{n,m}, \qquad n,m\in\mathbb{N},
\end{equation}
where $Q_n$ is given \eqref{eq:Qnexpli}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The proof of \eqref{eq:Pnexpli} is similar to that of \eqref{eq:Qnexpli}. By \eqref{eq:spanequv1} and \eqref{eq:spanequv2},
it suffices to verify
\begin{equation}
P_n(x)\in\textrm{Span}\{\rho_{\nu,b}(x),\ldots, \rho_{\nu+n,b}(x)\},
\end{equation}
and satisfies the conditions
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Pnortho}
\int_0^\infty P_n(x)\omega_{\mu+j,a}(x)\ud x=0, \qquad j=0,1,\ldots,n-1.
\end{equation}
These requirements follow directly from the determinantal representation and \eqref{eq:intomegarho}. A further expansion of the matrix leads to the second equality in \eqref{eq:Pnexpli}.
To show \eqref{eq:intofPn}, we note that
\begin{equation}
\rho_{\nu+j,b}(x)=\frac{b^{-\nu-j}}{4 \pi i}\int_{c-i\infty}^{c+i\infty}\Gamma(t)\Gamma(t+\nu+j)
\left(b^2 x\right)^{-t}\ud t,
\quad c>0,
\end{equation}
see \eqref{eq:rhoMellin}. This, together with \eqref{eq:Pnexpli}, implies that
\begin{align*}
P_n(x)&=(-1)^n\frac{(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+\nu+1}}{a^\mu b^{2\nu} n!}\sum_{j=0}^n \binom{n}{j}\left(\frac{a^2-b^2}{b^2}\right)^j\frac{1}{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+j)} \\
&\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \times \frac{1}{2 \pi i}\int_{c-i\infty}^{c+i\infty}\Gamma(t)\Gamma(t+\nu+j)
\left(b^2 x\right)^{-t}\ud t \\
&=(-1)^n\frac{(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+\nu+1}}{a^\mu b^{2\nu}\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1)n!} \\
&\qquad \times \frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{c-i\infty}^{c+i\infty}\sum_{j=0}^n \left(\frac{(-n)_j(t+\nu)_j}{j!(\mu+\nu+1)_j}
\left(\frac{b^2-a^2}{b^2}\right)^j\right)\Gamma(t) \Gamma(t+\nu) (b^2 x)^{-t} \ud t \\
&=(-1)^n\frac{(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+\nu+1}}{a^\mu b^{2\nu}\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1)n!} \\
&\qquad \times \frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{c-i\infty}^{c+i\infty}{\; }_2 F_1 \left({ -n, t+\nu \atop \mu+\nu+1} \Big{|} 1-\frac{a^2}{b^2} \right)
\Gamma(t) \Gamma(t+\nu) (b^2 x)^{-t} \ud t, \end{align*}
as expected.
Finally, the differential property \eqref{eq:Pnderivative} follows directly from \eqref{eq:Pnexpli} and \eqref{eq:recurrho2}. For the biorthogonality properties \eqref{eq:orthoPQ}, by \eqref{eq:Pnortho}, it remains to check the case when $m=n$. Note that the coefficient of $\omega_{\mu+n,a}$ in \eqref{eq:Qnexpli} is $\left(\frac{b^2-a^2}{a}\right)^n$, it is readily seen from \eqref{eq:Pnexpli} and \eqref{eq:intomegarho} that
\begin{align*}
&\int_0^\infty Q_n(x)P_n(x)\ud x = \left(\frac{b^2-a^2}{a}\right)^n\int_0^\infty P_n(x)\omega_{\mu+n,a}(x)\ud x \\
&=\frac{c_n\left(\frac{b^2-a^2}{a}\right)^n}{\prod_{k=0}^{n-1}k!\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+k)} \\
&~~ \times
\det
\begin{pmatrix}
\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1) & \cdots & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+n) & \frac{a^{\mu+n}b^\nu}{2(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+\nu+n+1}}\Gamma(\mu+\nu+n+1) \nonumber \\
\Gamma(\mu+\nu+2) & \cdots & \Gamma(\mu+\nu+n+1)& \frac{a^{\mu+n}b^\nu}{2(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+\nu+n+1}}\Gamma(\mu+\nu+n+2) \nonumber \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots \\
\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n) & \cdots &\Gamma(\mu+\nu+2n) & \frac{a^{\mu+n}b^\nu}{2(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+\nu+n+1}}\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+2n)
\end{pmatrix}\\
&~~=1.
\end{align*}
This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:Pnexpli}. \end{proof}
Combining Theorem \ref{thm:Pnexpli} and Proposition \ref{prop:rhohigh},
explicit formulas for the dual polynomials $B_{n,1}$ and $B_{n,2}$ are immediate, which are given in the following theorem
and the proof is omitted.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:expBn}
With the polynomials $B_{n,i}$, $i=1,2$ defined in \eqref{def:Bn}, we have, for $n\geq 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:explBn1}
B_{n,1}(x)=(-1)^n\frac{2(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+\nu+1}}{a^\mu b^\nu n!}\sum_{i=0}^{\lfloor\frac{n}{2}\rfloor}b_{i,n}x^i,
\end{equation}
where
$$b_{i,n}=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{1}{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1)}, & \hbox{$i=0$,} \\
b^{2i}\sum_{j=2i}^n\binom{n}{j}\binom{j-i-1}{i-1}\frac{(\nu+i+1)_{j-2i}}{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+j)}
\left(\frac{a^2-b^2}{b^2}\right)^j, & \hbox{$i\geq 1$,}
\end{array}
\right.
$$
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:explBn2}
B_{n,2}(x)=(-1)^{n}\frac{2(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+\nu+1}}{a^\mu b^{\nu-1} n!}\sum_{i=0}^{\lfloor\frac{n-1}{2}\rfloor}\tilde b_{i,n}x^i,
\end{equation}
where
$$\tilde b_{i,n}=\sum_{j=2i+1}^n\binom{n}{j}\binom{j-i-1}{i}\frac{(\nu+i+1)_{j-2i-1}}{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+j)}
\left(\frac{a^2-b^2}{b^2}\right)^j,\qquad i\geq 0.
$$
\end{theorem}
\section{Limiting forms of $Q_n$ and $P_n$}\label{sec:limitingform}
Based on the explicit formulas for $Q_n$ and $P_n$ established in Section \ref{sec:expli formula}, we are able to derive various limiting forms of $Q_n$ and $P_n$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:Qlim}
We have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Qnazero}
\lim_{a \to 0, \; b/\sqrt{a} \to k}Q_n\left(\frac{x}{a}\right)
=(-1)^n\frac{(\mu+\nu+1)_n}{\Gamma(\mu+1)} {\; }_1 F_2 \left({ -n \atop \mu+\nu+1, \mu+1} \Big{|} k^2x \right)x^\mu,
\end{equation}
uniformly for $x$ in any compact subset of $(0,+\infty)$, where the notation $\lim_{a \to 0, \; b/\sqrt{a} \to k}$
means that both $a,b \to 0$ with $b/\sqrt{a}\to k>0$.
Suppose that $c=b-a>0$ fixed, one has
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Qnainfty}
\lim_{a \to +\infty, \; b-a=c}\frac{2\sqrt{\pi a}}{e^{2a x}}Q_n(x^2)=x^{\mu-\frac{1}{2}}L_n^{(\mu+\nu)}(2cx),
\end{equation}
uniformly for $x$ in any compact subset of $(0,+\infty)$, where the notation $\lim_{a \to +\infty, \; b-a=c}$ means that
both $a,b \to +\infty$ with $b-a=c>0$ and
$$
L_n^{(\alpha)}(x)
=(-1)^n\sum_{j=0}^n \binom{n}{j}\frac{\Gamma(\alpha+1+n)}{\Gamma(\alpha+1+j)}\left(-x \right)^j,\qquad \alpha>-1,
$$
is the monic generalized Laguerre polynomial.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
From \eqref{eq:expanomega}, it is easily seen that
$$\lim_{a\to 0}\omega_{\mu+j,a}\left(\frac{x}{a}\right)=\frac{x^{\mu+j}}{\Gamma(\mu+1+j)},
\qquad j=0,1,\ldots,n,
$$
uniformly valid for $x$ belonging to any compact subset of $(0,+\infty)$. This, together with \eqref{eq:Qnexpli} and the fact that
$$\lim_{a \to 0, \; b/\sqrt{a} \to k}\frac{a^2-b^2}{a}=-k^2,$$
implies
\begin{align*}
&\lim_{a \to 0, \; b/\sqrt{a} \to k}Q_n\left(\frac{x}{a}\right) \nonumber
\\&=(-1)^n\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n)
\sum_{j=0}^n\frac{(-n)_j}{j!}\frac{x^{\mu+j}}{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+j)\Gamma(\mu+1+j)}k^{2j} \nonumber \\
&=(-1)^n\frac{(\mu+\nu+1)_n}{\Gamma(\mu+1)}
{\; }_1 F_2 \left({ -n \atop \mu+\nu+1, \mu+1} \Big{|} k^2x \right)x^\mu,
\end{align*}
which is \eqref{eq:Qnazero}.
To show \eqref{eq:Qnainfty}, we note that, on account of \eqref{eq:asyI2} and \eqref{def:omega},
$$\lim_{a\to +\infty}\frac{2\sqrt{\pi a}}{e^{2ax}}\omega_{\mu+j,a}(x^2)=x^{\mu+j-\frac{1}{2}},
\qquad j=0,1,\ldots,n,$$
uniformly valid for $x$ belonging to any compact subset of $(0,+\infty)$, and
$$\lim_{a \to +\infty, \; b-a=c}\frac{a^2-b^2}{a}=-2c.$$
Substituting the above two equations into \eqref{eq:Qnexpli} gives us \eqref{eq:Qnainfty}.
This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:Qlim}.
\end{proof}
The results for $P_n$ are stated in the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:Plim}
Suppose that $c=b-a>0$ fixed, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Pnainfty}
\lim_{b \to +\infty, \; b-a=c}\sqrt{\frac{4b}{\pi}}e^{2 b x}P_n(x^2)=
\frac{2(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+\nu+1}}{a^\mu b^\nu \Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n)n!}x^{\nu-\frac{1}{2}}L_n^{(\mu+\nu)}(2cx),
\end{equation}
uniformly for $x$ in any compact subset of $(0,+\infty)$.
Furthermore, one has
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Pnxsmall}
\lim_{x \to 0}P_n(x)=(-1)^n\frac{(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+\nu+1}\Gamma(\nu)}{a^\mu b^{2\nu}\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1)n!}
{\; }_2 F_1 \left({ -n, \nu \atop \mu+\nu+1} \Big{|} 1-\frac{a^2}{b^2} \right)
\end{equation}
and the following Mehler-Heine asymptotics
\begin{multline}\label{eq:PnMHasy}
\lim_{n\to \infty} (-1)^nn!(n+1)^{\nu}P_n\left(\frac{x}{(n+1)(b^2-a^2)}\right)
=\frac{(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+1}}{a^\mu}\mathop{{G^{{2,0}}_{{0,3}}}\/}\nolimits\!\left({- \atop 0, \nu, -\mu} \Big{|} x\right)
\\=\frac{(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+1}}{a^\mu}\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{c-i\infty}^{c+i\infty}
\frac{\Gamma(t)\Gamma(t+\nu)}{\Gamma(1+\mu-t)}x^{-t} \ud t, \quad c>0,
\end{multline}
where $\mathop{{G^{{m,0}}_{{0,q}}}\/}$ stands for the Meijer G-function; cf. \cite[Section 16.17]{DLMF}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By \eqref{eq:asyK2} and \eqref{def:rho}, it is readily seen that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:limrho}
\lim_{b\to +\infty}\sqrt{\frac{4b}{\pi}}e^{2 b x}\rho_{\nu+j,b}(x^2)=x^{\nu+j-\frac{1}{2}},
\qquad j=0,1,\ldots,n,
\end{equation}
uniformly valid for $x$ belonging to any compact subset of $(0,+\infty)$. A combination of \eqref{eq:limrho},
\eqref{eq:Pnexpli} and the fact that
$$\lim_{b \to +\infty, \; b-a=c}\frac{a^2-b^2}{b}=-2c$$
gives us \eqref{eq:Pnainfty}.
On account of \eqref{eq:asyrho1}, the limit \eqref{eq:Pnxsmall} is immediate from \eqref{eq:Pnexpli}. To
show \eqref{eq:PnMHasy}, we make use of the following asymptotics of Gauss hypergeometric function for large parameter
(see \cite[Equation 2.6]{Temme})
\begin{equation}
{\; }_2 F_1 \left({ -n, \alpha+\beta+1 \atop 2\alpha+1} \Big{|} 1- z \right)
\sim \frac{\Gamma(2\alpha+1)}{\Gamma(\alpha-\beta)}\left[(n+1)(1-z)\right]^{-\alpha-\beta-1},
\end{equation}
for $\Re (\alpha+\beta)>-1$ and $|z|<1$ fixed. Thus, in view of the Mellin-Barnes integral representation \eqref{eq:intofPn} for $P_n$, we have
\begin{align}
&\lim_{n\to \infty} (-1)^nn!(n+1)^{\nu}P_n\left(\frac{x}{(n+1)(b^2-a^2)}\right) \nonumber \\
&=\frac{(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+\nu+1}}{a^\mu b^{2\nu} \Gamma(\mu+\nu+1)} \nonumber \\
&\quad~~ \times \frac{1}{2 \pi i}\int_{c-i\infty}^{c+i\infty}\frac{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1)\Gamma(t)\Gamma(t+\nu)}{\Gamma(1+\mu-t)}\left(\frac{b^2 x}{b^2-a^2}\right)^{-t}\left(1-\frac{a^2}{b^2}\right)^{-t-\nu} \ud t \nonumber \\
&= \frac{(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+1}}{a^\mu} \frac{1}{2 \pi i}\int_{c-i\infty}^{c+i\infty}\frac{\Gamma(t)\Gamma(t+\nu)}{\Gamma(1+\mu-t)}x^{-t} \ud t, \nonumber
\end{align}
which is \eqref{eq:PnMHasy}. The interchange of limit and integral is justified by the fact that the gamma function is
exponentially small along the contour of integration and the dominated convergence theorem.
This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:Plim}.
\end{proof}
\section{Recurrence relations}\label{sec:recurrence rel}
By general theory of mixed type multiple orthogonal polynomials (cf. \cite{AFM11}), it follows that both $Q_n$ and $P_n$ satisfy five-term recurrence relations. It is the aim of this section to calculate these recurrence coefficients explicitly.
We stress out that both $Q_n$ and $P_n$ are not polynomials.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:recurrence}
For $n\geq 0$, the function $Q_n$ satisfies the following recurrence relation:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Qnrecurrence}
x Q_n(x) = a_{2,n}Q_{n+2}(x) + a_{1,n}Q_{n+1}(x)+a_{0,n}Q_n(x)+a_{-1,n}Q_{n-1}(x)+a_{-2,n}Q_{n-2}(x)
\end{equation}
with initial conditions $Q_{-2}(x)=Q_{-1}(x)=0$ and $Q_{0}(x)=\omega_{\mu,a}(x)$, where
\begin{align*}
a_{2,n}&=\left(\frac{a}{b^2-a^2}\right)^2, \\
a_{1,n}&=2(\mu+\nu+2n+2)\left(\frac{a}{b^2-a^2}\right)^2+\frac{\mu+n+1}{b^2-a^2}, \\
a_{0,n}&=(6n^2+6(\mu+\nu+1)n+(\mu+\nu+1)(\mu+\nu+2))\left(\frac{a}{b^2-a^2}\right)^2 \nonumber
\\& \qquad +\frac{3n^2+(4\mu+2\nu+3)n+(\mu+1)(\mu+\nu+1)}{b^2-a^2},
\\
a_{-1,n}&=n(\mu+\nu+n)\left(2(\mu+\nu+2)\left(\frac{b}{b^2-a^2}\right)^2-\frac{\nu+n}{b^2-a^2}\right), \\
a_{-2,n}&=(n-1)n(\mu+\nu+n-1)(\mu+\nu+n)\left(\frac{b}{b^2-a^2}\right)^2.
\end{align*}
Similarly, the dual function $P_n$ satisfies recurrence relation
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Pnrecurrence}
x P_n(x) = b_{2,n}P_{n+2}(x) + b_{1,n}P_{n+1}(x)+b_{0,n}P_n(x)+b_{-1,n}P_{n-1}(x)+b_{-2,n}P_{n-2}(x)
\end{equation}
with initial conditions $P_{-2}(x)=P_{-1}(x)=0$ and
$P_{0}(x)=\frac{2(b^2-a^2)^{\mu+\nu+1}}{a^\mu b^\nu\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1)}\rho_{\nu,b}(x)$, where
\begin{equation}\label{eq:aibi}
b_{i,n}=a_{-i,n+i}, \qquad i\in\{-2,-1,0,1,2\}.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By \eqref{eq:orthocondQnequiv}, \eqref{eq:Pnortho} and \eqref{eq:orthoPQ}, it is readily seen that
\begin{equation}
\int_0^\infty Q_n(x)P_m(x)\ud x=\delta_{n,m}, \qquad n,m\in\mathbb{Z}_+.
\end{equation}
Hence,
\begin{align*}
a_{i,n} = \int_0^{\infty} x Q_n(x)P_{n+i}(x)\ud x, \quad
b_{i,n} = \int_0^{\infty} x P_n(x) Q_{n+i}(x) \ud x, \quad i\in\{-2,-1,0,1,2\},
\end{align*}
which gives us \eqref{eq:aibi}.
The explicit formulas of recurrence coefficients follow directly from the explicit formula for $Q_n$ and
the three-term recurrence relation for $\omega_{\mu,a}$. Indeed, by setting
$$c_{j,n}= (-1)^n \binom{n}{j}\frac{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+n)}{\Gamma(\mu+\nu+1+j)}\left(\frac{a^2-b^2}{a}\right)^j,
~~j=0,1,\ldots,n,$$
we obtain from \eqref{eq:Qnexpli}, \eqref{eq:recuromega1} and \eqref{eq:Qnrecurrence} that
\begin{align*}
x Q_n(x) & = \sum_{j=0}^n c_{j,n}x\omega_{\mu+j,a}(x)
=\sum_{j=0}^n c_{j,n}\left(\omega_{\mu+j+2,a}(x)+\frac{\mu+j+1}{a}\omega_{\mu+j+1,a}(x)\right)
\\
&=c_{0,n}\frac{\mu+1}{a}\omega_{\mu+1,a}(x)+\sum_{j=2}^{n+1}\left(c_{j-2,n}+c_{j-1,n}\frac{\mu+j}{a}\right)
\omega_{\mu+j,a}(x)+c_{n,n}\omega_{\mu+n+2,a}(x)
\\
&=a_{2,n}\sum_{j=0}^{n+2} c_{j,n+2}\omega_{\mu+j,a}(x)+a_{1,n}\sum_{j=0}^{n+1} c_{j,n+1}\omega_{\mu+j,a}(x)
+a_{0,n}\sum_{j=0}^{n} c_{j,n}\omega_{\mu+j,a}(x)
\\
&\qquad + a_{-1,n}\sum_{j=0}^{n-1} c_{j,n-1}\omega_{\mu+j,a}(x)+a_{-2,n}\sum_{j=0}^{n-2} c_{j,n-2}\omega_{\mu+j,a}(x).
\end{align*}
Comparing the coefficients of $\omega_{\mu+n+i,a}$, $i\in\{2,1,0,-1,-2\}$ in the last equality then gives us $a_{i,n}$
recursively.
This completes the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:recurrence}.
\end{proof}
By \eqref{def:QnNotation} and \eqref{def:PnNotation}, we have that the polynomials $A_{n,i}$ and $B_{n,i}$, $i=1,2$ also satisfy the recurrence relations \eqref{eq:Qnrecurrence} and \eqref{eq:Pnrecurrence}, respectively.
\section{Products of two coupled random matrices}\label{sec:prod}
In this section, we explain in detail how the mixed type multiple orthogonal polynomials associated with the modified Bessel functions are related to products of two coupled random matrices in a general setting introduced by Liu in \cite{Liu16}.
We start with a coupled two-matrix model defined by the probability distribution
\begin{equation}\label{def:coupledmatrix}
\frac{1}{\widehat Z_n} \exp \left(-\beta \textrm{Tr}(X_1X_1^*+X_2^*X_2)+\textrm{Tr}(\Omega X_1 X_2 +(\Omega X_1 X_2)^*)\right)\ud X_1\ud X_2,
\end{equation}
over pairs of rectangular complex matrices $(X_1,X_2)$, each of size $L\times M$ and $M\times n$ respectively, where $\ud X_1$ and $\ud X_2$ are the flat complex Lebesgue measures on the entries of $X_1$ and $X_2$, and $\widehat Z_n$ is a normalization constant. Here $\beta>0$, and $\Omega$ is a fixed $n\times L$ complex matrix such that $\Omega\Omega^* < \beta^2$ which plays the role of coupling between $X_1$ and $X_2$.
If $L=n$ and $\Omega$ is a scalar matrix, the model \eqref{def:coupledmatrix} can be interpreted as the chiral two-matrix model \cite{ADOS07,OSborn04}, which was introduced in the context of quantum chromodynamics. In this case, an alternative formulation of the model is given in \eqref{eq:X1andX2}. Indeed, the pair $(X_1,X_2)$ therein is then distributed according to \eqref{def:coupledmatrix} with $L=n$, $\beta=\frac{1+\tau}{2\tau}$
and $\Omega=\frac{1-\tau}{2\tau}I_n$, where $I_n$ stands for the $n\times n$ identity matrix; see \cite{AS15,Liu16}.
Our interest lies in the singular values of the product matrix
$$\widehat Y=X_1X_2,$$
where the pair $(X_1,X_2)$ has the probability distribution \eqref{def:coupledmatrix}.
It comes out that the squared singular values of $\widehat Y$ are distributed according to a determinantal point process \cite{AS15,Liu16} over the positive real axis. The determinantal point process is a biorthogonal ensemble \cite{Bor} with joint probability density function (see \cite[Proposition 1.1]{Liu16})
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{Z_n}\det \left[I_{\kappa}(2\alpha_i\sqrt{x_j})\right]_{i,j=1}^n
\det\left[x_j^{\frac{\nu+i-1}{2}}K_{\nu-\kappa+i-1}(2\beta\sqrt{x_j})\right]_{i,j=1}^n,
\end{equation}
with $I_\mu$ and $K_\nu$ being the modified Bessel functions of the first kind and the second kind, respectively, where $$\kappa:=L-n, \qquad \nu:=M-n,$$
$\alpha_i$, $i=1,\ldots,n$ are the singular values of coupling matrix $\Omega$, and $Z_n$ is a normalization constant explicitly known. Here, it is also assumed that $L,M\geq n$.
We now focus on the confluent case that all the singular values of $\Omega$ are the same, that is, $\alpha_i \to \alpha>0$.
The linear space spanned by the functions $x \mapsto I_{\kappa}(2\alpha_i\sqrt{x})$, $i=1,\ldots,n$, tends to
the linear space spanned by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:linear_span}
x \mapsto \frac{\partial^{j-1}}{\partial y^{j-1}}I_{\kappa}(2y \sqrt{x})|_{y=\alpha}, \quad j=1,\ldots,n.
\end{equation}
Using the recurrence relations \eqref{eq:recurI1} and \eqref{eq:recurI2} satisfied by the modified Bessel
functions of the first kind, it is easily seen that the resulting space is spanned by the functions
$x \mapsto x^{\frac{i-1}{2}}I_{\kappa+i-1}(2\alpha\sqrt{x})$, $i=1,\ldots,n$. Thus, a further simple algebraic calculation
implies that the joint probability density function for the squared singular values of $\widehat Y$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:jpdfcon}
\frac{1}{Z_n}\det \left[x_j^{\frac{\kappa+i-1}{2}}I_{\kappa+i-1}(2\alpha\sqrt{x_j})\right]_{i,j=1}^n
\det\left[x_j^{\frac{\nu-\kappa+i-1}{2}}K_{\nu-\kappa+i-1}(2\beta\sqrt{x_j})\right]_{i,j=1}^n,
\end{equation}
under the condition that the coupling matrix $\Omega$ has a single singular value $\alpha$. For the case $\kappa=0$, the result was first obtained by Akemann and Strahov \cite{AS15}.
From general properties of biorthogonal ensembles \cite{Bor}, it is known that the correlation kernel of determinantal point process \eqref{eq:jpdfcon}
is given by \eqref{def:Kn},
where for each $k = 0, 1, \ldots$, $\mathcal{Q}_k$ belongs to the linear span of $x^{\frac{\kappa+i}{2}}I_{\kappa+i}(2\alpha \sqrt{x})$, $i=0,\ldots,k$, while $\mathcal{P}_k$ belongs to
the linear span of $x^{\frac{\nu-\kappa+i}{2}}K_{\nu-\kappa+i}(2\beta \sqrt{x})$, $i=0,\ldots,k$ in such a way that the biorthogonality conditions \eqref{eq:biortho} hold.
By Theorems \ref{thm:Qnexpli} and \ref{thm:Pnexpli}, we actually have
$$ \mathcal{Q}_k(x)=Q_{k}^{\kappa,\nu-\kappa,\alpha,\beta}(x),\qquad
\mathcal{P}_k(x)=P_{k}^{\kappa,\nu-\kappa,\alpha,\beta}(x),\qquad k=0,1,\ldots,$$
recall the notations in \eqref{eq:notations}. For the special case that $\kappa=0$, the explicit formulas and recurrence
relations for $\mathcal{Q}_k$ and $\mathcal{P}_k$ can also be found in \cite{AS15} and coincide with ours up to some common constants, but without noting the multiple orthogonality.
Due to the connection to multiple orthogonal polynomials of mixed type, the point process \eqref{eq:jpdfcon} is a multiple orthogonal polynomial ensemble \cite{Kui10a,Kui10b}. This in particular implies the following RH characterization (\cite{DK,DKV08,Delvaux10}) of the correlation kernel \eqref{def:Kn}.
\begin{rhp} \label{rhp:Y}
We look for a $4\times 4$ matrix-valued function
$Y : \mathbb C \setminus \mathbb [0,+\infty) \to \mathbb C^{4 \times 4}$
satisfying
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\rm (1)] $Y$ is defined and analytic in $ \mathbb{C} \setminus [0,+\infty)$.
\item[\rm (2)] $Y$ has limiting values $Y_{\pm}$ on $(0,\infty)$,
where $Y_+$ ($Y_-$) denotes the limiting value from the upper
(lower) half-plane, and
\begin{equation}\label{defjumpmatrix0}
Y_{+}(x) = Y_{-}(x)
\begin{pmatrix} I_2 & W(x)\\
0 & I_2
\end{pmatrix}, \qquad x \in \mathbb (0,+\infty),
\end{equation}
where $W(x)$ is
the rank-one matrix (outer product of two vectors)
\begin{align*}
W(x) &=
\begin{pmatrix}
\omega_{\kappa,\alpha}(x) \\
\omega_{\kappa+1,\alpha}(x)
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
\rho_{\nu-\kappa,\beta}(x) &
\rho_{\nu-\kappa+1,\beta}(x)
\end{pmatrix}\\
&=\begin{pmatrix}
\omega_{\kappa,\alpha}(x)\rho_{\nu-\kappa,\beta}(x) & \omega_{\kappa,\alpha}(x)\rho_{\nu-\kappa+1,\beta}(x) \\
\omega_{\kappa+1,\alpha}(x)\rho_{\nu-\kappa,\beta}(x) & \omega_{\kappa+1,\alpha}(x)\rho_{\nu-\kappa+1,\beta}(x)
\end{pmatrix},
\end{align*}
where $\omega_{\mu,a}$ and $\rho_{\nu,b}$ are given in \eqref{def:omega} and \eqref{def:rho}, respectively.
\item[\rm (3)] As $z\to\infty$, we have that
\begin{equation}\label{asymptoticconditionY0}
Y(z) = \left(I_4+\frac{Y_1}{z}+O\left(\frac{1}{z^2}\right)\right)
\diag(z^{n_1},z^{n_2},z^{-n_1},z^{-n_2}).
\end{equation}
with $n_1=\lfloor \frac{n-1}{2} \rfloor+1$ and $n_2=\lfloor \frac{n-2}{2} \rfloor+1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{rhp}
Combined with appropriate local behavior near the origin that depends on the parameters
$\kappa,\nu$, it is shown in \cite{DK} that the RH problem for $Y$
has a unique solution and the correlation kernel \eqref{def:Kn} admits the following representation in terms of the solution of the RH problem:
\begin{multline}\label{kernel representation}
K_{n}(x,y)
\\=\frac{1}{2\pi i(x-y)}\begin{pmatrix}0 &0 & \rho_{\nu-\kappa,\beta}(y)&
\rho_{\nu-\kappa+1,\beta}(y)\end{pmatrix} Y_{+}^{-1}(y)Y_{+}(x)
\begin{pmatrix}
\omega_{\kappa,\alpha}(x) \\ \omega_{\kappa+1,\alpha}(x) \\ 0 \\ 0
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{multline}
The representation \eqref{kernel representation} is based on the Christoffel-Darboux
formula for multiple orthogonal polynomials of mixed type; see also \cite{AFM11}.
The solution $Y(z)$ to the RH problem actually admits the following partition:
\begin{equation}
Y(z)=\begin{pmatrix}
Y_{1,1}(z) & Y_{1,2}(z) \\
Y_{2,1}(z) & Y_{2,2}(z)
\end{pmatrix},
\end{equation}
where each block $Y_{i,j}$ is of size $2 \times 2$. The blocks $Y_{1,1}$ and $Y_{2,1}$ are built in terms of mixed type
multiple orthogonal polynomials, while the blocks $Y_{1,2}$ and $Y_{2,2}$ contain certain Cauchy transforms thereof;
see \cite{DK} for the precise description. A further connection between mixed type multiple orthogonal polynomials and the products of coupled random matrices is that
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E}\left[\prod_{k=1}^n(z-x_k)\right]=\det Y_{1,1}(z),
\end{equation}
where the expectation $\mathbb{E}$ is taken with respect to \eqref{eq:jpdfcon}, and the polynomial is called average characteristic polynomial; see \cite[Theorem 1.2]{Delvaux10}.
Based on an integral representation of the correlation kernel $K_n$, the hard edge scaling limit as well as its transition have been established in \cite{AS15b,AS15,Liu16}. The hard edge scaling limit belongs to the Meijer G-kernels found in the products of independent random matrices \cite{Kuijlaars-Zhang14}. The limiting mean distribution and local universality of the squared singular values of $\widehat Y$, however, remain open. The interpretation of \eqref{eq:jpdfcon} as a multiple orthogonal polynomial ensemble then provides an alternative way to tackle this problem by performing Deift/Zhou steepest descent analysis \cite{Deift99book} for the associated RH problem $Y$. The study of this aspect will be the topics of future research.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The author would like to thank Dang-Zheng Liu comments on the manuscript. The work was partially supported by The Program for Professor of Special Appointment (Eastern Scholar) at Shanghai Institutions of Higher Learning (No. SHH1411007), by National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 11501120) and by Grant EZH1411513 from Fudan University.
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $G$ be a hyperbolic group with a fixed finite generating set $S$. Then $G$ acts by isometries on its associated Cayley graph $\mathrm{C}_S(G)$, which itself is a geodesic hyperbolic metric space. This cocompact, proper action has the property that each infinite order $g\in G$ acts as a \emph{loxodromic isometry}, i.e. with sink--source dynamics on the Gromov boundary $\partial G$. Much geometric and algebraic information about the group $G$ has been learned by studying the dynamics
of the action $G \curvearrowright \mathrm{C}_S(G)$, beginning with the seminal work of Gromov \cite{Gromov}. However, deeper facts about the group $G$ can often be detected by investigating actions $G \curvearrowright X$ which are specifically constructed to extract particular information about $G$. Important examples include the theory of JSJ decompositions of $G$ \cite{rips_sela,bowditch1998cut}, or more generally actions on trees arising from splittings of $G$ \cite{Serre}, $G$ acting on the quasi--trees of Bestvina--Bromberg--Fujiwara \cite{BBF}, or $G$ acting on coned--off versions of $\mathrm{C}_S(G)$ as appearing in the theory of relatively hyperbolic groups \cite{farb1998relatively, osin2006relatively}, hyperbolically embedded subgroups \cite{DGO}, and hyperbolic Dehn surgery \cite{osin2007peripheral, groves2008dehn}. Several other examples appear in Section \ref{sec:apps}.
In this paper, we are interested in the typical behavior of elements of $G$ with respect to an arbitrary action $G \curvearrowright X$. Working in this level of generality has applications to the natural actions of $G$ that one regularly encounters, regardless of whether the action is nonproper or distorted.
Let $G$ be a hyperbolic group which acts by isometries on a hyperbolic metric space $X$. A choice of a finite generating set $S$
determines a word metric on $G$, and we denote as $B_n$ the ball of radius $n$ about $1 \in G$.
We say that a subset $A \subset G$ is \emph{generic} if the proportion of elements of word length at most $n$ which belong to $A$
tends to $1$ as $n \to \infty$, i.e.
\[
\lim_{n\to \infty} \frac{\#(A \cap B_n)}{\#B_n} = 1.
\]
An element $g \in G$ is said to be \emph{loxodromic} if it has exactly two fixed points on the boundary of $X$, one attracting and the other repelling. This is equivalent to the condition that there is a positive constant $\epsilon = \epsilon(g)$ such that $ d_X(x,g^nx) \ge \epsilon \cdot |n|$ for all $n \in \mathbb{Z}$, where $|g|$ denotes the word length of $G$ with respect to $S$.
Our first main theorem is the following:
\begin{theorem}[Genericity of loxodromics] \label{cor:intro_gen_lox}
Let $G$ be a hyperbolic group with a nonelementary action by isometries on a separable, hyperbolic metric space $X$. Then $X$--loxodromics are generic on $G$, i.e.
\[
\frac{\#\{g \in B_n : g \; \mathrm{is} \; X - \mathrm{loxodromic} \}}{\#B_n} \to 1,
\]
as $n\to \infty$.
\end{theorem}
Recall that two loxodromic isometries $f$ and $g$ of $X$ are \emph{independent}
if their fixed point sets in $\partial X$ are disjoint, and
the action $G\curvearrowright X$ is \emph{nonelementary} if $G$ contains two independent loxodromic isometries of $X$\footnote{Actions satisfying this condition are sometimes called \emph{of general type} \cite{caprace2015amenable}.}.
We actually prove the stronger result that $X$--loxodromics are generic with respect to counting in spheres $S_n$ in the Cayley graph of $G$.
Our results demonstrate that much of the typical geometry of $G$ is preserved under the action $G \curvearrowright X$.
Let us recall that the choice of a generating set $S$ determines a natural boundary measure $\nu$
on $\partial G$ which is called the \emph{Patterson--Sullivan measure} \cite{coornaert1993mesures}.
Intuitively, this measure is defined by taking weak limits of the uniform distribution on balls $B_n$ as $n \to \infty$ (with the previous definition, it is only defined up to a multiplicative constant, but we actually fix a normalization: see Section \ref{sec:hyperbolic}).
\subsection{Typical geodesic rays in $G$}
Our next collection of results concerns the behavior of $\nu$--typical geodesic rays of $G$ and the paths they determine in the space $X$ under the orbit map $G \to X$. That the images of geodesics in $G$ have any controlled behavior when projected to $X$ is particularly surprising at this level of generality. A few examples to bear in mind are $G$ acting on a locally infinite hyperbolic graph, $G$ acting on one of its nonelementary hyperbolic quotient groups, or $G$ acting on $\mathbb{H}^n$ with dense orbits.
We first show that typical geodesic rays of $G$ converge to the boundary in $X \cup \partial X$:
\begin{theorem} [Convergence to the boundary of $X$] \label{th:intro_1}
Let $G$ be a hyperbolic group with a nonelementary action by isometries on a separable, hyperbolic metric space $X$.
For every $x \in X$ and $\nu$--almost every $\eta \in \partial G$, if $(g_n)_{n\ge0}$ is a geodesic ray in $G$ converging to $\eta$, then the sequence $g_nx$ in $X$ converges to a point in the boundary $\partial X$.
\end{theorem}
For $x\in X$, let $\Phi = \Phi_x \colon G \to X$ given by $\Phi(g) = gx$ denote the orbit map of the action $G \curvearrowright X$.
Theorem \ref{th:intro_1} implies the existence of a $\nu$-measurable, $G$-equivariant map
$\partial \Phi \colon \partial G \to \partial X$ from the Gromov boundary of $G$ to the Gromov boundary of $X$.
In fact, if we define
\[
\partial^X G = \{\eta \in \partial G : \Phi([1,\eta)) \subset X \text{ converges to a point in } \partial X\},
\]
then $\Phi$ extends to a map $\partial \Phi \colon \partial ^X G \to \partial X$ and the set $\partial^X G$ has full $\nu$-measure by Theorem \ref{th:intro_1}.
In addition, we show that for almost every $\eta \in \partial G$, the path $\Phi([1,\eta))$ makes linear progress in the space $X$:
\begin{theorem}[Positive drift] \label{th:intro_2}
Let $G$ be a hyperbolic group with a nonelementary action by isometries on a separable, hyperbolic metric space $X$.
Then there exists $L > 0$ such that for every $x \in X$ and $\nu$--almost every $\eta \in \partial G$, if $(g_n)_{n\ge0}$ is a geodesic in $G$ converging to $\eta$, then
\[
\lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{d_X(x, g_n x)}{n} = L >0.
\]
\end{theorem}
Theorem \ref{th:intro_1} and Theorem \ref{th:intro_2} are proven using a Markov chain (introduced by Calegari--Fujiwara \cite{calegari2010combable}) on the directed graph $\Gamma$ which parameterizes a geodesic combing of $G$. That is, directed paths in $\Gamma$ evaluate to geodesics in the group $G$.
Let $\mathbb{P}$ be the corresponding Markov measure on the space of sample paths $(w_n)$ which begin at the ``identity'' vertex of $\Gamma$. (See Section \ref{sec:Markov_action} for details.) By combining Theorem \ref{th:intro_1} and Theorem \ref{th:intro_2} we show that along a $\mathbb{P}$--typical path in $\Gamma$ one encounters elements of $G$ which are loxodromic for the action on $X$ and whose translation lengths grow linearly.
Recall that the \emph{(stable) translation length of $g$} with respect to its action on $X$ is
\[
\tau_X(g) = \liminf_{n \to \infty} \frac{d_X(x,g^nx)}{n},
\]
which is well-defined, independent of $x \in X$, and an element $g \in G$ is $X$--loxodromic if and only if $\tau_X(g) >0$.
\begin{theorem}[Linear growth of $X$--translation lengths] \label{th:intro_Mark}
Let $G$ be a hyperbolic group with a nonelementary action by isometries on a separable hyperbolic metric space $X$.
Then there is an $L_1 >0$ such that
\[
\PP \big(\tau_X(w_n) \ge L_1 n \big) \to 1,
\]
as $n \to \infty$.
\end{theorem}
\noindent In fact, we show that the constant $L_1$ appearing in Theorem \ref{th:intro_Mark} can be taken to be $L - \epsilon$ for any $\epsilon > 0$,
where $L$ is the drift constant of Theorem \ref{th:intro_2}.
\subsection{Genericity in $G$ and the action $G \curvearrowright X$}
Our third collection of results concerns the typical behavior of elements $g\in G$ with respect to counting in the balls $B_n \subset G$. We emphasize that our genericity results also hold for counting in spheres $S_n$ (i.e. elements of word length exactly $n$) which gives a priori stronger information.
First, we show that for a fixed $x \in X$, the ratio of the displacement $d_X(x,gx)$ to the word length of $g$ is uniformly bounded from below for a generic subset of $G$.
\begin{theorem}[Genericity of positive drift] \label{th: intro_gen_drift}
Let $G$ be a hyperbolic group with a nonelementary action by isometries on a separable hyperbolic metric space $X$.
Then there exists $L_1 > 0$ such that
$$\frac{\#\{ g \in B_n \ : \ d_X(gx,x) \geq L_1|g| \}}{\#B_n} \to 1 \qquad \textup{as }n \to \infty.$$
\end{theorem}
By combining Theorem \ref{th: intro_gen_drift} with estimates for the Gromov product between generic elements we show that, generically, the translation length of $g$ with respect to the action $G \curvearrowright X$ grows linearly with $|g|$.
\begin{theorem}[Genericity of linear growth] \label{th:intro_gen_trans}
Let $G$ be a hyperbolic group with a nonelementary action by isometries on a separable hyperbolic metric space $X$.
Then there is an $L_1 >0$ so that
\[
\frac{\#\{g \in B_n : \tau_X(g) \ge L_1|g| \}}{\#B_n} \to 1,
\]
as $n\to \infty$.
\end{theorem}
Just as above, the constant $L_1$ appearing in Theorem \ref{th: intro_gen_drift} and Theorem \ref{th:intro_gen_trans} can be taken to be $L - \epsilon$
for any $\epsilon > 0$, where $L$ is the drift constant of Theorem \ref{th:intro_2}. \\
Since $\tau_X(g) >0$ if and only if $g$ is loxodromic for the action $G \curvearrowright X$, Theorem \ref{th:intro_gen_trans} immediately implies that $X$--loxodromics are generic in $G$, proving Theorem \ref{cor:intro_gen_lox}.
\subsection{Methods and connections to previous results}
Counting problems for discrete groups have a long history; in particular, starting with Margulis' thesis \cite{margulis},
much attention has been devoted to counting orbit points of a lattice in a Lie group,
with respect to the Riemannian metric in the Lie group. This is closely related to counting geodesics of a certain length in the quotient space.
However, few works have addressed the counting with respect to the \emph{word metric} on $G$.
For example, Pollicott and Sharp \cite{pollicott1998comparison} compare word length in a cocompact lattice of $\mathrm{Isom}(\mathbb{H}^n)$ to distance between orbit points in $\mathbb{H}^n$.
In a different vein, Calegari and Fujiwara \cite{calegari2010combable} study the generic behavior of a bicombable function on a hyperbolic group and, in particular, establish a Central Limit Theorem for such functions. Finally, Wiest \cite{wiest2014genericity} recently showed that if a group $G$ satisfies a weak automaticity condition and the action $G \curvearrowright X$ on a hyperbolic space $X$ satisfies a strong ``geodesic word hypothesis,'' then the loxodromics make up a \emph{definite proportion} of elements of the $n$ ball (when counting with respect to certain normal forms). This geodesic word hypothesis essentially requires geodesics in the group $G$, given by the normal forms, to project to unparameterized quasigeodesics in the space $X$ under the orbit map.
Another way of counting is to run a random walk on the Cayley graph of $G$ and count with respect to the $n$-step distribution of such random walk.
Since sample paths are generally not geodesics, this counting is also different from counting in balls. However,
in this case many more results are known: for instance, Rivin \cite{rivin2008walks} and Maher \cite{Maher} proved that pseudo-Anosov mapping classes
are generic with respect to random walks in the mapping class group.
Moreover, if a random walk converges almost surely
to $\partial X$, then it defines a \emph{harmonic measure} on $\partial X$ which is the hitting measure at infinity of the walk.
See, among others, \cite{kaimanovich1994poisson, calegari2015statistics, MaherTiozzo}.
In general, it is hard to compare the hitting measure for a random walk with the Patterson--Sullivan measure, and that makes the
two types of counting different.
In our case though, the theory of geodesic combings of hyperbolic groups \cite{cannon1984combinatorial} tells us that counting with respect
to balls is equivalent to counting paths in a certain finite graph. Further, there exists a Markov chain on the graph whose $n$-step distribution produces essentially
the uniform distribution on balls \cite{calegari2010combable}. \\
One consequence of our study is that (a particular normalization of) the Patterson--Sullivan measure $\nu$ on $\partial G$
decomposes as a countable sum of harmonic measures associated to random walks on $G$, in the following sense.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:intro_sum}
There exists a finite collection of measures $\nu_1, \dots, \nu_r$ on $\partial G$, which are harmonic measures for random walks on $G$ with finite
exponential moment, and such that the Patterson--Sullivan measure $\nu$ can be written as
\[
\nu = \sum_{g \in G} a_g \ g_* \nu_{i(g)},
\]
where each $a_g$ is a non-negative, real coefficient, and $i(g) \in \{1, \dots, r \}$.
\end{proposition}
One should compare Proposition \ref{prop:intro_sum} with the main theorem of Connell--Muchnik \cite{connell2007harmonicity},
who show that for certain actions of hyperbolic groups, the Patterson--Sullivan measure is actually the harmonic measure for some random walk on $G$. We note that their result does not apply in our setting (the Gromov boundary of a hyperbolic group) since the Patterson--Sullivan measure $\nu$
does not necessarily have the property that the Radon--Nikodym derivative of $g_*\nu$ with respect to $\nu$ is continuous.
See also Remark 2.15 of \cite{gouezel2015entropy}.
\subsection{Applications} \label{sec:apps}
We now collect some immediate applications of our main results.
\subsubsection{Splittings and quotients of hyperbolic groups}
Applying Theorem \ref{th:intro_gen_trans} directly to the action $G \curvearrowright C_S(G)$ of a hyperbolic group on its Cayley graph, we see that generic elements of $G$ are infinite order and their translation lengths grow linearly in word length.
The main point of our results is that they apply to a much more general setting.
For example, recall that a splitting of a group $G$ is an action of $G$ on a simplicial tree $T$ -- this is equivalent to realizing $G$ as the fundamental group of a graph of groups \cite{Serre}. The splitting is
minimal if there is no invariant subtree. For $g \in G$, we denote by $g^*$
the shortest representative of the conjugacy class of $g$ in $T/G$.
\begin{proposition}
Suppose that $G \curvearrowright T$ is a minimal splitting of a hyperbolic group $G$ such that $T$ has at least $3$ ends. Then the set of elements which are not conjugate into a vertex stabilizer is generic.
Moreover, there is an $L >0$ such that the set of $g \in G$ having the property that
\[
\#(\mathrm{edges} \ \mathrm{crossed} \ \mathrm{by} \ g^* ) \ge L |g|
\]
is generic in $G$.
\end{proposition}
Similar statements can be made about other useful actions of $G$ on hyperbolic spaces. These include the quasi--trees of Bestvina--Bromberg--Fujiwara \cite{BBF} or hyperbolic graphs obtained by coning--off uniformly quasiconvex subsets of the hyperbolic group $G$ \cite{KapRaf}.
We state one further general application, which follows directly from Theorem \ref{th: intro_gen_drift} and Theorem \ref{th:intro_1}.
\begin{theorem}[Epimorphisms are generically bilipschitz]
Let $\phi \colon G \to H$ be a surjective homomorphism between nonelementary hyperbolic groups. Then there is an $L >0$ such that the set of $g \in G$ for which
\[
|\phi(g)| \ge L |g|
\]
is generic in $G$.
Moreover, there is a subset $\partial^H G$ of $\partial G$ with $\nu(\partial^H G) = 1$ and a boundary map $\partial \phi \colon \partial^H G \to \partial H$ extending the homomorphism $\phi \colon G \to H$.
\end{theorem}
\subsubsection{Mapping class groups and $\mathrm{Out}(F_N)$}
Our main result on the genericity of loxodromics is in part motivated by a long-standing conjecture about the mapping class group of an orientable surface $S$ with $\chi(S) <-1$. For background material on mapping class groups see, for example, \cite{FM}.
\begin{conjecture}[{\cite[Conjecture 3.15]{Farbproblems}}] \label{conj_farb}
Let $\mathrm{Mod}(S)$ be the mapping class group of an orientable surface $S$ with $\chi(S)<-1$. Then pseudo--Anosov mapping classes are generic in $\mathrm{Mod}(S)$.
\end{conjecture}
While Conjecture \ref{conj_farb} seems at the moment out of reach, our main result does imply the corresponding statement for hyperbolic subgroups of $\mathrm{Mod}(S)$. Recall that $\mathrm{Mod}(S)$ is \emph{not} itself hyperbolic and so the techniques of this paper do not directly apply. We say that a subgroup $G$ of $\mathrm{Mod}(S)$ is irreducible if no finite index subgroup of $G$ fixes a multicurve on $S$.
\begin{theorem}[Genericity in $\mathrm{Mod}(S)$] \label{th:pA_gen}
Let $G$ be a nonelementary hyperbolic group which is an irreducible subgroup of $\mathrm{Mod}(S)$. Then pseudo--Anosov mapping classes are generic in $G$ with respect to any generating set of $G$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The mapping class group $\mathrm{Mod}(S)$ acts by isometries on the curve complex $\mathcal{C}(S)$ of the surface $S$, which is hyperbolic by \cite{MM1}. Since $G$ is an irreducible subgroup of $\mathrm{Mod}(S)$ which is not virtually cyclic, $G$ has a nonelementary action on $\mathcal{C}(S)$; this follows from the subgroup structure theorems of \cite{BLM, Iv2}. Since the loxodromics of the action $\mathrm{Mod}(S) \curvearrowright \mathcal{C}(S)$ are exactly the pseudo-Anosov mapping classes, again by \cite{MM1}, the result follows from Theorem \ref{cor:intro_gen_lox}.
\end{proof}
We remark that hyperbolic, irreducible subgroups of $\mathrm{Mod}(S)$, i.e. those subgroups to which Theorem \ref{th:pA_gen} applies, are abundant. For example, there are several constructions of right--angled Artin subgroups of $\mathrm{Mod}(S)$ \cite{CLM, Kobraag} and such subgroups are well-known to contain a variety of hyperbolic subgroups (see Section \ref{sec:RAAGs}).
For a second source of examples, let $S$ be a closed surface of genus at least $2$ and set $\mathring{S} = S \setminus p$ for some $p\in S$. Recall that there is a natural map $\mathrm{Mod}(\mathring{S}) \to \mathrm{Mod}(S)$ and for $h \in \mathrm{Mod}(S)$, the preimage of $\langle h \rangle$ under this map is exactly the subgroup $\pi_1(M_h) \le \mathrm{Mod}(\mathring{S}) $, the fundamental group of the mapping torus of the homeomorphism $h \colon S \to S$ \cite{birman1969mapping}. If $h$ is pseudo-Anosov, then Thurston's hyperbolization theorem for $3$--manifolds fibering over the circle implies that $M_h$ is hyperbolic \cite{thurston1998hyperbolic3}. In particular, $\pi_1(M_h)$ is hyperbolic. Theorem \ref{th:pA_gen} implies that for any pseudo-Anosov $h \in \mathrm{Mod}(S)$ and any generating set of $\pi_1(M_h)$, pseudo-Anosov mapping classes are generic in the subgroup $\pi_1(M_h) \le \mathrm{Mod}(\mathring{S})$. More interestingly, this is true for \emph{any} embedding of $\pi_1(M_h)$ into a mapping class group, so long as the image does not virtually fix a multicurve on the surface.
There is also a direct analogue for hyperbolic subgroups of $\Out(F_N)$. Similar to the discussion for mapping class groups, there are various techniques for constructing hyperbolic subgroups of $\Out(F_N)$. See for example \cite{Tayl1}. We say that a subgroup $G$ of $\Out(F_N)$ is irreducible if no finite index subgroup of $G$ fixes a
free factor of $F_N$.
\begin{theorem}[Genericity in $\Out(F_N)$]
Let $G$ be a nonelementary hyperbolic group which is an irreducible subgroup of $\Out(F_N)$. Then fully irreducible automorphisms are generic in $G$ with respect to any generating set of $G$.
Moreover, if $G$ is also not contained in a mapping class subgroup of $\Out(F_N)$, then atoroidal, fully irreducible automorphisms are generic in $G$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We mimic the proof of Theorem \ref{th:pA_gen} using the action of $\Out(F_N)$ on two free group analogues of the curve complex. First, since $G \le \Out(F_N)$ is irreducible and not virtually cyclic, the main result of \cite{handel2013subgroup} implies that $G$ contains ``independent'' fully irreducible automorphisms. This implies that $G$ has a nonelementary action on $\mathcal{FF}_N$, the free factor complex of $F_N$, which is hyperbolic by \cite{BF14}. We then apply Theorem \ref{cor:intro_gen_lox} to obtain the first part of the theorem since the loxodromic isometries of $\mathcal{FF}_N$ are exactly the fully irreducible automorphisms \cite{BF14}.
To get the moreover statement, we use the action of $\Out(F_N)$ on $\mathcal{CS}_N$, the co-surface graph of $F_N$. By \cite{DT3}, $\mathcal{CS}_N$ is a hyperbolic graph and the loxodromic elements of the action $\Out(F_N) \curvearrowright \mathcal{CS}_N$ are exactly the atoroidal fully irreducible automorphisms. By \cite{uyanik2015generalized}, $G \le \Out(F_N)$ must contain an atoroidal element of $\Out(F_n)$ for otherwise $G$ is contained in a mapping class subgroup of $\Out(F_N)$, contrary to our hypothesis. From this, it follows easily that the action $G \curvearrowright \mathcal{CS}_N$ is nonelementary and so another application of Theorem \ref{cor:intro_gen_lox} completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{Special hyperbolic groups and loxodromics in RAAGs} \label{sec:RAAGs}
As a final application, we recall the celebrated result of Agol, who building of work of Wise and his collaborators showed that every hyperbolic cubulated group $G'$ has a finite index subgroup $G$ which embeds into a right-angled Artin group $A(\Gamma)$ \cite{AgolVHC}. Following work of Haglund and Wise, a finitely generated group which embeds into a right--angled Artin group $A(\Gamma)$ is called \emph{special} \cite{HW1}. For additional information of RAAGs and special groups see, for example, \cite{wise2012riches}.
As $A(\Gamma)$ is itself a CAT$(0)$ group, an important role is played by its elements which act by rank--$1$ isometries on its associated CAT$(0)$ cube complex, its so-called Salvetti complex. Following \cite{KK3}, we call such elements of $A(\Gamma)$ \emph{loxodromic}. Equivalently, loxodromics elements of $A(\Gamma)$ are characterized algebraically by having cyclic centralizer in $A(\Gamma)$ \cite{Servatius, BestvinaFujiwara} and geometrically as being the Morse elements of $A(\Gamma)$ \cite{BC}.
Being of geometric interest, one might ask how frequently elements of a hyperbolic cubulated group $G$ get mapped to loxodromics of $A(\Gamma)$ via the embeddings provided by Agol's theorem, and our next application shows that this is indeed generically the case. Note this is in contrast to the well--known result that the only subgroups of $A(\Gamma)$ for which \emph{each} nontrivial element is loxodromic are free subgroups \cite{CLM, KK3,KMT}.
\begin{theorem}[Genericity in hyperbolic, special groups]
Let $G$ be a nonelementary
hyperbolic group and $\phi \colon G \to A(\Gamma)$ be an injective homomorphism into a right--angled Artin group $A(\Gamma)$. Then either $\phi$ is conjugate to a homomorphism into $A(\Lambda)$ for a subgraph $\Lambda \le \Gamma$, or
\[
\frac{\#\{g \in B_n : \phi(g) \; \mathrm{is} \; \mathrm{loxodromic} \: \mathrm{in} \: A(\Gamma) \}}{\#B_n} \to 1.
\]
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem 5.2 of \cite{BC}, if $\phi(G)$ is not conjugate into $A(\Lambda)$ for some proper subgraph $\Lambda \le \Gamma$, then $\phi(G)$ contains at least $2$ independent loxodromic elements. This implies that the induced action of $G$ on the extension graph $\Gamma^e$ is nonelementary. Since $\Gamma^e$ is hyperbolic and the loxodromic isometries of $A(\Gamma) \curvearrowright \Gamma^e$ are exactly the loxodromic elements of $A(\Gamma)$ (\cite{KK3}), applying Theorem \ref{cor:intro_gen_lox} to the action $G \curvearrowright \Gamma^e$ completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Summary of paper}
In Section \ref{sec:counting_graphs} and Section \ref{sec:Mchains} we present the theory of Markov chains on directed graphs that will be needed for our counting arguments.
In Section \ref{sec:markov_to_walk} we describe a process by which we turn a Markov chain into a number of random walks, using first return probabilities. Section \ref{sec:groups} then presents background material on hyperbolic groups and spaces, geodesic combings, and random walks.
These techniques are combined in Section \ref{sec:Markov_action} to show that sample paths in the geodesic combing of $G$ converge to the boundary of $X$ and have positive drift. This proves Theorem \ref{th:intro_1} and Theorem \ref{th:intro_2}. We also show that with probability going to $1$, the $n$th step of a sample path in the Markov chain is $X$--loxodromic with translation length growing linearly in $n$. One of the main steps in establishing these results is to show that the first return probabilities discussed above determine nonelementary measures on the group $G$.
Finally, in Section \ref{sec:counting}, we turn our statements about the Markov measure into statements about counting in the Cayley graph of the group $G$. This culminates in the proofs of Theorem \ref{th: intro_gen_drift} and Theorem \ref{th:intro_gen_trans}.
\subsection*{Acknowledgements}
The authors thank Ilya Kapovich and Joseph Maher for helpful suggestions.
The first author is partially supported by NSF grant DMS-1401875, and second author is partially supported by NSF grant DMS-1400498.
\section{Counting paths in graphs} \label{sec:counting_graphs}
We start by setting up our notation and recalling some fundamental facts about directed graphs. Note that we will first
deal with general graphs, and introduce the group structure only later. We mostly follow Calegari--Fujiwara \cite{calegari2010combable}.
\subsection{Almost semisimple graphs}
Let $\Gamma$ be a finite, directed graph with vertex set $V(\Gamma) = \{v_0, v_1, \dots, v_{r-1}\}$.
The \emph{adjacency matrix} of $\Gamma$ is the $r \times r$ matrix $M = (M_{ij})$ defined so that
$M_{ij}$ is the number of edges from $v_i$ to $v_j$.
Such a graph is \emph{almost semisimple} of growth $\lambda > 1$ if the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
There is an \emph{initial vertex}, which we denote as $v_0$;
\item
For any other vertex $v$, there is a (directed) path from $v_0$ to $v$;
\item
The largest modulus of the eigenvalues of $M$ is $\lambda$, and for any eigenvalue of modulus $\lambda$, its geometric
multiplicity and algebraic multiplicity coincide.
\end{enumerate}
The \emph{universal cover} of $\Gamma$ is the countable tree $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ whose vertex set
is the set of finite paths in $\Gamma$ starting from $v_0$, and there is an edge $p_1 \to p_2$ in $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ if
the path $p_2$ is the concatenation of $p_1$ with an edge of $\Gamma$.
The set $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ is naturally a rooted tree, where the root is the path of length $0$ from $v_0$ to itself, hence it can be identified with $v_0$.
Moreover, $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ is naturally endowed with a distance coming from the tree structure: there, a vertex has distance $n$ from the initial vertex
if and only if it represents a path of length $n$. We denote as $| g |$ the distance between $g \in \widetilde{\Gamma}$ and the root.
There is a natural graph map $\widetilde{\Gamma} \to \Gamma$ which sends each vertex in $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ representing a path in $\Gamma$
to its endpoint, seen as a vertex of $\Gamma$.
For any vertex $g$ of $\widetilde{\Gamma}$, we denote as $[g]$ the corresponding vertex of $\Gamma$.
Given two vertices $v_1$, $v_2$ of a directed graph, we say that $v_2$ is \emph{accessible from} $v_1$ and write $v_1 \to v_2$ if there is a path from $v_1$ to $v_2$.
Then we say that two vertices are \emph{mutually accessible} if $v_1 \to v_2$ and $v_2 \to v_1$.
Mutually accessibility is an equivalence relation, and equivalence classes are called \emph{irreducible components} of $\Gamma$.
