Total variation bound for Kac's random walk

Abstract: We show that the classical Kac's random walk on $(n-1)$-sphere $S^{n-1}$ starting from the point mass at $e_1$ mixes in $\mathcal{O}(n^5(\log n)^3)$ steps in total variation distance. The main argument uses a truncation of the running density after a burn-in period, followed by $\mathcal{L}^2$ convergence using the spectral gap information derived by other authors. This improves upon a previous bound by Diaconis and Saloff-Coste of order $\mathcal {O}(n^{2n})$.

\section{Introduction}
 Mark Kac proposed the following simplified model of one-dimensional Boltzmann gas dynamics (for historical details, see \cite{PDLSC}, \cite{Kac}):
 For $n$ particles on $\RR$, we can represent their velocities $(v_1, \ldots, v_n)$ as a point on the unit sphere $S^{n-1}$, after normalization so that
 \begin{align*}
 \sum_{i=1}^n v_i^2 = 1
 \end{align*}.
  Conservation of kinetic energy (assuming $0$ potential energy) in the gas dynamics is equivalent to $(v_1(t), \ldots, v_n(t))$ staying on $S^{n-1}$ for all $t \ge 0$. We will not introduce momentum conservation in our model, because that will force the collision to be inelastic (see 2nd paragraph below).

   Each time there is a collision, it occurs with probability $1$ between two particles, which corresponds to choosing two coordinate directions $x_i, x_j$ and rotating $S^{n-1}$ along the 2-plane $x_i \wedge x_j$ by some angle $\theta$. Notice that $v_i^2 + v_j^2$ before and after the collision stays the same, since the velocities of the other particles are not affected by the collision.

   By disregarding the position information of the particles (which have to be confined in some compact domain, for example $S^1$, else they will eventually run off to infinity), each collision occurs between any pair of the particles with equal probability $\frac{1}{{n \choose 2}}$. The rotation angle $\theta$ can be chosen from some distribution on $[0,2\pi)$, which physically is a measure of the elasticity of the collision; for example, inelastic collision in $\RR$ will correspond to a distribution of $\theta$ that's a delta measure concentrated at $\pi$. In this paper, we will assume that $\theta$ is uniformly distributed on $[0, 2\pi)$.

   Thus we obtain a discrete time Markov chain on $S^{n-1}$ with transition kernel given by, for $f: S^{n-1} \to \RR$ continuous, and $x \in S^{n-1}$,

   \begin{align} \label{Kac kernel}
   Kf = \frac{1}{{n \choose 2}} \sum_{i\neq j}^n \int_0^{2\pi} f(R(i,j;\theta) x) \frac{1}{2\pi} d\theta
   \end{align}
   where $R(i,j;\theta)$ denotes the rotation along the oriented $i\wedge j$ plane by the angle $\theta$. By transposing, $K$ defines a map from the set of probability measures on $S^{n-1}$ to itself, since $K(1) = 1$.

   It is not too hard to see that the $U_{n-1}$, the uniform distribution on $S^{n-1}$, is a stationary distribution for $K$: for each summand $K_{i,j}$ (without $\frac{1}{{n \choose 2}}$ in \eqref{Kac kernel}), we have
   \begin{align*}
   U_{n-1} (K_{i,j} f) &= \int_{S^{n-1}} (K_{i,j} f)(x) U_{n-1}(dx) \\
   &= \int_{S^{n-1}} (\int_0^{2\pi} f(R(i,j; \theta) x) \frac{1}{2\pi} d\theta) U_{n-1}(dx) \\
   &= \int_{S^{n-1}} \frac{1}{2\pi} (\int_0^{2\pi} f(x) d\theta )U_{n-1}(  R(i,j;\theta) dx) \\
   &=  \int_{S^{n-1}} f(x) U_{n-1}( d  x)
   \end{align*}
   using a change of variable formula and the fact that $U_{n-1}$ is invariant under rotations.

   This establishes that $U_{n-1} K_{i,j} = U_{n-1}$ for all $i \neq j$. Thus their average $U_{n-1} K = U_{n-1}$ as well.

   We further claim that Markov chain is aperiodic because once a point is reached, it can be reached in the next step with positive probability density for any rotation. It is also irreducible since along a sequence of rotations $(i_1 \wedge i_2, \ldots, i_k \wedge i_{k+1})$ that form a connected spanning graph in $K_n$, the complete graph on $n$ vertices, one can transport any point on $S^{n-1}$ to any other point with positive probability density; such sequence of rotations certainly occur with positive probability. Thus by general theory of Markov chains, we know that with any initial distribution $\mu$ on $S^{n-1}$,
   \begin{align*}
   \lim_{l \to \infty} \mu K^l (A) - U_{n-1}(A) = 0
   \end{align*}
   uniformly in $A \subset S$. This implies total variation convergence.

