A Toeplitz property of ballot permutations and odd order permutations

Abstract: We give a new semi-combinatorial proof for the equality of the number of ballot permutations of length $n$ and the number of odd order permutations of length $n$, which is due to Bernardi, Duplantier and Nadeau. Spiro conjectures that the descent number of ballot permutations and certain cyclic weight of odd order permutations of the same length are equi-distributed. We present a bijection to establish a Toeplitz property for ballot permutations with any fixed number of descents, and a Toeplitz property for odd order permutations with any fixed cyclic weight. This allows us to refine Spiro's conjecture by tracking the neighbors of the largest letter in permutations.

\section{Introduction}
Let $\mathfrak{S}_n$ be the symmetric group
of permutations of the set $[n]=\{1,2,\dots,n\}$.
Let $\pi=\pi_1\pi_2\dotsm\pi_n\in\mathfrak{S}_n$.
The \emph{signature} of $\pi$ is defined to be
the sequence $(q_1,q_2,\dots,q_{n-1})$
where
\[
q_i=\begin{cases}
-1,&\text{if $\pi_i>\pi_{i+1}$};\\
1,&\text{if $\pi_i<\pi_{i+1}$}.
\end{cases}
\]
Niven~\cite{Niv68} found a determinantal formula for the number
of permutations of length~$n$ with a prescribed signature,
and showed that this number attains its maximum if and only if
the signature is for an Andr\'e permutation~\cite{And1881};
see de Bruijn~\cite{deB70} for a recursive proof.
A pair $(\pi_i,\,\pi_{i+1})$ of letters
is a \emph{descent} (resp., an \emph{ascent})
if $\pi_i<\pi_{i+1}$ (resp., $\pi_i>\pi_{i+1}$).
Denote the number of descents (resp., ascents) of $\pi$ by $\des(\pi)$
(resp., $\asc(\pi)$).
We call the number
\[
h(\pi)
=\asc(\pi_1\pi_2\dotsm\pi_n)-\des(\pi_1\pi_2\dotsm\pi_n)
\]
the \emph{height} of $\pi$.
The permutation $\pi$ is said to be a \emph{ballot permutation}
if the height of any prefix of~$\pi$ is nonnegative, namely,
$h(\pi_1\pi_2\cdots\pi_i)\ge 0$
for all $i\in[n]$.
The number of ballot permutations of height $0$ in $\mathfrak{S}_{2n+1}$,
or \emph{Dyck permutations} of length~$n$,
is the Eulerian-Catalan number; see Bidkhori and Sullivant~\cite{BS11}.
A classical coin-tossing game problem
concerning the descent-ascent structure
in a sequence of independent random variables of values $\pm1$
was considered by Chung and Feller~\cite{CF49}.

In this paper, we concern the following beautiful result
which is due to Bernardi, Duplantier and Nadeau \cite{BDN10}.

\begin{theorem}[Bernardi et al.]\label{thm:b=p}
The number of ballot permutations of length $n$ is
\[
p_n=\begin{cases}
(n-1)!!^2,&\text{if $n$ is even},\\[3pt]
n!!\cdot (n-2)!!,&\text{if $n$ is odd},
\end{cases}
\]
where $(2m-1)!!=(2m-1)(2m-3)\cdots3\cdot 1$.
\end{theorem}

Bernardi et al.~\cite{BDN10} obtained \cref{thm:b=p}
by considering more generalized paths containing horizontal steps,
called \emph{well-labelled positive paths}.
They constructed a bijection between well-labelled positive paths
of size $n$ with $k$ horizontal steps and matchings on $[2n]$
having $k$ pairs $(i,j)$ with $i\in[n]$ and $j\in[n+1,\,\dotsc,\,2n-1]$,
and thus obtained an explicit formula
for the number of well-labelled positive paths of size $n$
having $k$ horizontal steps. Taking $k=0$ in their formula yields \cref{thm:b=p}.

Denote by $\P_n$ the set of odd order permutations
of $[n]$, viz., the set of permutations of $[n]$ whose every cycle is of odd length.
By considering the neighbours of the letter $n$, we see that
\[
\abs{\P_n}=\abs{\P_{n-1}}+(n-1)(n-2)\abs{\P_{n-2}}.
\]
This recurrence gives
\[
\abs{\P_n}=p_n
\]
immediately, where $p_n$ is the number defined in \cref{thm:b=p}.
In order to find an analogue for the descent statistic in the context
of odd order permutations, Spiro~\cite{Spi18X}
introduced the following interesting notion.
For a permutation $\pi$, Spiro defines
\[
M(\pi)=\sum_{c}\min\brk1{\cdes(c),\,casc(c)},
\]
where the sum runs over all cycles of $\pi$, with the \emph{cyclic descent}
\[
\cdes(c)=\abs{\{i\in[k]\colon c_i>c_{i+1}\ \text{where $c_{k+1}=c_1$}\}},
\]
and the \emph{cyclic ascent}
\[
\casc(c)=\abs{\{i\in[k]\colon c_i<c_{i+1}\ \text{where $c_{k+1}=c_1$}\}}
=\abs{c}-\cdes(c),
\]
where $\abs{c}$ is the length the cycle $c$.
We call
\[
w(c)=\min\brk1{\cdes(c),\,casc(c)}
\]
the \emph{cyclic weight} of $c$, and $w(\pi)=M(\pi)$
the \emph{cyclic weight} of $\pi$.

\begin{conjecture}[Spiro]\label{conj:Spiro}
Let $n\ge 1$ and $0\le d\le \floor{(n-1)/2}$.
Then the number of ballot permutations of length $n$
with descent $d$
equals the number of odd order permutations of length $n$
with cyclic weight~$d$.
\end{conjecture}
Spiro confirmed \cref{conj:Spiro} for $d\le 3$,
$d=\floor{(n-1)/2}$, and $d=(n-3)/2$.

In the next section we give a new proof of \cref{thm:b=p}
by using certain combinatorial decomposition of ballot permutations
with respect to the neighbors of the letter $n$.
In \cref{sec:Toeplitz},
we display a bijection to establish
a Toeplitz property for the number of ballot permutations of length $n$
with a fixed number of descents.
A slight modification of the bijection gives the Toeplitz property
for the number of odd order permutations of length $n$ with a fixed cyclic weight.
These Toeplitz properties lead us to a refinement conjecture of \cref{conj:Spiro};
see \cref{conj:nd1j}. In \cref{sec:easy},
we show some easy cases of \cref{conj:nd1j}.

\section{A new semi-bijective proof of \cref{thm:b=p}}\label{sec:reproof}

We give an overview of notion and notation in combinatorics on words
which will be of use; see \cite{Lot02B,Lot05B}.
For any word $w$ of length~$n$,
we denote its $i$th letter by~$w_i$,
denote its alphabet
$\mathcal{A}(\alpha)=\{w_1,\dots,w_n\}$,
denote its length~$n$ by~$\ell(w)$,
and write $w_{-1}=w_n$.
Denote the \emph{reversal} of $w$ by $w'=w_nw_{n-1}\dotsm w_1$.
In particular, the reversal of the empty word
$\epsilon$ is $\epsilon$ itself.
We call a word $u$ a \emph{factor} (resp., \emph{prefix}) of~$w$
if there exist words $x$ and~$y$ such that $w=xuy$ (resp., $w=uy$).
We say that~$w$ is \emph{ballot} if
$h(u)\ge0$ for any prefix $u$ of $w$.

The notions of reversal and factor have a cyclic version.
Let $\pi=(c_1)\cdots (c_k)\in\mathfrak{S}_n$, where $(c_i)$ are the cycles of $\pi$.
We say that a word $u$
is a \emph{cyclic factor} of~$\pi$ if $u$ is a factor of some word $v$
such that~$(v)$ is a cycle of $\pi$.
For example, the permutation $\pi=(145)(26837)$ has a cyclic factor $(372)$.

Denote by $\mathscr{B}_n$ the set of ballot permutations of $[n]$.
Denote
\[
\mathscr{B}_{n,d}=\{\pi\in\mathscr{B}_n\colon \des(\pi)=d\}
\quad\text{and}\quad
\P_{n,d}=\{\pi\in\P_n\colon w(\pi)=d\}.
\]
For any letters $i$ and~$j$,
denote by $\mathscr{B}_{n,d}(i,j)$
the set of permutations in $\mathscr{B}_{n,d}$ that contain the factor~$inj$,
by $\P_{n,d}(i,j)$
the set of permutations in $\P_{n,d}$ that contain the cyclic factor $inj$.
For example, we have
\begin{alignat*}{2}
\mathscr{B}_{4,1}(1,3)&=\emptyset,\quad\quad&
\mathscr{B}_{4,1}(3,1)&=\{2341,\,3412\},\\
\P_{4,1}(1,3)&=\{(143)\},\quad\quad&
\P_{4,1}(3,1)&=\{(341)\}.
\end{alignat*}
We use lower-case letters $b$ and $p$,
in replace of $\mathscr{B}$ and $\P$ respectively,
to denote the corresponding set cardinality,
such as $p_{n,d}(i,j)=\abs{\P_{n,d}(i,j)}$.
It is clear that
\[
b_{n,d}=p_{n,d}=\begin{cases}
1,&\text{if $d=0$};\\[3pt]
0,&\text{if $d>\floor{(n-1)/2}$}.
\end{cases}
\]

\begin{lemma}\label{lem:|i-j|=1}
For any $i,j\in[n]$ such that $\abs{i-j}=1$,
\[
b_{n,d}(i,j)=b_{n-2,\,d-1}
\quad\text{and}\quad
p_{n,d}(i,j)=p_{n-2,\,d-1}.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Fix a letter $i$. Suppose that $i<j$. Then $j=i+1$.
For $\pi\in\mathscr{B}_{n,d}(i,\,i+1)$,
define $\phi(\pi)$ to be the permutation obtained from $\pi$ by
removing the letters $i+1$ and $n$
and arranging the remaining letters in the order-preserving manner
so that $\phi(\pi)\in\mathfrak{S}_{n-2}$.
It is clear that $\phi$ is a bijection between the sets
$\mathscr{B}_{n,d}(i,\,i+1)$ and $\mathscr{B}_{n-2,\,d-1}$.
The other case $i>j$ can be handled similarly.
For odd order permutations, one obtains the desired equality
by using the same operation of $\phi$ and keeping the cycle structure.
\end{proof}

For any permutation $\pi$ on a set of $n$ positive integers,
we define the \emph{standard form} of $\pi$
to be the permutation $\sigma\in\mathfrak{S}_n$
such that $\pi_i<\pi_j$ if and only if $\sigma_i<\sigma_j$
for all pairs $(i,j)$.
Denote by $\mathscr{B}$ the set of finite permutations on positive integers
whose standard forms are ballot permutations.
Let $\omega\in\mathscr{B}\setminus\{\epsilon\}$.
We say that a ballot permutation $\pi\in\mathscr{B}_n$
is \emph{$\omega$-decomposable} if
$\pi$ is the concatenation $\alpha\omega\gamma\delta$
of factors $\alpha,\omega,\gamma,\delta$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{cond:omega}
h(\alpha\omega\gamma)=h(\omega),
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$, $\gamma$ and $\delta$ are allowed to be the empty word $\epsilon$.
Let $X_n(\omega)$ be the set of
$\omega$-decomposable ballot permutations $\pi\in\mathfrak{S}_n$.
Define the \emph{$\omega$-decomposition} of a permutation $\pi\in X_n(\omega)$
to be the $4$-tuple $(\alpha,\omega,\gamma,\delta)$
such that $\pi=\alpha\omega\gamma\delta$ and that~$\gamma$ is
the longest word satisfying
\[
\gamma'\omega_{-1}\in\mathscr{B}.
\]
From definition we see that the $\omega$-decomposition
of any permutation in $X_n(\omega)$ uniquely exists.
In this case, we write
$\pi=(\alpha,\omega,\gamma,\delta)$.
In addition,
we will use the convenience
$\gamma_{-1}= \omega_{-1}$
if $\gamma=\epsilon$.

\begin{lemma}\label{lem:delta}
Suppose that $\pi=(\alpha,\omega,\gamma,\delta)$.
If $\delta\not\in\mathscr{B}$, then $\gamma_{-1}>\delta_1$ and $h(\omega)\ne 1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Denote by $\chi$ the characteristic function defined by
$\chi(P)=1$ if a proposition~$P$ is true,
and $\chi(P)=0$ if $P$ is false.
Suppose that $\delta\not\in\mathscr{B}$. Then $\ell(\delta)\ge 2$.
Let~$j$ be the minimum index such that
\[
h(\delta_1\delta_2\cdots\delta_j)=-1.
\]
Then the factor $\eta=\gamma\delta_1\delta_2\cdots\delta_j$,
which is longer than~$\gamma$, satisfies
\begin{align}
h(\alpha\omega\eta)
&=h(\alpha\omega\gamma)+(-1)^{\chi(\gamma_{-1}>\delta_1)}
+h(\delta_1\delta_2\cdots \delta_j)\notag\\
&=h(\omega)+(-1)^{\chi(\gamma_{-1}>\delta_1)}-1.\label{pf:omega}
\end{align}
On the other hand, note that
\[
h(\delta_{j-1}\cdots\delta_2\delta_1)=h(\delta_1\delta_2\cdots\delta_{j-1})=0
\quad\text{and}\quad
\delta_{j-1}\cdots\delta_2\delta_1\in\mathscr{B}.
\]
If $\gamma_{-1}<\delta_1$, then
\[
h(\delta_j\delta_{j-1}\cdots\delta_1\gamma_{-1})=0
\quad\text{and}\quad
\delta_j\delta_{j-1}\cdots\delta_1\gamma_{-1}\in\mathscr{B}.
\]
Since $\gamma'\omega_{-1}\in\mathscr{B}$, we find $\eta'\omega_{-1}\in\mathscr{B}$.
In this case, \cref{pf:omega} reduces to
$h(\alpha\omega\eta)=h(\omega)$,
contradicting the choice of $\gamma$.
This proves $\gamma_{-1}>\delta_1$.

Now assume that $h(\omega)=1$.
Then \cref{pf:omega} reduces to
\[
h(\alpha\omega\eta)=h(\omega)-2=-1,
\]
contradicting the premise $\pi\in\mathscr{B}$.
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}

As will be seen, \cref{thm:X=Y} is the key in the new proof
of \cref{thm:b=p}.

\begin{theorem}\label{thm:X=Y}
Let $\lambda=in(j-1)j$ and $\mu=(j-1)jni$ where \hbox{$i+2\le j\le n-1$}.
The map
$(\alpha,\lambda,\gamma,\delta)
\mapsto(\gamma', \mu, \alpha', \delta)$
is a bijection between the sets $X_n(\lambda)$ and $X_n(\mu)$, with the inverse map
$(\alpha,\mu,\gamma,\delta)
\mapsto(\gamma', \lambda, \alpha', \delta)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
For $\pi=(\alpha,\lambda,\gamma,\delta)\in X_n(\lambda)$, define
$f(\pi)=\gamma'\mu\alpha'\delta$.
We shall show that
$f(\pi)\in X_n(\mu)$ and
the $\mu$-decomposition of $f(\pi)$
is $(\gamma', \mu, \alpha', \delta)$, i.e.,
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\arabic*)]
\item\label[itm]{itm:f:B}
$f(\pi)\in\mathscr{B}$;
\item\label[itm]{itm:h=h}
$h(\gamma'\mu\alpha')=h(\mu)$;
\item\label[itm]{itm:c}
$\alpha\mu_{-1}\in\mathscr{B}$; and
\item\label[itm]{itm:longest}
$\alpha'$ is the longest factor of $f(\pi)$ satisfying \cref{itm:c,itm:h=h}.
\end{enumerate}
Note that \cref{itm:f:B,itm:h=h,itm:c} are independent to each other.
We show \cref{itm:h=h} first for it will be of use in showing \cref{itm:f:B}.