The \emph{boundary} of $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ is the set $\partial \widetilde{\Gamma}$ of infinite paths in $\Gamma$ starting from the initial vertex.
The set $\widetilde{\Gamma} \cup \partial \widetilde{\Gamma}$ carries a natural metric, where the distance between two (finite or infinite) paths
$\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ is $d(\gamma_1, \gamma_2) = 2^{-P(\gamma_1, \gamma_2)}$ where $P(\gamma_1, \gamma_2)$ is the length of the longest
path from the initial vertex which is a common prefix of both $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$.
This way, $\widetilde{\Gamma} \cup \partial \widetilde{\Gamma}$ is a compact metric space, and $\partial \widetilde{\Gamma}$ is a Cantor set.
\subsection{Counting measures}
For each $n$, we denote as $S_n \subseteq \widetilde{\Gamma}$ the sphere of radius $n$ around the origin, i.e. the set of vertices at distance $n$ from the initial vertex. This defines a sequence $P^n$ of \emph{counting measures} on $\widetilde{\Gamma}$: namely, for each set $A \subset \widetilde{\Gamma}$
we define
$$P^n(A):= \frac{\# (A \cap S_n)}{\# S_n}.$$
For any subset $A \subseteq \widetilde{\Gamma}$, we define the \emph{growth} $\lambda(A)$ of $A$ as
$$\lambda(A) := \limsup_{n \to \infty} \sqrt[n]{\# (A \cap S_n)}.$$
By construction, the growth of $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ is $\lambda$ (see also Lemma \ref{L:growth}).
For each vertex $v$ of $\Gamma$ which lies in a component $C$, let $\P_v(C)$ denote the set of finite paths in $\Gamma$ based at $v$ which lie entirely in $C$.
Moreover, for any lift $g$ of $v$ to $\widetilde{\Gamma}$, we let $\P_g(C)$ be the set of finite paths in $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ based at $g$ whose projection to $\Gamma$ lies entirely in $C$.
We call an irreducible component $C$ of $\Gamma$ \emph{maximal} if for some (equivalently, any) $g$ which projects to an element of $C$, the growth of $\P_g(C)$ equals $\lambda$.
\subsection{Vertices of small and large growth}
\begin{definition}
For each vertex $g \in \widetilde{\Gamma}$,
the \emph{cone} of $g$, denoted as $cone(g)$, is the set of (finite or infinite) paths in $\widetilde{\Gamma}$
starting at $v_0$ and passing through $g$.
\end{definition}
We now define vertices to be of large or small growth, according to the growth of their cone.
More precisely, following Calegari-Fujiwara \cite{calegari2010combable}, we define the linear map $\rho: \mathbb{R}^{V(\Gamma)} \to \mathbb{R}^{V(\Gamma)}$ as
$$\rho(v) := \lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{1}{N} \sum_{n=0}^{N} \frac{M^n v}{\lambda^n}$$
The limit exists by the almost semisimplicity assumption (3).
If we denote by $1$ the vector in $\mathbb{R}^{V(\Gamma)}$ all of whose coordinates are $1$, note that by construction
$(M^n 1)_i$ equals the number of paths of length $n$ starting at $v_i$, i.e. for any $g \in \widetilde{\Gamma}$ we have
$$(M^n 1)_i = \#( cone(g) \cap S_{n+|g|})$$
where $[g] = v_i$. In particular, $(M^n 1)_0 = \#S_n$.
\begin{definition}
We say a vertex $v_i$ of $\Gamma$ has \emph{small growth} if $\rho(1)_i = 0$, and has \emph{large growth} if $\rho(1)_i > 0$.
\end{definition}
Note that if $v_i$ is of small growth and there is an edge $v_i \to v_j$, then $v_j$ is also of small growth. We denote as $LG$ the set of
vertices of large growth. Note that if a vertex belongs to a maximal irreducible component, then it has large growth, but the converse is not
necessarily true; indeed, the cone of a vertex may have maximal growth, while its irreducible component may have smaller growth.
\begin{lemma} \label{L:growth}
Let $\Gamma$ be an almost semisimple graph of growth $\lambda > 1$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
There exists $c >0$ such that for any vertex $v$ of large growth and any $n \geq 0$,
$$c^{-1} \lambda^n \leq \# \{ \textup{paths from }v\textup{ of length }n \} \leq c \lambda^n$$
\item
There exists $c > 0$ and $\lambda_1 < \lambda$ such that, for any vertex $v$ of small growth and any $n \geq 0$,
$$\# \{ \textup{paths from }v\textup{ of length }n \} \leq c \lambda_1^n$$
\item
Let $v$ be a vertex which belongs to a maximal component $C$. Then there exists $c > 0$ such that for any $n \geq 0$,
$$c^{-1} \lambda^n \leq \# \{\textup{paths in } \mathcal{P}_v(C) \textup{ of length }n \} \leq c \lambda^n$$
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let us first assume that $v = v_0$ is the initial vertex, which has large growth by construction.
By writing $M$ in Jordan normal form, one has $\Vert M^n \Vert \asymp \lambda^n$ for any submultiplicative norm.
Since all norms on the space of matrices are equivalent, we also have
$$\sum_{i,j} (M^n)_{ij} \asymp \lambda^n$$
which can be rewritten as
$$\sum_i (M^n 1)_i \asymp \lambda^n$$
Now, for each vertex $v_j$ there is a path of length $l_j$ from $v_0$ to $v_j$, hence
$$(M^{n+l_j} 1)_0 \geq (M^n 1)_j$$
Moreover, since the degree of each vertex is bounded by some $d$,
$$(M^{n+l_j} 1)_0 \leq d^{l_j} (M^n 1)_0$$
thus putting together the estimates yields
$$(M^n 1)_0 \leq \sum_i (M^n 1)_i \leq \sum_i d^{l_i} (M^n 1)_0$$
which gives
$$\#S_n = (M^n 1)_0 \asymp \lambda^n$$
proving (1) in this case.
Let us now pick a vertex $v$, and consider the set $\mathcal{V}$ of all vertices which are accessible from $v$.
Then the matrix $M^T$ leaves invariant the span $V'$ of all basis vectors corresponding to elements of $\mathcal{V}$.
Let $M_1$ be the restriction of $M^T$ to $V'$; then either $M_1$ is almost semisimple of growth $\lambda$, or it has spectral radius $< \lambda$.
In the first case, the above proof shows that
$$\#(cone(v) \cap S_n) \asymp \lambda^n$$
which implies that $v$ has large growth; in the second case, then $(M_1^n 1)_v \leq \Vert M_1^n \Vert \leq c \lambda_1^n$ with $\lambda_1 < \lambda$,
hence $v$ has small growth, proving (2).
To prove (3), let us consider the set $\mathcal{W}$ of vertices which belong to the maximal component $C$, let $V''$ be the span
of its basis vectors. Now, $M_1^T$ leaves invariant $V''$, and let $M_2$ be the restriction of $M_1^T$ to $V''$. Again, either $M_2$ is almost
semisimple or it has spectral radius strictly smaller than $\lambda$. However, since $C$ is maximal the spectral radius cannot be strictly smaller than
$\lambda$, hence if $v = v_i$ we have
$$ \# \{\textup{paths in } \mathcal{P}_v(C) \textup{ of length }n \} = (M_2^n 1)_i \asymp \lambda^n .$$
\qedhere
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In order to clarify the connection between large growth vertices and maximal components, let us note that one can prove the following:
if $v$ is a vertex which belongs to a component $C$, then $v$ has large growth if and only if there exists a descendent component of $C$ (possibly $C$ itself)
which is maximal.
\end{remark}
\begin{comment}
\begin{lemma}
Let $M$ be an almost semisimple matrix of growth $\lambda > 1$. Then all its eigenvalues of modulus $\lambda$ are of the form
$\lambda \omega$, where $\omega$ is a root of unity.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By reordering the variables, we can arrange it so that $M$ has a block-upper triangular form, where each diagonal block is associated to an
irreducible component. Then the characteristic polynomial of $M$ is the product of the characteristic polynomials of the blocks; since its block is
irreducible, by Perron-Frobenius each eigenvalue of modulus $\lambda$ equals $\lambda \omega$, where $\omega$ is a root of unity of order
equal to the period of $M$ restricted to each block. Hence, each eigenvalue of $M$ is of the required form.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
There exists an integer $p > 1$ such that the only eigenvalue of $M^p$ of maximum modulus is real, and its geometric and algebraic
multiplicities coincide.
\end{corollary}
\end{comment}
Let us denote as $S_n$ the set of elements of $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ at distance $n$ from the initial vertex. If $g \in S_n$, then we denote $\widehat{g}$ the element along the path from the initial vertex to $g$ at distance $n-\log n$ from the initial vertex.
\begin{proposition} \label{P:smallg}
We have
$$\frac{\#\{g \in S_n \ : \ \widehat{g} \textup{ of small growth} \}}{\# S_n } \to 0$$
as $n \to \infty$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{L:growth} (1), the number of paths from the origin of length $n - \log n$ is at most $c \lambda^{n - \log n}$, and
by Lemma \ref{L:growth} (2) for each vertex of small growth the number of outgoing paths of length $\log n$ is at most $c \lambda_1^{\log n}$,
so the total number of paths of length $n$ from the origin which passes at time $n - \log n$ through a vertex of small growth is at most
$$c \lambda^{n - \log n} \cdot c \lambda_1^{\log n} \leq c^2 \lambda^n n^{\log \lambda_1 - \log \lambda}$$
which is negligible with respect to the cardinality of $S_n$, of the order of $\lambda^n$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The Patterson-Sullivan measure}
We define the \emph{Patterson-Sullivan measure} $\nu$ as the limit of the measures
\[
\nu_N := \frac{\sum_{|g| \leq N} \lambda^{-|g|} \delta_g}{\sum_{|g| \leq N} \lambda^{-|g|}}
\]
on $\widetilde{\Gamma} \cup \partial \widetilde{\Gamma}$.
As a consequence of the almost semisimplicity one gets the following proposition. For its statement, recall that $1$ denotes the vector with all entries equal to $1$.
\begin{proposition}
The limit $\nu := \lim_{N \to \infty} \nu_N$ exists as a limit of measures on $\widetilde{\Gamma} \cup \partial \widetilde{\Gamma}$,
and it is given on cones by the formula:
\begin{equation} \label{E:PS}
\nu(cone(g)) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \frac{\rho(1)_i}{\rho(1)_0} \lambda^{-|g|} & \textup{ if } [g] = v_i \textup{ has large growth}\\
0 & \textup{ otherwise}
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
In particular, $\nu$ is supported on $\partial \widetilde{\Gamma}$. The measure $\nu$ is called the \emph{Patterson-Sullivan measure}.
\end{proposition}
For a proof, see the discussion preceding Lemma 4.19 of \cite{calegari2010combable}. The only difference is that they
consider the limit of the measures $\widehat{\nu}_N := \frac{1}{N} \sum_{|g| \leq N} \lambda^{-|g|} \delta_g$, so the limit may not be a probability measure.
We normalize by dividing by $\rho(1)_0$ so that $\nu$ is a probability measure.
\section{Markov chains} \label{sec:Mchains}
Let $\Gamma$ be a finite directed graph, with vertex set $V(\Gamma)$ and edge set $E(\Gamma)$.
A \emph{transition probability} $\mu$ for $\Gamma$ is a function $\mu : E(\Gamma) \to \mathbb{R}^{\geq 0}$
such that for each vertex $v \in V(\Gamma)$, the total sum of the probabilities of the edges going out from $v$ is $1$:
$$\sum_{e \in Out(v)} \mu(e) = 1$$
where $Out(v)$ denotes the set of outgoing edges from vertex $v$.
A \emph{vertex distribution} for $\Gamma$ is a function $p: V(\Gamma) \to \mathbb{R}^{\geq 0}$ such that
$\sum_{v \in V(\Gamma)} p(v) = 1$.
Let $\Omega$ denote the set of all infinite paths in $\Gamma$, no matter what the starting vertex is.
Given a transition probability $\mu$ and a vertex distribution $p$, we define a probability measure $\mathbb{P}_{p, \mu}$
on $\Omega$ by assigning to each cylinder set
$$C_{e_1, \dots, e_n} = \{ \omega = (\omega_n) \in \Omega \ : \ \omega_1 = e_1, \dots, \omega_n = e_n \}$$
the probability
$$\mathbb{P}_{p, \mu}\left(C_{e_1, \dots, e_n}\right) = p(v_0) \mu(e_1) \cdots \mu(e_n)$$
where $v_0$ is the initial vertex of the edge $e_1$. Finally, if $\gamma = e_1 \dots e_n$ is a finite path in $\Gamma$ or $\widetilde{\Gamma}$,
we define
$$\mu(\gamma) = \mu(e_1)\dots \mu(e_n)$$
to be the product of the transition probabilities of its edges.
\subsection{Recurrence}
Let us now fix a transition probability $\mu$ on the graph $\Gamma$.
Then for each vertex $v$, we denote as $\mathbb{P}_v = \mathbb{P}_{\delta_v, \mu}$
the probability measure on $\Omega$ where the vertex distribution is the $\delta$-measure at $v$. Clearly, this measure
is supported on the set of infinite paths starting at $v$, which we denote by $\Omega_v$.
Finally, we denote simply as $\mathbb{P} = \mathbb{P}_{v_0}$ the probability measure on the set of infinite paths starting at the initial vertex $v_0$. Set $\Omega_0 = \Omega_{v_0}$.
The measure $\mathbb{P}$ defines a Markov process on $\widetilde{\Gamma}$, which starts at the initial vertex $v_0$
and moves along the graph according to the transition probabilities.
To be precise, let us define the map $g_n : \Omega_{0} \to \widetilde{\Gamma}$ which associates to each infinite path starting at the initial vertex
its prefix of length $n$, seen as a vertex of $\widetilde{\Gamma}$.
This defines a sequence of \emph{Markov measures} $(\mathbb{P}^n)$ on $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ by
setting $\mathbb{P}^n(A)$ as the probability that the Markov chain hits $A$ at time $n$, that is $\mathbb{P}^n(A) = \mathbb{P}(g_n \in A)$.
\begin{definition}
A vertex $v$ of $\Gamma$ is \emph{recurrent} if:
\begin{enumerate}
\item there is a path from $v_0$ to $v$ of positive probability; and
\item
whenever there is a path from $v$ to another vertex $w$ of positive probability, there is also a path from $w$ to $v$
of positive probability.
\end{enumerate}
Two recurrent vertices $v_1$ and $v_2$ are \emph{equivalent} if there exists a path from $v_1$ to $v_2$ of positive probability,
and a path from $v_2$ to $v_1$ of positive probability.
A \emph{recurrent component} is an equivalence class of recurrent vertices.
\end{definition}
For each $n$, let us define $X_n : \Omega \to \Gamma$ so that $X_n(\omega)$ denotes the endpoint of the finite prefix
of $\omega$ of length $n$.
Once we fix a measure on $\Omega$, the sequence $(X_n)$ is a stochastic process with values in $\Gamma$ (in our case, a Markov chain)
and $X_n$ is the location of the nth step of the chain.
\begin{lemma}\label{L:recurrent} \label{lem:first_return}
Let $\Gamma$ be a directed graph with transition probability $\mu$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
For $\mathbb{P}$-almost every path in $\Omega$, there exists a recurrent component $C$ and an index $N$ such that
$X_n$ belongs to $C$ for all $n \geq N$.
Moreover, $X_n$ visits every vertex of $C$ infinitely many times.
\item
There exists $c > 0$ such that, for any recurrent vertex $v$, for each $n\ge0$ we have
$$\mathbb{P}_v\left( \tau^+_v = n \right) \leq e^{-cn}$$
where $\tau^+_v = \min \{ n \geq 1 \ : \ X_n = v \}$ denotes the first return time to vertex $v$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For each pair of vertices $v_i, v_j$ such that there is a path from $v_i$ to $v_j$ of positive probability,
let us pick one such path $\gamma_{ij}$, and let $\mathcal{L}$ be the (finite) collection of all $\gamma_{ij}$.
Now, let $r$ be the maximum length of all the elements of $\mathcal{L}$, and $p := \min_{\gamma \in \mathcal{L}} \mu(\gamma) > 0$.
For each non-recurrent vertex $v_i$ which can be reached from $v_0$ with positive probability,
there is a path $\gamma$ in $\mathcal{L}$ from $v_i$ to some recurrent $v_j$.
Then for each non-recurrent $v_i$ we have
$$\mathbb{P}_{v_i}(X_n \textup{ not recurrent for all }n \leq r) \leq 1-p$$
Thus, for any $k$ we have
$$\mathbb{P}_{v_i}(X_n \textup{ not recurrent for all }n \leq k r) \leq (1-p)^k$$
yielding the first claim if $k \to \infty$.
Now, if $v_i$ and $v_j$ lie in the same recurrent component, then there are paths in $\mathcal{L}$ from $v_i$ to $v_j$ and from $v_j$ to $v_i$,
hence
$$\mathbb{P}_{v_i}(X_n \neq v_j \textup{ for all }n \leq r) \leq 1-p$$
and by repeated application of this argument (as you never leave a recurrent component)
$$\mathbb{P}_{v_i}(X_n \neq v_j \textup{ for all }n \leq k r) \leq (1-p)^k$$
which implies the second claim. The claim about the return time follows from the above inequality setting $v_i = v_j = v$
a recurrent vertex.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Markov measure} \label{sec:markov}
On the other hand, given an almost semisimple graph $\Gamma$ of growth $\lambda$, we construct a Markov chain by defining a transition probability $\mu \colon E(\Gamma) \to \mathbb{R}^{\ge0}$ as follows:
if $v_i$ has large growth, then for each directed edge $e$ from $v_i$ to $v_j$ we define
\begin{equation} \label{E:Markov}
\mu(e) := \frac{ \rho(1)_j}{\lambda \rho(1)_i}.
\end{equation}
If $v_i$ has small growth, we define $\mu(e) =0$ for each directed edge from $v_i$ to $v_j$ if $i\ne j$ and $\mu(e) = 1/d_i$ if $e$ is one of $d_i$ directed edges from $v_i$ to itself. Let $\mu(v_i \to v_j)$ denote the probability of going from $v_i$ to $v_j$ and observe that if $v_i$ has large growth, then
\[
\mu(v_i \to v_j) = \frac{M_{ij} \rho(1)_j}{\lambda \rho(1)_i},
\]
and if $v_i$ has small growth, $\mu(v_i \to v_j) =0$ for $i\neq j$ and $\mu(v_i \to v_i) = 1$.
With this observation, one can easily check that $\mu$ defines a transition probability for $\Gamma$ as in \cite[Lemma 4.9]{calegari2010combable}.
For this choice of transition probability $\mu$, it is now easy to explicitly compute the $n$-step distributions $\mathbb{P}^n$ of
the associated Markov chain. In fact, from eq. \eqref{E:Markov} one gets for each vertex $g \in \widetilde{\Gamma}$
\begin{equation} \label{E:Markov-cone}
\mathbb{P}^n(\{g \}) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \frac{\rho(1)_i}{ \rho(1)_0} \lambda^{-n} & \textup{ if } |g| = n, [g] = v_i \textup{ has large growth}\\
0 & \textup{ otherwise}
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
One can check from direct calculation, comparing formulas \eqref{E:PS} and \eqref{E:Markov-cone} that the sequence $(\mathbb{P}^n)$ of measures on $\widetilde{\Gamma} \cup \partial \widetilde{\Gamma}$
converges to the Patterson-Sullivan measure $\nu$. In particular, if we identify $\Omega_0$ with $\partial \widetilde \Gamma$ via path lifting to the base vertex, then $\nu = \mathbb{P}$.
\begin{lemma}
Let $\Gamma$ be an almost semisimple graph
with transition probability $\mu$ given by eq. \eqref{E:Markov}. Then an irreducible component of $\Gamma$ is maximal if and only if it is recurrent.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $C$ be an irreducible component of $\Gamma$, and $v_i \in C$ a vertex. If $C$ is recurrent, then for each $n$ almost every path
of length $n$ which starts from $v_i$ stays in $C$, hence by equation \eqref{E:Markov} one gets
$$1 = \sum_{v_j \in C} \mathbb{P}_{v_i}(X_n = v_j) = \sum_{j \in C} \frac{M^n_{ij} \rho(1)_j}{\lambda^n \rho(1)_i} \leq \left( \frac{\max_{v_j \in C} \rho(1)_j}{\rho(1)_i} \right)
\frac{ \sum_{v_j \in C} M^n_{ij} }{\lambda^n }$$
Note that $\sum_{j \in C} M^n_{ij}$ equals the number of paths of length $n$ which start from $v_i$ and lie entirely in $C$, hence by the above estimate
such number is bounded below by $c \lambda^n$, proving that $C$ is maximal.
Conversely, suppose that $C$ is maximal. Then each vertex of $C$ has large growth and so for each $v$ in $C$ there is a path from $v_0$ to $v$ of positive probability. If there is a path from $v$ to some vertex $w$ of positive probability, then $w$ also has large growth (eq. \eqref{E:Markov}). Hence, $w \in C$ since $\Gamma$ is almost semisimple. Now any directed path from $w$ back to $v$ in $C$ has positive probability by definition of $\mu$, showing that $C$ is recurrent and completing the proof.
\end{proof}
Finally, the next lemma compares the $n$-step distribution for the Markov chain to the counting measure.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:comparePn}
There exists $c > 1$ such that, for each $A \subseteq \widetilde{\Gamma}$, we have the inequality
\begin{equation} \label{E:countmu}
c^{-1} \ \mathbb{P}^n(A) \leq P^n(A \cap LG) \leq c \ \mathbb{P}^n(A).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By definition,
$$P^n(A \cap LG) = \frac{\# (A \cap LG \cap S_n)}{ \# S_n}$$
while from formula \eqref{E:Markov-cone}
$$\mathbb{P}^n(A) = \left( \frac{1}{\rho(1)_0} \right) \sum_{g \in A \cap LG \cap S_n} \rho(1)_g \lambda^{-n}$$
Now, since there are a finite number of vertices, we have $c^{-1} \leq \rho(1)_g \leq c$ for any $g$ of large growth, hence
$$\mathbb{P}^n(A) = \left( \frac{1}{\rho(1)_0} \right) \sum_{g \in A \cap LG \cap S_n} \rho(1)_g \lambda^{-n} \asymp \#(A \cap LG \cap S_n) \lambda^{-n}$$
and since $\#S_n \asymp \lambda^n$ we get the claim.
\end{proof}
\section{From Markov chains to random walks} \label{sec:markov_to_walk}
Let $\Gamma$ be the finite graph, $v_0$ its initial vertex, and $\mathbb{P}$ the Markov measure on the space $\Omega_0$ of
infinite paths starting at the initial vertex.
We will associate to each recurrent vertex of the Markov chain a random walk, and use previous results on random walks to
prove statements about the asymptotic behavior of the Markov chain.
\subsection{Return times}
For each sample path $\omega \in \Omega_0$, let us define $n(k,v, \omega)$ as the $k^{th}$ time the path $\omega$ lies at the vertex $v$.
In formulas,
$$n(k, v, \omega) := \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 0 & \textup{if } k = 0 \\ \min \left( h > n(k-1, v, \omega) \ : \ X_h(\omega) = v \right) & \textup{if }k \geq 1 \end{array} \right.$$
To simplify notation, we will write $n(k,v)$ instead of $n(k,v, \omega)$ when the sample path $\omega$ is fixed. Moreover, we denote
$$\tau(k,v) := n(k,v) - n(k-1, v).$$
These are the return times to the vertex $v$.
\begin{definition}
For every vertex $v$ of $\Gamma$, the \emph{loop semigroup} of $v$ is the set $L_v$ of loops in the graph
$\Gamma$ which begin and end at $v$. It is a semigroup with respect to concatenation.
A loop in $L_v$ is \emph{primitive} if it is not the concatenation of two (non-trivial) loops in $L_v$.
\end{definition}
Let us now pick a recurrent component $C$, and let $\Omega_C$ be the set of all infinite paths from the initial vertex
which enter $C$ and remain inside $C$ forever. We denote as $\mathbb{P}_C$ the conditional probability of $\mathbb{P}$ on $\Omega_C$.
Let us now fix a vertex $v$ of $C$. Then $\mathbb{P}_C$-almost every infinite path $\gamma$ in $\Omega_C$ passes through $v$
infinitely many times, hence such $\gamma$ can be decomposed as a concatenation
$\gamma = \gamma_0 \gamma_1 \dots \gamma_n \dots$ where $\gamma_0$ is a path from $v_0$ to $v$ which visits $v$ only once, and each $\gamma_i$
for $i \geq 1$ is a primitive loop at $v$. This defines for each recurrent vertex $v \in C$ a measurable map
$$\varphi_v : (\Omega_C, \mathbb{P}_C) \to (L_v)^\mathbb{N}$$
$$(e_n) \to (\gamma_{1} , \gamma_{2}, \ldots)$$
where $\gamma_{k} = e_{n(k,v)+1} \dots e_{n(k+1,v)}$.
We now define the \emph{first return measure} $\mu_v$ on the set
of primitive loops by setting, for each primitive loop $\gamma = e_1 \dots e_n$
with edges $e_1, \dots, e_n$,
$$\mu_v(e_1 \dots e_n) = \mu(e_1)\dots \mu(e_n).$$
Extend $\mu_v$ to the entire loop semigroup $L_v$ by setting $\mu_v(\gamma) = 0$ if $\gamma\in L_v$ is not primitive.
Since almost every path starting at $v$ visits $v$ infinitely many times, the measure $\mu_v$ is a probability measure.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:getting_iids} For any recurrent vertex $v$ which belongs to a component $C$, we have
$$(\varphi_v)_\star \mathbb{P}_C = \mu_v^\mathbb{N}.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It suffices to show that the measures $\mu_v^\mathbb{N}$ and $(\varphi_v)_\star \mathbb{P}_C$ agree on cylinder sets of the form $C_{l_1,l_2, \ldots, l_k} \subset (L_v)^\mathbb{N}$. We may also assume that each $l_i$ is primitive, otherwise $C_{l_1,l_2, \ldots, l_k}$ has $\mu_v^\mathbb{N}$--measure $0$ and $\varphi_v^{-1}(C_{l_1,l_2, \ldots, l_k})$ is empty. Hence, $\mu_v^\mathbb{N} (C_{l_1,l_2, \ldots, l_k}) = \mu_v(l_1)\ldots \mu_v(l_k)$.
Let $H_v$ be the set of paths in $\Omega_C$ which start at $v_0$ and meet $v$ only at their terminal endpoint. Then we have the disjoint union
\[
\varphi_v^{-1}(C_{l_1,l_2, \ldots, l_k}) = \bigcup_{\gamma \in H_v} \gamma \cdot l_1 l_2 \ldots l_k \cdot \Omega_v.
\]
So by the Markov property
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{P}_C(\varphi_v^{-1}(C_{l_1,l_2, \ldots, l_k})) &= \sum_{\gamma \in H_v} \mathbb{P}_C(\gamma) \mathbb{P}_v(l_1) \ldots \mathbb{P}_v(l_k) \\
&= \mu_v(l_1)\ldots \mu_v(l_k),
\end{align*}
where the second equality follows from the fact that almost every path in $\Omega_C$ hits $v$ and that each $l_i$ is a primitive loop. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
By Lemma \ref{lem:first_return}, for every recurrent vertex $v$, the first return measure $\mu_v$ has finite exponential moment,
i.e. there exists a constant $\alpha >0$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{e:expo}
\int_{L_v} e^{\alpha|\gamma|} \ d\mu_v(\gamma) < \infty.
\end{equation}
\section{Groups, combings and random walks} \label{sec:groups}
The connection between hyperbolic groups and Markov chains is through the theory of geodesic combings.
\begin{definition}
A \emph{finite state automaton} over the alphabet $S$ is a finite, directed graph $\Gamma$, with a distinguished \emph{initial vertex} $v_0$
and such that its edges are labeled by elements of $S$, in such a way that no vertex has two outgoing edges with the same label.
\end{definition}
Let $G$ be a countable group, and $S \subset G$ a finite set which generates $G$ as a semigroup. Then we say that $G$ has a \emph{geodesic combing} with respect to $S$
if there exists a finite state automaton $\Gamma$ such that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item every path in $\Gamma$ starting at the initial vertex is a geodesic in the word metric for $S$;
\item for every element $g \in G$, there exists exactly one path in $\Gamma$ which starts at the initial vertex and represents $g$.
\end{enumerate}
In this paper, we will only need geodesic combings on hyperbolic groups. For detailed introduction, see \cite{calegari2013ergodic}. We begin by reviewing some basics on hyperbolic metric spaces.
\subsection{Hyperbolic spaces and groups} \label{sec:hyperbolic}
A geodesic metric space $X$ is \emph{$\delta$--hyperbolic}, where $\delta\ge0$, if for every geodesic triangle in $X$, each side is contained within the $\delta$--neighborhood of the other two sides. Each hyperbolic space has a well-defined \emph{Gromov boundary} $\partial X$, and we refer the reader to \cite[Section III.H.3]{BH}, \cite{GhysdelaHarpe}, or \cite[Section 2]{kap_boundaries} for definitions and properties. We note that when the metric space $X$ is proper (meaning that closed metric balls are compact), $X\cup \partial X$ is a compactification of $X$.
If a group $G$ acts on $X$ by isometries, then there is an induced action $G \curvearrowright \partial X$ by homeomorphisms.
Recall that we have defined a \emph{nonelementary} action of $G$ on $X$ as an action $G \curvearrowright X$ for which there are $g,h \in G$ which act loxodromically on $X$ and whose fixed point sets on the Gromov boundary of $X$ are disjoint. We say that two such elements of $G$ are independent loxodromics for the action $G \curvearrowright X$.
This definition extends equally well to an action of a semigroup $L$ on $X$. We will require the following criterion which characterizes when a semigroup action $L \curvearrowright X$ is nonelementary:
\begin{proposition}[{\cite[Proposition 7.3.1]{das2014geometry}}] \label{th:Tushar}
Suppose that $L$ is a semigroup which acts on the hyperbolic metric space $X$ by isometries. If the limit set $\Lambda_L \subset \partial X$ of $L$ on the boundary of X is nonempty and $L$ does not have a finite orbit in $\partial X$, then
the action $L \curvearrowright X$ is nonelementary \footnote{Das--Simmons--Urbanski call such an action \emph{of general type}.}, that is $L$ contains two independent loxodromics.
\end{proposition}
If $G$ is a finitely generated group, then $G$ is \emph{hyperbolic} if for some (any) finite generating set $S$, the associated Cayley graph $C_S(G)$ is $\delta$--hyperbolic for some $\delta\ge0$. Since $C_S(G)$ is locally finite, the Gromov boundary $\partial G = \partial C_S(G)$ is compact. In fact, the boundary of $G$ can be identified with the set of asymptote classes of geodesic rays starting at the identity, where two geodesic
rays $\gamma_1$, $\gamma_2 : [0, \infty) \to G$ are asymptotic if $\sup_{t} d(\gamma_1(t), \gamma_2(t)) < \infty$.
Since the boundary $\partial G$ is compact and Hausdorff, it is a Baire space -- the union of closed nowhere dense sets has empty interior.\\
Hyperbolic groups have automatics structures by the well-known theorem of Cannon:
\begin{theorem}[\cite{cannon1984combinatorial}] \label{th:combing}
Let $G$ be a hyperbolic group, and $S$ a finite generating set. Then $G$ has a geodesic combing with respect to $S$.
\end{theorem}
Let $\Gamma$ be the directed graph associated to the geodesic combing of $G$, whose edges are labeled by generators from $S$. As $\Gamma$ is a directed graph, we will use the notation and terminology established in Section \ref{sec:counting_graphs}. That $\Gamma$ comes from a combing of $G$ implies that there is a map $\mathrm{ev} \colon \widetilde{\Gamma} \to G$, the \emph{evaluation map}, which associates to each directed path $p$ in $\Gamma$ beginning at $v_0$, the element $\mathrm{ev}(p) \in G$ represented by the word obtained by concatenating the edge labels of $p$. By definition, $|\mathrm{ev}(p)| = |p|$ and $\mathrm{ev} \colon \widetilde \Gamma \to G$ is bijective. We remark that this map extends to \emph{all} directed paths in $\Gamma$ (no matter which vertex they start from), again by concatenating edge labels, and we will continue to denote this map by $\mathrm{ev}$. Note that the extension still maps directed paths to geodesics, but is no longer injective since paths which start at different vertices at $\Gamma$ may still read the same edge labels.
Moreover, since paths in $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ beginning at $v_0$ map to geodesics in $G$ beginning at $1$, $\mathrm{ev}$ induces a boundary map, denoted $\mathrm{ev} \colon \partial \widetilde{\Gamma} \to \partial G$, which is continuous, surjective, closed, and finite-to-one \cite{calegari2013ergodic}.
In fact, the graph $\Gamma$ is almost semisimple \cite[Lemma 4.15]{calegari2010combable}, this follows from a theorem of Coornaert.
\begin{theorem}[{\cite[Theorem 7.2]{coornaert1993mesures}}] \label{th:Coorn}
Let $G$ be a nonelementary hyperbolic group with generating set $S$. Let $S_n$ be the set of elements of $G$ of word length $n$. Then there are constants $\lambda >0$, $c\ge1$ such that
\[
c^{-1}\lambda^n \le \#S_n \le c \lambda^n.
\]
\end{theorem}
\noindent We remark that since $\Gamma$ parameterizes the geodesic combing of $G$, the constant $\lambda >0$ in Theorem \ref{th:Coorn} is the growth rate of $\Gamma$.
Finally, the map $\mathrm{ev} \colon \partial \widetilde \Gamma \to \partial G$ pushes forward the Patterson-Sullivan measure on $\partial \widetilde{\Gamma}$ to the usual \emph{Patterson--Sullivan measure} on $\partial G$, which we continue to denote by $\nu$. The measure $\nu$ is a quasiconformal measure on $\partial G$, which can alternatively be defined, up to bounded ratios, as a weak limit of uniform measure on the balls $B_n$.
For details, see \cite{coornaert1993mesures} or Section 4.3 of \cite{calegari2010combable}.
\begin{lemma}[\cite{coornaert1993mesures}\cite{calegari2013ergodic}] \label{L:ergodic}
The Patterson-Sullivan measure on $\partial G$ has full support, i.e. every open set has positive measure.
Moreover, the action of $G$ on $\partial G$ is ergodic, i.e. any $G$-invariant subset of $\partial G$
has either zero or full measure.
\end{lemma}
Finally, we turn to the definition and basic properties of shadows in the $\delta$-hyperbolic space $X$. For $x,y \in X$, the \emph{shadow in $X$ around $y$ based at $x$} is
\[
S_x(y,R) = \{z\in X : (y,z)_x \ge d(x,z) -R\},
\]
where $R> 0$ and $(y,z)_x = \frac{1}{2}(d(x,y) +d(x,z) -d(y,z))$ is the usual \emph{Gromov product}. The \emph{distance parameter} of $S_x(y,R)$ is by definition the number $r = d(x,y) -R$, which up to an additive constant depending only on $\delta$, measures the distance from $x$ to $S_x(y,R)$. Indeed, $z \in S_x(y,R)$ if and only if any geodesic $[x,z]$ $2\delta$--fellow travels any geodesic $[x,y]$ for distance $r+O(\delta)$.
We will use shadows in both the hyperbolic group $G$ and the hyperbolic space $X$, but the location of the shadow will always be clear from context. For example, $S_1(g,R)$ will usually denote a shadow in $G$ based at the identity element. \\
The following lemma is an easy exercise in hyperbolic geometry.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:neigh-shadow}
For each $D \geq 0$, and each $x, y$ in a $\delta$-hyperbolic space, we have
$$N_D(S_x(y, R)) \subseteq S_x(y, R + D+2\delta).$$
\end{lemma}
Returning to the directed graph $\Gamma$ parameterizing the geodesic combing for $G$,
we say a vertex $v$ is \emph{continuable} if there exists at least one infinite path starting from $v$.
Otherwise, $v$ is said to be $\emph{non-continuable}$. Elements of $g$ are called continuable or non-continuable
according to the property of their vertex. Note that $g$ is continuable if and only if it lies on an infinite geodesic ray in the combing.
\begin{lemma} \label{l:continuable}
Let $r$ be the number of vertices in $\Gamma$. Then for every $g \in G$, there exists $h \in G$ with $d_G(g,h) \leq r$ and such that the vertex of $h$ is continuable.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Note that every path of length $\geq r$ in the graph passes through some vertex at least twice,
and a vertex which supports a loop is continuable.
If $|g| \leq r$, just pick $h = 1$; otherwise, consider the path in the combing from $1$ to $g$,
and look at the final subpath of length $r$ (the one ending in $g$). By the previous observation, such subpath has to hit a continuable vertex, proving the claim.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{l:shadow-large}
There exists a constant $c\ge 0$ which depends only on $\delta$ such that,
for any $g$ continuable, and any $R \geq 0$, the shadow $S_1(g, R+c)$ in $G$ has maximal growth.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\gamma$ be an infinite geodesic in $G$ which contains $g$, and let $D = |g|$.
Moreover, let $g_n$ be a point on $\gamma$ at distance $n + D + c$ from $1$, where $c$ is a constant which depends on $\delta$.
We claim that the ball of radius $n$ around $g_{n}$ is contained in $S_1(g, R)$.
Indeed, if $h \in B_n(g_{n})$, then
$$(h, g_n)_1 \geq d_G(1, g_n) - d_G(h, g_n) \geq n + D + c - n = D + c$$
Thus, a closest point projection $p$ of $h$ to $[1, g_n]$ lies on the segment $[g, g_n]$.
As a consequence, $d(1,h) = d(1,g) + d(g, p) + d(p,h) + O(\delta)$ and $d(g, h) = d(g, p) + d(p, h) + O(\delta)$, hence
$$(h, g)_1 = d_G(1, g) + O(\delta)$$
which proves the claim.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Random walks}
If $X$ is a separable hyperbolic space and $G$ acts on $X$ by isometries, then a probability measure $\mu$ on $G$ is said to be \emph{nonelementary} with respect to the action $G \curvearrowright X$ if the semigroup generated by the support of $\mu$ contains two independent loxodromics.
\begin{comment}
We will require a few theorems from the theory of random walks on weakly hyperbolic groups.
First, set
$$Sh(x_0,r) = \{S_{x_0}(gx_0,R) \ : \ g\in G \text{ and } d(x_0,gx_0) -R \ge r \}.$$
This is the set of shadows based at $x_0$ and centered at points in the orbit of $x_0$ with distance parameter at least $r$. For the following lemma of Maher--Tiozzo, recall that $\mu^{*n}$ is the $n$-fold convolution of $\mu$; it is the distribution of the $n$th step of the random walk.
\begin{lemma}[{\cite[Corollary 5.3]{MaherTiozzo}}] \label{lem:MT_shadow_decay}
Let $G$ be a countable group which acts by isometries on a separable hyperbolic space $X$, and let $\mu$ be a nonelementary probability distribution on $G$. Then there is a function $f(r)$, with $f(r) \to 0$ as $r \to \infty$ such that for all $n$
\[
\sup_{S \in Sh(x_0,r)}\mu^{*n}(S) \le f(r).
\]
\end{lemma}
\end{comment}
We will need the fact that a random walk on $G$ whose increments are distributed according to a nonelementary measure $\mu$ almost surely converge to the boundary of $X$ and has positive drift in $X$.
\begin{theorem}[{\cite[Theorems 1.1, 1.2]{MaherTiozzo}}] \label{thm:MT_drift}
Let $G$ be a countable group which acts by isometries on a separable hyperbolic space $X$, and let $\mu$ be a nonelementary probability distribution on $G$. Fix $x\in X$. Then,
almost every sample path $(w_nx)$ converges to a point in the boundary of $\partial X$, and the resulting hitting measure $\nu$ is nonatomic.
Moreover, if $\mu$ has finite first moment, then there is a constant $L>0$ such that for almost every sample path
$$\lim_{n \to \infty}\frac{d(x,w_nx)}{n} = L >0.$$
\end{theorem}
\noindent The constant $L >0$ in Theorem \ref{thm:MT_drift} is called the \emph{drift} of the random walk $(w_n)$.
\section{The Markov process and the action $G \curvearrowright X$}
\label{sec:Markov_action}
Let $G$ be a hyperbolic group with a nonelementary action $G \curvearrowright X$ on a hyperbolic space $X$. In this section, we relate the geometry of generic geodesics in $G$, with respect to Patterson--Sullivan measure, to the geometry of $X$ under the orbit map $G \to X$. These results will be used in the next section to prove genericity statements in $G$ with respect to counting in the Cayley graph. \\
We begin by fixing the notation needed throughout the remainder of the paper. Let $G$ be a hyperbolic group with finite generating set $S$ and let $\Gamma$ be the directed graph parameterizing the geodesic combing given by Theorem \ref{th:combing}. The directed edges of $\Gamma$ are labeled by $s \in S$ and we denote by $\Omega$ the set of all infinite paths in $\Gamma$ starting at any vertex $v \in \Gamma$.
As $\Gamma$ is almost semisimple, we apply the machinery of Section \ref{sec:markov} to make the directed graph $\Gamma$ into a Markov chain with transition probability $\mu$ (see Equation \ref{E:Markov}). This induces the measures $\mathbb{P}_v$ on the set $\Omega$,
one for each vertex $v \in \Gamma$ of large growth. As directed paths in $\Gamma$ evaluate to geodesics in $G$, the measure $\mathbb{P} = \mathbb{P}_{v_0}$, for $v_0$ the vertex associated to $1 \in G$, is thought of as a measure on the (combing) geodesic rays in $G$ starting at $1$. The other measures $\mathbb{P}_v$ have similar interpretations. Let
$$
w_n \colon \Omega \to G
$$
be the variable which associates to each path $p$ in $\Omega$ the element of $G$ spelled by concatenating the first $n$ edges of $p$. That is, $\mathbb{P}_v(w_n =g)$ is the probability of hitting $g\in G$ after $n$ steps starting at $v \in \Gamma$.
We will apply the notation and terminology developed in Sections \ref{sec:counting_graphs}, \ref{sec:Mchains}, and \ref{sec:markov_to_walk} to the Markov chain $\Gamma$. For example, for a subset $A \subset G$, $P^n(A)$ is the proportion of elements in the sphere $S_n$ of radius $n$ about $1 \in G$ which are contained in $A$. We also fix $\lambda >0$ to be the growth rate of $G$, as in Theorem \ref{th:Coorn}, and note that $\lambda$ is exactly the growth of $\Gamma$, as defined in Section \ref{sec:counting_graphs}. Finally, for $g \in G$, we set
\[
\mathrm{cone}(g) = \mathrm{ev}(cone(\gamma)) \subset G \cup \partial G,
\]
where $\gamma \in \widetilde{\Gamma}$ with $\mathrm{ev}(\gamma) =g$. Informally, $\mathrm{cone}(g)\subset G \cup \partial G$ is the set of points which are reachable by geodesics of $G$ (parameterized by $\Gamma$) which pass through $g$.
\subsection{Patterson--Sullivan measure as a combination of harmonic measures}
\label{sec: PS_comb}
We begin by realizing the Patterson--Sullivan measure on $\partial G$ as a combination of harmonic measures associated to random walks.
In Section \ref{sec:markov_to_walk}, to each vertex $v$ in $\Gamma$ we associated a loop semigroup $L_v$. Under evaluation, these semigroups map to subsemigroups of $G$, which we denote by $\Gamma_v$. In other words, $\Gamma_v$ is the semigroup of elements of $G$ which can be spelled by directed loops at the vertex $v \in \Gamma$. Hence, the first return measure $\mu_v$ on $L_v$ induces a probability measure, still denoted $\mu_v$, on $\Gamma_v \le G$, which has finite exponential moment (see eq. \eqref{e:expo}).
Let $\mathcal{R}$ be the set
of recurrent vertices of $\Gamma$ and let
$\nu_v$ be the harmonic measure on $\partial G$ corresponding to the random walk $\mu_v$ on $G$. Let $N_v$ be the set of finite directed paths in $\Gamma$ beginning at $v_0$ and ending at $v$ which do not meet a recurrent vertex of $\Gamma$ in their interior.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:PS_comb}
The Patterson--Sullivan measure $\nu$ on $\partial G$ is a combination of the harmonic measures $\nu_v$:
\[
\nu = \sum_{v \in \mathcal{R}} \sum_{\gamma \in N_v} \mu(\gamma) \gamma_* \nu_v.
\]
\end{proposition}
\noindent In the statement of Proposition \ref{prop:PS_comb}, we have identified $\gamma \in N_v$ with its evaluation $\mathrm{ev}(\gamma) \in G$.
\begin{proof}
Let $\Pi \subset \Omega_0$ be the set of infinite paths which enter some maximal component and remain there forever.
Let $\gamma \in \Pi$, and $v$ be the first recurrent vertex which is met along $\gamma$.
Then $\gamma$ can be decomposed uniquely as $\gamma = \gamma_0 \gamma_1 \dots$
where $\gamma_0$ is a path from $v_0$ to $v$ which does not meet any recurrent vertex in its interior,
and each $\gamma_i$ for $i \geq 1$ is a primitive loop at $v$.
Thus one can define the map $\varphi : \Pi \to \widetilde{\Gamma} \times \bigcup_v (\Gamma_v)^\mathbb{N}$ as $\varphi(\gamma) =
(\gamma_0, \gamma_1, \dots, \gamma_n, \dots)$. Since the set $\Pi$ has full $\mathbb{P}$-measure, and the
Patterson-Sullivan measure $\nu$ on $\partial \widetilde{\Gamma}$ is the same as $\mathbb{P}$ under the identification $\partial \widetilde{\Gamma} = \Omega_{0}$,
the map $\varphi$ can be defined as a measurable, $\nu$-almost surely defined map $\varphi : \partial \widetilde{\Gamma} \to \widetilde{\Gamma} \times \bigcup_v (\Gamma_v)^\mathbb{N}$.
Moreover, one has the boundary map $\textup{bnd} : G \times G^\mathbb{N} \to \partial G$ defined as
$$\textup{bnd}(g_0, (g_1, \dots, g_n, \dots)) = \lim_{n \to \infty} g_0 g_1 \dots g_n$$
(whenever the limit exists).
Combining these maps with the evaluation map, we get the following commutative diagram of measurable maps:
$$\xymatrix{
\partial \widetilde{\Gamma} \ar^{\mathrm{ev}}[r] \ar^\varphi[d] & \partial G \\
\widetilde{\Gamma} \times \bigcup_v (\Gamma_v)^\mathbb{N} \ar^{\mathrm{ev}}[r] & G \times G^\mathbb{N} \ar^{\textup{bnd}}[u]
}$$
The claim follows by pushing forward the Patterson-Sullivan measure $\nu$ on $\partial \widetilde{\Gamma}$ along the diagram.
First, by disintegration we get
$$\nu = \sum_{v \in \mathcal{R}} \sum_{\gamma \in N_v} \mu(\gamma) \nu_\gamma$$
where $\nu_\gamma$ is the conditional probability on the set of infinite paths which start with $\gamma$.
By Lemma \ref{lem:getting_iids}, $\varphi_*(\nu_\gamma) = \delta_\gamma \times (\mu_v)^\mathbb{N}$, so
$$\varphi_*(\nu) = \sum_{v \in \mathcal{R}} \sum_{\gamma \in N_v} \mu(\gamma) \left(\delta_\gamma \times (\mu_v)^\mathbb{N}\right)$$
Now, by definition the pushforward of $\delta_1 \times (\mu_v)^\mathbb{N}$ by the boundary map bnd is the harmonic measure $\nu_v$,
hence by $G$-equivariance $\textup{bnd}_\star(\delta_\gamma \times (\mu_v)^\mathbb{N}) = \gamma_\star \nu_v$,
yielding the claim.
\end{proof}
We can also obtain an analogous statement for any vertex of large growth. Indeed, for each vertex $v$ of large growth,
there exists a measure $\nu_v$ on $\partial G$ which is the hitting measure
of the Markov chain on $\partial G$, starting from the identity element on $G$.
Then we have
\begin{equation} \label{E:Gcombo}
\nu_v = \sum_{w \in \mathcal{R}} \sum_{\gamma: v \to w} \mu(\gamma) \gamma_* \nu_w
\end{equation}
Here, the sum is over all finite paths from $v$ to $w$ which only meet a recurrent vertex at their terminal endpoint.
Note that if $v$ is recurrent, then $\nu_v$ is the harmonic measure for the random walk on $G$ generated by the measure $\mu_v$, as discussed above.
\subsection{The loop semigroup is nonelementary}
Now suppose that $X$ is a hyperbolic space and that $G \curvearrowright X$ is a nonelementary action. In this section, we show:
\begin{proposition} \label{P:general}
There is a recurrent vertex $v$ of $\Gamma$ such that the corresponding loop semigroup $\Gamma_v$ is nonelementary.
\end{proposition}
We define the \emph{limit set} of the loop semigroup $\Gamma_v$ on the boundary of $G$ to be $\Lambda_{\Gamma_v} = \overline{\Gamma_v} \cap \partial G$, while the limit set on the boundary of $X$ is $\Lambda^X_{\Gamma_v} = \overline{\Gamma_v x} \cap \partial X$.
For an irreducible component $C$ of $\Gamma$, let $\P_v(C)$ be the set of finite paths in $\Gamma$ which are based at $v$ and lie entirely in $C$, and $P_v(C) = \mathrm{ev}(\P_v(C))$.
Similarly, $\partial \P_v(C)$ is the set of infinite paths in $\Gamma$ which are based at $v$ and lie entirely in $C$, and $\partial P_v(C) = \mathrm{ev}(\partial \P_v(C))$. We remind the reader that $\mathrm{ev}$ is injective on directed paths in $\Gamma$ which start at a fixed vertex $v$.
\begin{lemma} \label{L:open}
There exists a maximal component $C$ of $\Gamma$ and a vertex $v$ in $C$ such that $\partial P_v(C)$ contains an open set on $\partial G$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Every infinite path starting at the origin eventually stays forever in some component, hence we can write $\partial \widetilde{\Gamma}$
as the countable disjoint union
$$\partial \widetilde{\Gamma} = \bigcup_{i = 1}^\infty \gamma_i \cdot \partial \P_{v_i}(C_i)$$
where $\gamma_i$ is a path from the initial vertex to $v_i$, and $C_i$ is the component of $v_i$, hence
by applying the evaluation map we get
$$\partial G = \bigcup_{i = 1}^\infty g_i \cdot \partial P_{v_i}(C_i)$$
with $g_i = \mathrm{ev}(\gamma_i)$.
Since $\partial G$ is a Baire space and all $\partial P_{v_i}(C_i) $ are closed, then there exists some $i$ such that $\partial P_{v_i}(C_i)$ contains
an open set on $\partial G$.
For a shadow $S$ in $G$, let $\partial S \subseteq \partial G$ be the set of equivalence classes of geodesic rays based at $1$ which have a representative
$(g_n)$ which eventually lies in $S$ (i.e. for which there exists $n_0$ such that $g_n \in S$ for all $n \geq n_0$).
If $\partial P_v(C)$ contains a (non-empty) open set, then by definition of the topology on $\partial G$ there exists a nested pair of shadows
$S = S_1(g, R)$ and $S' = S_1(g, R+r +2\delta)$
such that $\partial P_v(C) \supseteq \partial S' \supseteq \partial S \neq \emptyset$.
Note that by Lemma \ref{l:shadow-large} this implies that $S$ has maximal growth.
We claim that this implies that for a constant $D$ which depends only on $\delta$ we have
$$S \subseteq N_D(P_v(C)).$$
Then, since $S$ has maximal growth, so does $N_D(P_v(C))$, hence $P_v(C)$ also has maximal growth, proving the lemma.
To prove the claim, let $h \in S$. Then by Lemma \ref{l:continuable}, there exists $h'$ with $d_G(h,h') \leq r$ and such that $h'$ is continuable.
By Lemma \ref{lem:neigh-shadow}, $h'$ belongs to $S'$.
Then $h'$ belongs to a geodesic ray $\gamma$ which converges to $\xi \in \partial S$.
Since $\partial S' \subseteq P_v(C)$ and $h'$ belongs to $S'$, then
there exists $\gamma'$ an infinite geodesic ray which $2\delta$-fellow travels $\gamma$ and which lies in $P_v(C)$.
Thus, $h$ belongs to a $(2\delta +r)$--neighborhood of $P_v(C)$. Setting $D = 2\delta +r$
establishes the claim.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{L:open2}
Let $v$ be a vertex in the irreducible component $C$. Then
$$\Lambda_{\Gamma_v} \supseteq \partial P_v(C).$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\xi \in \partial P_v(C)$, and $(g_n)$ a sequence of elements of $P_v(C)$ so that $g_n \to \xi$. Then there exists for each $n$ a path $s_n$ from
the endpoint of $g_n$ to $v$, so $g_n s_n \in \Gamma_v$ and $|s_n| \leq D$, where $D$ is the diameter of the component $C$.
Then $d(g_n s_n, g_n) \leq D$, hence $g_n s_n$ also converges to $\xi$, proving the claim.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{L:grows}
If $C$ is a maximal irreducible component and $v$ belongs to $C$, then the growth of $\Gamma_v$ is maximal.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $D$ be the diameter of $C$.
Since every path from $v$ to any vertex $v_i$ inside $C$ of length $n$ can be extended
to a path of length $\leq n + D$ from $v$ to itself, we have for each $n$
$$\#(P_v(C) \cap B_n) \leq \#(\Gamma_v \cap B_{n+D})$$
which, together with Lemma \ref{L:growth}, proves the claim.
\end{proof}
We can now give the proof of Proposition \ref{P:general}:
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{P:general}]
Let $v$ be the vertex given by Lemma \ref{L:open}. We first claim that the semigroup $\Gamma_v$ does not have a finite orbit in $\partial X$. Otherwise, the subgroup $H = \langle \Gamma_v \rangle$ also has a finite orbit in $\partial X$. Since $C$ is maximal, by Lemma \ref{L:grows} the semigroup
$\Gamma_v$ has maximal growth, hence $|B(r) \cap \Gamma_v| \asymp \lambda^r$, where $\lambda$ is the growth rate of $G$; then \cite[Theorem 4.3]{gouezel2015entropy} implies that the subgroup $H$ must have finite index in $G$. This implies that the action $G \curvearrowright \partial X$ has a finite orbit, contradicting that $G \curvearrowright X$ is nonelementary.
Using Proposition \ref{th:Tushar}, it remains to show that $\Lambda^X_{\Gamma_v}$ contains at least $3$ points. To this end, let $U$ be an open set of $\partial G$ contained in $\Lambda_{\Gamma_v} \subset \partial G$, which exists by Lemma \ref{L:open2}. Since the action of $G$ on its boundary is minimal, we can find $f,g \in G$, which are independent loxodromics with respect to the action $G \curvearrowright X$ and with $f^{\pm \infty}, g^{\pm \infty} \in U \subset \partial G$. We claim that each of these $4$ points gives points of $\Lambda^X_{\Gamma_v}$. Since $f,g$ are independent and loxodromic with respect to the action $G \curvearrowright X$, these $4$ points must be distinct points of $\Lambda^X_{\Gamma_v}$, completing the proof.
Since $f^\infty \in U \subset \Lambda_{\Gamma_v}$, there is a sequence $l_i \in \Gamma_v$ with $l_i \to f^\infty$ in $G \cup \partial G$ as $i \to \infty$. As $\widetilde{\Gamma} \cup \partial \widetilde \Gamma$ is compact, after passing to a subsequence, we may assume that $l_i \to l_\infty$ in $\widetilde{\Gamma} \cup \partial \widetilde \Gamma$ and by continuity, $\mathrm{ev}(l_\infty) = f^\infty$. Let $g_i$ be element of $G$ represented by the $i$th term of $l^\infty$ (realizing $l^\infty$ as an infinite path in $\widetilde \Gamma$). Then $(g_i)_{i\ge0}$ is a geodesic in $G$ converging to $f^{\infty} \in \partial G$ and so there is a $K$, depending only on $f$, such that
\[
d_G(g_i, f^{j_i}) \le K,
\]
for some sequence $j_i$ which goes to $\infty$ as $i \to \infty$. Since the (fixed) orbit map $G \to X$ is $L$--coarsely Lipschitz,
\[
d_X(g_i x, f^{j_i} x) \le KL.
\]
As $f \in G$ is loxodromic for the $X$-action, $f^{j_i} x$ converges to some point $f^\infty_X \in \partial X$, hence so does $g_i x$. We conclude $f^\infty_X \in \Lambda^X_{\Gamma_v}$, as required.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
If it is a priori known that no element $g \in G$ acts parabolically on $X$ (i.e. $g$ is either loxodromic or has a bounded orbit), then the use of \cite[Theorem 4.3]{gouezel2015entropy} in Proposition \ref{P:general} (and in Corollary \ref{c:general}) can be removed.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Convergence to the boundary of $\partial X$}
In this section we show that almost every sample path for the Markov chain converges to the boundary of $X$. Since sample paths in the Markov chain evaluate to geodesic rays in $G$, this will show that the orbit of almost every geodesic ray in $G$ converges to the boundary of $X$.
Let $\partial \widetilde \Gamma^X$ be the set of infinite paths beginning at $v_0$ which converge to a point in $\partial X$ when projected to $X$ and set $\partial ^X G = \mathrm{ev}(\partial \widetilde \Gamma^X)$. Since the orbit map $G \to X$ is Lipschitz, $\partial^X G \subset \partial G$ consists of those $\xi$ such that the projection of any geodesic ray $[1,\xi) \subset G$ to $X$ converges in $X \cup \partial X$ to a point of $\partial X$.
\begin{lemma}
The set $\partial^X G$ is $G$--invariant.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If $\eta \in \partial^X G$, then $[1,\eta)$ is a geodesic in $G$ which projects under the orbit map to a path $\gamma$ in $X$ which converges to a point $\xi$ in $\partial X$. Hence, $g \gamma$ converges to $g \xi$ in $\partial X$. Since $g[1,\eta)$ is a geodesic in $G$ with the same endpoint as $[1,g\eta)$, they $R$--fellow-travel in $G$. Hence, the projection $\gamma'$ of $[1,g\eta)$ to $X$ must $RL$--fellow-travel the path $g\gamma$ in $X$, where $L$ is the Lipschitz constant of the fixed orbit map $G \to X$. Hence, $\gamma'$ converges to the point $g\xi$ in $X \cup \partial X$ showing that $g\eta \in \partial^X G$ as required.
\end{proof}
Here we show that $\partial^X G$ has full measure in $\partial G$, so that the map
$\Phi \colon \partial^X G \to \partial X$ gives a measurable map $\partial G \to \partial X$.
\begin{theorem} \label{th:chain_converges}
For $\mathbb{P}$-almost every path $(w_n)$ in the Markov chain, the projection $(w_n x)$ to the space converges to a point in the boundary $\partial X$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We know by Lemma \ref{L:recurrent} that $\mathbb{P}$-almost every sample path enters some recurrent component $C$, and stays there forever. Let $v$ be a vertex in $C$.
Then for each $v$, one can split the infinite path into a prefix $\gamma_0$, and a sequence $\gamma_1, \gamma_2, \dots$ of primitive loops at $v$.
Then the pushforward of $\mathbb{P}_C$ via the map $\varphi_v$ equals the measure $\mu_v^{\mathbb{N}}$ on the set $\Gamma_v^{\mathbb{N}}$ (as in Theorem \ref{prop:PS_comb}).
Now, if the measure $\mu_v$ is non-elementary, then by Theorem \ref{thm:MT_drift} we know that almost surely the sequence
$(\gamma_1 \gamma_2 \dots \gamma_n x)$ converges to a point in $\partial X$.