   Using the $\mathcal{L}^2$ theory of discrete time Markov chains, it can be shown that if the starting distribution $\mu$ is in $\mathcal{L}^2(S^{n-1},U_{n-1})$, then we get the following convergence bound
   \begin{align*}
   || \mu K^l - U_{n-1}||_{TV} < ||\mu - 1||_{\mathcal{L}^2} (1-\frac{1}{2n})^l
   \end{align*}
   by the result in \cite{Kac}, that shows the spectral gap of $K$ is bounded below by $\frac{1}{2n}$. In fact it's given exactly by $\frac{n+2}{2n(n-1)}$ for $n \ge 2$.

   If the initial distribution $\mu$ does not have an $\mathcal{L}^2$ density with respect to $U_{n-1}$, then the $\mathcal{L}^2$ theory above fails. The best result for the rate of convergence when the initial distribution is say concentrated at one point is given in \cite{PDLSC}, where to get with $\epsilon$ close to $U_{n-1}$ in total variation norm requires $O(n^{2n}\log \epsilon)$ steps. The $\mathcal{L}^2$ theory gives a mixing time of $O(2n \log \epsilon ||\mu||_{\mathcal{L}^2})$. In the following section, however, we will show that by some 'truncation' argument, and triangle inequalities for the total variation distance, one can still essentially use the spectral gap to bound the total variation mixing time to $O(n^5 (\log n\log \epsilon)^3)$, when the walk starts at $e_1$, a fixed point on $S^{n-1}$. It is not clear whether the power on the $\log \epsilon$ factor in the mixing time bound can be reduced to $1$. In this sense, the result is not a strict improvement over \cite{PDLSC}.

\section{Bounding the Total Variation Distance}

 Next we want to bound the convergence rate of the Kac's random walk on $S^{n-1}$, in total variation distance.

 Recall the total variation distance between two probability measures $\mu$ and $\nu$ on the same probability space $(S, \mathcal{S})$ is defined by the following variational quantity:
 \begin{align*}
 || \mu - \nu||_{\rm{TV}} = \sup_{A \in \mathcal{S}} |\mu(A) - \nu(A)|
 \end{align*}
 where $\mathcal{S}$ is the $\sigma$-algebra on $S$.

 Let $A_k$ be the event that at the $k$th step of the walk, every pair of coordinates has been used. Then we have
 \begin{align*}
 P(A_k^c) := \eta_k < {n \choose 2}(1-\frac{1}{{n \choose 2}})^k
 \end{align*}
 Conditioning on this event, we have the following two claims:

 1. the density $g :=\frac{d \mu'_k}{d U_{n-1}}$ of the resulting distribution $\mu'_k$ of the conditioned random walk with respect to the uniform distribution on $S^{n-1}$ satisfies the following bound
 \begin{align} \label{density bound}
 g(x) &\le |\min_{i=1}^n x_i|^{-n} (\sum_{i=1}^n (-\log |x_i|)^k) C^k \prod_{m=1}^k m! \\
&\le C^k k^{k^2} |\min_{i=1}^n x_i|^{-n} (-\log|\min_{i=1}^n x_i|)^k
 \end{align}
 for some fixed absolute constant $C$.

 2. For $k > - n^2 \log n \log \epsilon$, and $\epsilon < \frac{n^{-3/2}}{2}$ the set $H_{\epsilon} := \{x \in S^{n-1}: |x_i| < \epsilon$ for some $i\}$ satisfies the following bound on its probability

 \begin{align} \label{epsilon neighborhood bound}
 \mu'_k(H_{\epsilon}) \le \epsilon^{\frac{1}{4}}
 \end{align}

 Let us first show how claims 1 and 2 lead to a polynomial time convergence rate for the Kac walk under total variation norm. Let $\mu_k$ be the distribution on $S^{n-1}$ after $k$ steps of the random walk, and let $\mu'_k$ be $\mu_k$ conditional on $A_k$, i.e., for $B \subset S^{n-1}$,

 \begin{align*}
 \mu'_k(B) = P(\delta_{e_1} R^k \in B | A_k)
 \end{align*}

 where $R$ is the one step transition kernel of the Kac random walk.

 Then we have

 \begin{align} \label{singular to L^1 TV bound}
 ||\mu'_k - \mu_k||_{\rm{TV}} < \eta_k < {n \choose 2}(1-\frac{1}{{n \choose 2}})^k
 \end{align}

 To check this, let $B \subset S^{n-1}$ be Lebesgue measurable. Then we have

 \begin{align*}
 \mu_k(B) &= P(\delta_{e_1} R^k \in B|A_k)P(A_k) + P(\delta_{e_1} R^k \in B|A_k^c)P(A_k^c) \\
   & \le \mu_k'(B) + \eta_k
   \end{align*}

   This implies

   \begin{align*}
   \mu_k(B) - \mu'_k(B)\le \eta_k
   \end{align*}

   On the other hand, since

   \begin{align*}
   \mu'_k(B) =\frac{P(\{ \delta_{e_1} R^k \in B \} \cap A_k)}{P(A_k)}
   \end{align*}

   we also get

   \begin{align*}
   \frac{\mu_k(B)}{1- \eta_k} > \mu'_k(B)
   \end{align*}

   which gives

   \begin{align*}
   \mu_k(B) > \mu'_k(B) - \eta_k \mu'_k(B)
   \end{align*}

   hence

   \begin{align*}
   \mu'_k(B) - \mu_k(B) < \eta_k
   \end{align*}

   which shows \eqref{singular to L^1 TV bound}.