\noindent\cref{itm:h=h}
Since the integers $\lambda_{-1}=j$ and $\mu_1=j-1\notin\mathcal{A}(\gamma)$ are adjacent,
we obtain
\[
h(\gamma'\mu_1)=h(\gamma'\lambda_{-1})=-h(\lambda_{-1}\gamma).
\]
Since $h(\lambda)=h(\mu)=1$,
we can verify that
\begin{align}
h(\gamma'\mu\alpha')
&=h(\gamma'\mu_1)
+h(\mu)
+h(\mu_{-1}\alpha')\notag\\
&=-h(\lambda_{-1}\gamma)
+(2-h(\lambda))
-h(\alpha\lambda_1)\notag\\
&=2-h(\alpha\lambda\gamma)
=2-h(\lambda)=1.\label{pf:h:gma}
\end{align}

\noindent\cref{itm:f:B}
Since $\pi=(\alpha,\lambda,\gamma,\delta)$, we have $\gamma' \lambda_{-1}\in\mathscr{B}$.
Replacing $\lambda_{-1}=j$ by the adjacent integer $j-1$ gives $\gamma'\mu_1\in\mathscr{B}$.
Since $\mu\in\mathscr{B}$, we find
$\gamma'\mu\in\mathscr{B}$ immediately.
Now, since $\alpha\in\mathscr{B}$,
for any factorization $\alpha'=\rho\tau$, we have
$h(\tau)=-h(\tau')\le 0$. Using \cref{pf:h:gma}, we can deduce that
\[
h(\gamma'\mu\rho)
\ge
h(\gamma'\mu\rho)+h(\tau)
\ge h(\gamma'\mu\alpha')-1
=0.
\]
Hence $\gamma'\mu\alpha'\in\mathscr{B}$.
Since $h(\lambda)=1$, \cref{lem:delta} implies
$\delta\in\mathscr{B}$.
Together with \cref{pf:h:gma}, we conclude $\gamma'\mu\alpha'\delta\in\mathscr{B}$.

\noindent\cref{itm:c}
It is true since the word $\alpha\mu_{-1}=\alpha\lambda_1$
is a prefix of the ballot permutation~$\pi$, and thus a ballot one.

\noindent\cref{itm:longest}
Assume that $\alpha'$
is not the longest factor of $f(\pi)$ satisfying \cref{itm:c,itm:h=h}.
Then~$\delta$ has a nonempty prefix $\rho$ such that $\rho'\alpha\mu_{-1}\in\mathscr{B}$ and
\[
h(\gamma'\mu\alpha'\rho)=1.
\]
Together with  \cref{pf:h:gma}, we find
\begin{equation}\label{pf:h:ar}
h(\alpha_{-1}'\rho)
=h(\gamma'\mu\alpha'\rho)-h(\gamma'\mu\alpha')=0.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, since $\rho'\alpha\mu_{-1}$ is ballot, so is its prefix $\rho'$.
Since $\delta$ is ballot, so is its prefix $\rho$.
Therefore, the word $\rho$ must be of height $0$,
and $h(\alpha_{-1}'\rho)\in\{\pm1\}$, contradicting \cref{pf:h:ar}.

It remains to show that $f\colon X_n(\lambda)\to X_n(\mu)$ is a bijection.
For $\sigma=(\alpha,\mu,\gamma,\delta)\in X_n(\mu)$, define
$g(\sigma)=\gamma'\lambda\alpha'\delta$.
Same to the above, one may show that $g(\sigma)\in X_n(\lambda)$
and the $\lambda$-decomposition of $g(\sigma)$
is $(\gamma', \lambda, \alpha', \delta)$.
By definition, we can derive that
\[
gf(\pi)
=g\brk1{(\gamma', \mu, \alpha', \delta)}
=\brk1{(\alpha')',\lambda,(\gamma')',\delta}
=\pi.
\]
Thus the composition $gf$ is the identity on $X_n(\lambda)$.
In the same fashion, one may show that $fg$ is the identity on $X_n(\mu)$.
Hence $f$ is a bijection, with the inverse~$g$.
\end{proof}

Now we are in a position to give the new proof of \cref{thm:b=p}.

\begin{proof}[Proof of \cref{thm:b=p}]
Let $n\ge 4$, $i\ge 1$ and $i+2\le j\le n-1$.
Let $b_n(i,j)$ be the number of ballot permutations in $\mathscr{B}_n$
containing the factor $inj$.
Recall that $\lambda=in(j-1)j$ and $\mu=(j-1)jni$.
We claim that
\begin{equation}\label{X:lambda}
\abs{X_n(\lambda)}=b_n(i,\,j-1)-b_n(i,j).
\end{equation}

In fact, consider the involution $\Phi$ of
exchanging the letters $j-1$ and $j$ on the set
\[
Y_n=\mathscr{B}_n(i,\,j-1)\setminus X_n(\lambda).
\]
We shall show that $\Phi(Y_n)=\mathscr{B}_n(i,j)$, which
implies \cref{X:lambda} immediately. Let $\pi\in Y_n$.
If the letters $j-1$ and $j$ are not adjacent in $\pi$,
then $\Phi(\pi)\in\mathscr{B}_n(i,j)$ and
the letters $j-1$ and $j$ are not adjacent in $\Phi(\pi)$.
Suppose that $j-1$ and $j$ are adjacent in $\pi$.
Since $\pi\not\in X_n(\lambda)$,
there is no factor~$\gamma$ satisfying~\cref{cond:omega}.
In other words, the height of any prefix of $\pi$ that
is longer than $\alpha\lambda$ is at least 2, where $\alpha\lambda$
is the prefix of $\pi$ ending at $\lambda$.
Therefore $\Phi(\pi)\in \mathscr{B}_n(i,j)$.
It is clear that the preimage of every permutation $\sigma\in\mathscr{B}_n(i,j)$
lies in $Y_n$.
This proves \cref{X:lambda}.

Similarly, one may show that
\begin{equation}\label{X:mu}
\abs{X_n(\mu)}=b_n(j,i)-b_n(j-1,\,i).
\end{equation}
By \cref{thm:X=Y,X:lambda,X:mu,lem:|i-j|=1}, we infer that
\begin{align*}
b_n(i,j)+b_n(j,i)
&=b_n(i,\,j-1)+b_n(j-1,\,i)\\
&=\dotsb=b_n(i,\,i+1)+b_n(i+1,\,i)=2b_{n-2}.
\end{align*}
Since the number of ballot permutations in $\mathscr{B}_n$
ending with the letter $n$ is~$b_{n-1}$, we obtain
\[
b_n=b_{n-1}+\sum_{i,\,j}b_n(i,j)
=b_{n-1}+(n-1)(n-2)b_{n-2}.
\]
It is trivial to check that $b_1=b_2=1$.
Since the sequence $p_n$ admits the same recurrence and initial values,
we conclude that $b_n=p_n$.
\end{proof}

\section{A Toeplitz property}\label{sec:Toeplitz}
Computer calculus gives that the matrices $\brk1{b_n(i,j)}_{i,j}$
for $3\le n\le 8$ are respectively
\[
\left[ \begin {array}{cc} 0&1\\ \noalign{\medskip}1&0\end {array}
\right],\quad
 \left[ \begin {array}{ccc} 0&1&0\\ \noalign{\medskip}1&0&1
\\ \noalign{\medskip}2&1&0\end {array} \right],\quad
 \left[ \begin {array}{cccc} 0&3&2&1\\ \noalign{\medskip}3&0&3&2
\\ \noalign{\medskip}4&3&0&3\\ \noalign{\medskip}5&4&3&0\end {array}
 \right],\quad
\left[ \begin {array}{ccccc} 0&9&6&3&1\\ \noalign{\medskip}9&0&9&6&3
\\ \noalign{\medskip}12&9&0&9&6\\ \noalign{\medskip}15&12&9&0&9
\\ \noalign{\medskip}17&15&12&9&0\end {array} \right],
\]
\[
\left[ \begin {array}{cccccc} 0&45&36&27&19&13\\ \noalign{\medskip}45
&0&45&36&27&19\\ \noalign{\medskip}54&45&0&45&36&27
\\ \noalign{\medskip}63&54&45&0&45&36\\ \noalign{\medskip}71&63&54&45&0
&45\\ \noalign{\medskip}77&71&63&54&45&0\end {array} \right],
\quad\text{and}\quad
\left[ \begin {array}{ccccccc} 0&225&182&139&99&65&38
\\ \noalign{\medskip}225&0&225&182&139&99&65\\ \noalign{\medskip}268&
225&0&225&182&139&99\\ \noalign{\medskip}311&268&225&0&225&182&139
\\ \noalign{\medskip}351&311&268&225&0&225&182\\ \noalign{\medskip}385
&351&311&268&225&0&225\\ \noalign{\medskip}412&385&351&311&268&225&0
\end {array} \right].
\]
A square matrix $(a_{ij})$ is said to be \emph{Toeplitz} if
$a_{i+1,\,j+1}=a_{i,j}$ for all well defined entries $a_{i+1,\,j+1}$ and~$a_{i,j}$.
In this section, we manage to show that the matrices
\[
B(n,d)=\brk1{b_{n,d}(i,j)}_{i,j=1}^{n-1}
\quad\text{and}\quad
P(n,d)=\brk1{p_{n,d}(i,j)}_{i,j=1}^{n-1}
\]
are Toeplitz for any number $d$.

\begin{theorem}\label{thm:Toeplitz:B}
The matrix $B(n,d)$ is Toeplitz for all $n$ and $d$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Suppose that $n\ge 4$, $1\le d\le \floor{(n-1)/2}$, and $i, j\in[n-2]$.
This proof is organized as follows. First we give necessary notion and notation
to define a map~$T$ between the sets $\mathscr{B}_{n,d}(i,j)$ and $\mathscr{B}_{n,d}(i+1,\,j+1)$.
Second we interpret some facts implicitly contained in the definition.
We then make some efforts to show that~$T$ is well defined.
Finally we prove that $T$ is bijective, which will complete the proof.

Let $m=\min(i,j)$ and $M=\max(i,j)$.
We introduce the notation
\[
\overline{x}=\begin{cases}
M+1,&\text{if $x=M$},\\[3pt]
x,&\text{otherwise},
\end{cases}
\quad\text{and}\quad
\underline{x}=\begin{cases}
m,&\text{if $x=m+1$},\\[3pt]
x,&\text{otherwise},
\end{cases}
\]
and define the words
\[
\overline{(m;l)}=\overline{m(m+1)\dotsm(m+l-1)}
\quad\text{and}\quad
\underline{(M+1;\,l)}=
\underline{(M+1)M\dotsm(M-l+2)}.
\]
In particular, $\overline{(m;0)}=\underline{(M+1;\,0)}=\epsilon$.
For $\pi\in \mathscr{B}_{n,d}(i,j)$,
define the \emph{lower width}~$l_\pi$ to be the length~$l$ of
the longest factor of the form $\overline{(m;l)}$
or $\overline{(m;l)}'$, if the letters~$M$ and $M+1$ are not adjacent in $\pi$;
and define $l_\pi=0$ if $M$ and $M+1$ are adjacent.
Note that $l_\pi\le M-m+1$
since the letter $M+1$ occurs twice in the word $\overline{(m;\,M-m+2)}$.
Define the \emph{lower core} of $\pi$ to be the word
\begin{equation}\label{def:kappa:pi}
\kappa_\pi=\begin{cases}
\overline{(i;\,l_\pi)}'nj,&\text{if $i<j$},\\[3pt]
in\overline{(j;\,l_\pi)},&\text{if $i>j$}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Then $\kappa_\pi$ is a factor of $\pi$ of length $l_\pi+2$.
For example,
\[
\kappa_{382549671}=96
\quad\text{and}\quad
\kappa_{134875962}=7596.
\]
Define a map
\[
T\colon \mathscr{B}_{n,d}(i,j)\to\mathscr{B}_{n,d}(i+1,\,j+1)
\]
by firstly replacing the lower core $\kappa_\pi$ by the word
\begin{equation}\label{def:T:kappa:pi}
T|_{\kappa_\pi}=\begin{cases}
(i+1)n\underline{(j+1;\,l_\pi)},&\text{if $i<j$},\\[3pt]
\underline{(i+1;\,l_\pi)}'n(j+1),&\text{if $i>j$},
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
and secondly substituting the letter~$\overline{x}$
by the letter $\underline{x-l_\pi+1}$
for each element $x\in[m+l_\pi,\,M]\backslash\mathcal{A}(\kappa_\pi)$.
For example,
\[
T(382549671)=382645971
\quad\text{and}\quad
T(134875962)=134869752.
\]

We call the first operation the \emph{core replacement}, and the second
the \emph{straightening}.
We will show that $T$ is well defined, i.e.,
$T(\pi)\in \mathscr{B}_{n,d}(i+1,\,j+1)$ for any $\pi\in\mathscr{B}_{n,d}(i,j)$,
and that $T$ is bijective.
From definition, we observe that the map $T$ operates in the following 3 steps:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
The core replacement is length-preserving and position-preserving,
namely the words $T|_{\kappa_\pi}$ and $\kappa_\pi$ have the same length
and the same position.
Every letter in the set
\[
\mathcal{A}(\kappa_\pi)=\{\ovU{m},\,\ovU{m+1},\,\dots,\,\ovD{m+l_\pi-1},\,M,\,n\}
\]
is replaced by a letter in the set
\begin{equation}\label{pf:A:T:kappa}
\mathcal{A}\brk1{T|_{\kappa_\pi}}
=\{m+1,\,\underline{M-l_\pi+2},\,\underline{M-l_\pi+3},
\,\dots,\,\underline{M+1},\,n\}.
\end{equation}
In particular, the letter $n$ is contained in both words
$\kappa_\pi$ and $T|_{\kappa_\pi}$.
\item
The straightening operation maps the letters in the set
\[
[m,\,M+1]\backslash\mathcal{A}\brk1{\kappa_\pi}
=\brk[c]1{\ovD{m+l_\pi},\,\ovD{m+l_\pi+1},\,\dots,\,\overline{M}}
\]
to the letters in the set
\[
[m,\,M+1]\backslash\mathcal{A}\brk1{T|_{\kappa_\pi}}
=\brk[c]1{\underline{m+1},\,\underline{m+2},\,\dots,\,\underline{M-l_\pi+1}}
\]
in the order-preserving manner, where $\overline{M}=M+1$ and $\underline{m+1}=m$.
\item
The letters that is not dealt with in the first two steps constitute
the union $[m-1]\cup[M+2,\,n-1]$, and are unchanged by $T$.
\end{enumerate}
From the above observations we can infer that $T(\pi)\in\mathfrak{S}_n$.
Fix $\pi\in \mathscr{B}_{n,d}(i,j)$.
Then~$\pi$ induces a unique bijection
$T_\pi\colon[n]\to[n]$ which maps the letter~$\pi_i$
to the letter $T(\pi)_i$ for all $i\in[n]$.
Note that the preimage of every letter in the interval $[m,\,M+1]$ under~$T_\pi$
must be in the same set $[m,\,M+1]$.