Since the same is true for every vertex of $C$, then the sequence $(w_n)$ is partitioned in a finite number of subsequences, and for each such subsequence $(w_{n_k})$
the sample path $(w_{n_k}x)$ converges to a point in $\partial X$.
Thus, we define the equivalence relation on the set of vertices of $C$ by defining $v_i \sim v_j$ if the sequences $(w_{n(k,v_i)}x)$ and $(w_{n(k, v_j)}x)$
converge to the same point.
Now, we know that if $w_{n_k}x \to \xi \in \partial X$, then also $w_{n_k+1}x \to \xi$, so this equivalence relation satisfies the hypothesis of Lemma \ref{L:equiv},
hence as a consequence there is only one equivalence class, thus the whole sequence $(w_n x)$ converges to the same $\xi \in \partial X$.
Since there exists at least one (recurrent) vertex $v$ such that the semigroup $\Gamma_v$ is nonelementary by Proposition \ref{P:general},
the previous argument shows that $\nu(\widetilde \Gamma^X) >0$, thus $\nu(\partial^X G)> 0$. Since $G \curvearrowright (\partial G, \nu)$ is ergodic (Lemma \ref{L:ergodic}) and $\partial^X G$ is invariant, then $\partial^X G$ has full measure, which completes the proof of the theorem.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{L:equiv}
Let $r\geq 1$, and $\sim$ be an equivalence relation on the set $\{1, \dots, r\}$, and $\mathbb{N} = A_1 \sqcup \dots \sqcup A_r$ a partition
of the set of natural numbers into finitely many, disjoint infinite sets. Assume moreover that if
the intersection $(A_i + 1) \cap A_j$ is infinite, then $i \sim j$. Then there is only one equivalence class.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that there are at least two equivalence classes, and pick one equivalence class. Let $X$ be the union of all sets $A_i$ which belong to such a class,
and $Y$ the union of all other equivalence classes. Then $\mathbb{N} = X \sqcup Y$, with both $X$ and $Y$ infinite. Then $(X+1) \cap Y$ is infinite,
which implies that there exists a set $A_i \subseteq X$ and a set $A_j \subseteq Y$ such that $|(A_i + 1) \cap A_j| = \infty$, contradicting the fact
that $i$ and $j$ are in different equivalence classes.
\end{proof}
Theorem \ref{th:intro_1} now follows immediately as a corollary to Theorem \ref{th:chain_converges}.
\begin{corollary}[Convergence to the boundary of $X$]
For every $x \in X$ and $\nu$--almost every $\eta \in \partial G$, if $(g_n)_{n\ge0}$ is a geodesic in $G$ converging to $\eta$, then the sequence $g_nx$ in $X$ converges to a point in the boundary $\partial X$.
\end{corollary}
Theorem \ref{th:chain_converges} was proven using only the knowledge that for \emph{some} recurrent vertex $v$, $\Gamma_v$ was nonelementary. However, using Theorem \ref{th:chain_converges} we can now show that for \emph{every} recurrent vertex, $\Gamma_v$ is nonelementary. This will be crucial for what follows.
\begin{corollary} \label{c:general}
Suppose that $G \curvearrowright X$ is as above. Then for each recurrent vertex $v$ of
$\Gamma$,
the semigroup $\Gamma_v$ is nonelementary with respect to the action on $X$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Since $\Gamma_v$ has maximal growth, $\nu(\partial \P_v(C))>0$. Then, identifying $\partial \P_v(C)$ with the corresponding endpoints in $\partial \widetilde \Gamma$, we have that $\partial \P_v(C) \cap \partial \widetilde \Gamma^X$ is infinite since $\nu(\partial \widetilde \Gamma^X)=1$. Hence, so is $\mathrm{ev}(\partial \P_v(C) \cap \partial \widetilde \Gamma^X) \subset \Lambda_{\Gamma_v} \cap \partial ^X G$ and we conclude that $\Lambda^X_{\Gamma_v}$ is infinite.
Just as in the proof of Proposition \ref{P:general}, the subgroup $H = \langle \Gamma_v \rangle$ has finite index in $G$ and so $\Gamma_v$ cannot have a finite orbit on $\partial X$. Since $\Lambda^X_{\Gamma_v} \neq \emptyset$, Theorem \ref{th:Tushar}, implies that $\Gamma_v$ is nonelementary.
\end{proof}
Similar to the discussion in Section \ref{sec: PS_comb}, we denote as $\nu_v^X$ the corresponding hitting measure on $\partial X$ (which is well-defined since we already
proved the Markov process converges to the boundary).
By equation \eqref{E:Gcombo} and applying convergence to the boundary we get:
\begin{equation} \label{E:combo}
\nu^X_v = \sum_{w \in \mathcal{R}} \sum_{\gamma: v \to w} \mu(\gamma) \gamma_* \nu^X_w
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:nonatomic}
For any $v$ of large growth, the measure $\nu_v^X$ is non-atomic.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since the random walk measures $\nu^X_w$ are non-atomic, so are the measures $\gamma_* \nu^X_w$ for each $\gamma$,
hence by equation \eqref{E:combo} the measure $\nu_v$ is also non-atomic as it is a linear combination of non-atomic measures.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Positive drift along geodesics}
In this section, we show that almost every sample path has positive drift in $X$. This will imply (Corollary \ref{cor:PS_drift}) the same for almost every geodesic ray in $G$ with respect to Patterson--Sullivan measure.
We first show that there is a well-defined average return time for a recurrent vertex $v$ of $\Gamma$:
\begin{lemma} \label{l:return}
For each vertex $v$ in $C$ recurrent, there exists $T_v > 0$ such that for almost every $\omega \in \Omega_C$
$$\lim_{k \to \infty} \frac{n(k,v,\omega)}{k} = T_v.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We know by Lemma \ref{lem:first_return}
that the return time to $v$ has an exponential tail:
$$\mathbb{P}_v(\tau(1, v, \omega) \geq n) \leq c e^{-cn}$$
Thus, the average return time is finite:
$$\int \tau(1,v, \omega) \ d\mathbb{P}_v(\omega)= T_v < \infty$$
which implies that $\mu_v$ has finite first moment in the word metric:
$$\int |g| \ d \mu_v(g) = T_v.$$
Now, by definition
$$n(k, v, \omega) = \tau(0, v, \omega) + \tau(1, v, \omega) + \dots + \tau(k, v, \omega)$$
then since the variables $\tau(1, v, \omega), \dots, \tau(k, v, \omega)$ are independent and identically distributed,
we get almost surely
$$\lim_{k \to \infty} \frac{n(k,v,\omega)}{k} = T_v.$$
\end{proof}
Using these average return times, we show that sample paths in the Markov chain have a well-defined drift and hence make linear progress in $X$.
\begin{theorem} \label{th:drift}
There exists $L > 0$ such that for $\mathbb{P}$-almost every sample path $(w_n)$ we have
$$\lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{d(w_n x, x)}{n} = L.$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $v$ be a recurrent vertex. Then by Proposition \ref{c:general} the loop semigroup $\Gamma_v$ is nonelementary, hence the random walk
given by the return times to $v$ has positive drift. More precisely,
from Theorem \ref{thm:MT_drift}, there exists a constant $\ell_v > 0$ such that
for almost every sample path which enters $v$,
$$\lim_{k \to \infty} \frac{d(w_{n(k,v)} x, x)}{k} = \ell_v.$$
Combined with Lemma \ref{l:return}, this implies
$$\lim_{k \to \infty} \frac{d(w_{n(k,v)} x, x)}{n(k,v)} = \frac{\ell_v}{T_v}.$$
Now, almost every infinite path visits every vertex of some recurrent component infinitely often.
Thus, for each recurrent vertex $v_i$ which belongs to a component $C$, there exists a constant $L_i > 0$ such that for $\mathbb{P}_C$-almost every path $(w_n)$, there is a limit
$$L_i = \lim_{k \to \infty} \frac{d(w_{n(k, v_i)} x, x)}{n(k, v_i)}.$$
Let $C$ be a maximal component, and $v_1, \dots, v_k$ its vertices. Our goal now is to prove that $L_1 = L_2 = \dots L_k$.
Let us pick a path $\omega \in \Omega_0$ such that the limit $L_i$ above exists for each $i = 1, \dots, k$, and define $A_i = \{ n(k, v_i), k \in \mathbb{N} \}$, and the equivalence relation $i \sim j$ if $L_{i} = L_{j}$.
Since $w_{n(k, v_i)}$ and $w_{n(k, v_i) + 1}$ differ by one generator, $d(w_{n(k, v_i)}x, w_{n(k, v_i) + 1}x)$ is uniformly bounded, hence
$$\lim_{k \to \infty} \frac{d(w_{n(k, v_i) + 1} x, x)}{n(k, v_i) + 1} = \lim_{k \to \infty} \frac{d(w_{n(k, v_i)}x, x)}{n(k, v_i)} = L_i$$
so the equivalence relation satisfies the hypothesis of Lemma \ref{L:equiv},
hence there is a unique limit $L = L_i$ so that
$$\lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{d(w_n x, x)}{n} = L.$$
In order to prove that the drift is the same for all maximal components,
let us now pick $L = L_i$ for some recurrent vertex $v_i$, and consider the set $\partial G_L$ of points $\xi$ in $\partial G$ such that
there exists a geodesic $(g_n) \subseteq G$ with $g_n \to \xi$ and such that
$\lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{d(g_n x, x)}{n} = L$.
The set $\partial G_L$ is $G$-invariant, and by the above statement it has positive probability, hence by ergodicity it has full measure.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem} \label{th:drift2}
For every vertex $v$ of large growth, and for $\mathbb{P}_v$-almost every sample path
$(w_n)$ we have
$$\lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{d(w_n x, x)}{n} = L.$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem \ref{th:drift}, for $\mathbb{P}$-almost every path which passes through $v$,
the drift equals $L$. Each such path $\gamma = (w_n)$ can be decomposed as $\gamma = \gamma_0 \star \widetilde{\gamma}$,
where $\gamma_0$ is a finite path from $v_0$ to $v$ and $\widetilde{\gamma} = (\widetilde{w}_n)$ is an infinite path starting from $v$.
Thus for each $n$, $w_n = g_0 \widetilde{w}_n$, where $g_0$ is the group
element which represents $\gamma_0$.
Hence,
\[
d(w_nx,x) - d(x,g_0x) \le d(\widetilde{w}_nx , x) = d(w_nx, g_0 x) \le d(w_nx,x) + d(x,g_0x)
\]
and so
$$\lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{d(\widetilde{w}_n x, x)}{n} = \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{d(w_n x, x)}{n} = L$$
as required.
\end{proof}
For application in Section \ref{sec:counting}, we will need the following convergence in measure statement.
\begin{corollary} \label{cor:drift_in_measure}
For any $\epsilon > 0$, and for any $v$ of large growth,
$$\mathbb{P}_v\left(\left| \frac{d(x, w_n x)}{n} - L \right| \geq \epsilon \right) \to 0.$$
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
By the theorem, the sequence of random variables $X_n = \frac{d(w_nx, x)}{n}$ converges almost surely to $L$.
Moreover, for every $n$ the variable $X_n$ is bounded above by the Lipschitz constant of the orbit map $G \to X$.
Thus, $X_n$ converges to $L$ in $L^1$, yielding the claim.
\end{proof}
Finally, Theorem \ref{th:drift} implies the following linear progress statement for almost every geodesic ray in $G$. This proves Theorem \ref{th:intro_2} from the introduction.
\begin{corollary}[Positive drift] \label{cor:PS_drift}
For every $x \in X$ and $\nu$--almost every $\eta \in \partial G$, if $(g_n)_{n\ge0}$ is a geodesic in $G$ converging to $\eta$, then
\[
\lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{d_X(x, g_n x)}{n} = L >0.
\]
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Note that the measure $\mathbb{P}$ on the set of infinite paths starting at $1$ pushes forward to $\nu$ on $\partial G$.
Thus, by Theorem \ref{th:drift}, for $\nu$-almost every $\xi \in \partial G$ there exists a geodesic $(g_n)$ in the combing with $g_n \to \xi$
for which the statement is true; by hyperbolicity, any other geodesic $(g_n')$ which converges to $\xi$ fellow travels $(g_n)$, hence the drift in $X$ is the same.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Decay of shadows for $\mathbb{P}$}
Let us denote as $Sh(x,r)$ the set of shadows of the form $S_x(gx, R)$ where $g \in G$ and the distance parameter satisfies $d(x,gx) - R \geq r$. For any shadow $S$, we denote its closure in $X \cup \partial X$ by $\overline S$.
\begin{proposition}[Decay of shadows] \label{P:decay1}
There exists a function $f : \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$ such that $f(r) \to 0$ as $r \to \infty$, and such that
for each $v$ of large growth,
$$\nu_v^X \big(\overline{S_x(gx, R)}\big) \leq f(r),$$
where $r = d(x, gx) -R$ is the distance parameter of the shadow.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{lem:nonatomic}, the measure $\nu_v^X$ on $\partial X$ is nonatomic. The proposition now follows from a standard measure theory argument, as in Proposition 5.1 of \cite{MaherTiozzo}.
\end{proof}
Let $\Omega$ be the set of all infinite paths in $\Gamma$, starting from any vertex.
We define for each $n$ the map $w_n : \Omega \to G$ which maps each infinite path to the
product of the first $n$ edges of the path:
$$w_n((e_1, \dots, e_n, \dots)) = e_1 \dots e_n$$
and
$$w_\infty(x) := \lim_{n \to \infty} w_n x \in \partial X$$
(if it exists). Recall that by definition $\nu_v^X(A) = \mathbb{P}_v(w_\infty(x) \in A)$.
\begin{proposition} \label{p:decay}
There exists a function $p : \mathbb{R}^+ \to \mathbb{R}^+$ with $p(r) \to 0$ as $r \to \infty$, such that for each vertex $v$
and any shadow $S_x(gx, R)$ we have
\[
\mathbb{P}_v \Big( \exists n \geq 0 \ : \ w_n x \in S_x(gx, R) \Big) \leq p(r),
\]
where $r = d(x, gx) - R$ is the distance parameter of the shadow.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $S = S_x(gx, R)$ and $S_1 = S_x(gx, R + c_1)$, for $c_1$ to be determined in a moment. The idea is that for $c_1$ sufficiently large, the probability that the sample path $(w_nx)$ ever reaches the shadow $S$ is dominated by the probability that it convergence to a point of $\overline S_1 \cap \partial X$.
For any $h\in G$ such that $hx \in S$, hyperbolicity of $X$ implies that there is a constant $c_2 \ge0$ with $c_2 = c_1 + O(\delta)$ such that the complement of $S_1$ is contained in the shadow
\[
S^h = S_{hx} \big( x, d(x,hx) - c_2 \big).
\]
Note that the distance parameter of $S^h$ is $c_2 = c_1 + O(\delta)$. Then since $h^{-1}S^h$ is a shadow based at $x$, Proposition \ref{P:decay1} implies that we can choose $c_1$ large enough so that
\[
\nu_w^X(h^{-1}S^h) \le f(c_1 + O(\delta)) \le 1/2,
\]
for any large growth vertex $w$. This is our fixed $c_1 \ge 0$.
Now we have
$$\mathbb{P}_v( w_\infty(x) \in \overline{S_1}) \geq \mathbb{P}_v( w_\infty(x) \in \overline{S_1} \ \textup{ and } \ \exists n \ : \ w_n x \in S ) = $$
If there exists $n$ such that $w_n x$ belongs to $S$, let $n_1$ be the first hitting time. Then
$$ = \sum_{hx \in S} \mathbb{P}_v(w_{n_1} = h) \mathbb{P}_v(w_\infty(x) \in \overline{S_1} \ | \ w_{n_1} = h) = $$
hence from the Markov property of the chain
$$ = \sum_{hx \in S} \mathbb{P}_v(w_{n_1} = h) \mathbb{P}_{v^h}(w_\infty(x) \in h^{-1} \overline{S_1}),$$
where $v^h$ is terminal vertex of the path starting at $v$ which reads the words $h$.
Since the complement of $S_1$ is contained in $S^h$, $(\partial X - h^{-1}\overline S_1) \subset h^{-1} \overline{S^h}$ and so
$$\nu^X_w(h^{-1} \overline{S_1}) \geq 1 - \nu^X_w(h^{-1} \overline{S^h}) \geq 1 - f(c_1 + O(\delta)) \geq 1/2 ,$$
by our fixed choice of $c_1$.
Hence, combining this with the previous estimate,
$$\mathbb{P}_v( w_\infty(x) \in \overline{S_1}) \geq \sum_{hx \in S} \mathbb{P}_v(w_{n_1} = h) \cdot \nu^X_{v^h}(h^{-1} \overline{S_1}) \geq \frac{1}{2}
\mathbb{P}_v(\exists n \ : \ w_n x \in S)$$
hence
$$\mathbb{P}_v \big( \exists n \ : \ w_n x \in S \big) \leq 2 \cdot \mathbb{P}_v( w_\infty(x) \in \overline{S_1}) \leq 2 \cdot f\big(d(x, gx) - R -c_1\big)$$
so the claim is proven by taking $p(r) := 2 \cdot f(r - c_1)$.
\end{proof}
We conclude this section with a simple lower bound on the Gromov product:
\begin{lemma}\label{l:gromov}
Let $x,y,z$ be points in a metric space $X$. Then
$$(y,z)_x \geq d(x, z) - d(y,z).$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By definition
$$(y,z)_x = \frac{1}{2}\left( d(x,y) + d(x, z) - d(y,z) \right)$$
and by the triangle inequality $d(x, y) \geq d(x, z) - d(y,z)$, yielding the claim.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Almost independence and Gromov products}
Let $\mathbb{P}$ denote the probability measure (on the space of infinite paths) for the Markov chain starting at the identity.
Given a vertex $v$, we will denote as $\mathbb{P}_v(w_n = g)$ the probability that the Markov chain starting at the vertex $v$
reads $g$ after $n$ steps.
Let $m = \lfloor n/2 \rfloor$.
Finally, we denote as $u_m$ the random variable $u_m = w_m^{-1} w_{n}$, so that $w_{n} = w_m u_m$.
Recall that by the Markov property of the chain, for any $g,h \in G$ and each $m$,
$$\mathbb{P}(w_m = g \textup{ and } u_m^{-1} = h) =
\mathbb{P}(w_m = g) \cdot \mathbb{P}_v(w_m = h^{-1})$$
where $v = [g]$.
Let $V$ denote the vertex set of $\Gamma$.
The following three lemmas will be essential in controlling the size of $(gx,g^{-1}x)_x$ over the Markov chain (Lemma \ref{lem:prod_inv}), which is needed to produce loxodromic elements of the action $G \curvearrowright X$.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:prob_prod_1}
Let $f : \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$ be any function such that $f(m) \to +\infty$ as $m \to +\infty$. Then
$$\mathbb{P} \big((w_m x, u_m^{-1} x)_x \geq f(m) \big) \to 0$$
as $m \to \infty$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Let us denote as $S(m) := \{ (g,h) \in G \times G \ : (gx, hx)_x \geq f(m) \}$. Then by definition we have
$$\mathbb{P}((w_m x, u_m^{-1} x)_x \geq f(m) ) = \sum_{g,h \in S(m)} \mathbb{P}(w_m = g \textup{ and } u_m = h^{-1} ) \leq $$
hence by the Markov property
$$ \leq \sum_{v \in V} \sum_{h \in G} \mathbb{P}_v(w_m = h^{-1} ) \sum_{\{g : [g] =v, (g,h) \in S(m)\}} \mathbb{P}(w_m = g) \leq $$
and forgetting the requirement that $[g] = v$
$$\leq \sum_{v \in V} \sum_{h \in G} \mathbb{P}_v(w_m = h^{-1} ) \mathbb{P}( w_m x \in S_x(hx, R)) \leq $$
where $R = d(x, h x) - f(m)$, while using the estimate on shadows (Proposition \ref{p:decay}) we have
$$\leq \sum_{v \in V} \sum_{h \in G} \mathbb{P}_v(w_m = h^{-1} ) p(f(m)) \leq \#V \cdot p(f(m))$$
and the claim follows by decay of shadows.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:prob_prod_2}
For each $\eta > 0$, the probability
$$\mathbb{P} \big((w_n^{-1} x, u_m^{-1} x)_x \leq n(L - \eta)/2 \big)$$
tends to $0$ as $n \to \infty$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{l:gromov}, and since the group acts by isometries,
$$(w_n^{-1} x, u_m^{-1} x)_x \geq d(x, w_n^{-1}x) - d(w_n^{-1} x, u_m^{-1} x) = d(w_n x, x) - d(x, w_m x)$$
Now, by Theorem \ref{th:drift},
$$\mathbb{P}(d(w_n x, x) \geq n(L-\epsilon)) \to 1 \quad \text{and} \quad \mathbb{P}(d(w_m x, x) \leq n/2(L+\epsilon)) \to 1$$
hence with probability which tends to $1$
$$(w_n^{-1} x, u_m^{-1} x)_x \geq n(L-\epsilon) - \frac{n}{2}(L+\epsilon) = \frac{n}{2}(L-3\epsilon)$$
which yields the claim setting $\eta = 3\epsilon/2$.
\end{proof}
Finally, we show
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:prob_prod_3}
For each $\eta > 0$, the probability
$$\mathbb{P} \big( (w_m x, w_n x)_x \leq n (L - \eta)/2 \big)$$
tends to $0$ as $n \to \infty$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} By Lemma \ref{l:gromov},
$$(w_n x, w_m x)_x \geq d(x, w_n x) - d(w_m x, w_n x) = d(x, w_n x) - d(x, u_m x) $$
so if we have $d(x, w_n x) \geq n(L-\epsilon)$ and $d(x, u_m x) \leq n(L+\epsilon)/2$ then
$$(w_n x, w_m x)_x \geq n(L-3\epsilon)/2 $$
Now, the first statement holds with probability which tends to $1$ by Theorem \ref{th:drift};
for the second statement, note that for each $g$ and each $m$,
$$\mathbb{P}(u_m = g) = \sum_{v \in V} \mathbb{P}([w_m] = v) \mathbb{P}_v(w_m = g)$$
and by Theorem \ref{th:drift2}
$$\mathbb{P}_v \left(d(x, w_m x) \leq n(L+\epsilon)/2 \right) \to 1$$
for each recurrent $v$.
Hence $$\mathbb{P} \left(d(x, u_m x) \leq n(L+\epsilon)/2 \right) \to 1$$
completing the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Linear translation length along geodesics}
For $g \in G$, let $\tau_X(g)$ be the (stable) translation length of $g$ with respect to its action on $X$. Recall that $\tau_X(g) > 0$ if and only if $g$ is a loxodromic for the action $G \curvearrowright X$.
The following lemma for estimating the translation length of an isometry $g$ of $X$ is well-known; see for example \cite[Proposition 5.8]{MaherTiozzo}.
\begin{lemma} \label{l:tau-formula}
There exists a constant $c$, which depends only on $\delta$, such that for any isometry $g$ of a $\delta$-hyperbolic space $X$
and any $x \in X$ with $d(x, gx) \geq 2(gx, g^{-1}x)_x + c$, the translation length of $g$ is given by
$$\tau_X(g) = d(x, gx) - 2(gx, g^{-1}x)_x + O(\delta).$$
\end{lemma}
Since we already proved that the term $d(x, gx)$ grows linearly $\mathbb{P}$--almost surely (Theorem \ref{cor:drift_in_measure}), to complete the proof we need to
show that the Gromov product $(gx, g^{-1}x)_x$ does not grow too fast. To do so, we will use the following trick. For a proof, see \cite{TT}.
\begin{lemma}[Fellow traveling is contagious]\label{l:fellow_travel}
Suppose that $X$ is a $\delta$--hyperbolic space with basepoint $x$ and suppose that $A\ge0$. If $a,b,c,d \in X$ are points of $X$ with $(a\cdot b)_{x} \ge A$, $(c\cdot d)_{x} \ge A$, and $(a\cdot c)_{x} \le A-3\delta$. Then $(b \cdot d)_{x} -2\delta \le (a \cdot c)_{x} \le (b \cdot d)_{x} +2\delta$.
\end{lemma}
We apply this to prove the following:
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:prod_inv}
Let $f : \mathbb{N} \to \mathbb{R}$ be any function such that $f(n) \to +\infty$ as $n \to +\infty$. Then
$$\mathbb{P} \Big( (w_n x, w_n^{-1} x)_x \geq f(n) \Big) \to 0$$
as $n \to \infty$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Define
$$f_1(n) = \min \left\{ f(n) - 2 \delta, \frac{n(L-\eta)}{2} - 3\delta \right\}$$
It is easy to see that $f_1(n) \to \infty$ as $n \to \infty$.
By Lemma \ref{l:fellow_travel}, if we know that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$(w_mx, w_nx)_x \geq n(L-\eta)/2$,
\item
$(u_m^{-1}x, w_n^{-1}x)_x \geq n(L-\eta)/2$, and
\item
$(w_mx, u_m^{-1}x)_x \leq f_1(n) \leq n(L-\eta)/2 - 3\delta$,
\end{enumerate}
then
$$(w_nx, w_n^{-1}x)_x \leq (w_mx, u_m^{-1}x)_x + 2 \delta \leq f_1(n) + 2\delta.$$
Using Lemmas \ref{lem:prob_prod_1}, \ref{lem:prob_prod_2}, and \ref{lem:prob_prod_3}, the probability that conditions (1),(2), (3) hold tends to $1$, hence we have
$$\PP^n \left( (w_nx, w_n^{-1}x)_x \leq f(n) \right) \to 1$$
as $n \to \infty$.
\end{proof}
We can now prove Theorem \ref{th:intro_Mark} from the introduction.
\begin{theorem}
For every $\epsilon > 0$, one has
\[
\PP \Big(\tau_X(w_n) \ge n (L-\epsilon) \Big) \to 1,
\]
as $n \to \infty$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
If we set $f(n) = \eta n$ with $\eta > 0$, then by Lemma \ref{lem:prod_inv} and Corollary \ref{cor:drift_in_measure} the events
$(w_nx, w_n^{-1}x)_x \leq \eta n$ and $d(x, w_nx) \geq n(L-\eta)$ occur with probability ($\mathbb{P}^n$) which tends to $1$, hence
by Lemma \ref{l:tau-formula}
\begin{align*}
\PP^n \Big( \tau(w_n) \ge n(L- 3 \eta) \Big) \ge
\PP^n \Big( d(x, w_nx) - 2(w_nx, w_n^{-1}x)_x + O(\delta) \ge n(L- 3 \eta) \Big)
\end{align*}
which approaches $1$ as $n \to \infty$. This implies the statement if we choose $\epsilon > 3 \eta$.
\end{proof}
\section{Generic elements and the action $G \curvearrowright X$}
\label{sec:counting}
Recall that for any $A \subseteq G$,
\[
P^n(A) = \frac{\#(A \cap S_n)}{\#S_n},
\]
where $S_n$ is the $n$--sphere in $G$. Hence, $P^n$ is uniform measure on the $n$--sphere of $G$.
We remind the reader that there is a constant $c>1$ such that $c^{-1} \lambda^n \le \#S_n \le c \lambda^n$ (Theorem \ref{th:Coorn}) where $\lambda$ is the growth of the directed graph $\Gamma$. Also, since $\mathrm{ev} \colon \widetilde \Gamma \to G$ is bijective, we may unambiguously use graph terminology when referring to elements of $G$. For example, $[g]=v$ means that $v$ is the vertex of $\Gamma$ which is the terminal endpoint of the path starting at $v_0$ and spelling $g$. Further, for $g \in G$, $\widehat{g}$ denote the element of $G$ along the unique combing geodesic from $1$ to $g$ which has distance $\log|g|$ from $g$.
\begin{lemma} \label{l:shadow-cone}
For any $R \geq 0$ and any $h \in G$, the group shadow $S_1(h, R) \subseteq G$ is contained in the union of finitely many cones:
\[
S_1(h,R) \subseteq \bigcup_{g \in B_{R+c}(h)} \mathrm{cone}(g)
\]
where $c$ depends only on $\delta$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For each $x, y, z$ in a metric space, by definition of shadow and Gromov product,
$$z \in S_x(y, R) \Leftrightarrow (y,z)_x \geq d(x, y) - R \Leftrightarrow (x,z)_y \leq R$$
Thus, if $g_1 \in S_1(h, R)$, then $(g_1, 1)_h \leq R$, which implies that the distance between any geodesic segment from $1$ to $g_1$
and $h$ is at most $R + c$, where $c$ only depends on $\delta$. In particular, there exists a group element $h_1$ on the
combing geodesic from $1$ to $g_1$ which lies at distance $\leq R + c$ from $h$. Thus,
$g_1 \in \mathrm{cone}(h_1)$ with $h_1 \in B_{R+c}(h)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:near_large_growth}
There is $K\ge0$ such that for every $h \in G$ there is a $g \in G$ such that $v=[g]$ has large growth and $d_G(h,g) \le K$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that there exists an $R\ge0$ such that for any $h$ the group shadow $\overline {S_1(h,R)}$ contains an open set on $\partial G$. Hence, $\#(S_1(h,R) \cap S_n) \asymp c_1 \lambda^n$ for some $c_1$ depending only on $h$ (Lemma \ref{l:shadow-large}). Moreover, by Lemma \ref{l:shadow-cone} the shadow $S_1(h, R)$
is contained in a finite union of cones:
\[
S_1(h,R) \subseteq \bigcup_{g \in B_{R+c}(h)} \mathrm{cone}(g)
\]
where $C$ depends only on $\delta$. We conclude that one such cone $\mathrm{cone}(g)$ also has large growth. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Genericity of positive drift}
The following result establishes Theorem \ref{th: intro_gen_drift} from the introduction using what we have shown about the Markov measures in Section \ref{sec:Markov_action}.
\begin{theorem} \label{th:gen_drift}
For every $\epsilon > 0$ one has
$$\frac{\#\{ g \in S_n \ : \ d(gx,x) \geq (L- \epsilon) \ |g| \}}{\#S_n} \to 1 \qquad \textup{as }n \to \infty.$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $A_L$ denote the set of group elements
$$A_L := \{ g \in G \ : \ d(gx,x) \leq L |g| \}. $$
We know by Corollary \ref{cor:drift_in_measure} that for any $L' < L$ one has
$$\mathbb{P}^n(A_{L'}) \to 0 \qquad \textup{as }n \to \infty.$$
Then we have
$$P^n(A_{L-\epsilon}) \leq \frac{\# \{ g \in S_n \ : \ \widehat{g} \notin LG \}}{\#S_n} + \frac{\#\{ g \in S_n \cap A_{L-\epsilon} \ : \ \widehat{g} \in LG \}}{\#S_n}$$
and we know by Proposition \ref{P:smallg} that the first term tends to $0$.
Now, by writing $g = \widehat{g}h$ with $| h | = \log |g|$ we have that $d(gx, x) \leq (L-\epsilon) |g|$ implies
$$d(\widehat{g}x, x) \leq d(gx,x) + d(\widehat{g}x, gx) \leq (L-\epsilon) |g| + d(x, hx) \leq $$
hence, there exists $C$ such that it is less than
$$ \leq (L-\epsilon) |g| + C \log |g| \leq L' |\widehat{g}|$$
for any $L-\epsilon < L' < L$ whenever $|g|$ is sufficiently large. This proves the inclusion
$$\{ g \in S_n \cap A_{L-\epsilon} \ : \ \widehat{g} \in LG \} \subseteq \{ g \in S_n \ : \ \widehat{g} \in A_{L'} \cap LG \}$$
and by Lemma \ref{L:growth} (1)
$$\#\{ g \in S_n \ : \ \widehat{g} \in A_{L'} \cap LG \} \leq c \lambda^{\log n} \#( S_{n - \log n} \cap A_{L'} \cap LG) \leq $$
hence by Lemma \ref{lem:comparePn} (equation \eqref{E:countmu}) and considering the size of $S_{n-\log n}$
$$\leq c_1 \lambda^{\log n} \mathbb{P}^{n-\log n}(A_{L'}) \# S_{n-\log n} \leq c_2 \lambda^n \mathbb{P}^{n-\log n}(A_{L'}).$$
Finally, using that $\mathbb{P}^{n-\log n}(A_{L'}) \to 0$ we get
$$\limsup_{n \to \infty} \frac{\#\{ g \in S_n \cap A_{L-\epsilon} \ : \ \widehat{g} \in LG \}}{\#S_n} \leq \limsup_{n \to \infty} c_3 \mathbb{P}^{n-\log n}(A_{L'}) = 0$$
which proves the claim.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Counting and decay of shadows}
For $g \in G$, we set
\[
S_x^G(gx,R) = \left \{ h\in G : hx \in S_x (gx,R) \right \},
\]
where as usual, $S_x (gx,R)$ is the shadow in $X$ around $gx$ centered at the basepoint $x\in X$. We will need the following decay property for $S_x^G(gx,R) \subset G$.
\begin{proposition} \label{P:counting-decay}
There is a function $\rho : \mathbb{R}^+ \to \mathbb{R}^+$ with $\rho(r) \to 0$ as $r \to \infty$ such that for every $n \geq 0$
\[
P^n(S^G_x(gx, R)) \le \rho \left(d(x,gx) -R \right).
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{lem:near_large_growth}, every $h \in S^G_x(gx, R)$ lies at distance $\leq D$ from a group element $h_1$ of large growth,
and moreover by Lemma \ref{lem:neigh-shadow} such an element $h_1$ is contained in the shadow $S^G_x(gx, R + c D)$, where $c$ is the Lipschitz constant
of the orbit map $G \to X$. Thus,
$$S^G_x(gx, R) \subseteq N_D(S^G_x(gx, R+cD) \cap LG).$$
Now,
$$P^n(S^G_x(gx, R)) \leq P^n \left(N_D(S^G_x(gx, R+cD) \cap LG) \right) \leq $$
hence, if $\# B_D$ is the size of a ball of radius $D$ in the Cayley graph,
$$\leq \#B_D \cdot P^n(S^G_x(gx, R+cD) \cap LG) \leq $$
and by Lemma \ref{lem:comparePn}
$$\leq c_1 \# B_D \cdot \mathbb{P}^n(S^G_x(gx, R+cD)) \leq $$
hence by decay of shadows for $\mathbb{P}$ (Proposition \ref{p:decay})
$$\leq c_1 \# B_D \cdot p \left( d(x,gx) - R - cD \right)$$
thus the claim is proven if we set $\rho(r) := c_1 \# B_D \cdot p(r - cD)$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Genericity of loxodromics}
For each $n$, let $n_1 = \lfloor \frac{n}{2} \rfloor$, $n_2 = n - n_1$. For each $g \in S_n$, let us pick its representative
path from the initial vertex, and let $a$, $b$ be the group elements associated respectively to the first $n_1$ edges, and the last $n_2$
edges of this path. Thus we can canonically write $g = ab$, with $a \in S_{n_1}$, $b \in S_{n_2}$, and $b$ in the cone of $a$.
We now show that $a$ and $b$ are almost independent:
\begin{lemma} \label{l:indep-count}
There exists a constant $c > 0$ such that for any $n \geq 2$ the inequality
$$P^n(a \in A, b \in B) \leq c P^{n_1}(A) P^{n_2}(B)$$
is satisfied for any subsets $A, B \subseteq G$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
$$P^n(a \in A, b \in B) = \frac{ \#\{(a,b) \in S_{n_1} \times S_{n_2} \ : \ b \in \mathrm{cone}(a), a \in A, b \in B \}}{\#S_n} \leq$$
and forgetting the requirement that $b \in \mathrm{cone}(a)$,
$$\leq \frac{ \#\{(a,b) \in S_{n_1} \times S_{n_2} \ : \ a \in A, b \in B \}}{\#S_n} \leq \frac{P^{n_1}(A) P^{n_2}(B) \#S_{n_1} \#S_{n_2}}{\#S_n} .$$
Now, $\#S_{n_1} \#S_{n_2} \leq c \#S_n$ for some $c$ which depends only on $\Gamma$, proving the claim.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{l:positivehalf}
For any $\epsilon > 0$,
$$P^n\left(d(x,ax) \leq \frac{n(L+\epsilon)}{2}\right) \to 1$$
and
$$P^n\left(d(x,bx) \leq \frac{n(L+\epsilon)}{2}\right) \to 1.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We prove the complementary statement that
$$P^n\left(d(x,ax) \geq \frac{n(L+\epsilon)}{2}\right) \to 0.$$
Indeed, by Lemma \ref{l:indep-count}
$$P^n\left(d(x,ax) \geq \frac{n(L+\epsilon)}{2}\right) \leq c P^{n_1}\left(d(x, gx) \geq \frac{n(L+\epsilon)}{2} \right)$$
which tends to zero by Theorem \ref{th:gen_drift}, recalling that $n_1 \sim \frac{n}{2}$.
The proof of the second statement is completely analogous.
\end{proof}
Our goal is to prove that the translation length of a generic element in the $n$--sphere grows linearly in $n$. In order to apply Lemma \ref{l:fellow_travel}, we need to check that the first half of $g$ (which is $a$) and the first half of $g^{-1}$ (which is $b^{-1}$)
generically do not fellow travel:
\begin{comment}
In order to do so we use the
following basic result in hyperbolic geometry:
\begin{lemma} \label{l:tau-formula}
There exists a constant $C$, which depends only on $\delta$, such that for any isometry $g$ of a $\delta$-hyperbolic space $X$
and any $x \in X$ with $d(x, gx) \geq 2(gx, g^{-1}x)_x + C$, the translation length of $g$ is given by
$$\tau(g) = d(x, gx) - 2(gx, g^{-1}x)_x + O(\delta).$$
\end{lemma}
Since we already proved that the term $d(x, gx)$ grows linearly (Theorem \ref{th:gen_drift}), to complete the proof we need to
show that the Gromov product $(gx, g^{-1}x)_x$ does not grow too fast. To do so, we will use the following trick.
\begin{lemma}[Fellow traveling is contagious]\label{l:fellow_travel}
Suppose that $X$ is a $\delta$--hyperbolic space with basepoint $x$ and suppose that $A\ge0$. If $a,b,c,d \in X$ are points of $X$ with $(a\cdot b)_{x} \ge A$, $(c\cdot d)_{x} \ge A$, and $(a\cdot c)_{x} \le A-3\delta$. Then $(b \cdot d)_{x} -2\delta \le (a \cdot c)_{x} \le (b \cdot d)_{x} +2\delta$.
\end{lemma}
\end{comment}
\begin{lemma} \label{l:prod0}
Let $f : \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$ be any function such that $f(n) \to +\infty$ as $n \to +\infty$. Then
\[
P^n \Big( (a x, b^{-1} x)_x \geq f(n) \Big) \to 0
\]
as $n \to \infty$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We compute
$$P^n \left((ax, b^{-1}x)_x \geq f(n)\right) = \frac{\#\{ (g,h) \in S_{n_1} \times S_{n_2} \ : \ h \in \mathrm{cone}(g), \ (gx, h^{-1}x)_x \geq f(n) \}}{\#S_n} \leq $$
and removing the requirement that $h \in \mathrm{cone}(g)$ we have
$$\leq \frac{\#\{ (g,h) \in S_{n_1} \times S_{n_2} \ : \ (gx, h^{-1}x)_x \geq f(n) \}}{\#S_n} \leq $$
$$\leq \frac{1}{\#S_n} \sum_{h \in S_{n_2}} \#\left\{ g \in S_{n_1} \ : \ gx \in S_x(h^{-1}x, d(x, h^{-1}x) - f(n)) \right \} \leq$$
and from decay of shadows (Proposition \ref{P:counting-decay}) follows that
$$\leq \frac{1}{\#S_n} \sum_{h \in S_{n_2}} \rho(f(n)) \#S_{n_1} \leq \frac{ \#S_{n_1} \# S_{n_2} \rho(f(n))}{\#S_n} \leq c \rho(f(n)) \to 0 .$$
\end{proof}
The following two lemmas are the counting analogues of Lemma \ref{lem:prob_prod_2} and Lemma \ref{lem:prob_prod_3}.
\begin{lemma} \label{l:prod1}
For each $\eta > 0$, the probability
\[
P^n\left((b^{-1} x, g^{-1} x)_x \leq \frac{n (L - \eta)}{2} \right)
\]
tends to $0$ as $n \to \infty$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{l:gromov}, and since the action is isometric
$$(b^{-1}x, g^{-1}x)_x \geq d(x, g^{-1}x) - d(b^{-1} x, g^{-1} x) = d(x, gx) - d(x, ax)$$
Now, for any $\epsilon > 0$, by genericity of positive drift (Theorem \ref{th:gen_drift})
$$P^n\left(d(x, gx) \geq n(L-\epsilon)\right) \to 1$$
and by Lemma \ref{l:positivehalf}
$$P^n\left(d(x, ax) \leq \frac{n}{2}(L+\epsilon)\right) \to 1$$
so
$$P^n\left( (b^{-1}x, g^{-1}x)_x \geq n \left( \frac{L}{2} - \frac{3\epsilon}{2} \right) \right) \to 1$$
which proves the claim setting $\eta = 3 \epsilon/2$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{l:prod2}
For each $\eta > 0$, the probability
\[
P^n\left( (a x, g x)_x \leq \frac{n (L - \eta)}{2} \right)
\]
tends to $0$ as $n \to \infty$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{l:gromov},
$$(ax, gx)_x \geq d(x, gx) - d(ax, gx) = d(x, gx) - d(x, bx)$$
hence, since for any $\epsilon > 0$ we have by genericity of positive drift (Theorem \ref{th:gen_drift})
$$P^n(d(x, gx) \geq n(L-\epsilon)) \to 1$$
and by Lemma \ref{l:positivehalf}
$$P^n\left(d(x, bx) \leq \frac{n}{2}(L+\epsilon)\right) \to 1$$
we get
$$P^n\left( (ax, gx)_x \geq n \left( \frac{L}{2} - \frac{3\epsilon}{2} \right) \right) \to 1$$
which proves the claim setting $\eta = 3 \epsilon/2$.
\end{proof}
The following proposition establishes control of the Gromov products $(gx,g^{-1}x)_x$ with respect to our counting measures:
\begin{proposition} \label{p:g-prod}
Let $f : \mathbb{N} \to \mathbb{R}$ be a function such that $f(n) \to +\infty$ as $n \to \infty$.
Then
$$P^n \Big( (gx, g^{-1}x)_x \leq f(n) \Big) \to 1$$
as $n \to \infty$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Define
$$f_1(n) = \min \left\{ f(n) - 2 \delta, \frac{n(L-\eta)}{2} - 3\delta \right\}$$
It is easy to see that $f_1(n) \to \infty$ as $n \to \infty$.
By Lemma \ref{l:fellow_travel}, if we know that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$(ax, gx)_x \geq n(L-\eta)/2$,
\item
$(b^{-1}x, g^{-1}x)_x \geq n(L-\eta)/2$, and
\item
$(ax, b^{-1}x)_x \leq f_1(n) \leq n(L-\eta)/2 - 3\delta$,
\end{enumerate}
then
$$(gx, g^{-1}x)_x \leq (ax, b^{-1}x)_x + 2 \delta \leq f_1(n) + 2\delta.$$
Using Lemmas \ref{l:prod0}, \ref{l:prod1}, and \ref{l:prod2}, the probability that conditions (1),(2), (3) hold tends to $1$, hence we have
$$P^n( (gx, g^{-1}x)_x \leq f(n)) \to 1$$
as $n \to \infty$.
\end{proof}
Finally, we prove Theorem \ref{th:intro_gen_trans} from the introduction.
\begin{theorem}[Linear growth of translation length]
For any $\epsilon > 0$ we have
\[
\frac{\#\{g \in S_n : \tau_X(g) \ge n(L-\epsilon) \}}{\#S_n} \to 1,
\]
as $n\to \infty$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
If we set $f(n) = \eta n$ with $\eta > 0$, then by Proposition \ref{p:g-prod} and Theorem \ref{th:gen_drift} the events
$(gx, g^{-1}x)_x \leq \eta n$ and $d(x, gx) \geq n(L-\eta)$ occur with probability ($P^n$) which tends to $1$, hence
by Lemma \ref{l:tau-formula}
\begin{align*}
P^n \Big( \tau(g) \ge n(L- 3 \eta) \Big) \ge
P^n \Big ( d(x, gx) - 2(gx, g^{-1}x)_x + O(\delta) \ge n(L- 3 \eta) \Big)
\end{align*}
which approaches $1$ as $n \to \infty$. This implies the statement if we choose $\epsilon > 3 \eta$.
\end{proof}
Since elements with positive translation length are loxodromic, we finally get
\begin{corollary}[Genericity of loxodromics]
\[
\frac{\#\{g \in S_n : g \; \mathrm{is} \; X - \mathrm{loxodromic} \}}{\#S_n} \to 1,
\]
as $n\to \infty$.
\end{corollary}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
The (Unconstrained) Boolean Quadratic Programming Problem (BQP) is to
\begin{align*}
\text{maximise } & f(x) = x^T Q' x + c' x + c'_0\\
\mbox{subject to } & x \in \{ 0, 1 \}^n,
\end{align*}
where $Q'$ is an $n \times n$ real matrix, $c'$ is a row vector in $\mathbb{R}^n$, and $c'_0$ is a constant.
The BQP is a well-studied problem in the operational research literature~\cite{Billionnet2004}.
The focus of this paper is on a problem closely related to BQP, called the \emph{Bipartite (Unconstrained) Boolean Quadratic Programming Problem} (BBQP)~\cite{Punnen2012}\@.
BBQP can be defined as follows:
\begin{align*}
\text{maximise } & f(x, y) = x^TQy + cx + dy + c_0\\
\text{subject to } & x \in \{ 0, 1 \}^m, y \in \{ 0, 1 \}^n,
\end{align*}
where $Q = (q_{ij})$ is an $m \times n$ real matrix, $c = (c_1, c_2, \ldots, c_m)$ is a row vector in $\mathbb{R}^m$, $d = (d_1, d_2, \ldots, d_n)$ is a row vector in $\mathbb{R}^n$, and $c_0$ is a constant.
Without loss of generality, we assume that $c_0 = 0$, and $m \le n$ (which can be achieved by simply interchanging the rows and columns if needed).
In what follows, we denote a BBQP instance built on matrix $Q$, row vectors $c$ and $d$ and $c_0 = 0$ as BBQP$(Q, c, d)$, and $(x, y)$ is a feasible solution of the BBQP if $x \in \{ 0, 1 \}^m$ and $y \in \{ 0, 1 \}^n$.
Also $x_i$ stands for the $i$th component of the vector $x$ and $y_j$ stands for the $j$th component of the vector $y$.
A graph theoretic interpretation of the BBQP can be given as follows~\cite{Punnen2012}.
Let $I = \{ 1 ,\allowbreak 2 ,\allowbreak \ldots ,\allowbreak m \}$ and $J = \{ 1 ,\allowbreak 2 ,\allowbreak \ldots ,\allowbreak n \}$.
Consider a bipartite graph $G = (I, J, E)$.
For each node $i \in I$ and $j \in J$, respective costs $c_i$ and $d_j$ are prescribed.
Furthermore, for each $(i,j) \in E$, a cost $q_{ij}$ is given.
Then the \emph{Maximum Weight Induced Subgraph Problem} on $G$ is to find a subgraph $G' = (I', J', E')$ such that $\sum_{i \in I'} c_i + \sum_{j \in J'} d_j + \sum_{(i,j) \in E'} q_{ij}$ is maximised, where $I' \subseteq I$, $J' \subseteq J$ and $G'$ is induced by $I' \cup J'$.
The Maximum Weight Induced Subgraph Problem on $G$ is precisely the BBQP, where $q_{ij} = 0$ if $(i, j) \notin E$.
There are some other well known combinatorial optimisation problems that can be modelled as a BBQP\@.
Consider the bipartite graph $G = (I, J, E)$ with $w_{ij}$ being the weight of the edge $(i, j) \in E$\@.
Then the \emph{Maximum Weight Biclique Problem} (MWBP)~\cite{Ambuhl2011,Tan2008} is to find a biclique in $G$ of maximum total edge-weight.
Define
\[
q_{ij} =
\begin{cases}
w_{ij} &\mbox{if } (i,j) \in E, \\
-M & \mbox{otherwise,}
\end{cases}
\]
where $M$ is a large positive constant.
Set $c$ and $d$ as zero vectors.
Then BBQP$(Q, c, d)$ solves the MWBP~\cite{Punnen2012}.
This immediately shows that the BBQP is NP-hard and one can also establish some approximation hardness results with appropriate assumptions~\cite{Ambuhl2011,Tan2008}.
Note that the MWBP has applications in data mining, clustering and bioinformatics~\cite{Chang2012,Tanay2002} which in turn become applications of BBQP\@.
Another application of BBQP arises in approximating a matrix by a rank-one binary matrix~\cite{Gillis2011,Koyuturk2005,Koyuturk2006,Lu2011,Shen2009}.
For example, let $H = (h_{ij})$ be a given $m \times n$ matrix and we want to find an $m \times n$ matrix $A = (a_{ij})$, where $a_{ij} = u_i v_j$ and $u_i, v_j \in \{ 0, 1 \}$, such that $\sum_{i = 1}^m \sum_{j = 1}^n (h_{ij} - u_i v_j)^2$ is minimised.
The matrix $A$ is called a rank one approximation of $H$ and can be identified by solving the BBQP with $q_{ij} = 1 - 2h_{ij}$, $c_i = 0$ and $d_j = 0$ for all $i \in I$ and $j \in J$.
Binary matrix factorisation is an important topic in mining discrete patterns in binary data~\cite{Lu2011,Shen2009}.
If $u_i$ and $v_j$ are required to be in $ \{-1,1\}$ then also the resulting factorisation problem can be formulated as a BBQP.
The Maximum Cut Problem on a bipartite graph (MaxCut) can be formulated as BBQP~\cite{Punnen2012} and this gives yet another application of the model.
BBQP can also be used to find approximations to the cut-norm of a matrix~\cite{Alon2006}.
For theoretical analysis of approximation algorithms for BBQP, we refer to~\cite{Punnen2015}.
A preliminary version of this paper was made available to the research community in 2012~\cite{Karapetyan2012}.
Subsequently Glover et al.~\cite{Glover2015} and Duarte et al.~\cite{Duarte2014} studied heuristic algorithms for the problem.
The testbed presented in our preliminary report~\cite{Karapetyan2012} continues to be the source of benchmark instances for the BBQP\@.
In this paper, in addition to providing a detailed description of the benchmark instances, we refine the algorithms reported in~\cite{Karapetyan2012}, introduce a new class of algorithms and give a methodology for automated generation of a multi-component metaheuristic.
By (algorithmic) component we mean a black box algorithm that modifies the given solution.
All the algorithmic components can be roughly split into two categories: hill climbers, i.e.\ components that guarantee that the solution not be worsened, and mutations, i.e.\ components that usually worsen the solution.
Our main goals are to verify that the proposed components are sufficient to build a high-performance heuristic for BBQP and also investigate the most promising combinations.
By this computational study, we also further support the ideas in the areas of automated parameter tuning and algorithm configuration (e.g. see \cite{Belarmino2006,BezerraEtal2015:component-MOO,HutterEtal2009:ParamILS,Hutter2007}).
Thus we rely entirely on automated configuration.
During configuration, we use smaller instances compared to those in our benchmark.
This way we ensure that we do not over-train our metaheuristics to the benchmark instances -- an issue that is often quite hard to avoid with manual design and configuration.
We apply the resulting multi-component metaheuristic to our benchmark instances demonstrating that a combination of several simple components can yield powerful metaheuristics clearly outperforming the state-of-the-art BBQP methods.
The main contributions of the paper include:
\begin{itemize}
\item
In Section~\ref{sec:components}, we describe several BBQP algorithmic components, one of which is completely new.
\item
In Section~\ref{sec:cmchh} we take the Markov Chain idea, such as in the Markov Chain Hyper-heuristic \cite{McClymontKeedwell:GECCO2011:MCHH-selective-HH}, but restrict it to use static weights (hence having no online learning, and so, arguably, not best labelled as a ``hyper-heuristic''), but instead adding a powerful extension to it, giving what we call ``Conditional Markov Chain Search (CMCS)''.
\item
In Section~\ref{sec:testbed} we describe five classes of instances corresponding to various applications of BBQP\@.
Based on these classes, a set of benchmark instances is developed.
These test instances were first introduced in the preliminary version of this paper~\cite{Karapetyan2012} and since then used in a number of papers~\cite{Duarte2014,Glover2015} becoming de facto standard testbed for the BBQP.
\item
In Section~\ref{sec:tuning} we use automated configuration of CMCS to demonstrate the performance of individual components and their combinations, and give details sufficient to reproduce all of the generated metaheuristics.
We also show that a special case of CMCS that we proposed significantly outperforms several standard metaheuristics, on this problem.
\item
In Section~\ref{sec:evaluation} we show that our best machine-generated metaheuristic is, by several orders of magnitude, faster than the previous state-of-the-art BBQP method.
\end{itemize}
\tempclearpage
\section{Algorithmic Components}
\label{sec:components}
In this section we introduce several algorithmic components for BBQP\@.
Except for `\component{Repair}{}' and `Mutation-X/Y', these components were introduced in~\cite{Karapetyan2012}.
A summary of the components discussed below is provided in Table~\ref{tab:components}.
The components are selected to cover a reasonable mix of fast and slow hill climbing operators for intensification, along with mutation operators that can be expected to increase diversification, and with \component{Repair}{} that does a bit of both.
Note that a hill climbing component can potentially implement either a simple improvement move or a repetitive local search procedure with iterated operators that terminates only when a local maximum is reached.
However in this project we opted for single moves leaving the control to the metaheuristic framework.
\begin{table*}[htb]
\begin{tabular}{@{} ll @{}}
\toprule
Name & Description \\
\midrule
\multicolumn{2}{@{}l}{\textbf{--- Hill climbing operators: that is, components guaranteeing that the solution will not be worsened}} \\
\component{OptX}{} & \component{Optimise-X}, Section~\ref{sec:optimisexy}. Fixes vector $y$ while optimising $x$. \\
\component{OptY}{} & As \component{OptX}{}, but reversing roles of $x$ and $y$. \\
\component{FlpX}{} & \component{Flip-X}, Section~\ref{sec:flip}. Checks if flipping $x_i$ for some $i \in I$ and subsequently optimising $y$ improves the solution. \\
\component{FlpY}{} & As \component{FlpX}{}, but reversing roles of $x$ and $y$. \\[2ex]
\multicolumn{2}{@{}l}{\textbf{--- Mutations: that is, components that may worsen the solution}} \\
\component{Repair}{} & \component{Repair}{}, Section~\ref{sec:repair}. Finds a single term of the objective function that can be improved and ``repairs'' it. \\
\MutX{4} & Mutation-X(4), Section~\ref{sec:mutation}. Flips $x_i$ for four randomly picked $i \in I$. \\
\MutY{4} & As \MutX{4}, but reversing roles of $x$ and $y$. \\
\MutX{16} & As \MutX{4}, but for 16 randomly picked $x_i$. \\
\MutY{16} & As \MutY{4}, but for 16 randomly picked $y_i$. \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{
List of the algorithmic components used in this paper, and described in Section~\ref{sec:components}
}
\label{tab:components}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Components: \component{Optimise-X} / \component{Optimise-Y}}
\label{sec:optimisexy}
Observe that, given a fixed vector $x$, we can efficiently compute an optimal $y = y_\text{opt}(x)$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:optimal-y}
y_\text{opt}(x)_j = \begin{cases}
1 & \text{if } \displaystyle{\sum_{i \in I} q_{ij} x_i + d_j > 0}, \\
0 & \text{otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
This suggests a hill climber operator \emph{\component{Optimise-Y}} (\component{OptY}{}) that fixes $x$ and replaces $y$ with $y_\text{opt}(x)$.
Equation (\ref{eq:optimal-y}) was first introduced in~\cite{Punnen2012} and then used as a neighbourhood search operator in \cite{Karapetyan2012}, \cite{Duarte2014} and \cite{Glover2015}.
\component{OptY}{} implements a hill climber operator in the neighbourhood $N_\text{\component{OptY}{}}(x, y) = \{ (x, y') :\allowbreak\, y' \in \{ 0, 1 \}^n \}$, where $(x, y)$ is the original solution.
Observe that the running time of \component{OptY}{} is polynomial and the size of the neighbourhood $|N_\text{\component{OptY}{}}(x, y)| = 2^n$ is exponential; hence \component{OptY}{} corresponds to an operator that could be used in a very large-scale neighbourhood search (VLNS), a method that is often considered as a powerful approach to hard combinatorial optimisation problems~\cite{Ajuja2002}.
Observe that \component{OptY}{} finds a local maximum after the first application because $N(x, y) = N(x, y_\text{opt}(y))$ (that is, it is an ``idempotent operator''); hence, there is no gain from applying \component{OptY}{} again immediately after it was applied.
Though, for example, iterating and alternating between between \component{OptX}{} and \component{OptY}{} would give a VLNS.
Note that $y_\text{opt}(x)_j$ can take any value if $\sum_{i \in I} q_{ij} x_i + d_j = 0$, without affecting the objective value of the solution.
Thus, one can implement various ``tie breaking'' strategies including randomised decision whether to assign 0 or 1 to $y_\text{opt}(x)_j$, however in that case \component{OptY}{} would become non-deterministic.
In our implementation of \component{OptY}{} we preserve the previous value by setting $y_\text{opt}(x)_j = y_j$ for every $j$ such that $\sum_{i \in I} q_{ij} x_i + d_j = 0$.
As will be explained in Section~\ref{sec:solution-representation}, changing a value $y_j$ is a relatively expensive operation and thus, whenever not necessary, we prefer to avoid such a change.
By interchanging the roles of rows and columns, we also define
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:optimal-x}
x_\text{opt}(y)_i = \begin{cases}
1 & \text{if } \displaystyle{\sum_{j \in J} q_{ij} y_j + c_i > 0}, \\
0 & \text{otherwise,}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
and a hill climber operator \emph{\component{Optimise-X}} (\component{OptX}{}) with properties similar to those of \component{OptY}{}.
\subsection{Components: \component{Flip-X} / \component{Flip-Y}}
\label{sec:flip}
This class of components is a generalisation of the previous one.
In \emph{\component{Flip-X}} (\component{FlpX}{}), we try to flip $x_i$ for every $i \in I$, each time re-optimising $y$.
More formally, for $i = 1, 2, \ldots, m$, we compute $x' = (x_1 \comma \ldots \comma x_{i-1} \comma 1 - x_i \comma x_{i + 1} \comma \ldots \comma x_m)$ and then verify if solution $(x', y_\text{opt}(x'))$ is an improvement over $(x, y)$.
Each improvement is immediately accepted, but the search carries on for the remaining values of $i$.
In fact, one could consider a generalisation of \component{Flip-X} that flips $x_i$ for several $i$ at a time.
However, exploration of such a neighbourhood would be significantly slower, and so we have not studied such a generalisation in this paper.
By row/column interchange, we also introduce the \emph{\component{Flip-Y}} (\component{FlpY}{}) hill climbing operator.
Clearly, \component{FlpX}{} and \component{FlpY}{} are also VLNS operators, though unlike \component{OptX}{} and \component{OptY}{} they are not idempotent and so could be used consecutively.
\component{FlpX}{} and \component{FlpY}{} were first proposed in~\cite{Punnen2012} and then used in \cite{Glover2015}.
\subsection{Components: \component{Repair}{}}
\label{sec:repair}
While all the above methods were handling entire rows or columns, \emph{\component{Repair}{}} is designed to work on the level of a single element of matrix $Q$.