   Next recall that a Markov kernel is weakly contracting in total variation norm because if $f$ is a bounded continuous function on the state space with
   \begin{align*}
   ||f||_{\infty} \le 1
   \end{align*}
   then $Rf(x) = \int R(x, dy) f(y)$ satisfies the same $\mathcal{L}^{\infty}$ bound, hence
   \begin{align*}
   (\mu R - \nu R)(f) = (\mu - \nu)(Rf) \le ||\mu - \nu||_{\rm{TV}}
   \end{align*}

   Thus by the triangle inequality we just need to bound $||\mu'_k R^l - U_{n-1}||_{\rm{TV}}$ from now on, where $U_{n-1}$ denotes the uniform distribution on $S^{n-1}$ and at the end add $\eta_k$ to the resulting bound.

   Next we modify $\mu'_k$ to a different distribution $\nu_k$ as following. We define $\nu_k$ in terms of its density with respect to $U_{n-1}$.

   On the set $H_{\epsilon}^c$,
   \begin{align*}
   \frac{d\nu_k}{dU_{n-1}} = \frac{d\mu'_k}{dU_{n-1}}
   \end{align*}

   On the set $H_{\epsilon}$, we let its density be a constant equal to the mass of $H_{\epsilon}$ under $\mu'_k$ divided by its mass under $U_{n-1}$, which is what's needed for $\nu_k$ to be a probability distribution on $S^{n-1}$; we invoke claim 1 above to get an upper bound on this constant:
   \begin{align*}
   \frac{d\nu_k}{dU_{n-1}} &\equiv \frac{\mu'_k(H_{\epsilon})}{U_{n-1}(H_{\epsilon})} \\
   &< \frac{\epsilon^{1/4}}{\epsilon \frac{\Gamma(\frac{n}{2})}{\Gamma(\frac{n-1}{2})\Gamma(\frac{1}{2})}} \\
   &< \frac{\epsilon^{1/4}}{\epsilon \sqrt{\frac{n-2}{2\pi}}}\\
   &<  \epsilon^{-\frac{3}{4}} \sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{n-2}}
   \end{align*}
Here we used the fact that
\begin{align*}
\frac{\Gamma(\frac{n}{2})}{\Gamma(\frac{n-1}{2})} > \sqrt{\frac{n-2}{2}}
\end{align*}
   which follows from log convexity of the $\Gamma$ function.

   The total variation distance between $\mu'_k$ and $\nu_k$ is given simply by their total variation distance over the region $H_{\epsilon}$, hence we have
   \begin{align} \label{L^1 to L^2 TV bound}
   ||\mu'_k - \nu_k||_{\rm{TV}} &\le \mu'_k(H_{\epsilon}) + \frac{n \Gamma(\frac{n}{2})}{\Gamma(\frac{1}{2}) \Gamma(\frac{n-1}{2})} \epsilon \\
   &\le n^{3/2} \epsilon + \epsilon^{1/4}
   \end{align}

   Thus by choosing $\epsilon$ sufficiently small, whose exact value we will determine in the end, we can make sure that $\mu'_k$ and $\nu_k$ are very close in total variation distance. And again by weak contractivity of Markov kernel, we now simply need to focus on bounding $||\nu_k R^l - U_{n-1}||_{\rm{TV}}$. Since $\nu_k$ has an $\mathcal{L}^2$ density with respect to $U_{n-1}$, we can use the spectral gap to bound the rate of convergence. First we bound the $\mathcal{L}^2(dU_{n-1})$ distance between $\nu_k$ and $U_{n-1}$:
   \begin{align} \label{L^2 distance}
   ||\nu_k - U_{n-1}||_{\mathcal{L}^2(d U_{n-1})} = (\int_{H_{\epsilon}} |\frac{d \nu_k}{dU_{n-1}} - 1|^2 d U_{n-1} + \int_{H_{\epsilon}^c} |\frac{d \nu_k}{dU_{n-1}} -1|^2 dU_{n-1})^{\frac{1}{2}}
   \end{align}
   Let's bound the two integrals separately.