Now, we show that $T(\pi)\in \mathscr{B}_{n,d}(i+1,\,j+1)$.
More precisely, we need to show
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item\label[itm]{itm:pf:i+1:j+1}
the word $T(\pi)$ contains the factor $(i+1)n(j+1)$;
\item\label[itm]{itm:pf:des=des}
$\des\brk1{T(\pi)}=\des(\pi)$; and
\item\label[itm]{itm:pf:T:B}
$T(\pi)\in\mathscr{B}$.
\end{enumerate}

Suppose that $l_\pi=0$.
Then the $\kappa_\pi\in\{nM,\,Mn\}$,
and $\pi$ contains the factor
\[
\iota=mnM(M+1)
\]
or its reversal.
From definition of the core replacement,
$T|_{\kappa_\pi}$ is the factor $(m+1)n$ or its reversal.
Since the letter $m$ (resp., $M+1$) is the smallest (resp., largest)
one in the interval $[m,\,M+1]$,
it is invariant in the order-preserving straightening.
Therefore, the image $T(\pi)$ contains the factor
\[
T|_\iota=m(m+1)n(M+1)
\]
or its reversal. This proves \cref{itm:pf:i+1:j+1}.
Note that each of the words
$\iota$ and $T|_\iota$
has a unique descent,
and the reversal operation exchanges descents and ascents.
Since the straightening is order-preserving,
the map $T$ preserves all descents
and ascents that has empty intersection with the cores. As a result,
we obtain \cref{itm:pf:des=des}. Moreover,
the unique descent in $T|_\iota$ appears later
than the unique descent appears in $\iota$,
and the unique ascent in $T|_\iota'$ appears earlier than that in $\iota$.
Since $\pi$ is ballot, so is~$T(\pi)$.
This proves \cref{itm:pf:T:B} and $T(\pi)\in \mathscr{B}_{n,d}(i+1,\,j+1)$ for $l_\pi=0$.

Below we can suppose that $l_\pi\ge 1$.
Then \cref{itm:pf:i+1:j+1} is clear from the definition of the core replacement.
In order to show \cref{itm:pf:des=des},
we claim the equivalence
\begin{equation}\label[eqrl]{pf:eqrl}
u<v\iff T_\pi(u)<T_\pi(v)
\end{equation}
for any adjacent letters $u$ and $v$ such that $\{u,v\}\not\subseteq\mathcal{A}(\kappa_\pi)$.
Since the straightening is order-preserving,
\cref{pf:eqrl} is true if $\{u,v\}\cap\mathcal{A}(\kappa_\pi)=\emptyset$.
Below we can suppose that
\[
v\in\{M,\,\ovD{m+l_\pi-1}\}\subseteq\mathcal{A}(\kappa_\pi)
\quad\text{and}\quad
u\not\in\mathcal{A}(\kappa_\pi).
\]

\smallskip

If $v=\ovD{m+l_\pi-1}$,
then $T_\pi(v)=m+1$ by the core replacement.
Since $u\not\in\mathcal{A}(\kappa_\pi)$, the letter $u$ is not mapped in the core replacement.
If $T_\pi(u)=m$, then the letter~$u$ is mapped in the straightening operation.
Since $m$ is the smallest image in the straightening,
its preimage $u$ must be the smallest element in the straightening,
that is, $u=T_\pi^{-1}(m)=\ovD{m+l_\pi}$.
Now, the elements $\ovD{m+l_\pi}=u$ and $\ovD{m+l_\pi-1}=v$ are adjacent,
contradicting the definition of the lower width $l_\pi$. Therefore,  $T_\pi(u)\ne m$.
We then obtain the equivalence
\[
T_\pi(u)<T_\pi(v)\iff
T_\pi(u)\le m-1.
\]
On the other hand,
by the premise $u\not\in\mathcal{A}(\kappa_\pi)$ and $v\in\mathcal{A}(\kappa_\pi)$,
we deduce the equivalence
\[
u<v\iff
u\le \overline{m}-1=m-1.
\]
Since all letters in the set $[m-1]$ are fixed under $T_\pi$,
we obtain the desired \cref{pf:eqrl} by combining
the above two equivalences.

\smallskip

If $v=M$, then $T_\pi(v)=\underline{M-l_\pi+2}$.
Since $l_\pi\ne0$,
we find $u\ne M+1$. Since $u\not\in\mathcal{A}(\kappa_\pi)$, we obtain the equivalence
\[
u>v\iff
u\in[M+2,\,n-1].
\]
On the other hand, since $u\not\in\mathcal{A}(\kappa_\pi)$, we deduce
$T_\pi(u)\not\in\mathcal{A}\brk1{T(\kappa_\pi)}$.
In view of \cref{pf:A:T:kappa}, we obtain the equivalence
\[
T_\pi(u)>T_\pi(v)\iff
T_\pi(u)\in[M+2,\,n-1].
\]
Since the map $T_\pi$ restricted on the set $[M+2,\,n-1]$ is the identity,
we obtain \cref{pf:eqrl} as desired.

\smallskip

By \cref{pf:eqrl}, the map $T$ preserves all descents and ascents
that are not entirely contributed by the lower core.
For those entirely contained in the lower core,
we note both the numbers of descents of the words $\kappa_\pi$
and~$T|_{\kappa_\pi}$ equal the lower width $l_\pi$.
Therefore,
$T$ preserves the total number of descents.
This proves \cref{itm:pf:des=des}.

\smallskip

For \cref{itm:pf:T:B}, we observe that in the core replacement, either
\begin{itemize}
\item
both the preimage $\kappa_\pi$ and its image $T|_{\kappa_\pi}$
contain a unique ascent,
and the ascent in $T|_{\kappa_\pi}$
appears earlier than the ascent in~$\kappa_\pi$ appears, or
\item
both of them contain a unique descent,
and the decent in $T|_{\kappa_\pi}$
appears later than the descent in $\kappa_\pi$ appears.
\end{itemize}
Since $T$ preserves all other descents and ascents,
the premise $\pi\in\mathscr{B}$ implies \cref{itm:pf:T:B}.
This confirms that $T(\pi)\in \mathscr{B}_{n,d}(i+1,\,j+1)$.

\smallskip

It remains to show that $T$ is bijective.
We define the \emph{upper width} $l_\sigma'$ to be the length $l$
of the longest factor of the form $\underline{(M+1;\,l)}$
or $\underline{(M+1;\,l)}'$,
if the letters $m$ and $m+1$ are not adjacent in $\sigma$;
and define $l_\sigma'=0$ otherwise.
Define the \emph{upper core}
of $\sigma$ to be the word
\[
\rho_\sigma=\begin{cases}
(i+1)n\underline{(j+1;\,l_\sigma')},&\text{if $i<j$},\\[3pt]
\underline{(i+1;\,l_\sigma')}'n(j+1),&\text{if $i>j$}.
\end{cases}
\]
Define a map
\[
T'\colon \mathscr{B}_{n,d}(i+1,\,j+1)\to B_{n,d}(i,j)
\]
as follows.
For $\sigma\in \mathscr{B}_{n,d}(i+1,\,j+1)$,
define $T'(\sigma)$ to be the permutation obtained
from $\sigma$ by firstly replacing its upper core by
\[
T'|_{\rho_\sigma}
=\begin{cases}
\overline{(i;\,l_\sigma')}'nj,&\text{if $i<j$},\\[3pt]
in\overline{(j;\,l_\sigma')},&\text{if $i>j$},
\end{cases}
\]
and then replacing each letter in the set $[m,\,M+1]\backslash\mathcal{A}(\rho_\sigma)$
to a letter in the set $[m,\,M+1]\backslash\mathcal{A}(T'|_{\rho_\sigma})$
in the order-preserving manner.

We shall show that
\begin{equation}\label{dsr:l=l}
l_\pi=l_{T(\pi)}'.
\end{equation}

In fact, if $l_\pi=0$, then $\pi$ contains the factor
$\iota$ or its reversal.
It follows that $\sigma$ contains the factor~$T|_\iota$ or its reversal.
Thus $l_\sigma'=0=l_\pi$.
Suppose that $l_\pi\ge 1$.
Then $m+1$ and $m$ are not adjacent in $\sigma$, since otherwise
the letters
\[
\ovD{m+l_\pi-1}=T_\pi^{-1}(m+1)
\quad\text{and}\quad
\ovD{m+l_\pi}=T_\pi^{-1}(m)
\]
would be adjacent in $\pi$, which
contradicts the definition of $l_\pi$.
Thus $l_\sigma'\ge l_\pi$ from the definition of the core replacement.
Furthermore, the letters $\underline{M-l_\pi+2}$ and $\underline{M-l_\pi+1}$
are not adjacent in $\sigma$, since otherwise the letters
\[
M=T_\pi^{-1}\brk1{\underline{M-l_\pi+2}}
\quad\text{and}\quad
M+1=T_\pi^{-1}\brk1{\underline{M-l_\pi+1}}
\]
would be adjacent in $\pi$, which contradicts $l_\pi\ge 1$.
This proves \cref{dsr:l=l}.

In the same fashion one may prove that $l_\sigma'=l_{T'(\sigma)}$.
As a consequence, both compositions $TT'$ and~$T'T$ are identities.
This completes the whole proof.
\end{proof}

We remark that the map $T_\pi$
can be represented letter-wise using a piecewise function,
with the aid of the number $l_\pi$.

Note that the key notion of lower and upper core widths,
and that of lower and upper cores,
are defined in a local structure of a permutation.
In fact, the map~$T$ looks for the
longest factor consisting of discretely continuous numbers
starting from $m$.
This localness perspective inspires us
to translate the idea application from permutations to certain cyclic words,
especially to each cycle of a permutation in its cycle representation,
and obtain \cref{thm:Toeplitz:P}.

\begin{theorem}\label{thm:Toeplitz:P}
The matrix $P(n,d)$ is symmetric and Toeplitz for all $n$ and $d$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
In this proof, we keep in mind that permutations are considered to be
unions of cycles, and forget their nature as maps on the set $[n]$.
Since taking reversal cycle-wise
is an involution between the sets $\P_{n,d}(i,j)$ and $\P_{n,d}(j,i)$,
the matrix $P(n,d)$ is symmetric.
Let $n\ge 4$ and $1\le d\le \floor{(n-1)/2}$.
In order to show the Toeplitz property, namely $P(n,d)_{i,j}=P(n,d)_{i+1,\,j+1}$,
it suffices to consider $1\le i<j\le n-2$ by virtue of the symmetry.

For $\pi\in \P_{n,d}(i,j)$,
let $C_\pi$ be the cycle of $\pi$ containing the maximum letter $n$.
Paralleling the notion of lower width by considering
cyclic factors instead of factors, we define the lower width $l_\pi$
to be the length $l$ of the longest \emph{cyclic factor} of $C_\pi$ that is
of the form $\overline{(m;l)}$ or $\overline{(m;l)}'$,
if the letters $M$ and $M+1$ are not adjacent in~$C_\pi$;
and define $l_\pi=0$ otherwise.
The subsequent notion of the lower core and core replacement
are exactly the same as those in the proof of \cref{thm:Toeplitz:B},
using the cyclic version of the lower width.
Define the map
\[
T\colon\P_{n,d}(i,j)\to\P_{n,d}(i+1,\,j+1)
\]
by running firstly the core replacement and then the straightening.

While the core replacement affects letters only inside the cycle $C_\pi$,
the straightening works on letters that are both inside and outside~$C_\pi$.
Same to the proof of \cref{thm:Toeplitz:B}, we can deduce the following one by one:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item
the width $l_\pi\le M-m+1$, where $M=\max(i,j)$ and $m=\min(i,j)$;
\item
the image $T(\pi)$ is a permutation of length~$n$,
and contains the cyclic factor $(i+1)n(j+1)$;
\item
the map $T$ preserves the length of each cycle of~$\pi$, and
the permutation~$T(\pi)$ is of odd order;
\item
the map $T$ preserves the cyclic descents outside $\kappa_\pi$,
and thus preserves the cyclic descent number of each cycle except $C_\pi$;
\item
the map $T$ preserves the cyclic descent number inside the core $\kappa_\pi$,
and the cyclic descents formed by one letter inside $\kappa_\pi$
and the other letter outside~$\kappa_\pi$;
thus $T$ preserves the cyclic descent number of $C_\pi$ if $C_\pi\ne(\kappa_\pi)$;
\item\label[itm]{itm:pf:C=kappa}
the map $T$ preserves the cyclic descent number of $C_\pi$ if $C_\pi=(\kappa_\pi)$.
\end{enumerate}
In conclusion, the map $T$ preserves the cyclic descent number of each cycle,
thus preserves the cyclic weight $d$ of $\pi$.