\component{Repair}{} is a new component inspired by the WalkSAT heuristic for SAT problem \cite{Papadimitriou1991:selecting-truth-assignment,Selman95localsearch} in that it is a version of `iterative repair' \cite{ZwebenEtal1993:scheduling-with-iterative-repair} that tries to repair some significant `flaw' (deficiency of the solution) even if this results in creation of other flaws, in a hope that the newly created flaws could be repaired later.
This behaviour, of forcing the repair of randomly selected flaws, gives some stochasticity to the search that is also intended to help in escaping from local optima.
Recall that the objective value of BBQP includes terms $q_{ij} x_i y_j$.
For a pair $(i, j)$, there are two possible kinds of flaws: either $q_{ij}$ is negative but is included in the objective value (i.e.\ $x_i y_j = 1$), or it is positive and not included in the objective value (i.e.\ $x_i y_j = 0$).
The \component{Repair}{} method looks for such flaws, especially for those with large $|q_{ij}|$.
For this, it uses the tournament principle; it randomly samples pairs $(i, j)$ and picks the one that maximises $(1 - 2 x_i y_j) q_{ij}$.
Once an appropriate pair $(i, j)$ is selected, it `repairs' the flaw; if $q_{ij}$ is positive then it sets $x_i = y_j = 1$; if $q_{ij}$ is negative then it sets either $x_i = 0$ or $y_j = 0$ (among these two options it picks the one that maximises the overall objective value).
Our implementation of \component{Repair}{} terminates after the earliest of two: (i) finding 10 flaws and repairing the biggest of them, or (ii) sampling 100 pairs $(i, j)$.
Note that one could separate the two kinds of flaws, and so have two different methods: \component{Repair-Positive}, that looks for and repairs only positive `missing' terms of the objective function, and \component{Repair-Negative}, that looks for and repairs only negative included terms of the objective function.
However, we leave these options to future research.
\subsection{Components: \component{Mutation-X} / \component{Mutation-Y}}
\label{sec:mutation}
In our empirical study, we will use some pure mutation operators of various strengths to escape local maxima.
For this, we use the $N_\text{\component{OptX}{}}(x, y)$ neighbourhood.
Our \emph{\component{Mutation-X($k$)}} operator picks $k$ distinct $x$ variables at random and then flips their values, keeping $y$ unchanged.
Similarly we introduce \emph{\component{Mutation-Y($k$)}}.
In this paper we use $k \in \{ 4, 16 \}$, and so have components which we call \MutX{4}, \MutX{16}, \MutY{4} and \MutY{16}.
An operator similar to Mutation-X/Y was used in~\cite{Duarte2014}.
\tempclearpage
\section{The Markov Chain Methods}
\label{sec:cmchh}
The algorithmic components described in Section~\ref{sec:components} are designed to work within a metaheuristic; analysis of each component on its own would not be sufficient to conclude on its usefulness within the context of a multi-component system.
To avoid bias due to picking one or another metaheuristic, and to save human time on hand-tuning it, we chose to use a generic schema coupled with automated configuration of it.
\subsection{Conditional Markov Chain Search (CMCS)}
The existing framework that was closest to our needs was the Markov Chain Hyper-Heuristic (MCHH) \cite{McClymontKeedwell:GECCO2011:MCHH-selective-HH}.
MCHH is a relatively simple algorithm that applies components in a sequence.
This sequence is a Markov chain; the `state' in the Markov chain is just the operator that is to be applied, and so the Markov nature means that the transition to a new state (component/operator) only depends on the currently-applied component and transition probabilities.
Transition probabilities, organised in a transition matrix, are obtained in MCHH dynamically, by learning most successful sequences.
While MCHH is a successful approach capable of effectively utilising several algorithmic components, it does not necessarily provide the required convenience of interpretation of performance of individual components and their combinations because the transition probabilities in MCHH change dynamically.
To address this issue, we chose to fix the transition matrix and learn it offline.
We can then perform the analysis by studying the learnt transition probabilities.
The drawback of learning the probabilities offline is that MCHH with static transition matrix receives no feedback from the search process and, thus, has no ability to respond to the instance and solution properties.
To enable such a feedback, we propose to extend the state of the Markov chain with the information about the outcome of the last component execution; this extension is simple but will prove to be effective.
In particular, we suggest to distinguish executions that improved the solution quality, and executions that worsened, or did not change, the solution quality.
We call our new approach \emph{Conditional Markov Chain Search} (CMCS)\@.
It is parameterised with two transition matrices: $\Msucc$ for transitions if the last component execution was successful (improved the solution), and $\Mfail$ for transitions if the last component execution failed (has not improved the solution).\footnote{
Note that executions that do not change the solution quality at all are also considered as a failure.
This allows us to model a hill climber that is applied repeatedly until it becomes trapped in a local maximum.
Let $\mathcal{H}$ be the pool of algorithmic components.
CMCS is a single-point metaheuristic that applies one component $h \in \mathcal{H}$ at a time, accepting both improving and worsening moves.
The next component $h' \in \mathcal{H}$ to be executed is determined by a function $\mathit{next} : \mathcal{H} \rightarrow \mathcal{H}$.
In particular, $h'$ is chosen using roulette wheel with probabilities $p_{hh'}$ of transition from $h$ to $h'$ defined by matrix $\Msucc$ if the last execution of $h$ was successful and $\Mfail$ otherwise.
All the moves are always accepted in CMCS\@.
Pseudo-code of the CMCS schema is given in Algorithm~\ref{alg:cmchh}.
}
\begin{algorithm}[htb]
\Input{Ordered set of components $\mathcal{H}$;}
\Input{Matrices $\Msucc$ and $\Mfail$ of size $|\mathcal{H}| \times |\mathcal{H}|$;}
\Input{Objective function $f(S)$ to be maximised;}
\Input{Initial solution $S$;}
\Input{Termination time $\mathit{terminate\text{-}at}$;}
$S^* \gets S$\;
$h \gets 1$\;
\While {$\mathit{now} < \mathit{terminate\text{-}at}$}
{
$f_\text{old} \gets f(S)$\;
$S \gets \mathcal{H}_h(S)$\;
$f_\text{new} \gets f(S)$\;
\If {$f_\text{new} > f_\text{old}$}
{
$h \gets \mathit{RouletteWheel}(\Msucc_{h, 1}, \Msucc_{h, 2}, \ldots, \Msucc_{h, |\mathcal{H}|})$\;
\If {$f(S) > f(S^*)$}
{
$S^* \gets S$\;
}
}
\Else
{
$h \gets \mathit{RouletteWheel}(\Mfail_{h, 1}, \Mfail_{h, 2}, \ldots, \Mfail_{h, |\mathcal{H}|})$\;
}
}
\Return {$S^*$}\;
\caption{Conditional Monte-Carlo Search}
\label{alg:cmchh}
\end{algorithm}
CMCS does not in itself employ any learning during the search process, but is configured by means of offline learning, and so the behaviour of any specific instance of CMCS is defined by two matrices $\Msucc$ and $\Mfail$ of size $|\mathcal{H}| \times |\mathcal{H}|$ each.
Thus, we refer to the general idea of CMCS as \emph{schema}, and to a concrete instance of CMCS, i.e.\ specific values of matrices $\Msucc$ and $\Mfail$, as \emph{configuration}.
For the termination criterion, we use a predefined time after which CMCS terminates.
This is most appropriate, as well as convenient, when we need to compare metaheuristics and in which different components run at different speeds so that simple counting of steps would not be a meaningful termination criterion.
CMCS requires an initial solution; this could have been supplied from one of the several construction heuristics developed for BBQP~\cite{Karapetyan2012,Duarte2014}, however, to reduce potential bias, we initialise the search with a randomly generated solution with probability of each of $x_i = 1$ and $y_j = 1$ being 50\%.
\subsection{CMCS properties}
Below we list some of the properties of CMCS that make it a good choice in our study.
We also believe that it will be useful in future studies in a similar way.
\begin{itemize}
\item
CMCS is able to combine several algorithmic components in one search process, and with each component taken as a black box.
\item
CMCS has parameters for inclusion or exclusion of individual components as we do not know in advance if any of our components have poor performance.
This is particularly true when considering that performance of a component might well depend on which others are available -- some synergistic combinations might be much more powerful than the individuals would suggest.
\item
CMCS has parameters that permit some components to be used more often than others as some of our hill climbing operators are significantly faster than others; this also eliminates the necessity to decide in advance on the frequency of usage of each of the components.
Appropriate choices of the parameters should allow the imbalance of component runtimes to be exploited.
\item
CMCS is capable of exploiting some (recent) history of the choices made by the metaheuristic, as there might be efficient sequences of components which should be exploitable.
\item
As we will show later, CMCS is powerful enough to model some standard metaheuristics and, thus, allows easy comparison with standard approaches.
\item
The performance of CMCS does not depend on the absolute values of the objective function; it is rank-based in that it only uses the objective function to find out if a new solution is better than the previous solution.
This property helps CMCS perform well across different families of instances.
In contrast, methods such as Simulated Annealing, depend on the absolute values of the objective function and thus often need to be tuned for each family of instances, or else need some mechanism to account for changes to the scale of the objective function.
\item
The transition matrices of a tuned CMCS configuration allow us conveniently interpret the results of automated generation.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Special cases of CMCS}
\label{sec:special-cases}
Several standard metaheuristics are special cases of CMCS\@.
If $\mathcal{H} = \{ \text{HC}, \text{Mut} \}$ includes a hill climbing operator ``HC'' and a mutation ``Mut'' then
\begin{align*}
\Msucc = &\left(
\begin{array}{ l | l l }
& \text{HC} & \text{Mut} \\
\hline
\text{HC} & 1 & 0 \\
\text{Mut} & 1 & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right)
\quad \text{and}\\
\Mfail = &\left(
\begin{array}{ l | l l }
& \text{HC} & \text{Mut} \\
\hline
\text{HC} & 0 & 1 \\
\text{Mut} & 1 & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right)
\end{align*}
implements Iterated Local Search~\cite{Lourenco2010}; the algorithm repeatedly applies HC until it fails, then applies Mut, and then returns to HC disregarding the success or failure of Mut.
If $\Msucc_{h,h'} = \Mfail_{h,h'} = 1 / |\mathcal{H}|$ for all $h, h' \in \mathcal{H}$ then CMCS implements a simple uniform random choice of component \cite{Cowling2001}.
A generalisation of the uniform random choice is to allow non-uniform probabilities of component selection.
We call this special case \emph{Operator Probabilities} (\opprob) and model it by setting $\Msucc_{h,h'} = \Mfail_{h,h'} = p_{h'}$ for some vector $p$ of probabilities.
Note that Operator Probabilities is a static version of a Selection Hyper-heuristic~\cite{Cowling2001}.
Obviously, if $\Msucc = \Mfail$ then CMCS implements a static version of MCHH\@.
By allowing $\Msucc \neq \Mfail$, it is possible to implement a Variable Neighbourhood Search (VNS) using the CMCS schema.
For example, if
$$
\Msucc = \left(
\begin{array}{ l | l l l l }
& \text{HC1} & \text{HC2} & \text{HC3} & \text{\component{Mut}} \\
\hline
\text{HC1} & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\text{HC2} & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\text{HC3} & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\text{\component{Mut}} & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right)
$$
and
$$
\Mfail = \left(
\begin{array}{ l | l l l l }
& \text{HC1} & \text{HC2} & \text{HC3} & \text{\component{Mut}} \\
\hline
\text{HC1} & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
\text{HC2} & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
\text{HC3} & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\text{\component{Mut}} & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right)
$$
then CMCS implements a VNS that applies HC1 until it fails, then applies HC2\@.
If HC2 improves the solution then the search gets back to HC1; otherwise HC3 is executed.
Similarly, if HC3 improves the solution then the search gets back to HC1; otherwise current solution is a local maximum with respect to the neighbourhoods explored by HC1, HC2 and HC3 (assuming they are deterministic) and mutation \component{Mut} is applied to diversify the search.
However, even though the previous examples are well-known metaheuristics, they are rather special cases from the perspective of CMCS, which allows much more sophisticated strategies.
For example, we can implement a two-loop heuristic, which alternates hill climbing operator HC1 and mutation Mut1 until HC1 fails to improve the solution.
Then the control is passed to the second loop, alternating HC2 and Mut2.
Again, if HC2 fails, the control is passed to the first loop.
To describe such more sophisticated strategies, it is convenient to represent CMCS configurations with automata as in Figure~\ref{fig:two-loops}.
Blue and red lines correspond to transitions in case of successful and unsuccessful execution of the components, respectively.
Probabilities of each transition are shown with line widths (in Figure~\ref{fig:two-loops} all the shown probabilities are 100\%).
The advantage of automata representation is that it visualises the probabilities of transition and sequences in which components are executed (and so complements, not supplants, the formal description via the pseudo-code and the explicit transition matrices), as common when describing transition systems.
\tikzset{vertex/.style={circle, draw, thick}}
\tikzset{edge base/.style={->, >=stealth'}}
\tikzset{improved/.style={edge base, blue, bend left=10}}
\tikzset{unimproved/.style={edge base, red, bend left=30}}
\tikzset{loop improved/.style={edge base, blue, loop above, in=70, out=110, looseness=8}}
\tikzset{loop unimproved/.style={edge base, red, loop above, in=60, out=120, looseness=9}}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[vertex] (HC1) at (0, 0) {HC1};
\node[vertex] (Mut1) at (0, 3) {\component{Mut1}};
\node[vertex] (HC2) at (4, 0) {HC2};
\node[vertex] (Mut2) at (4, 3) {\component{Mut2}};
\path (HC1) edge[improved, ultra thick] (Mut1);
\path (Mut1) edge[improved, ultra thick] (HC1);
\path (Mut1) edge[unimproved, ultra thick] (HC1);
\path (HC1) edge[unimproved, ultra thick, bend left=0] (Mut2);
\path (HC2) edge[improved, ultra thick] (Mut2);
\path (Mut2) edge[improved, ultra thick] (HC2);
\path (Mut2) edge[unimproved, ultra thick] (HC2);
\path (HC2) edge[unimproved, ultra thick, bend left=0] (Mut1);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{
Implementation of a two-loop heuristic within the CMCS framework.
Blue lines show transitions in case of success, and red lines show transitions in case of failure of the component.
}
\label{fig:two-loops}
\end{figure}
The transitions in the above example are deterministic, however, this is not an inherent limitation; for example, one could implement a two phase search with the transition being probabilistic, see Figure~\ref{fig:two-phase-probabilistic}.
We also note here that CMCS can be significantly enriched by having several copies of each component in $\mathcal{H}$ and/or employing dummy components for describing more sophisticated behaviours; but we leave these possibilities to future work.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[vertex] (HC1) at (0, 0) {HC1};
\node[vertex] (Mut1) at (0, 3) {\component{Mut1}};
\node[vertex] (HC2) at (4, 0) {HC2};
\node[vertex] (Mut2) at (4, 3) {\component{Mut2}};
\path (HC1) edge[improved, ultra thick] (Mut1);
\path (Mut1) edge[improved, ultra thick] (HC1);
\path (Mut1) edge[unimproved, ultra thick] (HC1);
\path (HC1) edge[unimproved, ultra thick] node[midway, left, black] {90\%} (Mut1);
\path (HC1) edge[unimproved, bend left=0] node[midway, above, sloped, black] {10\%} (Mut2);
\path (HC2) edge[improved, ultra thick] (Mut2);
\path (Mut2) edge[improved, ultra thick] (HC2);
\path (Mut2) edge[unimproved, ultra thick] (HC2);
\path (HC2) edge[unimproved, ultra thick] (Mut2);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{
Implementation of a two-phase heuristic with probabilistic transition from the first phase to the second phase.
All the probabilities are 100\% unless otherwise labelled.
}
\label{fig:two-phase-probabilistic}
\end{figure}
These are just some of the options available with CMCS, showing that it is potentially a powerful tool.
However, this flexibility does come with the associated challenge -- of configuring the matrices to generate effective metaheuristics.
For example, if $|\mathcal{H}| = 10$ then CMCS has $2|\mathcal{H}|^2 = 200$ continuous parameters.
By simple reasoning we can fix the values of a few of these parameters:
\begin{itemize}
\item
If component $h$ is a deterministic hill climbing operator then $\Mfail_{h,h} = 0$, as when it fails then the solution remains unchanged and so immediate repetition is pointless.
\item
If component $h$ is an idempotent operator (e.g.\ \component{OptX}{} or \component{OptY}{}) then $\Msucc_{h,h} = \Mfail_{h,h} = 0$; again there is no use in applying $h$ several times in a row.
\end{itemize}
Nevertheless, the significant number of remaining parameters of CMCS makes it hard to configure.
For this reason we propose, and exploit a special case of the CMCS schema, with much fewer parameters but that still provides much of the power of the framework of the full CMCS\@.
Specifically, we allow at most $k$ non-zero elements in each row of $\Msucc$ and $\Mfail$, calling the resulting metaheuristic ``\krow{$k$}''.
Clearly, \krow{$|\mathcal{H}|$} is identical to the full version of CMCS\@.
In practice, however, we expect one to use only smaller values of $k$; either $k = 1$ or $k = 2$.
When $k = 1$, the corresponding automata has at most one outgoing ``success'' arc, and one outgoing ``failure'' arc for each component.
Hence CMCS turns into a deterministic control mechanism.
Note that iterated local search and VNS are in fact special cases of \krow{1}.
When $k = 2$, the corresponding automata has at most two outgoing ``success'' arcs from each component, and their total probability of transition is 100\%.
Hence, the ``success'' transition is defined by a pair of components and the split of probabilities between them.
``Failure'' transition is defined in the same way.
In Section~\ref{sec:tuning}, we show that \krow{2} is sufficiently powerful to implement complex component combinations but is much easier to configure and analyse than full CMCS.
\tempclearpage
\section{Benchmark Instances}
\label{sec:testbed}
The testbed which is currently de facto standard for BBQP was first introduced in our unpublished work~\cite{Karapetyan2012}.
Our testbed consists of five instance types that correspond to some of the real life applications of BBQP\@.
Here we provide the description of it, and also make it available for download.%
\footnote{\url{http://csee.essex.ac.uk/staff/dkarap/?page=publications&key=CMCS-BBQP}}
We keep record of the best known solutions for each of the test instances which will also be placed on the download page.
In order to generate some of the instances, we need random bipartite graphs.
To generate a random bipartite graph $G = (V, U, E)$, we define seven parameters, namely $m = |V|$, $n = |U|$, $\underline{d}_1$, $\bar{d_1}$, $\underline{d}_2$, $\bar{d_2}$ and $\mu$ such that $0 \le \underline{d}_1 \le \bar{d_1} \le n$, $0 \le \underline{d}_2 \le \bar{d_2} \le m$, $m \underline{d}_1 \le n \bar{d}_2$ and $m \bar{d}_1 \ge n \underline{d}_2$.
The bipartite graph generator proceeds as follows.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
For each node $v \in V$, select $d_v$ uniformly at random from the range $[\underline{d}_1, \bar{d}_1]$.
\item
For each node $u \in U$, select $d_u$ uniformly at random from the range $[\underline{d}_2, \bar{d}_2]$.
\item
While $\sum_{v \in V} d_v \neq \sum_{u \in U} d_u$, alternatively select a node in $V$ or $U$ and re-generate its degree as described above.%
\footnote{In practice, if $m (\underline{d}_1 + \bar{d}_1) \approx n (\underline{d}_2 + \bar{d}_2)$, this algorithm converges very quickly.
However, in theory it may not terminate in finite time and, formally speaking, there needs to be a mechanism to guarantee convergence.
Such a mechanism could be turned on after a certain (finite) number of unsuccessful attempts, and then it would force the changes of degrees $d_v$ that reduce $|\sum_{v \in V} d_v - \sum_{u \in U} d_u|$.
}
\item
Create a bipartite graph $G = (V, U, E)$, where $E = \emptyset$.
\item
Randomly select a node $v \in V$ such that $d_v > \deg v$ (if no such node exists, go to the next step).
Let $U' = \{ u \in U :\allowbreak\, \deg u < d_u \connect{and} (v, u) \notin E \}$. If $U' \neq \emptyset$, select a node $u \in U'$ randomly.
Otherwise randomly select a node $u \in U$ such that $(v, u) \notin E$ and $d_u > 0$; randomly select a node $v' \in V$ adjacent to $u$ and delete the edge $(v', u)$.
Add an edge $(v, u)$.
Repeat this step.
\item
For each edge $(v, u) \in E$ select the weight $w_{vu}$ as a normally distributed integer with standard deviation $\sigma = 100$ and given mean $\mu$.
\end{enumerate}
The following are the instance types used in our computational experiments.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
The \emph{Random} instances are as follows: $q_{ij}$, $c_i$ and $d_j$ are integers selected at random with normal distribution (mean $\mu = 0$ and standard deviation $\sigma = 100$).
\item
The \emph{Max Biclique} instances model the problem of finding a biclique of maximum weight in a bipartite graph.
Let $G = (I, J, E)$ be a random bipartite graph with $\underline{d}_1 = n / 5$, $\bar{d_1} = n$, $\underline{d}_2 = m / 5$, $\bar{d_2} = m$ and $\mu = 100$.
(Note that setting $\mu$ to 0 would make the weight of any large biclique likely to be around 0, which would make the problem much easier.)
If $w_{ij}$ is the weight of an edge $(i, j) \in E$, set $q_{ij} = w_{ij}$ for every $i \in I$ and $j \in J$ if $(i, j) \in E$ and $q_{ij} = -M$ otherwise, where $M$ is large number.
Set $c$ and $d$ as zero vectors.
\item
The \emph{Max Induced Subgraph} instances model the problem of finding a subset of nodes in a bipartite graph that maximises the total weight of the induced subgraph.
The Max Induced Subgraph instances are similar to the Max Biclique instances except that $q_{ij} = 0$ if $(i, j) \notin E$ and $\mu = 0$.
(Note that if $\mu > 0$ then the optimal solution would likely include all or almost all the nodes and, thus, the problem would be relatively easy).
\item
The \emph{MaxCut} instances model the MaxCut problem as follows.
First, we generate a random bipartite graph as for the Max Induced Subgraph instances.
Then, we set $q_{ij} = -2 w_{ij}$ if $(i, j) \in E$ and $q_{ij} = 0$ if $(i, j) \notin E$.
Finally, we set $c_i = \frac{1}{2} \sum_{j \in J} q_{ij}$ and $d_j = \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i \in I} q_{ij}$.
For an explanation, see~\cite{Punnen2012}.
\item The \emph{Matrix Factorisation} instances model the problem of producing a rank one approximation of a binary matrix. The original matrix $H = (h_{ij})$ (see Section~\ref{sec:introduction}) is generated randomly with probability 0.5 of $h_{ij} = 1$. The values of $q_{ij}$ are then calculated as $q_{ij} = 1 - 2 h_{ij}$, and $c$ and $d$ are zero vectors.
\end{enumerate}
Our benchmark consists of two sets of instances: Medium and Large.
Each of the sets includes one instance of each type (Random, Max Biclique, Max Induced Subgraph, MaxCut and Matrix Factorisation) of each of the following sizes:\\
Medium: $200 \times 1000$, $400 \times 1000$, $600 \times 1000$, $800 \times 1000$, $1000 \times 1000$;\\
Large: $1000 \times 5000$, $2000 \times 5000$, $3000 \times 5000$, $4000 \times 5000$, $5000 \times 5000$.\\
Thus, in total, the benchmark includes 25 medium and 25 large instances.
\tempclearpage
\section{Metaheuristic Design}
\label{sec:tuning}
In this section we describe configuration of metaheuristics as discussed in Section~\ref{sec:cmchh} and using the BBQP components given in Section~\ref{sec:components}.
In Sections~\ref{sec:solution-representation} and~\ref{sec:polishing} we give some details about our experiments, then in Section~\ref{sec:metaheuristic-generation} describe the employed automated configuration technique, in Section~\ref{sec:emergent-metaheuristics} we provide details of the configured metaheuristics, and in Section~\ref{sec:analysis} analyse the results.
Our test machine is based on two Intel Xeon CPU E5-2630 v2 (2.6~GHz) and has 32~GB RAM installed.
Hyper-threading is enabled, but we never run more than one experiment per physical CPU core concurrently, and concurrency is not exploited in any of the tested solution methods.
\subsection{Solution Representation}
\label{sec:solution-representation}
We use the most natural solution representation for BBQP, i.e. simply storing vectors $x$ and $y$.
However, additionally storing some auxiliary information with the solution can dramatically improve the performance of algorithms.
We use a strategy similar to the one employed in~\cite{Glover2015}.
In particular, along with vectors $x$ and $y$, we always maintain values $c_i + \sum_j y_j q_{ij}$ for each $i$, and $d_j + \sum_i x_i q_{ij}$ for each $j$.
Maintenance of this auxiliary information slows down any updates of the solution but significantly speeds up the evaluation of potential moves, which is what usually takes most of time during the search.
\subsection{Solution Polishing}
\label{sec:polishing}
As in many single-point metaheuristics, the changes between diversifying and intensifying steps of CMCS mean that the best found solution needs to be stored, and also that it is not necessarily a local maximum with respect to all the available hill climbing operators.
Hence, we apply a polishing procedure to every CMCS configuration produced in this study, including special cases of VNS, \opprob{}\ and MCHH\@.
Our polishing procedure is executed after the CMCS finishes its work, and it is aimed at improving the best solution found during the run of CMCS\@.
It sequentially executes \component{OptX}{}, \component{OptY}{}, \component{FlpX}{} and \component{FlpY}{} components, restarting this sequence every time an improvement is found.
When none of these algorithms can improve the solution, that is, the solution is a local maximum with respect to all of our hillclimbing operators, the procedure terminates.
While taking very little time, this polishing procedure has notably improved our results.
We note that this polishing stage is a Variable Neighbourhood Descent, and thus a special case of CMCS; hence, the final polishing could be represented as a second phase of CMCS\@.
We also note that the Tabu Search algorithm, against which we compare our best CMCS configuration in Section~\ref{sec:comparison}, uses an equivalent polishing procedure applied to each solution and thus the comparison is fair.
\subsection{Approach to Configuration of the Metaheuristics }
\label{sec:metaheuristic-generation}
Our ultimate goal in this experiment is to apply automated configuration (e.g.\ in the case of CMCS, to configure $\Msucc$ and $\Mfail$ matrices), which would compete with the state-of-the-art methods on the benchmark instances (which have sizes $200 \times 1000$ to $5000 \times 5000$) and with running times in the order of several seconds to several minutes.
As explained in Section~\ref{sec:cmchh}, instead of hand designing a metaheuristic we chose to use automated generation based on the CMCS schema.
Automated generation required a set of training instances.
Although straightforward, directly training on benchmark instances would result in over-training (a practice generally considered unfair because an over-trained heuristic might perform well only on a very small set of instances on which it is tuned and then tested) and also would take considerable computational effort.
Thus, for training we use instances of size $200 \times 500$.
We also reduced the running times to 100~milliseconds per run of each candidate configuration, that is, matrices when configuring CMCS or MCHH, probability vector for \opprob{}, and component sequence for VNS.
Let $T$ be the set of instances used for training.
Then our objective function for configuration is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:tuning-objective}
f(h, T) = \frac{1}{|T|} \sum_{t \in T} \frac{f_\text{best}(t) - h(t)}{f_\text{best}(t)} \cdot 100\% \,,
\end{equation}
where $h$ is the evaluated heuristic, $h(t)$ is the objective value of solution obtained by $h$ for instance $t$, and $f_\text{best}(t)$ is the best known solution for instance $t$.
For the training set, we used instances of all of the types.
In particular, we use one instance of each of the five types (see Section~\ref{sec:testbed}), all of size $200 \times 500$, and each of these training instances is included in $T$ 10 times, thus $|T| = 50$ (we observed that without including each instance several times the noise level significantly obfuscated results).
Further, when testing the top ten candidates, we include each of the five instances 100 times in $T$, thus having $|T| = 500$.
We consider four types of metaheuristics: VNS, \opprob,\ MCHH and \krow{2}, all of which are also special cases of CMCS\@.
All the components discussed in Section~\ref{sec:components}, and also briefly described in Table~\ref{tab:components}, are considered for inclusion in all the metaheuristics.
Additionally, since \component{Repair}{} is a totally new component, we want to confirm its usefulness.
For this we also study a special case of \krow{2} which we call ``\emph{\reduced}''.
In \reduced{}, the pool of potential components includes all the components in Table~\ref{tab:components} except \component{Repair}{}.
To configure VNS and \opprob{}, we use brute force search as we can reasonably restrict the search to a relatively small number of options.
In particular, when configuring \opprob{}, the number of components $|\mathcal{H}|$ (recall that $\mathcal{H}$ is the set of components employed by the metaheuristic) is restricted to at most four, and weights of individual components are selected from $\{ 0.1 ,\allowbreak 0.2 ,\allowbreak 0.5 ,\allowbreak 0.8 ,\allowbreak 1 \}$ (these weights are then rescaled to obtain probabilities).
We also require that there has to be at least one hill climbing operator in $\mathcal{H}$ as otherwise there would be no pressure to improve the solution, and one mutation operator as otherwise the search would quickly become trapped in a local maximum.
Note that we count \component{Repair}{} as a mutation as, although designed to explicitly fix flaws, it is quite likely to worsen the solution (even if in the long run this will be beneficial).
When configuring VNS, $\mathcal{H}$ includes one or several hill climbing operators and one mutation and the configuration process has to also select the order in which they are applied.
To configure CMCS and static MCHH, we use a simple evolutionary algorithm, with the solution describing matrices $\Msucc$ and $\Mfail$ (accordingly restricted), and fitness function (\ref{eq:tuning-objective}).
Implementation of a specialised tuning algorithm has an advantage over the general-purpose automated algorithm configuration packages, as a specialised system can exploit the knowledge of the parameter space (such as entanglement of certain parameters).
In this project, our evolutionary algorithm employs specific neighbourhood operators that intuitively make sense for this particular application.
For example, when tuning 2-row, we employ, among others, a mutation operator that swaps the two non-zero weights in a row of a weight matrix.
Such a move is likely to be useful for ``exploitation''; however it is unlikely to be discovered by a general purpose parameter tuning algorithm.
We compared the tuning results of our CMCS-specific algorithm to ParamILS~\cite{HutterEtal2009:ParamILS}, one of the leading general purpose automated parameter tuning/algorithm configuration software.
We found out that, while ParamILS performs well, our specialised algorithm clearly outperforms it, producing much better configurations.
It should be noted that there can be multiple approaches to encode matrices $\Msucc$ and $\Mfail$ for ParamILS.
We tried two most natural approaches and both attempts were relatively unsuccessful; however it is possible that future research will reveal more efficient ways to represent the key parameters of CMCS\@.
We also point out that CMCS can be a new interesting benchmark for algorithm configuration or parameter tuning software.
\subsection{Configured Metaheuristics}
\label{sec:emergent-metaheuristics}
In this section we describe the configurations of each type (VNS, \opprob{}, MCHH, \reduced{} and \krow{2}) generated as described in Section~\ref{sec:metaheuristic-generation}.
From now on we refer to the obtained configurations by the name of their types.
Note that the structures described in this section are all machine-generated, and thus when we say that ``a metaheuristic chose to do something'', we mean that such a decision emerged from the generation process; the decision was not a human choice.
\bigskip
VNS chose three hill climbing operators, \component{OptY}{}, \component{FlpY}{} and \component{OptX}{}, and a mutation \MutX{16}, and using the order as written.
It is interesting to observe that this choice and sequence can be easily explained.
Effectively, the search optimises $y$ given a fixed $x$ (\component{OptY}{}), then tries small changes to $x$ with some lookahead (\component{FlpY}{}), and if this fails then optimises $x$ globally but without lookahead (\component{OptX}{}).
If the search is in a local maximum with respect to all three neighbourhoods then the solution is perturbed by a strong mutation \MutX{16}.
Observe that the sequence of hill climbing operators does not obey the generally accepted rule of thumb to place smaller neighbourhoods first; the third hill climbing operator \component{OptX}{} has clearly smaller neighbourhood than \component{FlpY}{}\@.
However, this sequence has an interesting internal logic.
Whenever \component{FlpY}{} succeeds in improving the solution, the resultant solution is a local minimum with respect to \component{OptX}{}.
Accordingly, VNS jumps back to \component{OptY}{} when \component{FlpY}{} succeeds.
However, if \component{FlpY}{} fails then the solution might not be a local minimum with respect to \component{OptX}{}, and then \component{OptX}{} is executed.
This shows that the automated configuration is capable of generating meaningful configurations which are relatively easy to explain but might not be so easy to come up with.
\bigskip
The \opprob{}\ chose four components: \component{OptX}{} (probability of picking is 40\%), \component{FlpX}{} (20\%), \component{Repair}{} (20\%) and \MutX{16} (20\%).
Note that the actual runtime frequency of \component{OptX}{} is only about 30\% because the framework will never execute \component{OptX}{} twice in a row.
\bigskip
Out of 9 components, MCHH chose five: \component{OptX}{}, \component{OptY}{}, \component{FlpX}{}, \MutY{4} and \MutX{16}.
The generated transition matrix (showing the probabilities of transitions) is given in Figure~\ref{fig:mchh-matrix}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
$$
\begin{array}{@{} r | rrrrr @{}}
& \text{\component{OptX}{}} & \text{\component{OptY}{}} & \text{\component{FlpX}{}} & \text{\MutY{4}} & \text{\MutX{16}} \\
\midrule
\text{\component{OptX}{}} &- &78.2\% &5.4\% &12.9\% &3.5\% \\
\text{\component{OptY}{}} &86.9\% &- &0.0\% &13.1\% &0.0\% \\
\text{\component{FlpX}{}} &16.2\% &30.1\% &19.4\% &5.0\% &29.3\% \\
\text{\MutY{4}} &35.6\% &24.7\% &22.9\% &4.1\% &12.8\% \\
\text{\MutX{16}} &1.4\% &84.6\% &0.0\% &14.0\% &0.0\% \\
\end{array}
$$
\caption{
Transition matrix of MCHH\@.
Dashes show prohibited transitions, i.e.\ the transitions that are guaranteed to be useless and so are constrained to zero, as opposed to being set to zero by the tuning generation process.
In this table, and subsequent ones, the row specifies the previously executed component, and the column specifies the next executed component.
}
\label{fig:mchh-matrix}
\end{figure}
\bigskip
\reduced{} chose to use only \component{OptX}{}, \component{OptY}{}, \component{FlpX}{}, \MutX{4}, \MutY{4} and \MutY{16} from the pool of 8 components it was initially permitted (recall that \reduced{} was not allowed to use \component{Repair}{}), and transition matrices as given in Figure~\ref{fig:reduced-matrices} and visually illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:reduced}.
The line width in Figure~\ref{fig:reduced} indicates the frequency of the transition when we tested the configuration on the tuning instance set.
Although these frequencies may slightly vary depending on the particular instance, showing frequencies preserves all the advantages of showing probabilities but additionally allows one to see: (i) how often a component is executed (defined by the total width of all incoming/outgoing arrows), (ii) the probability of success of a component (defined by the the total width of blue outgoing arrows compared to the total width of the red outgoing arrows), and (iii) most common sequences of component executions (defined by thickest arrows).
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\small
\begin{subfigure}{0.48\textwidth}
$$
\begin{array}{@{} r | *{6}{@{~~}r} @{}}
& \text{\component{OptX}{}} & \text{\component{OptY}{}} & \text{\component{FlpX}{}} & \text{\MutX{4}} & \text{\MutY{4}} & \text{\MutY{16}} \\
\midrule
\text{\component{OptX}{}} &- &100\% &. &. &. &. \\
\text{\component{OptY}{}} &8\% &- &. &. &92\% &. \\
\text{\component{FlpX}{}} &38\% &62\% &. &. &. &. \\
\text{\MutX{4}} &. &. &. &100\% &. &. \\
\text{\MutY{4}} &45\% &. &. &. &. &55\% \\
\text{\MutY{16}} &. &. &. &54\% &. &46\% \\
\end{array}
$$
\caption{$\Msucc$}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}{0.48\textwidth}
$$
\begin{array}{@{} r | *{6}{@{~~}r} @{}}
& \text{\component{OptX}{}} & \text{\component{OptY}{}} & \text{\component{FlpX}{}} & \text{\MutX{4}} & \text{\MutY{4}} & \text{\MutY{16}} \\
\midrule
\text{\component{OptX}{}} &- &. &. &. &100\% &. \\
\text{\component{OptY}{}} &. &- &80\% &20\% &. &. \\
\text{\component{FlpX}{}} &. &. &- &. &. &100\% \\
\text{\MutX{4}} &28\% &. &72\% &. &. &. \\
\text{\MutY{4}} &68\% &. &. &. &. &32\% \\
\text{\MutY{16}} &51\% &. &. &. &. &49\% \\
\end{array}
$$
\caption{$\Mfail$}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{
Transition matrices of \reduced{}.
Dashes show prohibited transitions, see Section~\ref{sec:special-cases}.
\reduced{} transition frequencies are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:reduced}.
}
\label{fig:reduced-matrices}
\end{figure*}
\bigskip
\krow{2} decided to use only \component{OptX}{}, \component{OptY}{}, \component{FlpX}{}, \component{Repair}{}, \MutY{4} and \MutY{16} from the set of 9 moves it was initially permitted, and transition matrices as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:tworow-matrices}.
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\small
\begin{subfigure}{0.48\textwidth}
$$
\begin{array}{@{} r | *{6}{@{~~}r} @{}}
& \text{\component{OptX}{}} & \text{\component{OptY}{}} & \text{\component{FlpX}{}} & \text{\component{Repair}{}} & \text{\MutY{4}} & \text{\MutY{16}} \\
\midrule
\text{\component{OptX}{}} &- &66\% &. &. &. &34\% \\
\text{\component{OptY}{}} &41\% &- &. &. &59\% &. \\
\text{\component{FlpX}{}} &. &29\% &71\% &. &. &. \\
\text{\component{Repair}{}} &41\% &. &. &. &. &59\% \\
\text{\MutY{4}} &. &. &40\% &60\% &. &. \\
\text{\MutY{16}} &. &. &. &55\% &45\% &. \\
\end{array}
$$
\caption{$\Msucc$}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}{0.48\textwidth}
$$
\begin{array}{@{} r | *{6}{@{~~}r} @{}}
& \text{\component{OptX}{}} & \text{\component{OptY}{}} & \text{\component{FlpX}{}} & \text{\component{Repair}{}} & \text{\MutY{4}} & \text{\MutY{16}} \\
\midrule
\text{\component{OptX}{}} &- &. &. &. &100\% &. \\
\text{\component{OptY}{}} &25\% &- &. &75\% &. &. \\
\text{\component{FlpX}{}} &45\% &55\% &- &. &. &. \\
\text{\component{Repair}{}} &2\% &. &. &. &. &98\% \\
\text{\MutY{4}} &87\% &. &. &13\% &. &. \\
\text{\MutY{16}} &. &. &. &. &82\% &18\% \\
\end{array}
$$
\caption{$\Mfail$}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{
Transition matrices of \krow{2}, our best performing metaheuristic.
Dashes show prohibited transitions.
\krow{2} transition frequencies are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:tworow}.
}
\label{fig:tworow-matrices}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Analysis of Components and Metaheuristics}
\label{sec:analysis}
\begin{table}[htb]
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{@{} l r r @{}}
\toprule
Metaheuristic
& Objective value (\ref{eq:tuning-objective})
& Comp.\ exec.
\\
\midrule
VNS
& 0.598\%
& 384
\\
\opprob{}
& 0.448\%
& 520
\\
MCHH
& 0.395\%
& 2008
\\
\reduced{}
& 0.256\%
& 5259
\\
\krow{2}
& 0.242\%
& 5157
\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{
Performance of the emergent metaheuristics on the training instance set.
Rows are ordered by performance of metaheuristics, from worst to best.
}
\label{tab:heuristics500}
\end{table}
Table~\ref{tab:heuristics500} gives the tuning objective function (\ref{eq:tuning-objective}) and the average number of component executions per run (i.e.\ in 100 milliseconds when solving a $200 \times 500$ instance) for each metaheuristic.
CMCS, even if restricted to \krow{2} and even if the pool of components is reduced, outperforms all standard metaheuristics (VNS, \opprob{}\ and MCHH), even though \opprob{}\ and VNS benefit from higher quality configuration (recall that VNS and \opprob{} are configured using complete brute-force search).
An interesting observation is that the best performing metaheuristics mostly employ fast components thus being able to run many more iterations than, say, VNS or \opprob{}
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\includegraphics[scale=1]{fig6-crop.pdf}
\caption{
Runtime frequency of usage of the components in tuned metaheuristics.
}
\label{fig:components}
\end{figure*}
Figure~\ref{fig:components} gives the relative frequency of usage of each component by each metaheuristic.
Most of the components appear to be useful within at least one of the considered metaheuristic schemas; only \MutX{4} is almost unused.
It is however not surprising to observe some imbalance between the Mutation-X and Mutation-Y components because the number of rows is about half of the number of columns in the training instances.
The selection of components is hard to predict as it significantly depends on the metaheuristic schema; indeed, different types of metaheuristics may be able to efficiently exploit different features of the components.
Thus components should not be permanently discarded or selected based only on expert intuition and/or a limited number of experiments.
We believe that the approach to component usage analysis proposed and used in this paper (and also in works such as \cite[and others]{HutterEtal2009:ParamILS,BezerraEtal2015:component-MOO}) is in many circumstances more comprehensive than manual analysis.
While frequencies of usage of the components vary between all the metaheuristics, \opprob{}\ is clearly an outlier in this respect.
We believe that this reflects the fact that \opprob{}\ is the only metaheuristic among the considered ones that does not have any form of memory and thus does not control the order of components.
Thus it prefers strong (possibly slow) components whereas other metaheuristics have some tendency to form composite components from fast ones, with the latter (history-based) approach apparently being superior.
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[
scale=0.7
]
\node[vertex] (OptX) at ( 4, 0) {\component{OptX}{}};
\node[vertex] (OptY) at ( 7, -4) {\component{OptY}{}};
\node[vertex] (FlpX) at ( 1, -2) {\component{FlpX}{}};
\node[vertex] (MutX4) at ( 1, 2) {\MutX{4}};
\node[vertex] (MutY4) at (10, 0) {\MutY{4}};
\node[vertex] (MutY16) at ( 7, 4) {\MutY{16}};
\path (OptX) edge[improved=100, line width=5, bend right=10] (OptY);
\path (OptX) edge[unimproved=100, line width=3.28167042045076, bend right=10] (MutY4);
\path (OptY) edge[improved=100, line width=1.42334020373296, bend right=10] (OptX);
\path (OptY) edge[unimproved=100, line width=0.651997311703321, bend left=5] (FlpX);
\path (OptY) edge[unimproved=100, line width=0.306307821512429, bend left=15] (MutX4);
\path (OptY) edge[improved=100, line width=4.76918229710326, bend right=10] (MutY4);
\path (FlpX) edge[improved=100, line width=0.410522026332434, bend right=10] (OptX);
\path (FlpX) edge[improved=100, line width=0.542967234955163, bend right=20] (OptY);
\path (FlpX) edge[unimproved=100, line width=0.353484210062046, bend left=25, in=140] (MutY16);
\path (MutX4) edge[unimproved=100, line width=0.270868704757155, bend left=10] (OptX);
\path (MutX4) edge[unimproved=100, line width=0.403970722495793, bend right=10] (FlpX);
\path (MutY4) edge[improved=100, line width=0.552304926092725, bend right=30] (OptX);
\path (MutY4) edge[unimproved=100, line width=4.7281679910585, bend right=10] (OptX);
\path (MutY4) edge[improved=100, line width=0.62090678787576, bend right=10] (MutY16);
\path (MutY4) edge[unimproved=100, line width=3.23389775596361, bend right=30] (MutY16);
\path (MutY16) edge[unimproved=100, line width=3.28979036462274, bend right=30] (OptX);
\path (MutY16) edge[improved=100, line width=0.377806456179487, bend right=30] (MutX4);
\path (MutY16) edge[loop improved=100, line width=0.35473993057108] (MutY16);
\path (MutY16) edge[loop unimproved=100, line width=3.23300387268048] (MutY16);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{
Emergent \reduced{}, i.e.\ a metaheuristic which was allowed to use any components except \component{Repair}{}.
}
\label{fig:reduced}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}{0.50\textwidth}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[
scale=0.7
]
\node[vertex] (OptX) at ( 4, 0) {\component{OptX}{}};
\node[vertex] (OptY) at ( 7, -4) {\component{OptY}{}};
\node[vertex] (FlpX) at ( 2, -2) {\component{FlpX}{}};
\node[vertex] (MutY4) at (10, 0) {\MutY{4}};
\node[vertex] (MutY16) at ( 7, 4) {\MutY{16}};
\node[vertex] (Repair) at (13, 3) {\component{Repair}{}};
\path (OptX) edge[improved=100, line width=3.98816860100795, bend right=10] (OptY);
\path (OptX) edge[unimproved=100, line width=2.72247442389867, bend right=10] (MutY4);
\path (OptX) edge[improved=100, line width=2.91259937316483, bend left=10] (MutY16);
\path (OptY) edge[improved=100, line width=2.53561881907278, bend right=10] (OptX);
\path (OptY) edge[unimproved=100, line width=0.366936388326369, bend right=30] (OptX);
\path (OptY) edge[unimproved=100, line width=0.632518787075294, bend right=40] (Repair);
\path (OptY) edge[improved=100, line width=3.03028146414151, bend right=10] (MutY4);
\path (FlpX) edge[unimproved=100, line width=0.191169481593167, bend left=10] (OptX);
\path (FlpX) edge[improved=100, line width=0.434607789428906, bend right=15] (OptY);
\path (FlpX) edge[unimproved=100, line width=0.230407336222265, bend right=30] (OptY);
\path (FlpX) edge[loop improved=100, line width=0.674033851937335] (FlpX);
\path (Repair) edge[improved=100, line width=0.322880193809841, bend right=15] (OptX);
\path (Repair) edge[unimproved=100, line width=0.282871000989214, bend right=30] (OptX);
\path (Repair) edge[improved=100, line width=0.396660005722433, bend right=15] (MutY16);
\path (Repair) edge[unimproved=100, line width=2.15320966878754, bend right=30] (MutY16);
\path (MutY4) edge[unimproved=100, line width=5, bend right=10] (OptX);
\path (MutY4) edge[improved=100, line width=0.531017394082002, bend left=30] (FlpX);
\path (MutY4) edge[improved=100, line width=0.643373095205325, bend right=10] (Repair);
\path (MutY4) edge[unimproved=100, line width=1.9435261563258, bend right=30] (Repair);
\path (MutY16) edge[improved=100, line width=0.623020508480837, bend left=45] (Repair);
\path (MutY16) edge[improved=100, line width=0.535346411863011, bend left=10] (MutY4);
\path (MutY16) edge[unimproved=100, line width=3.54967778117428, bend left=25] (MutY4);
\path (MutY16) edge[loop unimproved=100, line width=1.67072663720565] (MutY16);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{
Emergent \krow{2}, i.e.\ our best performing metaheuristic which was allowed to use any components.
}
\label{fig:tworow}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{
Runtime frequencies of \reduced{} and \krow{2} tested on the training instance set.
The names and brief descriptions of each component are given in Table~\ref{tab:components}.
}
\label{fig:cmcs-tuned}
\end{figure*}
More information about the performance of \reduced{} and \krow{2} configurations can be collected from Figure~\ref{fig:cmcs-tuned} detailing the runtime frequencies of transitions in each of them.
Edge width here is proportional to square root of the runtime frequency of the corresponding transition occurring in several test runs; thus it allows to see not only the probabilities of transitions from any individual component, but also how frequently that component was executed and how often it was successful, compared to other components.
Firstly, we observe that the two metaheuristics employ similar sets of components; the only difference is that \krow{2} does not use \MutX{4} but adds \component{Repair}{} (recall that \component{Repair}{} was purposely removed from the pool of components of \reduced{}).
Furthermore, the core components (\component{OptX}{}, \component{OptY}{}, \MutY{4} and \MutY{16}) are exactly the same, and most of interconnections between them are similar.
However, the direction of transitions to and from \MutY{16} is different.
One may also notice that both metaheuristics have ``mutation'' blocks; that is, mutations that are often executed in sequences.
It is then not surprising that \krow{2} connects \component{Repair}{} to the other mutation components.
Both metaheuristics include some natural patterns such as alternation of \component{OptX}{} and \component{OptY}{}, or iterated local search \component{OptX}{}--\MutY{4}, which we could also expect in a hand-designed metaheuristic.
It is also easy to suggest an explanation for the loop at \MutY{16} as it allows the component to be repeated a couple of times intensifying the mutation.
However, the overall structure of the metaheuristics is complex and hard to explain.
Our point here is that, although the observed chains of components make sense, it is unlikely that a human expert would come up with a heuristic of such a level of detail.
\tempclearpage
\section{Evaluation of Metaheuristics}
\label{sec:evaluation}
\begin{table*}[htb]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{@{} lrrrrr @{}}
\toprule
Instance & VNS & \opprob{} & MCHH & \reduced{} & \krow{2} \\
\midrule Rand 200x1000 & {{0.01}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} \\
Rand 400x1000 & {{0.05}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} \\
Rand 600x1000 & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & {{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} \\
Rand 800x1000 & {{0.08}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & {{0.01}} & {{0.00}} & {{0.00}} \\
Rand 1000x1000 & {{0.07}} & {{0.03}} & {{0.20}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & {{0.04}} \\[1ex]
Biclique 200x1000 & {{0.88}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} \\
Biclique 400x1000 & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & {{0.14}} & {{0.09}} & {{0.09}} \\
Biclique 600x1000 & {\textbf{0.09}} & {{0.54}} & {{0.95}} & {{0.55}} & {{1.48}} \\
Biclique 800x1000 & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & {{0.53}} & {{0.34}} & {{0.24}} & {{0.56}} \\
Biclique 1000x1000 & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & {{0.14}} & {{0.13}} & {{0.16}} & {{0.35}} \\[1ex]
MaxInduced 200x1000 & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} \\
MaxInduced 400x1000 & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} \\
MaxInduced 600x1000 & {{0.18}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} \\
MaxInduced 800x1000 & {{0.30}} & {{0.08}} & {{0.08}} & {{0.09}} & {\textbf{0.00}} \\
MaxInduced 1000x1000 & {{0.16}} & {{0.04}} & {{0.04}} & {{0.04}} & {\textbf{0.03}} \\[1ex]
BMaxCut 200x1000 & {{1.76}} & {{0.14}} & {{0.09}} & {{0.43}} & {\textbf{0.06}} \\
BMaxCut 400x1000 & {{2.25}} & {{0.67}} & {{1.25}} & {{0.89}} & {\textbf{0.40}} \\
BMaxCut 600x1000 & {{2.46}} & {{1.18}} & {{3.19}} & {{1.16}} & {\textbf{0.53}} \\
BMaxCut 800x1000 & {{4.35}} & {{2.19}} & {{2.75}} & {{1.49}} & {\textbf{1.05}} \\
BMaxCut 1000x1000 & {{4.51}} & {{2.65}} & {{2.39}} & {\textbf{0.39}} & {{0.46}} \\[1ex]
MatrixFactor 200x1000 & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & {{0.27}} & {{0.05}} & {{0.03}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} \\
MatrixFactor 400x1000 & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} \\
MatrixFactor 600x1000 & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & {{0.12}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} \\
MatrixFactor 800x1000 & {{0.43}} & {{0.01}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} \\
MatrixFactor 1000x1000 & {{0.09}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & {{0.10}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & {{0.03}} \\[1ex]
\midrule
Average & 0.71 & 0.34 & 0.47 & 0.22 & \textbf{0.20} \\
Max & 4.51 & 2.65 & 3.19 & 1.49 & \textbf{1.48} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{
Evaluation of metaheuristics on Medium Instances, 10~sec per run.
Reported are the gaps, as percentages, to the best known solutions.
Best value in a row is bold, and where heuristic finds the best known (objective value) solution, the gap is underlined. (Note that due to rounding, a gap value of $0.00$ is not automatically the same as having found the best known.)
}
\label{tab:internal-evaluation-medium}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[htb]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{@{} lrrrrr @{}}
\toprule
Instance & VNS & \opprob{} & MCHH & \reduced{} & \krow{2} \\
\midrule Rand 1000x5000 & {{0.07}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & {{0.08}} & {{0.04}} & {{0.04}} \\
Rand 2000x5000 & {{0.38}} & {{0.17}} & {{0.15}} & {{0.13}} & {\textbf{0.07}} \\
Rand 3000x5000 & {{0.50}} & {{0.19}} & {{0.22}} & {{0.24}} & {\textbf{0.12}} \\
Rand 4000x5000 & {{0.29}} & {{0.13}} & {{0.19}} & {{0.08}} & {\textbf{0.07}} \\
Rand 5000x5000 & {{0.38}} & {{0.31}} & {{0.31}} & {{0.23}} & {\textbf{0.11}} \\[1ex]
Biclique 1000x5000 & {{0.92}} & {\textbf{0.06}} & {{0.23}} & {{0.22}} & {{0.08}} \\
Biclique 2000x5000 & {\textbf{0.05}} & {{0.37}} & {{0.53}} & {{0.57}} & {{0.52}} \\
Biclique 3000x5000 & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & {{0.11}} & {{0.13}} & {{0.07}} & {{0.43}} \\
Biclique 4000x5000 & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & {{0.26}} & {{0.27}} & {{0.38}} \\
Biclique 5000x5000 & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & {{0.16}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} & {{0.03}} & \underline{\textbf{0.00}} \\[1ex]
MaxInduced 1000x5000 & {{0.21}} & {{0.01}} & {{0.01}} & {{0.05}} & {\textbf{0.01}} \\
MaxInduced 2000x5000 & {{0.36}} & {{0.08}} & {{0.19}} & {{0.01}} & {\textbf{0.01}} \\
MaxInduced 3000x5000 & {{0.53}} & {{0.11}} & {{0.21}} & {{0.20}} & {\textbf{0.08}} \\
MaxInduced 4000x5000 & {{0.52}} & {{0.30}} & {{0.28}} & {\textbf{0.14}} & {{0.20}} \\
MaxInduced 5000x5000 & {{0.52}} & {{0.32}} & {{0.42}} & {{0.23}} & {\textbf{0.14}} \\[1ex]
BMaxCut 1000x5000 & {{2.57}} & {\textbf{0.71}} & {{1.39}} & {{2.90}} & {{2.69}} \\
BMaxCut 2000x5000 & {{5.61}} & {\textbf{2.63}} & {{3.41}} & {{3.99}} & {{3.75}} \\
BMaxCut 3000x5000 & {{6.00}} & {{2.86}} & {{4.11}} & {{3.35}} & {\textbf{2.69}} \\
BMaxCut 4000x5000 & {{6.09}} & {{4.33}} & {{4.07}} & {{3.41}} & {\textbf{3.34}} \\
BMaxCut 5000x5000 & {{5.28}} & {{3.76}} & {{4.34}} & {{2.65}} & {\textbf{2.49}} \\[1ex]
MatrixFactor 1000x5000 & {{0.09}} & {{0.35}} & {{0.10}} & {\textbf{0.04}} & {{0.07}} \\
MatrixFactor 2000x5000 & {{0.41}} & {{0.12}} & {\textbf{0.11}} & {{0.13}} & {{0.16}} \\
MatrixFactor 3000x5000 & {{0.55}} & {{0.17}} & {{0.43}} & {{0.24}} & {\textbf{0.16}} \\
MatrixFactor 4000x5000 & {{0.45}} & {{0.34}} & {{0.43}} & {{0.28}} & {\textbf{0.13}} \\
MatrixFactor 5000x5000 & {{0.42}} & {{0.38}} & {{0.40}} & {{0.38}} & {\textbf{0.16}} \\[1ex]
\midrule
Average & 1.29 & 0.72 & 0.88 & 0.80 & \textbf{0.72} \\
Max & 6.09 & 4.33 & 4.34 & 3.99 & \textbf{3.75} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{
Evaluation of metaheuristics on Large Instances, 100~sec per run.
The format of the table is identical to that of Table~\ref{tab:internal-evaluation-medium}.
}
\label{tab:internal-evaluation-large}
\end{table*}
So far we have only been testing the performance of the metaheuristics on the training instance set.
In Tables~\ref{tab:internal-evaluation-medium} and~\ref{tab:internal-evaluation-large} we report their performance on benchmark instances, giving 10~seconds per Medium instance and 100~seconds per Large instance.
For each instance and metaheuristic, we report the percentage gap, between the solution obtained by that metaheuristic and the best known objective value for that instance.
The best known objective values are obtained by recording the best solutions produced in all our experiments, not necessarily only the experiments reported in this paper.
The best known solutions will be available for download, and their objective values are reported in Tables~\ref{tab:comparison-medium} and~\ref{tab:comparison-large}.
The results of the experiments on benchmark instances generally positively correlate with the configuration objective function (\ref{eq:tuning-objective}) reported in Table~\ref{tab:heuristics500}, except that \opprob{}\ shows performance better than MCHH, and is competing with \reduced{} on Large instances.
This shows a common problem that the evaluation by short runs on small instances, as used for training, may not always perfectly correlate with the performance of the heuristic on real (or benchmark) instances~\cite{Hutter2007}.
However, in our case, the main conclusions are unaffected by this.
In particular, we still observe that \krow{2} outperforms other metaheuristics, including \reduced{}, hence proving usefulness of the \component{Repair}{} component.
Also \krow{2} clearly outperforms MCHH demonstrating that even a restricted version of the CMCS schema is more robust than the MCHH schema; recall that CMCS is an extension of MCHH with conditional transitions.
We made the source code of \krow{2} publicly available\footnote{\url{http://csee.essex.ac.uk/staff/dkarap/?page=publications&key=CMCS-BBQP}}.
The code is in C\# and was tested on Windows and Linux machines.
We note here that CMCS is relevant to the Programming by Optimisation (PbO) concept~\cite{Hoos2012}.
We made sure that our code complies with the ``PbO Level~3'' standard, i.e.\ ``the software-development process is structured and carried out in a way that seeks to provide design choices and alternatives in many performance- relevant components of a project.''~\cite{Hoos2012}.
Our code is not compliant with ``PbO Level~4'' because some of the choices made (specifically, the internal parameters of individual components) were not designed to be tuned along with the CMCS matrices; for details of PbO see~\cite{Hoos2012}.
\subsection{Comparison to the State-of-the-art}
\label{sec:comparison}
There have been two published high-performance metaheuristics for BBQP: \emph{Iterated Local Search} by Duarte et al.~\cite{Duarte2014} and \emph{Tabu Search} by Glover et al.~\cite{Glover2015}.
Both papers agree that their approaches perform similarly; in fact, following a sign test, Duarte et al.~conclude that ``there are not significant differences between both procedures''.
At first, we compare \krow{2} to Tabu Search for which we have detailed experimental results~\cite{Glover2015}.
Then we also compare \krow{2} to ILS using approach adopted in~\cite{Duarte2014}.
Tabu Search has two phases: (i) a classic tabu search based on a relatively small neighbourhood, which runs until it fails to improve the solution, and (ii) a polishing procedure, similar to ours, which repeats a sequence of hill climbing operators \component{OptY}{}, \component{FlpX}{}, \component{OptX}{} and \component{FlpY}{} until a local maximum is reached.\footnote{In~\cite{Glover2015}, a composite of \component{OptY}{} and \component{FlpX}{} is called Flip-$x$-Float-$y$, and a composite of \component{OptX}{} and \component{FlpY}{} is called Flip-$y$-Float-$x$.}
The whole procedure is repeated as many times as the time allows.
The experiments in~\cite{Glover2015} were conducted on the same benchmark instances, first introduced in~\cite{Karapetyan2012} and now described in Section~\ref{sec:testbed} of this paper.