   For the first integral on the right hand side of \eqref{L^2 distance}, we have
   \begin{align}
   \int_{H_{\epsilon}} |\frac{d \nu_k}{dU_{n-1}} - 1|^2 d U_{n-1} &\le \int_{H_{\epsilon}} (\frac{d\nu_k}{dU_{n-1}})^2 dU_{n-1} + U_{n-1}(H_{\epsilon}) \nonumber \\
   &< \epsilon^{-3/2} \frac{8\pi}{n-2} \epsilon \frac{\Gamma(\frac{n}{2})}{\Gamma(\frac{n-1}{2})\Gamma(\frac{1}{2})} \nonumber\\
   &< 4 \epsilon^{-1/2} \sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{n-2}} \label{bound of first integral}
   \end{align}

   For the second integral, notice first that $H_{\epsilon}^c$ is the set of points on $S^{n-1}$ for which all the coordinates are greater than $\epsilon$. So claim 2 tells us that the density $\frac{d\nu_k}{dU_{n-1}}$ over this region is bounded above by $\epsilon^{-n}$, from which we immediately get the following bound
   \begin{align} \label{bound of second integral}
   \int_{H_{\epsilon}^c}  |\frac{d \nu_k}{dU_{n-1}} - 1|^2 d U_{n-1} < \epsilon^{-2n} + 1
   \end{align}

 Combining \eqref{bound of first integral} and \eqref{bound of second integral}, we get, for $\epsilon < \frac{1}{2}$ and $n > 2$ say, that
 \begin{align*}
 ||\nu_k - U_{n-1}||_{\mathcal{L}^2(dU_{n-1})} \le 2 \epsilon^{-n}
 \end{align*}

 By the results in \cite{Kac}, we know that the spectral gap of the Kac kernel is $\frac{1}{n}$, so we get
 \begin{align}
 ||\nu_k R^l - U_{n-1}||_{\rm{TV}} &\le ||\frac{d\nu_k}{dU_{n-1}} -1||_{\mathcal{L}^2(dU_{n-1})} (1-\frac{1}{n})^m \nonumber \\
 &\le 2 \epsilon^{-n} (1-\frac{1}{n})^m \label{spectral bound}
 \end{align}

 Finally combining \eqref{singular to L^1 TV bound} \eqref{L^1 to L^2 TV bound} and \eqref{spectral bound}, we get

 \begin{align} \label{final TV bound}
 || \delta_{e_1} R^{k+l} - U_{n-1}||_{\rm{TV}} \le {n \choose 2} (1-\frac{1}{{n \choose 2}})^k + n^{3/2} \epsilon + \epsilon^{1/4} + C^k k^{k^2} |\epsilon|^{-n} (-\log \epsilon )^k (1-\frac{1}{n})^l
 \end{align}

 So it remains to minimize the right hand side of \eqref{final TV bound} with respect to $k$ and $l$.

 Suppose our target total variation distance is $3\delta$. Then we can simply divide $3\delta$ into three equal parts and bound each summand in \eqref{final TV bound} by $\delta$. We look at each summand below:

 bounding the first summand yields
 \begin{align*}
 &{n \choose 2} (1-\frac{1}{{n \choose 2}})^k < \delta \\
 \Rightarrow & k > (-\log \delta + 2\log n ) {n \choose 2}
 \end{align*}

 So it suffices to take

 \begin{align} \label{first summand}
 k > n^2 \log n \log \frac{1}{\delta}
 \end{align}

 Bounding the second summand $\epsilon^{1/4} + n^{3/2} \epsilon < \delta$, it suffices to have

 \begin{align*}
 \epsilon^{1/4} &< \delta /2 \\
 n^{3/2} \epsilon &< \delta /2
 \end{align*}

 which gives

 \begin{align*}
 \epsilon < \frac{1}{2} \delta^4 n^{-3/2}
 \end{align*}

 This will be used to bound $l$ from above in the third summand:

 \begin{align*}
 & C^k k^{k^2} |\epsilon|^{-n} (-\log \epsilon )^k  (1-\frac{1}{n})^l < \delta
\end{align*}
implies we need $l$ greater than
\begin{align*}
&n(-\log \delta + k \log C + k^2 \log k - n \log \epsilon + k \log \log (\epsilon^{-1}) ) \\
&< n(-\log \delta + k \log C + n^4 (\log n)^2 (\log \delta)^2 (2 \log n + \log \log n + \log \log (\delta^{-1})) +n(-4 \log \delta + \frac{3}{2} \log n) + k \log \log \epsilon^{-1})\\
&< C' n^5 (\log n)^3 (\log \delta)^3
\end{align*}

for some constant $C'$.

Clearly $l$ dominates $k$, so it requires a total of $C' n^5 (\log n)^2 (\log \delta)^2$ steps to bring the running distribution of the Kac random walk to be $3\delta$ close to its stationary distribution on the unit sphere $S^{n-1}$.

 Lastly we prove the two claims introduced in the beginning.

 \section{Proof of Claim 1}
 Starting at the delta mass at $e_1$, an admissible sequence of rotations in $A_k$ will distribute it over the entire $S^{n-1}$ with positive probability everywhere provided that $P(A_k) > 0$, i.e., for $k$ sufficiently large. This will certainly be the case if $k \ge - n^2 \log n \log \delta$ for $- \log \delta > 2$.

   Observe that at step $j-1$, $j \le k$, the support of the running distribution is a subsphere of $S^{n-1}$. Without loss of generality, we call this subsphere $S^m$. Denote by $u_j, v_j$ the axes that span the plane of rotation $\gamma_j$.