We shall show \cref{itm:pf:C=kappa} in detail.
Suppose that $C_\pi=(\kappa_\pi)$. We claim that $1\le l_\pi\le M-m$.
In fact, if $l_\pi=0$, then $\abs{C_\pi}=\abs{\kappa_\pi}=2$,
contradicting that $\abs{C_\pi}$ is odd. If $l_\pi=M-m+1$,
then the letter $M+1=\underline{m+l_\pi}$ is adjacent to the letter $M$,
and $l_\pi=0$, a contradiction. This proves the claim.
Now the image $T(\pi)$ contains the cycle $\brk1{T|_{\kappa_\pi}}$.
As a consequence, one finds
\begin{itemize}
\item
if $i<j$, then $\casc(\kappa_\pi)=1=\casc(T|_{\kappa_\pi})$;
\item
if $i>j$, then $\cdes(\kappa_\pi)=1=\cdes(T|_{\kappa_\pi})$.
\end{itemize}
This proves \cref{itm:pf:C=kappa} and completes the proof.
\end{proof}

For example, if
$\pi=(1,6,8,2,10)(3,12,9,11,7,5,4)\in\P_{12,4}(3,9)$,
then
\[
C_\pi=(3,12,9,11,7,5,4),\
l_\pi=3,\
\kappa_\pi=(5,4,3,12,9)\ \text{and}\
T|_{\kappa_\pi}=(4,12,10,9,8).
\]
The straightening maps the letters in
\[
[3,10]\backslash\mathcal{A}(\kappa_\pi)=\{6,7,8,10\}
\]
to the letters in
\[
[3,10]\backslash\mathcal{A}\brk1{T|_{\kappa_\pi}}=\{3,5,6,7\}
\]
in the order-preserving manner. As a result, we obtain
\[
T(\pi)=(1,3,6,2,7)(10,9,8,11,5,4,12)\in\P_{12,4}(4,10).
\]

We propose the following refinement conjecture of \cref{conj:Spiro}.

\begin{conjecture}\label{conj:nd1j}
$b_{n,d}(1,j)+b_{n,d}(j,1)=2p_{n,d}(1,j)$.
\end{conjecture}

\begin{theorem}
\cref{conj:Spiro} is true if \cref{conj:nd1j} is true.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Fix $n,d,i,j$.
Since $b_{n,d}(1,j)+b_{n,d}(j,1)=2p_{n,d}(1,j)$ for all $n$, $d$ and $j$,
we can infer by \cref{thm:Toeplitz:P,thm:Toeplitz:B} that
\[
b_{n,d}(i,j)+b_{n,d}(j,i)=2p_{n,d}(i,j).
\]
Since the number of permutations in $\mathscr{B}_{n,d}$ with
the letter $n$ appearing at the last position is $b_{n-1,\,d}$,
we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bnd}
b_{n,d}=b_{n-1,\,d}+\sum_{i\ne j}b_{n,d}(i,j).
\end{equation}
Since the number of permutations in $\P_{n,d}$ with the letter~$n$
forming a singleton is~$p_{n-1,\,d}$,
we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pnd}
p_{n,d}=p_{n-1,\,d}+\sum_{i\ne j}p_{n,d}(i,j).
\end{equation}
Since $p_{n,d}(i,j)=p_{n,d}(j,i)$ and \cref{conj:Spiro} holds
for $d=\floor{(n-1)/2}$, by induction on $n$, we derive \cref{conj:Spiro}
by the recurrences \cref{eq:bnd,eq:pnd}.
\end{proof}

\section{Easy cases of \cref{conj:nd1j}}\label{sec:easy}

In this section we solve some easy cases for \cref{conj:nd1j}.

\begin{proposition}
\Cref{conj:nd1j} is true for $d=0$ and $d=1$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
When $d=0$, both sides the desired equality equal to $1$. Let $d=1$.
By \cref{lem:|i-j|=1}, we can infer that
\[
b_{n,1}(1,2)=b_{n,1}(2,1)=b_{n-2,\,0}=1
\quad\text{and}\quad
p_{n,1}(1,2)=p_{n-2,\,0}=1.
\]
For $j\ge3$, it is easy to show that
\[
b_{n,1}(j,1)=2^{j-2},\qquad
b_{n,1}(1,j)=0,\quad\text{and}\quad
p_{n,1}(1,j)=2^{j-3}.
\]
This verifies \cref{conj:nd1j} for $d=1$ by direct calculation.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma}\label{lem:pnd:12=13}
$p_{n,d}(1,2)=p_{n,d}(1,3)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We define a map $\phi\colon \P_{n,d}(1,2)\to\P_{n,d}(1,3)$ as follows.
Let $\pi\in\P_{n,d}(1,2)$.
By considering the exchange of the letters $2$ and $3$,
we can suppose that there exists a nonempty word $\alpha$ such that~$\pi$
contains a cycle $c=(1n23\alpha)$.
Define $\phi(\pi)$ to be the permutation obtained from $\pi$
by replacing the cycle $c$ by the cycle $u=(1n32\alpha')$.
It is clear that $\phi$ is an involution.
Let $d=\des(\alpha)$.
Then
\[
\cdes(c)=d+2=\casc(u)
\quad\text{and}\quad
\casc(c)=\ell(c)-d-2=\cdes(u).
\]
It follows that $c$ and $u$ have the same weight,
and so do the permutations $\pi$ and~$\phi(\pi)$.
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}

\begin{proposition}
If \cref{conj:nd1j} is true for $j=2$,
then it is true for $j=3$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that \cref{conj:nd1j} is true for $j=2$, that is,
\[
b_{n,d}(1,2)+b_{n,d}(2,1)=2p_{n,d}(1,2).
\]
For the sake of showing \cref{conj:nd1j} for $j=3$, i.e.,
\[
b_{n,d}(1,3)+b_{n,d}(3,1)=2p_{n,d}(1,3),
\]
by \cref{lem:pnd:12=13}, it suffices to show that
\[
b_{n,d}(1,2)-b_{n,d}(1,3)
=
b_{n,d}(3,1)-b_{n,d}(2,1).
\]
For words $u$ and $v$, let $b_{n,d}(u,v)$
be the number of permutations in $\mathscr{B}_{n,d}$ that contain the factor $unv$.
By exchanging the letters $2$ and $3$, we obtain
\begin{align}
b_{n,d}(1,2)-b_{n,d}(1,3)
&=b_{n,d}(1,23)-b_{n,d}(1,32),\quad\text{and}\quad\label{pf:1}\\
b_{n,d}(3,1)-b_{n,d}(2,1)
&=b_{n,d}(23,1)-b_{n,d}(32,1).\label{pf:2}
\end{align}
Using the proof of \cref{lem:|i-j|=1}, one may show that
\begin{align}
b_{n,d}(1,23)&=b_{n-3,\,d-1}=b_{n,d}(23,1)\quad\text{and}\quad\label{pf:3}\\
b_{n,d}(1,32)&=b_{n-3,\,d-2}=b_{n,d}(32,1).\label{pf:4}
\end{align}
Combining \cref{pf:1,pf:2,pf:3,pf:4}, we can deduce
\begin{align*}
b_{n,d}(1,2)-b_{n,d}(1,3)
&=b_{n,d}(1,23)-b_{n,d}(1,32)\\
&=b_{n,d}(23,1)-b_{n,d}(32,1)
=b_{n,d}(3,1)-b_{n,d}(2,1).
\end{align*}
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}

\section*{Acknowledgment}
We are grateful to Professor Richard Stanley for his encouragement
of working on this project,
and to Professor Olivier Bernardi for his interests of the new proof
of \cref{thm:b=p}.
The main part of this paper was completed when the first author
was a visiting scholar at MIT.


Redimensioning of Euclidean Spaces

Abstract: A vector space over a field $\mathbb{F}$ is a set $V$ together with two binary operations, called vector addition and scalar multiplication. It is standard practice to think of a Euclidean space $\mathbb{R}^n$ as an $n$-dimensional real coordinate space i.e. the space of all $n$-tuples of real numbers ($R^n$), with vector operations defined using real addition and multiplication coordinate-wise. A natural question which arises is if it is possible to redefine vector operations on the space in such a way that it acquires some other dimension, say $k$ (over the same field i.e., $\mathbb{R}$). In this paper, we answer the question in the affirmative, for all $k\in\mathbb{N}$. We achieve the required dimension by `dragging' the structure of a standard $k$-dimensional Euclidean space (\R{k}) on the $n$-tuple of real numbers ($R^n$). At the heart of the argument is Cantor's counterintuitive result that $\mathbb{R}$ is numerically equivalent to $\mathbb{R}^n$ for all $n\in\mathbb{N}$, which can be proved through an elegant construction. Finally, we generalize the result to all finite dimensional vector spaces.

\section{Introduction}

\begin{quote}
\textit{An engineer, a physicist, and a mathematician are discussing how to visualise four dimensions: \\
Engineer: I never really get it.\\
Physicist: Oh it's really easy, just imagine three dimensional space over a time - that adds your fourth dimension.\\
Mathematician: No, it's way easier than that; just imagine \R{n}, then set $n$ = 4.}
\end{quote}

The humourous anectode strikes at the heart of the notion of `dimension'. With our Euclidean intuitions,  inherited from ancient primates, it is easy to jump to the notion that the physical universe we exist in can be well represented by a 3 parameter model of depth, breadth and height - that it is 3-dimensional. But what does such a statement really mean?

Modern mathematics has a way to formalize, generalize and give meaning to these notions by defining the Euclidean space as an $n$-dimensional real vector space. The vectors correspond to the points, and the addition operation in the vector space corresponds to translations in the Euclidean space. Defined in this manner, the plane is a 2-dimensional real vector pace \R{2}, the space is a 3-dimensional real vector space \R{3}, and so on.

Given this context, the idea of having $R^n$ (the set of all $n$-tuples of real numbers), with a different dimension (say $k$), may seem absurd at first glance. The gap in the intuition stems from thinking of dimension as purely residing in the properties of the set $R^n$, and not in the vector operations that define the relationship between members of the set. The space \R{3} has dimension 3 not because a point in \R{3} is described by 3 different coordinates, but because it has imbibed certain special properties because of the way vector addition and scalar multiplication have been defined over it.\footnote{The idea of independence is crucial here. Space has three dimensions because the length of a box is independent of its width or breadth, and space-time is four-dimensional because the location of a point in time is independent of its location in space. Thus, space is three-dimensional because every point in space can be described by a linear combination of three independent vectors.}

We show that it is possible to change the structure of the space \R{n} to one having an arbitrary dimension $k\in\mathbb{N}$ (for all $n\in\mathbb{N}$). We do this by `naturally relating' it to the space \R{k}, in particular  redefining vector addition and scalar multiplication on $R^n$ to imitate those of the space \R{k}. We then generalize the result to any finite-dimensional vector space which exists in bijection with another vector space of a different dimension.

\section{On \R{n} being numerically equivalent to \R{k}}
It is a well known theorem in Linear Algebra that every $n$-dimensional vector space over a field $\mathbb{F}$ is isomorphic to the standard space $\mathbb{F}^n$. Thus, if $R^n$ were to attain the dimension $k$ over $\mathbb{R}$, the resulting space would be isomorphic to \R{k}. To this end, we first prove that the space \R{n} is numerically equivalent to the space \R{k}, which is a necessary condition for such an isomorphism to exist.\footnote{The counterintuitive result that cardinality did not respect dimensions was first discovered by Cantor, and led to his now famous remark, ``I see it, but I don’t believe it." For a better exposition, read \cite{gouvea2011cantor}}.

We first prove that the the unit square $\left[0,1\right]\times\left[0,1\right]$ is numerically equivalent to the unit interval $\left[0,1\right]$. This would suffice to prove that $\mathbb{R}$ is numerically equivalent to \R{2}, since a bijection from $\left[0,1\right]\mapsto\mathbb{R}$ exists. Also, it does not really matter whether we consider $\left[0,1\right]$, $\left(0,1\right]$, or $\left(0,1\right)$, since there are bijections between all of these.

\begin{theorem}
The set  $\left(0,1\right]\times\left(0,1\right]$ is numerically equivalent to the unit interval $\left(0,1\right]$
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
For real numbers with two decimal expansions, we will choose the one that ends with nines rather than with zeroes. Thus, we represent 1/2 as $0.4999...\left(0.4\overline{9}\right)$ instead of as 0.5.
Let $x = \left(a,b\right) \in$ \R{2}. Break each coordinate into groups consiting of zeroes (possibly none) followed by a single non-zero digit. For example, 1/400 = 0.0024999... is broken up as 0.002 4 9 9 9 ..., and 0.003801007373... as 0.003 8 001 007 3 7 3 ... This is well defined since we have not taken up decimal representations ending with infinite zeroes.
Thus now $x = (0.a_1a_2a_3\ldots, 0.b_1b_2b_3...) \in$ \R{2}, where $a_i$ and $b_j$ represent groups consisting of zeroes followed by a non-zero digit. Let $y = 0.a_1b_1a_2b_2...$ Note that $y$ will not have an infinite sequence of trailing zeroes. The resuling map $\phi : \left(0,1\right]\times\left(0,1\right] \mapsto \left(0,1\right]$, where $\phi\left(x\right)=y$, defines a bijection between the two sets. \footnote{We can also interleave digits, instead of groups as shown. However, this map would be not be surjective, and we'll need to use the Schroeder-Bernstein theorem to show the existence of the bijection. Such a proof would, however, be non-constructive. Cantor himself had originally tried a proof with interleaving digits, but later Dedekind  pointed out the problem of nonunique decimal representations.}
\end{proof}

\begin{corollary}\label{rr}
$\mathbb{R}$ is numerically equivalent to \R{2}.
\end{corollary}

\begin{theorem}
The sets $R^n$ and $R^n+1$ are numerically equivalent, where $n\in\mathbb{N}$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
We’ll proceed by the principal of Mathematical Induction.\\
\textit{Base Case:} For $n=1$: $R$ and $R^2$ are numerically equivalent. (Corollary \ref{rr})\\
\textit{Inductive Hypothesis}: The sets $R^{n-1}$ and $R^n$ are numerically equivalent, where $n\in\mathbb{N}$.\\
\textit{Claim: }The sets $R^{n}$ and $R^{n+1}$ are numerically equivalent, where $n\in\mathbb{N}$.\\
	Let $\Phi:R^{n-1} \mapsto R^n$ be a bijection (Inductive hypothesis)\\
	If $x \in R^{n-1};$ $x = (x_1,...,x_{n-1})$, then ${\Phi(x)} = (\Phi(x)_1,...,\Phi(x)_n);$ ${\Phi(x)}\in R^n$.\\
	Take ${y} = (y_1,...,y_{n}) \in R^n$. The $(n-1)$-tuple formed from this $n$-tuple, by taking the first $n-1$ components is $y(n-1) = (y_1,...,y_{n-1});$ $y(n-1) \in R^{n-1}$.\\
	Let the element formed by appending $y_n$ to the $n$-tuple $ \Phi(y(n-1)) $ be denoted by $ \tau(y) $; $ \tau(y)  = (\Phi(y(n-1))_1,..., \Phi(y(n-1))_{n}, y_n )$.\\ The function $\tau:R^{n} \mapsto R^{n+1}$ where the element $y \in R^n$ is mapped to $\tau(y) \in R^{n+1}$, is a one-one onto correspondence.

\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
The sets $R$ and $R^n$ are numerically equivalent, where $n\in\mathbb{N}$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{corollary}
The sets $R^n$ and $R^k$ are numerically equivalent, where $n,k\in\mathbb{N}$.
\end{corollary}

\section{The Vector Space $R^n_k$}
Let $\Phi:R^n \mapsto$ \R{k} be a bijection from the set of real n-tuples $R^n$ to the vector space \R{k}. As proved in the previous section, such a bijection exists, for all $n\in\mathbb{N}$ and all $k\in\mathbb{N}$.