Each run of Tabu Search was given 1000 seconds for Medium instances ($n = 1000$) and 10000 seconds for Large instances ($n = 5000$).
In Table~\ref{tab:comparison-medium} we report the performance results of \krow{2}, our best performing metaheuristic, on Medium instances with 1, 10, 100 and 1000 second time limits, and in Table~\ref{tab:comparison-large} on Large instances with 10, 100, 1000 and 10000 second time limits, and explicitly compare those results to the performance of Tabu Search and so implicitly compare to the results of Duarte et al.\ \cite{Duarte2014} that were not significantly different from Tabu.
\begin{table*}[htb]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{@{} lrrrrrr @{}}
\toprule
&
& \multicolumn{4}{c}{\krow{2}}
& \multicolumn{1}{c@{}}{Tabu Search} \\
\cmidrule(lr){3-6}
\cmidrule(l){7-7}
Instance
& Best known
& 1 sec.
& 10 sec.
& 100 sec.
& 1000 sec.
& 1000 sec. \\
\midrule
Rand 200x1000 & 612,947 & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} \\
Rand 400x1000 & 951,950 & {0.05} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} \\
Rand 600x1000 & 1,345,748 & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & {0.00} \\
Rand 800x1000 & 1,604,925 & {0.09} & \textbf{0.00} & \textbf{0.00} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & {0.01} \\
Rand 1000x1000 & 1,830,236 & \textbf{0.04} & \textbf{0.04} & \textbf{0.02} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & {0.07} \\[1ex]
Biclique 200x1000 & 2,150,201 & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} \\
Biclique 400x1000 & 4,051,884 & {0.27} & {0.09} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} \\
Biclique 600x1000 & 5,501,111 & \textbf{0.59} & {1.48} & \textbf{0.47} & \textbf{0.47} & {0.65} \\
Biclique 800x1000 & 6,703,926 & \textbf{0.68} & \textbf{0.56} & \textbf{0.04} & \textbf{0.04} & {0.79} \\
Biclique 1000x1000 & 8,680,142 & \textbf{0.10} & \textbf{0.35} & \textbf{0.35} & \textbf{0.11} & {0.91} \\[1ex]
MaxInduced 200x1000 & 513,081 & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} \\
MaxInduced 400x1000 & 777,028 & {0.01} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} \\
MaxInduced 600x1000 & 973,711 & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} \\
MaxInduced 800x1000 & 1,205,533 & \textbf{0.01} & \textbf{0.00} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & {0.07} \\
MaxInduced 1000x1000 & 1,415,622 & \textbf{0.03} & \textbf{0.03} & \textbf{0.03} & \textbf{0.01} & {0.06} \\[1ex]
BMaxCut 200x1000 & 617,700 & {1.59} & \textbf{0.06} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & {0.14} \\
BMaxCut 400x1000 & 951,726 & {1.34} & \textbf{0.40} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & {1.13} \\
BMaxCut 600x1000 & 1,239,982 & \textbf{1.83} & \textbf{0.53} & \textbf{0.53} & \textbf{0.37} & {2.00} \\
BMaxCut 800x1000 & 1,545,820 & {1.74} & \textbf{1.05} & \textbf{0.08} & \textbf{0.08} & {1.66} \\
BMaxCut 1000x1000 & 1,816,688 & \textbf{1.83} & \textbf{0.46} & \textbf{0.23} & \textbf{0.23} & {2.47} \\[1ex]
MatrixFactor 200x1000 & 6,283 & {0.18} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} \\
MatrixFactor 400x1000 & 9,862 & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} \\
MatrixFactor 600x1000 & 12,902 & {0.05} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & {0.03} \\
MatrixFactor 800x1000 & 15,466 & {0.49} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & {0.19} \\
MatrixFactor 1000x1000 & 18,813 & \textbf{0.08} & \textbf{0.03} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & {0.11} \\
\midrule
Average && 0.44& \textbf{0.20}& \textbf{0.07}& \textbf{0.05}& 0.41\\
Max && \textbf{1.83}& \textbf{1.48}& \textbf{0.53}& \textbf{0.47}& 2.47\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{
Empirical comparison of the \krow{2} and Tabu Search \cite{Glover2015} (which performs on average similarly to the method of \cite{Duarte2014}) on the Medium instances.
Reported are the gaps to the best known solution, in percent.
As in Tables~\ref{tab:internal-evaluation-medium} and~\ref{tab:internal-evaluation-large}, where the heuristic finds the best known (objective value) solution, the value ($0.00$) is underlined.
Where \krow{2} finds a solution at least as good as the one found by Tabu Search, the gap is shown in bold.
Similarly, where Tabu Search (1000s) finds a solution at least as good as the one found by \krow{2} (1000s), the gap is shown in bold.
}
\label{tab:comparison-medium}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[htb]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{@{} lrrrrrr @{}}
\toprule
&
& \multicolumn{4}{c}{\krow{2}}
& \multicolumn{1}{c@{}}{Tabu Search} \\
\cmidrule(lr){3-6}
\cmidrule(l){7-7}
Instance
& Best known
& 10 sec.
& 100 sec.
& 1000 sec.
& 10000 sec.
& 10000 sec. \\
\midrule
Rand 1000x5000 & 7,183,221 & {0.04} & {0.04} & {0.01} & {0.01} & \textbf{0.01} \\
Rand 2000x5000 & 11,098,093 & {0.18} & \textbf{0.07} & \textbf{0.07} & \textbf{0.02} & {0.09} \\
Rand 3000x5000 & 14,435,941 & \textbf{0.16} & \textbf{0.12} & \textbf{0.11} & \textbf{0.07} & {0.22} \\
Rand 4000x5000 & 18,069,396 & \textbf{0.14} & \textbf{0.07} & \textbf{0.01} & \textbf{0.01} & {0.19} \\
Rand 5000x5000 & 20,999,474 & {0.26} & \textbf{0.11} & \textbf{0.08} & \textbf{0.07} & {0.25} \\[1ex]
Biclique 1000x5000 & 38,495,688 & {0.22} & {0.08} & \textbf{0.02} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & {0.02} \\
Biclique 2000x5000 & 64,731,072 & {1.67} & \textbf{0.52} & \textbf{0.19} & \textbf{0.28} & {0.94} \\
Biclique 3000x5000 & 98,204,538 & {1.68} & \textbf{0.43} & \textbf{0.01} & \textbf{0.04} & {1.50} \\
Biclique 4000x5000 & 128,500,727 & \textbf{0.38} & \textbf{0.38} & \textbf{0.22} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & {2.19} \\
Biclique 5000x5000 & 163,628,686 & \textbf{0.38} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & {1.01} \\[1ex]
MaxInduced 1000x5000 & 5,465,051 & \textbf{0.01} & \textbf{0.01} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & {0.02} \\
MaxInduced 2000x5000 & 8,266,136 & \textbf{0.10} & \textbf{0.01} & \textbf{0.01} & \textbf{\underline{0.00}} & {0.12} \\
MaxInduced 3000x5000 & 11,090,573 & \textbf{0.15} & \textbf{0.08} & \textbf{0.04} & \textbf{0.03} & {0.18} \\
MaxInduced 4000x5000 & 13,496,469 & \textbf{0.29} & \textbf{0.20} & \textbf{0.06} & \textbf{0.05} & {0.36} \\
MaxInduced 5000x5000 & 16,021,337 & \textbf{0.19} & \textbf{0.14} & \textbf{0.08} & \textbf{0.08} & {0.29} \\[1ex]
BMaxCut 1000x5000 & 6,644,232 & {2.98} & {2.69} & {2.17} & \textbf{1.20} & {1.70} \\
BMaxCut 2000x5000 & 10,352,878 & {5.39} & {3.75} & {3.39} & \textbf{1.80} & {2.58} \\
BMaxCut 3000x5000 & 13,988,920 & {3.49} & \textbf{2.69} & \textbf{1.99} & \textbf{1.81} & {3.45} \\
BMaxCut 4000x5000 & 17,090,794 & {4.36} & \textbf{3.34} & \textbf{3.31} & \textbf{2.31} & {4.28} \\
BMaxCut 5000x5000 & 20,134,370 & \textbf{3.15} & \textbf{2.49} & \textbf{2.34} & \textbf{1.79} & {3.90} \\[1ex]
MatrixFactor 1000x5000 & 71,485 & {0.11} & {0.07} & \textbf{0.00} & \textbf{0.00} & {0.02} \\
MatrixFactor 2000x5000 & 108,039 & {0.19} & {0.16} & \textbf{0.06} & \textbf{0.04} & {0.09} \\
MatrixFactor 3000x5000 & 144,255 & \textbf{0.17} & \textbf{0.16} & \textbf{0.14} & \textbf{0.11} & {0.26} \\
MatrixFactor 4000x5000 & 179,493 & \textbf{0.26} & \textbf{0.13} & \textbf{0.10} & \textbf{0.10} & {0.29} \\
MatrixFactor 5000x5000 & 211,088 & \textbf{0.21} & \textbf{0.16} & \textbf{0.13} & \textbf{0.04} & {0.33} \\
\midrule
Average && 1.05& \textbf{0.72}& \textbf{0.58}& \textbf{0.39}& 0.97\\
Max && 5.39& \textbf{3.75}& \textbf{3.39}& \textbf{2.31}& 4.28\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{
Empirical comparison of \krow{2} with Tabu Search~\cite{Glover2015} (which performs on average similarly to the method of \cite{Duarte2014}) on the Large instances.
The format of the table is identical to that of Table~\ref{tab:comparison-medium}.
}
\label{tab:comparison-large}
\end{table*}
Given the same time, \krow{2} produces same (for 10 instances) or better (for 20 instances) solutions.
The worst gap between best known and obtained solution (reported in the Max row at the bottom of each table) is also much larger for Tabu Search than for \krow{2}.
\krow{2} clearly outperforms Tabu Search even if given a factor of 100 less time, and competes with it even if given a factor of 1000 less time.
Thus we conclude that \krow{2} is faster than Tabu Search by two to three orders of magnitude.
Further, we observe that \krow{2} does not converge prematurely, that is, it continues to improve the solution when given more time.
As pointed out above, it is known from the literature that ILS~\cite{Duarte2014} performs similarly to Tabu Search, and hence the conclusions of the comparison between \krow{2} and Tabu Search can be extended to ILS as well.
However, to verify this, we reproduced the experiment from \cite{Duarte2014}.
In that experiment, Duarte et al.\ solved each of the medium and large instances, giving ILS 1000 seconds per run, and then reported the average objective value.
We tested \krow{2} is exactly the same way, except that we allowed only 10 seconds per run.
Despite a much lower time budget, our result of 14,523,968.32 is superior to the result of 14,455,832.30 reported in \cite[Table 8]{Duarte2014}.
This direct experiment confirms that \krow{2} significantly outperforms ILS.
We note here that this result is achieved in spite of \krow{2} consisting of simple components combined in an entirely automated way; without any human intelligence put into the detailed metaheuristic design.
Instead, only a modest computational power (a few hours of CPU time) was required to obtain it.
(Note that this computational power should not be compared to the running time of the algorithm itself; it is a replacement of expensive time of a human expert working on manual design of a high-performance solution method.)
We believe that these results strongly support the idea of automated metaheuristic in general and CMCS schema in particular.
\tempclearpage
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusion}
In this work, we considered an important combinatorial optimisation problem called Bipartite Boolean Quadratic Programming Problem (BBQP)\@.
We defined several algorithmic components for BBQP, primarily aiming at components for metaheuristics.
To test and analyse the performance of the components, and to combine them in a powerful metaheuristic, we designed a flexible metaheuristic schema, which we call Conditional Markov Chain Search (CMCS), the behaviour of which is entirely defined by an explicit set of parameters and thus which is convenient for automated configuration.
CMCS is a powerful schema with special cases covering several standard metaheuristics.
Hence, to evaluate the performance of a metaheuristic on a specific problem class, we can configure the CMCS restricted to that metaheuristic, obtaining a nearly best possible metaheuristic of that particular type for that specific problem class.
The key advantages of this approach include avoidance of human/expert bias in analysis of the components and metaheuristics, and complete automation of the typically time-consuming process of metaheuristic design.
Of the methods we consider, the CMCS schema is potentially the most powerful as it includes the others as special cases, however, it has a lot of parameters, and this complicates the selection of the matrices.
To combat this, we proposed a special case of CMCS, \krow{$k$}, which is significantly easier to configure, but that still preserves much of the flexibility of the approach.
By configuring several special cases of CMCS on a set of small instances and then testing them on benchmark instances, we learnt several lessons.
In particular, we found out that CMCS schema, even if restricted to the \krow{2} schema, is significantly more powerful than VNS, \opprob{}\ and even MCHH (with a static transition matrix).
We also verified that the new BBQP component, \component{Repair}{}, is useful, as its inclusion in the pool of components improved the performance of \krow{2}.
Finally, we showed that the best found strategies are often much more sophisticated than the strategies implemented in standard approaches.
Our best performing metaheuristic, \krow{2}, clearly outperforms the previous state-of-the-art BBQP methods.
Following a series of computational experiments, we estimated that \krow{2} is faster than those methods by roughly two to three orders of magnitude.
\subsection{Future Work}
A few other BBQP algorithmic components could be studied and exploited using the CMCS schema.
Variations of the \component{Repair}{} heuristic, as discussed in Section~\ref{sec:repair}, should be considered more thoroughly.
Another possibility for creating a new class of powerful components is to reduce the entire problem by adding constraints of the form $x_i = x_{i'}$, $x_i \neq x_{i'}$ or $x_i = 1$, or even more sophisticated such as $x_i = x_{i'} \vee x_{i''}$.
Note that such constraints effectively reduce the original problem to a smaller BBQP; then this smaller BBQP can be solved exactly or heuristically.
Also note that if such constraints are generated to be consistent with the current solution then this approach can be used as a hill climbing operator.
It is interesting to note that the reduced size subproblem could itself be solved using a version of CMCS configured to be effective for brief intense runs.
This gives the intriguing possibility of an upper-level CMCS in which one of the components uses a different CMCS -- though we expect that tuning such a system could be a significant, but interesting, challenge.
The CMCS schema should be developed in several directions.
First of all, it should be tested on other domains.
Then a few extensions can be studied, e.g.\ one could add a ``termination'' component that would stop the search -- to allow variable running times.
It is possible to add some form of memory and/or backtracking functionality, for example to implement a tabu-like mechanism.
Another direction of research is population-based extensions of CMCS\@.
Of interest are efficient configuration procedures that would allow to include more components.
Finally, of course, one can study methods for online learning, that is adaptation of the transition probabilities during the search process itself; in which case it would be most natural to call the method ``Conditional Markov Chain Hyper-heuristic.''
\section*{Acknowledgement}
This research work was partially supported by an NSERC Discovery accelerator supplement awarded to Abraham P. Punnen, EPSRC grants EP/H000968/1 and EP/F033214/1 (``The LANCS Initiative''), and also LANCS Initiative International Scientific Outreach Fund which supported the visit of Daniel Karapetyan to the Simon Fraser University.
\bibliographystyle{model2-names}
|
\section{Introduction}
The concurrent movement of fish in a school involves significant hydrodynamic interactions. The relative longitudinal and lateral distances and velocities between the fish, as well as their relative lengths and cross-sectional areas determine the magnitude of the hydrodynamic forces and moments involved \citep{Kadri:2005, Rattanasiri:2014, Kadri:2014}, which in turn affect the school overall manoeuvrability \citep{Partridge:1979}. It is not the aim of the current study to discuss how information due to a sudden movement is (physiologically) transferred among the school members in terms of sensory systems \citep{Partridge:1980}, environmental effects \citep{Killen:2007}, or aerobic capacity \citep{Killen:2011}. In this respect, the overall manoeuvrability of a given school is dependant on the instantaneous school pattern (structure) mode which dictates to leading order, the hydrodynamic interactions.
\begin{figure}
\centering{ \epsfig{figure=Figure_1_four_schools_reduced.pdf,width=\linewidth}}
\caption{Examples for schools of fishes swimming in random pattern mode: (a) Jack Caranx sp. (60 cm) ; (b) Bluelined snapper Lutjanus kasmira \& Yellowspot emperor Gnathodentex aurolineatus (35 cm / 24 cm); (c) Goggle-eye Priacanthus hamrur (40 cm); and (d) Bluestreak fusilier Pterocaesio tile (25 cm). (Photos by F. Br\"{u}mmer)
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering{ \epsfig{figure=Figure_2_Kadri-eps-converted-to.pdf,width=10cm}}
\caption{{\bf Top}: distribution of a school of Jack Caranx sp. (60 cm); at time 00.04.44 (circles), 00.05.44 (star), 00.06.59 (square). {\bf Middle}: probability density function (PDF) of the distance between each fish and the closest upper downstream neighbour. {\bf Bottom}: PDF of the angle between each fish and the closest upper downstream neighbour. All dimensionless quantities were normalized with respect to the mean fish length.
\end{figure}
Although it has been suggested that fish might be found to swim in a diamond-shape pattern to increase hydrodynamic efficiency \citep{Weihs:1983}, or other preferred orientations and angles, observations (Fig. 1) and analyses (Fig. 2) of aerial photographs and videos of different schools of fishes (Jacks, blue-lined snapper, yellow-spot emperor, goggle-eye, and bluestreak fusilier) reveal random-shape patterns instead. The supporting theoretical analysis we present here show that swimming in random pattern modes increases the mean hydrodynamic forces by a factor of two to five, depending on school size, which in turn decreases the response time of fish due to a sudden change of movement in neighbouring fish and enhances the overall manoeuvring of the school. An increased energy consumption that enhances the manoeuvring efficiency is thus essential for survival especially amongst smaller fish that cannot escape fast enough from predators.
\section{Methods}
\subsection{Hydrodynamic calculations}
The model by \cite{Weihs:1983} accurately predicts diamond-shape pattern modes especially for relatively large fish or dolphins \citep{Weihs:2004, Kadri:2005}, and for different types of fish preferred orientations might be identified. However, for smaller fish (e.g. Jack Caranx sp., 60 cm) the school pattern-shapes were found to be random; especially when fish encounter danger (e.g. due to the presence and sudden movement of scuba-divers) their behaviour becomes more disordered within the school; at any given instant the relative distances and angles between neighbouring fish fail to form ordered patterns, as we observed (Fig. 2). It is observed that the probability density function (PDF) of the relative distances and angles are \textit{Gaussian}, indicating continuous random variables. This observation raises the question whether random school patterns and disordered behaviour, which are probably due to a natural `panic' reflex \citep{Hamilton:1971}, are beneficial or unfavourable for survival.
In order to evaluate the effect of random school patterns, we carried out a theoretical analysis, based on the studies by \cite{Tuck:1974}, and \cite{Wang:1975} who investigated the hydrodynamic interactions between two submerged slender bodies of revolution at various separation distances. For the sake of brevity, the actual motion of each fish in the school is now translated into the motion of a slender ellipsoid with $d/{L}=\epsilon$, where $d$ and $L$ are the maximum lateral and longitudinal dimensions of the body, and $\epsilon$ is assumed to be small. On this basis, an approximate solution is sought for the hydrodynamic quantities of interest. Each two streamlined bodies move through an ideal fluid with constant velocities $U_i$ and $U_j$ along parallel paths. The relative positions of the two bodies change in time as a quasi--steady approximation, where each position is calculated individually. The two bodies are separated by a lateral distance, $\eta_{ij}$, and fore--and--aft distance, $\xi_{ij}$, which is a function of time $t$. For each two bodies we define two coordinate systems, $(x_i,y_i,z_i)$ fixed on body $i$ and $(x_j,y_j,z_j)$ fixed on the upper upstream neighbour, body $j$, which are related to the fixed coordinate system $(x_0,y_0,z_0)$ so that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:2.34-36}
\begin{split}
x_0=x_i+U_it=x_j+U_jt-\xi_{ij}(0); \\ y_0=y_i=y_j+\eta_{ij}; \quad z_0=z_i=z_j,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation} \label{eq:2.37}
\xi_{ij}(t)=x_j-x_i=(U_i-U_j)t+\xi(0).
\end{equation}
where $\xi_{ij}(0)$ is the initial longitudinal distance between bodies $i$ and $j$. The flow about the $i$--th body is considered asymptotically steady, and can be estimated by standard methods of slender body theory \citep{Newman:1977}. It is also assumed that the separation distance $\eta_{ij}$ is $O(\epsilon L_i)$ to allow calculations of small lateral separation distances. Thus, the three dimensional velocity potential in outer region is expanded in a \textit{Taylor} series about the other body. Using the method of asymptotic expansions we find a solution to the longitudinal motion. The inner solution is governed by the two--dimensional \textit{Laplace} equation and the no penetration boundary condition. The outer solution is governed by the three dimensional \textit{Laplace} equation and by the condition at infinity where the potential diminishes. These solutions are matched in an overlap region, leading to, after rather long but straight forward algebra, expressions for the longitudinal and lateral forces, and moment acting on body $j$ due to the presence and/or movement of body $i$ \citep{Newman:1977, Kadri:2005, Kadri:2014}:
\small
\begin{equation} \label{eq:2.81}
X_j=\sum\limits_{i=1}^n\frac{\rho }{4\pi}\int\limits_{L_i}S'_i(x_i)\left[U_i^2 +U_j^2\int\limits_{L_j}S'_i(x_i){T_j(x_j)\sigma_{ij}\textrm{d} x_j}\right] \textrm{d} x_j\textrm{d} x_i,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:2.63}
Y_j=\sum\limits_{i=1}^n\frac{\rho U_j\eta_{ij}}{4\pi} \int\limits_{L_i} (2U_j-U_i)S'_i(x_i) \int\limits_{L_j}T_j(x_j) \textrm{d} x_j \textrm{d} x_i,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:2.67}
\begin{split}
N_j=\sum\limits_{i=1}^n\frac{\rho U_j\eta_{ij}}{4\pi}\int\limits_{L_i} \left[x_i(2U_j-U_i)S'_i(x_i)+2U_jS_i(x_i)\right]
\int\limits_{L_j}T_j(x_j)\textrm{d} x_j\textrm{d} x_i \textrm{d} x_i.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\normalsize
where $n$ is the school size, $j=1,2,...,n$, and
\[T_j(x_j)={S'_j(x_j)}{\left(\sigma_{ij}^2+\eta_{ij}^2\right)^{-3/2}} \]
\[\sigma_{ij}=(x_j-x_i-\xi_{ij}); \quad S_j(x_j)=S_j(0)\left(1-{4x_j^2}/{L_j^2}\right)\]
where $S_j(x_j)$ is chosen to be a simple sectional area distribution of parabolic form; $S_j(0)$ is a constant related to the cross-sectional area of the $j$-th body and $S_j(x_j)={\pi r_j^2}$; and $r_j$ is the radius of the cross-sectional area. For nondimensional representation we define
\[F_{X_j}\equiv{X_jL^2}/{\rho U^2S^2}; \quad
F_{Y_j}\equiv{Y_jL^2}/{\rho U^2S^2}; \quad M_{N_j}\equiv{N_jL}/{\rho U^2S^2}. \]
\subsection{Data collection and analysis}
A total of 48 photos and eight videos (total duration: 300 seconds) of fish schools from 11 different species were examined for analysis. Data presented in Fig. 2 was processed from a movie (MPEG-4 format) recorded movement and distribution of fish in a school for 00.59.36 min. The video was converted to TIF file formats (at 15 frames per second giving a total of 894 frames) using the tool iMovie (Mac). Positions (x and y coordinates) of fish were determined at three different frames (71, 86 and 104), corresponding to movement at times 00.04.00, 00.05.44 and 00.06.59 min, respectively, using image analysis software (SigmaScan Pro 5.0).
\subsection{Numerical calculations}
In the case of Figs. 3 and 4, the velocities and lengths of the fish were considered unity, and the slenderness parameter $\epsilon=0.1$. For the diamond pattern cases the longitudinal and lateral distances between each two neighbouring fish rows and columns are $\xi_0=1.1$, and $\eta_0=0.12$, respectively. In the case of a random pattern mode, the same amount of fish were randomly distributed within a similar domain size; the longitudinal and lateral distances were calculate based on a {\it Monte Carlo} algorithm as presented in the statistical guidelines. In the case of Fig. 5, the algorithm was extended to three-dimensions.
\subsection{Statistical guidelines}
The random pattern data presented in Fig. 3 were obtained by carrying out a {\it Monte Carlo} algorithm. Each data point represents an average of repeated random computations of a size of at least a hundred repetitions. For each school size, $n\times n$, the length and width of the computation domain, $\mathbf{l}\times\mathbf{w}$, are given by $\mathbf{l}=n\times L_i$, and $\mathbf{w}=n\times d$. The location of the fish are generated randomly, such that no overlaps are allowed. The longitudinal and later forces, and yawing moments between each two fish are computed using Eqs. (\ref{eq:2.81}), (\ref{eq:2.63}), and (\ref{eq:2.67}). Note that the random pattern data presented in subplots (a)-(j) of Fig. 4, are for a single calculation (no repetition). The (layer) school size is $20 \times 20$.
\begin{figure} \label{fig:graphs}
\centering{ \epsfig{figure=Figure_3_Kadri-eps-converted-to.pdf,width=\linewidth}}
\caption{Nondimensional hydrodynamic forces and moments as function of fish (square root) school size; for random ($\ast$) and diamond ($\diamond$) patterns. {\bf Top}: longitudinal forces. {\bf Middle}: lateral forces. {\bf Bottom}: yawing moments}
\end{figure}
\section{Results}
The analysis presented here considers two structure mode patterns, diamond and random. The mean longitudinal and lateral forces acting on a fish in a random pattern mode is larger than those in a diamond mode, whereas the mean moments are similar in both modes (Fig. 3). In this respect, a diamond-shaped swimming pattern is optimal in terms of energy saving which supports previous findings by \cite{Weihs:1983}. Such mode might be observed in schools migrating in `safe' zones, or in large fish or mammals, e.g. dolphins \citep{Weihs:2004, Kadri:2005}, that use the saved energy for extra thrust during escape. However, smaller fish counts on their manoeuvrability for survival, which increases with the total hydrodynamic forces \citep{Wu:1981, Liu:2011}. Table 1 compares between the mean total hydrodynamic forces, $F_{tot}=\sqrt{F_X^2+F_Y^2}$, of the two patterns. It indicates that the mean total force in random patterns is two to five times larger than in diamond patterns.
\begin{figure} \label{fig:distribution}
\centering{ \epsfig{figure=Figure_4_Kadri-eps-converted-to.pdf,width=\linewidth}}
\caption{The hydrodynamic force effect of the upper fish row (presented by {\color{magenta}$\bullet$}) on the remaining fish school. interaction intensity: blue (low) to red (high). Upper subplot: diamond pattern. Remaining subplots: random patterns.}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\def~{\hphantom{0}}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
School size & Diamond & Random\\[3pt]
\hline
$2\times2 $ & $0.3974 $&$2.0754$ \\
$3\times3 $ & $0.9302 $& $2.6132$\\
$4\times4 $ & $1.4072$& $3.1733$\\
$5\times5 $ & $1.1768$& $3.0591$\\
$6\times6 $ & $1.1690$& $2.9400$\\
$7\times7 $ & $0.9532$& $3.3220$\\
$8\times8 $ & $0.9422$& $3.1863$\\
$9\times9$ & $0.8139$& $3.3187$\\
$10\times10$ & $ 0.7812$& $3.3280$\\
$11\times11$ & $0.6810$& $3.2530$\\
$12\times12 $ & $0.6641$& $3.1084$\\
$13\times13$ & $0.5921$& $3.1943$\\
$14\times14$ & $ 0.5734$& $3.0777$\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Calculations of the mean total forces per school size for diamond and random patterns. In the case of a random pattern, the mean total forces are factor of two to five times larger.}
\label{tab:trenches}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Swimming in a random pattern mode enables fish to interact more intensely with remote fish members, resulting in a faster and more efficient `information' transfer, from a hydrodynamic perspective. This can be easily seen by the following example. Assume a (layered) rectangular fish school of the size of $20\times 20$ (Fig. 4), the fish on the sides of the rectangle represent an envelope that separates the remaining fish from the surrounding. If , for the sake of brevity, the whole upper fish row (presented by ({\color{magenta}$\bullet$}) encounters a danger, then the survivability of the whole school depends on how fast this information is transferred through the whole school, again from a hydrodynamic perspective. In other words, we are interested in the distribution of the total hydrodynamic effect of the first fish row on the remaining fish school. In a diamond pattern mode (upper subplot) the effect on each row is almost homogeneous. While the lateral forces experienced by the second row are relatively small, due to the fact that $\xi_{ij}$ is large, the effect is largest on the third row and the general trend is that the information (hydrodynamic interaction) decreases with the (double) rows. However, for random pattern modes (subplots (a)-(j)) the information penetrates through the rows, which can be seen in the figure by the differences in colour gradients across the vertical layers (i.e. orange yellow and green compared to blue). Thus, the reaction at the next time instant would occur at multilevel rows simultaneously, which enhances the overall manoeuvrability of the fish as a school.
\begin{figure} \label{fig:3D}
\centering{ \epsfig{figure=fish_schooling_3Db-eps-converted-to.pdf,width=\linewidth}}
\caption{The hydrodynamic force effect of the upper fish layer (presented by dark blue {\color{darkblue}$\bullet$}) on the remaining fish school. interaction intensity: blue (low) to red (high). {\bf Left}: side views (fish move to the right). {\bf Middle}: front views (fish move into page). {\bf Right}: Isometric view. First row: 27 fish, in a $6\times3\times3$ box. Second row: 64 fish, in a $8\times4\times4$ box. Third row: 125 fish, in a $10\times5\times5$ box. Fourth row: 216 fish, in a $12\times6\times6$ box.}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion}
Within a random pattern a manoeuvring fish experiences, on average, larger centripetal forces, and thus can reach larger angular velocities ($\omega \propto {F_{tot}}^{1/2}$). Since each fish, within a random pattern, applies on average larger hydrodynamic forces on the school, its manoeuvring, e.g as a response to danger, results in larger impact on the fish school and in particular on its proximate neighbours. Therefore, the hydrodynamic changes within the school as a whole are larger in case of random pattern mode, which enhances its survivability. Note that the mathematical analysis presented in Fig. 4 considers discrete layers of the school, an assumption which is rarely met in nature \citep{Breder:1965, Oshima:1950, Partridge:1979}. However, it is easy to show that the three dimensional fish school analysis would result in larger hydrodynamic forces, which in turn, further enhances the school manoeuvrability, and alertness. Such an analysis is carried out in Fig. 5. Here, we examined the three-dimensional effect of the upper fish group (presented in dark blue {\color{darkblue}$\bullet$}) on the remaining school members. We considered four different school sizes, $27$, $64$, $125$, and $216$, within boxes of dimensions $6\times3\times3$, $8\times4\times4$, $10\times5\times5$, and $12\times6\times6$, respectively. The fish swim from left to right relative to the side view. It is notable here that the hydrodynamic effects made by the upper fish group on the remaining school members is somewhat disordered, which can be seen by the inhomogeneous distribution of colours. In reality, the analyses of the videos show that the different fishes, of each school, may have different lengths, speeds, and orientations, as well as locomotion techniques, which would all add to the disordered behaviour of transferring the hydrodynamic ``information'' among the school members, both spatially and temporally.
The analysis made here has been described in the context of specific fish schooling species, though similar analysis can be carried out for other fishes, swarming behaviour in general, and bird flocking in particular, e.g. by a straight forward extension of the work by \cite{Higdon:1978}, and \cite{Higdon:1975}. These support the general hypothesis that a disordered and non-trivial collective behaviour of individuals within a nonlinear dynamical system is essential for optimising transfer of information - an optimisation that might be crucial for survival. The work presented here can also be applied for interaction between multiple AUV's with a submarine, e.g. \cite{Leong:2015}.
\subsubsection*{Acknowledgments.}
The authors gratefully acknowledge Martina and Herbert Bauder for providing the photos and videos.
\bibliographystyle{elsart-harv}
|
\section{Experimental methods}
\subsection{Sample Preparation}
We prepare stable uniform oil-in-water emulsions as described in \cite{zhang2015structure}. We start with a $3:1$ mixture by weight of polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS; viscosity $15 \sim 45$ mPa.s, density 1.006 g/mL) and polyphenylmethylsiloxane (PPMS-AR200; viscosity 200 mPa.s, density 1.05 g/mL) and we emulsify it in a couette shear-cell with sodium dodecyl sulfate
(SDS) surfactant in water for stabilizing the droplets. To remove evaporable
short molecules the PDMS oils is placed in an oven at $60^{\circ}C$ overnight prior to emulsification.
Depletion sedimentation \cite{bibette1991depletion} is then used to fractionate the droplets by size, until the desired polydispersity $PD\simeq12\%$ is achieved in the sample.
For such polydispersity we find the size distribution of droplets to be close to
log-normal with a mean droplet radius $a= 1.05$ $\mu$m or a droplet diameter $\sigma=2.1$ $\mu$m.
To sterically stabilize the droplets, SDS is replaced by the block-copolymer surfactant Pluronic F108. In addition, formamide and
dimethylacetamid (DMAC) are added to the solvent in order
to simultaneously match the solute-solvent density and the refractive index at room temperature $T$ = 22 $^{\circ}$C.
Finally, the fluorescent dye Nile red is added to the solution in order to obtain optical contrast between the droplet and the dispersion medium.
Several hundred microliters of sample are spun down marginally above jamming with centrifugation. The latter is carried out at 4 $^{\circ}$C in order to induce a slight density mismatch between the droplets and the solvent.
The stock sample then is diluted continuously in steps of $0.5\%$. After each dilution, we put a small amount
of suspension in an evaporation-proof cylindrical cell of diameter $d=2$ mm and heigth $h=120$ $\mu$m sealed with UV-glue to a
microscope cover slip.
\subsection{Image acquisition}
$3$D High-resolution images of droplets are obtained using a
laser-scanning confocal microscopy module, Nikon A1R, controlled by Nikon Elements software. Images are acquired with a X60 oil immersion objective with zoom X2.
Although the dye is present both in the continous phase and in the dispersed oil droplets, the emission spectra are different, exhibiting emission peaks of $670$ nm and $580$ nm
for the continuous phase and for the oil, respectively, when the sample is excited with a $488$ nm laser.
The dimension of the recorded images are $512$x$512$x$101$ pixels with a resolution of 0.21 $\mu m$/pixel in each direction.
Droplets are reconstructed by a template based particle tracking method
known as the Sphere Matching Method (SMM) \cite{brujic2004experimental} and Voronoi radical tessellation \cite{rycroft2009voro} to identify neighbors of each particle.
In our case the accuracy of the coordinates is roughly 20 nm in the lateral direction and 35 nm in the
vertical direction. The accuracy of the size determined from the analysis of immobile droplets is about 20 nm. Due to the finite exposure time, the size of droplets extracted from the tracking algorithm is slightly different for samples having different volume fractions, due to motion blurring of droplets in the images. Since all samples are made out of the same stock suspension, we assume that the particle size distribution for different samples is the
same. We proceed in the following way: first the particle size distribution of the system is measured at random close packing assuming $\phi_J$ = $64.2\%$, which corresponds to the value found for marginally jammed polydisperse frictionless spheres with polydispersity $PD\simeq12\%$ \cite{desmond2014influence,zhang2015structure}. This size distribution is fixed throughout. Next, the particle size distributions obtained from the SMM tracking algorithm at lower concentrations are calibrated using this reference distribution, and, in this way, the volume fraction of each sample is determined.
\newline \indent The fact that we can reversibly jam the system provides a well defined benchmark. In turn, we obtain a much better estimate for the absolute values of the packing fraction as compared to hard sphere systems \cite{poon2012measuring}. We estimate the absolute accuracy of our $\phi$-values to be better than $0.5\%$ with a statistical error better than $0.3\%$. The small difference is due to the finite systematic error with respect to $\phi_J$ \cite{desmond2014influence,zhang2015structure}.
\section{Simulation methods}
To model the behaviour of dense emulsions we use a soft repulsive potential, following previous works\cite{lacasse1996model, berthier2009compressing, ikeda2012unified, ikeda2013disentangling, scheffold2013linear, vlassopoulos2014tunable} which have shown how the elastic and dynamic properties across the glass and the jamming transitions depend not only on the volume fraction $\phi$ but also on the strength of the repulsion. We thus model emulsions as particles interacting with a harmonic potential
\begin{equation}
\beta U(r_{ij})=\, u_0\,(1-r/\sigma_{ij})^2\Theta(r_{ij} -\sigma_{ij})
\label{eq:harmonic}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $i,j$ is the index of two particles with diameter $\sigma_i$ and $\sigma_j$ (with $\sigma_{ij}=0.5(\sigma_{i}+\sigma_{j})$) and $u_0$ is proportional to the harmonic spring constant and is in units of $k_BT$. The length unit is chosen to be the
average colloid diameter $\langle\sigma\rangle$ and time $t$ is in units of $\langle\sigma\rangle \sqrt{m/u_0}$ (reduced units) where $m$ is the mass of a single particle. We perform Brownian Dynamics (BD) simulations of $N=2000$ polydisperse particles; a velocity Verlet integrator is used to integrate the equations of motion with a time step $dt=10^{-4}$.
We follow Ref. \cite{russo2009reversible} to model Brownian diffusion by defining the probability $p$ that a particle undergoes a random collision every $X$ time-steps for each particle. By tuning $p$ it is possible to obtain the desired free particle diffusion coefficient $D_0=(k_BTX dt/m)(1/p -1/2)$.
We fix $D_0=0.0081$ in reduced units, for which the crossover from ballistic
to diffusive regime, for isolated particles, takes place at $t\sim 0.01$.
\newline \indent Using a harmonic approximation for the interaction potential is reasonable for small deformations of the droplets \cite{lacasse1996model,seth2006elastic}. Here, we consider only concentrations at or below jamming $\phi\le \phi_J=64.2\%$ \cite{zhang2015structure} and thus deformations can be considered small and the harmonic potential approximately applies. As discussed in a previous work \cite{scheffold2013linear}, the value of $u_0$ is set by the surface tension of the system. Indeed a $1\%$ change in volume fraction above random close packing corresponds to a droplet compression $(1-r/\sigma)^2=2.7\cdot10^{-5}$, thus as long as $u_0$ is much larger than $10^{5} k_BT$ the energy cost to thermally induce a corresponding shape fluctuation is $ \gg k_BT$. Based on these considerations, we set $u_0 =1.0\cdot 10^7$, which also matches rheology data Ref. \cite{scheffold2013linear,elasticityRheo}. For such values of $u_0$, the system under study is hard enough to be considered almost as hard-spheres, since the droplet deformation due to thermal fluctuations is very small. Nonetheless, the softness of the droplets and the absence of friction are key properties of emulsions that allow for the preparation of dense and marginally jammed systems. The polydispersity of the system is described by a log-normal distribution with unitary mean and standard deviation equal to $PD=12\%$ following the experimental probability size distribution.
The total simulation time for all the volume fractions investigated ranges between $5.5 \cdot10^{7}$ and $2.4\cdot 10^{8}$ BD steps, corresponding to $t\in[5.5 \cdot10^{3}, 2.4\cdot 10^{4}$] in reduced units.
A recent numerical work on HS with polydispersity $\simeq12\%$ \cite{zaccarelli2015polydispersity} has shown that the relaxation features of the system depends very much on the population of small and large particles belonging to the tails of the size distribution. In the HS system, aging also affects fully decaying intermediate scattering functions (ISF) when $\phi>59\%$, which depend not only on the observation time $t$ but also on the waiting time $t_w$, i.e. the time elapsed from the beginning of the experiment or simulation.
Due to polydispersity, it was found that small and large particles undergo a dynamical arrest at different packing fractions; while large HS particles are dynamically arrested already at $\phi=58\%$, small particles are still free to move in the matrix formed by the large particles. For our emulsions, we observe a similar behavior, finding that the system starts to display aging for $\phi>58.1\%$. This is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:msd} (a) where the self ISF defined as $F_s(\vec{q},t)=(1/N)\sum_{1=1}^{N} e^{i\vec{q}\cdot(\vec{r}_i(0)-\vec{r}_i(t))}$ is displayed at different waiting times for $\phi=58.1\%$ and $\phi=58.5\%$ and wave vector $\vec{q}$ roughly corresponding to the position of the first peak of the structure factor $S(q)$. Hence, for $\phi>58.1\%$ we consider the system to be out-of-equilibrium.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{nFig1}
\caption{(a) Self intermediate scattering function (ISF) for two droplet volume fractions $\phi=58.1\%$ and $\phi=58.5\%$ evaluated at different waiting times $t_w$ and $q<\sigma>\simeq 7.2$. While for $\phi=58.1\%$ non aging effects are observed, for $\phi=58.5\%$ an increase of the relaxation time of the self ISF as a function of $t_w$ is not negligible. Dashed lines are guides to the eye. (b) Normalized mean square displacements. Droplet volume fractions range from $53.5\%$ to $60.4\%$. Symbols are data from confocal microscopy measurements; lines are results from Brownian dynamics simulations. Note that the simulation curves have been shifted on the time-axis by the same arbitrary factor to match the experimental microscopic timescale.}
\label{fig:msd}
\end{figure}
\section{Comparison between numerical and experimental data}
Using Brownian dynamics (BD), rather than molecular dynamics (MD), in the simulation method is advantageous, because BD yields more accurate microscopic dynamics of emulsion droplets, thereby enabling us to achieve very good quantitative agreement between numerical and experimental dynamical observables, such as the mean square displacement, over an extended dynamic range in time. The use of MD simulations would have only allowed us to compare the resulting transport coefficients, such as the long-time diffusion coefficient $D$, although with better numerical efficiency in terms of computational time.
By contrast to other systems \cite{zaccarelli2015polydispersity}, the determination of the packing fraction does not require any adjustable free parameter, and we directly use the experimental values in the simulations.
In order to improve the agreement reported with experimental data, we had to account in simulations for the error in the experimental exposure time, which is a source of noise in the coordinates along the three axis in confocal microscopy measurements. In fact, the scan over a single particle takes on average $1$ s, a time in which the particle is free to explore a certain volume within the cage.
As a consequence, the coordinates of particles extracted are affected by a noise that results in a suppression of the peak of the $g(r)$ \cite{mohanty2014effective}.
Since the short time motion for samples with different volume fraction is different, we would expect different level of noise on increasing $\phi$.
An estimate of how much a particle with average radius $a\sim 1\mu m$ has moved in $1$s is given by the cage size which can be approximately written as \cite{doliwa1998cage,weeks2002properties}
$\epsilon=4a[(\phi_J/\phi)^{1/3}-1]$. In addition to that, we consider the accuracy of the particle tracking. This brings an error of roughly $\delta_{track}\simeq 0.1$pixel (with $1$pixel $\simeq 0.21 \mu m$) in the lateral direction and $\delta_{track}\simeq 0.15$ pixel in the axial directions. Basing on such consideration, the noise can be approximately estimated as a Gaussian distribution $P(0, \epsilon^2 +\delta^2_{track})$ with zero mean and variance $w=\epsilon^2 +\delta^2_{track}$. We apply such Gaussian noise to the three coordinates of all the particles in simulations, finding a very good agreement with experimental results.
\section{Results}
\subsection{Dynamical properties close to the glass transition}
\subsubsection{Mean square displacement and $\alpha$-relaxation}
We start our discussion by showing the dynamical properties of emulsions in experiments and simulations around the glass transition volume fraction. Fig. \ref{fig:msd} (b) shows the comparison between the two sets of data for the mean square displacement $\langle\delta r^2\rangle=(1/N)\sum_{i}|\vec{r}_i(0)-\vec{r}_i(t)|^2$. As for most of molecular liquids and colloidal systems, the dynamics shows a dramatic slowing down on approaching $\phi_g$ and $\langle\delta r^2\rangle$ displays the emergence of a typical plateau associated to the presence of "cages" in which particles remain trapped for an increasingly long time. We find that a simple model such as harmonic spheres quantitatively captures the dynamical behaviour of emulsions in an extended time region covering more than two decades for a wide range of packing fractions at and below jamming. Note that to superimpose experimental and numerical data a shift in time has been applied to the numerical mean square displacement. From the long-time limit of numerical mean-squared displacements we can extract the diffusion coefficient using the Einstein relation $D=\langle \delta r^2\rangle/6t$. For experiments, we could not reach a purely diffusive long-time regime, thus we estimate $D$ by introducing a relaxation time $\tau_{D}$, through the
empirical relation $\langle \delta r^2\rangle =3(1+t/\tau_{D})\epsilon^2$\cite{ChiThesis} where $\epsilon$ is the characteristic cage size. The derivation of such expression is found in Appendix A. The associated diffusion coefficient is defined as $D=3\epsilon^2/\tau_D$. The resulting numerical and experimental $D$ and $\tau_D$ are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:relaxation}.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{nFig2}
\caption{(a) Diffusion coefficient $D$ as a function of the volume fraction $\phi$ for experiments (open squares) and simulations (open circles). Open diamonds are numerical results for HS particles with polydispersity $PD=12\%$ from Ref. \cite{zaccarelli2015polydispersity}. Note that numerical D values have been shifted by an arbitrary factor to match the experimental results for emulsions. The dashed line is the power-law fit of the experimental data set which gives $\phi_g=58.9\%$ and $\gamma=2.29$. The same interpolation for numerical data gives $\phi_g=59.1\%$ and $\gamma=2.12$; (b) relaxation time $\tau_D$ extracted from the mean square displacement for both experiments (open squares) and simulations (open circles). A power-law fit of the two data sets gives, respectively, $\phi_g=58.9\%$ and $\gamma=2.1$ for experiments and $\phi_g=59.1\%$ and $\gamma=2.1$ for simulations. By interpolating experimental data with the VFT relation we obtain $\phi_g=61.6\%$. The two interpolating lines for experimental data are shown in the figure (dashed lines). For comparison we also show the relaxation time $\tau_{\alpha}$ extracted from the numerical self ISF (open triangles). As in the left panel, numerical data have been shifted by an arbitrary factor. We find that $\tau_{\alpha}$ starts to decouple from the numerical $\tau_D$ on approaching the glass transition packing fraction. }
\label{fig:relaxation}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{nFig3}
\caption{Experimental measurements of non-Gaussian step-size distributions and dynamical heterogeneities for $\phi$ near and above $\phi_g$. (a) Distribution of droplet displacements $\Delta x$ obtained from confocal microscopy at a volume fraction of $\phi=60.3\%$ and time $t=2160$ s. Dashed line: best fit of the peak center to a Gaussian distribution; solid line: best fit of the tails to a stretched exponential distribution. (b) Non-Gaussian parameter $\alpha_2$ as a function of the dimensionless mean square displacement for volume fractions from $52.8\%$ to $60.3\%$.}
\label{fig:a2}
\end{figure}
The diffusion coefficient is represented in the Fig. \ref{fig:relaxation} (a), showing no difference on the way it has been calculated (Einstein or empirical relation). We also notice that
the results are in good agreement with previous numerical data for a HS sphere system with the same polydispersity \cite{zaccarelli2015polydispersity} that we plot together with results from emulsions, to show that our system behaves almost as HS. By performing a power-law fit $D\propto |\phi-\phi_g|^{\gamma}$ we find that $\phi_g=58.9\%$ and $\gamma=2.29$ for experiments, while $\phi_g=59.1\%$ and $\gamma=2.12$ for simulations, which are both in good agreement with power-law fits of Ref. \cite{zaccarelli2015polydispersity}. However, differently from HS simulations, we do not observe a deviation from a power-law decay in our numerical study; this is because Brownian dynamics is slower than molecular dynamics and does not allow to probe, within the same simulation time, the time scales that can be explored with MD. Hence, we are more far from $\phi_g$ than in Ref. \cite{zaccarelli2015polydispersity}, to observe any deviation. The relaxation time $\tau_D$ is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:relaxation} (b); a power-law fit of $\tau_D$ as a function of $\phi$, gives similar results for $\phi_g$ and $\gamma$. A slightly higher value of $\phi_g\simeq61.6\%$ is obtained if data are instead interpolated with the empirical Vogel-Fulcher-Tammann (VFT) expression
\begin{equation}
\tau_{D} = \exp(A\phi_g/|\phi-\phi_g|)
\label{VFT}
\end{equation}
The small difference between the results of the two interpolations is again a consequence of the fact that both numerical and experimental results are too far from $\phi_g$ to observe a difference between the interpolating relations and discern which is the the best between the two. The two fits (power law and exponential) for the experimental data set are shown also in the figure.
Finally we want to point out the difference between the numerical $\tau_D$ and the $\alpha$-relaxation time $\tau_{\alpha}$ extracted from the self ISF from simulations which are both shown in the same panel (dashed and dash-dotted lines); we find that the two times can be superimposed for a wide range of packing fractions, but start to show a decoupling on approaching the glass transition, a signature of the the violation of the Stokes-Einstein relation occurring between $D$ and $\tau_{\alpha}$ close to $\phi_g$.
\subsubsection{Dynamical heterogeneity}
One common way to characterize dynamic heterogeneities is to look for deviations of the particle displacements compared to free diffusion \cite{kob1997dynamical,weeks2000three}. For a random diffusion process the displacement distribution $P(\Delta x,t)$ at a given time $t$ is a Gaussian with zero mean and a variance equal to the mean squared displacement. Collective and correlated displacements lead to dynamic heterogeneities and deviations from the Gaussian distribution as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:a2}(a). Such deviations can be quantified by a non-Gaussian parameter defined as:
\begin{equation}
\alpha_{2} = \frac{3 \langle \delta r^{4}\rangle}{5 \langle \delta r^{2}\rangle^{2}}-1,
\label{Ngaussian}
\end{equation}
In Fig. \ref{fig:a2}(b) we plot $\alpha_2$ as a function of the particle mean squared displacement. Initially the values are nearly zero in the liquid but acquire appreciable values when approaching the glass transition volume fraction. In this regime $\alpha_{2}$ displays a pronounced peak. This is because the movement of particles results from the combination of the intra-cage and inter-cage dynamics. At short time scales, the displacement is mostly due to intra-cage dynamics and the distribution is nearly Gaussian $\alpha_{2}\sim 0$. Collective rearrangements are associated with cage breaking in the glass. Thus the peak in $\alpha_{2}$ is related to the size of the cage. As the cage size gets compressed the maximum of $\alpha_{2}$ is shifted towards smaller values of $\langle \delta r^{2}\rangle$. At long times, or large values of $\langle \delta r^{2}\rangle$, the displacements are due to a sum of many random cage breaking processes and the distribution becomes Gaussian again.
\newline \indent Another interesting way to analyze the collective particle motion is to look specifically at a of particles that differ from the Gaussian. Following \cite{weeks2000three} we define the population of fast particles as the $5\%$ most mobile particles within a certain time interval, calculated with respect to $t=0$. The ratio of $5\%$ is chosen based on the fact that the percentage of particles whose displacement deviates from a Gaussian distribution is roughly $5\%$ (Fig. \ref{fig:a2} (a)) \cite{kob1997dynamical,donati1999spatial}.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{nFig4}
\caption{(a) Identification of fast particles in the microscopy experiments at different volume fractions: from left to right $\phi=54.6\%$, $\phi=58.7\%$ and $\phi=60.4\%$
respectively for $t= 270 s, 4320 s, 8640s$. (b) Mean cluster size from experiments as a function of time for different samples with volume fraction of $54.6\%$, $58.7\%$ and $60.4\%$. Lines are guides to the eye. (c) Mean cluster size of fast particles as a function of the volume fraction $\phi$. Closed squares: experiments; open circles: simulations. }
\label{fig:snapshot}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{fig:snapshot} shows several snapshots of fast particles that are spatially correlated. The appearance of spatial correlations is direct evidence for dynamic heterogeneities close to the glass transition \cite{weeks2000three,kegel2000direct}. We define clusters of $i$ particles from set of fast neighbouring particles identified via the Voronoi radical tesselation. The mean cluster size of fast particles is defined by taking the sum over clusters of all sizes and averaging over several configurations. The values for $\langle N_c\rangle$ we find depend both on concentration and on time . The latter is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:snapshot}. Especially close to $\phi_g$, $\langle N_c\rangle$ displays a pronounced maximum as a function of time. Moreover, this maximum is located close to the relaxation time $\tau_D$. Away from $\phi_g$ the peak is not pronounced or even absent. This suggests that, on approaching $\phi_g$, collective rearrangements play a increasingly important role.
By selecting the maximum value of $\langle N_c\rangle$ for several volume fractions, we can plot the concentration dependence of the cluster size $\langle N_c\rangle_{\textmd{max}}$ (In the absence of a clear maximum we select an arbitrary time). As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:snapshot} (b) and (c) the cluster size increases on approaching the glass transition and then decreases above $\phi_g$. This behaviour is observed both for simulations and experiments as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:snapshot}(a). We note that due to the polydispersity of the system small particles tend to be more mobile than larger particles. In connection to this it is worthwhile mentioning that the average size of the fast particle population is smaller, e.g. for $\phi=59.3\%$, the mean radius of fast particles is around 0.92$\mu$m, while for all particles it is 1.05$\mu$m.
\subsection{Structural properties close to the glass transition}
\subsubsection{Radial distribution function}
Fig. \ref{fig:grtotal} (a) shows the radial distribution functions of the system for three different packing fractions taken from experiments and simulations. The agreement is striking in the whole investigated range of packing fractions.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{nFig5}
\caption{(a) Radial distribution function $g(r)$ of soft spheres for three volume fractions $\phi$. Symbols denote experimental data for emulsions from confocal microscopy measurements, lines denote results from Brownian dynamics simulations. (b) Peak (left panel) and dip (right panel) amplitudes of $g(r)$ versus the volume fraction. Experiments: full squares. Simulations: open symbols. Circles show results obtained by averaging over a single run; diamonds show results obtained by averaging over $100$ independent runs at time $t_w=2500$.}
\label{fig:grtotal}
\end{figure}
We thus analyze the concentration dependence of the minima and maxima of the $g(r)$ across the glass transition. The results are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:grtotal} (b) for experiments and simulations. For the latter, the structural properties above $\phi_g$ have been obtained both by averaging over a single run (as for the experimental data) and by averaging over $100$ independent runs at a fixed waiting time $t_w=2500$, to eliminate the effects of aging in the sample. The two sets of data are displayed with different colours in Fig. \ref{fig:grtotal} (b), showing that the results are similar.
The main interesting feature that we find is the non-monotonic behaviour of the peaks of the $g(r)$.
While the first peak seems to be barely influenced by the presence of the glass transitions, the second and the third peak together with the first three dips of the $g(r)$ display a clear change at $\phi_g$. In fact we find that their amplitudes increase (peaks) or decrease (dips) on approaching the glass transition, saturating above $\phi_g$ meaning that the long-range structure remains unchanged by further compressing the emulsion. Differently, the behaviour of the first peak shows some changes within the first shell even beyond $\phi_g$ and seems to saturate only close to the jamming volume fraction \cite{zhang2015structure}. This is consistent with the behaviour found in other soft particles \cite{silbert2006structural, jacquin2011microscopic} such as PNIPAM particles \cite{zhang2009thermal} and granular materials \cite{cheng2010experimental} close to jamming. In those cases a maximum in the first peak of the $g(r)$ has been predicted and experimentally observed as a structural signature of the jamming transition \cite{zhang2009thermal,paloli2013fluid,liu2010dynamical}. Our data is consistent with these previous studies. However, due to the onset of coalescence under significant droplet compression we cannot access deeply jammed samples ($\phi > 66\%$). The limited stability under compression is a trade-off when optimizing the emulsion systems for buoancy and index matching conditions. At and below $\phi_J$ ($\sim 64.2\%$) we do not observe coalescence after more than one year.
\newline \indent The increase of the peaks and the decrease of all the dips of the $g(r)$ is related to the fact that, on increasing the volume fraction, particles tends to organize in better defined shells displaying a kind of "amorphous order"\cite{biroli2008thermodynamic} that needs to be quantified. This picture can be captured by looking at those parameters that probe the local structure of the system. One parameter is the average number of neighbors.
\newline \indent There are different ways
to determine the number of nearest neighbours. One possibility is to define a cut-off distance, such as the first minimum of the $g(r)$, $r_{min}$, and count all the neighbours within that distance from a specific particle $N_{coord}=4\pi \rho \int_0^{r_{min} } r^2 g(r)$. In that case the number of neighbours $N_{coord}$ is called coordination number. However, such a definition depends on the value of the cut-off that changes in dependence of the volume fraction. Here we implement a different approach. We consider two particles as neighbours if they share a wall of a Voronoi cell. This way, the result is unique and parameter free since it is based only on geometrical considerations. The Voronoi tessellation allows not only to count the number of neighbours but also to determine geometric properties of the cells as we will show later. The trends found in simulations and experiment are exactly the same and, except for a small shift, the data sets for $N$ superimpose as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:isoperimetric} (a).
\newline \indent The concentration dependence of the average number of neighbours N shown in Fig. \ref{fig:isoperimetric} (a), reveals a clear change around $\phi_g$. When approaching $\phi_g$ the number of neighbours decreases. Above $\phi_g$ the average number of neighbours saturates close to the value predicted for random close packing $N=14.3$\cite{zhang2015structure}.
These observations can be rationalized by considering the evolution of the dips and peaks in the radial distribution function. Below $\phi_g$ the boundary between the first and the second neighbouring shell is shallow and the average number of neighbours found is thus larger. As the volume fraction increases, the two shells become well separated (the first dip of the $g(r)$ decreases) and, as a consequence, the average number of neighbours decreases. For $\phi >\phi_g$ the first dip and all higher order dips and peaks saturate which is consistent with a constant number of neighbours in this regime.
For comparison, the coordination number $N_{coord}$, extracted from the simulation data, is found to remain almost constant for $\phi <\phi_g$ and sharply decreases to a smaller value above the transition.
\subsubsection{Isoperimetric quotient}
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{nFig6}
\caption{Analysis of the Voronoi cell and the number of neighbors: (a) Average number of neighbors $N$ and (b) Isoperimetric quotient $IQ$ as a function of the droplet volume fraction $\phi$. Experiments: full squares. Simulations: open symbols. Circles are the result of a single run while diamonds are obtained by averaging over $100$ independent runs at $t_w=2500$. Inset in (a): Coordination number $N_{coord}$ from simulation data. Up triangles are the result of a single run while down triangles are obtained by averaging over $100$ independent runs at $t_w=2500$.}
\label{fig:isoperimetric}
\end{figure}
The isoperimetric quotient $IQ$ \cite{damasceno2012predictive} is an interesting measure that describes the similarity of a Voronoi cell to a sphere, and as such it is sensitive to shape changes of the cells. For an individual particle $i$, $IQ_i=36\pi V_i^2/S_i^3$ where $V_i$ and $S_i$ are the volume and the surface area of the Voronoi cell of particle i. $IQ_i$ is dependent on the configurations of the nearest neighbors, including the orientation and separation. With $IQ$ we denote the average of $IQ_i$ over all the particles. The evolution of $IQ$ as a function of the volume fraction $\phi$ is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:isoperimetric}(b). We find that the $IQ$ parameter increases up to $\phi_g$ indicating that the particles pack more homogeneously and thus tend to form more spherical Voronoi cells. Once the glass transition is approached, the packing geometry cannot be improved any further since an efficient particle rearrangement process is lacking. The saturation of $N$ and $IQ$ in the glass clearly shows that the geometrically configurations are frozen in and the only remaining process is the compression of the preformed cages until random close packing or jamming is reached at $\phi \to \phi_c$.