 The way $\gamma_j$ affects the previous running distribution can be classified into three cases:

 1. $u_j, v_j \not\in S^m$, in which case the running distribution remains unchanged.

 2. $u_j, v_j \in S^m$, in which case the support at step $j$ is still on $S^m$.

 3. $u_j \in S_m$, $v_j \not\in S_m$, in which case the support of the running distribution grows to be a sphere with $1$ dimension higher than $S^m$, denoted without loss of generality $S^{m+1}$, and the density with respect to the uniform distribution on $S^{m+1}$ is bounded by $(u_j^2+v_j^2)^{-1/2}$ times the previous density bound with respect to $S^m$.

 Case 1 is clear because the rotation does not take $S^m$ outside itself and for $\theta \in [0, 2\pi]$, the density at $(x_1, \ldots, x_{m+1}, \ldots, (u_j^2 + v_j^2)^{1/2} \cos \theta, \ldots, (u_j^2+v_j^2)^{1/2} \sin \theta, \ldots, x_n)$ with respect to $U_m$ only depends on the first $m+1$ coordinates, which means that averaging over $\theta$ uniformly in $[0, 2\pi]$ remains the same.

 to understand case 3, we have the following

 \begin{lem}
 Assuming the running density $h(x_1, \ldots, x_{m+1})$ with respect to $U_m$ after step $j-1$ is bounded by $g(x_1, \ldots x_{m+1})$, and that without loss of generality $u_j = x_{m+1}$, $v_j = x_{m+2}$, then the new density with respect to $U_{m+1}$ after step $j$ is bounded by
 \begin{align*}
 \frac{1}{2 \pi} g(x_1, \ldots, (x_{m+1} + x_{m+2})^{1/2}) (x_{m+1}^2+x_{m+2}^2)^{-1/2}
 \end{align*}
 \end{lem}

 \begin{proof}
 Denote the new density with respect to $U_{m+1}$ by $h(x_1, \ldots, x_{m+2})$ with a slight abuse of notation. Then we have
 \begin{align*}
 h(x_1, \ldots, (x_{m+1}^2 + x_{m+2}^2)^{1/2} \cos \theta, (x_{m+1}^2 + x_{m+2}^2)^{1/2} \sin \theta)
 \end{align*}
  is independent of $\theta$ and in particular equals
  \begin{align*}
  h(x_1, \ldots, (x_{m+1}^2 + x_{m+2}^2)^{1/2}, 0)
  \end{align*}
  Furthermore the total contribution of density from $(x_1, \ldots, (x_{m+1}^2 + x_{m+2}^2)^{1/2} \cos \theta, (x_{m+1}^2 + x_{m+2}^2)^{1/2} \sin \theta)$ for all $\theta$ should add up to the previous density at the point $(x_1, \ldots, (x_{m+1}^2 + x_{m+2}^2)^{1/2})$. In other words,
  \begin{align*}
  &(x_{m+1}^2 + x_{m+2}^2)^{1/2}\int_{\theta=0}^{2\pi} h(x_1, \ldots, (x_{m+1}^2 + x_{m+2}^2)^{1/2} \cos \theta, (x_{m+1}^2 + x_{m+2}^2)^{1/2} \sin \theta) \\
  = &h(x_1, \ldots, \ldots, (x_{m+1}^2 + x_{m+2}^2)^{1/2})
  \end{align*}
  Notice that the factor $(x_{m+1}^2 + x_{m+2}^2)^{1/2}$ accounts for the measure of the circle over which we aggregate.

  Thus we get
  \begin{align*}
  & h(x_1, \ldots, (x_{m+1}^2 + x_{m+2}^2)^{1/2} \cos \theta, (x_{m+1}^2 + x_{m+2}^2)^{1/2} \sin \theta)\\
  = &\frac{1}{2\pi} (x_{m+1}^2 + x_{m+2}^2)^{-1/2} h(x_1, \ldots, (x_{m+1}^2 + x_{m+2}^2)^{1/2})\\
 \le &\frac{1}{2\pi} (x_{m+1}^2 + x_{m+2}^2)^{-1/2} g(x_1, \ldots, (x_{m+1}^2 + x_{m+2}^2)^{1/2})
  \end{align*}

 \end{proof}

 to study case 2, we make the assumption that after step $j-1$, the density with respect to $U_m$ is bounded by an expression of the form
 \begin{align} \label{inductive bound}
 C (a_1^2 + b_1^2)^{-1/2} \ldots (a_{m-1}^2 + b_{m-1}^2)^{-1/2} [(-\log |x_1|)^{j-1} + \ldots + (-\log |x_{m+1}|)^{j-1}]
 \end{align}
  where $C$ is a constant that varies with $j$ and $m$. Here $a_i \neq b_i$ for each $i$ and $(a_1, b_1), \ldots, (a_{m-1}, b_{m-1})$ are pairs in $(x_1, \ldots, x_{m+1})^2$ with the property that no two pairs are the same and each coordinate appears at most twice.

 \begin{lem}
 Under the assumption above, if $j$th rotation is in case 2, then the new density bound takes the form
 \begin{align*}
 2 C (j+1)! (a_1^2 + b_1^2)^{-1/2} \ldots (a_{m-1}^2 + b_{m-1}^2)^{-1/2} [(-\log |x_1|)^j + \ldots + (-\log |x_{m+1}|)^j]
 \end{align*}
 with possibly a different sequence of $(a_i, b_i)$ satisfying the same property as before.
 \end{lem}

 \begin{proof}

 Without loss of generality assume $(u_j,v_j)=(1,2)$.