Assume $\V{x}, \V{y}\in R^n$ and $c\in\mathbb{R}$. We define two binary operations, vector additon and scalar multiplication, on the set $R^n$ as follows:
\begin{align}
\text{\textbf{Vector Addition}} \colon \V{x}  \oplus \V{y} & = \Phi^{-1}(\Phi(\V{x}) + \Phi(\V{y}))\label{eq:1}\\
\text{\textbf{Scalar Multiplication}} \colon c\odot\V{x} &= \Phi^{-1}(c\cdot(\Phi(\V{x}))
\label{eq:2}
\end{align}

\subsection{Axioms}

To qualify as a vector space, the set $R^{n}$ with the operations vector addition and scalar multiplication defined above must satisfy the following eight axioms.\\
\begin{enumerate}

\item \textbf{Commutativity of addition}

\begin{align*}
& \,\quad \V{x}  \oplus \V{y} \\
& = \Phi^{-1}(\Phi(\V{x}) + \Phi(\V{y})) \tag{From Equation \ref{eq:1}}\\
& = \Phi^{-1}(\Phi(\V{y}) + \Phi(\V{x}))  \tag{Commutativity of \R{k}}\\
& = \V{y} \oplus \V{x} \tag{From Equation \ref{eq:1}}
\end{align*}
\item \textbf{Associativity of addition}
\begin{align*}
& \,\quad \V{x} \oplus (\V{y} \oplus \V{z}) \\
& = \V{x} \oplus (\Phi^{-1}(\Phi(\V{y}) + \Phi(\V{z}))) \tag{From Equation \ref{eq:1}}\\
& = \Phi^{-1}(\Phi(\V{x}) + \Phi((\Phi^{-1}(\Phi(\V{y}) + \Phi(\V{z}))))) \tag{From Equation \ref{eq:1}}\\
& = \Phi^{-1}(\Phi(\V{x}) + (\Phi(\V{y}) + \Phi(\V{z}))) \tag{$\Phi \circ \Phi^{-1} = \mathds{1}$}\\
& = \Phi^{-1}((\Phi(\V{x}) + \Phi(\V{y})) + \Phi(\V{z}))\tag{Associativity of \R{k}} \\
& = \Phi^{-1}((\Phi(\Phi^{-1}(\Phi\V{x} + \Phi\V{y})) + \Phi(\V{z})) \tag{$\Phi \circ \Phi^{-1} = \mathds{1}$}\\
& = \Phi^{-1}((\Phi(\V{x} + \V{y}) + \Phi(\V{z})) \tag{From Equation \ref{eq:1}} \\
& = (\V{x} + \V{y}) \oplus \V{z} \tag{From Equation \ref{eq:1}}
\end{align*}
\item \textbf{Existence of Identity element of addition}
\begin{align*}
 & \,\quad \V{x} \oplus \Phi^{-1}(0_k) \\
& =\Phi^{-1}(\Phi(\V{x}) + \Phi(\Phi^{-1}(0_k))) \tag{From Existence of Identity $0_k$ for \R{k}}\\
& =\Phi^{-1}(\Phi(\V{x}) + 0_k) \tag{$\Phi \circ \Phi^{-1} = \mathds{1}$}\\
& = \Phi^{-1}(\Phi(\V{x})) \tag{ $0_k$ is Identity for \R{k}}\\
& = \V{x} \tag{Hence Additive Identity for $R^{n}_{k}$ is $0_{k}$}
\end{align*}
\item \textbf{Existence of Additive Inverse}
\begin{align*}
& \,\quad \V{x} \oplus \Phi^{-1}(-\Phi(\V{x})) \\
& = \Phi^{-1}(\Phi(\V{x}) + \Phi(\Phi^{-1}(-\Phi(\V{x}))) \tag{From Equation \ref{eq:1}}\\
& = \Phi^{-1}(\Phi(\V{x}) + (-\Phi(\V{x}))) \tag{$\Phi \circ \Phi^{-1} = \mathds{1}$}\\
& = \Phi^{-1}(0_k) \tag{Hence Additive Inverse of $\V{x}$ is $\Phi^{-1}(-\Phi(\V{x}))$}
\end{align*}
\item \textbf{Existence of Identity element of scalar multiplication}
\begin{align*}
 & \,\quad 1\odot\V{x} \\
 & = \Phi^{-1}(1\cdot(\Phi(\V{x})) \tag{From Equation \ref{eq:2}}\\
 & = \Phi^{-1}(\Phi(\V{x}))  \tag{Multiplication by Scalar Identity for \R{k}}\\
 & = \V{x} \tag{$\Phi \circ \Phi^{-1} = \mathds{1}$}\\
 \end{align*}
\item \textbf{Compatibility of scalar multiplication with field multiplication}
\begin{align*}
 & \,\quad  c_1\odot(c_2\odot\V{x})   \\
& = \Phi^{-1}(c_1\cdot(\Phi(c_2\odot\V{x})) \tag{From Equation \ref{eq:2}}\\
& = \Phi^{-1}(c_1\cdot(\Phi(\Phi^{-1}(c_2\cdot\V{x}))) \tag{From Equation \ref{eq:2}}\\
 & = \Phi^{-1}(c_1\cdot(c_2\cdot\Phi(\V{x})))  \tag{$\Phi \circ \Phi^{-1} = \mathds{1}$}\\
 & = \Phi^{-1}(c_1c_2\cdot\Phi(\V{x})))  \tag{Compatibility of \R{k}}\\
& = c_1c_2\odot\V{x} \tag{From Equation \ref{eq:2}}\\
\end{align*}
\item \textbf{Distributivity of scalar multiplication with respect to vector addition}
\begin{alignat*}{2}
 & \,\quad c\odot(\V{x} \oplus \V{y}) \\
 & = \Phi^{-1}(c\cdot\Phi(\V{x} \oplus \V{y}) ) \tag{From Equation \ref{eq:2}}\\
 & = \Phi^{-1}(c\cdot\Phi(\Phi^{-1}(\Phi(\V{x}) + \Phi(\V{y}))) ) \tag{From Equation \ref{eq:1}}\\
 & = \Phi^{-1}(c\cdot(\Phi(\V{x}) + \Phi(\V{y})) ) \tag{$\Phi \circ \Phi^{-1} = \mathds{1}$}\\
& =\Phi^{-1}(c \cdot \Phi(\V{x}) + c\cdot \Phi(\V{y}) ) \tag{From Distributivity of \R{k}}\\
& =\Phi^{-1}(\Phi(\Phi^{-1}(c \cdot \Phi(\V{x})) + \Phi(\Phi^{-1}(c\cdot \Phi(\V{y}) )) \tag{$\Phi \circ \Phi^{-1} = \mathds{1}$}\\
& = \Phi^{-1}( \Phi(c\odot\V{x}) + \Phi(c\odot\V{y}) )  \tag{From Equation \ref{eq:2}}\\
& = (c\odot\V{x}) \oplus (c\odot\V{y})  \tag{From Equation \ref{eq:1}}\\
\end{alignat*}
\item \textbf{Distributivity of scalar multiplication with respect to field addition}
\begin{align*}
& \,\quad (c_1 + c_2) \odot \V{x}\\
& =  \Phi^{-1}((c_1 + c_2) \cdot (\Phi(\V{x})) \tag{From Equation \ref{eq:2}}\\
& =  \Phi^{-1}(c_1\cdot (\Phi(\V{x}) + c_2\cdot (\Phi(\V{x})) \tag{From Distributivity of \R{k}}\\
\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}

The set $R^n$, together with vector additon and scalar multiplication as defined in Equation \ref{eq:1} and \ref{eq:2}, satisfies all eight axioms of a vector space over the field $\mathbb{R}$. We call this vector space $R^{n}_{k}$.
\subsection{Basis and Dimension}

What is the dimension of the vector space $R^{n}_{k}$.?

Let $\mathcal{B} = \lbrace \alpha_1, \ldots, \alpha_k \rbrace $ be an ordered basis for \R{k}. Let $T \subset R^n \colon T = \lbrace \Phi^{-1}(\alpha_1), \ldots, \Phi^{-1}(\alpha_k) \rbrace$.

Take $\V{x} \in R^{n}$. Since $\mathcal{B}$ is a basis for \R{k}, and $\Phi(\V{x}) \in$ \R{k}, there exists a unique set of real numbers (coordinates) $(x_1, \ldots, x_k)$ such that:
\begin{align*}
\Phi(\V{x}) =  x_1\cdot\alpha_1 + \ldots + x_k\cdot\alpha_k \\
\Leftrightarrow \V{x} = \Phi^{-1}(x_1\cdot\alpha_1 + \ldots + x_k\cdot\alpha_k) \\
\Leftrightarrow \V{x} = \Phi^{-1}(x_1\cdot\Phi(\Phi^{-1}\alpha_1) + \ldots + x_k\cdot\Phi(\Phi^{-1}\alpha_k)) \\
\Leftrightarrow \V{x} = \Phi^{-1}( \Phi(x_1\odot\Phi^{-1}\alpha_1) + \ldots +\Phi( x_k\odot\Phi^{-1}\alpha_k ) ) \\
\Leftrightarrow \V{x} = (x_1\odot\Phi^{-1} \alpha_1) \oplus \ldots \oplus (x_k\odot\Phi^{-1}\alpha_k) \\
\end{align*}
Thus, for every $\V{x} \in R^{n}$, there exists a unique set of real numbers  $(x_1, \ldots, x_k)$ such that $ \V{x} = x_1\odot\Phi^{-1} \alpha_1 + \ldots + x_k\odot\Phi^{-1}\alpha_k$. This implies that $ \Phi^{-1}(\mathcal{B})\subset R^n = \lbrace \Phi^{-1}(\alpha_1), \ldots, \Phi^{-1}(\alpha_k) \rbrace $ is a basis for $R^{n}_{k}$. Since $|\Phi^{-1}(\mathcal{B})| = k$, $dim\, R^{n}_{k} = k$.\footnote{The dimension of a vector space is the same as the cardinality of its basis}

\section{Conclusion}

Let $\Phi:V \mapsto W$ be a one-one onto correspondence, where $W$ is a vector space over field $\mathbb{F}$. Then we can always define vector addition and scalar multiplication on the set $V$, in such a way, so that it attains the vector space structure and dimension of $W$. This would turn $\Phi$ into a linear map between the two vector spaces, $V$ and $W$.
In particular, if $W$ is a $k$-dimensional Euclidean space, then we can always give the set \R{n} the structure of the $k$-dimensional space. The set $ \left\{(x_1,x_2,x_3): x_i \in \mathbb{R}, i= 1,2,3\right\}$ for instance, can always be represented as having dimension of 1 over $\mathbb{R}$.

\section*{Appendix}

\begin{theorem} \label{{easy}}
The sets $\left[0,1\right], \left(0,1\right]$ and $(0,1)$ are in bijection with each other.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Let $f$ be the function with mappings $0\mapsto \frac12, \frac12\mapsto\frac23,\frac23\mapsto\frac34,$ and so on. For any other $x \in [0,1] -\left\{0, \frac12, \frac23, \frac34,\ldots\right\}$, $f\left(x\right) = x$. Then $f:[0,1]\mapsto(0,1]$ is a bijection. A bijection from $\left(0,1\right] to \left(0,1\right)$ can be found similarly.
\end{proof}

\begin{theorem}\label{figthm}
There is a bijection from $\mathbb{R}$ to the open interval $(0,1)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5,trim=0 0 0 0,clip=]{fig.png}\label{fig:main}
In Figure \ref{fig:main}, $S$ is a semi-circle, excluding the end points. $S$ is drawn in such a way that the real axis is tangent to it at 0.5, with radius 0.5. An arbitrarily chosen point $x \in \mathbb{R}$ is joined to the centre of $S$ with a line. The point $x'$ is obtained on $S$ by the intersection of the line and the semi-circle. This gives a one-to-one onto correspondence between the every point $x \in \mathbb{R}$ and $x' \in S$. Now project the point $x' \in S$ to the point $f\left(x\right)$ on the real axis. The function $f$ thus defined gives a bijection between $\mathbb{R}$ and open interval $(0,1)$.

\end{proof}

\begin{theorem}
$R^n_k$ is isomorphic to the space \R{k}.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Note that:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Phi(\V{x}\oplus\V{y}) &= \Phi(\Phi^{-1}(\Phi(\V{x}) + \Phi(\V{y}))) &= \Phi(\V{x}) + \Phi(\V{y})
\label{eq:3}\\
\Phi(c\odot\V{x}) &= \Phi(\Phi^{-1}(c\cdot(\Phi(\V{x}))) &= c\cdot(\Phi(\V{x}))
\label{eq:4}
\end{eqnarray}
Hence, the function $\Phi$ is a linear transformation as well as a bijection from $R^n_k$ to \R{k}.
Thus, $R^n_k \cong$ \R{k}
\end{proof}

\begin{corollary}
The space $R^n_k$, defined as above, is a vector space over the field $\mathbb R$ with dimension $k$.
\end{corollary}

\section*{Acknowledgement}
We are grateful to Ashutosh Nayyar, for the coming up with the initial idea which eventually sparked off the result.

\bibliographystyle{amsmath}
\nocite{*}

Redimensioning of Euclidean Spaces


Convergence of the randomized Kaczmarz method for phase retrieval

Abstract: The classical Kaczmarz iteration and its randomized variants are popular tools for fast inversion of linear overdetermined systems. This method extends naturally to the setting of the phase retrieval problem via substituting at each iteration the phase of any measurement of the available approximate solution for the unknown phase of the measurement of the true solution. Despite the simplicity of the method, rigorous convergence guarantees that are available for the classical linear setting have not been established so far for the phase retrieval setting. In this short note, we provide a convergence result for the randomized Kaczmarz method for phase retrieval in $\mathbb{R}^d$. We show that with high probability a random measurement system of size $m \asymp d$ will be admissible for this method in the sense that convergence in the mean square sense is guaranteed with any prescribed probability. The convergence is exponential and comparable to the linear setting.

\section{Introduction}

The classical Kaczmarz iteration is a popular and convenient method for the recovery of any real or complex $d$-dimensional vector $x$ from a collection of sufficient linear measurements $y_i:=\inner{x}{\phi_i}$, $i=1,\dots,m$, where $\inner{u}{v}$ denotes the Euclidean inner product of $u$ and $v$. Starting with any initial point $x_0$, the algorithm produces a succession of iterates $(x_k)_0^\infty$ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{Kaczmarz-orig}
x_{k+1}  = x_k + \left( y_{t} - \inner{x_k}{\phi_{t}} \right) \frac{\phi_{t}}{\|\phi_{t} \|^2},
\end{equation}
where $t:=t(k) \in \{ 1,...,m \}$ is the index of the selected vector (and the corresponding measurement) at time $k$.
This equation has a simple interpretation: $x_{k+1}$ is the orthogonal projection of $x_k$ on the solution hyperplane $\{u: \inner{u}{\phi_{t}} = y_{t}\}$. In other words, the update $x_{k+1}-x_k$ is the orthogonal projection of the error $x-x_k$ on the chosen direction $\phi_{t}$. Kaczmarz's original scheme cycles through the indices periodically, but it has been shown that random selection generally yields faster convergence. For this and other results, see \cite{SV, NT, NSW, CP}.

This method can be adapted in a straightforward manner to the phase retrieval problem where we only have access to the intensities $\{|y_i|\}_{i=1}^m$: By simply using the sign (phase) of the approximate measurement $\inner{x_k}{\phi_{t}}$ in place of that of $y_{t}$, we get the {\em phase-adapting Kaczmarz iteration}
\begin{equation}\label{Kaczmarz-phase}
x_{k+1}  = x_k + \left( \sigma(\inner{x_k}{\phi_{t}})|y_{t}| - \inner{x_k}{\phi_{t}} \right) \frac{\phi_{t}}{\|\phi_{t} \|^2},
\end{equation}
where $\sigma(w)$ is the sign (or phase) of the scalar $w$, defined by the relation $w = \sigma(w)|w|$. We will assume the convention that $\sigma(0)=1$.
This method has been proposed by various authors (e.g. \cite{Wei, GL}) and has been observed to perform well in practice. For general theory and some other main approaches to the phase retrieval problem, such as PhaseLift and PhaseCut, see \cite{EM2014,CSV2013,WdM2015}.