\subsubsection{Orientational correlation length}
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{nFig7}
\caption{Correlation map of bond orientational order (BOO) parameters $Q^{k}_4$
and $Q^{k}_6$ at two volume fractions. The figure highlights the regions in which the order is related to three types of crystals commonly seen in colloidal system: FCC, BCC and HCP. (a) Experimental values for $\phi=53.5\%$ and $\phi=58.1\%$. (b) Simulations for $\phi=53.5\%$ and $\phi=58.1\%$ (obtained analysing $100$ independent configurations at $t_w=2500$). }
\label{fig:Q6vsQ4}
\end{figure}
Previous studies have suggested that dynamical heterogeneities are related to the emergence of a medium range crystalline order \cite{kawasaki2007correlation,tanaka2010critical,leocmach2012roles} in weakly polydisperse systems highlighted by a growing bond-orientational correlation length. Although such correlation has been found to grow in a "critical-like fashion", i.e. can be well fitted with some diverging law, the correlation lengths observed are typically limited to few particle diameters only.
To investigate the presence of crystalline ordering in our moderately polydispersed emulsions, we use the bond orientational order parameters (BOO) which provide a powerful measure of the local and extended orientational symmetries in dense liquids and glasses \cite{steinhardt1983bond}. The BOO analysis focuses on bonds joining a particle and its neighbors. Bonds are defined as the lines that link together the centers of a particle and its nearest neighbors determined by Voronoi radical tessellation.
We define the BOO $l$-fold symmetry of a particle $k$ as the $2l+1$ vector:
\begin{equation}
q^{k}_{lm}=\frac{1}{N^k}\sum_{j=1}^{N^k} Y_{lm}(\Theta(\vec{r}_{kj}), \Phi(\vec{r}_{kj}))
\end{equation}
\noindent where $N^k$ is the number of bonds of particle $k$, $Y_{lm}(\Theta(\vec{r}_{kj}), \Phi(\vec{r}_{kj}))$ is the spherical harmonics of degree $l$ and order $m$ associated to each bond and $\Theta(\vec{r}_{kj})$ and $ \Phi(\vec{r}_{kj})$ are polar angles of the corresponding bond measured with respect to some reference direction. Following the work of Lechner and Dellago \cite{lechner2008accurate} we employ the BOO coarse-grained over the neighbours, which increases the accuracy of the type of medium-range crystalline order (e.g. FCC,HCP or BCC type):
\begin{equation}
Q^{k}_{l}=\sqrt{\frac{4\pi}{2l+1}\sum_{m=-l}^{l} |Q^{k}_{lm}|^2}
\end{equation}
\noindent with
\begin{equation}
Q^{k}_{lm}=\frac{1}{N^k_0}\sum_{j=1}^{N^k_0} q^{k}_{lm}(\vec{r}_{kj})
\end{equation}
\noindent and where $N^k_0$ is the number of nearest neighbors of particle k including particle k itself.
We first evaluate the behaviour of $Q^{k}_6$ and $Q^{k}_4$ which allow us to distinguish between cubic and hexagonal medium-range crystalline order. The results are shown for experiments and simulations respectively in Fig. \ref{fig:Q6vsQ4}(a) and (b). The correlation map of $Q^{k}_4$ and $Q^{k}_6$ reveals that, over the whole investigated range, only liquid-like structures are detected. This is due to polydispersity of our sample, which largely exceeds the known terminal polydispersity for single-phase crystallization in hard spheres \cite{fasolo2003equilibrium, zaccarelli2009crystallization, martinez2014exposing}. So far, only experimental results for weakly polydisperse hard spheres (with polydispersity around $6\%$) have been reported, in which a medium-range crystalline order of FCC type was observed. However in our system,the reference crystal phase is not trivial since particles should fractionate to crystallize \cite{fasolo2003equilibrium}. As a consequence also the BOO parameter does not reveal a clear tendency to organise in a specific crystal structure. Hence polydispersity in our case completely suppresses the formation of any crystal-like order even at the local scale.
\subsection{Locally favoured structures}
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{nFig8}
\caption{ Decay of stable particle configurations for $\Delta t=2500$ in reduced units. (a) Simulation data showing the fraction of stable particles as a function of time for several volume fractions. (b) Map extracted from simulations for the number of neighbors $N$ versus the isoperimetric quotient $IQ$ for all particles (black dots) and for stable particles (open circles).}
\label{fig:structLFS-1}
\end{figure}
Locally favoured structures (LFS) are energetically favoured and as a consequence they should be longer-living in the system. LFS thus can be identified in the system by looking at the lifetime of the neighbours around a given particle. To this end we define a stable particle $i$ as the one that within a certain time interval $\Delta t$ maintains the same neighbours $n^{ij}$. The latter are defined
as before via the Voronoi radical tessellation. In Fig. \ref{fig:structLFS-1}(a) we plot for different volume fractions the typical stable particle survival rate as a function of time defined as $N_{stable}/N=\langle\sum_{i<j}n^{ij}(t)n^{ij}(t+\Delta t)\rangle/N(t)$, where $N$ is the total number of neighbours \cite{puertas2003simulation, zaccarelli2009colloidal}. We expect that, for a fixed $\Delta t$, on increasing $\phi$ the number of stable particles will increase since cage rearrangements become more difficult. For our analysis we fix $\Delta t=2500$ in reduced units.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{nFig9}
\caption{ Distribution of number of neighbors for $\Delta t=2500$ in reduced units. (a) Stable particles, data averaged over $54.6\% <\phi < 60.4\%$. Experiments: bars; simulations: circles. (b) All particles at $\phi=58.1\%$. Experiments: blue bars; simulations: red circles. Inset: Bond-order diagram of $N$ = 12 particle clusters identified, as described in the text and Fig. \ref{fig:structLFS-2}. Left: experiments. Right: simulations.}
\label{fig:structLFS-2}
\end{figure}
\indent We first notice by looking at Fig. \ref{fig:structLFS-1}(b) that the number of neighbours of stable particles is strongly correlated with a high values of the isoperimetric quotient IQ : this suggests that stable particles belong to a peculiar structure with a given symmetry. This is confirmed in Figs. \ref{fig:structLFS-2} where the distribution of the number of neighbours is shown both for stable particles and for all particles. The comparison between the two distributions shows that most stable particles have exactly 12 neighbours both in simulations and in experiments, which is consistent with the idea that stable particles may form icosahedral structures. To verify this hypothesis we select stable particles with 12 neighbours and we perform a topological cluster classification (TCC)\cite{watanabe2008direct, malins2013identification} that allows to identify clusters that are topologically equivalent to certain reference clusters. The inset in Fig. \ref{fig:structLFS-2} (a) shows the bond-order diagrams of the $N=12$ particle clusters both for experiments and simulations. The ``heat style'' patterns stands for the probabilities of finding a neighbor in that direction. We start by considering that we are looking from the top of a icosahedral-structure with the central particle in the center of the figure. The central spot shows the probability of finding the top neighbor. The first five-folded spots show the probability of finding the upper layer of five neighbors. The second five-folded spots shows the lower layer. The bottom neighbor is not shown. Typical spatial icosahedral configurations of $N=12$ clusters for different volume fractions are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:spatialLFS}(a).
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{nFig10}
\caption{(a) Visualization of typical LFS for different volume fractions (simulations). (b) Number of icosahedral centers over total number of particles. (c) Mean cluster size of icosahedral structures. Experiments: closed squares; simulations: open circles. Solid lines are guide to the eye. }
\label{fig:spatialLFS}
\end{figure}
\indent The population of such structures is increasing when approaching some critical volume fraction around $\phi\sim 60\%$ as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:spatialLFS}(b). Here we plot the fraction of the population of icosahedral centers as the volume fraction crosses $\phi_g$. In parallel the average size of connected clusters formed by icosahedral structures accordingly increases as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:spatialLFS} (c). Here the cluster size $N_c$ is defined by considering
all particles which are part of icosahedral structures (both centers and neighbors) and thus for an unconnected, isolated cluster $N_c/13=1$. Therefore $Nc/13$ shown in Fig. \ref{fig:spatialLFS}(c) describes the cluster size normalized by a single icosahedral structure. Above the glass transition, both the overall number and the size of icosahedral domains decreases again.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{nFig11}
\caption{Correlation map of bond orientational order parameters $w_6$
and $Q^{k}_6$ at two volume fractions. The figure highlights the regions in which the order is related to icosahedral structures. (a) Experimental values for $\phi=53.5\%$ and $\phi=58.1\%$. (b) Simulations for $\phi=53.5\%$ and $\phi=58.1\%$ (obtained analysing $100$ independent configurations at $t_{w}=2500$).}
\label{fig:w6}
\end{figure}
\indent Finally in Fig. \ref{fig:w6} we consider correlations between the BOO parameter Q6 and another order parameter called $w_6$, which is defined as
\begin{equation}
w_{6}(i)=\frac{\sum_{m_1+m_2+m_3} \begin{bmatrix}
6 & 6 & 6 \\
m_1 & m_2 & m_3
\end{bmatrix} q_{6m_1}(i) q_{6m_2}(i) q_{6m_3}(i) }{(\sum_{m=-6}^{6} |q_{6 m}(i)|^2)^{3/2}}.
\end{equation}
An increase of $w_6$ has been observed in polydisperse HS particles \cite{leocmach2012roles} together with the increase of crystalline order identified by a growth of the parameter $Q_6$. In our case, we do not observe an increase of $Q_6$, due to the higher polydispersity. Hence, contrary to what found in previous works on hard-spheres \cite{leocmach2012roles}, we observe that crystalline order remains modest while icosahedral order grows when approaching the glass transition. We now need to understand if such growth is somehow related to the dynamic slowing down of the system close to $\phi_g$
\subsection{Link between structure and dynamics}
In the previous sections, we presented evidence of both dynamical and structural signatures
of the glass transition. In order to establish a link between dynamics and structure,
it is worth analysing the evolution of some structural features as a function of time. For instance we can characterize the structural and dynamical heterogeneities discussed above
by some corresponding correlation lengths and search for a connection between them.
To this end we estimate the correlation length associated to clusters of fast particles and to the icosahedral structures, respectively using the following relations: $\xi_{fast}\propto\langle N_c^{1/3}\rangle$ and $\xi_{ico}\propto\langle N_{ico}^{1/3}\rangle$. In addition we evaluate the spatial correlation length $\xi_6$ with fold-symmetry $l=6$ of the BOO, which can be extracted from the spatial correlation function
\begin{equation}
g_6(r)=\frac{4\pi}{13}\langle \sum_{m=-6}^{6}Q_{6m}(0)Q_{6m}(r)^* \rangle / \rho(r),
\label{eq:g6}
\end{equation}
\noindent via the Ornstein-Zernike expression $g_6\propto \frac{1}{r}\exp(-\frac{r}{\xi_6})$ . In Eq. \ref{eq:g6}, $\rho(r)$ is the radial density function. The growing orientational correlation length can be characterized by a power-law function that diverges at the ideal glass transition $\phi_0$\cite{onuki2002phase}
\begin{equation}
\xi_6=\xi_0[(\phi_{0}-\phi)/\phi]^{-2/3}.
\label{eq:xi6}
\end{equation}
As suggested previously by Tanaka and coworkers \cite{tanaka2010critical} we can express the relaxation time $\tau_D$ in terms of the empirical Vogel-Fulcher-Tammann (VFT) expression, Eq.\ref{VFT} and $\xi_6$ can be fitted with Eq. \ref{eq:xi6}. Combining both, an analytic relation between $\tau_{D}$ and $\xi_6$ can be derived:
\begin{equation}
\log(\tau_{D}) \propto \xi_6^{3/2}.
\label{eq:tauvsxi}
\end{equation}
It is a reasonable assumption that also the other two structural correlation lengths can be described by a critical divergence analogue to Eq. \ref{eq:xi6} and hence we expect them to have a similar dependence on $\tau_{D}$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{nFig12}
\caption{Natural logarithm of the $\alpha$-relaxation time $\tau_{D}$ plotted versus three different spatial correlation lengths. Experiments: closed squares; simulations: open circles. (a) $\xi_{ico}^{3/2}$ - average size of icosahedral clusters $N_{ico}$; (b) $\xi_{fast}^{3/2}$ - average size of the fast particle clusters $N_c$ and (c) $\xi_6^{3/2}$ correlation length derived the bond orientational order parameter Q6. Lines are guides to the eye.}
\label{fig:tauvsxi}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{fig:tauvsxi} (a)-(c) we verify the suggested scaling between $\tau_{D}$ and the three structural correlations both for
experiments and simulations. For $\xi_{ico}^{3/2}$ and $\xi_{fast}^{3/2}$ a linear relationship with $\log(\tau_{D})$ is clearly confirmed. This shows that indeed the dynamics is strongly correlated with the appearance of icosahedral structures and clusters of fast particles. However, for $\xi_6$ such a connection is less evident. This in turn confirms that the crystalline bond orientational ordering does not play an important role in the dynamic slowing down of the system on approaching the glass transition.
Note that in our investigation the growth of the correlation lengths is found to be much smaller than the increase of the relaxation time. A recent work on mixtures of hard-sphers has pointed out that the dynamic correlation length extracted from the overlap function is always decoupled from the point-to-set correlation length, which represents an upper bound for the structural correlation lengths considered here\cite{charbonneau2013decorrelation}. Such results question the existence of a one-to-one causality relation between the growth of specific structures and the dynamical slowing down of the system close to the transition. Such correspondence has been also investigated with different tools coming from information theory \cite{jack2014information} that confirm a connection between LFS and mobility, although such correlation turned out to be weak. Hence, although our results suggest a link between dynamical slowing down and local structural correlations even in the absence of any crystal-like ordering, the exact mechanisms connecting the growing static correlation lengths to the dynamic slowing down still remain a challenging question.
\section{Summary and Conclusions}
In summary, we have presented a comprehensive study of the glass transition in emulsions that have moderate polydispersity. We have performed 3D confocal microscopy measurements over a range of volume fractions in order to sample the system below and well above $\phi_g$ up to jamming. The experimental study of a system in such an extended $\phi$ region, crossing the glass transition and even reaching marginal jamming conditions has been previously attempted quite rarely. To obtain more detailed insights and to verify and benchmark our observations, we have compared our experimental results with a comprehensive set of Brownian dynamics simulations, finding remarkable agreement in all studied structural and dynamical properties. From this, we have demonstrated that uniform emulsions are excellent model systems for the study of the glass transition in soft colloidal systems.
\newline \indent In good agreement with previous work on hard spheres, we have observed that the dynamical slowing down on approaching $\phi_g$ is characterized by an increase of the relaxation time and the appearance of spatial and dynamical heterogeneities. The latter have been identified by the presence of fast and stable droplets that are spatially correlated. Fast droplets tend to form clusters whose size depend, not only on the distance from $\phi_g$, but also on time scale considered. A close link between the maximum cluster size and the relaxation time $\tau_{D}$ was observed. This suggests that fast droplets play an important role in the structural relaxation of the system. Analogously, mechanically stable droplets arrange in long-living clusters that have peculiar geometries. By performing topological cluster classification analysis we have shown that most of these clusters are icosahedra. Moreover, their population also increases on approaching the glass transition volume fraction, approximately saturating in the glassy region. The thorough investigation of these local and average properties at volume fractions below and above $\phi_g$ allowed us to follow the behaviour of structural and dynamical properties over a wide range, in- and out-of-equilibrium, finding that their all relevant parameters show a peak/dip or saturate at a maximum/minimum at $\phi_g$. We have also investigated whether the presence of a crystalline order exists and can be linked to the other structural signatures. Contrary to previous investigations on weakly polydisperse hard spheres, in our emulsion, which has a moderate polydispersity of about 12$\%$, the BOO parameters $Q_6$ and $Q_4$ do not increase either on approaching the transition or even above $\phi_g$; so, we do not observe signatures for the onset of crystallization or of locally ordered crystal-like regions. Thus, we have been able to establish a clear link between growing structural correlation lengths and relaxation times, thereby confirming the existence of simultaneous structural and dynamical signatures of the glass transition even in the absence of the tendency to crystallize. Our results thus generalize the picture of heterogeneities occurring at the glass transition to the experimentally relevant case of polydisperse colloids and provide evidence that emulsions are a particularly advantageous model system for testing numerical and theoretical predictions.
\ack
This research was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation through project number 149867 (ZC, FS), by the European Research Council through project MIMIC, ERC Consolidator Grant number 681597 (NG, EZ), and by MIUR through Futuro in Ricerca project ANISOFT number RBFR125H0M (NG, EZ). TGM acknowledges support from UCLA.
|
\section{\label{sec:level1} Acknowledgments}
S.E.R.-L. thanks R.F. Berger and T. Birol for valuable discussions. Work at the Molecular Foundry was supported by the Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, of the U.S. Department of Energy, and Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. T.R. acknowledges support from the SciDAC Program on Excited State Phenomena in Energy Materials. F.B. acknowledges the Enhanced Eurotalent program and the France Berkeley Fund for supporting his sabbatical leave in UC Berkeley. This research used resources of the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center, which is supported by the Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy.
|
\section{Introduction}
\subsection{Statement of results}
Fix some integer $n \geq 2$ and let $G$ be the group of direct
isometries of the real hyperbolic $(n+1)$-space $\mathbf{H}^{n+1}$,
$G=\mathbf{SO}^o(1,n+1)$, and choose some Iwasawa decomposition
$G=KAN$. Recall that $N$ identifies with the real $n$-space $\mathbf{R}^n$. We
will consider the Bowen-Margulis-Sullivan (BMS) measure on $\Gamma
\backslash G$. Our first result in this paper is the following
\begin{theoremA}
Let $\Gamma$ be a discrete non-elementary subgroup of $G$ of growth
exponent $\delta_\Gamma$, and assume that $\Gamma$ is Zariski-dense
and has finite BMS measure. Let $m$ be some integer, $1 \leq m \leq
n$, and fix some $m$-plane $U$ in $N$. Let $U$ act on the right on
$\Gamma \backslash G$. The following dichotomy holds:
\begin{itemize}
\item if $\delta_\Gamma \leq n-m$, the BMS measure is totally
dissipative (and thus not ergodic) with respect to $U$ ;
\item if $\delta_\Gamma > n-m$, the BMS measure is totally recurrent
with respect to $U$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theoremA}
Unless $\Gamma$ is a lattice, the BMS measure is
not $N$-invariant (or even quasi-invariant), so the reader may wonder
what it means for a non-invariant measure to be totally recurrent or
dissipative -- see section \ref{ss.recurrence}.
Theorem A above is a particular case of the more precise Theorem
\ref{th.principal1}, which I do not state in this introduction because
it is slightly more technical, as it involves the theory of
conditional measures along group operations and the dimension theory
of such conditional measures. Theorem A is a \emph{qualitative}
statement which is weaker than the \emph{quantitative} Theorem
\ref{th.principal1}, the latter dealing with \emph{dimension} of BMS
measure along the subgroup $U$ (as well as the transversal dimension
with respect to this subgroup).
Before stating our second result, let us introduce the (\emph{ad hoc})
notion of \emph{regular measure} on the Euclidean space.
\begin{definitions}
Let $\mu$ be some (Borel) probability measure on $\mathbf{R}^n$ ($n \geq
2$). Assume that $\mu$ has exact dimension $\delta$. We say that
$\mu$ is \emph{regular} if for any $m$-plane $V$ in $\mathbf{R}^n$ ($1 \leq
m \leq n-1$) the orthogonal projection of $\mu$ onto $V$ has
dimension $\inf\{\delta,m\}$ almost everywhere.
\end{definitions}
Obviously, if this is the case, then the orthogonal projection of
$\mu$ onto $V$ is in fact exact dimensional.
\begin{theoremB}[Theorem \ref{th.principal2}]
Let $\Gamma$ be a discrete non-elementary subgroup of
$G=\mathbf{SO}^o(1,n+1)$. Assume that $\Gamma$ is Zariski-dense and
has finite BMS measure. Let $\mu$ be the
Patterson-Sullivan measure (of exponent $\delta_\Gamma$) associated
with $\Gamma$. For $\mu$-almost every $\xi \in \partial \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$,
the push-forward of $\mu$ through the inverse stereographic mapping
$\partial \mathbf{H}^{n+1} \setminus \{\xi\} \to \mathbf{R}^n$ is a regular
measure.
\end{theoremB}
The proof of Theorem B relies on results of Hillel
Furstenberg, Pablo Shmerkin and Michael Hochman.
\subsection{Background and motivation}
Let us now provide some background. Theorem A is motivated by the works of
Mohammadi-Oh and Maucourant-Schapira. The seminal paper is \cite{OhMohammadi}. In this work, Mohammadi and Oh look at the dynamics of the Burger-Roblin measure (BR, see \cite{OhMohammadi} for the definition) on $\Gamma \backslash G$ with respect to a fixed $m$-plane $U$ in $N$. They state and prove the following
\begin{theorem}[\cite{OhMohammadi}, Theorem 1.1]
Let $n=2$ (so we work in $\mathbf{H}^3$). Assume that $\Gamma$ is Zariski-dense and convex-cocompact. If $\delta_\Gamma > 1$, then the Burger-Roblin measure is totally recurrent and ergodic with respect to any 1-parameter subgroup $U$ of $N$.
\end{theorem}
One of the features of their approach is the use of Marstrand's projection Theorem to show that the BMS measure is recurrent with respect to $U$ (when $\delta_\Gamma > 1$), which implies that the BR measure is also recurrent with respect to $U$. The authors are then able to deduce that the BR measure is ergodic with respect to $U$; the proof is difficult and lengthy and we refer the reader to \cite{OhMohammadi}.
This is what prompted me to try and analyse precisely the BMS measure from the geometric and dynamical point of view, in order to deduce corresponding statements for the Burger-Roblin measure. In particular, the case $\delta \leq 1$ is not, in my opinion, clearly settled in \cite{OhMohammadi}.
Maucourant and Schapira have also looked at these questions. They prove the following result.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{MaucourantSchapira}]
Let $n$ be $\geq 2$. Assume that $\Gamma$ is Zariski-dense and has finite BMS measure. Let $U$ be some $m$-plane of $N$, $1 \leq m \leq n$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\delta_\Gamma < n-m$ and, furthermore, $\Gamma$ is convex-cocompact, then the BMS and BR measures are totally dissipative.
\item If $\delta_\Gamma > n-m$, the BMS and BR measures are ergodic and recurrent.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
Their approach is geometric and it also relies on Marstrand's projection Theorem. Note that the case $\delta_\Gamma = n-m$ is left open.
Theorem A thus clarifies the situation for the BMS measure. Note that we do not deal here with the BR measure; in fact, this will be done in a subsequent paper. It should be noted that, although recurrence of the BMS measure clearly implies recurrence of the BR measure, there is no reason why dissipativity of the BMS measure should imply dissipativity of the BR measure; indeed, it will be seen that the BR measure is in fact recurrent with respect to any $m$-plane when $\delta_\Gamma = n-m$, at least if $\Gamma$ is convex-cocompact.
Another motivation for Theorem A (more precisely, for Theorem \ref{th.principal1}) comes from the complex hyperbolic world. We refer to \cite{preprint} for more details on this. To put it shortly, most of the Patterson-Sullivan theory we recall below holds, \emph{mutatis mutandis}, when the real hyperbolic space is replaced with the complex hyperbolic space; in this setting, $N$ identifies not with the Euclidean space but with the Heisenberg space, and the dimension of the BMS measure along the center of $N$ is related to the dimension of the limit set of $\Gamma$ \emph{with respect to the spherical metric on the boundary}. See \cite{preprint}, Theorem 37. The reason why the proof of Theorem \ref{th.principal1} does not easily translate into the complex hyperbolic setting is because of the lack of a useful version of Marstrand's projection Theorem in Heisenberg space.
As for Theorem B, the question it answers has apparently never been considered before. In general, understanding the geometry (and, in particular, the dimension) of the projection of a given ``fractal'' set or measure along some \emph{fixed} direction is a difficult problem . In recent years, a powerful theory has been set up by Furstenberg, Hochman, Shmerkin and other people. See \cite{Hoch} and other references there. We will apply this theory to prove Theorem B.
In all this paper we fix an Iwasawa decomposition $G=KAN$. Recall that
$K$ is isomorphic to $\mathbf{SO}(n+1)$, $A$ is isomorphic to $\mathbf{R}$
(since $\mathbf{H}^{n+1}$ is a rank one symmetric space) and $N$ is
isomorphic to $\mathbf{R}^{n}$.
Recall that $A$ and $M$ centralize each other and that the group $AM$
normalizes the ``horospherical group'' $N$; we may thus look at the
way $AM$ operates on $N$, \emph{i.e.} for any $g \in AM$ consider the
group automorphism $h \mapsto ghg^{-1}$ from $N$ to $N$. In fact, $N$
may be identified with $\mathbf{R}^n$ and $M$ then identifies with the group
of all linear isometries of $\mathbf{R}^n$ (endowed with the usual euclidean
norm). Furthermore, $A$ identifies with the group of all linear
homotheties of $N$. These elementary facts are to be borne in mind as
we will use them throughout this paper.
If $G$ is some group and $g$ any element of $G$, the left and right
translations by $g$ and $g^{-1}$ respectively are denoted by
\[ L_g : h \mapsto gh\quad ; \quad R_g : h \mapsto h g^{-1} \text. \]
The plan of the paper is as follows. In section 2 we recall the
classical Marstrand Theorem as well as some useful facts from the
theory of self-similar measures. In section 3 we state basic facts
from the Patterson-Sullivan theory, and we apply the celebrated
Ledrappier-Young Theorem to the disintegration of the
BMS measure along subgroups of $N$. In section 4
and 5 we state and prove our main results.
I would like to thank my thesis advisor, Jean-Fran\c{c}ois Quint, for his constant support and help during my PhD.
\section{Preliminaries}
\subsection{Definition}
\begin{definition}
Let $X$ be a metric space and $\mu$ a measure on $X$ such that any ball in $X$ has finite measure. The \emph{lower dimension} of $\mu$ at some point $x \in X$ is the finite or infinite number
\[ \underline{\dim}(\mu,x) = \liminf_{\rho \to 0} \frac{\log \mu(B(x,\rho))}{\log \rho}. \]
The \emph{lower dimension} of $\mu$ is the $\mu$-essential infimum of $\underline{\dim} (\mu,x)$, \emph{i.e.}
\[ \underline{\dim}(\mu) = \sup\{ s \geq 0\ ;\ \underline{\dim}(\mu,x) \geq s \text{ for $\mu$-almost every $x$} \}. \]
We say that $\mu$ is \emph{exact-dimensional of dimension $\delta$} if, for $\mu$-almost every $x$
\[ \lim_{\rho \to 0} \frac{\log \mu(B(x,\rho))}{\log \rho} = \delta \text. \]
\end{definition}
Let us state for future reference the following obvious
\begin{lemma}
Let $X,Y$ be two metric spaces and $\pi : X \to Y$ a Lipschitz mapping. If $\mu$ is a probability measure on $X$, then
\[ \underline{\dim}(\mu,x) \geq \underline{\dim}(\pi \mu,\pi x) \]
for any $x \in X$, and
\[ \underline{\dim}(\mu) \geq \underline{\dim}(\pi \mu) \text. \]
\end{lemma}
In this lemma, as well as in the rest of this paper, we denote by $\pi \mu$ the push-forward of $\mu$ through $\pi$, \emph{i.e.} $\pi \mu(A) = \mu (\pi^{-1}A)$ for any Borel subset $A \subset Y$.
Let us also introduce the following definition for the sake of brevity.
\begin{definition}
If $G$ is a Borel group and $H$ a Borel subgroup of $G$, we say that a Borel measure $\mu$ on $G$ is concentrated on a Borel graph over $G/H$ if there is a Borel section $\Sigma$ (with respect to $H$) that has full $\mu$-measure.
\end{definition}
Recall that $\Sigma$ is a section with respect to $H$ if $\Sigma H=G$ and $\Sigma \cap gH = \{g\}$ for any $g \in \Sigma$.
\subsection{Almost sure dimension of projections}
Here we state the classical Theorem of Marstrand on the almost sure dimension of projected measures in Euclidean spaces. Fix some integer $n \geq 2$. For any integer $m$, $1 \leq m \leq n-1$, and any $m$-plane $V$ in $\mathbf{R}^n$, we denote by $\pi_V$ the orthogonal projection $\mathbf{R}^n \to V$. If $\mu$ is a finite measure on $\mathbf{R}^n$, its push-forward through $\pi_V$ is denoted by $\pi_V \mu$.
Recall that the Grassmannian of $m$-planes of $\mathbf{R}^n$ is a Hausdorff compact topological space. It carries a unique probability measure that is invariant under the natural operation of the orthogonal group $O(n)$. When we use the phrase ``for almost every $m$-plane $V$ in $\mathbf{R}^n$'' we mean \emph{with respect to the above probability measure}.
\begin{proposition}[\cite{Mattila}] \label{prop.marstrand}
Let $\mu$ be some probability measure on $\mathbf{R}^n$ and fix some integer $m$, $1 \leq m \leq n-1$. For almost every $m$-plane $V$ in $\mathbf{R}^n$,
\[ \underline{\dim}(\pi_V \mu) = \inf\{m, \underline{\dim}(\mu) \} \]
and in the case when $\underline{\dim}(\mu) > m$, the projected measure $\pi_V \mu$ is almost surely absolutely continuous (with respect to the Haar measure on $V$).
Furthermore, if $\mu$ is exact-dimensional, then so is $\pi_V \mu$ (almost surely).
\end{proposition}
\subsection{Projections of self-similar measures}
We are going to state an important result of M. Hochman about Hausdorff dimension of projections of self-similar measures. First, we have to pass through several definitions and notations. The reader is referred to \cite{Hoch} for more details.
\subsubsection{Notations}
We work in Euclidean $n$-space $\mathbf{R}^n$. The unit ball with respect to the supremum norm, $[-1,1]^n$, is denoted by $B_1$. Let $\mathcal M$ be the space of non-zero Radon measures. For any real number $t$, let $S_t : \mathbf{R}^n \to \mathbf{R}^n$ be the homothety
\[ S_t : x \mapsto e^t x \]
which induces a mapping $S_t : \mathcal M \to \mathcal M$
\[ \mu \mapsto S_t \mu\text. \]
The 'S' stands for \emph{scaling}.
If $\mu \in \mathcal M$ is such that $B_1$ is non-negligible, we denote by $\mu^*$ the normalized measure
\[ \mu^* = \frac{\mu}{\mu(B_1)} \text. \]
and by $\mu^\square$ the conditional measure defined by
\[ \mu^\square(A) = \frac{\mu(A \cap B_1)}{\mu(B_1)} \text. \]
The set of all measures $\mu \in \mathcal M$ such that $\mu(B_1)=1$ is denoted by $\mathcal M^*$; the set of all probability measures $\mu \in \mathcal M$ supported on $B_1$ is denoted by $\mathcal M^\square$.
If $\mu \in \mathcal M$ is such that $0$ belongs to the support of $\mu$, we may consider $(S_t \mu)^*$ and $(S_t \mu)^\square$ for any real number $t$. We then write
\[ S_t^* \mu = (S_t \mu)^*,\quad S_t^\square \mu = (S_t \mu)^\square \text. \]
For any $x \in \mathbf{R}^n$, let $T_x$ be the translation $y \mapsto y-x$. If $\mu$ belong to $\mathcal M$, we write $T_x^* \mu = (T_x \mu)^*$; this is well-defined for any $x$ in the support of $\mu$.
\subsubsection{Fractal distributions}
Following Hochman \cite{Hoch}, probability measures on spaces of measures are called \emph{distributions}, and denoted by the letter $P$. We keep the letter $\mu$ for measures on Euclidean spaces. For example, if $\mu$ is some element of $\mathcal M$, the Dirac measure at $\mu$, $\delta_\mu$, is a distribution on $\mathcal M$.
\begin{definition}
A \emph{fractal distribution} is a distribution on $\mathcal M^*$ that satisfies the following conditions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item given any relatively compact neighbourhood $U$ of $0$ in $\mathbf{R}^n$, the distribution
\[ \int \mathrm{d} P(\mu) \int_U \delta_{T_x^* \mu} \mathrm{d} \mu(x) \]
on $\mathcal M^*$ is equivalent to $P$ (which means that each of them is absolutely continuous with respect to the other);
\item for any real number $t$, $S_t^* P=P$; in other words, $P$ is invariant under the flow $(S_t^*)_t$.
\end{enumerate}
If, furthermore, $P$ is ergodic with respect to $(S_t^*)$, we say that $P$ is an ergodic fractal distribution.
\end{definition}
Note that if $P$ satisfies condition 1 (such a distribution $P$ is called \emph{quasi-Palm}), its image $P^\square$ through the (not everywhere defined) mapping $\mu \mapsto \mu^\square$ is a well-defined distribution on $\mathcal M^\square$. Indeed, condition 1 implies that $0$ belongs to the support of $\mu$ for $P$-almost every $\mu$.
A distribution on $\mathcal M^\square$ that may be written $P^\square$, where $P$ is an ergodic fractal distribution, is called a \emph{restricted ergodic fractal distribution}.
\subsubsection{Uniformly scaling measures}
Let $\mu$ be some Radon measure on $\mathbf{R}^n$ and let $x$ some point in the support of $\mu$. We denote by $\mu_{x,t}$ the image of $\mu$ through the composition $S_t \circ T_x$ ($t \in \mathbf{R}$) and consider the probability measure $\mu_{x,t}^\square$. Let $\langle \mu \rangle_{x,T}$ be the distribution on $\mathcal M^\square$
\[ \langle \mu \rangle_{x,T} = \frac{1}{T} \int_0^T \delta_{\mu_{x,t}^\square} \mathrm{d}t \text. \]
If there exists a distribution $P$ on $\mathcal M^\square$ such that, for $\mu$-almost every $x$, $\langle \mu \rangle_{x,T}$ converges (weakly) to $P$ as $T \to \infty$, we say that $\mu$ is \emph{uniformly scaling}, and that it \emph{generates} $P$.
The following non-obvious Theorem is stated for clarity, as we will not need it.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{Hoch}]
If $\mu$ is a uniformly scaling measure generating a distribution $P$, $P$ is a restricted ergodic fractal distribution. Conversely, if $P$ is an ergodic fractal distribution, then $P$-almost every $\mu$ is a uniformly scaling measure generating $P^\square$.
\end{theorem}
\subsubsection{Mean dimension of a fixed projection}
Let $P$ be a distribution on $\mathcal M^\square$. Let $\pi$ be some linear mapping from $\mathbf{R}^n$ onto $\mathbf{R}^m$, $1 \leq m \leq n-1$. Let
\[ E_P(\pi) = \int \mathrm{d} P(\mu)\ \underline{\dim}(\pi \mu) \text. \]
\begin{theorem}[\cite{Hoch}] \label{th.hochman}
Let $\mu$ be a uniformly scaling probability measure on $\mathbf{R}^n$ and let $P$ be the restricted ergodic fractal distribution generated by $\mu$. For any linear mapping $\pi$ from $\mathbf{R}^n$ onto $\mathbf{R}^m$, $1 \leq m \leq n-1$,
\[ \underline{\dim} (\pi \mu) \geq E_P(\mu) \text. \]
\end{theorem}
\begin{corollary} \label{corollary.lol}
Assume, furthermore, that $P$ is invariant under the natural operation of the special orthogonal group $\mathbf{SO}(n)$. Then
\[ \underline{\dim} (\pi \mu) = \inf \{ m, \underline{\dim} (\mu) \} \text. \]
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Apply proposition \ref{prop.marstrand} and Fubini's Theorem.
\end{proof}
\section{Patterson-Sullivan theory}
We recall some classical results and definitions. Let $G=\mathbf{SO}^o(1,n+1)$ ($n \geq 2$) be the group of direct isometries of the real hyperbolic $(n+1)$-plane $\mathbf{H}^{n+1}$. We fix an Iwasawa decomposition $G=KAN$, and $\mathbf{H}^{n+1}$ identifies with the quotient manifold $G/K$; thus, $K$ is the stabilizer of some fixed point $o \in \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$. The boundary at infinity of $\mathbf{H}^{n+1}$ is denoted by $\partial \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$.
Recall the classical Busemann function,
\[ b_\xi(x,y) = \lim_{t \to \infty} d(x,\xi_t) - d(y,\xi_t) \]
for any $x,y \in \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$, $\xi \in \partial \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$, where $t \mapsto \xi_t$ is some geodesic with positive endpoint $\xi$ (\emph{i.e.} $\xi = \lim_{t \to \infty} \xi_t$), and $d$ is the hyperbolic distance in $\mathbf{H}^{n+1}$.
Good references for this section are \cite{Roblin},\cite{LNQuint} and \cite{SchapiraPaulinPollicott}.
\subsection{Limit set and growth exponent}
Let $\Gamma$ be a discrete subgroup of $G$. If $x$ is some point of $\mathbf{H}^{n+1}$, the set of accumulation points of the orbit $\Gamma \cdot x$ on $\mathbf{H}^{n+1} \cup \partial \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$ is a subset $\Lambda_\Gamma$ of the boundary, namely $\Lambda_\Gamma = \overline{\Gamma \cdot x} \cap \partial \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$. This set does not depend on $x$. It is called the limit set of $\Gamma$. If $\Lambda_\Gamma$ is a finite set, $\Gamma$ is called elementary, otherwise $\Gamma$ is called non-elementary.
The growth exponent of $\Gamma$,
\[ \delta_\Gamma = \limsup_{R \to \infty} \frac{1}{R} \mathrm{Card} \{\gamma \in \Gamma\ ;\ d(x,\gamma x) \leq R \} \]
does not depend on $x$. It is a finite number, $0 < \delta_\Gamma \leq n$.
Our main interest here is in studying the geometry of Patterson-Sullivan measures. We now introduce these measures.
\subsection{Patterson-Sullivan measures}
\begin{definition}
Let $\Gamma$ be a non-elementary discrete subgroup of $G$. Let $\beta$ be some real number $\geq 0$. A $\Gamma$-conformal density of exponent $\beta$ is a family $(\mu_x)_{x \in \mathbf{H}^{n+1}}$ of finite measures on $\partial \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$ which satisfies
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\Gamma$-equivariance:
\[ \gamma \mu_x = \mu_{\gamma x} \]
for any $x \in \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$ and any $\gamma \in \Gamma$.
\item Conformity: for any $x,y \in \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$, $\mu_x$ and $\mu_y$ are equivalent measures and the Radon-Nikodym derivative is given by
\[ \frac{\mathrm{d} \mu_y}{\mathrm{d} \mu_x}(\xi) = e^{-\beta b_\xi(y,x)} \]
almost everywhere.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
The following well-known Theorem is basic.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{Roblin}]
Let $\Gamma$ be a non-elementary discrete subgroup of $G$, with growth exponent $\delta_\Gamma$. There exist a $\Gamma$-conformal density of exponent $\delta_\Gamma$.
\end{theorem}
If $(\mu_x)$ is such a density, the measures $\mu_x$ are called Patterson-Sullivan measures.
\subsection{The Bowen-Margulis-Sullivan measure}
We will identify the unit tangent bundle $T^1 \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$ with the quotient space $G/M$, where $M$ is the centralizer, in $K$, of the Cartan subgroup $A$ (recall that we fixed an Iwasawa decomposition $G=KAN$). For more details on this identification see \cite{Winter}. Through this isomorphism $T^1 \mathbf{H}^{n+1} \simeq G/M$, the geodesic flow on $T^1 \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$ identifies with the right operation of $A$ on $G/M$, $(gM, a) \mapsto gaM$. More precisely, there is a (unique) isomorphism $\mathbf{R} \to A$, $t \mapsto a_t$, such that the geodesic flow on $T^1 \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$ identifies with the operation of $\mathbf{R}$ on $G/M$ given by $(t,gM) \mapsto ga_tM$.
The Hopf isomorphism is the bijective mapping from $T^1 \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$ onto $\partial^2 \mathbf{H}^{n+1} \times \mathbf{R}$, that maps the unit tangent vector $u$ with base point $x$ to the triple
\[ (u^-,u^+, b_{u^-}(x,o)) \]
where $u^-$ and $u^+$ are the negative and positive, respectively, endpoints of the geodesic whose derivative at $t=0$ is $u$. Here we denote by $\partial^2 \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$ the set of all $(\xi,\eta) \in \partial \mathbf{H}^{n+1} \times \partial \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$ such that $\xi \neq \eta$.
We will write, by an abuse of language, $u=(\xi,\eta,s)$, meaning $\xi=u^-$, $\eta=u^+$ and $s=b_{u^-}(x,o)$ (where $x$ is the base point of $u$).
Now, let $\Gamma$ be a discrete non-elementary subgroup of $G$. Let $\mu$ be a $\Gamma$-conformal density of exponent $\delta_\Gamma$. Fix some arbitrary point $x \in \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$. We define the BMS measure $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$ on the unit tangent bundle of $\mathbf{H}^{n+1}$, $T^1 \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq.BMS}
\mathrm{d} m_{\mathrm{BMS}}(u) = e^{\delta_\Gamma(b_\xi(x,u)+b_\eta(x,u))} \mathrm{d} \mu_x(\xi) \mathrm{d} \mu_x(\eta) \mathrm{d}s\text.
\end{equation}
This Radon measure does not depend on the choice of $x$. It is invariant under the geodesic flow as well as under $\Gamma$. Consequently, the measure on $\Gamma \backslash T^1 \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$ defined by passing to the quotient is a Radon measure that is invariant under the geodesic flow. Equivalently, we obtain a Radon measure on $\Gamma \backslash G/M$, that is $A$-invariant on the right.
\begin{definition}
We say that a discrete non-elementary subgroup $\Gamma$ of $G$ has finite BMS measure if the associated Bowen-Margulis-Measure on $\Gamma \backslash T^1 \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$ is finite.
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}[\cite{Roblin}]
Let $\Gamma$ be a discrete non-elementary subgroup of $G$. If $\Gamma$ has finite BMS measure, the $\Gamma$-conformal density of exponent $\delta_\Gamma$ is unique, atomless, its support is the limit set $\Lambda_\Gamma$, and the conical limit set $\Lambda_\Gamma^c$ has full measure. Furthermore, the BMS measure is (strongly) mixing with respect to the geodesic flow.
\end{theorem}
We will always assume that $\Gamma$ has finite BMS measure, so that the Patterson-Sullivan measure is essentially unique and we may say, by an abuse of language, ``let $\mu$ be \emph{the} Patterson-Sullivan measure associated to $\Gamma$''.
The Bowen-Margulis-Measure on $\Gamma \backslash G/M$ does not exactly suit our needs, because, as we said, $N$ does not act on the right on this space. Hence we are led to consider the unique $M$-invariant lifting of this measure to $\Gamma \backslash G$. We still call this measure on $\Gamma \backslash G$ the BMS measure. Note that the right action of $A$ on $\Gamma \backslash G/M$ extends to a right action on $\Gamma \backslash G$. The space $\Gamma \backslash G$ is sometimes called \emph{the frame bundle of $\Gamma \backslash \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$}, and the operation of $\mathbf{R}$ on $\Gamma \backslash G$, $(t, \Gamma g) \mapsto \Gamma g a_t$ is called the \emph{frame flow}. The following Theorem is crucial.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{Winter}] \label{th.dale}
Let $\Gamma$ be a discrete non-elementary subgroup of $G$. Assume that $\Gamma$ is Zariski-dense and has finite BMS measure. Then the BMS measure on $\Gamma \backslash G$ is (strongly) mixing under the right operation of $A$.
\end{theorem}
If $g$ is any element of $G$, we let $g^+ = (gM)^+$ and $g^- = (gM)^-$ (see \emph{supra}).
\subsection{Disintegrating the Bowen-Margulis-Sullivan measure along the horospherical group}
\subsubsection{General facts}
A key point in our approach is that we look at the conditional measures of the BMS measure on $\Gamma \backslash G$ along the horospherical group $N$ (recall that we fixed an Iwasawa decomposition $G=KAN$). This is part of the general theory of conditional measures along group operations.
In this subsection we distract from our main objective in order to recall the basic facts we will need.
Let $X$ be a standard Borel space where some fixed second countable locally compact topological group $R$ acts (on the left) in a Borel way with discrete stabilizers (\emph{i.e.} for any $x \in X$ the stabilizer of $x$ is a discrete subgroup of $R$). (The reader should think of $R$ as $N$ or any $m$-plane of $N$.)
Let $\lambda$ be some Borel probability measure on $X$. We can disintegrate $\lambda$ along the operation of $R$ on $X$. For any $x \in X$, the ``conditional measure of $\lambda$ along $R$ at $x$'' is a projective Radon measure $\sigma(x)$.
Recall that if $\mu$ is some non-zero Radon measure on $R$, its projective class is
\[ [\mu] = \{ t \mu\ ;\ t>0 \}\]
and the space of all such projective classes is denoted by ${\mathcal{M}}_{\mathrm{r}}^{\mathrm{1}}(R)$. The space of non-zero Radon measures on $R$ is a standard Borel space in a canonical way and we endow ${\mathcal{M}}_{\mathrm{r}}^{\mathrm{1}}(R)$ with the quotient Borel structure, thus turning it into a standard Borel space.
Let us now describe briefly the construction of this mapping $\sigma$. For more details, we refer the reader to \cite{preprint} or \cite{thesis}.
According to a Theorem of Kechris \cite{Kechris1}, we may find a Borel subset $\Sigma$ of $X$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item Any $R$-orbit in $X$ meets $\Sigma$, \emph{i.e.} $X=R\Sigma$.
\item There is a neighbourhood $U$ of the identity in $R$ such that, for any $x' \in \Sigma$, the only $g \in U$ that maps $x'$ into $\Sigma$ is the identity element.
\end{enumerate}
We call such a set a \emph{complete lacunary section}. The Borel mapping
\[ a_\Sigma : R \times \Sigma \to X \qquad (g,x') \mapsto gx' \]
has countable fibers, that is, $a_\Sigma^{-1}(x)$ is countable for any $x \in X$. We may thus define a $\sigma$-finite measure $a_\Sigma^* \lambda$ on $R \times \Sigma$ by letting
\[ \int f(g,x') \ \mathrm{d}(a_\Sigma^* \lambda)(g,x')=\int \sum_{(g,x') \in a_\Sigma^{-1}(x)} f(g,x') \ \mathrm{d}\lambda(x) \]
for any positive Borel mapping $f : R \times \Sigma \to \mathbf{R}$.
Choose some Borel finite measure $\lambda_\Sigma$ on $\Sigma$ such that a Borel subset $A$ of $\Sigma$ is negligible (with respect to $\lambda_\Sigma$) if and only if $R \times \Sigma$ is negligible (with respect to $a_\Sigma^*\lambda$).
We may now disintegrate $a_\Sigma^* \lambda$ above $\lambda_\Sigma$:
\[ a_\Sigma^* \lambda = \int \mathrm{d}\lambda_\Sigma(x')\ \sigma_\Sigma(x') \otimes \delta_{x'} \]
where $\delta_{x'}$ is the Dirac probability measure concentrated on $x'$ and $\sigma_\Sigma(x')$ is a Radon measure on $R$, as we may check.
\begin{proposition}[\cite{BenoistQuint} or \cite{thesis}, Proposition 2.1.1.14] \label{prop.benoistquint}
There is a mapping $\sigma : X \to {\mathcal{M}}_{\mathrm{r}}^{\mathrm{1}}(R)$ with the following property: for any complete lacunary section $\Sigma$, there is a conegligible subset $X' \subset X$ such that for almost every $x' \in \Sigma$ and any $g \in R$, if $gx'$ belongs to $X'$ then
\[ (R_g)^{-1}\sigma(gx')=[\sigma_\Sigma(x')] \text. \]
The mapping $\sigma$ is unique up to a negligible set. Furthermore, $\sigma$ is essentially $R$-equivariant, \emph{i.e.} there is a conegligible set $X' \subset X$ such that if $x$ and $gx$ belong to $X'$, then
\begin{equation} \sigma(gx)=R_g \sigma(x) \text. \label{eq.equivariance}
\end{equation}
If $\lambda$ is finite, then $\sigma$ maps $X$ into ${\mathcal{M}}_{\mathrm{r}}^{\mathrm{1}}(R)$, and is Borel.
\end{proposition}
By an abuse of language, we will speak of the ``measure'' $\sigma(x)$, despite the fact that this is not a genuine measure.
It is easy to check that for $\lambda$-almost every $x$, the identity element $e$ of $R$ belongs to the support of $\sigma(x)$.
Also, a subset $A \subset X$ is negligible with respect to $\lambda$ if and only if for $\lambda$-almost every $x \in X$, the set of all $g \in R$ such that $gx \in A$ is negligible with respect to $\sigma(x)$.
We are now going to state an important transitivity property. Let $L$ be some closed subgroup of $R$. Obviously, $L$ acts on $X$ in a Borel way with discrete stabilizers, so that we may disintegrate $\lambda$ along $L$, this gives another Borel mapping
\[ \sigma_{\lambda,L} : X \to {\mathcal{M}}_{\mathrm{r}}^{\mathrm{1}}(L) \text. \]
Now, for $\lambda$-almost every $x$, we disintegrate also the (projective) Radon measure $\sigma(x)$ along the natural operation of $L$ on $R$ (on the left). Note that $\sigma(x)$ is (usually) not a finite (projective) measure, but there is no difficulty in generalizing the above proposition to the setting of a measure that is $\sigma$-finite instead of being finite, see \cite{thesis}. For $\lambda$-almost every $x$, let
\[ \sigma_{\sigma(x),L} : R \to {\mathcal{M}}_{\mathrm{r}}^{\mathrm{1}}(L) \]
be the Borel mapping obtained by disintegrating $\sigma(x)$ along $L$.
\begin{proposition}[\cite{thesis}, proposition 2.1.3.5] \label{prop.transitivity}
For $\lambda$-almost every $x$ and $\sigma(x)$-almost every $g \in R$,
\[ \sigma_{\lambda,L}(gx)=\sigma_{\sigma(x),L}(g) \text. \]
\end{proposition}
Finally, the following lemma, although obvious, is important.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma.isom}
Let $Y$ be another standard Borel space where $R$ acts on the left in a Borel way with discrete stabilizers. Let $\alpha$ be some Borel group automorphism of $R$. Let $\phi : X \to Y$ be some Borel automorphism that is a $\alpha$-homomorphism of $R$-spaces, which means that
\[ \phi(rx)=\alpha(r) (\phi(x)) \]
for any $x \in X$ and $r \in R$. Denote by $\nu$ the push-forward $\phi \lambda$ of $\lambda$ through $\phi$. We disintegrate $\lambda$ and $\nu$ along $R$, this yields two mappings
\[ \sigma_\lambda : X \to {\mathcal{M}}_{\mathrm{r}}^{\mathrm{1}}(R),\qquad \sigma_\nu : Y \to {\mathcal{M}}_{\mathrm{r}}^{\mathrm{1}}(R)\text{.}\]
Then for $\lambda$-almost every $x \in X$, there holds
\[ \sigma_\nu(\phi(x))=\alpha (\sigma_\lambda(x)) \text. \]
\end{lemma}
\subsubsection{Dimension and transverse dimension along a given subgroup}
Now we specialize to the setting where $X=\Gamma \backslash G$, $R=N$ (recall that we fixed an Iwasawa decomposition $G=KAN$) and $\lambda$ is the BMS measure on $\Gamma \backslash G$, $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$. Fix some $m$-plane $U$ in $N$, $1 \leq m \leq n-1$, and let $\sigma_N$ and $\sigma_U$ be the Borel mappings from $\Gamma \backslash G$ to ${\mathcal{M}}_{\mathrm{r}}^{\mathrm{1}}(N)$ and ${\mathcal{M}}_{\mathrm{r}}^{\mathrm{1}}(U)$, obtained by disintegrating $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$ along $N$ and $U$, respectively.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma.biglemma}
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{Transitivity of disintegration:} For $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x$, if we disintegrate (in the usual sense) $\sigma_N(x)$ along the quotient mapping $\pi : N \to N/U$, yielding
\[ \sigma_N(x) = \int_{N/U} \sigma_{N,\pi g}(x)\ \mathrm{d}(\theta(x))(\pi g) \]
then for $\sigma_N(x)$-almost every $g \in N$, the conditional measure $\sigma_{N,\pi g}(x)$ of $\sigma_N(x)$ above $\pi(g)$ is the push-forward of $\sigma_U(xg)$ through the translation $L_g : U \to \pi^{-1}(g)$.
\item For $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x = \Gamma g$ in $\Gamma \backslash G$ the push-forward of $\sigma_N(x)$ through the homeomorphism
\[ \begin{array}{rcl} N &\to& \partial \mathbf{H}^{n+1} \setminus \{g^-\}\\ h & \mapsto &(gh)^+
\end{array} \]
is equivalent to the Patterson-Sullivan measure (restricted to the complement of $g^-$), and the Radon-Nikodym derivative is a continuous mapping
\[ \partial \mathbf{H}^{n+1} \setminus \{g^- \} \to \ ]0,\infty[ \text. \]
\item For $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x$, $\sigma_N(x)$ and $\sigma_U(x)$ are exact dimensional; their dimensions are almost surely independent of $x$. We denote the (almost sure) dimension of $\sigma_N(x)$ and $\sigma_U(x)$ by $\mathrm{dim}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},N)$ and $\mathrm{dim}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},U)$, respectively.
\item For any integer $m$, $1 \leq m \leq n-1$, and any $m$-plane $U$ in $N$, there is a well-defined ``transversal (lower) dimension''
\[ \underline{\mathrm{dim}}^{\mathrm{T}}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},N/U) \in [0,n-m] \]
such that, for $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$, if we restrict $\sigma_N(x)$ to some compact neighbourhood $B$ of the identity element of $N$, and look at the projection $\pi (\sigma_N(x)|B)$, then, for $\sigma_N(x)$-almost every $g \in B$,
\[ \underline{\dim}(\pi (\sigma_N(x)|B), \pi(g)) = \underline{\mathrm{dim}}^{\mathrm{T}}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},N/U) \text. \]
\item If $\mathrm{dim}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},U)$ is zero, then $\sigma_N(x)$ is almost surely concentrated on a Borel graph above $N/U$, \emph{i.e.} for $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$ there is a Borel section for $N/U$ that has full $\sigma_N(x)$-measure; in other words, there is a Borel subset $E \subset N$ of full measure (with respect to $\sigma_N(x)$) such that $\pi$ restricts to a bijection $\pi|E : E \to N/U$. \label{biglemma.graph}
\item The following Ledrappier-Young formula holds:
\[ \delta_\Gamma = \mathrm{dim}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},U) +\underline{\mathrm{dim}}^{\mathrm{T}}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},N/U) \text. \]
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Statement 1. is just a restatement of proposition \ref{prop.transitivity}. Statement 2 is straightforward. For statements 3 to 6 see \cite{preprint} or \cite{thesis}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
This lemma relies on the crucial fact that $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$ is ergodic with respect to any non trivial $a \in A$ (it is, indeed, strongly mixing with respect to the frame flow, see theorem \ref{th.dale}).
\end{remark}
\subsubsection{Recurrence and dissipativity}\label{ss.recurrence}
Let $X$ be a standard Borel space endowed with a Borel $\sigma$-finite measure $\lambda$. Let $H$ be a locally compact second countable topological group acting in a Borel way on $X$, with discrete stabilizers.
We do \emph{not} assume that $\lambda$ is invariant under $H$.
\begin{definition}
A Borel subset $W \subset X$ is a \emph{wandering set} if for $\lambda$-almost every $x \in X$, the set
\[ \{ g \in H\ ;\ gx \in W\} \]
is relatively compact.
A Borel subset $A \subset X$ is a \emph{recurrent set} if for any Borel subset $B \subset A$ and $\lambda$-almost every $x \in B$, the set
\[ \{ g \in H\ ;\ gx \in B \} \]
is not relatively compact.
We say that $\lambda$ is totally recurrent with respect to $H$ if $X$ is a recurrent set. We say that $\lambda$ is totally dissipative with respect to $H$ if $X$ is a countable union of wandering sets.
\end{definition}
It follows immediately that $A$ is a recurrent set if and only if $A \cap W$ is negliglible for every wandering set $W$.
It is possible to generalize the classical Hopf decomposition to this setting (where the measure is not even quasi-invariant), see \cite{thesis} section 2.1.2.
\begin{proposition}[\cite{thesis}, Th\'{e}or\`{e}me 2.1.2.6]
Assume that $\lambda$ is finite. Let $\sigma : X \to {\mathcal{M}}_{\mathrm{r}}^{\mathrm{1}}(H)$ be the mapping obtained by disintegrating $\lambda$ along $H$.
\begin{itemize}
\item If, for $\lambda$-almost every $x$, $\sigma(x)$ is \emph{finite}, then $\lambda$ is totally dissipative (with respect to $H$).
\item If, for $\lambda$-almost every $x$, $\sigma(x)$ is \emph{infinite}, then $\lambda$ is totally recurrent (with respect to $H$).
\end{itemize}
\end{proposition}
The following lemma relates the dynamics of the BMS measure (with respect to some $m$-plane $U$ in $N$) to its dimension (along $U$).
\begin{lemma}[\cite{thesis}, corollary 2.2.1.9] \label{lemma.dissip}
Let $U$ be an $m$-plane of $N$, $1 \leq m \leq n-1$. The following assertions are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\mathrm{dim}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},U)=0$;
\item $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$ is totally dissipative with respect to $U$;
\item For $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$, $\sigma(x)$ is concentrated on a Borel graph over $N/U$;
\item There is a Borel subset $\Omega \subset \Gamma \backslash G$ of full BMS measure such that, for any $x \in \Omega$, $\Omega \cap xU = \{x\}$.
\end{enumerate}
Also, $\mathrm{dim}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},U)>0$ if and only if $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$ is totally recurrent with respect to $U$.
\end{lemma}
\section{Dimension and dynamics of the Bowen-Margulis-Sullivan along some horospherical subgroup}
\subsection{Dimension and transverse dimension}
\begin{theorem} \label{th.principal1}
Let $\Gamma$ be a Zariski-dense discrete subgroup of $G$ with finite BMS measure. Fix an integer $m$, $1 \leq m \leq n-1$. For any $m$-plane $U$ in $N$, the following dichotomy holds:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\delta_\Gamma \leq n-m$, then $\mathrm{dim}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},U) = 0$ and $\underline{\mathrm{dim}}^{\mathrm{T}}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},U)=\delta_\Gamma$.
\item If $\delta_\Gamma > n-m$, then $\mathrm{dim}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},U)=\delta_\Gamma-(n-m)$ and $\underline{\mathrm{dim}}^{\mathrm{T}}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},U)=n-m$.
\end{enumerate}
Besides, the transversal measure is exact dimensional: for $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$, and any compact neighbourhood $B$ of the identity in $N$, the projection of $\sigma(x)|B$ onto $N/U$ is exact dimensional (of dimension $\underline{\mathrm{dim}}^{\mathrm{T}}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},N/U)$).
Furthermore, when $\delta_\Gamma > n-m$ the transversal measure is in fact absolutely continuous: for $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$ and any compact neighbourhood $B$ of the identity in $N$, the projection of $\sigma(x)|B$ onto $N/U$ is absolutely continuous (with respect to the Haar measure).
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Fix $m$. The first step is to prove that $\mathrm{dim}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},U)$ does not depend on the choice of the $m$-plane $U$. Indeed choose two $m$-plane $U,U'$ in $N$. Pick some $g \in M$ such that $U'=gUg^{-1}$ (recall that $M$ acting on $N$ by conjugation is just $\mathbf{SO}(n)$ acting on $\mathbf{R}^n$). For $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$,
\[ \sigma(xg)=\mathrm{Int}(g) \left(\sigma(x)\right) \]
where $\mathrm{Int}(g)(y)=gyg^{-1}$ for $y \in N$ (this is a basic consequence of $M$-invariance of $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$ and uniqueness of conditional measures).