 The new density $h'$ is obtained from the old density $h$ by averaging over $\theta \in [0, 2\pi]$ of $h(R(1,2,\theta) x)$, where $R(1,2,\theta)x$ denotes the rotation of the vector $x \in S^m$ by angle $\theta$ along $x_1 \wedge x_2$. In formula we have,

 \begin{align} \label{circle averaging}
 h'(x) = \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_0^{2\pi} h(R(1,2,\theta) x) d\theta
 \end{align}

 We write the bound \eqref{inductive bound} as a sum of $m+1$ terms and consider one of the terms

 \begin{align*}
 g_i(x) = C (a_1^2 + b_1^2)^{-1/2} \ldots (a_{m-1}^2 + b_{m-1}^2)^{-1/2} (-\log |x_i|)^{j-1}
 \end{align*}

 By assumption, at most two of $a_1, b_1, \ldots, a_{m-1}, b_{m-1}$ equals $x_1$ at most two equals $x_2$.

 By the circle averaging formula \eqref{circle averaging}, we have

 \begin{align*}
 g_i'(x) = \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_0^{2\pi} g((x_1^2 + x_2^2)^{1/2}\cos \theta,(x_1^2 + x_2^2)^{1/2}\sin \theta ,x_3, \ldots, x_{m+1}) d \theta
 \end{align*}

 We shall break the integral into two parts, where the range of integration is over $I_c = [0,\pi/4] \cup [3\pi/4,5\pi/4] \cup [7\pi/4,2\pi]$ and its complement $I_s$ in $[0,2\pi]$ respectively, i.e., the ranges are where $\cos \theta$ is close to $1$ and $\sin \theta$ is close to $1$ respectively.

  For $\theta \in I_c$, all the factors in $g_i(x)$ of the form $(x_2^2 + x_s^2)^{-1/2}$, that involves $x_2$ but not $x_1$ upon the rotation $R(1,2,\theta)$ becomes $((x_1^2 + x_2^2) \sin^2 \theta + x_s^2)^{-1/2}$, which can be bounded above by $\sqrt{2} (x_1^2 + x_2^2 + x_s^2)^{-1/2}$.

  As of the factors that involve both $x_1$ and $x_2$, i.e., $(x_1^2 + x_2^2)^{-1/2}$, there can be at most one of such. And it remains the same under the rotation $R(1,2,\theta)$ since $(x_1^2 + x_2^2)\cos^2 \theta + (x_1^2 + x_2^2) \sin^2 \theta = x_1^2 + x_2^2$.

  The factors that involve $x_1$ and $x_l$, $l \neq 2$, becomes $((x_1^2 + x_2^2) \cos^2 \theta + x_s^2)^{-1/2}$, which we can bound as follows:

  using the fact that $\frac{1}{2} (|a| + |b|) \le (a^2 + b^2)^{1/2} \le |a| + |b|$, we get

  \begin{align*}
  ((x_1^2 + x_2^2) \cos^2 \theta + x_s^2)^{-1/2} \sim (|x_1| + |x_2|) |\cos \theta| + |x_s|)^{-1}
  \end{align*}

  where $a \sim b$ means $b/C \le a \le bC$ for some constant $C$. Here the constant can be taken to be $2$.

  Finally it's also possible that $i \in \{1,2\}$, in which case we also have to deal with a $(-\log[(x_1^2 + x_2^2)^{-1/2} \cos \theta])^{j-1}$ factor that goes to infinite for $\theta \in I_c$.

  In fact when $i =1$, the only factors that have singularities for $\theta \in I_c$ and for the coordinates bounded away from $0$ take the following form:

  \begin{align*}
  ((|x_1| + |x_2|) |\cos \theta| + |x_s|)^{-1}((|x_1| + |x_2|) |\cos \theta| + |x_t|)^{-1} (-\log[(x_1^2 + x_2^2)^{-1/2} \cos \theta])^j
  \end{align*}

  where $s\neq t$, or without the $x_t$ factor. In the former case we show that the following integral

  \begin{align*}
 \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{\theta \in I_c} ((|x_1| + |x_2|) |\cos \theta| + |x_s|)^{-1}((|x_1| + |x_2|) |\cos \theta| + |x_t|)^{-1} (-\log[(x_1^2 + x_2^2)^{1/2} \cos \theta])^{j-1} d\theta
  \end{align*}