Intuitively, this scheme has the biggest chance of success if the iterates can be guaranteed to stay reasonably close to one of the solutions of the phaseless equations so that the approximate signs $\sigma(\inner{x_k}{\phi_{t}})$ have a chance to frequently match (or approximate, in the complex case) the true signs and make progress. Each time there is a phase mismatch, the iterate gets an update in the wrong direction, so it is important that this event does not happen too frequently. Hence, unlike the linear classical Kaczmarz scheme \eqref{Kaczmarz-orig} which is not susceptible to the initial condition, a good initialization is needed for the nonlinear phase-adapting version \eqref{Kaczmarz-phase}. There are now good methods for this, such as the truncated spectral initialization \cite{CC}.

\subsection{Contribution}

This paper will be about the real case, i.e. both $x$ and the $\phi_i$ are in $\mathbb{R}^d$. Without loss of generality, we assume that the $\phi_i$ are of unit norm, since we can always run the iteration \eqref{Kaczmarz-phase} with normalized vectors $\hat \phi_i := \phi_i/\|\phi_i\|$ and intensity measurements $|\hat y_i|:= |y_i|/\|\phi_i\|$. Hence we will work with the iteration

\begin{equation}\label{Kaczmarz-phase-normalized}
x_{k+1}  = x_k + \left( \sigma(\inner{x_k}{\phi_{t}})|\inner{x}{\phi_{t}}| - \inner{x_k}{\phi_{t}} \right) \phi_{t}.
\end{equation}

There will be two sources of randomness in this paper. The first and the primary source of randomness is the following:
Given any measurement system $\Phi:=(\phi_1,\dots,\phi_m)$, we will assume that the indices $t$ are chosen uniformly and independently from $\{1,\dots,m\}$. We will call the resulting method {\em phase-adapting randomized Kaczmarz iteration}, irrespective of how $\Phi$ may have been chosen.
In Section \ref{sec-admissibility}, we present a certain deterministic condition on $\Phi$ called ``$\delta$-admissibility''(which consists of four individual properties), and show that with a $\delta$-admissible $\Phi$ (and for a sufficiently small $\delta$), if the starting relative error is less than $\delta$, then after one iteration the error shrinks in conditional expectation (with respect to the random choice of $t$). We then carry out a probabilistic analysis of convergence in Section \ref{sec-prob-analysis} via ``drift analysis'' and ``hitting-time'' bounds.

The secondary source of randomness will come into play when we want to show that most measurement systems are $\delta$-admissible in the $m \asymp d$ regime. To achieve this, we will assume that the $\phi_i$ are chosen independently from the uniform distribution on the unit sphere $\mathbb{S}^{d-1}$ in $\mathbb{R}^d$. The standard Gaussian distribution on $\mathbb{R}^d$ can also be used.

For convenience, we state here a summarized theorem combining these two types of randomness. Individual (and stronger) results are stated separately in Sections \ref{sec-admissibility} and \ref{sec-prob-analysis}. We use the notation
$$\mathrm{dist}(u,v):= \min(\|u-v\|, \|u+v\|)$$
to denote the distance between $u$ and $v$ up to a global phase.

\begin{theorem}\label{main-theorem}
Let $\phi_1,\dots,\phi_m$ be chosen independently and uniformly on $\mathbb{S}^{d-1}$.
There exist absolute positive constants $C$, $c$, and $\delta_0$ such that if $m \geq C d$, then
with probability $1-\exp(-cm)$ the system $\Phi:=(\phi_1,\dots,\phi_m)$ satisfies the following property:

For any $0<\varepsilon <1$, if the phase-adapting randomized Kaczmarz method with respect to $\Phi$ is applied to any initial point $x_0$ satisfying the relative error bound
$$\frac{\mathrm{dist}(x,x_0)}{\|x\|} \leq \delta_0 \varepsilon,$$
then the stability event
$$\Sigma:=\left\{\frac{\mathrm{dist}(x,x_k)}{\|x\|} \leq \delta_0~~ \text{for all}~~ k\geq 1\right \}$$
holds with probability at least $1-\varepsilon^2$, and conditioned on this event the expected squared error decays exponentially. More precisely, we have
$$\mathbb{E} \left[\mathrm{dist}^2(x,x_k) \mathbbm{1}_\Sigma \right] \leq e^{-k/4d} \mathrm{dist}^2(x,x_0)$$
for all $k\geq 1$.
\end{theorem}

We prove this theorem at the end of Section \ref{sec-prob-analysis}. Some remarks are in order:

\begin{itemize}
\item As is the case for the randomized Kaczmarz method for linear inverse problems, the exponential convergence of $x_k$ to $x$ is achieved in the mean-squared sense. However, an important distinction is that this is conditional on a stability event. (In the linear case, this event is automatic due to the fact that error decreases deterministically.) We handle this problem using methods that are known as ``drift analysis'' (see \cite{HB}).

\item The above stated probability lower bound for the stability event is not tight. Furthermore, our preliminary calculations suggest that the methods of this paper can be extended to achieve an improved probabilistic guarantee of the form $1-O(\varepsilon^{2p})$ for any {\em fixed} $p \geq 1$. For the sake of exposition we do not pursue this extension in this manuscript.

\item We have left out performance guarantees regarding the initialization procedure from the above theorem because we have no new results to offer here. One may simply use the truncated spectral method \cite{CC} which is capable of providing the kind of guarantee that is compatible with the above theorem in that for any accuracy guarantee it can operate in the regime $m \asymp d$ and succeed with probability $1-\exp(-\Omega(m))$.

\end{itemize}

{\bf Note for the revision:} We would like to note here that simultaneously with the initial posting of this paper, Y.~Shuo Tan and R.~Vershynin posted a manuscript (see \cite{Shuo_etal}) on the randomized Kaczmarz method for phase retrieval, with results that are somewhat similar to ours, but established using different methods. Subsequently, we were also informed that Zhang et al.~\cite{Zhang_etal} had previously established a conditional error contractivity result for the Gaussian measurement model and using the so-called ``reshaped Wirtinger flow'' method.

\section{Basic relations}

Let $z_k:=x-x_k$. Then \eqref{Kaczmarz-phase-normalized} can be rewritten as
\begin{eqnarray}
z_{k+1} &=& z_k - \left( \sigma(\inner{x_k}{\phi_{t}})|\inner{x}{\phi_{t}}| - \inner{x_k}{\phi_{t}} \right) \phi_{t} \nonumber \\
& = &
\label{error-iteration}
z_k - (\inner{z_k}{\phi_{t}})\phi_{t} + \left[\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi_t})- \sigma(\inner{x_k}{\phi_{t}}) \right]|\inner{x}{\phi_{t}}|\phi_{t}.
\end{eqnarray}
Since $z_k - (\inner{z_k}{\phi_{t}})\phi_{t}$ and $\phi_t$ are orthogonal, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
 \|z_{k+1}\|^2 & = & \|z_k - (\inner{z_k}{\phi_{t}})\phi_{t}\|^2 + \left|\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi_t})- \sigma(\inner{x_k}{\phi_{t}}) \right|^2|\inner{x}{\phi_{t}}|^2 \nonumber \\
 & = &
 \label{error-iteration-norm}
 \|z_k\|^2 - |\inner{z_k}{\phi_{t}}|^2 + \left|\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi_t})- \sigma(\inner{x_k}{\phi_{t}}) \right|^2|\inner{x}{\phi_{t}}|^2.
\end{eqnarray}
When $\inner{x}{\phi_t}$ and $\inner{x_k}{\phi_{t}}$ have opposite signs we have
$|\inner{x}{\phi_t}| \leq |\inner{(x-x_k)}{\phi_t}|$ so that
$$ \left|\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi_t})- \sigma(\inner{x_k}{\phi_{t}}) \right|
|\inner{x}{\phi_t}| \leq
\left|\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi_t})- \sigma(\inner{x_k}{\phi_{t}}) \right|
|\inner{z_k}{\phi_t}|$$
is always valid. Hence \eqref{error-iteration-norm} implies
\begin{equation} \label{error-iteration-norm-bound}
 \|z_{k+1}\|^2 \leq \|z_k\|^2 + \left[\left|\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi_t})- \sigma(\inner{x_k}{\phi_{t}}) \right|^2-1\right]|\inner{z_k}{\phi_{t}}|^2.
\end{equation}

Note that \eqref{Kaczmarz-phase-normalized} is invariant under the transformation $x \mapsto -x$. Hence we actually have
\begin{equation}
 \|\pm x - x_{k+1}\|^2 \leq \|\pm x-x_k\|^2 + \left[\left|\sigma(\inner{\pm x}{\phi_t})- \sigma(\inner{x_k}{\phi_{t}}) \right|^2-1\right]|\inner{(\pm x-x_k)}{\phi_{t}}|^2,
\end{equation}
i.e. the analysis is identical for $x$ and $-x$.
For convenience of notation and without loss of generality we will work to analyze $\|x-x_k\|$ and make our initial condition assumption on $\|x-x_0\|$.

\subsection{Heuristic for convergence}\label{heuristic}
Let $\phi$ be uniformly distributed on $\mathbb{S}^{d-1}$.
It is a standard fact that
$$ \mathbb{E} ~|\inner{z}{\phi}|^2 = \frac{1}{d}\|z\|^2,$$
and an easy calculation (see Appendix) yields
$$ \mathbb{E} ~|\inner{z}{\phi}|^4 = \frac{3}{d(d+2)}\|z\|^4.$$
It can also be checked easily that for any two nonzero $x$ and $y$ we have
$$ \mathbb{P}\{\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi}) \not= \sigma(\inner{y}{\phi})\} =
\frac{1}{\pi}\theta_{x,y} =: d(\hat x,\hat y),$$
where $\theta_{x,y}\in[0,\pi]$ is the angle between $x$ and $y$, and therefore
$d(\hat x,\hat y)$ is the normalized geodesic distance on $\mathbb{S}^{d-1}$ between $\hat x$ and $\hat y$. Hence, by Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbb{E} \left|\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi})- \sigma(\inner{y}{\phi}) \right|^2|\inner{(x-y)}{\phi}|^2
& \leq & 4 \left (\mathbb{P}\{\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi}) \not= \sigma(\inner{y}{\phi})\}\right)^{1/2} \left(\mathbb{E} |\inner{(x-y)}{\phi}|^4\right)^{1/2} \nonumber \\
& \leq & \frac{4}{d} \left(\frac{3\theta_{x,y}}{\pi}\right)^{1/2} \|x - y\|^2.
\end{eqnarray}
Hence, if $\theta_{x,y}$ is sufficiently small (e.g., less than $1/64$), then
$$ \mathbb{E} \left(\left|\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi})- \sigma(\inner{y}{\phi}) \right|^2-1\right)|\inner{(x-y)}{\phi}|^2
\leq -\frac{1}{2d} \|x - y\|^2.$$

Guided by these calculations, we turn to the error bound \eqref{error-iteration-norm-bound}. We see that if $\theta_{x,x_k}$ is sufficiently small (which, for a fixed $x$, would be guaranteed by a sufficiently small $z_k$) and if we were to choose each $\phi_t$ uniformly and independently on the unit sphere, then we would have
$$ \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k+1}\|^2 \Big | \mathscr{F}_k,\theta_{x,x_k} < \frac{1}{64}\right] \leq \left(1-\frac{1}{2d}\right) \|z_k\|^2,$$
where $\mathscr{F}_k$ is the sigma-algebra generated by $\phi_{t(0)},\dots,\phi_{t(k{-}1)}$, and for any event $E$, $\{\mathscr{F}_k,E\}$ is the sigma-algebra in $E$ formed by intersecting elements of $\mathscr{F}_k$ with $E$.

Hence the stochastic process $(\|z_k\|^2)_{k=0}^\infty$ is contractive in conditional expectation which is also conditional on the size of $\|z_k\|$. Without the size condition on $\|z_k\|$, the analysis would have been fairly straightforward, similar to the situation of the randomized Kaczmarz iteration for linear systems. As we will see, this condition makes the task non-trivial.

However, we must also establish a similar contractivity result (conditional and in expectation) for the actual random model used in this paper, i.e., when $\phi_t$ is chosen uniformly from a fixed collection $\Phi:=(\phi_1,\dots,\phi_m)$. This collection itself may also have been chosen randomly, though with the above observation we can now define certain deterministic properties of $\Phi$ that are needed for the algorithm to work.

\section{Admissible measurement systems} \label{sec-admissibility}

Let $\delta \in (0,1)$ and $\Phi:=(\phi_1,\dots,\phi_m)$ be a given collection of nonzero vectors in $\mathbb{R}^d$.
Following \cite{PV}, we say that $\Phi$, or more appropriately, the linear hyperspaces $(\phi_1^\perp,\dots,\phi_m^\perp)$ produce a $\delta$-uniform tessellation of $\mathbb{S}^{d-1}$ if for all $x$ and $y$ in $\mathbb{S}^{d-1}$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{delta-uniform}
\left| \frac{1}{m}\text{card}\big \{1\leq i \leq m : \sigma(\inner{x}{\phi_i}) \not= \sigma(\inner{y}{\phi_i}) \big \}
 - d(x,y) \right | < \delta.
\end{equation}
Then by Theorem 1.2 of \cite{PV}, there exists two positive absolute constants $C$ and $c$ such that if $m \geq C \delta^{-6}d$ and the $\phi_i$ are chosen independently from the uniform distribution on $\mathbb{S}^{d-1}$, then with probability at least $1-2\exp(-c\delta^2 m)$, we get a $\delta$-uniform tessellation of $\mathbb{S}^{d-1}$.

If $\phi$ is chosen from the collection $\Phi:=(\phi_1,\dots,\phi_m)$ uniformly at random and $f$ is any function on $\Phi$, then we define the empirical mean
$$ \mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~ f(\phi) := \frac{1}{m} \sum_{i=1}^m f(\phi_i). $$
With a $\Phi$ that yields a $\delta$-uniform tessellation, we have that the empirical mean $\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} {\bf 1}_{\{\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi}) \not= \sigma(\inner{y}{\phi})\}}$ is within $\delta$ of the ensemble mean $d(\hat x,\hat y)$. The upper part of this bound obviously yields
\begin{equation}\label{delta-uniform-implies}
 \mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim\Phi} ~ \mathbbm{1}_{\left \{\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi})\not= \sigma(\inner{y}{\phi}) \right \}} \leq \delta + d(\hat x,\hat y)~~~\mbox{ for all } x,y.
\end{equation}

The above result provides a pathway for mimicking the argument in Section \ref{heuristic} with $\mathbb{E}$ replaced by $\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi}$.
Under the same random model for $\Phi$, a useful concentration result (i.e. for the regime $m \asymp d$) holds for the empirical mean $\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} |\inner{z}{\phi}|^2$. Indeed as it follows from \cite[Theorem 5.39]{Vershynin}, there exist absolute positive constants $C$ and $c$ such that for $m \geq Cd$ and with probability $1-\exp(-cm)$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{2-lower-upper-bound}
\frac{\|z\|^2}{2d} \leq \mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~|\inner{z}{\phi}|^2 \leq \frac{3\|z\|^2}{2d} ~~~\mbox{ for all } z.
\end{equation}
(If desired, the constants $1/2$ and $3/2$ can be chosen closer to $1$ without changing the form of this statement.)

