Manifold Ways to Darboux-Halphen System

Abstract: Many distinct problems give birth to Darboux-Halphen system of differential equations and here we review some of them. The first is the classical problem presented by Darboux and later solved by Halphen concerning finding infinite number of double orthogonal surfaces in $\mathbb{R}^3$. The second is a problem in general relativity about gravitational instanton in Bianchi IX metric space. The third problem stems from the new take on the moduli of enhanced elliptic curves called Gauss-Manin connection in disguise developed by one of the authors and finally in the last problem Darboux-Halphen system emerges from the associative algebra on the tangent space of a Frobenius manifold.

\section{Introduction}\label{intro}
The Darboux--Halphen system of dif\/ferential equations
\begin{gather}
\dot t_1=t_1(t_2+t_3)-t_2t_3,\nonumber\\
\dot t_2= t_2(t_1+t_3)-t_1t_3, \nonumber \\
 \dot t_3= t_3(t_1+t_2)-t_1t_2, \qquad \dot {}=\partial /\partial \tau,\label{halphen}
\end{gather}
where $\tau$ is a free parameter, f\/irst came to existence when Darboux \cite{MR1508661} was studying the existence of an inf\/inite number of double orthogonal system of coordinates. He formulated the problem as follows: {\it Let~$A$ and~$B$ be two f\/ixed surfaces in the $3$-dimensional Euclidean space~$\mathbb{R}^3$ and suppose that~$\Sigma$ is the family of surfaces which are the locus of the points such that the sum of their distances from the surfaces~$A$ and~$B$ are constant; and~$\Sigma'$ is the family of surfaces which are the locus of the points so that the difference of their distances from the surfaces~$A$ and~$B$ are constant. Is there a third family of surfaces intersecting~$\Sigma$ and~$\Sigma'$ orthogonally?} When we restrict the third family to the surfaces given by second degree equations, we f\/ind the Darboux--Halphen system. In Section~\ref{darbouxproblem} we present Halphen's solution to this problem.

The Darboux--Halphen system also emerge from a direct map from Ramanujan relations (Section~\ref{Ramanujan relations}).

In 1979, Gibbons and Pope \cite{MR535151} found the Darboux--Halphen equations while studying gra\-vitational instanton solutions in Bianchi~IX spaces without having noticed it. Couple of decades later, Ablowitz et al.~\cite{MR1713583} pointed it out and recently one of the authors \cite{2016IJGMM..1350042C} explored its integrability aspects. A gravitational instanton is simply the (anti-)self-duality condition imposed on the curvature of a Einstein manifold with asymptotic locally Euclidian boundary conditions.

Hitchin \cite{hitchin1995twistor} and Tod~\cite{tod1994self} realized that (anti-)self-duality in Bianchi~IX metric has a more general solution envolving to a Darboux--Halphen system coupled to another system of linear dif\/ferential equation similar to Darboux--Halphen. A revised and simplif\/ied proof of the results of Tod and Hitchin can be found in \cite{babich1998self}. See \cite{manin2015symbolic} for a physical application in cosmology. We review these works in Section~\ref{BianchiIXsection}.

Another author \cite{ho06-1,ho14} among us met the Darboux--Halphen system while exploring the Gauss--Manin connection of a universal family of elliptic curves. This method is called \textit{Gauss--Manin connection in disguise}, which also name the vector f\/ield in this method that gives rise to the Darboux--Halphen equations and we present it in Section~\ref{GMCD}.

The last interesting problem where Darboux--Halphen system appears is in the context of a~3-dimensional Frobenius manifold with a certain potential function~$F(t)$. Frobenius manifold arose as a geometrization of Witten--Dijkgraaf--Verlinde--Verlinde (WDVV) equations \cite{Dijkgraaf:1990tp,Witten:1990fz}, an overdetermined system of dif\/ferential equations that appear in the physics of topological f\/ield theories in 2 dimensions. In this particular case of dimension 3, the WDVV equation is known as Chazy equation, which has a~close tie with the solutions of Darboux system. We present it in Section~\ref{Frobenius}, where we follow Dubrovin's notes~\cite{Dubrovin1992NuPhB,Dubrovin:1996di}.

We conclude this article, crossing information between problems displayed here, which led us to interesting remarks and an evidence that leads to a new way on how to examine spectral curves from monopoles using Gauss--Manin connection in disguise, further explored in~\cite{Torres:2017hqc} by one of the authors.

Throughout this text we make extensive use of Einstein summation convention where the sum over identical upper and lower indices is implicit.

\section{The Darboux problem}\label{darbouxproblem}
The above Darboux problem given in Section \ref{intro} is equivalent to the following problem: \emph{Let~$A$ and~$B$ be as before and suppose that $\Sigma$ is a family of surfaces parallel to~$A$ which is parameterized by~$v$, and~$\Sigma '$ is a family of surfaces parallel to $B$ that is parameterized by~$w$. Is there a third family of surfaces parameterized by $\tau$ such that it intersects $\Sigma$ and $\Sigma '$ orthogonally?} Note that, two surfaces $A_1$ and $A_2$ are said to be \emph{parallel}, if there exist a constant $c\in \mathbb{R}_{\ne 0}$ and a continuous one to one map between points $a_1\in A_1$ and points $a_2\in A_2$, such that the tangent planes at these points are parallel and the position vector $\bf a_2=a_1+{\rm c}\hat{N}$, where $\bf \hat{N}$ is the unitary vector normal to the surface $A_1$ at~$a_1$. We say that a~family of surfaces is parameterized by $\varphi=\varphi(x,y,z)$, if any surface belonging to this family is given by $\varphi(x,y,z)={\rm const}$, in which $x$, $y$, $z$ are the standard coordinates of~$\mathbb{R}^3$. If for a~function $\varphi=\varphi(x,y,z)$, we def\/ine
 \begin{gather*}
\varphi_x=\frac{\partial \varphi}{\partial x} , \qquad
\varphi_y=\frac{\partial \varphi}{\partial y} , \qquad
\varphi_z=\frac{\partial \varphi}{\partial z} ,
\end{gather*}
then in the latter problem, Darboux chose a case of parametrization of parallel surfaces that gives the Gauss map for points on the parallel surfaces
\begin{gather*}
v_x^2+v_y^2+v_z^2=1,\qquad w_x^2+w_y^2+w_z^2=1,
\end{gather*}
and the condition of orthogonality at points in the intersection of $v$ and $\tau$ and $w$ and $\tau$, respectively, is given by
\begin{gather*}
\tau_xv_x+\tau_yv_y+\tau_zv_z=0,\qquad \tau_xw_x+\tau_yw_y+\tau_zw_z=0.
\end{gather*}
So the problem is equivalent to the following system of equations,
\begin{gather}
v_x^2+v_y^2+v_z^2=1, \label{eq 1}\\
w_x^2+w_y^2+w_z^2=1, \label{eq 2}\\
\tau_xv_x+\tau_yv_y+\tau_zv_z=0, \label{eq 3}\\
\tau_xw_x+\tau_yw_y+\tau_zw_z=0. \label{eq 4}
\end{gather}
If for a function $\varphi$ of three variables $(x,y,z)$ we def\/ine the operator
\begin{gather*}\partial_\varphi:=\varphi_x\frac{\partial}{\partial
x}+\varphi_y\frac{\partial}{\partial y}+\varphi_z\frac{\partial}{\partial z},\end{gather*} then equations \eqref{eq
1}, \eqref{eq 2}, \eqref{eq 3} and \eqref{eq 4}, respectively, are given by $\partial_vv=1$, $\partial_ww=1$, $\partial_\tau v=\partial_v\tau =0$ and $\partial_\tau w=\partial_w\tau =0$, respectively. These equations imply $\partial_\tau \partial_vv=0$, $\partial_\tau \partial_ww=0$, $\partial_v\partial_v\tau =0$, $\partial_w\partial_w\tau =0$. Hence we get
\begin{gather} \label{eq parv}
2\partial_v\partial_v\tau -\partial_\tau \partial_vv=0,\qquad
2\partial_w\partial_w\tau -\partial_\tau \partial_ww=0.
\end{gather}

The situation is more interesting when the family $(\tau )$ is of second degree. Hence let us suppose that the family $(\tau )$ is
given by
\begin{gather}\label{eq elips}
ax^2+by^2+cz^2=1,
\end{gather}
where $a$, $b$, $c$ are functions of the parameter $\tau $. By this assumption, equations \eqref{eq 3} and \eqref{eq 4} yield
\begin{gather}\label{eq axv}
 axv_x+byv_y+czv_z=0,\qquad
 axw_x+byw_y+czw_z=0.
\end{gather}
As well, from equation \eqref{eq parv} we get
\begin{gather}\label{eq avx}
av_x^2+bv_y^2+cv_z^2=0,\qquad
aw_x^2+bw_y^2+cw_z^2=0
\end{gather}
Equations \eqref{eq 1}, \eqref{eq elips}, \eqref{eq axv} and \eqref{eq avx} imply
\begin{gather}
\big(a^2b'+b^2a'\big)(xv_y-yv_x)^2+\big(b^2c'+c^2b'\big)(yv_z-zv_y)^2 +\big(c^2a'+a^2c'\big)(zv_x-xv_z)^2=0, \nonumber\\
ab(xv_y-yv_x)^2+bc(yv_z-zv_y)^2+ca(zv_x-xv_z)^2=0,\label{eq v}
\end{gather}
in which $'=\frac{d}{d\tau }$. Analogously for $w$ we f\/ind
\begin{gather}
\big(a^2b'+b^2a'\big)(xw_y-yw_x)^2+\big(b^2c'+c^2b'\big)(yw_z-zw_y)^2 +\big(c^2a'+a^2c'\big)(zw_x-xw_z)^2=0,\nonumber\\
ab(xw_y-yw_x)^2+bc(yw_z-zw_y)^2+ca(zw_x-xw_z)^2=0. \label{eq w}
\end{gather}
The two equations in \eqref{eq v} and the two equations in \eqref{eq w} become equivalent if
\begin{gather}\label{eq dar1}
\frac{a^2b'+b^2a'}{ab}=\frac{b^2c'+c^2b'}{bc}=\frac{c^2a'+a^2c'}{ac}.
\end{gather}
If in \eqref{eq elips} we substitute $a$, $b$, $c$ respectively by $\frac{1}{t_1}$, $\frac{1}{t_2}$, $\frac{1}{t_3}$, then from~\eqref{eq
dar1} we get that the family
\begin{gather*}
\frac{x^2}{t_1}+\frac{y^2}{t_2}+\frac{z^2}{t_3}=1,
\end{gather*}
is orthogonal to both $\Sigma$ and $\Sigma'$ if $t_1$, $t_2$, $t_3$
satisfy the following
\begin{gather}\label{eq darboux}
t_3\left(\frac{{\rm d}t_1}{{\rm d}\tau }+\frac{{\rm d}t_2}{d\tau }\right)=t_2\left(\frac{{\rm d}t_1}{{\rm d}\tau }+\frac{{\rm d}t_3}{{\rm d}\tau }\right)=t_1\left(\frac{{\rm d}t_2}{{\rm d}\tau }+\frac{{\rm d}t_3}{{\rm d}\tau }\right).
\end{gather}
A particular case of the equation \eqref{eq darboux}, which is known
as Darboux--Halphen system, is given in \eqref{halphen}.
In 1881, G.~Halphen~\cite{ha81} studied this system of dif\/ferential
equations and expressed a~solution of it in terms of the logarithmic
derivatives of the theta functions; namely,
\begin{gather}
t_1= 2 (\ln \theta_2(\tau ))',\qquad
t_2=2 (\ln \theta_3(\tau ))', \qquad
t_3=2 (\ln \theta_4(\tau ))'.\label{darbouxsolution}
\end{gather}
with
\begin{gather*}
\theta_2(\tau ):=\sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty q^{\frac{1}{2}(n+\frac{1}{2})^2},\qquad
\theta_3(\tau ):=\sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty q^{\frac{1}{2}n^2},\\
\theta_4(\tau ):=\sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty (-1)^nq^{\frac{1}{2}n^2},\qquad q=e^{2\pi i \tau },\qquad \tau \in {\mathbb H}.
\end{gather*}
These theta functions can be written in terms of the more general theta functions with characteristics $r$ and $s$ and arguments $z$ and $\sigma$:
\begin{gather*}
\vartheta[r,s](z,\sigma)=\sum_{m\in \mathbb{Z}}\exp\big\{\pi i(m+r)^2\sigma+2\pi i (m+r)(z+s)\big\},\qquad z,r,s\in \mathbb{C},\qquad \sigma \in \mathbb{H},
\end{gather*}
such that
\begin{gather*}
\theta_2(\tau )= \vartheta[1/2,0](0,\tau ),\qquad\theta_3(\tau )= \vartheta[0,0](0,\tau ),\qquad\theta_4(\tau )= \vartheta[0,1/2](0,\tau ).
\end{gather*}

\section{Ramanujan relations between Eisenstein series}\label{Ramanujan relations}
The following dif\/ferential equation
\begin{gather}\label{raman}
q\frac{\partial E_2}{\partial q}=\frac{1}{12}\big(E_2^2-E_4\big), \qquad
q\frac{\partial E_4}{\partial q}=\frac{1}{3}(E_2E_4-E_6), \qquad
q\frac{\partial E_6}{\partial q}=\frac{1}{2}\big(E_2E_6-E_4^2\big),
\end{gather}
where $E_i$'s are the Eisenstein series
\begin{gather*
E_{2i}(q):=1+b_i\sum_{n=1}^\infty \left (\sum_{d\mid n}d^{2i-1}\right )q^{n},\qquad i=1,2,3,
\end{gather*}
and $(b_1,b_2,b_3)=(-24, 240, -504)$, was discovered by Ramanujan in \cite{ra16} and it is mainly known
as Ramanujan's relations between Eisenstein series.
Ramanujan was a master of formal power series
and had a very limited access to the modern mathematics of his time.
In particular, he and many people in number theory didn't know that the dif\/ferential equation~\eqref{raman} had already been studied by Halphen in his book \cite[p.~331]{hal00}, thirty years before S.~Ramanujan.
The equalities of the coef\/f\/icients of $x^i$ in
\begin{gather}\label{27spet2017}
4(x-t_1)(x-t_2)(x-t_3)=4(x-a_1E_2)^3-a_2E_4(x-a_1E_2)-a_3E_6,
\end{gather}
where
\begin{gather*}
(a_1,a_2,a_3):=\left(\frac{2\pi i}{12}, 12\left(\frac{2\pi i}{12}\right)^2, 8\left(\frac{2\pi i}{12}\right)^3\right),
\end{gather*}
gives us a map from ${\mathbb C}^3$ into itself which transforms Darboux--Halphen into Ramanujan dif\/fe\-ren\-tial equation,
see \cite[pp.~330, 335]{ho14}.