  is bounded by

  \begin{align} \label{two inverse singular terms}
  j! (x_1^2 + x_2^2)^{-1/2} (x_s^2 + x_t^2)^{-1/2} [(-\log |x_1|)^j + (-\log |x_2|)^j + (-\log |x_s|)^j + (-\log |x_t|)^j]
  \end{align}

  whereas in the case $x_t$ is not present, the same bound applies to the expression

  \begin{align} \label{only one inverse singular term}
  \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{\theta \in I_c} ((|x_1| + |x_2|) |\cos \theta| + |x_s|)^{-1}(-\log[(x_1^2 + x_2^2)^{1/2} \cos \theta])^{j-1} d\theta
  \end{align}
  clearly because
  \begin{align*}
  ((|x_1| + |x_2|) \cos \theta + |x_t|)^{-1} \ge 1
  \end{align*}

  When $i \neq 1$, the logarithmic singularity will not arise when integrating over $\theta \in I_c$, so it will trail off as a remaining factor of the form $(-\log |x_i|)^{j-1} \le 1 + (-\log |x_i|)^j$.

  Recall also that we have factors of the form
  \begin{align} \label{uniform bounds from nonsingular factors}
  2 (x_1^2 + x_2^2 + x_s^2)^{-1/2} (x_1^2 + x_2^2 + x_t^2)^{-1/2}
  \end{align}
   coming from the uniform bound on the factors involving $x_2$ but not $x_2$; here $s,t$ are possibly different indices than those appearing in the singular factors. \eqref{uniform bounds from nonsingular factors} can be trivially bounded above by $ 2(x_1^2 + x_s^2)^{-1/2}(x_2^2 + x_t^2)^{-1/2}$.
   The remaining inverse factors in $g(R(1,2,\theta)x)$ do not contain $x_1$ or $x_2$, so one can easily check that the inductive hypothesis is satisfied.

   The best way to visualize this branching inductive argument is to consider a simple graph on $m+1$ vertices with degrees bounded above by 2. The edges between $i$ and $j$ represents a factor of the form $(x_i^2 + x_j^2)^{-1/2}$ in the bound on the density. A rotation in the $x_1 \wedge x_2$ plane has the effect of producing two graphs on $m+1$ vertices. Without loss of generality let's describe one of those two descendant graphs, the one associated with $x_1$:

   there will be edges $(1,2)$, $(3,4)$, $(1,3)$, and $(2,4)$ if $x_3$ and $x_4$ were incident to $x_1$ in the previous graph, or simply $(1,2)$ when $x_1$ only has degree $1$. If $x_1$ had degree $0$, then it remains isolated in the $x_1$ component of the descendant graph. In the process of this rewiring, some logarithmic factors are also introduced, namely, if $(-\log|x_3|)^{j-1}$ or $(-\log|x_4|)^{j-1}$ was a factor in the bound for the previous step running disribution, then the new bound will have $j!(-\log|x_4|)^j$. If it's a log factor of other coordinates, then the exponent remains the same.

   It remains to prove the bound \eqref{two inverse singular terms}, which is given by the following technical lemma.
   \end{proof}
  \begin{lem}
  For $0 \le x_t, x_s$, $0 \le x_1, x_2$,
  \begin{align*}
  &\int_0^1 ((x_1 + x_2) \theta + x_s)^{-1} ((x_1 + x_2) \theta + x_t)^{-1} (-\log [(x_1 + x_2) \theta])^{j-1} d\theta \\
  \le &4(j+1)! (x_s + x_t)^{-1} (x_1 + x_2)^{-1} [(-\log x_1 )^j + (-\log x_2)^j + (-\log x_s)^j + (-\log x_t)^j]
  \end{align*}
  \end{lem}
  \begin{proof}
  Without loss of generality, we can assume $x_t \le x_s$.

  First of all the factor $((x_1 + x_2) \theta + x_s)^{-1}$ can be bounded above by $2(x_s + x_t)^{-1}$ for $\theta \in [0, 1]$.
  So it remains to bound the integral of the remaining factors
  \begin{align*}
  &\int_0^1 ((x_1 + x_2) \theta + x_t)^{-1} (-\log [(x_1 + x_2) \theta])^{j-1} d\theta \\
  \le &x_t ^{-1} \int_0^{\epsilon} (-\log[(x_1+x_2) \theta])^{j-1} d\theta + (-\log[(x_1 + x_2) \epsilon])^{j-1} \int_{\epsilon}^1 ((x_1 + x_2) \theta + x_t)^{-1} d\theta \\
  \le &x_t^{-1} j! \epsilon (-\log [(x_1 + x_2) \epsilon])^j + (-\log [(x_1 + x_2) \epsilon])^{j-1} (x_1 + x_2)^{-1} \log [(x_1 + x_2 + x_t)/((x_1 + x_2) \epsilon + x_t)] \\
  \le &x_t^{-1} j! \epsilon (-\log [(x_1 + x_2) \epsilon])^j + (-\log [(x_1 + x_2) \epsilon])^{j-1} (x_1 + x_2)^{-1} \log [(x_1 + x_2) \epsilon]\\
  = &x_t^{-1} j! \epsilon (-\log [(x_1 + x_2) \epsilon])^j + (-\log [(x_1 + x_2) \epsilon])^j (x_1 + x_2)^{-1}
  \end{align*}
  Taking $\epsilon = x_t$, we obtain the result.
  \end{proof}