In order to continue on the same path, one would wish to have $\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~|\inner{z}{\phi}|^4 \lesssim \|z\|^4/d^2$ with high probability. As it turns out,\footnote{We thank Y. Shuo Tan and R. Vershynin for bringing this fact to our attention.} this is impossible in the regime $m \asymp d$.
We will circumvent this obstacle by tightening the Cauchy-Schwarz argument of Section \ref{heuristic}: In order to do this, we will invoke \eqref{delta-uniform-implies} coupled with the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality only in the event $|\inner{z}{\phi}|^2$ does not exceed a fixed multiple of its mean value $\|z\|^2/d$, and show that the above desirable upper bound is then achievable with high probability. At the same time, we will show that the second moment contribution from the large values is in fact small, so in this event we will only invoke the trivial bound on $\left|\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi})- \sigma(\inner{y}{\phi}) \right|^2$.

To this end, given $\delta \in (0,1)$, consider the alternative weaker conditions
\begin{equation}\label{4-truncate-upper-bound}
\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~|\inner{z}{\phi}|^4\, \mathbbm{1}_{\left \{|\inner{z}{\phi}|^2\leq \|z\|^2/\delta d\right \}} \leq \frac{4\|z\|^4}{d^2} ~~~\mbox{ for all } z,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{2-truncate-upper-bound}
\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~|\inner{z}{\phi}|^2 \,\mathbbm{1}_{\left \{|\inner{z}{\phi}|^2> \|z\|^2/\delta d\right \}} \leq \frac{4\delta \|z\|^2}{d} ~~~\mbox{ for all } z.
\end{equation}
We will say that $\Phi$ is {\em $\delta$-admissible} if all of the four conditions \eqref{delta-uniform-implies}, \eqref{2-lower-upper-bound}, \eqref{4-truncate-upper-bound}, and \eqref{2-truncate-upper-bound} hold. Note that all of these are deterministic conditions on $\Phi$. We will show in Lemma \ref{admissible-whp} that a random measurement system $\Phi$ is $\delta$-admissible with high probability when $m \geq C d$, but first let us show how these two alternative conditions are used instead of a bound on $\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~|\inner{z}{\phi}|^4$. Suppose $\Phi$ is $\delta$-admissible.
Noting that $\left|\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi})- \sigma(\inner{y}{\phi}) \right|^2 /4 = \mathbbm{1}_{\left \{\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi})\not= \sigma(\inner{y}{\phi}) \right \}}$, we have
\begin{align}
& \mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi}  ~\left|\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi})- \sigma(\inner{y}{\phi}) \right|^2|\inner{(x-y)}{\phi}|^2
\nonumber \\
& \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad = ~ 4 ~ \mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim\Phi} ~ \mathbbm{1}_{\left \{\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi})\not= \sigma(\inner{y}{\phi}) \right \}}
~|\inner{(x-y)}{\phi}|^2\,\mathbbm{1}_{\left \{|\inner{(x-y)}{\phi}|^2\leq \|x-y\|^2/\delta d\right \}}  \nonumber \\
& \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad + 4 ~ \mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim\Phi} ~ \mathbbm{1}_{\left \{\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi})\not= \sigma(\inner{y}{\phi}) \right \}}
~|\inner{(x-y)}{\phi}|^2\,\mathbbm{1}_{\left \{|\inner{(x-y)}{\phi}|^2> \|x-y\|^2/\delta d\right \}}
\nonumber \\
& \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \leq ~ 4 \left(\delta + d(\hat x,\hat y)\right)^{1/2}
\Big(\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim\Phi} ~|\inner{(x-y)}{\phi}|^4\,\mathbbm{1}_{\left \{|\inner{(x-y)}{\phi}|^2\leq \|x-y\|^2/\delta d\right \}}\Big)^{1/2}  \nonumber \\
& \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad + 4 ~ \mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim\Phi}
~|\inner{(x-y)}{\phi}|^2\,\mathbbm{1}_{\left \{|\inner{(x-y)}{\phi}|^2> \|x-y\|^2/\delta d\right \}}.
\end{align}
Invoking \eqref{4-truncate-upper-bound} and \eqref{2-truncate-upper-bound}, we get that
\begin{eqnarray}
 \mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi}  ~\left|\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi})- \sigma(\inner{y}{\phi}) \right|^2|\inner{(x-y)}{\phi}|^2
 & \leq &
 \left(8 (\delta + d(\hat x,\hat y))^{1/2} + 16 \delta \right) \frac{\|x-y\|^2}{d} \nonumber \\
 & \leq & \frac{1}{4d} \|x - y\|^2,
\end{eqnarray}
provided $d(\hat x, \hat y)\leq \delta$ and $\delta$ is sufficiently small (e.g. $8\sqrt{2\delta} + 16\delta \leq 1/4$). Hence, together with the lower bound of \eqref{2-lower-upper-bound}, we have
$$ \mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~\left(\left|\sigma(\inner{x}{\phi})- \sigma(\inner{y}{\phi}) \right|^2-1\right)|\inner{(x-y)}{\phi}|^2
\leq -\frac{1}{4d} \|x - y\|^2$$
and therefore
$$ \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k+1}\|^2 \Big | \mathscr{F}_k,d(\hat x,\hat x_k) \leq \delta\right] \leq \Big(1-\frac{1}{4d}\Big) \|z_k\|^2,$$
where again $\mathscr{F}_k$ is the sigma-algebra generated by $\phi_{t(0)},\dots,\phi_{t(k{-}1)}$.

At this point, it will be helpful to replace the condition $d(\hat x,\hat x_k) \leq \delta$ by a size condition on $z_k$. Note that for any two nonzero vectors $x$ and $y$, we have
$$
d(\hat x, \hat y) \leq \frac{1}{2} \|\hat x - \hat y\| =
\frac{1}{2} \left \| \frac{x}{\|x\|} - \frac{y}{\|y\|} \right \|
= \frac{\big \| (x - y)\|y\| + y(\|y\|-\|x\|) \big \|}{2\|x\| \|y\|} \leq \frac{\|x-y\|}{\|x\|}$$
so that the condition $\|z_k\|\leq \delta \|x\|$ implies $d(\hat x, \hat x_k) \leq \delta$. Therefore we have
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k+1}\|^2 \Big | \mathscr{F}_k,\|z_k\| \leq \delta \|x\| \right] \leq  \Big(1-\frac{1}{4d}\Big) \|z_k\|^2.
\end{equation}

With the above discussion we have established the following result:
\begin{lemma}\label{admissible-implies-conditional-contraction}
There exists $\delta_0>0$ such that, if $\delta\leq \delta_0$ and $\Phi$ is $\delta$-admissible, then
\begin{equation}\label{conditional-contraction}
\mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k+1}\|^2 \Big | \mathscr{F}_k,\|z_k\| \leq b \right] \leq  \rho \|z_k\|^2~~~\mbox{ for all } k\geq 0,
\end{equation}
where $b:=\delta \|x\|$ and  $\rho := 1-\frac{1}{4d}$.
\end{lemma}

We now show that a random $\Phi$ is $\delta$-admissible with high probability in the regime $m \asymp d$.

\begin{lemma}\label{admissible-whp}
For every $\delta \in (0,1)$, there exists positive constants $C$ and $c$ depending only on $\delta$ such that
if $m\geq Cd$, then a random measurement system $\Phi:=(\phi_1,\dots,\phi_m)$ that is chosen independently from the uniform distribution on $\mathbb{S}^{d-1}$ is $\delta$-admissible with probability at least $1-\exp(-cm)$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
The property \eqref{delta-uniform-implies} is proven in \cite{PV} and \eqref{2-lower-upper-bound} is covered by
\cite[Theorem 5.39]{Vershynin}. Hence we only need to establish \eqref{4-truncate-upper-bound} and \eqref{2-truncate-upper-bound}. Note that by homogeneity we may assume $\|z\|=1$.

We start with \eqref{4-truncate-upper-bound}. As is standard in this type of question, we would like to establish the stated inequality for fixed $z$ first (with high probability) and then use approximation over an $\epsilon$-net of $\mathbb{S}^{d-1}$ to achieve uniformity over $z$.
However $\mathbbm{1}_{\left \{|\inner{z}{\phi}|^2\leq \|z\|^2/\delta d\right \}}$ is a discontinuous function of the random variable $|\inner{z}{\phi}|$, presenting a difficulty for the approximation argument. The solution will follow by incorporating a suitable Lipschitz extension, as also done in \cite{CC}.

For this purpose, let $\gamma_1:[0,\infty) \to [0,\infty)$ be defined by
\begin{equation}\label{gamma-1}
\gamma_1(s) := \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
s^2,& s \leq \delta^{-1},\\
(2 \delta^{-1} - s)\delta^{-1},& \delta^{-1} < s \leq 2\delta^{-1},\\
0,& 2\delta^{-1} < s.
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
Then $\gamma_1$ is a Lipschitz function with Lipschitz constant $2 \delta^{-1}$. Furthermore,
$$
s^2 \chi_{[0,\delta^{-1}]}(s) \leq \gamma_1(s) \leq s^2
$$
so that for any $z$ we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gamma_1-initial}
\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~|\inner{z}{\phi}|^4\, \mathbbm{1}_{\left \{|\inner{z}{\phi}|^2\leq 1/\delta d\right \}}
& = & \frac{1}{d^2} \,\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~|\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^4\, \chi_{[0,\delta^{-1}]}(|\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2) \nonumber \\
& \leq & \frac{1}{d^2} \,\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~\gamma_1(|\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2).
\end{eqnarray}

Now, let $\phi$ denote the random vector uniformly distributed on $\mathbb{S}^{d-1}$ so that $\sqrt{d} \phi$ is a {\em spherical} random vector in $\mathbb{R}^d$ (see \cite[Section 5.2.5]{Vershynin}). Let
$\| \cdot \|_{\psi_1}$ stand for the sub-exponential norm and
$\| \cdot \|_{\psi_2}$ the sub-Gaussian norm (see \cite[Section 5.2.3 and 5.2.4]{Vershynin}).
Noting that $\gamma_1(s)\leq \delta^{-1}s$, we have
$$ \left \| \gamma_1(|\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2) \right \|_{\psi_1}
\leq \delta^{-1} \left \| |\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2 \right \|_{\psi_1}
\leq 2 \delta^{-1} \left \| |\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}| \right \|^2_{\psi_2}
\lesssim \delta^{-1}
$$
where in the second step we have used \cite[Lemma 5.14]{Vershynin}) and in the
last step the fact that the sub-Gaussian norm of a spherical random vector is bounded by an absolute constant (see \cite[Section 5.2.5]{Vershynin}; a direct computation is also possible).

Hence, by the Bernstein-type inequality \cite[Proposition 5.16]{Vershynin}, there is an absolute constant $c_1>0$ such that for any $t>0$ we have, with probability at least $1-\exp(-c_1\min(\delta t, \delta^2 t^2)m)$,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gamma_1-concentration}
\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~\gamma_1(|\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2)
& \leq &  \mathbb{E} ~\gamma_1(|\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2) ~+~ t \nonumber \\
& \leq &  \mathbb{E} ~|\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^4 ~+~ t \nonumber \\
& \leq & 3 ~+~ t,
\end{eqnarray}
where in the second step we have used $\gamma_1(s) \leq s^2$ instead.

Now pick an $\epsilon$-net $\mathcal{N}$ of the unit sphere $\mathbb{S}^{d-1}$ of cardinality at most $(3/\epsilon)^d$ where $\epsilon < 1$. For each $z' \in \mathbb{S}^{d-1}$ and $z \in \mathcal{N}$ such that $\|z'-z\|<\epsilon$, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gamma_1-Lipschitz}
\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~\left| \gamma_1(|\inner{z'}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2) - \gamma_1(|\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2)\right |
& \leq &  2\delta^{-1} \mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~ \left| |\inner{z'}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2 - |\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2\right | \nonumber \\
& = & 2\delta^{-1} \mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~ \left |[\inner{(z'-z)}{(\sqrt{d}\phi)}][\inner{(z'+z)}{(\sqrt{d}\phi)}]\right | \nonumber \\
& \leq & 6 \delta^{-1} \epsilon,
\end{eqnarray}
where in the first step we have utilized the Lipschitz continuity of $\gamma_1$, and in the last step Cauchy-Schwarz inequality coupled with the upper bound of \eqref{2-lower-upper-bound}.
Combining \eqref{gamma_1-initial}, \eqref{gamma_1-concentration}, and \eqref{gamma_1-Lipschitz}, we find that with probability at least $1-(3/\epsilon)^d\exp(-c_1 \min(\delta t, \delta^2 t^2)m)$, we have
$$
\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~|\inner{z'}{\phi}|^4\, \mathbbm{1}_{\left \{|\inner{z'}{\phi}|^2\leq 1/\delta d\right \}}
\leq \frac{1}{d^2} (3 + t + 6\delta^{-1}\epsilon)
$$
for every $z' \in \mathbb{S}^{d-1}$. We may choose $t=1/2$ and $\epsilon = \delta/12$ so that
$3 + t + 6\delta^{-1}\epsilon = 4$ and therefore \eqref{4-truncate-upper-bound} holds with probability at least $1-\exp(-c_1 \delta^2 m/8)$ provided $c_1 \delta^2 m/8 \geq d \log (36/\delta)$.