The measure automorphism $R_g : \Gamma \backslash G \to \Gamma \backslash G$ mapping $x$ to $xg^{-1}$ intertwines the (right) operation of $U$ with the (right) operation of $U'$: for any $u \in U$, if we let $u'=gug^{-1}$,
\[ R_g(x) u' = xg^{-1}(gug^{-1}) = xug^{-1} = R_g(xu) \text. \]
Consequently, using the fact that $R_g (m_{\mathrm{BMS}})=m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$, we get
\[ \sigma_U(x) = \mathrm{Int}(g) (\sigma_{U'}(xg^{-1})) \]
and since $\mathrm{Int}(g)$ is an isometry $U \to U'$, this implies readily that
\[ \mathrm{dim}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},U)=\mathrm{dim}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},U') \text. \]
Likewise, one shows in the same way that $\underline{\mathrm{dim}}^{\mathrm{T}}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},N/U)$ does not depend on the choice of the $m$-plane $U$. Also, assume that the $m$-plane $U$ satisfies the following property: there is some relatively compact neighbourhood of the identity $B$ in $N$ such that the push-forward
\[ \frac{\sigma(x)|B}{\sigma(x)(B)} \]
through the quotient mapping $N \to N/U$ is absolutely continuous for $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$. Then the same property holds for any other $m$-plane $U'$.
Now let $B$ be some fixed relatively compact neighbourhood of the identity in $N$. For any $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$, let
\[ \nu^B(x) = \frac{\sigma(x)|B}{\sigma(x)(B)}\]
this is a finite measure on $N$. For $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x$, this measure is exact dimensional, of dimension $\delta_\Gamma$. Fix such an $x$. For almost every $m$-plane $U$ in $N$, the push-forward of $\nu^B(x)$ through the quotient mapping $N \to N/U$ must be exact dimensional of dimension $\inf \{ n-m,\delta_\Gamma\}$.
On the other hand, for any $m$-plane $U$ and $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x$, the push-forward of $\nu^B(x)$ through $N \to N/U$ has lower dimension equal to $\underline{\mathrm{dim}}^{\mathrm{T}}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},N/U)$ almost everywhere.
By virtue of Fubini's Theorem, we deduce that
\begin{enumerate}
\item For any $m$-plane $U$,
\[ \underline{\mathrm{dim}}^{\mathrm{T}}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},U) = \inf\{n-m,\delta_\Gamma\} \]
\item For any $m$-plane $U$ and $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$, the push-forward of $\nu^B(x)$ through $N \to N/U$ is exact dimensional (of dimension $\underline{\mathrm{dim}}^{\mathrm{T}}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},U)$.
\item If $\delta_\Gamma > n-m$, then for any $m$-plane $U$ and $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$, the push-forward of $\nu^B(x)$ through $N \to N/U$ is absolutely continuous.
\end{enumerate}
Finally, the Ledrappier-Young Theorem immediately implies that for any $m$-plane $U$,
\[ \mathrm{dim}(m_{\mathrm{BMS}},U)=\left\{ \begin{array}{lcl} 0 & \mathrm{if} & \delta_\Gamma \leq n-m \\ \delta_\Gamma-(n-m) & \mathrm{otherwise} &
\end{array}\right. \]
\end{proof}
In proving this Theorem we used Marstrand's Theorem (proposition \ref{prop.marstrand}) and the fact that the BMS measure on $\Gamma \backslash G$ is $M$-invariant (on the right).
The reader should pay attention to the order of quantifiers in Theorem \ref{th.principal1}. This Theorem really deals with projections of the BMS measure in almost every direction. Our argument revolves around Marstrand's Theorem and uses Winter's Theorem about ergodicity of the BMS measure on $\Gamma \backslash G$ (with respect to frame flow), as well as Ledrappier-Young's Theorem.
We will soon (section \ref{sect.dimproj}) state and prove a result about the projection in some fixed direction -- for this we will need another tool. For now, the following corollary is of interest.
\begin{corollary}
Assume that $\delta_\Gamma \leq n-m$. For almost every $\xi \in \partial \mathbf{H}^{n+1}$, the following holds: if we identify the $\partial \mathbf{H}^{n+1} \setminus \{\xi\}$ with the $n$-space $N=\mathbf{R}^n$ (through stereographic projection), then, for almost every $m$-plane $U$ in $N$, the Patterson-Sullivan measure is concentrated on a Borel graph along $U$ (\emph{i.e.} there is a Borel section $N/U \to N$ whose range has full Patterson-Sullivan measure).
\end{corollary}
Thus we may say that if $\delta_\Gamma \leq n-m$, the Patterson-Sullivan is concentrated on a Borel graph along almost every $m$-plane.
\begin{proof}
See lemma \ref{lemma.biglemma}.\ref{biglemma.graph}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Dynamics of the Bowen-Margulis-Sullivan measure}
We still assume that $\Gamma$ is a Zariski-dense discrete subgroup of $G$ with finite BMS measure. The following corollary follows from Theorem \ref{th.principal1} by virtue of lemma \ref{lemma.dissip}.
\begin{corollary}
Fix some $m$-plane $U$ in $N$ and let $U$ act on $\Gamma \backslash G$ (on the right). With respect to the BMS measure this operation is
\begin{enumerate}
\item totally dissipative if $\delta_\Gamma \leq n-m$
\item totally recurrent if $\delta_\Gamma > n-m$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\section{Dimension of projections} \label{sect.dimproj}
\subsection{Statement}
\begin{definition}
Let $\mu$ be some Radon measure on $\mathbf{R}^n$. We say that $\mu$ is regular if
\begin{enumerate}
\item it is exact dimensional of dimension $\delta \in [0,n]$
\item for any $k$-plane $V$ in $\mathbf{R}^n$ ($1 \leq k \leq n-1$), and any relatively compact open subset $B \subset \mathbf{R}^n$ such that $\mu(B)>0$, the orthogonal projection of $\mu|B$ onto $V$ has dimension
\[ \inf\{ \delta,k\} \text. \]
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem} \label{th.principal2}
Let $\Gamma$ be a discrete Zariski-dense subgroup of $G$ with finite BMS measure. Let $\sigma : \Gamma \backslash G \to {\mathcal{M}}_{\mathrm{r}}^{\mathrm{1}}(N)$ be the mapping obtained by disintegrating $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$ along $N$. For $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$, $\sigma(x)$ is a regular measure.
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Proof}
Let $\sigma : \Gamma \backslash G \to {\mathcal{M}}_{\mathrm{r}}^{\mathrm{1}}(N)$ be the mapping obtained by disintegrating $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$ along $N$. We are going to apply Theorem \ref{th.hochman}. Identify $N$ with $\mathbf{R}^n$ and denote by $B_1$ the unit cube $[-1,1]^n$. The space $\mathcal M$ of non-zero Radon measures on $\mathbf{R}^n$ identifies with the space of non-zero Radon measures on $N$.
For any $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$ let
\[ \sigma^*(x) = \frac{\sigma(x)}{\sigma(x)(B_1)} \]
that is, $\sigma^*$ is the composition of $\sigma$ and the mapping $[\mu] \mapsto \mu^*$. Likewise, we let
\[ \sigma^\square(x)=\frac{\sigma(x)|B_1}{\sigma(x)(B_1)} \text. \]
Obviously $\sigma^*(x) \in \mathcal M^*$ and $\sigma^\square(x) \in \mathcal M^\square$.
We define a distribution $P$ on $\mathcal M^*$:
\[ P = \int \mathrm{d} m_{\mathrm{BMS}}(x)\ \delta_{\sigma^*(x)} \]
where $\delta_{\sigma^*(x)}$ is the Dirac mass at $\sigma^*(x)$.
The proof of our Theorem consists of the following checks:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The distribution $P$ is an ergodic fractal distribution.
\item For $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$ $\sigma^\square(x)$ is a uniformly scaling measure generating the restricted version of $P$ (that is, $P^\square$).
\item For any $k$, $1 \leq k \leq n-1$, and any linear mapping $\pi$ from $\mathbf{R}^n$ onto $\mathbf{R}^k$,
\[ E_{P^\square}(\pi) = \inf\{ \delta_\Gamma,k\} \text. \]
\end{enumerate}
These three points are enough to prove the Theorem. Indeed, by virtue of Theorem \ref{th.hochman}, for $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$, and \emph{every} $k$-plane $V \subset N$, we obtain
\[ \underline{\dim}\left( \pi_V(\sigma^\square(x)) \right) \geq \inf\{ \delta_\Gamma,k\} \]
where $\pi_V$ is the orthogonal projection $\mathbf{R}^n \to V$. The converse inequality is obviously true, so that we get
\[ \underline{\dim}\left( \pi_V(\sigma^\square(x)) \right) = \inf\{ \delta_\Gamma,k\} \]
for \emph{every} $k$-plane $V$.
Before proceeding to prove the above three points, let us clarify notations. Remember that we fixed an isomorphism $\mathbf{R} \to A$, $t \mapsto a_t$ such that the frame flow on $\Gamma \backslash G$ identifies with the operation $(t,\Gamma g) \mapsto \Gamma g a_t$. The automorphism $\mathrm{Int}(a_t)$ of $N$ that maps $g$ to $a_t g a_{-t}$ identifies with the homothety
\[ S_t : \mathbf{R}^n \to \mathbf{R}^n,\quad y \mapsto e^t y \text. \]
For any fixed $t \in \mathbf{R}$ and $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$, $\sigma^*(xa_{-t}) = S_t \sigma^*(x)$ by lemma \ref{lemma.isom}.
Also, for $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$ and $\sigma(x)$-almost every $g \in N$, the push-forward of $\sigma(x)$ through the mapping $L(g^{-1}) : h \mapsto g^{-1}h$, is equal to $\sigma(xg)$.
\begin{lemma}
The distribution $P$ is an ergodic fractal distribution.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The mapping
\[ \begin{array}{ccc}\Gamma \backslash G & \to & \mathcal{M}^* \\ x & \mapsto & \sigma^*(x)
\end{array} \]
maps $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$ onto $P$ and intertwines ($m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost surely) the operation of $(a_t)_t$ on $\Gamma \backslash G$ with the operation of $(S_t^*)_t$ on $\mathcal M^*$. In other words, for every $t \in \mathbf{R}$ and $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$, there holds
\[ S_t^* \sigma^*(x) = \sigma^*(x a_t)\text. \]
The dynamical system $(\mathcal{M}^*, P, (S_t^*)_t)$ is thus a factor of the dynamical system $(\Gamma \backslash G, m_{\mathrm{BMS}}, (a_t)_t)$. Since the latter is ergodic, the former must be ergodic as well.
Let us now check quasi-Palmness. Let $\mathcal E$ be some Borel subset of $\mathcal M^*$ and let $E$ be the set of all $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$ such that $\sigma^*(x) \in \mathcal E^*$. Let $W$ be some relatively compact neighbourhood of the identity in $N$. Keeping in mind the relation \eqref{eq.equivariance} in proposition \ref{prop.benoistquint}, one readily checks that $\mathcal E$ is negligible with respect to the distribution on $\mathcal M^*$
\[ \int \mathrm{d} P(\mu) \int_W \mathrm{d} \mu(v) \delta_{T_v^* \mu} \]
if and only if the set of all $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$ such that
\[ \sigma^*(x)\{ y \in W; xy \in E \} > 0 \]
is negligible with respect to $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$. This is equivalent to the fact that $E$ is negligible with respect to $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$, hence also to the fact that $\mathcal E$ is negligible with respect to $P$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} For $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$, the measure $\sigma^*(x)$ is uniformly scaling and generates $P^\square$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $h$ be some continuous mapping on the compact second countable space $\mathcal M^\square$. We must prove that for $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$, for $\sigma^\square(x)$-almost every $g \in N$,
\[ (*) \qquad \lim_{T \to \infty} \frac{1}{T} \int_0^T h\left( S_t^\square (L_{g^{-1}} \sigma(x)) \right) \mathrm{d} t = \int h(\sigma^\square(x)) \mathrm{d} m_{\mathrm{BMS}} (x) \mathrm{.} \]
Let us first remark that this equality holds in the particular case when $g$ is the identity element of $N$. Indeed, since $h$ is bounded, we need just check that
\[ \lim_{k \to \infty} \frac{1}{k} \sum_{i=0}^{k-1} \int_0^1 h(S_t^\square \sigma^* (x a_{-i})) \mathrm{d} t \]
for $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x$. This is a consequence of pointwise ergodic Theorem of Birhov applied to the function
\[ x \mapsto \int_0^1 h(S_t^\square \sigma^*(x)) \mathrm{d} t \]
(recall that $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$ is ergodic with respect to the automorphism $x \mapsto xa_{-1}$, see Theorem \ref{th.dale}).
Now let us denote by $X$ the set of all points $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$ such that $(*)$ is satisfied when $g$ is the identity element of $N$. For $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$ and $\sigma(x)$-almost every $g \in N$, there holds $L(g^{-1}) \sigma(x)=\sigma(xg)$; furthermore, $xg$ belongs to $X$ for $\sigma(x)$-almost every $g$, since $X$ has full measure with respect to $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$.
This shows that $(*)$ holds for $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$-almost every $x \in \Gamma \backslash G$ and $\sigma^\square(x)$-almost every $g \in N$.
Hence the lemma.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
Let $V$ be some $k$-plane in $N$, $1 \leq k \leq n-1$, and $\pi$ be the orthogonal projection from $N$ onto $V$. Then
\[ E_{P^\square}(\pi) = \inf \{ \delta_\Gamma,k\} \text. \]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By the very definition of $P$, it stands to reason that this distribution is $M$-invariant (since $m_{\mathrm{BMS}}$ is $M$-invariant). Now apply corollary \ref{corollary.lol}.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
\bigskip
This article is devoted to the question of unique continuation for linear
kinetic transport equation with a scattering operator in the diffusive
limit. Let $\Omega$ be a bounded open subset of $\mathbb{R}^{\text{d}}$, d
>1 $, with boundary $\partial\Omega$ of class $C^{2}$. Consider in
\{(x,v)\in \Omega\times\mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\}\times\mathbb{R}_{t}^{+}$
the transport equation in the $v$ direction with a scattering operator $S$
and absorbing boundary condition
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
{\partial}_{t}f+\dfrac{1}{\epsilon}v\cdot\nabla f+\dfrac{a}{\epsilon^{2}
S\left( f\right) =0 & \quad\text{in}~\Omega\times\mathbb{S}^{\text{d
-1}\times\left( 0,+\infty\right) \text{ ,} \\
f=0 & \quad\text{on}~\left( \partial\Omega\times\mathbb{S}^{\text{d
-1}\right) _{-}\times\left( 0,+\infty\right) \text{ ,} \\
f\left( \cdot,\cdot,0\right) =f_{0}\in L^{2}(\Omega\times\mathbb{S}^{\text{d
-1})\text{ ,} &
\end{array}
\right. \tag{1.1} \label{1.1}
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon\in\left( 0,1\right] $ is a small parameter and $a\in
L^{\infty}\left( \Omega\right) $ is a scattering opacity satisfying
0<c_{min}\leq a\left( x\right) \leq c_{max}<\infty$. Here, $\nabla
=\nabla_{x}$ and $\left( \partial\Omega\times\mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right)
_{-}=\left\{ \left( x,v\right) \in\partial\Omega\times\mathbb{S}^{\text{d
-1};v\cdot\vec{n}_{x}<0\right\} $ where $\vec{n}_{x}$ is the unit outward
normal field at $x\in\partial\Omega$.
Two standard examples of scattering operators $S$ are the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item The neutron scattering operator
\begin{equation*}
S=f-\langle f\rangle\text{ where }\langle f\rangle\left( x,t\right) =\dfrac{
}{\left\vert \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right\vert }\displaystyle\int _{\mathbb
S}^{\text{d}-1}}f\left( x,v,t\right) dv\text{ .}
\end{equation*}
\item The Fokker-Planck scattering operator
\begin{equation*}
S=-\frac{1}{\text{d}-1}\Delta_{\mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}}f\text{ where
\Delta_{\mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}}\text{ is the Laplace-Beltrami operator on
\mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\text{.}
\end{equation*}
\end{itemize}
Let $\omega $ be a nonempty open subset of $\Omega $. Suppose we observe the
solution $f$ at time $T>0$ and on $\omega $, i.e. $f\left( x,v,T\right)
_{\left\vert \left( x,v\right) \in \omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d
-1}\right. }$ is known. A classical inverse problem consists to recover at
least one solution, and in particular its initial data, which fits the
observation on $\omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\times \left\{
T\right\} $. Our problem of unique continuation is: With how many initial
data, the corresponding solution achieves the given observation $f\left(
x,v,T\right) _{\left\vert \left( x,v\right) \in \omega \times \mathbb{S}^
\text{d}-1}\right. }$. Here $\epsilon $ is a small parameter and it is
natural to focus on the limit solution. This is the diffusion approximation
saying that the solution $f$ converges to a solution of a parabolic equation
when $\epsilon $ tends to $0$ (see \cite{B},\cite{DL},\cite{LK},\cite{BR}
\cite{BGPS},\cite{BSS},\cite{BBGS}). In this framework, two remarks are in
order:
\begin{itemize}
\item For our scattering operator, there holds
\begin{equation*}
\left\Vert f-\langle f\rangle \right\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^
\text{d}-1}\times \mathbb{R}_{t}^{+})}\leq \epsilon \frac{1}{\sqrt{2c_{min}}
\Vert f_{0}\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1})}\text{ .}
\end{equation*
For the operator of neutron transport, one uses a standard energy method by
multiplying both sides of the first line of (\ref{1.1}) by $f$ and
integrating over $\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\times \left(
0,T\right) $. For the Fokker-Planck scattering operator, one combines the
standard energy method as above and Poincar\'{e} inequalit
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \left\Vert f-\langle f\rangle \right\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega \times
\mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\times \mathbb{R}_{t}^{+})} \\
& \leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{\text{d}-1}}\left\Vert \nabla _{\mathbb{S}^{\text{d
-1}}f\right\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\times \mathbb
R}_{t}^{+})}\leq \epsilon \frac{1}{\sqrt{2c_{min}}}\Vert f_{0}\Vert
_{L^{2}(\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1})}\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*}
\item In the sense of distributions in $\Omega $, for any $t\geq 0$, the
average of $f$ solves the following parabolic equatio
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad {\partial }_{t}\langle f\rangle -\frac{1}{\text{d}}\nabla \cdot
\left( \frac{1}{a}\nabla \langle f\rangle \right) \\
& =\nabla \cdot \left( \frac{1}{a}\langle \left( v\otimes v\right) \nabla
\left( f-\langle f\rangle \right) \rangle \right) +\epsilon \nabla \cdot
\left( \frac{1}{a}\langle v\partial _{t}f\rangle \right) \text{ .
\end{array}
\tag{1.2} \label{1.2}
\end{equation
Indeed, multiply by $\dfrac{\epsilon }{a}v$ the equation ${\partial }_{t}f
\dfrac{1}{\epsilon }v\cdot \nabla f+\dfrac{a}{\epsilon ^{2}}Sf=0$ and take
the average over $\mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}$, using ${\partial }_{t}\langle
f\rangle +\dfrac{1}{\epsilon }\langle v\cdot \nabla f\rangle =0$, $\langle
v\cdot \nabla Sf\rangle =\langle v\cdot \nabla f\rangle $ and $\langle
v\left( v\cdot \nabla \langle f\rangle \right) \rangle =\frac{1}{\text{d}
\nabla \langle f\rangle $, one obtains for any $t\geq 0$ and any $\varphi
\in C_{0}^{\infty }\left( \Omega \right)
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\Omega }{\partial }_{t}\langle f\rangle \varphi dx+\frac{1}{\text{d}
\int_{\Omega }\frac{1}{a}\nabla \langle f\rangle \cdot \nabla \varphi
dx+\int_{\Omega }\frac{1}{a}\langle v\left( v\cdot \nabla \left( f-\langle
f\rangle \right) +\epsilon \partial _{t}f\right) \rangle \cdot \nabla
\varphi dx=0\text{ .}
\end{equation*
Moreover, we prove that the boundary condition on $\langle f\rangle $ is
small in some adequate norm with respect to $\epsilon $. In the sequel, any
estimates will be explicit with respect to $\epsilon $.
\end{itemize}
\bigskip
Backward uniqueness for parabolic equation has a long history (see \cite{DJP
,\cite{V}). Lions and Malgrange \cite{LM} used the method of Carleman
estimates. Later, Bardos and Tartar \cite{BT} gave some improvements by
using the log convexity method of Agmon and Nirenberg. More recently,
motivated by control theory and inverse problems (see \cite{I},\cite{P}),
Carleman estimates became an important tool to achieve an observability
inequality (see \cite{FI},\cite{FZ},\cite{FG},\cite{LRL},\cite{LeRR},\cit
{LRR}). In \cite{PW}, the desired observability inequality is deduced from
the observation estimate at one point in time which is obtained by studying
the frequency function in the spirit of log convexity method. In particular,
one can quantify the following unique continuation property (see \cite{EFV}
\cite{PWa}): If $u\left( x,t\right) =e^{t\Delta}u_{0}\left( x\right) $ with
u_{0}\in L^{2}\left( \Omega\right) $ and $u\left( \cdot,T\right) =0$ on
\omega$, then $u_{0}\equiv0$.
\bigskip
Our main result below involves the regularity of the nonzero initial data
f_{0}$ measured in term of two quantities. Let $p>2$
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{M}_{p}:=\frac{\left\Vert f_{0}\right\Vert _{L^{2p}\left( \Omega
\times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right) }}{\left\Vert \langle f_{0}\rangle
\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right) }}\text{ and }\mathbb{F}:=\frac
\left\Vert \langle f_{0}\rangle \right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right)
}^{2}}{\left\Vert \langle f_{0}\rangle \right\Vert _{H^{-1}\left( \Omega
\right) }^{2}}\text{ .}
\end{equation*
Observe in particular that $\mathbb{F}$ is the most natural evaluation of
the frequency of the velocity average of the initial data.
\bigskip
\begin{thm}
\label{theorem1.1} Suppose that $a\in C^{2}\left( \overline{\Omega}\right) $
and $f_{0}\in L^{2p}\left( \Omega\times\mathbb{S}^{\normalfont{\text{d}
-1}\right) $ with $M_{p}+F<+\infty$ for some $p>2$. Then the unique solution
$f$ of (\ref{1.1}) satisfies for any $T>0$
\begin{equation*}
\left( 1-\epsilon^{\frac{1}{2p}}(1+T^{\frac{p-1}{2p}}C_{p})\mathbb{M
_{p}e^{\sigma\left( f_{0},T\right) }\right) \left\Vert \langle
f_{0}\rangle\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega\right) }\leq e^{\sigma\left(
f_{0},T\right) }\left\Vert \langle f\rangle\left( \cdot,T\right) \right\Vert
_{L^{2}\left( \omega\right) }
\end{equation*}
with $C_{p}=\left( \frac{p-1}{p-2}\right) ^{\frac{p-1}{2p}}\left( \frac {1}{
}\right) ^{\frac{1}{2p}}$ and $\sigma\left( f_{0},T\right) =c\left( 1+\frac{
}{T}+T\mathbb{F}\right) $ where $c$ only depends on $\left( \Omega,\omega
\normalfont{\text{d}},a\right) $.
\end{thm}
\bigskip
By a direct application of our main result, we have:
\bigskip
\begin{cor}
\label{corollary1.2} Let $a\in C^{2}\left( \overline{\Omega }\right) $ and
f_{0}\in L^{2p}\left( \Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\normalfont{\text{d}
-1}\right) $ with $M_{p}+F<+\infty $ for some $p>2$. Suppose that $f_{0}\geq
0$. Then there is $\epsilon _{0}\in \left( 0,1\right) $ depending on $\left(
\mathbb{M}_{p},\mathbb{F},\Omega ,\omega ,\normalfont{\text{d}},p,T,a\right)
$ such that if $f\left( \cdot ,\cdot ,T\right) =0$ on $\omega \times \mathbb
S}^{\normalfont{\text{d}}-1}$ for some $\epsilon \leq \epsilon _{0}$, then
f_{0}\equiv 0$.
\end{cor}
\bigskip
\bigskip
This paper is organized as follows: The proof of the main result is given in
the next section. It requires two important results: an approximation
diffusion convergence of the average of $f$; an observation estimate at one
point in time for the diffusion equation with homogeneous Dirichlet boundary
condition. In Section 3, we prove the approximation theorem stated in
Section 2. In Section 4, a direct proof of the observation inequality at one
point in time for parabolic equations is proposed. Finally, in an appendix,
we prove a backward estimate for the diffusion equation and a trace estimate
for the kinetic transport equation.
\bigskip
\bigskip
\section{Proof of main Theorem \protect\ref{theorem1.1}}
\bigskip
The main task in the proof of Theorem \ref{theorem1.1} consists on the two
following propositions. Below we denote by $u\in C\left( \left[ 0,T\right]
,L^{2}(\Omega )\right) \cap L^{2}\left( 0,T;H_{0}^{1}\left( \Omega \right)
\right) $ any solution of the diffusion equatio
\begin{equation}
{\partial }_{t}u-\frac{1}{\text{d}}\nabla \cdot \left( \frac{1}{a}\nabla
u\right) =0 \tag{2.1} \label{2.1}
\end{equation
with $a\in C^{2}\left( \overline{\Omega }\right) $ and $0<c_{min}\leq
a\left( x\right) \leq c_{max}<\infty $.
\bigskip
\begin{prop}
\label{proposition2.1} There are $C>0$\ and $\mu \in \left( 0,1\right) $\
such that any solution$\ u\in C\left( \left[ 0,T\right] ,L^{2}(\Omega
)\right) \cap L^{2}\left( 0,T;H_{0}^{1}\left( \Omega \right) \right) $ of
\ref{2.1}) satisfies
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\leq \left(
Ce^{\frac{C}{T}}\int_{\omega }\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert
^{2}dx\right) ^{1-\mu }\left( \int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right)
\right\vert ^{2}dx\right) ^{\mu }\text{ .}
\end{equation*
Here $C$\ and $\mu $\ only depend on $\left( a,\Omega ,\omega
\normalfont{\text{d}}\right) $.
\end{prop}
\bigskip
As an immediate application, combining with the following backward estimate
for diffusion equatio
\begin{equation}
\left\Vert u\left( \cdot ,0\right) \right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right)
}\leq ce^{cT\frac{\left\Vert u\left( \cdot ,0\right) \right\Vert
_{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right) }^{2}}{\left\Vert u\left( \cdot ,0\right)
\right\Vert _{H^{-1}\left( \Omega \right) }^{2}}}\left\Vert u\left( \cdot
,T\right) \right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right) } \text{ ,} \tag{2.2}
\label{2.2}
\end{equation
we have:
\bigskip
\begin{cor}
\label{corollary2.2} For any nonzero $u\in C\left( \left[ 0,T\right]
,L^{2}(\Omega )\right) \cap L^{2}\left( 0,T;H_{0}^{1}\left( \Omega \right)
\right) $ solution of (\ref{2.1}), one has
\begin{equation*}
\left\Vert u\left( \cdot ,0\right) \right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right)
}\leq e^{C\left( 1+\frac{1}{T}+T\frac{\left\Vert u\left( \cdot ,0\right)
\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right) }^{2}}{\left\Vert u\left( \cdot
,0\right) \right\Vert _{H^{-1}\left( \Omega \right) }^{2}}\right)
}\left\Vert u\left( \cdot ,T\right) \right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \omega \right)
}
\end{equation*
where $C$\ only depends on $\left( a,\Omega ,\omega ,\normalfont{\text{d}
\right) $.
\end{cor}
\bigskip
\bigskip
\begin{prop}
\label{proposition2.3} Assume $f_{0}\in L^{2p}(\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^
\normalfont{\text{d}}-1})$ for some $p>2$ and consider $u\in C\left(
0,T;H_{0}^{1}(\Omega )\right) $ solution of (\ref{2.1}) with initial data
u\left( \cdot ,0\right) =\langle f_{0}\rangle $, then for any $T>0$ and any
\chi \in C_{0}^{\infty }\left( \omega \right) $, the solution $f$ of (\re
{1.1}) satisfies
\begin{equation*}
\left\Vert \chi \left( \langle f\rangle _{\left\vert t=T\right. }-u\left(
\cdot ,T\right) \right) \right\Vert _{H^{-1}\left( \Omega \right) }\leq
\epsilon ^{\frac{1}{2p}}\left( 1+T^{\frac{p-1}{2p}}C_{p}\right) C\Vert
f_{0}\Vert _{L^{2p}(\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\normalfont{\text{d}}-1})}
\end{equation*
where $C_{p}=\left( \frac{p-1}{p-2}\right) ^{\frac{p-1}{2p}}\left( \frac{1}{
}\right) ^{\frac{1}{2p}}$ and $C>0$ only depends on $\left( \Omega
\normalfont{\text{d}},a,\chi \right) $.
\end{prop}
\bigskip
The proof of Proposition \ref{proposition2.1} and Proposition \re
{proposition2.3} is given in section 4 and section 3 respectively.
\bigskip
\noindent In one hand, since $u\left( \cdot ,0\right) =\langle f_{0}\rangle
, we have by Corollary \ref{corollary2.2
\begin{equation*}
\left\Vert \langle f_{0}\rangle \right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right)
}\leq e^{C\left( 1+\frac{1}{T}+T\frac{\left\Vert \langle f_{0}\rangle
\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right) }^{2}}{\left\Vert \langle
f_{0}\rangle \right\Vert _{H^{-1}\left( \Omega \right) }^{2}}\right)
}\left\Vert \chi u\left( \cdot ,T\right) \right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega
\right) }\text{ .}
\end{equation*
On the other hand, by regularizing effect, we hav
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\left\Vert \chi u\left( \cdot ,T\right) \right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega
\right) } & \leq \left\Vert \chi u\left( \cdot ,T\right) \right\Vert
_{H^{-1}\left( \Omega \right) }^{1/2}\left\Vert \chi u\left( \cdot ,T\right)
\right\Vert _{H_{0}^{1}\left( \Omega \right) }^{1/2} \\
& \leq C\left\Vert \chi u\left( \cdot ,T\right) \right\Vert _{H^{-1}\left(
\Omega \right) }^{1/2}\left( 1+\frac{1}{T^{1/4}}\right) \left\Vert \langle
f_{0}\rangle \right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right) }^{1/2}\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
Therefore, the two above facts yield
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\left\Vert \langle f_{0}\rangle \right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right) } &
\leq e^{C\left( 1+\frac{1}{T}+T\frac{\left\Vert \langle f_{0}\rangle
\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right) }^{2}}{\left\Vert \langle
f_{0}\rangle \right\Vert _{H^{-1}\left( \Omega \right) }^{2}}\right) }\left(
\left\Vert \chi \left( u\left( \cdot ,T\right) -\langle f\rangle
_{\left\vert t=T\right. }\right) \right\Vert _{H^{-1}\left( \Omega \right)
}+\left\Vert \chi \langle f\rangle _{\left\vert t=T\right. }\right\Vert
_{H^{-1}\left( \Omega \right) }\right) \\
& \leq e^{C\left( 1+\frac{1}{T}+T\frac{\left\Vert \langle f_{0}\rangle
\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right) }^{2}}{\left\Vert \langle
f_{0}\rangle \right\Vert _{H^{-1}\left( \Omega \right) }^{2}}\right) }\left(
\epsilon ^{\frac{1}{2p}}\left( 1+T^{\frac{p-1}{2p}}C_{p}\right) \Vert
f_{0}\Vert _{L^{2p}(\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1})}+\left\Vert \chi
\langle f\rangle _{\left\vert t=T\right. }\right\Vert _{H^{-1}\left( \Omega
\right) }\right
\end{array
\end{equation*
where in the last line we used Proposition \ref{proposition2.3}. This
completes the proof.
\bigskip
\bigskip
\section{Estimates for diffusion approximation}
\bigskip
Below we give precise error estimates for the diffusion approximation.
\bigskip
\begin{thm}
\label{theorem3.1} Let $a\in C^{1}\left( \overline{\Omega }\right) $ such
that $0<c_{min}\leq a\left( x\right) \leq c_{max}<\infty $. Assume $f_{0}\in
L^{2p}(\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\normalfont{\text{d}}-1})$ for some $p>2$
and consider $u\in C\left( 0,T;H_{0}^{1}(\Omega )\right) $ solution of (\re
{2.1}) with initial data $u\left( \cdot ,0\right) =\langle f_{0}\rangle $,
then for any $T>0$, the solution $f$ of (\ref{1.1}) satisfie
\begin{equation*}
\left\Vert \langle f\rangle _{\left\vert t=T\right. }-u\left( \cdot
,T\right) \right\Vert _{H^{-1}\left( \Omega \right) }+\left\Vert \langle
f\rangle -u\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \times \left( 0,T\right) \right)
}\leq \epsilon ^{\frac{1}{2p}}\left( 1+T^{\frac{p-1}{2p}}C_{p}\right) C\Vert
f_{0}\Vert _{L^{2p}(\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\normalfont{\text{d}}-1})}
\end{equation*
where $C_{p}=\left( \frac{p-1}{p-2}\right) ^{\frac{p-1}{2p}}\left( \frac{1}{
}\right) ^{\frac{1}{2p}}$ and $C>0$ only depends on $\left( \Omega
\normalfont{\text{d}}\right) $ and $\left( c_{min},c_{max},\left\Vert \nabla
a\right\Vert _{\infty }\right) $.
\end{thm}
\bigskip
\bigskip
In the literature, there are at least two ways to get diffusion
approximation estimates:
- Use a Hilbert expansion: The solution $f$ of the transport problem can be
formally written as $f=f_{0}+\epsilon f_{1}+\epsilon^{2}f_{2}+...$ and we
substitute this expansion into the governing equations in order to prove
existence of $f_{0},f_{1},f_{2},...$. Next we set $F=f-\left( f_{0}+\epsilon
f_{1}\right) $ and check that it solves a transport problem for which energy
method can be used. This way requires well-prepared initial data that is
f_{0}=\langle f_{0}\rangle$ to avoid initial layers.
- Use moment method: The zeroth and first moments of $f$ are respectively
\langle f\rangle $ and $\langle vf\rangle $. First, we check that $f-\langle
f\rangle $ is small in some adequate norm with respect to $\epsilon $. Next
by computing the zeroth and first moments of the equation solved by $f$ (as
it was done in the introduction), we derive that $\langle f\rangle $ solves
a parabolic problem for which energy method can be used. This way and a new
\epsilon $ uniform estimate on the trace (see Proposition \re
{proposition3.2} below) give Theorem \ref{theorem3.1}. Notice that since
only the average of $f$, is involved, the proof requires no analysis of the
initial layer near $t=0$.
\bigskip
\begin{prop}
\label{proposition3.2} If $f_{0}\in L^{2p}(\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^
\normalfont{\text{d}}-1})$ for some $p>2$, then the solution $f$ of (\re
{1.1}) satisfies
\begin{equation*}
\left\Vert f\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \partial \Omega \times \mathbb{S}^
\normalfont{\text{d}}-1}\times \left( 0,T\right) \right) }\leq CT^{\frac{p-
}{2p}}\epsilon ^{\frac{1}{2p}}C_{p}\Vert f_{0}\Vert _{L^{2p}(\Omega \times
\mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1})}
\end{equation*
where $C_{p}=\left( \frac{p-1}{p-2}\right) ^{\frac{p-1}{2p}}\left( \frac{1}{
}\right) ^{\frac{1}{2p}}$ and $C>0$ only depends on $\left( \Omega
\normalfont{\text{d}}\right) $.
\end{prop}
\bigskip
Proposition \ref{proposition3.2} is proved in Appendix. The proof of Theorem
\ref{theorem3.1} starts as follows. Let $w_{\epsilon }=\langle f\rangle -u$
where $u$ solves
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
{\partial }_{t}u-\frac{1}{\text{d}}\nabla \cdot \left( \frac{1}{a}\nabla
u\right) =0 & \quad \text{in}~\Omega \times \left( 0,+\infty \right) \text{
} \\
u=0 & \quad \text{on}~\partial \Omega \times \left( 0,+\infty \right) \text{
,} \\
u\left( \cdot ,0\right) =\langle f_{0}\rangle \in L^{2}(\Omega )\text{ .} &
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*
By (\ref{1.2}) and a density argument, $w_{\epsilon }$ solves for any $t\geq
0$ and any $\varphi \in H_{0}^{1}\left( \Omega \right)
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \displaystyle\int_{\Omega }{\partial }_{t}w_{\epsilon }\varphi dx
\displaystyle\frac{1}{\text{d}}\int_{\Omega }\nabla w_{\epsilon }\cdot \frac
1}{a}\nabla \varphi dx \\
& =-\displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\langle v\left( v\cdot \nabla \left(
f-\langle f\rangle \right) \right) \rangle \cdot \frac{1}{a}\nabla \varphi
dx-\displaystyle\epsilon \int_{\Omega }\langle v\partial _{t}f\rangle \cdot
\frac{1}{a}\nabla \varphi d
\end{array}
\tag{3.1} \label{3.1}
\end{equation
with boundary condition $w_{\epsilon }=\langle f\rangle $ on $\partial
\Omega \times \mathbb{R}_{t}^{+}$ and initial data $w_{\epsilon }\left(
\cdot ,0\right) =0$. We choose
\begin{equation*}
\varphi =\left( -\frac{1}{\text{d}}\nabla \cdot \left( \frac{1}{a}\nabla
\right) \right) ^{-1}w_{\epsilon }\text{ .}
\end{equation*
By integrations by parts, the identity (\ref{3.1}) becomes
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \displaystyle\dfrac{1}{2\text{d}}\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\Omega }\frac{1}{
}\left\vert \nabla \varphi \right\vert ^{2}dx+\left\Vert \frac{1}{\text{d}
\nabla \cdot \left( \frac{1}{a}\nabla \right) \varphi \right\Vert
_{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right) }^{2} \\
& =-\displaystyle\int_{\partial \Omega }\langle f\rangle \frac{1}{a}\partial
_{n}\varphi dx \\
& \quad -\displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\langle v\left( v\cdot \nabla \left(
f-\langle f\rangle \right) \right) \rangle \cdot \frac{1}{a}\nabla \varphi dx
\\
& \quad -\displaystyle\epsilon \int_{\Omega }\langle v\partial _{t}f\rangle
\cdot \frac{1}{a}\nabla \varphi dx\text{ .
\end{array}
\tag{3.2} \label{3.2}
\end{equation
First, the contribution of the boundary data is estimate: One has, by a
classical trace theorem
\begin{equation*}
-\int_{\partial \Omega }\langle f\rangle \frac{1}{a}\partial _{n}\varphi
dx\leq C_{1}\left\Vert f\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \partial \Omega \times
\mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right) }\left\Vert \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{1}{a
\nabla \right) \varphi \right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right) }
\end{equation*
where the constant $C_{1}$ depends on $\left\Vert \nabla a\right\Vert
_{\infty }$.
Secondly, the contribution of the term
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\Omega}\langle v\left( v\cdot\nabla\left( f-\langle f\rangle\right)
\right) \rangle\cdot\frac{1}{a}\nabla\varphi dx
\end{equation*}
is estimated: By integration by parts and using $\nabla\varphi=\partial
_{n}\varphi\vec{n}_{x}$ on $\partial\Omega$, one has
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle\int_{\Omega}\langle v\left( v\cdot\nabla\left( f-\langle
f\rangle\right) \right) \rangle\cdot\frac{1}{a}\nabla\varphi dx & =
\displaystyle\dfrac{1}{\left\vert \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right\vert
\int_{\Omega\times\mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}}(f-\langle f\rangle)v\cdot
\nabla\left( v\cdot\frac{1}{a}\nabla\varphi\right) dxdv \\
& \quad+\displaystyle\dfrac{1}{\left\vert \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right\vert
}\int_{\partial\Omega\times\mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}}\left( v\cdot\vec{n
_{x}\right) ^{2}(f-\langle f\rangle)\frac{1}{a}\partial_{n}\varphi dxd
\end{array
\end{equation*}
which implie
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle\int_{\Omega}\langle v\left( v\cdot\nabla\left( f-\langle
f\rangle\right) \right) \rangle\cdot\frac{1}{a}\nabla\varphi dx & \leq
C_{1}\left\Vert f-\langle f\rangle\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \time
\mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right) }\left\Vert \nabla\cdot\left( \frac {1}{a
\nabla\right) \varphi\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega\right) } \\
& \quad+C_{1}\left\Vert f\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \partial\Omega \time
\mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right) }\left\Vert \nabla\cdot\left( \frac {1}{a
\nabla\right) \varphi\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega\right)
\end{array
\end{equation*}
with some constant $C_{1}>0$ depending on $\left\Vert \nabla a\right\Vert
_{\infty}$.
Thirdly, the contribution of the term $\displaystyle\epsilon \int_{\Omega
}\langle v\partial _{t}f\rangle \cdot \frac{1}{a}\nabla \varphi dx$ is
estimated: From the identitie
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \displaystyle\epsilon \int_{\Omega }\langle v\partial _{t}f\rangle
\cdot \frac{1}{a}\nabla \varphi dx \\
& =\displaystyle\frac{1}{\left\vert \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right\vert
\epsilon \frac{d}{dt}\int_{\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}}fv\cdot
\frac{1}{a}\nabla \varphi dxdv-\displaystyle\frac{1}{\left\vert \mathbb{S}^
\text{d}-1}\right\vert }\int_{\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}}fv\cdot
\frac{1}{a}\nabla \left( \epsilon {\partial }_{t}\varphi \right) dxdvdt \\
& =\displaystyle\frac{1}{\left\vert \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right\vert
\epsilon \frac{d}{dt}\int_{\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}}fv\cdot
\frac{1}{a}\nabla \varphi dxdv-\displaystyle\frac{1}{\left\vert \mathbb{S}^
\text{d}-1}\right\vert }\int_{\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}}\left(
f-\langle f\rangle \right) v\cdot \frac{1}{a}\nabla \left( \epsilon
\partial }_{t}\varphi \right) dxd
\end{array
\end{equation*
and
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\epsilon {\partial }_{t}\varphi & =\left( -\frac{1}{\text{d}}\nabla \cdot
\left( \frac{1}{a}\nabla \right) \right) ^{-1}\left( \epsilon {\partial
_{t}w_{\epsilon }\right) =\left( -\frac{1}{\text{d}}\nabla \cdot \left(
\frac{1}{a}\nabla \right) \right) ^{-1}\left( -\left\langle v\cdot \nabla
f\right\rangle -\epsilon {\partial }_{t}u\right) \\
& =\left( -\frac{1}{\text{d}}\nabla \cdot \left( \frac{1}{a}\nabla \right)
\right) ^{-1}\left\langle -v\cdot \nabla \left( f-\langle f\rangle \right)
\right\rangle +\epsilon u\text{ ,
\end{array
\end{equation*
we see tha
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \displaystyle\epsilon \int_{\Omega }\langle v\partial _{t}f\rangle \cdot
\frac{1}{a}\nabla \varphi dx \\
& =\displaystyle\frac{1}{\left\vert \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right\vert
\epsilon \frac{d}{dt}\int_{\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}}fv\cdot
\frac{1}{a}\nabla \varphi dxdv \\
& \quad +\displaystyle\frac{1}{\left\vert \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right\vert
}\int_{\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}}\left( f-\langle f\rangle
\right) v\cdot \frac{1}{a}\nabla \left( \left( -\frac{1}{\text{d}}\nabla
\cdot \left( \frac{1}{a}\nabla \right) \right) ^{-1}\left\langle v\cdot
\nabla \left( f-\langle f\rangle \right) \right\rangle \right) dxdv \\
& \quad -\epsilon \displaystyle\frac{1}{\left\vert \mathbb{S}^{\text{d
-1}\right\vert }\int_{\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}}\left( f-\langle
f\rangle \right) v\cdot \frac{1}{a}\nabla udxdv \\
& \leq \displaystyle\frac{1}{\left\vert \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right\vert
\epsilon \frac{d}{dt}\int_{\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}}fv\cdot
\frac{1}{a}\nabla \varphi dxdv+C\left\Vert f-\langle f\rangle \right\Vert
_{L^{2}\left( \Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right) }^{2}+\epsilon
^{2}C\left\Vert \nabla u\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right) }^{2}\text{
.
\end{array
\end{equation*
Combining the three above contributions with (\ref{3.2}), one obtain
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\Omega }\frac{1}{a}\left\vert \nabla \varphi
\right\vert ^{2}dx+\left\Vert \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{1}{a}\nabla \right)
\varphi \right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right) }^{2} & \leq \displaystyl
\epsilon C\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}}fv\cdot
\frac{1}{a}\nabla \varphi dxdv+\epsilon ^{2}C\left\Vert \nabla u\right\Vert
_{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right) }^{2} \\
& \quad +C\left( \left\Vert f\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \partial \Omega
\times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right) }^{2}+\left\Vert f-\langle f\rangle
\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right)
}^{2}\right) \text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
Integrating the above over $\left( 0,T\right) $, we observe with $\varphi
=\left( -\frac{1}{\text{d}}\nabla \cdot \left( \frac{1}{a}\nabla \right)
\right) ^{-1}w_{\epsilon }$ and $w_{\epsilon }=\langle f\rangle -u$ that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \left\Vert w_{\epsilon }(\cdot ,T)\right\Vert _{H^{-1}\left( \Omega
\right) }^{2}+\left\Vert w_{\epsilon }\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega
\times \left( 0,T\right) \right) }^{2} \\
& \leq \epsilon C\left( \left\Vert f_{\left\vert t=T\right. }\right\Vert
_{L^{2}\left( \Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right) }^{2}+\Vert
u_{\left\vert t=T\right. }\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega )}^{2}+\left\Vert
f_{0}\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right)
}^{2}+\Vert u_{0}\Vert _{L^{2}(\Omega )}^{2}\right) \\
& \quad +\epsilon ^{2}C\left\Vert \nabla u\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega
\times \left( 0,T\right) \right) }^{2} \\
& \quad +C\left( \left\Vert f\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \partial \Omega
\times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\times \left( 0,T\right) \right)
}^{2}+\left\Vert f-\langle f\rangle \right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \times
\mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\times \left( 0,T\right) \right) }^{2}\right) \text{
\end{array
\end{equation*
Next, we use the trace estimate in Proposition \ref{proposition3.2},
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}}\left\vert f\left( x,v,T\right)
\right\vert ^{2}dxdv+\frac{2c_{min}}{\epsilon ^{2}}\int_{0}^{T}\int_{\Omega
\times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}}\left\vert f-\langle f\rangle \right\vert
^{2}dxdvdt\leq \int_{\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}}\left\vert
f_{0}\right\vert ^{2}dxdv\text{ }
\end{equation*
and
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx+\frac{2}
\text{d}c_{max}}\int_{0}^{T}\int_{\Omega }\left\vert \nabla u\right\vert
^{2}dxdt\leq \int_{\Omega }\left\vert \langle f_{0}\rangle \right\vert ^{2}d
\text{ }
\end{equation*
to get that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \left\Vert \left( \langle f\rangle -u\right) \left( \cdot ,T\right)
\right\Vert _{H^{-1}\left( \Omega \right) }+\left\Vert \langle f\rangle
-u\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \times \left( 0,T\right) \right) } \\
& \leq \sqrt{\epsilon }C\left\Vert f_{0}\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega
\times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right) }+\epsilon ^{\frac{1}{2p}}T^{\frac{p-
}{2p}}C_{p}C\Vert f_{0}\Vert _{L^{2p}(\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1})
\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
This completes the proof.
\bigskip
\bigskip
\section{Observation estimates for diffusion equation}
\bigskip
In this section, we establish an observation estimate at one point in time
for parabolic equations (see Theorem \ref{theorem4.1} below). Such estimate
is an interpolation inequality. H\"{o}lder type inequalities of such form
already appear in \cite{LR} for elliptic operators by Carleman inequalities.
It applies to the observability for the heat equation in manifold and to the
sum of eigenfunctions estimate of Lebeau-Robbiano. On the other hand, for
parabolic operators, Escauriaza, Fernandez and Vessella proved such
interpolation estimate far from the boundary by some adequate Carleman
estimates \cite{EFV}. Here our approach is completely new and uses
properties of the heat kernel with a parametrix of order $0$.
\bigskip
\bigskip
\begin{thm}
\label{theorem4.1} Let $\Omega $\ be a bounded open set in $\mathbb{R}^{n}$,
$n\geq 1$, either convex or $C^{2}$\ and connected. Let $\omega $\ be a
nonempty open subset of $\Omega $, and $T>0$. Let $A$ be a $n\times n$
symmetric positive-definite matrix with $C^{1}\left( \overline{\Omega
\times \left[ 0,T\right] \right) $ coefficients such that $A\left( \cdot
,T\right) \in C^{2}\left( \overline{\Omega }\right) $. There are $c>0$\ and
\mu \in \left( 0,1\right) $\ such that any solution to
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\partial _{t}u-\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla u\right) =0 & \text{\textit{in}~
\Omega \times \left( 0,T\right) \ \text{,} \\
u=0 & \text{\textit{on}~}\partial \Omega \times \left( 0,T\right) \text{ ,}
\\
u\left( \cdot ,0\right) \in L^{2}\left( \Omega \right) \text{ ,} &
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*
satisfies
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\leq \left(
c\int_{\omega }\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\right)
^{1-\mu }\left( \int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right) \right\vert
^{2}dx\right) ^{\mu }\text{ .}
\end{equation*
Moreover, when $A$ is time-independent, then $c=Ce^{\frac{C}{T}}$ where $C$
and $\mu $ only depend on $\left( A,\Omega ,\omega ,n\right) $.
\end{thm}
\bigskip
\bigskip
Clearly, Proposition \ref{proposition2.1} is a direct application of Theorem
\ref{theorem4.1}. The proof of Theorem \ref{theorem4.1} uses covering
argument and propagation of interpolation inequalities along a chain of
balls (also called propagation of smallness): First we extend $A\left( \cdot
,T\right) $ to a $C^{2}$ function on $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ denoted $A_{T}$. Next,
for each $x_{0}\in \mathbb{R}^{n}$ there are a neighborhood of $x_{0}$ and a
function $x\mapsto d\left( x,x_{0}\right) $ on which the following four
properties hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\frac{1}{C}\left\vert x-x_{0}\right\vert \leq d\left( x,x_{0}\right)
\leq C\left\vert x-x_{0}\right\vert $ for some $C\geq1$ depending on $\left(
x_{0},A_{T}\right) $ ;
\item $x\mapsto d^{2}\left( x,x_{0}\right) $ is $C^{2}$ ;
\item $A_{T}\left( x\right) \nabla d\left( x,x_{0}\right) \cdot\nabla
d\left( x,x_{0}\right) =1$ ;
\item $\frac{1}{2}A_{T}\left( x\right) \nabla ^{2}d^{2}\left( x,x_{0}\right)
=I_{n}+O\left( d\left( x,x_{0}\right) \right) $ .
\end{enumerate}
Here $\nabla ^{2}$ denotes the Hessian matrix and $d\left( x,x_{0}\right) $
is the geodesic distance connecting $x$ to $x_{0}$. The proof of the above
properties for $d\left( x,x_{0}\right) $ is a consequence of Gauss's lemma
for $C^{2}$ metrics (see \cite[page 7]{IM}).
\bigskip
Now we are able to define the ball of center $x_{0}$ and radius $R$ as
B_{R}=\left\{ x;d\left( x,x_{0}\right) <R\right\} $. We will choose
x_{0}\in \Omega $ in order that one of the two following assumptions hold:
(i) $\overline{B_{r}}\subset \Omega $ for any $r\in \left( 0,R\right] $;
(ii) $B_{r}\cap \partial \Omega \neq \emptyset $ and $A\nabla d^{2}\cdot \nu
\geq 0$\textit{\ }on\textit{\ }$\partial \Omega \cap B_{R}$ for any $r\in
\left[ R_{0},R\right] $ where $R_{0}>0$. Here $\nu $ is the unit outward
normal vector to $\partial \Omega \cap B_{R}$.
\bigskip
The case $\left( i\right) $ deals with the propagation in the interior
domain by a chain of balls strictly included in $\Omega $. The analysis near
the boundary $\partial \Omega $ requires the assumptions of $\left(
ii\right) $.
However when $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{n}$ is a convex domain or a
star-shaped domain with respect to $x_{0}\in \Omega $, we only need to
propagate the estimate in the interior domain.
If further $A=I_{n}$, then $d\left( x,x_{0}\right) =\left\vert
x-x_{0}\right\vert $ and it is well defined for any $x\in \Omega $. From
\cite{PW} such observation at one point in time implies the observability
for the heat equation which from \cite{AEWZ} is equivalent to the sum of
eigenfunctions estimate of Lebeau-Robbiano type. Eventually a careful
evaluation of the constants gives the following estimates (whose proof is
omitted).
\bigskip
\begin{thm}
\label{theorem4.2} Suppose that $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{n}$ is a convex
domain or a star-shaped domain with respect to $x_{0}\in \Omega $ such that
\left\{ x;\left\vert x-x_{0}\right\vert <r\right\} \Subset \Omega $ for some
$r>0$. Then for any $u_{0}\in L^{2}\left( \Omega \right) $,\thinspace $T>0$,
$\left( a_{i}\right) _{i\geq 1}\in \mathbb{R}$, $\mu \geq 1$, $\varepsilon
\in \left( 0,1\right) $, one ha
\begin{equation*}
\left\Vert e^{T\Delta }u_{0}\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega \right) }\leq
\frac{1}{r^{n}}\frac{1}{r^{\varepsilon \left( n-2\right) }}e^{\frac{C}{T
\frac{1}{r^{6\varepsilon }}}\int_{0}^{T}\left\Vert e^{t\Delta
}u_{0}\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \left\vert x-x_{0}\right\vert <r\right) }d
\text{ }
\end{equation*
an
\begin{equation*}
\sum\limits_{\mu _{i}\leq \mu }\left\vert a_{i}\right\vert ^{2}\leq \frac{1}
r^{2n\left( 1+\varepsilon \right) }}e^{C\frac{1}{r^{2\varepsilon }}\sqrt{\mu
}}{\int\nolimits_{\left\vert x-x_{0}\right\vert <r}}\left\vert
\sum\limits_{\mu _{i}\leq \mu }a_{i}e_{i}\left( x\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx
\end{equation*
where $C>0$ is a constant only depending on $\left( \varepsilon ,n
\normalfont{\text{max}}\left\{ \left\vert x-x_{0}\right\vert ;x\in \overline
\Omega }\right\} \right) $. Here $\left( \mu _{i},e_{i}\right) $ denotes the
eigenbasis of the Laplace operator with Dirichlet boundary condition.
\end{thm}
\bigskip
\bigskip
In the next subsection, we state some preliminary lemmas and corollaries. In
subsection 4.2, we prove Theorem \ref{theorem4.1}. Subsection 4.3 is devoted
to the proof of the preliminary results.
\bigskip
\subsection{Preliminary results}
\bigskip
In this subsection we present some lemmas and corollaries which will be used
for the proof of Theorem \ref{theorem4.1}.
\bigskip
The following lemma allows to solve differential inequalities and makes
appear the H\"{o}lder type of inequality in Theorem \ref{theorem4.1}.
\bigskip
\begin{lem}
\label{lemma4.3} Let $T>0$, $\lambda >0$\ and $F_{1},F_{2}\in C^{0}\left(
\left[ 0,T\right] \right) $. Consider two positive functions $y,N\in
C^{1}\left( \left[ 0,T\right] \right) $\ such that
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\left\vert \displaystyle\frac{1}{2}y^{\prime }\left( t\right) +N\left(
t\right) y\left( t\right) \right\vert \leq \left( \displaystyle\frac{C_{0}}
T-t+\lambda }+C_{1}\right) y\left( t\right) +F_{1}\left( t\right) y\left(
t\right) & \\
N^{\prime }\left( t\right) \leq \left( \displaystyle\frac{1+C_{0}}
T-t+\lambda }+C_{1}\right) N\left( t\right) +F_{2}\left( t\right) \text{ } &
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*
where $C_{0},C_{1}\geq 0$. Then for any $0\leq t_{1}<t_{2}<t_{3}\leq T$, one
has
\begin{equation*}
y\left( t_{2}\right) ^{1+M}\leq y\left( t_{3}\right) y\left( t_{1}\right)
^{M}e^{4D}\left( \frac{T-t_{1}+\lambda }{T-t_{3}+\lambda }\right)
^{2C_{0}\left( 1+M\right) }
\end{equation*
wher
\begin{equation*}
M=\frac{\displaystyle\int_{t_{2}}^{t_{3}}\frac{e^{tC_{1}}}{\left(
T-t+\lambda \right) ^{1+C_{0}}}dt}{\displaystyle\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}\frac
e^{tC_{1}}}{\left( T-t+\lambda \right) ^{1+C_{0}}}dt}\text{ and }D=M\left(
t_{2}-t_{1}\right) \left( C_{1}+\underset{\left[ t_{1},t_{3}\right] }
\normalfont{\text{sup}}}\left\vert F_{1}\right\vert +\displaystyl
\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{3}}\left\vert F_{2}\right\vert dt\right) \text{ .}
\end{equation*}
\end{lem}
\bigskip
\begin{cor}
\label{corollary4.4} Under the assumptions of Lemma 1, for any $\lambda >0$\
and $\ell >1$\ such that $\ell \lambda <T/4$, one has
\begin{equation*}
y\left( T-\ell \lambda \right) ^{1+M_{\ell }}\leq y\left( T\right) y\left(
T-2\ell \lambda \right) ^{M_{\ell }}e^{D_{\ell }}\left( 2\ell +1\right)
^{2C_{0}\left( 1+M_{\ell }\right) }\text{ }
\end{equation*
where $D_{\ell }=TM_{\ell }\left( C_{1}+\underset{\left[ t_{1},t_{3}\right]
{\normalfont{\text{sup}}}\left\vert F_{1}\right\vert +\displaystyl
\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{3}}\left\vert F_{2}\right\vert dt\right) $, $M_{\ell }\leq
e^{C_{1}T}\frac{\left( \ell +1\right) ^{C_{0}}}{1-\left( \frac{2}{3}\right)
^{C_{0}}}$\ if $C_{0}>0$\ and $M_{\ell }\leq e^{C_{1}T}\frac
\normalfont{\text{ln}}\left( \ell +1\right) }{\normalfont{\text{ln}}2}$\ if
C_{0}=0$.