\section{Self-duality in Bianchi IX metrics}\label{BianchiIXsection}
An instanton is a f\/ield conf\/iguration that vanishes at spacetime inf\/inity. It is the quantum ef\/fect that leads metastable states to decay into vacuum. It is a~phenomenon that takes place in usual spacetime with signature $(-,+,+,+)$ but in order to perform physical calculation we use its equivalence with a soliton solution (static and energetically stable f\/ield conf\/iguration) in Euclidean spacetime.
 In Yang--Mills theory, self-duality of the f\/ield strength $F_{\mu\nu}=\epsilon_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}F^{\rho\sigma}$ in four spacetime dimensions is a widely known instanton conf\/iguration \cite{belavin1975pseudoparticle}. Similarly, self-duality constraint on the curvature two-form (and connection $1$-form) in Cartan's formalism of general relativity characterizes a gravitational instanton. An important feature of self-duality of the curvature is that the Ricci-tensor vanishes and it is a solution of the vacuum Einstein equations.
Also, self-dual curvature leads to solving a linear dif\/ferential equation, a task much easier than solving the full non-linear Einstein equations. Gravitational instantons were found in Bianchi~IX metrics, by Gibbons and Pope~\cite{MR535151}. Without realizing it, they arrived at Darboux--Halphen system from self-duality constraints.

In \cite{Bianchi2001}, L.~Bianchi studied continuous isometries of 3-dimensional spaces. He noticed that the continuous isometries (continuous motion that preserve ${\rm d}s^2$) of a space form a f\/inite-dimensional Lie group and he classif\/ied such spaces according to the corresponding group of isometries. Bianchi~IX corresponds to a~3-dimensional space with ${\rm SO}(3)$ or ${\rm SU}(2)$ as Lie group of isometries. When we consider it in the context of 4-dimensional cosmology, the isometries lie in the 3 spacial directions \cite{manin2015symbolic}, but since we are working in Euclidean signature we consider the isometry group ${\rm SO}(3)$ as a subgroup of ${\rm SO}(4)$. In this conf\/iguration, as the instanton vanishes at inf\/inity, Lorentz symmetry is recovered and the space is called asymptotically locally Euclidean (ALE). This same manifold describes the reduced\footnote{Moduli of charge 2 monopoles reduced by quotient by $\mathbb{R}^3$ action.} moduli~$M^0_2$ of charge 2 monopoles in a~${\rm SU}(2)$ Yang--Mills--Higgs theory.

A magnetic 2-monopole is a soliton solution of charge 2 of Bogomolny equations in the Yang--Mills--Higgs theory in $\mathbb{R}^3$, where ${\rm SU}(2)$ Yang--Mills is a gauge theory of 1-form connections $\bf{A}$ on a principal ${\rm SU}(2)$-bundle while the Higgs f\/ield $\Phi$ correspond to a section of an associated $\mathfrak{su}(2)$-bundle \cite{atiyahgeometry,Hurtubise:1983hl}. In \cite{atiyahgeometry}, Atiyah and Hitchin showed that the reduced moduli $M^0_2$ of 2-monopoles is a~4-dimensional hyperk\"ahler manifold and an anti-self-dual (curvature-wise) Einstein manifold. Since $M^0_2$ admits ${\rm SO}(3)$ isometry, the metric is a Bianch IX\footnote{Note that here the four coordinates of the moduli are not spacetime directions, but internal parameters of a~2-monopole solution.} (\ref{bianchiix}). This is a consequence of the hyperk\"ahler structure of $M^0_2$ which has an $S^2$-parameter family of complex structures, i.e., if $I$, $J$, $K$ are covariantly constant complex structures in $M^0_2$ then $aI+bJ+cK$ is also a covariantly
constant complex structure in $M^0_2$ given that $a^2+b^2+c^2=1$.

Here we present a detailed derivation of the Darboux--Halphen system starting from the Euclidean Bianchi~IX metric with ${\rm SO}(3)$ symmetry with an imposition of the constraints of self-duality at the level of Riemann curvature. The constraint of anti-self-duality yields an anti-instanton, a solution with negative instanton number and we present this solution together by using $\pm \operatorname{sign}$.
We follow the steps of \cite{2016IJGMM..1350042C} and \cite{MR535151}, see also \cite{PV2012}.

\subsection{Geometric analysis}
A metric for a 4-dimensional spacetime with coordinates $(x^1,x^2,x^3,x^4)$, Euclidean time~$x^4$
and ${\rm SO}(3)\subset {\rm SO}(4)$ isometry is written in terms of invariant 1-forms $\sigma^i$ on ${\rm SO}(3)$, dual to the standard basis $X_1$, $X_2$, $X_3$ of its Lie algebra
\begin{gather*}
\sigma^i = - \frac1{r^2} \eta^{i}_{\mu \nu} x^\mu {\rm d}x^\nu,
\end{gather*}
where $\mu, \nu = 1,2,3,4$ and $i= 1,2,3$ and $\eta^{i}_{\mu \nu}$ is a 't Hooft symbol given by
\begin{gather*
\eta^i_{\mu \nu} = \begin{cases}
\varepsilon_{i\mu\nu}+\delta_{i\mu}\delta_{\nu 4}-\delta_{\mu 4}\delta_{i\nu}\qquad\text{or},\\
\varepsilon_{i\mu\nu}-\delta_{i\mu}\delta_{\nu 4}+\delta_{\mu 4}\delta_{i\nu}.
\end{cases}
\end{gather*}
according to two dif\/ferent choices of $\mathfrak{so}(3)$ generators in the Lie algebra of the group ${\rm SO}(4)= {\rm SU}(2)\times {\rm SU}(2)$. Among the symbols presented above, $\varepsilon_{i\mu\nu}$ is the Levi-Civita symbol
\begin{gather*}
\varepsilon_{123}=\varepsilon_{231}=\varepsilon_{312}=-\varepsilon_{213}=-\varepsilon_{321}=-\varepsilon_{132}=1,\qquad\text{and zero elsewhere,}
\end{gather*}
and $\delta_{i\mu}$ refers to the Kronecker delta. The $\sigma^i$'s obey the structure equation:
\begin{gather}\label{struc} {\rm d} \sigma^i = - {\varepsilon}_{ijk} \sigma^j \wedge \sigma^k , \end{gather}
where we use Einstein summation in the repeated upper and lower indices here and what follows below. This choice of ${\rm SO}(3)$ isometry leads to a 4D spherically symmetric Bianchi IX metric
\begin{gather}
\label{bianchiix} {\rm d}s^2 = c_0(r)^2 {\rm d}r^2 + c_1^2 (r) \big(\sigma^1\big)^2 + c_2^2 (r) \big(\sigma^2\big)^2 + c_3^2 (r) \big(\sigma^3\big)^2 ,
\end{gather}
with $r=\sqrt[]{x_1^2+x_2^2+x_3^2+x_4^2}$, $ c_0 (r) = c_1 (r) c_2 (r) c_3 (r)$ and $c_1$, $c_2$, $c_3$ being functions of $r$.

We can impose self-duality in Bianchi IX metric in two ways:
\begin{enumerate}\itemsep=0pt
\item[1)] connection wise self-duality,
\item[2)] curvature wise self-duality.
\end{enumerate}
The connection wise self-duality is a stronger form of self-duality that leads to self-dual curvature tensor \cite{Eguchi:1978bx}. This form of self-duality does not present Darboux--Halphen system, but the Lagrange or Euler-top system~\cite{2016IJGMM..1350042C}. It is not in our goal to describe it here.

 One can perform a standard analysis using vierbeins, leading to Cartan's structure equation. The vierbeins could be chosen as
 \begin{gather*
 e^0 = c_0 {\rm d}r, \qquad e^i = c_i \sigma^i \quad (\textnormal{no sum in}\ i), \qquad i = 1, 2, 3,
 \end{gather*}
 and the connection $1$-form can be obtained from the structure equation
 \begin{gather*}
{\rm d}e^a= e^b\wedge {\omega^a}_b,
 \end{gather*}
 where $a, b=0,1,2,3$. Obviously, $e^0$ produces no connections while other three does
 \begin{gather
 {\rm d} e^0 = 0,\qquad
 {\rm d} e^i = \partial_r c_i {\rm d}r \wedge \sigma^i - c_i {\varepsilon}_{ijk} \sigma^j \wedge \sigma^k. \label{ei}
 \end{gather}
The f\/irst term on the r.h.s.\ above gives ${\omega^i}_0$ while the second term needs to be rewritten in order to produce a antisymmetric connection $1$-form
 \begin{gather*}
 \varepsilon_{ijk}\frac{c_i^2}{c_i} \sigma^j \wedge \sigma^k = \varepsilon_{ijk}\frac{2c_i^2 + \big( c_j^2 - c_k^2 \big) - \big( c_j^2 - c_k^2 \big)}{ 2c_i} \sigma^j \wedge \sigma^k \nonumber \\
\hphantom{\varepsilon_{ijk}\frac{c_i^2}{c_i} \sigma^j \wedge \sigma^k}{}
= \varepsilon_{ijk} \frac{c_i^2 + c_j^2 - c_k^2 }{ 2c_i c_j} e^j \wedge \sigma^k + \varepsilon_{ikj}\frac{c_i^2 + c_k^2 - c_j^2 }{ 2c_i c_k} e^k \wedge \sigma^j\\
\hphantom{\varepsilon_{ijk}\frac{c_i^2}{c_i} \sigma^j \wedge \sigma^k}{}
 = \varepsilon_{ijk} \frac{c_i^2 + c_j^2 - c_k^2 }{ c_i c_j} e^j \wedge \sigma^k .
 \end{gather*}
 Rewriting (\ref{ei}),
 \begin{gather*}
{\rm d} e^i = - \frac{\partial_r c_i}{c_0} \sigma^i \wedge e^0 - \varepsilon_{ijk} \frac{c_i^2 + c_j^2 - c_k^2 }{ c_i c_j} e^j \wedge \sigma^k .
 \end{gather*}
Hence,
 \begin{gather}\label{connection1form}
 {\omega^i}_0 = \frac{\partial_r c_i}{c_0} \sigma^i \quad (\text{no sum in} \ i) ,\qquad {\omega^i}_j = - \varepsilon_{ijk} \frac{c_i^2 + c_j^2 - c_k^2 }{ c_i c_j} \sigma^k.
 \end{gather}
Here the connection 1-form components are anti-symmetric under permutation of its indices.

\subsection{Curvature wise self-duality and Darboux--Halphen system}

Curvature-wise self-duality was f\/irst studied in search of gravitational instantons. It is a more general solution than imposing self-duality on connection 1-forms. The Cartan-structure equation for Ricci tensor is
\begin{gather*}\label{cartan2}
 R_{ij} = {\rm d} \omega_{ij} + \omega_{im} \wedge {\omega^m}_j.
\end{gather*}
The (anti-)self-duality of curvature demands that
\begin{gather}
\label{curvsd} R_{0i} =\pm \frac12 { \varepsilon_{0ilm} } R^{lm} = \pm R_{jk},
\end{gather}
where $\{i,j,k\}$, in this order, are a cyclic permutation of $\{1,2,3\}$ and we used the fact that Euclidean vierbein indices are raised and lowered with Kronecker deltas ${\delta^i}_j$. Comparing the l.h.s.\ and r.h.s.\ of~(\ref{curvsd}), we have
\begin{gather}
{\rm d}(\omega_{0i}\mp\omega_{jk})=\pm(\omega_{0k}\mp\omega_{ij})\wedge(\omega_{0j}\mp\omega_{ki}),\nonumber\\
{\rm d}\big(\lambda_1(r)\sigma^i\big)=\pm\big(\lambda_3(r)\sigma^k\big)\wedge\big(\lambda_2(r)\sigma^j\big)=\lambda_3(r)\lambda_2(r)\sigma^k\wedge\sigma^j, \nonumber\\
\partial_r\lambda_1 dr\wedge\sigma^i+\lambda_1d\sigma^i=\mp\lambda_2\lambda_3\sigma^j\wedge\sigma^k,\label{sdR}
\end{gather}
where the second line comes from equation (\ref{connection1form}) with $\lambda_1$, $\lambda_2$, $\lambda_3$ being functions of~$r$. But the third line and (\ref{struc}) show that $\lambda_i$'s are constants and $\lambda_1=\pm\tfrac{1}{2}\lambda_2\lambda_3$. From cyclicity of $i$, $j$, $k$ we obtain two more copies of~(\ref{sdR}). Therefore,
\begin{enumerate}\itemsep=0pt
 \item[1)] $\lambda_1=\lambda_2=\lambda_3=0$ or
 \item[2)] $(\lambda_1)^2=(\lambda_2)^2=(\lambda_3)^2=4$ with $\lambda_1\lambda_2\lambda_3=\pm 8$.
\end{enumerate}
The f\/irst case leads to self-dual connection $1$-forms and Euler-top system, while the second case can be resumed to $\lambda_1=\lambda_2=\lambda_3=\pm2$ by an appropriate change of sign in~$c_i$~\cite{MR535151}. Therefore, from equations (\ref{connection1form}) and (\ref{sdR}) we get
\begin{gather*}
 \left( \frac{\partial_r c_i}{c_0} \right) = \mp \left( \frac{ c_j^2 + c_k^2 - c_i^2 }{ c_j c_k} -2\right), \qquad
 \partial_r \big( \ln c_i^2 \big) = \mp 2\big( c_j^2 + c_k^2 - c_i^2 - 2c_j c_k \big)
 \end{gather*}
One may suppose that we must parametrize the l.h.s.\ to match the linear form in $c^2_{i}$, $c^2_{j}$ and~$c^2_{k}$ of the r.h.s.\ in the equation above. Essentially, the derivative operator aside, $c_i^2$ must be parametrized such that
\begin{gather*} \ln c_i^2= \ln \Omega_j + \ln \Omega_k - \ln \Omega_i +\text{const}= \ln \left( \frac{\Omega_j \Omega_k}{\Omega_i} \right)+\text{const}. \end{gather*}
 We choose new parametrization
 \begin{gather*
 ( c_i )^2 = \frac{\Omega_j \Omega_k}{2\Omega_i} \ \Rightarrow \ \Omega_i = 2c_j c_k.
 \end{gather*}
 which enable us to decouple the individual parameters into their own equations turning into simpler expressions. This allows us to continue our analysis
 \begin{gather*} \partial_r \left[ \ln \left( \frac{\Omega_j \Omega_k}{2\Omega_i} \right) \right] = \frac{\dot{\Omega}_j}{\Omega_j} + \frac{\dot{\Omega}_k}{\Omega_k} - \frac{\dot{\Omega}_i}{\Omega_i} = \mp \left( \frac{\Omega_k \Omega_i}{\Omega_j} + \frac{\Omega_i \Omega_j}{\Omega_k} - \frac{\Omega_j \Omega_k}{\Omega_i} -2\Omega_i\right). \end{gather*}
 Adding up the above equation with cyclic permutations of $i$, $j$, $k$ we will f\/ind that (anti-)self-dual cases of the Bianchi~IX metric gives us
 \begin{gather*}
\frac{\dot{\Omega}_j}{\Omega_j} + \frac{\dot{\Omega}_k}{\Omega_k} - \frac{\dot{\Omega}_i}{\Omega_i} = \mp \bigg( \frac{\Omega_k \Omega_i}{\Omega_j} + \frac{\Omega_i \Omega_j}{\Omega_k} - \frac{\Omega_j \Omega_k}{\Omega_i} -2\Omega_i\bigg) \\
 \hphantom{\frac{\dot{\Omega}_j}{\Omega_j} + \frac{\dot{\Omega}_k}{\Omega_k} - \frac{\dot{\Omega}_i}{\Omega_i}}{} + \\
\frac{\dot{\Omega}_k}{\Omega_k} + \frac{\dot{\Omega}_i}{\Omega_i} - \frac{\dot{\Omega}_j}{\Omega_j} = \mp \bigg( \frac{\Omega_i \Omega_j}{\Omega_k} + \frac{\Omega_j \Omega_k}{\Omega_i} - \frac{\Omega_k \Omega_i}{\Omega_j} -2\Omega_j\bigg) \\
\hphantom{\frac{\dot{\Omega}_j}{\Omega_j} + \frac{\dot{\Omega}_k}{\Omega_k} - \frac{\dot{\Omega}_i}{\Omega_i}}{} \big{\downarrow}\\
 \Rightarrow \ \frac{\dot{\Omega}_k}{\Omega_k} = \mp 2 \left(\frac{\Omega_i \Omega_j}{\Omega_k}-\Omega_i-\Omega_j\right) \ \Rightarrow \ \dot{\Omega}_k = \mp (\Omega_i \Omega_j-\Omega_k\Omega_i-\Omega_k\Omega_j),
 \end{gather*}
where throughout derivative (denoted by dot) is taken with respect to $r$. Self-duality proceeds to give us the classical Darboux--Halphen system
\begin{gather*}
 \dot{\Omega}_i+\dot{\Omega}_j = 2\Omega_i \Omega_j .
\end{gather*}