We continue with \eqref{2-truncate-upper-bound}. We will use the same method, but with a different Lipschitz function. Let $\gamma_2:[0,\infty) \to [0,\infty)$ be defined by
\begin{equation}\label{gamma-2}
\gamma_2(s) := \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
\delta s^2,& s \leq \delta^{-1}\\
s, & s > \delta^{-1}.\\
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
Then $\gamma_2$ is a Lipschitz function that fixes $0$ with Lipschitz constant $2$. We have
$$
s \chi_{(\delta^{-1},\infty)}(s) \leq \gamma_2(s) = \min(\delta s^2, s)
$$
so that for any fixed $z$ we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~|\inner{z}{\phi}|^2\, \mathbbm{1}_{\left \{|\inner{z}{\phi}|^2> 1/\delta d\right \}}
& = & \frac{1}{d} \,\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~|\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2\, \chi_{(\delta^{-1},\infty)}(|\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2) \nonumber \\
& \leq & \frac{1}{d} \,\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~\gamma_2(|\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2).
\end{eqnarray}
Noting that $\gamma_2(s) \leq s$, we now have
$$ \left \| \gamma_2(|\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2) \right \|_{\psi_1} \lesssim 1$$
so that by the Bernstein-type inequality (and reducing the value of $c_1$ if necessary), for any $t\in (0,1)$ we have, with probability at least $1-\exp(-c_1 t^2 m)$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~\gamma_2(|\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2)
& \leq &  \mathbb{E} ~\gamma_2(|\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2) ~+~ t \nonumber \\
& \leq &  \delta\, \mathbb{E} ~|\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^4 ~+~ t \nonumber \\
& \leq & 3\delta ~+~ t,
\end{eqnarray}
where in the second step we have used $\gamma_2(s) \leq \delta s^2$ instead.
We again pick an $\epsilon$-net $\mathcal{N}$ of the unit sphere $\mathbb{S}^{d-1}$ of cardinality at most $(3/\epsilon)^d$. For each $z' \in \mathbb{S}^{d-1}$ and $z \in \mathcal{N}$ such that $\|z'-z\|<\epsilon$, this time we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~\left| \gamma_2(|\inner{z'}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2) - \gamma_2(|\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2)\right |
& \leq &  2\,\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~ \left| |\inner{z'}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2 - |\inner{z}{(\sqrt{d} \phi)}|^2\right | \nonumber \\
& \leq & 6 \epsilon.
\end{eqnarray}
Hence by the union bound, with probability at least $1-(3/\epsilon)^d\exp(-c_1 t^2 m)$ we have
$$
\mathbb{E}_{\phi\sim \Phi} ~|\inner{z'}{\phi}|^2\, \mathbbm{1}_{\left \{|\inner{z'}{\phi}|^2> 1/\delta d\right \}}
\leq \frac{1}{d} (3\delta + t + 6 \epsilon)
$$
for every $z' \in \mathbb{S}^{d-1}$. We may choose $t=\delta/2$ and $\epsilon = \delta/12$ so that
$3\delta + t + 6\epsilon = 4\delta$ and therefore \eqref{2-truncate-upper-bound} holds with probability at least  $1-\exp(-c_1 \delta^2 m/8)$ provided $c_1 \delta^2 m/8 \geq d \log (36/\delta)$.
\end{proof}

\section{Probabilistic analysis of the error sequence} \label{sec-prob-analysis}

Our goal in this section will be to bound the probability that $\|z_k\|$ exceeds $b$ at some point and to obtain probabilistic guarantees on the exponential decay of $\|z_k\|$. Lemma \ref{admissible-implies-conditional-contraction} uses the randomness present in the selection of $\phi_{t(k)}$ only. To be able to iterate this result recursively we need to condition on the event $\Omega_k:=\{\|z_0\|\leq b, \|z_1\|\leq b,\dots,\|z_k\|\leq b\}$.
We define the ``hitting time''
$$ \tau_b := \min\{ j \geq 0: \|z_j\| > b\}.$$
Hence $\Omega_k$ is the same as $\{\tau_b > k\}$ and the event $\{\tau_b = \infty\}$ means $\|z_k\|\leq b$ for all $k$.
\begin{lemma}\label{full-contraction}
Suppose \eqref{conditional-contraction} holds. Then
\begin{equation}\label{recursive-contraction}
\mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k+1}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b > k \right] \leq  \rho~ \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b > k{-}1 \right]
\end{equation}
and therefore
\begin{equation}\label{recursive-contraction-outcome}
\mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b > k{-}1 \right] \leq  \rho^k \|z_0\|^2
\end{equation}
for all $k\geq 0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Note that $\mathscr{F}_0$ is the trivial sigma-algebra. We have
\begin{eqnarray}
 \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k+1}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b > k \right]
 & = & \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k+1}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b > k, \mathscr{F}_0 \right] \nonumber \\
 & = & \mathbb{E} \left [\mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k+1}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b > k, \mathscr{F}_k \right]\Big | \tau_b > k, \mathscr{F}_0 \right] \nonumber \\
 & \leq & \rho~ \mathbb{E} \left [\mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b > k, \mathscr{F}_k \right]\Big | \tau_b > k, \mathscr{F}_0 \right] \nonumber \\
 & = & \rho~ \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b > k \right]. \label{step-1}
\end{eqnarray}
Note also that
\begin{equation}\label{sandwich}
\mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  > k \right] \leq b^2 \leq \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b = k \right].
\end{equation}
Hence we have
\begin{eqnarray}
 \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  > k \right]
 & = & \mathbb{P}\left(\|z_k\| \leq b \Big| \tau_b > k{-}1\right ) \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  > k \right] \nonumber \\
 & & \quad \quad + ~ \mathbb{P}\left(\|z_k\| > b \Big| \tau_b > k{-}1\right ) \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  > k \right]  \nonumber \\
 & \leq & \mathbb{P}\left(\|z_k\| \leq b \Big| \tau_b > k{-}1\right ) \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  > k \right] \nonumber \\
 & & \quad \quad + ~ \mathbb{P}\left(\|z_k\| > b \Big| \tau_b > k{-}1\right ) \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  = k \right]  \nonumber \\
& = & \mathbb{P}\left(\|z_k\| \leq b \Big| \tau_b > k{-}1\right ) \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \|z_k\|\leq b,\tau_b  > k{-}1 \right] \nonumber \\
 & & \quad \quad + ~ \mathbb{P}\left(\|z_k\| > b \Big| \tau_b > k{-}1\right ) \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \|z_k\|>b, \tau_b > k{-}1 \right]  \nonumber \\
& = & \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \mathbbm{1}_{\{\|z_k\|\leq b\}} \Big | \tau_b  > k{-}1 \right]
+ \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \mathbbm{1}_{\{\|z_k\|> b\}}\Big | \tau_b  > k{-}1 \right] \nonumber \\
& = & \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  > k{-}1 \right]. \label{step-2}
\end{eqnarray}
The result now follows by combining \eqref{step-1} and \eqref{step-2}.
\end{proof}

We can now use Lemma \ref{full-contraction} to control (i) the probability of the event that the error $\|z_k\|$ exceeds $b$ at some point (i.e. $\{\tau_b < \infty\}$), and (ii) the expected decay of squared error $\|z_k\|^2$ conditional on the event that the error remains bounded by $b$ (i.e. $\{\tau_b = \infty\}$).

\begin{lemma}\label{bound-error-decay}
Suppose \eqref{conditional-contraction} holds. Then for any $k\geq 1$ we have
\begin{equation}
 \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  = \infty \right] \leq \frac{1}{1-\mathbb{P} \left (\tau_b < \infty \right)}
 \rho^k \|z_0\|^2.
\end{equation}
and for any $a>0$
\begin{equation}
 \mathbb{P} \left ( \|z_k\| \geq \rho^{k/2} a \right) \leq \left(\frac{\|z_0\|}{a}\right)^2 +  \mathbb{P} \left (\tau_b < \infty \right ).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For the first claim it suffices to observe that $\{\tau_b = \infty\} \subset \{\tau_b > k{-}1\}$ so that
$$
\mathbb{P} \left (\tau_b = \infty \right) \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  = \infty \right] \leq
\mathbb{P} \left (\tau_b > k{-}1 \right) \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  > k{-}1 \right].
$$
The result follows by bounding the right hand side of this inequality using \eqref{recursive-contraction-outcome}.

For the second claim, note that
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbb{P} \left ( \|z_k\| \geq \epsilon \right)
& = & \mathbb{P} \left ( \|z_k\| \geq \epsilon \Big | \tau_b > k{-}1 \right) \mathbb{P} \left (\tau_b > k{-}1 \right )
+ \mathbb{P} \left ( \|z_k\| \geq \epsilon \Big | \tau_b \leq k{-}1 \right) \mathbb{P} \left (\tau_b \leq k{-}1 \right )
\nonumber \\
& \leq & \mathbb{P} \left ( \|z_k\| \geq \epsilon \Big | \tau_b > k{-}1 \right) + \mathbb{P} \left (\tau_b < \infty \right )
\nonumber \\
& \leq & \epsilon^{-2} \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b > k{-}1 \right]  + \mathbb{P} \left (\tau_b < \infty \right ).
\end{eqnarray}
The result follows by setting $\epsilon = \rho^{k/2}a$ and using \eqref{recursive-contraction-outcome} again.
\end{proof}

Next we give a bound on $\mathbb{P} \left (\tau_b < \infty \right)$.

\begin{lemma}\label{bound-escape-prob}
 Suppose \eqref{conditional-contraction} holds.
 Then
 \begin{equation}
  b^2\, \mathbb{P}  \left (\tau_b < \infty \right) + (\rho^{-1}-1)
\sum_{k=1}^\infty \mathbb{P}\left(\tau_b > k\right )  \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k+1}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  > k \right] \leq \rho \|z_0\|^2,
 \end{equation}
 in particular we have
 \begin{equation}
  \mathbb{P}  \left (\tau_b < \infty \right) \leq \rho \left( \frac{\|z_0\|}{b}\right)^2.
 \end{equation}
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
We start by noting that
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbb{P} \left( \tau_b > k{-}1 \right) \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  > k{-}1 \right]
&  = &\quad \mathbb{P}\left(\|z_k\| > b , \tau_b > k{-}1\right ) \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \|z_k\| > b, \tau_b  > k{-}1 \right] \nonumber \\
& \quad &+ ~
 \mathbb{P}\left(\|z_k\| \leq b , \tau_b > k{-}1\right ) \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \|z_k\| \leq b, \tau_b  > k{-}1 \right]
  \nonumber \\
&  \geq &\quad \mathbb{P}\left(\tau_b = k\right ) b^2 + ~
 \mathbb{P}\left(\tau_b > k\right ) \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  > k \right]
  \nonumber \\
 &  \geq &\quad \mathbb{P}\left(\tau_b = k\right ) b^2 + ~
 \mathbb{P}\left(\tau_b > k\right ) \rho^{-1} \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k+1}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  > k \right] \nonumber \\
 &  \geq &\quad \mathbb{P}\left(\tau_b = k\right ) b^2 + ~
 \mathbb{P}\left(\tau_b > k\right )  \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k+1}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  > k \right] \nonumber \\
 & \quad &+ ~ (\rho^{-1}-1) \mathbb{P}\left(\tau_b > k\right )  \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k+1}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  > k \right]
\end{eqnarray}
where in the first inequality we have used (the second inequality of) \eqref{sandwich} and in the second equality \eqref{step-1}.
Since $\mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  > k{-}1 \right]$ has exponential decay we can sum both sides from $k=1$ to $\infty$. After cancelling the common term (the sum from $k=2$ to $\infty$) we obtain
$$
\mathbb{P} \left( \tau_b > 0 \right) \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_1\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  > 0 \right] \geq
b^2 \sum_{k=1}^\infty \mathbb{P}\left(\tau_b = k\right ) +  (\rho^{-1}-1)
\sum_{k=1}^\infty \mathbb{P}\left(\tau_b > k\right )  \mathbb{E} \left [\|z_{k+1}\|^2 \Big | \tau_b  > k \right] .
$$
The result follows by noting that the left hand side is bounded above by $\rho \|z_0\|^2$.
\end{proof}

We are now ready to prove Theorem \ref{main-theorem}.
\paragraph{\it Proof of Theorem \ref{main-theorem}.}
We choose $\delta_0$ as implied by Lemma \ref{admissible-implies-conditional-contraction} and apply  Lemma \ref{admissible-implies-conditional-contraction} and
\ref{admissible-whp} together where we set the values of $C$ and $c$ according to the choice $\delta = \delta_0$. Hence \eqref{conditional-contraction} is valid with $b = \delta_0 \|x\|$.

Let $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$ and $x_0$ such that $\mathrm{dist}(x,x_0) \leq \delta_0 \varepsilon$ be be given. Let us assume $\|x - x_0 \| \leq \|-x - x_0\|$ so that
$\mathrm{dist}(x,x_0) = \|x - x_0\|$. Otherwise we replace $x$ by $-x$ below. With \eqref{conditional-contraction}, we have the conclusions of Lemmas \ref{bound-error-decay} and \ref{bound-escape-prob} at our disposal. The stability event is simply equal to $\{ \tau_b = \infty\}$.
We bound $\mathbb{P} ( \tau_b < \infty )$ by $\rho (\delta_0 \varepsilon \|x\|/\delta_0 \|x\|)^2 \leq \varepsilon^2$. Lemma \ref{bound-error-decay} then yields the decay bound
$$
\mathbb{E} ~\left [\|z_k\|^2 \mathbbm{1}_{\{\tau_b = \infty\}} \right] \leq e^{-k/4d} \|z_0\|^2,
$$
where we have used $\rho = 1-\frac{1}{4d} \leq e^{-1/4d}$.
\qed

\section*{Appendix: A simple moment calculation}

Let the random variable $\phi$ be uniformly distributed on $\mathbb{S}^{d-1}$ and $e_1,\dots,e_d$ be the standard basis of $\mathbb{R}^d$. By the unitary invariance of the uniform distribution on $\mathbb{S}^{d-1}$, $\mathbb{E}\, |\inner{z}{\phi}|^2$ independent of $z \in \mathbb{S}^{d-1}$. Hence we have
$$ 1 =  \mathbb{E}\,\|\phi\|^2 = \mathbb{E}\,\sum_{j=1}^d|\inner{e_j}{\phi}|^2 = d \,
 \mathbb{E}\,|\inner{e_1}{\phi}|^2 $$
so that $\mathbb{E}\, |\inner{e_1}{\phi}|^2 = \frac{1}{d}$, and therefore $\mathbb{E}\, |\inner{z}{\phi}|^2 = \frac{\|z\|^2}{d}$ for general $z \in \mathbb{R}^d$.

Let us now consider $\mathbb{E}\, |\inner{z}{\phi}|^4$ which is also independent of $z \in \mathbb{S}^{d-1}$. Call its common value $\alpha$. It is also clear by symmetry that for $i\not= j$, the quantity
$\mathbb{E}\, |\inner{e_i}{\phi}|^2|\inner{e_j}{\phi}|^2$ is independent of the pair $(i,j)$. Call its common value $\beta$.

We have
$$\frac{1}{d} = \mathbb{E}\,|\inner{e_1}{\phi}|^2 = \mathbb{E}\,|\inner{e_1}{\phi}|^2 \|\phi\|^2 =
\mathbb{E}\,|\inner{e_1}{\phi}|^2\sum_{j=1}^d|\inner{e_j}{\phi}|^2 = \alpha + (d-1)\beta.$$

We also have
$$ 2\alpha = \mathbb{E}\, \left| \inner{\frac{e_1 + e_2}{\sqrt{2}}}{\phi} \right|^4 +
 \mathbb{E}\, \left| \inner{\frac{e_1 - e_2}{\sqrt{2}}}{\phi} \right|^4
 = \frac{1}{2}\left(\mathbb{E}\, |\inner{e_1}{\phi}|^4+\mathbb{E}\, |\inner{e_2}{\phi}|^4 + 6 \mathbb{E}\, |\inner{e_1}{\phi}|^2|\inner{e_2}{\phi}|^2 \right)  = \alpha + 3\beta,$$
so that $\alpha = 3 \beta$. Solving these two equations we get $\alpha = \frac{3}{d(d+2)}$, and therefore
$\mathbb{E}\, |\inner{z}{\phi}|^4 = \frac{3\|z\|^4}{d(d+2)}$ for general $z \in \mathbb{R}^d$.

\paragraph{Acknowledgement}
The authors gratefully acknowledge Y.~Shuo Tan and R.~Vershynin for pointing out a mistake in the first version of this paper. H.J.~thanks Yuri Bakhtin and Afonso Bandeira for various valuable discussions.

\bibliographystyle{plain}

Numerical Analysis (math.NA); Information Theory (cs.IT); Optimization and Control (math.OC); Probability (math.PR)