\end{cor}
\bigskip
Proof .- Apply Lemma \ref{lemma4.3} with $t_{3}=T$, $t_{2}=T-\ell \lambda $,
$t_{1}=T-2\ell \lambda $, with $\ell \lambda <T/4$. Here when $C_{0}>0$
\begin{equation*}
M_{\ell }=\frac{\displaystyle\int_{T-\ell \lambda }^{T}\frac{e^{tC_{1}}}
\left( T-t+\lambda \right) ^{1+C_{0}}}dt}{\displaystyle\int_{T-2\ell \lambda
}^{T-\ell \lambda }\frac{e^{tC_{1}}}{\left( T-t+\lambda \right) ^{1+C_{0}}}d
}\leq e^{2\ell \lambda C_{1}}\frac{\left( \ell +1\right) ^{C_{0}}-1}
1-\left( \frac{\ell +1}{2\ell +1}\right) ^{C_{0}}}\leq e^{C_{1}T}\frac
\left( \ell +1\right) ^{C_{0}}}{1-\left( \frac{2}{3}\right) ^{C_{0}}}\text{
for }\ell >1\text{ .}
\end{equation*
And when $C_{0}=0$
\begin{equation*}
M_{\ell }=\frac{\displaystyle\int_{T-\ell \lambda }^{T}\frac{e^{tC_{1}}}
\left( T-t+\lambda \right) }dt}{\displaystyle\int_{T-2\ell \lambda }^{T-\ell
\lambda }\frac{e^{tC_{1}}}{\left( T-t+\lambda \right) }dt}\leq e^{2\ell
\lambda C_{1}}\frac{\text{ln}\left( \ell +1\right) }{\text{ln}\left( \frac
2\ell +1}{\ell +1}\right) }\leq e^{C_{1}T}\frac{\text{ln}\left( \ell
+1\right) }{\text{ln}2}\text{ for }\ell >1\text{ .}
\end{equation*}
\bigskip
The following lemma establishes the differential inequalities associated to
parabolic equations in any open set $\vartheta \subset \mathbb{R}^{n}$:
\bigskip
\begin{lem}
\label{lemma4.5} For any $\xi \in C^{2}\left( \overline{\Omega }\times \left[
0,T\right] \right) $, $z\in H^{1}\left( 0,T;H_{0}^{1}\left( \vartheta
\right) \right) $, one ha
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert
z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx+\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot
\nabla ze^{\xi }dx \\
& =\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert
^{2}\left( \partial _{t}\xi +\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla \xi \right)
+A\nabla \xi \cdot \nabla \xi \right) e^{\xi }dx+\displaystyl
\int_{\vartheta }z\left( \partial _{t}z-\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla z\right)
\right) e^{\xi }d
\end{array
\end{equation*
and for some $C$\ only depending on $\left( A,\partial _{x}A,\partial
_{t}A\right)
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle\frac{d}{dt}\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot
\nabla ze^{\xi }dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert
^{2}e^{\xi }dx} & \leq \frac{-\displaystyle2\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla ^{2}\xi
A\nabla z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi }dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert
z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx}+\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\partial \vartheta
}\left( A\nabla z\cdot \nabla z\right) \left( A\nabla \xi \cdot \nu \right)
e^{\xi }dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi
}dx} \\
& \quad +\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert \partial
_{t}z-\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla z\right) \right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx}
\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx}+C\frac
\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left( 1+\left\vert \nabla \xi \right\vert
\right) \left\vert \nabla z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx}{\displaystyl
\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx} \\
& \quad +\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla z\left(
\partial _{t}\xi +\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla \xi \right) +A\nabla \xi \cdot
\nabla \xi \right) e^{\xi }dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert
z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx} \\
& \quad -\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi
}dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx
\times \frac{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert
^{2}\left( \partial _{t}\xi +\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla \xi \right)
+A\nabla \xi \cdot \nabla \xi \right) e^{\xi }dx}{\displaystyl
\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx}\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*}
\end{lem}
\bigskip
\begin{cor}
\label{corollary4.6} Let $R>0$\ be sufficiently small and $z\in H^{1}\left(
0,T;H_{0}^{1}\left( \Omega \cap B_{R}\right) \right) $\ with $B_{R}=\left\{
x;d\left( x,x_{0}\right) <R\right\} $. Introduce for $t\in \left( 0,T\right]
$, $\mathcal{P}z=\partial _{t}z-\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla z\right) $
\begin{equation*}
G_{\lambda }\left( x,t\right) =\frac{1}{\left( T-t+\lambda \right) ^{n/2}
e^{-\frac{d^{2}\left( x,x_{0}\right) }{4\left( T-t+\lambda \right) }}\quad
\forall x\in B_{R}\text{ ,}
\end{equation*
and
\begin{equation*}
N_{\lambda }\left( t\right) =\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap
B_{R}}A\left( x,t\right) \nabla z\left( x,t\right) \cdot \nabla z\left(
x,t\right) G_{\lambda }\left( x,t\right) dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap
B_{R}}\left\vert z\left( x,t\right) \right\vert ^{2}G_{\lambda }\left(
x,t\right) dx}
\end{equation*
whenever $\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R}}\left\vert z\left( x,t\right)
\right\vert ^{2}dx\neq 0$. Then, the following two properties hold:
\begin{description}
\item[$i)$] For some $C_{0}\geq 0$
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \left\vert \displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\Omega \cap
B_{R}}\left\vert z\left( x,t\right) \right\vert ^{2}G_{\lambda }\left(
x,t\right) dx+N_{\lambda }\left( t\right) \displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap
B_{R}}\left\vert z\left( x,t\right) \right\vert ^{2}G_{\lambda }\left(
x,t\right) dx\right\vert \\
& \leq \left( \displaystyle\frac{C_{0}}{T-t+\lambda }+C_{1}\right)
\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R}}\left\vert z\left( x,t\right) \right\vert
^{2}G_{\lambda }\left( x,t\right) dx \\
& \quad +\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R}}\left\vert z\left( x,t\right)
\mathcal{P}z\left( x,t\right) \right\vert G_{\lambda }\left( x,t\right) d
\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*}
\item[$ii)$] There are $R>0$, $0\leq C_{0}<1$, $C_{1}\geq 0$\ such that when
$A\nabla d^{2}\cdot \nu \geq 0$\ on $\partial \Omega \cap B_{R}$,\
\begin{equation*}
\frac{d}{dt}N_{\lambda }\left( t\right) \leq \left( \frac{1+C_{0}}
T-t+\lambda }+C_{1}\right) N_{\lambda }\left( t\right) +\frac{\displaystyl
\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R}}\left\vert \mathcal{P}z\left( x,t\right) \right\vert
^{2}G_{\lambda }\left( x,t\right) dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap
B_{R}}\left\vert z\left( x,t\right) \right\vert ^{2}G_{\lambda }\left(
x,t\right) dx}\text{ .}
\end{equation*}
\end{description}
\end{cor}
\bigskip
Proof .- Apply Lemma \ref{lemma4.5} with $\vartheta =\Omega \cap B_{R}$ and
\begin{equation*}
\xi \left( x,t\right) =-\frac{d^{2}\left( x,x_{0}\right) }{4\left(
T-t+\lambda \right) }-\frac{n}{2}\text{ln}\left( T-t+\lambda \right) \text{
}
\end{equation*
It remains to bound $\partial _{t}\xi +\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla \xi
\right) +A\nabla \xi \cdot \nabla \xi $, $-2A\nabla ^{2}\xi A\nabla z\cdot
\nabla z$ and $\left\vert \nabla \xi \right\vert $. First, one get
\begin{equation*}
C_{A_{T}}\left\vert \nabla \xi \right\vert ^{2}\leq A_{T}\nabla \xi \cdot
\nabla \xi =\frac{d^{2}\left( x,x_{0}\right) }{4\left( T-t+\lambda \right)
^{2}}\text{ .}
\end{equation*
Next, $\nabla \cdot \left( A_{T}\nabla \xi \right) =\frac{-n}{\left(
T-t+\lambda \right) }+\frac{O\left( d\left( x,x_{0}\right) \right) }
T-t+\lambda }$ and
\begin{equation*}
\partial _{t}\xi +\nabla \cdot \left( A_{T}\nabla \xi \right) +A_{T}\nabla
\xi \cdot \nabla \xi =\frac{O\left( d\left( x,x_{0}\right) \right) }
T-t+\lambda }\text{ }
\end{equation*
imply
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \partial _{t}\xi +\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla \xi \right) +A\nabla
\xi \cdot \nabla \xi \\
& =\frac{O\left( d\left( x,x_{0}\right) \right) }{T-t+\lambda }+\nabla \cdot
\left( \left( A-A_{T}\right) \left( A_{T}\right) ^{-1}A_{T}\nabla \xi
\right) +\left( A-A_{T}\right) \nabla \xi \cdot \nabla \xi \\
& =\frac{O\left( d\left( x,x_{0}\right) \right) }{T-t+\lambda }+O\left(
1\right) \text{ ,
\end{array
\end{equation*
where in the last equality we used $\left\Vert A\left( \cdot ,t\right)
-A_{T}\right\Vert \leq \left\Vert \partial _{t}A\right\Vert \left(
T-t+\lambda \right) $. Finally, we hav
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
-2A\nabla ^{2}\xi A\nabla z\cdot \nabla z & =\frac{1}{2\left( T-t+\lambda
\right) }A_{T}\nabla ^{2}d^{2}A\nabla z\cdot \nabla z+\left( A-A_{T}\right)
\nabla ^{2}d^{2}A\nabla z\cdot \nabla z \\
& =A\nabla z\cdot \nabla z\left( \frac{1+O\left( d\left( x,x_{0}\right)
\right) }{T-t+\lambda }+O\left( 1\right) \right) \text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
One conclude by choosing $R>0$ sufficiently small in order the constant
C_{0}$ in Corollary \ref{corollary4.6} satisfies $0<C_{0}<1$.
\bigskip
Remark .- When $A$ is time-independent, then $C_{1}=0$ in Corollary \re
{corollary4.6}.
\bigskip
The following lemma will be used to deal with the delocalized terms.
\bigskip
\begin{lem}
\label{lemma4.7} Let $\rho \in \left( 0,R\right) $\ and $0<\varepsilon <\rho
/2$. There are constants $c_{1},c_{2},c_{3}>0$ only depending on $\left(
\rho ,\varepsilon ,A\right) $\ such that for any $T-\theta \leq t\leq T$,
one has
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right) \right\vert
^{2}dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho }}\left\vert u\left(
x,t\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx}\leq e^{\frac{c_{1}}{\theta }}\text{ }
\end{equation*
where
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{\theta }=c_{2}\normalfont{\text{ln}}\left( e^{c_{3}\left( 1+\frac{
}{T}\right) }\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right)
\right\vert ^{2}dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho -2\varepsilon
}}\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx}\right) \text{\textit{\
with }}0<\theta \leq \normalfont{\text{min}}\left( 1,T/2\right) \text{ .}
\end{equation*}
\end{lem}
\bigskip
The interested reader may wish here to compare this lemma with \cite[Lemma 5
{EFV}.
\bigskip
\bigskip
\subsection{Proof of Theorem 4.1}
\bigskip
Let $\lambda >0$ and $\ell >1$ be such that $\ell \lambda <T/4$. By
Corollary \ref{corollary4.4} with $y\left( t\right) =\displaystyl
\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R}}\left\vert z\left( x,t\right) \right\vert
^{2}G_{\lambda }\left( x,t\right) dx$, $N\left( t\right) =N_{\lambda }\left(
t\right) $ given in Corollary \ref{corollary4.6},
\begin{equation*}
F_{1}\left( t\right) =\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R}}\left\vert
z\left( x,t\right) \left( \partial _{t}z\left( x,t\right) -\nabla \cdot
\left( A\left( x,t\right) \nabla z\left( x,t\right) \right) \right)
\right\vert G_{\lambda }\left( x,t\right) dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap
B_{R}}\left\vert z\left( x,t\right) \right\vert ^{2}G_{\lambda }\left(
x,t\right) dx}
\end{equation*
and
\begin{equation*}
F_{2}\left( t\right) =\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R}}\left\vert
\partial _{t}z\left( x,t\right) -\nabla \cdot \left( A\left( x,t\right)
\nabla z\left( x,t\right) \right) \right\vert ^{2}G_{\lambda }\left(
x,t\right) dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R}}\left\vert z\left(
x,t\right) \right\vert ^{2}G_{\lambda }\left( x,t\right) dx}\text{ }
\end{equation*
knowing that $N^{\prime }\left( t\right) \leq \left( \frac{1+C_{0}}
T-t+\lambda }+C_{1}\right) N\left( t\right) +F_{2}\left( t\right) $ from
Corollary \ref{corollary4.6}, one can deduce the following interpolation
inequality with $M_{\ell }\leq e^{C_{1}T}\frac{\left( \ell +1\right) ^{C_{0}
}{1-\left( \frac{2}{3}\right) ^{C_{0}}}$ and $0<C_{0}<1$
\begin{equation*}
y\left( T-\ell \lambda \right) ^{1+M_{\ell }}\leq y\left( T\right) y\left(
T-2\ell \lambda \right) ^{M_{\ell }}\left( 2\ell +1\right) ^{2C_{0}\left(
1+M_{\ell }\right) }e^{D_{\ell }}\text{ }
\end{equation*
that is
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R}}\left\vert z\left(
x,T-\ell \lambda \right) \right\vert ^{2}e^{\frac{-d^{2}\left(
x,x_{0}\right) }{4\left( \ell +1\right) \lambda }}dx\right) ^{1+M_{\ell }}
\\
& \leq \left( \ell +1\right) ^{n/2}\left( 2\ell +1\right) ^{2C_{0}\left(
1+M_{\ell }\right) }\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R}}\left\vert z\left(
x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}e^{\frac{-d^{2}\left( x,x_{0}\right) }{4\lambda
}dx\left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right)
\right\vert ^{2}dx\right) ^{M_{\ell }} \\
& \quad \times e^{TM_{\ell }\left( \displaystyle\int_{T-2\ell \lambda
}^{T}\left\vert F_{2}\right\vert dt+\underset{\left[ T-2\ell \lambda ,
\right] }{\text{sup}}\left\vert F_{1}\right\vert +C_{1}\right) }\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
From the definition of $F_{1}$,
\begin{equation*}
\left\vert F_{1}\left( t\right) \right\vert \leq e^{\frac{\left(
R-2\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{4\left( T-t+\lambda \right) }}e^{-\frac{\left(
R-\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{4\left( T-t+\lambda \right) }}\frac{\displaystyl
\int_{\Omega \cap \left\{ R-\varepsilon \leq d\left( x,x_{0}\right) \right\}
}\left\vert \chi u\right\vert \left\vert -2A\nabla \chi \cdot \nabla
u-\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla \chi \right) u\right\vert dx}{\displaystyl
\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R-2\varepsilon }}\left\vert u\right\vert ^{2}dx}\text{
}
\end{equation*
Since $e^{\frac{\left( R-2\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{4\left( T-t+\lambda
\right) }}e^{-\frac{\left( R-\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{4\left( T-t+\lambda
\right) }}=e^{-\frac{\varepsilon \left( 2R-3\varepsilon \right) }{4\left(
T-t+\lambda \right) }}\leq e^{-\frac{\varepsilon \left( 2R-3\varepsilon
\right) }{12\ell \lambda }}$ for $t\in \left[ T-2\ell \lambda ,T\right] $
with $\ell >1$, one has when $t\in \left[ T-2\ell \lambda ,T\right] $
\begin{equation*}
\left\vert F_{1}\left( t\right) \right\vert \leq e^{-\frac{\varepsilon
\left( 2R-3\varepsilon \right) }{12\ell \lambda }}\frac{\displaystyl
\int_{\Omega \cap \left\{ R-\varepsilon \leq d\left( x,x_{0}\right) \right\}
}\left\vert \chi u\right\vert \left\vert -2A\nabla \chi \cdot \nabla
u-\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla \chi \right) u\right\vert dx}{\displaystyl
\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R-2\varepsilon }}\left\vert u\right\vert ^{2}dx}\text{
}
\end{equation*
By Lemma \ref{lemma4.7} with $\rho =R-2\varepsilon $
\begin{equation*}
\underset{t\in \left[ T-2\ell \lambda ,T\right] }{\text{sup}}\left\vert
F_{1}\left( t\right) \right\vert \leq e^{-\frac{\varepsilon \left(
2R-3\varepsilon \right) }{12\ell \lambda }}ce^{\frac{c_{1}}{\theta }}\text{
if }2\ell \lambda \leq \theta \text{\ .}
\end{equation*
Similarly, from the definition of $F_{2}$,
\begin{equation*}
\left\vert F_{2}\left( t\right) \right\vert \leq e^{\frac{\left(
R-2\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{4\left( T-t+\lambda \right) }}e^{-\frac{\left(
R-\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{4\left( T-t+\lambda \right) }}\frac{\displaystyl
\int_{\Omega \cap \left\{ R-\varepsilon \leq d\left( x,x_{0}\right) \right\}
}\left\vert -2A\nabla \chi \cdot \nabla u-\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla \chi
\right) u\right\vert ^{2}dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap
B_{R-2\varepsilon }}\left\vert u\right\vert ^{2}dx}
\end{equation*
and then, when $t\in \left[ T-2\ell \lambda ,T\right] $
\begin{equation*}
\left\vert F_{2}\left( t\right) \right\vert \leq e^{-\frac{\varepsilon
\left( 2R-3\varepsilon \right) }{12\ell \lambda }}\frac{\displaystyl
\int_{\Omega \cap \left\{ R-\varepsilon \leq d\left( x,x_{0}\right) \right\}
}\left\vert -2A\nabla \chi \cdot \nabla u-\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla \chi
\right) u\right\vert ^{2}dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap
B_{R-2\varepsilon }}\left\vert u\right\vert ^{2}dx}\text{ .}
\end{equation*
By Lemma \ref{lemma4.7} with $\rho =R-2\varepsilon $
\begin{equation*}
\int_{T-2\ell \lambda }^{T}\left\vert F_{2}\left( t\right) \right\vert
dt\leq e^{-\frac{\varepsilon \left( 2R-3\varepsilon \right) }{12\ell \lambda
}}ce^{\frac{c_{1}}{\theta }}\text{ if }2\ell \lambda \leq \theta \text{ }
\end{equation*
where $c>1$ is a constant only dependent on $\left( A,R,\varepsilon \right)
. We conclude that for any $2\ell \lambda \leq \theta \frac{\varepsilon
\left( 2R-3\varepsilon \right) }{6c_{1}}
\begin{equation*}
\underset{t\in \left[ T-\theta ,T\right] }{\text{sup}}\left\vert F_{1}\left(
t\right) \right\vert +\int_{T-\theta }^{T}\left\vert F_{2}\left( t\right)
\right\vert dt\leq 2c\text{ .}
\end{equation*
Therefore there is $c_{4}:=\frac{\varepsilon \left( 2R-3\varepsilon \right)
}{6c_{1}}\in \left( 0,1\right) $ such that for any $2\ell \lambda \leq
c_{4}\theta $
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R}}\left\vert z\left(
x,T-\ell \lambda \right) \right\vert ^{2}e^{\frac{-d^{2}\left(
x,x_{0}\right) }{4\left( \ell +1\right) \lambda }}dx\right) ^{1+M_{\ell }}
\\
& \leq e^{\left( 2c+C_{1}\right) TM_{\ell }}\left( 2\ell +1\right)
^{2C_{0}\left( 1+M_{\ell }\right) +n/2}\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap
B_{R}}\left\vert z\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}e^{\frac{-d^{2}\left(
x,x_{0}\right) }{4\lambda }}dx\left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert
u\left( x,0\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\right) ^{M_{\ell }
\end{array
\end{equation*
which implie
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R}}\left\vert z\left( x,T-\ell
\lambda \right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\right) ^{1+M_{\ell }} & \leq e^{\left(
2c+C_{1}\right) TM_{\ell }}\left( 2\ell +1\right) ^{2C_{0}\left( 1+M_{\ell
}\right) +n/2}e^{\frac{R^{2}}{4\left( \ell +1\right) \lambda }\left(
1+M_{\ell }\right) } \\
& \quad \times \displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R}}\left\vert z\left(
x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}e^{\frac{-d^{2}\left( x,x_{0}\right) }{4\lambda
}dx\left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right)
\right\vert ^{2}dx\right) ^{M_{\ell }}\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
Now, we split $\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R}}\left\vert z\left(
x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}e^{\frac{-d^{2}\left( x,x_{0}\right) }{4\lambda
}dx$ into two parts: For any $0<r<R/2$ such that $B_{r}\Subset \Omega $,
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R}}\left\vert z\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}e^
\frac{-d^{2}\left( x,x_{0}\right) }{4\lambda }}dx\leq \int_{B_{r}}\left\vert
u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx+e^{\frac{-r^{2}}{4\lambda
}\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\text{ .}
\end{equation*
Consequently, we hav
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R}}\left\vert z\left(
x,T-\ell \lambda \right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\right) ^{1+M_{\ell }} \\
& \leq e^{\left( 2c+C_{1}\right) TM_{\ell }}\left( 2\ell +1\right)
^{2C_{0}\left( 1+M_{\ell }\right) +n/2}e^{\frac{R^{2}}{4\left( \ell
+1\right) \lambda }\left( 1+M_{\ell }\right) }\displaystyl
\int_{B_{r}}\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\left(
\displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right) \right\vert
^{2}dx\right) ^{M_{\ell }} \\
& \quad +e^{\left( 2c+C_{1}\right) TM_{\ell }}\left( 2\ell +1\right)
^{2C_{0}\left( 1+M_{\ell }\right) +n/2}e^{\frac{R^{2}}{4\left( \ell
+1\right) \lambda }\left( 1+M_{\ell }\right) }e^{\frac{-r^{2}}{4\lambda
}\left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right) \right\vert
^{2}dx\right) ^{1+M_{\ell }}\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
Now, choose $\ell >1$ in order that $\frac{R^{2}}{4\left( \ell +1\right)
\left( 1+M_{\ell }\right) \leq \frac{r^{2}}{8}$ (knowing that $M_{\ell }\leq
e^{C_{1}T}\frac{\left( \ell +1\right) ^{C_{0}}}{1-\left( \frac{2}{3}\right)
^{C_{0}}}$ for $\ell >1$ and $C_{0}<1$). Therefore there is $K>1$ such that
for any $\lambda \leq \frac{c_{4}}{2\ell }\theta $
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R-\varepsilon }}\left\vert u\left(
x,T-\ell \lambda \right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\right) ^{1+K} & \leq Ke^{\frac
r^{2}}{8\lambda }}\displaystyle\int_{B_{r}}\left\vert u\left( x,T\right)
\right\vert ^{2}dx\left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left(
x,0\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\right) ^{K} \\
& \quad +Ke^{\frac{-r^{2}}{8\lambda }}\left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega
}\left\vert u\left( x,0\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\right) ^{1+K}\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
But by Lemma \ref{lemma4.7} with $\rho =R-2\varepsilon $, since $\ell
\lambda \leq \theta $,
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\leq
\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\leq e^{\frac
c_{1}}{\theta }}\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R-\varepsilon }}\left\vert u\left(
x,T-\ell \lambda \right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\text{ .}
\end{equation*
As a consequence, for any $\lambda \leq \frac{c_{4}}{2\ell }\theta $ one
obtai
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert
^{2}dx\right) ^{1+K} & \leq e^{\frac{\left( 1+K\right) c_{1}}{\theta }}Ke^
\frac{r^{2}}{8\lambda }}\displaystyle\int_{B_{r}}\left\vert u\left(
x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert
u\left( x,0\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\right) ^{K} \\
& \quad +e^{\frac{\left( 1+K\right) c_{1}}{\theta }}Ke^{\frac{-r^{2}}
8\lambda }}\left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right)
\right\vert ^{2}dx\right) ^{1+K}\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
On the other hand, for any $\lambda \in \left( \frac{c_{4}}{2\ell }\theta
\frac{T}{4\ell }\right) $, one has $1\leq e^{\frac{-r^{2}}{8\lambda }}e^
\frac{r^{2}\ell }{4c_{4}\theta }}$. And for any $\lambda \geq \frac{T}{4\ell
}$, there holds $1\leq e^{\frac{-r^{2}}{8\lambda }}e^{\frac{r^{2}\ell }{4T}}
. Finally, there is $K>1$ such that for any $\lambda >0$
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert
^{2}dx\right) ^{1+K} & \leq e^{\frac{K}{\theta }}Ke^{\frac{r^{2}}{8\lambda }
\displaystyle\int_{B_{r}}\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert
^{2}dx\left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right)
\right\vert ^{2}dx\right) ^{K} \\
& \quad +e^{\frac{K}{\theta }}Ke^{\frac{K}{T}}e^{\frac{-r^{2}}{8\lambda
}\left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right) \right\vert
^{2}dx\right) ^{1+K}\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
Next, choose $\lambda >0$ such that $e^{\frac{r^{2}}{8\lambda }}:=2e^{\frac{
}{\theta }}Ke^{\frac{K}{T}}\left( \frac{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega
}\left\vert u\left( x,0\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega
}\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx}\right) ^{1+K}$ that is
\begin{equation*}
e^{\frac{K}{\theta }}Ke^{\frac{K}{T}}e^{\frac{-r^{2}}{8\lambda }}\left(
\displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right) \right\vert
^{2}dx\right) ^{1+K}=\frac{1}{2}\left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert
u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\right) ^{1+K}
\end{equation*
in order tha
\begin{equation*}
\displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert
^{2}dx\leq 2Ke^{\frac{K}{\theta }}\left( e^{\frac{K}{T}}\displaystyl
\int_{B_{r}}\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\right) ^{\frac{
}{2+2K}}\left( \displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right)
\right\vert ^{2}dx\right) ^{\frac{1+2K}{2+2K}}\text{ .}
\end{equation*
Recall that by Lemma \ref{lemma4.7} with $\rho =R-2\varepsilon $,
\begin{equation*}
e^{\frac{K}{\theta }}=\left( e^{c_{3}\left( 1+\frac{1}{T}\right) }\frac
\displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx}
\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R-4\varepsilon }}\left\vert u\left(
x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx}\right) ^{Kc_{2}}\text{ .}
\end{equation*
Finally, we obtain
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\Omega \cap B_{R-4\varepsilon }}\left\vert u\left( x,T\right)
\right\vert ^{2}dx\leq K\left( \int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right)
\right\vert ^{2}dx\right) ^{\frac{K}{1+K}}\left( e^{\frac{K}{T
}\int_{B_{r}}\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\right) ^{\frac
1}{1+K}}
\end{equation*
for some positive constant $K$ only depending on $\left( A_{T},\varepsilon
,R,r,n\right) $. By an adequate covering of $\Omega $ by balls
B_{R-4\varepsilon }$ where $x_{0}$ and $R$ are chosen such that $A\nabla
d^{2}\cdot \nu \geq 0$\textit{\ }on\textit{\ }$\partial \Omega \cap B_{R}$
and by a propagation of smallness based on the previous estimate, we get the
desired observation inequality at one point in time for parabolic equations.
\bigskip
\bigskip
\subsection{Proof of Lemma \protect\ref{lemma4.3}}
\bigskip
We shall distinguish two cases: $t\in \left[ t_{1},t_{2}\right] $; $t\in
\left[ t_{2},t_{3}\right] $. For $t_{1}\leq t\leq t_{2}$, we integrate
\left( \left( T-t+\lambda \right) ^{1+C_{0}}e^{-tC_{1}}N\left( t\right)
\right) ^{\prime }\leq \left( T-t+\lambda \right)
^{1+C_{0}}e^{-tC_{1}}F_{2}\left( t\right) $ over $\left( t,t_{2}\right) $ to
get
\begin{equation*}
\left( \frac{T-t_{2}+\lambda }{T-t+\lambda }\right)
^{1+C_{0}}e^{-C_{1}\left( t_{2}-t\right) }N\left( t_{2}\right)
-\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}\left\vert F_{2}\left( s\right) \right\vert ds\leq
N\left( t\right) \text{ .}
\end{equation*
Then we solve $y^{\prime }+2\alpha \left( t\right) y\leq 0$ with
\begin{equation*}
\alpha \left( t\right) =\left( \frac{T-t_{2}+\lambda }{T-t+\lambda }\right)
^{1+C_{0}}e^{-C_{1}\left( t_{2}-t\right) }N\left( t_{2}\right) -\frac{C_{0}}
T-t+\lambda }-C_{1}-\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}\left\vert F_{2}\right\vert ds
\underset{\left[ t_{1},t_{2}\right] }{\text{sup}}\left\vert F_{1}\right\vert
\end{equation*
and integrate it over $\left( t_{1},t_{2}\right) $ to obtain
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad e^{\displaystyle2N\left( t_{2}\right) \int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}\left(
\frac{T-t_{2}+\lambda }{T-t+\lambda }\right) ^{1+C_{0}}e^{-C_{1}\left(
t_{2}-t\right) }dt} \\
& \leq \frac{y\left( t_{1}\right) }{y\left( t_{2}\right) }\left( \frac
T-t_{1}+\lambda }{T-t_{2}+\lambda }\right) ^{2C_{0}}e^{2\left(
t_{2}-t_{1}\right) \left( \displaystyle C_{1}+\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}\left\vert
F_{2}\right\vert ds+\underset{\left[ t_{1},t_{2}\right] }{\text{sup}
\left\vert F_{1}\right\vert \right) }\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
For $t_{2}\leq t\leq t_{3}$, we integrate $\left( \left( T-t+\lambda \right)
^{1+C_{0}}e^{-tC_{1}}N\left( t\right) \right) ^{\prime }\leq \left(
T-t+\lambda \right) ^{1+C_{0}}F_{2}\left( t\right) $ over $\left(
t_{2},t\right) $ to get
\begin{equation*}
N\left( t\right) \leq e^{C_{1}\left( t-t_{2}\right) }\left( \frac
T-t_{2}+\lambda }{T-t+\lambda }\right) ^{1+C_{0}}\left( N\left( t_{2}\right)
+\int_{t_{2}}^{t_{3}}\left\vert F_{2}\left( s\right) \right\vert ds\right)
\text{ .}
\end{equation*
Then we solve $0\leq y^{\prime }+2\alpha \left( t\right) y$ with
\begin{equation*}
\alpha \left( t\right) =\left( \frac{T-t_{2}+\lambda }{T-t+\lambda }\right)
^{1+C_{0}}e^{C_{1}\left( t-t_{2}\right) }(N\left( t_{2}\right)
+\int_{t_{2}}^{t_{3}}\left\vert F_{2}\right\vert ds+\underset{\left[
t_{2},t_{3}\right] }{\text{sup}}\left\vert F_{1}\right\vert +C_{1})+\frac
C_{0}}{T-t+\lambda }
\end{equation*
and integrate it over $\left( t_{2},t_{3}\right) $ to obtain
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
y\left( t_{2}\right) & \leq e^{2\left( \displaystyle N\left( t_{2}\right)
+\int_{t_{2}}^{t_{3}}\left\vert F_{2}\right\vert ds+\underset{\left[
t_{2},t_{3}\right] }{\text{sup}}\left\vert F_{1}\right\vert +C_{1}\right)
\displaystyle\int_{t_{2}}^{t_{3}}\left( \frac{T-t_{2}+\lambda }{T-t+\lambda
\right) ^{1+C_{0}}e^{C_{1}\left( t-t_{2}\right) }dt} \\
& \quad \times y\left( t_{3}\right) \left( \frac{T-t_{2}+\lambda }
T-t_{3}+\lambda }\right) ^{2C_{0}}\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
Finally, combining the case $t_{1}\leq t\leq t_{2}$ and the case $t_{2}\leq
t\leq t_{3}$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
y\left( t_{2}\right) & \leq y\left( t_{3}\right) \left( \frac{y\left(
t_{1}\right) }{y\left( t_{2}\right) }\right) ^{M}\left( \frac
T-t_{2}+\lambda }{T-t_{3}+\lambda }\right) ^{2C_{0}}\left( \frac
T-t_{1}+\lambda }{T-t_{2}+\lambda }\right) ^{2C_{0}M} \\
& \quad \times e^{\displaystyle2M\left( t_{2}-t_{1}\right)
\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}\left\vert F_{2}\right\vert ds}e^{\displaystyle2M\left(
t_{2}-t_{1}\right) \int_{t_{2}}^{t_{3}}\left\vert F_{2}\right\vert ds} \\
& \quad \times e^{2M\left( t_{2}-t_{1}\right) \left( \underset{\left[
t_{1},t_{2}\right] }{\text{sup}}\left\vert F_{1}\right\vert +C_{1}\right)
}e^{2M\left( t_{2}-t_{1}\right) \left( \underset{\left[ t_{2},t_{3}\right] }
\text{sup}}\left\vert F_{1}\right\vert +C_{1}\right)
\end{array
\end{equation*
wit
\begin{equation*}
M=\frac{\displaystyle\int_{t_{2}}^{t_{3}}\frac{e^{tC_{1}}}{\left(
T-t+\lambda \right) ^{1+C_{0}}}dt}{\displaystyle\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}\frac
e^{tC_{1}}}{\left( T-t+\lambda \right) ^{1+C_{0}}}dt}
\end{equation*
which is the desired estimate.
\bigskip
\bigskip
\subsection{Proof of Lemma \protect\ref{lemma4.5}}
\bigskip
The aim of this section is to prove the differential inequalities for
parabolic equations stated in Lemma \ref{lemma4.5}. For any $z\in
H^{1}\left( 0,T;H_{0}^{1}\left( \vartheta \right) \right) $, a weak solution
of $\partial _{t}z-\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla z\right) =g$ with $g\in
L^{2}\left( \Omega \times \left( 0,T\right) \right) $, we apply the
following formula
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\vartheta }{\partial }_{t}z\varphi dx+\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot
\nabla \varphi dx=\int_{\partial \vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nu \varphi
dx+\int_{\vartheta }g\varphi dx\text{ }
\end{equation*
with different functions $\varphi $: $\varphi =ze^{\xi }$, $\varphi =
\partial }_{t}ze^{\xi }$ and $\varphi =A\nabla z\cdot \nabla \xi e^{\xi }$.
Here $\nu $ is the unit outward normal vector to $\partial \vartheta $ and
\xi =\xi \left( x,t\right) $ is a sufficiently smooth function which will be
chosen later. When $\varphi =ze^{\xi }$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi }dx=-\int_{\vartheta }\left(
\partial }_{t}z+A\nabla z\cdot \nabla \xi -\frac{1}{2}g\right) ze^{\xi }dx
\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }gze^{\xi }dx
\end{equation*
and
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert
z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx=\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }z{\partial
_{t}ze^{\xi }dx+\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert
z\right\vert ^{2}\partial _{t}\xi e^{\xi }dx \\
& =-\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi }dx
\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla \xi ze^{\xi }dx
\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }gze^{\xi }dx+\displaystyle\frac{1}{2
\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}\partial _{t}\xi e^{\xi }dx \\
& =-\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi }dx
\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla \left( z^{2}\right) \cdot
\nabla \xi e^{\xi }dx+\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }gze^{\xi }dx
\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert
^{2}\partial _{t}\xi e^{\xi }dx \\
& =-\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi }dx
\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}\left(
\partial _{t}\xi +\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla \xi \right) +A\nabla \xi \cdot
\nabla \xi \right) e^{\xi }dx+\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }gze^{\xi }d
\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
When $\varphi ={\partial }_{t}ze^{\xi }$, we hav
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert {\partial }_{t}z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi
}dx+\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot {\partial }_{t}\nabla ze^{\xi
}dx+\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla \xi {\partial }_{t}ze^{\xi
}dx=\int_{\vartheta }g{\partial }_{t}ze^{\xi }dx
\end{equation*
which implie
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot
\nabla ze^{\xi }dx-\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }\partial
_{t}A\nabla z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi }dx \\
& =\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot {\partial }_{t}\nabla
ze^{\xi }dx+\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla
z\partial _{t}\xi e^{\xi }dx \\
& =-\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert {\partial }_{t}z\right\vert
^{2}e^{\xi }dx-\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla \xi
\partial }_{t}ze^{\xi }dx+\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }g{\partial
_{t}ze^{\xi }dx+\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot
\nabla z\partial _{t}\xi e^{\xi }dx \\
& =-\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert {\partial }_{t}z+A\nabla z\cdot
\nabla \xi -\frac{1}{2}g\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx+\displaystyle\frac{1}{2
\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla z\partial _{t}\xi e^{\xi }dx \\
& \quad +\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left( {\partial }_{t}z-g\right)
A\nabla z\cdot \nabla \xi e^{\xi }dx+\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta
}\left\vert A\nabla z\cdot \nabla \xi \right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx
\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert \frac{1}{2}g\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi
}dx\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
We compute $\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left( {\partial }_{t}z-g\right)
A\nabla z\cdot \nabla \xi e^{\xi }dx$ by taking $\varphi =A\nabla z\cdot
\nabla \xi e^{\xi }$: One has with standard summation notations and
A=\left( A_{ij}\right) _{1\leq i,j\leq n}$
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left( {\partial }_{t}z-g\right)
A\nabla z\cdot \nabla \xi e^{\xi }dx+\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta
}\left\vert A\nabla z\cdot \nabla \xi \right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx \\
& =-\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla \left( A\nabla
z\cdot \nabla \xi e^{\xi }\right) dx+\displaystyle\int_{\partial \vartheta
}\left( A\nabla z\cdot \nu \right) \left( A\nabla z\cdot \nabla \xi \right)
e^{\xi }dx+\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert A\nabla z\cdot \nabla
\xi \right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx \\
& =-\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A_{ij}\partial _{x_{j}}z\partial
_{x_{i}}A_{k\ell }\partial _{x_{\ell }}z\partial _{x_{k}}\xi e^{\xi }dx
\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla ^{2}\xi A\nabla z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi
}dx \\
& \quad -\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla ^{2}zA\nabla z\cdot \nabla
\xi e^{\xi }dx+\displaystyle\int_{\partial \vartheta }\left( A\nabla z\cdot
\nu \right) \left( A\nabla z\cdot \nabla \xi \right) e^{\xi }dx\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
But by one integration by part
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad -\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla ^{2}zA\nabla z\cdot \nabla
\xi e^{\xi }dx \\
& =-\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\partial \vartheta }\left( A\nabla z\cdot
\nabla z\right) \left( A\nabla \xi \cdot \nu \right) e^{\xi }dx+\displaystyl
\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }\partial _{x_{\ell }}A_{ij}\partial
_{x_{j}}zA_{k\ell }\partial _{x_{i}}z\partial _{x_{k}}\xi e^{\xi }dx \\
& \quad +\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }\left( A\nabla z\cdot
\nabla z\right) \nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla \xi \right) e^{\xi }dx
\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }\left( A\nabla z\cdot \nabla
z\right) \left( A\nabla \xi \cdot \xi \right) e^{\xi }dx\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
The homogeneous Dirichlet boundary condition on $z$ implies $\nabla z=\nu
\partial _{\nu }z$ on $\partial \vartheta $. Therefore, one deduce
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla
ze^{\xi }dx & =\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }\partial _{t}A\nabla
z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi }dx-\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert {\partial
}_{t}z+A\nabla z\cdot \nabla \xi -\frac{1}{2}g\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx \\
& \quad -\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla ^{2}\xi A\nabla z\cdot \nabla
ze^{\xi }dx \\
& \quad +\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }\left( A\nabla z\cdot
\nabla z\right) \left( \partial _{t}\xi +\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla \xi
\right) +A\nabla \xi \cdot \nabla \xi \right) e^{\xi }dx \\
& \quad -\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A_{ij}\partial _{x_{j}}z\partial
_{x_{i}}A_{k\ell }\partial _{x_{\ell }}z\partial _{x_{k}}\xi e^{\xi }dx
\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }\partial _{x_{\ell }}A_{ij}\partial
_{x_{j}}zA_{k\ell }\partial _{x_{i}}z\partial _{x_{k}}\xi e^{\xi }dx \\
& \quad +\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\partial \vartheta }\left( A\nabla
z\cdot \nabla z\right) \left( A\nabla \xi \cdot \nu \right) e^{\xi }dx
\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert \frac{1}{2}g\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi
}dx\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
Now, we are able to compute $\displaystyle\frac{d}{dt}\frac{\int_{\vartheta
}A\nabla z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi }dx}{\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert
^{2}e^{\xi }dx}$: One ha
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \left( \displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert
^{2}e^{\xi }dx\right) ^{2}\displaystyle\frac{d}{dt}\frac{\displaystyl
\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi }dx}{\displaystyl
\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx} \\
& =-\displaystyle2\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla ^{2}\xi A\nabla z\cdot \nabla
ze^{\xi }dx\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi
}dx+\displaystyle\int_{\partial \vartheta }\left( A\nabla z\cdot \nabla
z\right) \left( A\nabla \xi \cdot \nu \right) e^{\xi }dx\displaystyl
\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx \\
& \quad -\displaystyle2\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert {\partial }_{t}z+A\nabla
z\cdot \nabla \xi -\frac{1}{2}g\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx\displaystyl
\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx \\
& \quad +\displaystyle2\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi
}dx\left( \displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi }dx
\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }gze^{\xi }dx\right) \\
& \quad +\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\partial _{t}A\nabla z\cdot \nabla
ze^{\xi }dx\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi
}dx \\
& \quad +2\left( -\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A_{ij}\partial
_{x_{j}}z\partial _{x_{i}}A_{k\ell }\partial _{x_{\ell }}z\partial
_{x_{k}}\xi e^{\xi }dx+\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }\partial
_{x_{\ell }}A_{ij}\partial _{x_{j}}zA_{k\ell }\partial _{x_{i}}z\partial
_{x_{k}}\xi e^{\xi }dx\right) \displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert
z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx \\
& \quad +\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left( A\nabla z\cdot \nabla z\right)
\left( \partial _{t}\xi +\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla \xi \right) +A\nabla
\xi \cdot \nabla \xi \right) e^{\xi }dx\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta
}\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx \\
& \quad -\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi
}dx\left( \displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}\left(
\partial _{t}\xi +\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla \xi \right) +A\nabla \xi \cdot
\nabla \xi \right) e^{\xi }dx\right) \\
& \quad +\displaystyle2\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert \frac{1}{2}g\right\vert
^{2}e^{\xi }dx\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert
^{2}e^{\xi }dx\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
Notice that by Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, the contribution of the fourth and
fifth terms of the above becomes
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad -\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert {\partial }_{t}z+A\nabla
z\cdot \nabla \xi -\frac{1}{2}g\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx\displaystyl
\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx \\
& \quad +\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi
}dx\left( \displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi }dx
\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }gze^{\xi }dx\right) \\
& =-\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert {\partial }_{t}z+A\nabla z\cdot
\nabla \xi -\frac{1}{2}g\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx\displaystyl
\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx \\
& \quad +\left( -\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left( {\partial
_{t}z+A\nabla z\cdot \nabla \xi -\frac{1}{2}g\right) ze^{\xi }dx
\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }gze^{\xi }dx\right) \\
& \quad \times \left( -\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left( {\partial
_{t}z+A\nabla z\cdot \nabla \xi -\frac{1}{2}g\right) ze^{\xi }dx
\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }gze^{\xi }dx\right) \\
& =-\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert {\partial }_{t}z+A\nabla z\cdot
\nabla \xi -\frac{1}{2}g\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx\displaystyl
\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx \\
& \quad +\left( \displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left( {\partial
_{t}z+A\nabla z\cdot \nabla \xi -\frac{1}{2}g\right) ze^{\xi }dx\right)
^{2}-\left( \displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\vartheta }gze^{\xi }dx\right) ^{2}
\\
& \leq 0\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
Therefore, one conclude tha
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle\frac{d}{dt}\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot
\nabla ze^{\xi }dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert
^{2}e^{\xi }dx} & \leq \frac{-\displaystyle2\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla ^{2}\xi
A\nabla z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi }dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert
z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx}+\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\partial \vartheta
}\left( A\nabla z\cdot \nabla z\right) \left( A\nabla \xi \cdot \nu \right)
e^{\xi }dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi
}dx} \\
& \quad +\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert g\right\vert
^{2}e^{\xi }dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert
^{2}e^{\xi }dx}+\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\partial _{t}A\nabla
z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi }dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert
z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx} \\
& \quad +\frac{-\displaystyle2\int_{\vartheta }A_{ij}\partial
_{x_{j}}z\partial _{x_{i}}A_{k\ell }\partial _{x_{\ell }}z\partial
_{x_{k}}\xi e^{\xi }dx+\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\partial _{x_{\ell
}}A_{ij}\partial _{x_{j}}zA_{k\ell }\partial _{x_{i}}z\partial _{x_{k}}\xi
e^{\xi }dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi
}dx} \\
& \quad +\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla z\left(
\partial _{t}\xi +\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla \xi \right) +A\nabla \xi \cdot
\nabla \xi \right) e^{\xi }dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert
z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx} \\
& \quad -\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }A\nabla z\cdot \nabla ze^{\xi
}dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx
\times \frac{\displaystyle\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert
^{2}\left( \partial _{t}\xi +\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla \xi \right)
+A\nabla \xi \cdot \nabla \xi \right) e^{\xi }dx}{\displaystyl
\int_{\vartheta }\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}e^{\xi }dx}\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*}
\bigskip
\bigskip
\subsection{Proof of Lemma \protect\ref{lemma4.7}}
\bigskip
Let $0<\varepsilon <\rho /2$ and $\phi \in C_{0}^{\infty }\left( B_{\rho
}\right) $ be such that $0\leq \phi \leq 1$, $\phi =1$ on $\left\{ x;d\left(
x,x_{0}\right) \leq \rho -\varepsilon \right\} $. We multiply the equation
\partial _{t}u-\nabla \cdot \left( A\nabla u\right) =0$ by $\phi
^{2}ue^{-d\left( x,x_{0}\right) ^{2}/h}$ where $h>0$ and integrate over
\Omega \cap B_{\rho }$. We get by one integration by parts
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho }}\left\vert \phi
u\right\vert ^{2}e^{-d\left( x,x_{0}\right) ^{2}/h}dx+\int_{\Omega \cap
B_{\rho }}A\nabla u\cdot \nabla \left( \phi ^{2}ue^{-d\left( x,x_{0}\right)
^{2}/h}\right) dx=0\text{ .}
\end{equation*
But, $A\nabla u\cdot \nabla \left( \phi ^{2}ue^{-d^{2}/h}\right) =\left[
2\phi uA\nabla \phi \cdot \nabla u+\phi ^{2}A\nabla u\cdot \nabla u+\phi
^{2}u\left( -\frac{2d\nabla d}{h}\right) \cdot A\nabla u\right] e^{-d^{2}/h}
. Therefore, by Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, it follows that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho
}}\left\vert \phi u\right\vert ^{2}e^{-d\left( x,x_{0}\right) ^{2}/h}dx
\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho }}\phi ^{2}A\nabla u\cdot \nabla
ue^{-d\left( x,x_{0}\right) ^{2}/h}dx \\
& \leq \displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho }}\phi ^{2}A\nabla u\cdot
\nabla ue^{-d\left( x,x_{0}\right) ^{2}/h}dx+\displaystyle\frac{1}{2
\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho }}4A\nabla \phi \cdot \nabla \phi \left\vert
u\right\vert ^{2}e^{-d\left( x,x_{0}\right) ^{2}/h}dx \\
& \quad +\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho }}\frac{4d^{2}}
h^{2}}A\nabla d\cdot \nabla d\left\vert \phi u\right\vert ^{2}e^{-d\left(
x,x_{0}\right) ^{2}/h}dx\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
Thus, with the fact that $A_{T}\left( x\right) \nabla d\left( x,x_{0}\right)
\cdot \nabla d\left( x,x_{0}\right) =1$, one get for some constant $C_{A}>0$
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \displaystyle\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho }}\left\vert \phi
u\right\vert ^{2}e^{-d\left( x,x_{0}\right) ^{2}/h}dx-\displaystyle\frac
\rho ^{2}}{h^{2}}C_{A}\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho }}\left\vert \phi
u\right\vert ^{2}e^{-d\left( x,x_{0}\right) ^{2}/h}dx \\
& \leq C_{A}e^{-\frac{\left( \rho -\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{h}}\displaystyl
\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho }}\left\vert u\left( x,t\right) \right\vert ^{2}d
\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
Then we have,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho }}\left\vert \phi u\left( \cdot
,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}e^{-d\left( x,x_{0}\right) ^{2}/h}dx & \leq e^
\frac{\rho ^{2}}{h^{2}}C_{A}\left( T-t\right) }\displaystyle\int_{\Omega
\cap B_{\rho }}\left\vert \phi u\left( \cdot ,t\right) \right\vert
^{2}e^{-d\left( x,x_{0}\right) ^{2}/h}dx \\
& \quad +C_{A}e^{\frac{\rho ^{2}}{h^{2}}C_{A}\left( T-t\right) }e^{-\frac
\left( \rho -\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{h}}\displaystyle\int_{t}^{T
\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho }}\left\vert u\right\vert ^{2}dxd
\end{array
\end{equation*
which give
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho -2\varepsilon }}\left\vert u\left(
x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx & \leq e^{\frac{\rho ^{2}}{h^{2}}C_{A}\left(
T-t\right) }e^{\frac{\left( \rho -2\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{h}}\displaystyl
\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho }}\left\vert u\left( x,t\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx
\\
& \quad +C_{A}e^{\frac{\rho ^{2}}{h^{2}}C_{A}\left( T-t\right) }e^{-\frac
\left( \rho -\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{h}}e^{\frac{\left( \rho -2\varepsilon
\right) ^{2}}{h}}\displaystyle\int_{t}^{T}\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap
B_{\rho }}\left\vert u\right\vert ^{2}dxds\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
Let $T/2<T-\delta h\leq t\leq T$, it yields
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho -2\varepsilon }}\left\vert u\left(
x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx & \leq e^{CT}e^{\frac{\rho ^{2}}{h}\delta
C_{A}}e^{\frac{\left( \rho -2\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{h}}\displaystyl
\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho }}\left\vert u\left( x,t\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx
\\
& \quad +C_{A}e^{\frac{\rho ^{2}}{h}\delta C_{A}}e^{-\frac{\left( \rho
-\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{h}}e^{\frac{\left( \rho -2\varepsilon \right) ^{2
}{h}}\displaystyle\int_{T-\delta h}^{T}\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap
B_{\rho }}\left\vert u\right\vert ^{2}dxds\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
Choose
\begin{equation*}
\delta =\frac{1}{C_{A}}\frac{\varepsilon \left( 2\rho -3\varepsilon \right)
}{2\rho ^{2}}
\end{equation*
that is $\delta C_{A}=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\left( \rho -\varepsilon \right)
^{2}-\left( \rho -2\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{\rho ^{2}}\in \left( 0,1/
\right] $ in order that $\rho ^{2}\delta C_{A}-\left( \rho -\varepsilon
\right) ^{2}+\left( \rho -2\varepsilon \right) ^{2}<0$. Therefore, we ge
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho -2\varepsilon }}\left\vert u\left(
x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx & \leq e^{\frac{\left( \rho -\varepsilon
\right) ^{2}+\left( \rho -2\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{2h}}\displaystyl
\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho }}\left\vert u\left( x,t\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx
\\
& \quad +C_{A}e^{\frac{-\left( \rho -\varepsilon \right) ^{2}+\left( \rho
-2\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{2h}}\displaystyle\int_{T-\delta h}^{T
\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho }}\left\vert u\right\vert ^{2}dxdt \\
& \leq e^{\frac{\left( \rho -\varepsilon \right) ^{2}+\left( \rho
-2\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{2h}}\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho
}}\left\vert u\left( x,t\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx \\
& \quad +C_{A}e^{\frac{-\left( \rho -\varepsilon \right) ^{2}+\left( \rho
-2\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{2h}}\displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert
u\left( x,0\right) \right\vert ^{2}d
\end{array
\end{equation*
where in the last line we used $\delta h<$max$\left( 1,T/2\right) $. Now,
choose $h$ such that both $\delta h<$max$\left( 1,T/2\right) $ and
\begin{equation*}
\left( 1+C_{A}\right) e^{\frac{-\left( \rho -\varepsilon \right) ^{2}+\left(
\rho -2\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{2h}}\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left(
x,0\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\leq \dfrac{1}{e}\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho
-2\varepsilon }}\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\text{ .}
\end{equation*
With such choice, one ha
\begin{equation*}
\left( 1-\frac{1}{e}\right) \int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho -2\varepsilon
}}\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\leq e^{\frac{\left( \rho
-\varepsilon \right) ^{2}+\left( \rho -2\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{2h
}\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho }}\left\vert u\left( x,t\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx
\end{equation*
and moreover
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\leq e^{\frac
\left( \rho -\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{h}}\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho
}}\left\vert u\left( x,t\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx
\end{equation*
for any $T/2<T-\delta h\leq t\leq T$. Such $h$ exists by choosing
\begin{equation*}
h=\frac{\varepsilon \left( 2\rho -3\varepsilon \right) /2}{\text{ln}\left(
\frac{\left( 1+C_{A}\right) \displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left(
x,0\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx}{\dfrac{1}{e}\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap
B_{\rho -2\varepsilon }}\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx
\right) }\text{ with }K=e^{\varepsilon \frac{\left( 2\rho -3\varepsilon
\right) }{2}\left( \frac{2}{T}+1\right) \delta }\text{ .}
\end{equation*
Clearly, $\delta h<T/2$ and $\delta h\leq 1$. We conclude that for any
T/2\leq T-\theta \leq t\leq T$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega }\left\vert u\left( x,0\right) \right\vert
^{2}dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega \cap B_{\rho }}\left\vert u\left(
x,t\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx}\leq e^{\frac{1}{C_{A}}\frac{\varepsilon
\left( 2\rho -3\varepsilon \right) \left( \rho -\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}
2\rho ^{2}}\frac{1}{\theta }}
\end{equation*
with
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{\theta }=C_{A}\frac{4\rho ^{2}}{\varepsilon ^{2}\left( 2\rho
-3\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}\text{ln}\left( e\left( 1+C_{A}\right) e^{\left(
\frac{2}{T}+1\right) \frac{1}{C_{A}}\frac{\varepsilon ^{2}\left( 2\rho
-3\varepsilon \right) ^{2}}{4\rho ^{2}}}\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega
}\left\vert u\left( x,0\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx}{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega
\cap B_{\rho -2\varepsilon }}\left\vert u\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}d
}\right) \text{ .}
\end{equation*
This completes the proof.
\bigskip
Remark .- When $A$ is time-independent, then $C_{A}=4$max$\left(
1,\left\Vert A\nabla \phi \cdot \nabla \phi \right\Vert _{L^{\infty }\left(
\Omega \right) }\right) $.
\bigskip
\bigskip
\section*{Appendix}
\bigskip
This appendix is devoted to the proof of Proposition \ref{proposition3.2}
and of inequality (\ref{2.2}).
\bigskip
\subsection*{Trace estimate for $f$ (proof of Proposition \protect\re
{proposition3.2})}
\bigskip
Denote $\left( \partial \Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right)
_{+}=\left\{ \left( x,v\right) \in \partial \Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{
}-1};v\cdot \vec{n}_{x}\geq 0\right\} $. First, multiplying both sides of
the first line of (\ref{1.1}) by $\eta f\left\vert f\right\vert ^{\eta -2}$
and integrating over $\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\times \left(
0,T\right) $, one has the following a priori estimate for any $\eta \geq 2
\begin{equation*}
\int_{0}^{T}\int_{\left( \partial \Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d
-1}\right) _{+}}v\cdot \vec{n}_{x}\left\vert f\right\vert ^{\eta }dxdvdt\leq
\epsilon \frac{2}{\eta }\int_{\Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d
-1}}\left\vert f_{0}\right\vert ^{\eta }dxdv\text{ .}
\end{equation*
Secondly, one uses H\"{o}lder inequality to get
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
& \quad \displaystyle\int_{0}^{T}\int_{\partial \Omega \times \mathbb{S}^
\text{d}-1}}\left\vert f\right\vert ^{2}dxdvdt \\
& \leq \left( \displaystyle\int_{0}^{T}\int_{\left( \partial \Omega \times
\mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right) _{+}}\dfrac{dxdvdt}{\left( v\cdot \vec{n
_{x}\right) ^{\frac{1}{p-1}}}\right) ^{\frac{p-1}{p}}\left( \displaystyl
\int_{0}^{T}\int_{\left( \partial \Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d
-1}\right) _{+}}v\cdot \vec{n}_{x}\left\vert f\right\vert ^{2p}dxdvdt\right)
^{\frac{1}{p}}\text{ .
\end{array
\end{equation*
Bu
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\left( \partial \Omega \times \mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1}\right) _{+}
\dfrac{dxdv}{\left( v\cdot \vec{n}_{x}\right) ^{\frac{1}{p-1}}}\leq C\frac
p-1}{p-2}\text{ for any }p>2\text{ .}
\end{equation*
Hence, as soon as $p>2$, one get the desired estimate
\begin{equation*}
\left\Vert f\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \partial \Omega \times \mathbb{S}^
\text{d}-1}\times \left( 0,T\right) \right) }\leq CT^{\frac{p-1}{2p
}\epsilon ^{\frac{1}{2p}}C_{p}\Vert f_{0}\Vert _{L^{2p}(\Omega \times
\mathbb{S}^{\text{d}-1})}
\end{equation*
where $C_{p}=\left( \frac{p-1}{p-2}\right) ^{\frac{p-1}{2p}}\left( \frac{1}{
}\right) ^{\frac{1}{2p}}$ and $C>0$ only depends on $\left( \Omega ,\text{d
\right) $.
\bigskip
\subsection*{Backward estimate for diffusion equations (proof of (\protect
\ref{2.2}))}
\bigskip
Classical energy identities for our parabolic equation are
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\Omega}\left\vert u\right\vert
^{2}dx+\int_{\Omega}\frac{1}{\text{d}a}\left\vert \nabla u\right\vert
^{2}dx=0\text{ ,}
\end{equation*
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\Omega}\frac{1}{\text{d}a}\left\vert
\nabla\varphi\right\vert ^{2}dx+\int_{\Omega}\left\vert u\right\vert ^{2}dx=
\text{ ,}
\end{equation*}
where $\varphi\left( \cdot,t\right) \in H_{0}^{1}\left( \Omega\right) $
solves $-\nabla\cdot\left( \frac{1}{\text{d}a}\nabla\varphi\left(
\cdot,t\right) \right) =u\left( \cdot,t\right) $ in $\Omega$. Now, one can
easily check with $y\left( t\right) =\displaystyle\int_{\Omega}\frac {1}
\text{d}a\left( x\right) }\left\vert \nabla\varphi\left( x,t\right)
\right\vert ^{2}dx$ and $N\left( t\right) =\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega
}\left\vert u\left( x,t\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx}{\displaystyle\int
_{\Omega}\frac{1}{\text{d}a\left( x\right) }\left\vert \nabla\varphi\left(
x,t\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx}$ that
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{1}{2}y^{\prime}\left( t\right) +N\left( t\right) y\left( t\right) =0 &
\\
N^{\prime}\left( t\right) \leq0\text{ .} &
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation*}
By solving such differential inequalities, one obtain
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\Omega}\frac{1}{\text{d}a\left( x\right) }\left\vert \nabla
\varphi\left( x,0\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx\leq e^{2TN\left( 0\right)
}\int_{\Omega}\frac{1}{\text{d}a\left( x\right) }\left\vert \nabla
\varphi\left( x,T\right) \right\vert ^{2}dx
\end{equation*}
which implies
\begin{equation*}
\left\Vert u\left( \cdot,T\right) \right\Vert _{H^{-1}\left( \Omega\right)
}^{2}\leq\frac{c_{max}}{c_{min}}e^{2T\frac{\left\Vert u\left( \cdot,0\right)
\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega\right) }^{2}}{\text{d}c_{min}\left\Vert
u\left( \cdot,0\right) \right\Vert _{H^{-1}\left( \Omega\right) }^{2}
}\left\Vert u\left( \cdot,T\right) \right\Vert _{H^{-1}\left( \Omega\right)
}^{2}\text{ .}
\end{equation*}
One conclude that
\begin{equation*}
\left\Vert u\left( \cdot,0\right) \right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega\right)
}\leq ce^{cT\frac{\left\Vert u\left( \cdot,0\right) \right\Vert
_{L^{2}\left( \Omega\right) }^{2}}{\left\Vert u\left( \cdot,0\right)
\right\Vert _{H^{-1}\left( \Omega\right) }^{2}}}\left\Vert u\left(
\cdot,T\right) \right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \Omega\right) }\text{ .}
\end{equation*}
\bigskip
\bigskip
\bigskip
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.