\subsection{General Bianchi IX self-dual Einstein metric}

Following \cite{babich1998self}, we rewrite the Bianchi IX by adding a conformal scaling term $F$ in the metric
\begin{gather*
{\rm d}s^2= F\left({\rm d}t^2+\frac{\sigma^2_1}{\Omega^2_1}+\frac{\sigma^2_2}{\Omega^2_2}+\frac{\sigma^2_3}{\Omega^2_3}\right).
\end{gather*}
where t is the cosmological time and dif\/ferent from before, here the isometry is ${\rm SU}(2)$ and ($\sigma_i$) are the corresponding ${\rm SU}(2)$ invariant forms along the spacial directions with structure constant
\begin{gather*}{\rm d}\sigma_1=\sigma_2\wedge\sigma_3,\qquad {\rm d}\sigma_2=\sigma_3\wedge\sigma_1,\qquad {\rm d}\sigma_3=\sigma_1\wedge\sigma_2.\end{gather*}
We def\/ine the new variables $A_i(t)$ by the equations
\begin{gather}
\partial_t \Omega_i=-\Omega_j\Omega_k+\Omega_i(A_j+A_k),\label{As}
\end{gather}
for distinct $i$, $j$ and $k$ taking values in the set $\{1,2,3\}$. The curvature-wise self-duality condition is expressed in terms of the new variables $A_i$ in the form of the Darboux--Halphen system
\begin{gather}\label{DarbouxA}
\partial_t A_i= -A_jA_k+A_i(A_j+A_k).
\end{gather}
Therefore we f\/ind $\Omega_i$'s by f\/irst solving system (\ref{DarbouxA}) and applying its solution in~(\ref{As}). A non-trivial solution is given by (\ref{darbouxsolution})
\begin{gather*}
A_1= 2 \frac{\partial}{\partial t}(\ln \theta_2(it)),\qquad
A_2=2 \frac{\partial}{\partial t}(\ln \theta_3(it)), \qquad
A_3=2 \frac{\partial}{\partial t}(\ln \theta_4(it)).
\end{gather*}
For simplicity, we rename $\vartheta_2\equiv\theta_2(it)$, $\vartheta_3\equiv\theta_3(it)$, $\vartheta_4\equiv\theta_4(it)$.
The system (\ref{As}) thus becomes
\begin{gather}
\partial_t{\Omega}_1=-\Omega_2\Omega_3+2\Omega_1\partial_t\ln (\vartheta_3\vartheta_4),\nonumber\\
\partial_t{\Omega}_2=-\Omega_3\Omega_1+2\Omega_2\partial_t\ln (\vartheta_4\vartheta_2),\nonumber\\
\partial_t{\Omega}_3=-\Omega_1\Omega_2+2\Omega_3\partial_t\ln (\vartheta_2\vartheta_3).\label{Omegasolution}
\end{gather}
There is a class of solutions of this system that satisf\/ies vacuum Einstein equations
\begin{gather*}
R_{ab}-\frac{1}{2}Rg_{ab}+\Lambda g_{ab}=0 ,
\end{gather*}
once we choose the appropriate conformal factor $F$ \cite{tod1994self}. This class depend on the values of the cosmological constant $\Lambda$ and satisfy the constraint
\begin{gather}\label{Omegaclass}
\vartheta^4_2\Omega_1^2-\vartheta^4_3\Omega_2^2+\vartheta^4_4\Omega_3^2=\frac{\pi^2}{4}\vartheta^4_2\vartheta^4_3\vartheta^4_4,
\end{gather}
The general two-parametric family of solutions of the system (\ref{Omegasolution}) satisfying condition (\ref{Omegaclass}), is given by the following formulas
\begin{gather*}
\Omega_1=-\frac{i}{2}\vartheta_3\vartheta_4\frac{\frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d}q}\vartheta\big[p,q+\tfrac{1}{2}\big]}{e^{\pi i p}\vartheta[p,q]},\qquad \Omega_2=\frac{i}{2}\vartheta_2\vartheta_4\frac{\frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d}q}\vartheta\big[p+\tfrac{1}{2},q+\tfrac{1}{2}\big]}{e^{\pi i p}\vartheta[p,q]},\nonumber\\
\Omega_3=\frac{i}{2}\vartheta_2\vartheta_4\frac{\frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d}q}\vartheta\big[p+\tfrac{1}{2},q+\tfrac{1}{2}\big]}{e^{\pi i p}\vartheta[p,q]},
\end{gather*}
 where $\vartheta[p,q]$ denotes the theta function $\vartheta[p,q](0,ir)$, $p,q\in {\mathbb C}$. The corresponding metric is real and satisf\/ies the Einstein equations for negative cosmological constant $\Lambda$ if $p\in \mathbb{R}$ and $\mathcal{R}\{q\}=\tfrac{1}{2}$ (real part of $q$) or for positive cosmological constant if $q\in \mathbb{R}$ and $\mathcal{R}\{p\}=\tfrac{1}{2}$. In both the cases the corresponding conformal factor is given by
 \begin{gather*}
 F=\frac{2}{\pi \Lambda}\frac{\Omega_1\Omega_2\Omega_3}{\big( \frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d}q}\ln \vartheta[p,q]\big)^2}.
 \end{gather*}
 There is another family of solutions
 \begin{gather*}
\Omega_1=\frac{1}{t+q_0}+2\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\ln\vartheta_2,\qquad \Omega_2=\frac{1}{t+q_0}+2\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\ln\vartheta_3,\qquad\Omega_3=\frac{1}{t+q_0}+2\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\ln\vartheta_4, \end{gather*}
 with $q_0\in \mathbb{R}$, that def\/ines manifolds with vanishing cosmological constant if
 \begin{gather*}F=C(t+q_0)^2\Omega_1\Omega_2\Omega_3.\end{gather*}
 \newcommand{\mat}[4]{
 \begin{pmatrix}
 #1 & #2 \\
 #3 & #4
 \end{pmatrix}
 }
\section{Gauss--Manin connection in disguise}\label{GMCD}
In this section we explain how one can derive the Darboux--Halphen equations from the Gauss--Manin connection of a universal family of elliptic curves.
This has been taken from the references
\cite{ho06-1, ho14}. The family of elliptic curves
\begin{gather*}
E_t\colon \ y^2-4(x-t_1)(x-t_2)(x-t_3)=0,\qquad t\in {\mathbb C}^3\backslash \cup_{i,j}\{t_i=t_j\},
\end{gather*}
is the universal family for the moduli of $3$-tuple $(E,(P,Q),\omega)$, where $E$ is an elliptic curve and $\omega\in H^1_{\rm dR}(E)\backslash F^1$. There is a unique regular dif\/ferential 1-form in the Hodge f\/iltration $ \omega_1\in F^1$, such that $\langle \omega,\omega_1\rangle=1$ and $\omega$, $\omega_1$ together form a basis of $H^1_{\rm dR}(E)$. $P$ and $Q$ are a pair of points of $E$ that generate the $2$-torsion subgroup with the Weil pairing $e(P,Q)=-1$. The points~$P$ and~$Q$ are given by $(t_1,0)$ and $(t_2,0)$ and $\omega=\frac{x{\rm d}x}{y}$ and $\omega_1=\frac{{\rm d}x}{y}$. The Gauss--Manin connection of the family of elliptic curves~$E_t$ written in the basis $\frac{{\rm d}x}{y}$, $\frac{x{\rm d}x}{y}$ is given as bellow
\begin{gather*
 \nabla\begin{pmatrix}\frac{{\rm d}x}{y}\vspace{1mm}\\ \frac{x{\rm d}x}{y}\end{pmatrix}=
A
\begin{pmatrix}\frac{{\rm d}x}{y}\vspace{1mm}\\ \frac{x{\rm d}x}{y}\end{pmatrix},
\end{gather*}
where
\begin{gather*}
A =
 \frac{{\rm d}t_1}{2(t_1-t_2)(t_1-t_3)}\mat{-t_1}{1}{t_2t_3-t_1(t_2+t_3)}{t_1}\\
\hphantom{A=}{}+\frac{{\rm d}t_2}{2(t_2-t_1)(t_2-t_3)}\mat{-t_2}{1}{t_1t_3-t_2(t_1+t_3)}{t_2}\\
\hphantom{A=}{}+ \frac{{\rm d}t_3}{2(t_3-t_1)(t_3-t_2)}\mat{-t_3}{1}{t_1t_2-t_3(t_1+t_2)}{t_3}.
\end{gather*}
The reader who is not familiar with the Gauss--Manin connection must replace $\nabla$ with ${\rm d}\int_{\delta_t}$, where $t_i$'s are assumed to depend on some parameter $\tau$, ${\rm d}=\frac{\partial}{\partial \tau}$ and $\delta_t$ is a 1-dimensional homology class in~$E_t$. In the parameter space of the family of elliptic curves $E_t$ there is a unique vector f\/ield $R$, such that
\begin{gather*
\nabla_{R}\left(\frac{{\rm d}x}{y}\right)= -\frac{x{\rm d}x}{y},\qquad \nabla_{R}\left(\frac{x{\rm d}x}{y}\right)= 0.
\end{gather*}
The vector f\/ield $R$ is given by the Darboux--Halphen system \eqref{halphen} and
it is called \textit{Gauss--Manin connection in disguise}.

\section{Frobenius manifolds and Chazy equation}\label{Frobenius}
Frobenius manifolds were developed in order to give a geometrical meaning to WDVV equations:
\begin{gather*}
 \frac{\partial^3 F(t)}{\partial t^{\alpha} \partial t^{\beta} \partial t^{\lambda}} \eta^{\lambda \mu} \frac{\partial^3 F(t)}{\partial t^{\mu} \partial t^{\gamma} \partial t^{\delta}} =
 \frac{\partial^3 F(t)}{\partial t^{\delta} \partial t^{\beta} \partial t^{\lambda}} \eta^{\lambda \mu} \frac{\partial^3 F(t)}{\partial t^{\mu} \partial t^{\gamma} \partial t^{\alpha}},
\end{gather*}
where $F(t)$, with $t=(t^1,t^2,\dots,t^n)$, is a quasi-homogeneous function on its parameters.
The above equations conceal properties of an associative commutative algebra on the tangent space of a~manifold $M$ of dimension $n$
def\/ined by the parameter space $(t^1,t^2,\dots,t^n)$. That's the essence of a Frobenius manifold that we will
detail below starting with the algebraic structure in $TM$.

\subsection{Frobenius algebra}

An algebra $A$ over $\mathbb{C}$ is Frobenius if
\begin{itemize}
\item it is a commutative associative $\mathbb{C}$-algebra with unity $e$,
\item it has a $\mathbb{C}$-bilinear symmetric non-degenerate inner product
\begin{align*}
\langle \, , \, \rangle\colon \ & A\times A\longrightarrow \mathbb{C}, \\
& (a , b)\mapsto \langle a,b \rangle,
\end{align*}
which is invariant, i.e., $\langle a.b,c \rangle =\langle a,b.c \rangle$
\end{itemize}
{\bf Properties:}
Let $e_\alpha$, $\alpha=1,\dots, N$, be any basis in $A$, such that $e_1=e$ is the unity. By notation, we def\/ine $\eta_{\alpha\beta}:=\langle e_\alpha,e_\beta\rangle$, which yields the matrix $\eta:=[\eta_{\alpha\beta}]_{1\leq \alpha, \beta \leq N}$ and its inverse $\eta^{-1}:=[\eta^{\alpha\beta}]_{1\leq \alpha, \beta \leq N}$, and it follows $\eta^{\alpha\beta}\eta_{\beta\gamma}=\delta^{\alpha}_{\gamma}$. By writing $e_\alpha\cdot e_\beta$ in the given basis, we f\/ind the structure constants $c_{\alpha\beta}^\gamma$ def\/ined by $e_\alpha \cdot e_\beta= c_{\alpha\beta}^\gamma e_\gamma$. If we set $c_{\alpha\beta\gamma}=c_{\alpha\beta}^\epsilon\eta_{\epsilon\gamma}$, then we get $c_{\alpha\beta}^\gamma=c_{\alpha\beta\epsilon}\eta^{\epsilon\gamma}$.
Note that in all above expressions, and in what follows, Einstein summation of indices is implicit.
Therefore, $\eta_{\alpha\beta}$ and the structure constants $c_{\alpha\beta}^\gamma$ satisfy
\begin{alignat}{3}\label{commutativity}
& \textnormal{commutativity} \qquad&& \eta_{\alpha\beta}=\eta_{\beta\alpha},& \\
& \textnormal{associativity}\qquad&& (e_\alpha. e_\beta).e_\gamma=e_\alpha.( e_\beta .e_\gamma) \therefore c_{\alpha\beta}^\epsilon c_{\epsilon\gamma}^\delta=c_{\alpha\epsilon}^\delta c_{\delta\beta}^\epsilon,& \label{associativity}\\
& \textnormal{normalization}\qquad&& c_{1\beta}^\alpha=\delta_\beta^\alpha,& \\ \label{invariance}
& \textnormal{invariance\&commutat.}\qquad&& c_{\alpha\beta\gamma}= \langle e_\alpha e_\beta, e_\gamma\rangle=c_{\beta\alpha\gamma}=c_{\alpha\gamma\beta}.&
\end{alignat}
Now consider an $n$-parametric deformation of the Frobenius algebra $A_t$, $t= (t^1,t^2,\dots,t^n)$, with structure constants $c_{\alpha\beta}^\gamma(t)$ preserving relations \eqref{commutativity} to \eqref{invariance}. Such deformed algebra~$A_t$ can be seen as a f\/iber bundle with the space of parameters $t\in M$ as base space. We identify this f\/iber bundle with the tangent bundle $TM$ to arrive at the def\/inition of a Frobenius manifold. The requirements for this to happen are presented in the def\/inition below.

\subsection{Frobenius manifold}

A Frobenius manifold M of dimension $n$, is an $n$-dimensional Riemannian manifold, such that for all $t\in M$ the tangent space $T_tM$ contains the structure of a Frobenius algebra $ (A_t, \langle \,, \,\rangle_t)$,
satisfying the following axioms:
\begin{enumerate}\itemsep=0pt
 \item[A.1.] The metric $\langle \,,\, \rangle_t$ on $M$ is f\/lat. The unit vector $e$ must be f\/lat, i.e., $\nabla e = 0$, where $\nabla$ is the Levi-Civita connection for the
metric.
 \item[A.2.] Let $c$ be the 3-tensor $c(x,y,z) = \langle x.y ,z \rangle $, with $x, y, z \in T_tM$. Then the 4-tensor $(\nabla_w c)(x,$ $y,z)$ must be symmetric in $x,y,z,w \in T_tM$.
 \item[A.3.] A linear vector f\/ield $E$ must be f\/ixed on $M$, i.e., $\nabla( \nabla E) = 0$ such that the corresponding one-parameter group of dif\/feomorphisms acts by conformal
transformations of the metric $\langle \, , \, \rangle$ and by rescaling on the Frobenius algebras $T_tM$.
\end{enumerate}
The f\/latness of the metric $\langle \,, \,\rangle$ implies the existence of a system of f\/lat coordinates $t^1, \dots, t^n$ on~$M$. In these f\/lat coordinates the structure
constants of $A_t$ are given by
\begin{gather*}
\frac{\partial}{\partial t^{\alpha}}.\frac{\partial}{\partial t^{\beta}} = c_{\alpha \beta}^{\gamma}(t) \frac{\partial}{\partial t^{\gamma}}.
\end{gather*}

{\bf Potential deformation.} If there is a function $F(t)$, called {\it potential}, such that the structure constants of $A_t$, $t\in M$, can be locally represented as
\begin{gather*}
 c_{\alpha \beta\gamma}(t) = \frac{\partial^3 F(t)}{\partial t^{\gamma} \partial t^{\alpha} \partial t^{\beta}},
\end{gather*}
 satisfying A.2 with unity vector $e=\tfrac{\partial}{\partial t^1}$, and the metric given by
\begin{gather*}
 \eta_{\beta\gamma}=c_{1 \beta\gamma} = \frac{\partial^3 F(t)}{\partial t^{\gamma} \partial t^{1} \partial t^{\beta}}\qquad \textnormal{s.t.}\qquad \frac{\partial^4 F(t)}{\partial t^{\alpha}\partial t^{\gamma} \partial t^{1} \partial t^{\beta}}=0,
\end{gather*}
 satisfying A.1, and the associativity property (\ref{associativity}) represented by the WDVV equations
\begin{gather*}
 \frac{\partial^3 F(t)}{\partial t^{\alpha} \partial t^{\beta} \partial t^{\lambda}} \eta^{\lambda \mu} \frac{\partial^3 F(t)}{\partial t^{\mu} \partial t^{\gamma} \partial t^{\delta}} =
 \frac{\partial^3 F(t)}{\partial t^{\delta} \partial t^{\beta} \partial t^{\lambda}} \eta^{\lambda \mu} \frac{\partial^3 F(t)}{\partial t^{\mu} \partial t^{\gamma} \partial t^{\alpha}},
\end{gather*}
 then $M$ is a Frobenius manifold
 and the Frobenius algebra $A_t$ is called a potential deformation.
 Note that the condition~A.3 is satisf\/ied by a quasihomogeneous function $F(t)$.
\begin{Example}

Let $\dim M = 3$, and consider the basis $e = e_1=\tfrac{\partial}{\partial t^1}$, $e_2=\tfrac{\partial}{\partial t^2}$ and $e_3=\tfrac{\partial}{\partial t^3}$ of the 3-dimensional algebra~$A_t$. Then the multiplication law is given by
\begin{gather*}
e_2^2 = f_{xxy}e_1 + f_{xxx}e_2 + e_3, \qquad
e_2 e_3 = f_{xyy}e_1 + f_{xxy}e_2, \qquad
e_3^2 = f_{yyy}e_1 + f_{xyy}e_2,
\end{gather*}
where the funtion $F(t)$ has the form $F(t) = \frac{1}{2} (t^1)^2t^3 + \frac{1}{2} t^1(t^2)^2 + f(t^2,t^3)$ and the notation $f_x= \partial_x f(x,y)$, $f_y= \partial_y f(x,y)$. The associativity condition $(e_2^2) e_3 = e_2 (e_2 e_3)$
implies the following PDE for $f(x,y)$:
\begin{gather}\label{associativity3dim}
 f^2_{xxy} = f_{yyy} + f_{xxx}f_{xyy}.
\end{gather}
\end{Example}

\subsection{Chazy equation and Darboux--Halphen system}\label{modular frobenius}
In this section we explain how the Chazy equation arises from a 3-dimensional Frobenius manifold. We follow Dubrovin's notes \cite{Dubrovin1992NuPhB,Dubrovin:1996di}.
Let dim $M = 3$, and consider the potential function
\begin{gather*}
F(t)= \frac{1}{2} \big(t^1\big)^2t^3 + \frac{1}{2} t^1\big(t^2\big)^2 - \frac{\big(t^2\big)^4}{16}\gamma\big(t^3\big),
\end{gather*}
where $\gamma(\tau)$ is an unknown $2\pi$-periodic function that is analytic at $\tau=i \infty$. Then the associativity condition~\eqref{associativity3dim} leads to the Chazy equation
\begin{gather*}
\gamma'''= 6\gamma\gamma''-9(\gamma')^2.
\end{gather*}
The solution, up to a shift in $\tau$, is given by $\gamma(\tau)= \frac{\pi i}{3}E_2(\tau)$, where $E_2$ is the weight-2 Eisenstein series.
Notice that the Darboux--Halphen solution (\ref{darbouxsolution}) leads to
\begin{gather*}
t_1+t_2+t_3= \frac{\pi i}{2}E_2(\tau),
\end{gather*}
which can be easily checked from \eqref{27spet2017} or by
writing the theta functions in terms of Dedekind eta
function, see \cite[Chapter~3, p.~29]{Zagier:2008uf}.
Applying $\tau$ derivatives on both sides and using Darboux--Halphen equations, one can also check that the solution to Darboux--Halphen system~(\ref{darbouxsolution}) are the roots of the cubic equation
\begin{gather*}
y^3-\frac{3}{2}\gamma(\tau)y^2+\frac{3}{2}\gamma'(\tau)y -\frac{1}{4}\gamma''(\tau)=0.
\end{gather*}

\section{Conclusion}
The study of Darboux--Halphen equations in several dif\/ferent problems in theoretical physics and mathematics raised more and
more questions that eventually lead us to further studies.

The problem involving Gauss--Manin connection in disguise lies at the center of some questions. It shows that the
Darboux--Halphen system corresponds to a vector f\/ield in the moduli of an enhanced elliptic curve.
As mentioned in Section~\ref{BianchiIXsection}, the Bianchi~IX four-manifold~\eqref{bianchiix} also describes the
reduced moduli of 2-monopoles and its self-dual curvature equations can be reparametrized to the Darboux--Halphen equations.
Furthermore, in the problem of 2-monopoles it has been found that a 2-monopole solution relates to an elliptic curve as its
spectral curve \cite{1982CMaPh..83..579H,Hitchin:1983ay,Hurtubise:1983hl}. Therefore, we believe that Gauss--Manin connection in disguise is a new way to demonstrate the association of spectral curves and the curvature equations of the moduli of monopole solutions. Starting from these coincidences, in~\cite{Torres:2017hqc} one of the authors started to f\/ind more evidences to support this idea.

Another interesting remark is the fact that potential functions and structure constants in Frobenius manifolds correspond
to prepotentials (or genus zero topological partition function) and Yukawa couplings in topological string theory and
Gauss--Manin connection in disguise has been used in the moduli of enhanced Calabi--Yau varieties to f\/ind polynomial expressions for
Yukawa couplings and higher genus topological partition functions \cite{Alim:2014dea, 2011arXiv1111.0357M}.
It would be interesting to f\/ind cases where the moduli of enhanced Calabi--Yau varieties are also Frobenius manifolds.
In particular, the Frobenius manifold presented in Section~\ref{modular frobenius} is a case of modular Frobenius
manifold where the prepotential is preserved under a inverse symmetry that acts as an $S$ gene\-ra\-tor of the modular
group ${\rm SL}(2,\mathbb{Z})$ in $t^3$ direction \cite{Morrison:2011cd}. Such modularity is a~desirable property
that can establish a relation to Gauss--Manin connection in disguise and may be
extended to
the group of transformations of Calabi--Yau modular forms \cite{Alim:2014dea,2011arXiv1111.0357M}.

\subsection*{Acknowledgements}

During the period of preparation of the manuscript MACT was fully sponsored by CNpQ-Brasil. The research of RR was supported by FAPESP through Instituto de Fisica, Universidade de Sao Paulo with grant number 2013/17765-0. The work was initiated during the visit of RR to IMPA, he would like to thank IMPA for the hospitality during the course of this project.

\pdfbookmark[1]{References}{ref}

Differential Geometry (math.DG); High Energy Physics - Theory (hep-th); Mathematical Physics (math-ph)

Manifold Ways to Darboux-Halphen System


Alternating projections, remotest projections, and greedy approximation

Abstract: Let $L_1,L_2,\dots,L_K$ be a family of closed subspaces of a Hilbert space $H$, $L_1\cap \dots \cap L_K =\{0\}$; let $P_k$ be the orthogonal projection onto $L_k$. We consider two types of consecutive projections of an element $x_0\in H$: alternating projections $T^nx_0$, where $T=P_K\circ\dots\circ P_1$, and remotest projections $x_n$ defined recursively, $x_{n+1}$ being the remotest point for $x_n$ among $P_1x_n,\dots,P_Kx_n$. These $x_n$ can be interpreted as residuals in greedy approximation with respect to a special dictionary associated with $L_1,L_2,\dots,L_K$. We establish parallels between convergence properties separately known for alternating projections, remotest projections, and greedy approximation in $H$.Here are some results. If $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp=H$, then $x_n\to 0$ exponentially fast. In case $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp\not=H$, the convergence $x_n\to 0$ can be arbitrarily slow for certain $x_0$. Such a dichotomy, exponential rate of convergence everywhere on $H$, or arbitrarily slow convergence for certain starting elements, is valid for greedy approximation with respect to general dictionaries. The dichotomy was known for alternating projections. Using the methods developed for greedy approximation we prove that $|T^nx_0|\le C(x_0,K)n^{-\alpha(K)}$ for certain positive $\alpha(K)$ and all starting points $x_0\in L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp$.

\section*{Introduction}

Let $H$ denote a real Hilbert space with norm $|\cdot|$ and scalar product $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle$.
Let $K\ge 2$ be a fixed integer number and let $L_1,L_2,\dots,L_K$ be a family of $K$
closed   subspaces of $H$ such that $L_1\cap \dots \cap L_K =\{0\}$.
Let $x_0\in H$ and $k_1,k_2,\dots \in \{1,\dots,K\}$
be an arbitrary sequence. Consider the sequence of vectors $x_n$ defined by  $x_n=P_{k_n}x_{n-1}$,
where $P_k$ denotes the orthogonal projection of $H$ onto the subspace  $L_k$.

In the case where $\{k_n\}$ contains each $k\in \{1,\dots,K\}$ infinitely often, $\{x_n\}$ is a weakly-null sequence according to~\cite{AA}. If $H$ is infinite-dimensional and $K\ge 3$, then the sequence $\{x_n\}$  does not, in general, converge in norm~\cite{P,KM,KP}. A list of various conditions sufficient for the norm convergence of $\{x_n\}$ can be found in~\cite{K}.

The most studied special case of  $\{k_n\}$ is the cyclic sequence
$k_n=n \mod K$.  For $T=P_K\circ\dots\circ P_1$   the  {\em alternating projections}
\begin{equation}\label{altpr}
T^n x_0, \qquad n=1,2,\dots,
\end{equation}
 enjoy the following convergence properties:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(A1)] {\em $|T^nx_0|\to 0$ for any $x_0\in H$;}
\item[(A2)]{\em if $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp=H$, then $\|T^n\|\le q^n$ and thus $|T^nx_0|\le |x_0| q^n$ for certain $q=q(L_1,\dots,L_K)\in [0,1)$;}
\item[(A3)]{\em if $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp\not=H$, then for any sequence $\alpha_n\to 0$ there exists a starting point $x_0\in H$ such that $|T^nx_0|\ge \alpha_n$, $n=1,2,\dots$.}
\end{enumerate}
For $K=2$ the convergence property (A1) is a classical result of von Neumann \cite{N}, and for  $K\geq 2$ of Halperin \cite{Ha}.
The {\em dichotomy result} (A2) and (A3)  was obtained independently in \cite{BDH,DH} and \cite{BaGM1,BaGM2}.

Another natural way of consecutively projecting onto $L_1,\dots,L_K$ is to choose in every step the projection of $x_n$ which is the  nearest to the origin, or, equivalently, which is the remotest from $x_n$.  Namely, for any $x_0\in H$ we consider the sequence $x_n$ of its {\it remotest projections} defined inductively by
\begin{equation}\label{rempr}
x_{n+1}=P_{i(n)}x_n, \qquad n=0,1,2,\dots,
\end{equation}
where  the  (possibly not unique) number $i(n)$ is chosen so that
$$
{\rm dist\,}(x_n,L_{i(n)})=\max\{{\rm dist\,}(x_n,L_k): k\in \{1,\dots,K\}\}.
$$
Remotest projections have been   investigated in \cite{GPR}, \cite{BB}, and \cite{BarRZ} in a more general setting of convex sets $L_k$.  When $L_k$'s are closed subspaces, Theorem~5.3 of~\cite{BB} provides $x_n\to 0$ for any $x_0\in H$ under the additional assumption that $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp=H$.

In the von Neumann case $K=2$, alternating projections and remotest projections are almost the same object: $T^nx_0$ is the $(2n-1)$-th remotest projection of $P_1x_0$. Consequently, analogues of (A1)--(A3) are valid for remotest projections in this case. A natural question arises:
\smallskip

\noindent{\em Do remotest projections (\ref{rempr}) satisfy  something like (A1)--(A3) for any $K\ge 2$?}
\smallskip

In order to answer it,  we observe that remotest projections can be interpreted as residuals in a special greedy approximation process.
We recall the notion of greedy approximation with respect to a dictionary (see \cite{teml_book} for a detailed survey).

A subset $D$ of the unit sphere $S(H)=\{s\in H: |s|=1\}$ is called a {\it dictionary} if $\overline{{\rm span\,}} D=H$.
For any dictionary $D\subset S(H)$ and any $x_0\in H$, the {\it pure greedy
algorithm} (PGA) generates a sequence $x_n$ defined inductively
by
\begin{equation}\label{greal}
x_{n+1}=x_n-\langle x_n,g_{n+1}\rangle g_{n+1}, \qquad n=0,1,2,\dots,
\end{equation}
where the element $g_{n+1}\in D$ is such that
$$
|\langle x_n,g_{n+1}\rangle |=\max \{|\langle x_n,g\rangle|: g\in D\}.
$$
The existence of the above maximum is an additional condition on
$D$.

It is easy to see that $x_{n+1}= x_n-y_{n+1}$, where $y_{n+1}$ is one of the nearest points to $x_n$ in the set $\Lambda(D)=\{\lambda g:\, \lambda \in {\mathbb R},\, g\in D\}$. Thus the existence of $g_{n+1}$ in (\ref{greal}) is equivalent to the proximality of $\Lambda(D)$.  When $\Lambda(D)$ is not proximal, a {\em weak greedy algorithm} (WGA) is an option. The sequence $\{x_n\}$ is again defined recursively by (\ref{greal}), but $g_{n+1}$ is such that
$|\langle x_n,g_{n+1}\rangle |\ge t_{n+1} \sup \{|\langle x_n,g\rangle|: g\in D\}$, for a given sequence $t_n\in (0,1)$ of weakness parameters (see~\cite{teml_book} for details).

We observe  that (\ref{rempr}) coincides with (\ref{greal}) for
$$
D=D_L=(L_1^\perp\cup\dots\cup L_K^\perp)\cap S(H).
$$
The set $D_L$ is indeed a dictionary, since
   $L_1\cap \dots \cap L_K =\{0\}$  and
$$
\overline{{\rm span\,}} D_L=\overline{{\rm span\,}} (L_1^\perp\cup\dots\cup L_K^\perp)=\overline{L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp}=H.
$$
Denote by $P_k^\perp$  the orthogonal projection onto $L_k^\perp$.
The remotest projection $P_{i(n)}x_n$ clearly corresponds to the  projection $P_{i(n)}^\perp x_n$
which is the nearest to $x_n$ among $P_1^\perp x_n, \dots, P_K^\perp x_n$:
$$
x_{n+1}=P_{i(n)}(x_n)=x_n-P_{i(n)}^\perp x_n.
$$

Jones proved  that PGA  converges for every dictionary $D$, that is,  $|x_n|\to 0$   for $\{x_n\}$ defined by (\ref{greal}) and any initial element $x_0\in H$  (\cite{Jones}; see also \cite[Ch. 2]{teml_book}).
Since $D_L$ is   a dictionary,   remotest projections (\ref{rempr}) have a property similar to (A1):
\begin{remark}\label{remark1}
$|x_n|\to 0$ for any $x_0\in H$; \\ here
$\{x_n\}$  is the sequence of remotest projections defined by (\ref{rempr}).
\end{remark}

DeVore and Temlyakov singled out a set of starting points generated by the dictionary   for which  the greedy algorithm converges polynomially fast \cite{DeVT}; see our Section~3 for details.
Consequently,  remotest projections as greedy residuals   converge polynomially fast for starting points from $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp$. In particular:

\smallskip
(R4) {\it If $x_0\in L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp$, then $|x_n|\le C(x_0) n^{-1/6}$.}
\smallskip

\noindent  Hence in the von Neumann case of  $K=2$ an analog of (R4) is valid for alternating projections  as well.  A natural   question
arises, if this is valid for any $K\ge 2$:
\smallskip

{\it Do alternating projections (\ref{altpr}) converge polynomially fast for starting points from $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp$?}

\smallskip

Deutsch and Hundal formulate a similar conjecture
in~\cite[Remark 6.5]{DH}   without any connection to greedy approximation.

In this paper we investigate the interplay  between alternating projections, remotest projections, and  greedy approximation.

If $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp=H$, remotest projections indeed converge fast.  According to
Remark~\ref{remark2},
$|x_n|\le |x_0|r^n$ for a certain $r=r(L_1,\dots, L_K)<1$. Moreover,
this $r$ is less than the best known $q$ in (A2), according to  Remark~\ref{remark3}.

In Theorem~\ref{theorem2} we give a
sufficient condition for the fast convergence of greedy algorithm: every element of $H$ is a finite linear combination of elements from the dictionary. The dichotomy of (A2)--(A3) type is valid also for greedy approximation with respect to general dictionaries  and hence for remotest projections as well, as we show in Theorem~\ref{theorem1} and Corollary~\ref{corollary1.1}.

Alternating projections indeed satisfy an analogue of (R4): if $x_0\in L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp$, then $|T^nx_0|\le C(x_0,K)n^{-\alpha(K)}$ for certain positive $\alpha(K)$, and $\alpha(2)=1/2$ happens to be the best possible; see Theorem~\ref{theorem4} and  Theorem~\ref{theorem3}.

We conclude by verifying that in spite of many similar convergence properties the family of remotest projections  is really distinct  from alternating projections. In Theorem~\ref{theorem5}
we give an example of remotest projections that never become cyclic.

\section{Fast convergence of remotest projections}\label{remotest}

In this section we investigate when  remotest projections converge fast and establish an analogue of (A2) for them.

\smallskip

\begin{remark}\label{remark2}
Let $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp=H$. Then
$$
|x_n|\le |x_0| (1-\rho^2)^{n/2},
$$
where $\{x_n\}$ is the sequence of remotest projections defined in (\ref{rempr}), and
$$
\rho=\rho(L_1,\dots,L_K)=\inf \{ \max_k {\rm dist\,}(x,L_k): x\in S(H)\}>0.
$$
More precisely,
\begin{equation}\label{rho*}
|x_n|\le |x_0| (1-\rho^2)^{1/2} (1-\rho_*^2)^{(n-1)/2},
\end{equation}
where
$$
\rho_*=\inf \{ \max_k {\rm dist\,}(x,L_k): x\in
S(H)\cap (L_1\cup\dots\cup L_K)\}\ge \rho.
$$
\end{remark}
\begin{proof} Since $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp$ is   closed,  $\rho>0$ by~\cite[Theorem~5.19]{BB}; see also Lemma~\ref{lemma1} proved in the next section. By Pythagoras' theorem and the definition of $\rho$,
$$
|x_{n+1}|^2=|x_n|^2-{\rm dist\,}(x_n,L_{i(n)})^2 \le |x_n|^2(1-\rho^2),
$$
hence $|x_{n}| \le |x_0| (1-\rho^2)^{n/2}$.
The refinement (\ref{rho*}) follows from   $x_n\in L_1\cup\dots\cup L_K$ for $n\ge 1$: the norm
decreases with coefficient at least $(1-\rho_*^2)^{1/2}$ after the
first projection.
\end{proof}

We will generalize Remark~\ref{remark2}  to  greedy approximation with respect to general dictionaries in Theorem~\ref{theorem2}.

Clearly, $\rho(L_1,\dots,L_K)<1$ for any non-trivial family
$L_1,\dots,L_K$. On the other hand, if, for example, the $L_k$'s  are mutually orthogonal, then  $\rho_*=1$. How large exactly  $\rho$ can be seems not  to be  known.

\begin{problem}\label{problem1}
Calculate
$\rho_K:=\sup \rho(L_1,\dots,L_K)$,
where  the supremum is taken over all families $L_1,\dots,L_K\subset H$.
\end{problem}

It is easy to see that $\rho(2)=1/\sqrt{2}$.

Next we compare the rate of convergence of  remotest
projections $|x_n|$ with that of alternating projections $|T^n(x_0)|$ in the ``(A2) case" when $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp=H$.

The best known estimate for $\|T^n\|$, which is also valid only when $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp=H$, is  \cite[Theorem
4.4]{BaGM2}:
\begin{equation}\label{normT^n}
\|T^n\|\le\left(1-\left(\frac{1-c}{4K}\right)^2\right)^{n/2},
\qquad n=1,2,\dots,
\end{equation}
where $c=c(L_1,\dots,L_K)$ denotes the generalized {\em Friedrichs number}
$$
c:=\sup\left\{\frac{\sum_{j\not=k}\langle y_j,y_k\rangle}{(K-1)(|y_1|^2+\dots+|y_K|^2)}:\,
y_j\in L_j,\, \sum_{k=1}^K |y_k|^2\not=0\right\}.
$$

We have to compare $\rho_*$ with $(1-c)/(4K)$.

\begin{remark}\label{remark3}
For any family $L_1,\dots,L_K$,
$$
\rho_*\ge \frac{1-c}{K-1},
$$
and thus (\ref{rho*}) witnesses a   faster  rate of convergence  than (\ref{normT^n}), in spite of   $T$ involving $K$ projections instead of just one.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof} We choose $y\in S(H)\cap (L_1\cup\dots\cup L_K)$
such that $\max_k {\rm dist\,}(y,L_k)=\rho_*$. If there is no such $y$, we
take one for which this equality ``nearly" holds. We may assume
$y\in L_1$. For $y_1=y$ and $y_k=P_k(y)$ if $k\in\{2,\dots,K\}$, we have
\begin{equation}\notag
\begin{split}
1-c&\leq 1-
\frac{\sum_{j\not=k}\langle y_j,y_k\rangle}{(K-1)(|y_1|^2+\dots+|y_K|^2)}=
\frac{\sum_{k=1}^K\sum_{j\not=k}(|y_k|^2-\langle y_j,y_k\rangle)}{(K-1)(|y_1|^2+\dots+|y_K|^2)} \\
&=\frac{\sum_{j\not=1}\langle y_1,y_1-y_j\rangle+\sum_{k=2}^K\sum_{j\not=k}\langle y_k,y_k-y_j\rangle}{(K-1)(|y_1|^2+\dots+|y_K|^2)}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Since $\langle y_j,y_1-y_j\rangle=0$ for  $j\in\{1,\dots,K\}$ we can continue estimating by
\begin{equation}\notag
\begin{split}
\ \ \ &=\frac{\sum_{j\not=1}\langle y_1-y_j,y_1-y_j\rangle+\sum_{k=2}^K\sum_{j\not=k,j\not=1}\langle y_k,y_1-y_j\rangle}{(K-1)(|y_1|^2+\dots+|y_K|^2)} \\
&\leq
\frac{(K-1)\rho_*^2+(K-1)(K-2)\rho_*}{(K-1)(1+|y_2|^2+\dots+|y_K|^2)}\le
\rho_*(\rho_*+K-2)\le (K-1)\rho_*.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{proof}

Above we have compared only {\em estimates} for rates of convergence of different projections but {\em not the rates} themselves.

In several particular examples of   $K$-tuples $\mathscr L=\{L_1,\dots,L_K\}$ and starting elements $x_0$ remotest projections indeed do converge faster than alternating projections.  A quantitative or a category result of this sort for   tuples $(\mathscr L,x_0)$ when  $K\ge 3$   would be of interest.
Of course, $\{T^n(x_0)\}$ may converge to zero faster than $\{x_n\}$ for
particular $x_0$'s.  Consider the four 1-dimensional subspaces $L_1,\dots,L_4$ of $\mathbb R^2$, generated by the vectors $(1,0)$, $(0,1)$, $(1,1)$, $(1,\varepsilon-1)$. Here  $\varepsilon>0$ is a small positive number. For $x_0\in L_3\setminus \{0\}$, we have
$$
x_1\in L_4, x_2\in L_3, x_3\in L_4, x_4\in L_3, \dots,
$$
and $x_n\not= 0$ for all $n$, since $L_4$ is the remotest subspace for elements of $L_3$ and vice versa and these two subspaces are not mutually orthogonal. At the same time, $T^nx_0=0$ for all $n=1,2,\dots$, since already $P_2P_1x_0=0$ due to the orthogonality of $L_1$ and $L_2$.

\section{Dichotomy for greedy approximation}\label{greedydichotomy}

In this section, we present a dichotomy result of (A2)--(A3) type for the pure and the weak greedy algorithms
 and hence also for the remotest projections.

For a dictionary $D\subset S(H)$, we define
$$
\rho(D)=\inf_{x\in S(H)} \sup\{|\langle x,g\rangle| :\, g \in  D\}.
$$
With a family of closed subspaces $L_1,\dots,L_K$ we associate the dictionary
$$
D_L=(L_1^\perp\cup\dots\cup L_K^\perp)\cap S(H).
$$
It is easy to see that   $\rho(D_L) =\rho(L_1,\dots, L_K)$ as  defined in Remark~\ref{remark2}.

Characteristics of dictionaries similar to $\rho(D)$ have  already been used in greedy approximation theory; see {\em e.g.} \cite{teml}. We show that $\rho(D)=0$ if and only if the dictionary $D$ is contained in an ``arbitrarily thin board".

\begin{lemma}\label{lemma1}
Let $D\subset S(H)$ be a dictionary.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(a)] The equality $\rho(D)=0$ holds if and only if there exists an orthonormal sequence $\{w_n\}$ in $H$ so that
$$
\lim_{n\to \infty}\sup\{|\langle w_n,g\rangle| :\, g \in  D\}=0.
$$
\item[(b)] If $D=D_L$ for  closed  subspaces  $L_1,\dots,L_K$  of $H$, then  $\rho(D_L)=0$ is equivalent to $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp\not= H$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} If $\rho(D)=0$ we choose a weakly convergent sequence $v_k\in S(H)$ so that $\lim_{k\to \infty}\sup\{|\langle v_k,g\rangle| :\, g \in  D\}=0$.  The sequence $\{v_k\}$ converges weakly to zero, since $\overline{{\rm span\,}} D=H$.  There is an orthonormal sequence $\{w_n\}$ and a subsequence of $\{v_k\}$, so that
$\lim_{n\to \infty}|w_n-v_{k_n}|=0$ (see {\em e.g.} Lemma~6.2 of~\cite{K}). Then $
\lim_{n\to \infty}\sup\{|\langle w_n,g\rangle| :\, g \in  D\}=0$.
The opposite implication of (a) is obvious.

That in the situation of (b) the existence of the orthonormal sequence $\{w_n\}$ is equivalent to  $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp\not= H$ was proved  in  Lemma~1.1 of \cite{K} which in turn follows from \cite{BB}.

We give here a different proof.  Assume $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp\not= H$. The unit ball $B_k$ of $L_k^\perp$ is a weakly compact set, hence $C=B_1+\dots+B_K$ is a symmetric  weakly compact  convex set with empty interior. We choose a sequence $\{v_n\}$  that separates vectors of
an  arbitrarily small norm from $C$.  Namely, for $n\in \mathbb N$ we choose $z_n\in H\setminus C$ and $ v_n\in H$ so that
$|z_n|\leq 1/n$, $|v_n|=1$, and  $\max_{x\in C}|\langle v_n,x\rangle|\leq  \langle v_n,z_n\rangle\leq 1/n$. Hence $\lim_{n\to \infty}\sup\{|\langle v_n,g\rangle| :\, g \in  D_L\}=0=\rho(D_L)$, since $D_L\subset C$.

Now assume $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp=H$ and to the contrary assume that $\rho(D_L)=0$. By  (a) there exists an orthonormal sequence
$\{w_n\}$  such that
$\sup_{g\in D_L}|\langle w_n,g\rangle|< 1/n^2$ for $n\in \mathbb N$.
 We choose $\lambda_j\in \mathbb R$  and $g_j\in L_j^\perp$ so that
 $$
 x=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}w_n/n=\lambda_1g_1+\dots+\lambda_Kg_K.
 $$
 Then for all $n\in \mathbb N$ we have
 $$
 \frac 1n=|\langle w_n,x\rangle|\leq \sum_{j=1}^K|\lambda_j||\langle w_n,g_j\rangle|\le\frac 1{n^2}\sum_{j=1}^K|\lambda_j|,
 $$
 which is a contradiction.
\end{proof}

 The characteristic $\rho(D)$ influences the rate of convergence of the greedy algorithm.
 If $\rho(D)>0$, the algorithm converges fast everywhere; if $\rho(D)=0$,
 it converges arbitrarily slowly for certain starting elements.

\begin{theorem}\label{theorem1}
Let $D\subset S(H)$ be a dictionary.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)]  If $\rho(D)>0$, then
\begin{equation}\label{WGArate}
|x_n|\le |x_0| \prod_{k=0}^{n-1}(1-t_k^2\rho(D)^2)^{1/2},
\qquad n\in \mathbb N,
\end{equation}
for every $x_0\in H$ and its sequence  $\{x_n\}$ of  WGA greedy residuals with weakness parameters $\{t_k\}$ as defined in (\ref{greal}) . In particular, for PGA greedy residuals (if PGA is possible for $D$) we have $|x_n|\le |x_0| (1-\rho(D)^2)^{n/2}$.
\item[(ii)]   If $\rho(D)=0$, then  for every sequence $\alpha_n\to 0$ there exists a starting element $x_0\in H$ such that its sequence  of greedy residuals in PGA or in WGA with any weakness parameters satisfies  $|x_n|\geq \alpha_n$ for $n\in \mathbb N$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} (i) According to the definition (\ref{greal}) of $\{x_n\}$,
\begin{equation}\notag
\begin{split}
|x_{k+1}|^2&=|x_k|^2-|\langle x_k, g_{k+1}\rangle |^2 \le |x_k|^2-t_k^2 \sup_{g\in D}|\langle x_k, g\rangle |^2\\
&\le |x_k|^2-t_k^2|x_k|^2\rho(D)^2= |x_k|^2(1-t_k^2\rho(D)^2),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and hence (\ref{WGArate}) holds.

(ii) We can assume that $\alpha=\max_{m\in \mathbb N} |\alpha_m|\leq 1/2$:
if $\alpha>1/2$ and $x_0\in H$ works for the sequence $\{\alpha_m/(2\alpha)\}$, then $2\alpha x_0$ works for $\{\alpha_m\}$.
We choose  $1\leq m_1<m_2<\dots$ so that $|\alpha_m|<1/(2n+2)$ if $m>m_n/(4n)$.

By Lemma~\ref{lemma1}, there is an orthonormal sequence  $\{w_n\}$ such that
$$
\sup\{|\langle w_n,g\rangle|:\, g\in  D\}\leq 1/m_n, \qquad n\in \mathbb N.
$$
Consider $x_0=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}w_n/n$. Then $|x_0|=\pi/\sqrt6<2$.
The $m$-th greedy residual of $x_0$ has the form
$$
x_m=x-\lambda_1g_1-\dots-\lambda_mg_m,
$$
where $g_j\in D$ and $|\lambda_j|=|\lambda_j g_j| \le |x_{j-1}|\leq |x_0|$.

 For a given $m\in \mathbb N$ we choose $n\in \mathbb N$ so that
$$
\frac1{2(n+1)}\leq |\alpha_m|\leq \frac1{2n}.
$$
Then $m\leq m_n/(4n)$, and
$$
|x_m|\geq |\langle x_m,w_n\rangle|\geq 1/n- \sum_{j=1}^m |\lambda_j| |\langle g_j,w_n\rangle|
$$
$$
\geq 1/n -|x_0|m/m_n\geq 1/(2n)\geq |\alpha_m|.
$$
\end{proof}

Since remotest projections correspond to greedy residuals, Theorem~\ref{theorem1} and (b) of Lemma~\ref{lemma1} imply the  dichotomy below.
This is a remotest projections analogue of the dichotomy result (A2)--(A3) for the alternating projections.

\begin{corollary}\label{corollary1.1}
Let $L_1,\dots, L_K$ be closed subspaces of a Hilbert space $H$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)]  If $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp= H$, then there exists $\rho\in(0,1]$ such that $|x_n|\le |x_0|(1-\rho^2)^{n/2}$
for every $x_0\in H$ and its sequence of remotest projections (\ref{rempr}).
\item[(ii)]   If $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp\not= H$, then  for every sequence $\alpha_n\to 0$ there exists a starting element $x_0\in H$ such that its remotest projections satisfy  $|x_n|\geq \alpha_n$ for $n\in \mathbb N$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}

The equality $L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp= H$ means that every element of $H$ can be represented as a linear combination of $K$ elements of the dictionary $D_L=(L_1^\perp\cup\dots\cup L_K^\perp)\cap S(H)$ associated with the remotest projections. The statement (i) of Corollary~\ref{corollary1.1} can be generalized to arbitrary dictionaries in this sense.

\begin{theorem}\label{theorem2}
Let a dictionary $D\subset S(H)$ be so that every element of $H$ is a finite linear
combination of  elements of $D$. Then $\rho(D)>0$ and  the estimate (\ref{WGArate}) holds for every starting point $x_0\in H$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} According to Theorem~\ref{theorem1} it is enough to prove that $\rho(D)>0$.  We mimic  the proof   of   Lemma~\ref{lemma1}(b).
Assume  to the contrary  $\rho(D)=0$. By Lemma~\ref{lemma1} there exists an orthonormal sequence
$\{w_n\}$  such that
$$
\sup_{g\in D}|\langle w_n,g\rangle|< 1/n^2,\ n\in \mathbb N.
$$

 We choose $\lambda_j\in {\mathbb R}$  and $g_j\in D$ so that
 $$
 x=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}w_n/n=\lambda_1g_1+\dots+\lambda_Ng_N.
 $$
 Then for all $n\in \mathbb N$ we have
 $$
 \frac 1n=|\langle w_n,x\rangle|\leq \sum_{j=1}^N|\lambda_j||\langle w_n,g_j\rangle|\le\frac 1{n^2}\sum_{j=1}^N|\lambda_j|,
 $$
 which is impossible.
\end{proof}

The converse  is not true: $\rho(D)>0$ does not imply
that every $x\in H$ can be represented
  as a finite linear
combination of  elements of $D$. Take, for example, $D\subset S(l_2)$ consisting of all unit vectors with finite number of non-zero coordinates.

A normalized Hamel basis of $H$ is an example of a dictionary that represents every   $x\in H$ as a  finite linear combination of its elements. If $H$ is infinite dimensional, the number of these elements is not uniformly bounded.

\begin{remark}\label{wclosed} Let  $D\subset S(H)$  be a dictionary such  that every $x\in H$  is a   linear combination of  finitely many elements of $D$.
Suppose, moreover,  that the set $\Lambda(D)=\{\lambda g:\, \lambda \in {\mathbb R},\, g\in D\}$ is weakly closed. Then  there exists $K\in \mathbb N$ so that  each   $x\in H$  is  a linear combination of  $K$ elements of $D$.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof} Let $B$ be the closed unit ball of $H$.
The set $A=B\cap \Lambda(D)$ is symmetric and weakly compact, hence
$$
A_n=\underbrace{A+\dots+A}_n
$$
is also symmetric and weakly compact.
Since $H=\bigcup_{n=1}^{\infty}A_n$ is a countable union of closed
sets $A_n$, by the Baire category theorem there is an $N\in \mathbb N$ so that the interior of $A_N$ is not empty.
Since $A_N$ is symmetric, the origin is contained in  the interior of   $A_N+A_N$. Hence
 every element of $H$ is a linear combination of no more than $K=2N$ elements of $D$.
\end{proof}

\section{Convergence rate for starting points from $L_1^\perp\cup\dots\cup L_K^\perp$}

Let $D\subset S(H)$ be a dictionary for which PGA (\ref{greal}) works. The general greedy approximation theory guarantees the rate of convergence
\begin{equation}\label{1/6}
|x_n|\le \frac{C(x_0)}{n^{1/6}}
\end{equation}
of greedy residuals for starting elements $x_0\in A_1(D):=\bigcup_{\lambda>0} \mathcal D_\lambda$, where
\begin{equation}\notag
\mathcal D_\lambda=\overline{\left\{\sum_{k=1}^m \lambda_k g_k: g_k\in D, m\in {\mathbb N}, \sum_{k=1}^m |\lambda_k|\le \lambda\right\} };
\end{equation}
see~\cite{DeVT}, \cite[Theorem 2.18]{teml_book}.  Moreover, the power $1/6$ here can be replaced by $0.182$~\cite{Sil} but cannot be replaced by $0.1898$~\cite{Liv}. The   exact power  in (\ref{1/6}) is not known.

Consider the special case of remotest projections (\ref{rempr}), when $D=D_L=(L_1^\perp\cup\dots\cup L_K^\perp)\cap S(H)$.
Denote $Y=L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp$ and  by $B_k$ the unit ball of $L_k ^{\perp}$. Then $C=B_1+\dots+B_K$ is a weakly compact set.
By the triangle inequality $\mathcal D_\lambda\subset \lambda C$ for $\lambda>0$ and
$$
Y\subset A_1(D_L)=\bigcup_{\lambda>0} \mathcal D_\lambda\subset\bigcup_{\lambda>0} \lambda C=Y.
$$
Hence for $x_0\in Y$ and its remotest projections $x_n$ the inequality   (\ref{1/6}) holds. This is the property (R4)   mentioned in Introduction. Since we deal with a very specific dictionary $D_L$, we face

\begin{problem}\label{problem2}
Can one refine (\ref{1/6}) in the case of remotest
projections (\ref{rempr})?
\end{problem}

In the von Neumann case $K=2$ the answer is yes: in Theorem~\ref{theorem3} we show that the best possible power is $1/2$. For
     $K\ge 3$ the problem  is open.

In Theorem~\ref{theorem3} and Theorem~\ref{theorem4} we
prove estimates of the type (\ref{1/6}) for the norm of alternating projections $|T^nx_0|$ of an element $x_0\in Y$. We use   a machinery developed in~\cite{DeVT}:   a simplified version in Theorem~\ref{theorem3} and a more complicated   version in Theorem~\ref{theorem4}.

We begin with preliminary lemmata and a notation.

\begin{lemma}\label{lemma2}
If $y\in Y=L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp$, then $P_j y\in Y$ for any $j\in \{1,\dots,K\} $.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $y=y_1+\dots+y_K$, $y_i\in L_i^\perp$. We have
$$
P_jy=y-P_j^\perp y= y_1+\dots+y_{j-1}+(y_j-P_j^\perp y)+y_{j+1}+\dots+y_K\in Y,
$$
since $y_j-P_j^\perp y\in L_j^\perp$.
\end{proof}

For $y\in Y=L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp$, we denote
\begin{equation}\label{s(y)}
s(y)= \inf \{|y_1|+\dots+|y_K|: y=y_1+\dots+y_K, y_j\in L_j^\perp\}.
\end{equation}
It is readily checked that $s$ is a norm on $Y$.
By the
triangle inequality $|y|\leq s(y)$  for $y\in Y$, hence every norm-open set is also $s$-open. For completeness we observe, although we do not use  it in this paper, that the norm $s$ is complete.

\begin{remark}\label{remark5}
The subspace $Y$ equipped with the norm $s$ is a Banach space.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
Denote by $(\tilde Y,s)$  the completion of $Y$.  The identity mapping $I:(Y,s)\to(H,|\cdot|)$ is  Lipschitz.
It admits a unique uniformly continuous extension, an injection  $f:(\tilde Y,s)\to (H,|\cdot|)$; see {\em e.g.} \cite{R}, p. 82.
It remains to show that $f(\tilde Y)=Y$.
Assume $y_n\in Y$ and $s$-$\lim_{n\to \infty} y_n=\tilde y\in \tilde Y$. Since $\{y_n\}$ is an $s$-Cauchy sequence in $Y$  it is norm-Cauchy   as well, and  $\lim_{n\to \infty} y_n=y\in H$.
The sequence  $\{y_n\}$ is contained in the weakly compact set
$rB_{L^{\perp}_1}+\dots+rB_{L^{\perp}_K}\subset Y$ for some $r>0$ since it is bounded in $s$, implying $y\in Y$. The continuity of $f$ yields
$f(\tilde y)=f(s$-$\lim_{n\to \infty} y_n)=\lim_{n\to \infty} f(y_n)=\lim_{n\to \infty} y_n=y\in Y$.
\end{proof}

For any $x\in H$, let $g(x)\in D_L$  be the vector in $D_L$ with direction  closest to that of $x$ (if there is more than one, we choose one of them):
\begin{equation}\label{g(x)}
\langle x,g(x)\rangle=\max \{\langle x,g\rangle: g\in  D_L\}.
\end{equation}
Denote  the cosine of the angle between   $x$ and $g(x)$ by
\begin{equation}\label{rho(x)}
\rho(x)=\frac{\langle x,g(x)\rangle}{|x|}.
\end{equation}
The direction  $g(x)$  determines the subtrahend in the remotest step (\ref{rempr}): $x_{n+1}=x_n-\langle x_n, g(x_n)\rangle g(x_n)$. The value  $\rho(x_n)$ determines the decay of the norm in the remotest step:
\begin{equation}\label{rho}
|x_{n+1}|^2=|x_n|^2-\langle x_n,g(x_n)\rangle^2=|x_n|^2(1-\rho (x_n)^2).
\end{equation}
On the subspace $Y$ the ratio between the Hilbert space norm and the norm $s$ gives a handy lower estimate for $\rho$.

\begin{lemmaX}\label{lemmaA}~\cite[Lemma 2.17]{teml_book}
For $y\in Y=L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp$, we have
$$
\rho(y)\ge \frac{|y|}{s(y)}.
$$
\end{lemmaX}
\begin{proof}  Let $y=y_1+\dots+y_K$, $y_i\in L_i^\perp$. Then
$$
|y|^2=\langle y, y_1+\dots+y_K\rangle = \sum_{i=1}^K |y_i| \langle y, y_i/|y_i|\rangle
$$
$$
\le \sum_{i=1}^K |y_i| \langle y,g(y)\rangle= |y| \rho(y) \sum_{i=1}^K |y_i|,
$$
so that
$$
\rho(y)\ge \frac{|y|}{|y_1|+\dots+|y_K|}.
$$
\end{proof}
In the special case of the dictionary $D_L=(L_1^\perp\cup L_2^\perp)\cap S(H)$ the rate of convergence (\ref{1/6}) of the greedy approximation can be improved to $O(n^{-1/2})$.

\begin{theorem}\label{theorem3}
Let $L_1,L_2$ be closed subspaces of $H$. Then for any $x_0\in Y=L_1^\perp+L_2^\perp$, we have
$$
|x_n|\le \frac{C(x_0)}{\sqrt{n}}, \qquad n\in \mathbb N.
$$
for remotest projections (\ref{rempr}) of $x_0$, and
\begin{equation}\label{t3}
|T^n(x_0)|\le \frac{\tilde C (x_0)}{\sqrt{n}}, \qquad n\in\mathbb N.
\end{equation}
for alternating projections (\ref{altpr}) of $x_0$, where $C(x_0)$ and $\tilde C (x_0)$ are constants depending only on $x_0$.

In both of these estimates, $\sqrt{n}$ cannot be replaced by $n^{1/2+\varepsilon}$ for any $\varepsilon>0$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof} 1. By Lemma~\ref{lemma2}, both of the  sequences $\{x_n\}$ and $\{T^n x_0\}$ belong to $Y$ for any $x_0\in Y$.
We show that the sequence $\{s(x_n)\}$
is decreasing, hence
$s(x_{n})\le s(x_1)$ for $n\in \mathbb N$.  Indeed, every $x_n$ belongs to $L_1$ or to $L_2$. Suppose $x_n\in L_1$, $x_n=y_1+y_2$, $y_i\in L_i^\perp$. We have $x_n\perp y_1$ and $y_2=x_n-y_1$, hence $|y_1|\leq |y_2|$. Next, $x_{n+1}=P_2(x_n)=P_2(y_1)=y_1+y_2'$, where $y_2'=P_2(y_1)-y_1=-P_2^\perp y_1\in L_2^\perp$, and thus $|y_2'|\le |y_1|$. Consequently,
$$
|y_1|+|y_2'|\le |y_1|+|y_1| \le |y_1|+|y_2|,
$$
and hence $s(x_{n+1})\le s (x_n)$.

2. By Lemma~\ref{lemmaA} for any $x_0\in Y$ and $n\in \mathbb N$ we have
$$
\rho(x_n)\ge \frac{|x_n|}{s(x_n)}\ge \frac{|x_n|}{s(x_1)},
$$
which together with (\ref{rho}) implies
\begin{equation}\label{x_n}
|x_{n+1}|^2\le |x_n|^2\left(1-\frac{|x_n|^2}{s(x_1)^2}\right), \qquad n\in \mathbb N.
\end{equation}

Now we need

\begin{lemmaX}\label{lemmaB}~\cite[Lemma 2.16]{teml_book}.
Suppose  the sequence $\{c_n\}_{n=1}^\infty$ satisfies $c_n\ge 0$, $c_1\le A$, and  $c_{n+1}\le c_n(1-c_n/A)$ for $n\in \mathbb N$. Then
$$
c_n\le \frac{A}{n}, \qquad n\in \mathbb N.
$$
\end{lemmaX}
\begin{proof} For  $n=1$ the inequality is  satisfied;
for $n=2$ it is proved as follows:
$$
c_2\le c_1 (1-c_1/A)\le \max_{t\in {\mathbb R}} \{f(t):=t(1-t/A)\}=f(A/2)=A/4\le A/2.
$$
For $n\ge 3$ the inequality is proved by induction using the monotonicity of $f$ on $[0,A/2]$:
$$
c_{n+1}\le c_n(1-c_n/A)=f(c_n)\le f(A/n)=\frac{A}{n}\left(1-\frac{1}{n}\right)<\frac{A}{n+1}.
$$
\end{proof}

Applying Lemma~\ref{lemmaB} to (\ref{x_n}) and taking into account the inequality $|x_1|^2\le s(x_1)^2$, we get
$$
|x_n|^2\le \frac{s(x_1)^2}{n}, \qquad n\in \mathbb N.
$$
Since $T^n (x_0)$ is the $(2n-1)$-th remotest projection of $P_1x_0$, the last inequality implies
$$
|T^n (x_0)|^2\le \frac{s(P_1x_0)^2}{2n-1}, \qquad n\in \mathbb N,
$$
and the first part of the theorem is proved.

3. Finally we show the optimality of the estimate: for any $\varepsilon>0$ we present two subspaces $L_{1},L_{2}$ and an element $x_0\in Y=L_1^\perp+L_2^\perp$ such that $|x_n|>C/n^{1/2+\varepsilon}$ for some $C>0$.

Consider $H$ as a sum of mutually orthogonal 2-dimensional Euclidean subspaces $H_m$, $m\in \mathbb N$. In each $H_m$, we take unit vectors $e_m^1$ and $e_m^2$ with the angle $\alpha_m=1/m$ between them and also unit vectors $y_m^1\perp e_m^1$, $y_m^2\perp e_m^2$ with the angle $\pi-\alpha_m$ between $y_m^1$ and $y_m^2$. Let $L_j$ be the closed subspace of $H$ generated by $e_1^j,e_2^j,e_3^j,\dots$, so that $L_j^\perp$ is the closed linear span of $y_1^j,y_2^j,y_3^j,\dots$, for  $j=1,2$.

Setting $y_m=y_m^1+y_m^2$ ($m\in \mathbb N$), consider
$$
x_0=\sum_{m=1}^\infty \frac{y_m}{m^{1/2+\varepsilon}} =\sum_{m=1}^\infty \frac{y_m^1}{m^{1/2+\varepsilon}} + \sum_{m=1}^\infty \frac{y_m^2}{m^{1/2+\varepsilon}}\in L_1^\perp+L_2^\perp;
$$
all series converge in $H$. We have
$$
|x_0|^2=\sum_{m=1}^\infty \frac{|y_m|^2}{m^{1+2\varepsilon}}=4\sum_{m=1}^\infty \frac{\sin^2 (\alpha_m/2)}{m^{1+2\varepsilon}}.
$$

Consecutive application of the projections $P_1,P_2,P_1,P_2,\dots$ to $x_0$ occurs ``coordinatewise".  That is, we iterate the projections in each of the 2-dimensional  subspace $H_m$, where the term $y_m/m^{1/2+\varepsilon}$ is consecutively projected onto lines with directions $e_m^1, e_m^2, e_m^1, e_m^2, \dots$, and its length is multiplied by $\cos (\alpha_m/2)$ after the first projection and then each time by $\cos \alpha_m$. Thus
\begin{equation}\notag
\begin{split}
&|T^nx_0|^2=|x_{2n}|^2=\sum_{m=1}^\infty \frac{|y_m|^2}{m^{1+2\varepsilon}}\cos^2\frac{\alpha_m}{2} (\cos \alpha_m)^{2(2n-1)} \\
&=\sum_{m=1}^\infty \frac{\sin^2 \alpha_m}{m^{1+2\varepsilon}}(\cos \alpha_m)^{4n-2}
\ge \sum_{m=1}^\infty \frac{((2 \alpha_m)/\pi)^2}{m^{1+2\varepsilon}}\left(1- \frac{\alpha_m^2}{2}\right)^{4n-2} \\
&=\frac{4}{\pi^2}\sum_{m=1}^\infty \frac{1}{m^{3+2\varepsilon}}\left(1- \frac{1}{2m^2}\right)^{4n-2}
\ge \frac{4}{\pi^2}\sum_{m\ge \sqrt{2n-1}} \frac{1}{m^{3+2\varepsilon}}\left(1- \frac{1}{2m^2}\right)^{2m^2} \\
&\ge C_1\sum_{m\ge \sqrt{2n-1}}\frac{1}{m^{3+2\varepsilon}}\ge C_2\int_{\sqrt{2n}}^\infty\frac{dt}{t^{3+2\varepsilon}}=\frac{C_3}{n^{1+\varepsilon}}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
for certain constants $C_{1,2,3}>0$. Above we have used that $2\sin \alpha\cos \alpha=\sin 2\alpha$,
that $\sin \alpha\geq 2\alpha /\pi$ and $\cos \alpha \geq 1-\alpha^2/2$ for $\alpha\in [0,\pi/2]$, and that $\lim_{t\to +\infty} (1-1/t)^t=1/e$.
\end{proof}

 Assume that the dense set  $Y=L_1^{\perp}+\dots +L_K^{\perp}$ is not  closed and hence (A3) takes place. Deutsch and Hundal asked where     the initial points
for the arbitrarily slow convergence of the alternating projections $T$ lie, and conjectured that they lie in   $H\setminus Y$ \cite{DH}.

 For a sequence $r=\{r_n\}$, $r_n\geq 0$, $r_n\to 0$,  let
$S_r=\{x \in H:\, |T^n x|>r_n$  for all $n\}$
be the starting points of ``$r$-slow" convergence of $T$.
M\"uller announced   that
  $S_r\cap (H\setminus Y)\neq \emptyset$ for any $r$ (V. M\"uller, {\em unpublished manuscript}, 2017).
  In the next theorem we resolve the question of Deutsch and Hundal fully. We show  that there even exist sequences $r$ so that $S_r\subset H\setminus Y$.

\begin{theorem}\label{theorem4}
Let  $L_1,\dots,L_K$ be closed subspaces of $H$, and  $Y=L_1^\perp+\dots+L_K^\perp$.  Then for every  $x_0\in Y$ there exists $c(x_0)>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{t4}
|T^n(x_0)|\leq c(x_0)\cdot n^{-1/(4 K\sqrt K+2)}, \qquad n=1,2,\dots .
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} 1. For $y\in Y$, we have $Ty\in Y$ by Lemma 2. More precisely,
\begin{equation}\label{v}
\begin{split}
Ty&=P_K\dots P_1 y=(I-P_K^{\perp})P_{K-1}\dots P_1 y \\
&= y-v_1-\dots -v_K,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $v_j=P_j^\perp P_{j-1}\dots P_1y\in L_j^\perp$.
For $y\neq 0$ we denote
$$
\nu(y)=(|v_1|^2+\dots+|v_K|^2)^{\frac 12}/|y|.
$$
By the Pythagoras theorem,
$|P_{j}\dots P_1y|^2=|P_{j-1}\dots P_1y|^2-|v_j|^2$. Adding these equalities yields
\begin{equation}\label{1step}
|Ty|^2=|y|^2(1-\nu^2(y)).
\end{equation}

2. We   estimate the growth of the norm $s$ defined in (\ref{s(y)}) as $y\in Y$ is being mapped to  $Ty$.
Since $v_j\in Y$, by (\ref{v}) and by Cauchy-Schwarz inequality we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{sTs}
s(Ty)\leq s(y)+\sum_{j=1}^K|v_j| \leq s(y)+\sqrt K|y|\nu(y).
\end{equation}

3. The quantity $\nu(y)$  determines  the decay  of the norm for the alternating projection step $y\to Ty$, just as $\rho(x)$ from (\ref{rho(x)}) does it for the remotest step. We have to estimate $\nu(y)$ from below, similarly  as we estimated $\rho(y)$   in Lemma A.

By (\ref{g(x)}) and (\ref{rho(x)}), one of the nearest points for $y$ in $L_1^\perp \cup\dots\cup L_K^\perp$ is
$$
P_k^\perp y=\langle y, g(y) \rangle g(y) =\rho(y) |y| g(y)
$$
for some $k=k(y)\in \{1,\dots,K\}$. We have
$$
|P_k^{\perp}y|=|y-P_ky|= {\rm dist\,}(y,L_k)\leq |y-P_k\dots P_1y|=|v_1+\dots +v_k|.
$$
On the other hand, Lemma~\ref{lemmaA} gives
$$
|P_k^{\perp}y|=\rho(y) |y|\geq\frac{|y|^2}{s(y)}.
$$
Hence  there exists an $m\in \{1,\dots,k\}$ so that $|v_m|\ge |y|^2/(ks(y))\ge |y|^2/(Ks(y)) $, and thus
\begin{equation}\label{nus}
\nu(y)\geq  \frac{|y|}{Ks(y)}.
\end{equation}

4. Let $0\neq x_0\in Y$ be given. Recursively we define the four sequences
\begin{equation}\notag
\begin{split}
a_n&=|T^nx_0|,\ a_0=|x_0|  \\
\nu_n&=\nu(T^nx_0),\ \nu_0=\nu(x_0)  \\
s_n&=s(T^nx_0),\ s_0=s(x_0)  \\
b_{n+1}&=b_n+\sqrt K a_n\nu_n ,\ b_0=s_0.  \\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We introduce the auxiliary increasing sequence $\{b_n\}$, as it is not clear that $\{s_n\}$ is monotone.
Then $s_n\leq b_n$ by (\ref{sTs}) and by induction. Hence
$$
\frac{a_n}{b_n}\leq \frac{a_n}{s_n}\leq K\nu_n,
$$
by (\ref{nus}). Therefore
$$
b_{n+1}=b_n(1+\sqrt K \nu_n\frac{a_n}{b_n})\leq b_n(1+K^{\frac 32}\nu_n^{2}).
$$
We define $\alpha=K^{-\frac 32}<1$ and use   Bernoulli's inequality $(1+t)^{\alpha}\leq 1+\alpha t$ for $t\ge 0$ to derive that
$$
b^{\alpha}_{n+1}\leq b_n^{\alpha}(1+\nu_n^2).
$$
Since  $a^2_{n+1}=a^2_n(1-\nu_n^2)$ by (\ref{1step}),
\begin{equation}\label{a/b}
a^2_{n+1}b^{\alpha}_{n+1}\leq a^2_nb^{\alpha}_n(1-\nu_n^4)\leq \dots\leq a^2_0b^{\alpha}_0=|x_0|^2s_0^{\alpha}.
\end{equation}
The sequence $\{b_n\}$ is increasing, hence by (\ref{nus}) we get
$$
\frac{a^2_{n+1}}{b_{n+1}^{2}}\leq\frac{a^2_{n}(1-\nu_n^2)}{b_{n}^{2}}\leq \frac{a^2_{n}}{b_{n}^{2}}\left(1-\frac{1}{K^2}\frac{a^2_n}{s^2_n}\right)\leq \frac{a^2_n}{b^2_n}\left(1-\frac{1}{K^2} \frac{a^2_n}{b^2_n}\right).
$$
Lemma~\ref{lemmaB} then implies
\begin{equation}\label{ab}
a_n^2/b_n^2\leq K^2/(n+1) \leq K^2/n
\end{equation}
for all $n\in \mathbb N$.
Hence by (\ref{a/b}) and (\ref{ab})
$$
a^{4+2\alpha}_n=a^4_nb^{2\alpha}_n\cdot\frac{a^{2\alpha}_n}{b^{2\alpha}_n}\leq |x_0|^4s_0^{2\alpha}K^{2\alpha}n^{-\alpha}
$$
and, finally, for a suitable $c(x_0)>0$ which depends on $x_0\in Y$ only (for given $L_1,\dots, L_K$), we get
$$
a_n\leq |x_0|^{\frac{2}{2+\alpha}}\cdot s(x_0)^{\frac{\alpha}{2+\alpha}}\cdot K^{\frac{\alpha}{2+\alpha}}\cdot n^{-\frac{1}{4/\alpha+2}}=c(x_0)\cdot n^{-\frac{1}{2(2 K^{3/2}+1)}}.
$$
\end{proof}

For $K=2$ Theorem~\ref{theorem4} gives a  much worse estimate than Theorem~\ref{theorem3}, and we face
\begin{problem}\label{problem3}
 Can one improve estimate (\ref{t4}) so that it would give
(\ref{t3}) for $K=2$? Ideally,  find the best possible power in (\ref{t4}) for $K\ge 3$.
\end{problem}

\section{Remotest and alternating projections are distinct}

We have seen that remotest projections are very similar to alternating projections in their convergence properties. A natural question arises: are they basically the same? If  $K=2$  this is obviously the case. Suppose $K\geq 3$.  Does the sequence $i(n)$ in (\ref{rempr}) become cyclic after a while for any starting element $x_0\in H$?

\begin{theorem}\label{theorem5}
There exist three   2-dimensional subspaces $L_{1,2,3}$ of ${\mathbb R}^4$ and a starting element $x_0\in {\mathbb R}^4$ such that the sequence of indices $i(n)$ of  its remotest projections never becomes cyclic.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Consider ${\mathbb R}^4$ as a sum ${\mathbb R}^2\oplus{\mathbb R}^2$ of two mutually orthogonal 2-dimensional subspaces. We choose unit vectors $e_{1,2,3}$ in the first copy of ${\mathbb R}^2$ such that all three angles between them are acute and $e_3$ ``lies" between $e_1$ and $e_2$. In the second copy of  ${\mathbb R}^2$  we also choose unit vectors $u_{1,2,3}$ with acute angles between them, but now  $u_2$ ``lies" between $u_1$ and $u_3$. Suppose that the angles $\alpha=\widehat{e_1e_2}$, $\beta=\widehat{e_1e_3}$, $\gamma=\widehat{u_1u_3}$, $\delta=\widehat{u_1u_2}$ satisfy the following conditions:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] $\alpha>\gamma>\beta>\delta>\alpha/2$;
\item[(b)] $\cos^2\delta-\cos^2\gamma=\cos^2\beta-\cos^2\alpha$;
\item[(c)] $r_1=\cos^2\alpha/\cos^2\delta$  and $r_2=\cos^2\gamma/\cos^2\beta$ are rational numbers;
\item[(d)]   $r_1^m\not= r_2^n$ for any positive integers $m$ and $n$.
\end{itemize}
For instance, one can take $\alpha=\arccos \sqrt{1/11}$, $\gamma=\arccos \sqrt{2/11}$, $\beta=\arccos \sqrt{3/11}$, $\delta=\arccos \sqrt{4/11}$.

We set $L_j={\rm span}\,\{e_j, u_j\}$, $j=1,2,3$. Since $\beta>\alpha/2$ in view of (a), the distance of any nonzero element $\xi e_3+\eta u_3\in L_3$ from $L_1$ is greater than that from $L_2$. Condition (a) also implies $\delta>\gamma/2$, and hence the distance of any nonzero element $\xi e_2+\eta u_2\in L_2$ from $L_1$ is greater than that from $L_3$. As for elements $x=\xi e_1+\eta u_1\in L_1$, the remotest subspace ($L_2$ or $L_3$) for them depends on the values of $\xi$ and $\eta$. If
$$
|P_2x|^2=|(\xi\cos \alpha) e_2+(\eta\cos \delta) u_2|^2=\xi^2\cos^2\alpha+\eta^2\cos^2\delta
$$
is greater than
$$
|P_3x|^2=|(\xi\cos \beta) e_3+(\eta\cos \gamma) u_3|^2=\xi^2\cos^2\beta+\eta^2\cos^2\gamma,
$$
that is, in view of (b), if  $|\eta|>|\xi|$, then $\rho(x,L_3)>\rho(x,L_2)$; while $|\eta|<|\xi|$ is equivalent to $\rho(x,L_2)>\rho(x,L_3)$.

Thus by iterating remotest projections the  element $x_n=\xi_n e_1+\eta_n u_1\in L_1$ is projected onto $L_3$ if $|\eta_n|>|\xi_n|$ and onto $L_2$ if $|\eta_n|<|\xi_n|$. Its image is  afterwards in both cases projected  onto $L_1$. In other words,
$$
|\eta_n|>|\xi_n| \Rightarrow i(n)=3,\   x_{n+2}=(\xi_n\cos^2\beta) e_1+(\eta_n\cos^2 \gamma) u_1,
$$
$$
|\eta_n|<|\xi_n| \Rightarrow i(n)=2,\   x_{n+2}=(\xi_n\cos^2\alpha) e_1+(\eta_n\cos^2 \delta) u_1.
$$

Consider the starting element $x_0=\xi e_1+\eta u_1\in L_1$, $\xi, \eta>0$, with  an irrational ratio $\xi/\eta$. Then for any even $n=2k$ the element $x_n$ has the form
$$
x_n=\xi_k e_1+\eta_k u_1=(\xi\cos^{2l} \alpha\cos^{2m}\beta) e_1+(\eta\cos^{2l} \delta\cos^{2m}\gamma) u_1
$$
for some $l=l(n)$ and $m=m(n)$ and positive values $\xi_k$ and  $\eta_k$ which are not equal to each other in view of (c). Hence the number $i(n)$ is uniquely determined and for any odd $n$, we have $i(n)=1$. Eventually the whole sequence $\{i(n)\}$ consists of pairs 21 and 31.
We show that this sequence never becomes cyclic.

We consider the sequence of points $(\xi_k, \eta_k)$ in the plane $L_1$. It is changing according to the rule
\begin{equation}\label{i(n)=3}
\xi_{k+1}=\xi_k \cos^2\beta, \eta_{k+1}=\eta_k\cos^2\gamma\quad \hbox{if} \quad |\eta_k|>|\xi_k|,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{i(n)=2}
\xi_{k+1}=\xi_k \cos^2\alpha, \eta_{k+1}=\eta_k\cos^2\delta\quad \hbox{if} \quad |\eta_k|<|\xi_k|,
\end{equation}
Our aim is to show that the choice between (\ref{i(n)=3}) and (\ref{i(n)=2}) never becomes cyclic.

Consider the sequence $\lambda_k=\ln (\eta_{k}/\xi_{k})$, $k=0,1,2,\dots$. It is changing according to the rule $\lambda_{k+1}=f(\lambda_k)$, where
$$
f(t)=\left\{
\begin{array}{ccc}
t-a &,& t\ge 0\\
t+b &,& t<0,\\
\end{array}
\right.
$$
$a=\ln(\cos^2\beta/\cos^2\gamma)>0$, $b=\ln(\cos^2\delta/\cos^2\alpha)>a$.
This function shifts $[-a,0)$ to $[b-a,b)$ and $[0,b)$ to $[-a,b-a)$. Thus it  transforms the half-interval $[-a,b)$ bijectively onto itself by permutation of  its two parts; it is the  so called ``baker's map". The orbit $\{f^k(t)\}$ of any point finds itself on this half-interval for $k\ge k(t)$. A well-known trick provides a continuous isomorphic  copy of this map. If one glues this half-interval onto a circle $S$ of length $a+b$ by identifying $-a$ and $b$,  then  $f$ induces a rotation $\tilde f$ of $S$ by arc of length $a$. Since the ratio
$$
\frac{a+b}{a}=1+\frac{\ln(\cos^2\delta/\cos^2\alpha)}{\ln(\cos^2\beta/\cos^2\gamma)}
$$
is irrational in view of (d), the orbit $\{\tilde f^k(t)\}$ of any point is dense in $S$. Consequently, $\{\lambda_k\}$ is dense in $[-a,b)$.

This density contradicts the possible cyclicity of $i(2k)$. Indeed, let $i(2k)$ become periodic with period $N$ starting from some $k_0$. Take some $\lambda_k\in (0,a)$ with $k>k_0$, so that $i(2k)=3$ and $i(2k+2)=2$. The sequence $\{\lambda_{k+N\nu}: \nu=0,1,2,\dots\}$ is also dense in $[-a,b)$ by the same  reasoning as above.  Hence  there exists  $\nu$ with $\lambda_{k+N\nu}\in (a,b)$, so that $i(2k+2N\nu)=3$ and $i(2k+2N\nu+2)=3\not= i(2k+2)$, which is a contradiction.
\end{proof}

The behavior of the sequence $\{i(n)\}$ in (\ref{rempr}) seems to be rather
mysterious. We wonder about the following:

\begin{problem}  Assume the sequence
$i(n)\in \{1,2,3\}$ satisfies $i(n)\not= i(n+1)$ for all $n\in \mathbb N$. Do there
exist three closed subspaces  $L_1,L_2,L_3$ of $H$ and a starting point $x_0\in H$ having
exactly  this sequence of indices of its remotest projections (\ref{rempr})?
\end{problem}

\subsection*{Acknowledgements}
We thank V.N. Temlyakov for a fruitful discussion, and David Seifert for explaining the conjecture of Deutsch and Hundal.