  \section{Proof of Claim 2}
Here we use the result from \cite{Oliviera} that after $k = n^2 \log n =log \epsilon $ steps the $\mathcal{L}^2$ transportation distance between the running distribution of the Kac random walk on $S^{n-1}$ and the uniform distribution $U_{n-1}$ is less than $\epsilon$. So by Holder's inequality, the $\mathcal{L}^1$ transportation distance is also less than $ \epsilon$.  Now suppose $\mu_k(H_{\epsilon}) > \epsilon^{1/4}$. We know that the uniform measure $U_{n-1}(H_{\epsilon})$ is of the order $\epsilon$; in fact using the marginal density formula for a single coordinate on the unit sphere, one sees that it is bounded above by $n^{3/2} \epsilon$, and similarly $U_{n-1}(H_{2\epsilon}) \le 2 n^{3/2} \epsilon$. So for $\epsilon$ sufficiently smaller than $n^{-3/2}$, we can make sure that
\begin{align*}
 (n^{3/2} \epsilon)^{1/4} - 2 \epsilon n^{3/2} > \epsilon^{1/2}
\end{align*}
then in order to transport the excessive mass in $H_{\epsilon}$ under the $k$th running distribution of the random walk to other places on $S^{n-1}$, any transport strategy has to take all the mass outside $H_{2 \epsilon}$, which means a distance more than $\epsilon$ has to be traversed for each particle mass. This shows the $\mathcal{L}^1$ transportation cost for smoothing out the region $H_{\epsilon}$ is at least $\epsilon \epsilon^{1/2}$, which is greater than the total $\mathcal{L}^1$ transportation distance, a contradiction.

  \section{Acknowledgement}
    I would like to thank my advisor Persi Diaconis for introducing me to the wonderful problem of Kac's random walk and directing me to the right papers to look at.


Symmetries and reductions of integrable nonlocal partial differential equations

Abstract: In this paper, symmetry analysis is extended to study nonlocal differential equations, in particular two integrable nonlocal equations, the nonlocal nonlinear Schrödinger equation and the nonlocal modified Korteweg--de Vries equation. Lie point symmetries are obtained based on a general theory and used to reduce these equations to nonlocal and local ordinary differential equations separately; namely one symmetry may allow reductions to both nonlocal and local equations depending on how the invariant variables are chosen. For the nonlocal modified Korteweg--de Vries equation, analogously to the local situation, all reduced local equations are integrable. At the end, we also define complex transformations to connect nonlocal differential equations and differential-difference equations.

\section{Introduction}
Symmetries have been fundamentally important for understanding solutions of  differential equations, e.g. \cite{Ol1993,Hy2000,BlKu1989,AcHe1975,BlCo1969}. It also reveals the integrability of partial differential equations; for instance,  the Ablowitz--Ramani--Segur conjecture states that every ordinary differential equation obtained by an exact reduction of an integrable evolution equation solvable via inverse scattering transforms is of the P-type, namely without movable critical points, c.f. \cite{AbRaSe1978}. In this paper, the powerful symmetry techniques are extended to study nonlocal differential equations with space and/or time reflections. It can not only provide insights for obtaining analytic solutions, but also reveal integrability of  nonlocal equations. After writing down  a general theory in Section \ref{sec:theory}, two integrable nonlocal differential equations, the nonlocal nonlinear Schr\"odinger (NLS) equation \cite{AbMu2013} and the nonlocal modified Korteweg--de Vries  (mKdV) equation \cite{JiZh2017}, are separately investigated as illustrative examples. The results are immediately applicable to the many nonlocal differential equations proposed during the recent years, e.g. \cite{Ya2015,Fo2016,AbMu2017,LoHu2017,SoXiZh2017a}.

The nonlocal NLS equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:noSc0}
\operatorname{i}q_t(x,t)+q_{xx}(x,t)+2q^2(x,t)q^{\ast}(-x,t)=0,
\end{equation}
 was derived by Ablowitz and Musslimani \cite{AbMu2013} via a reduction of the AKNS system. The nonlocal NLS equation admits a great number of good properties that the classical NLS equation possesses, e.g. PT-symmetric, admitting Lax-pair and infinitely many conservation laws, solvable using inverse scattering transforms. During the latest years, integrable nonlocal systems have received great attention with many newly-proposed models, e.g. nonlocal vector NLS equation \cite{Ya2015}, multidimensional extension of nonlocal NLS equation \cite{Fo2016}, nonlocal sine-Gordon equation, nonlinear derivative NLS equation and many other systems \cite{AbMu2017}, nonlocal mKdV equation \cite{JiZh2017}, Alice--Bob physics \cite{LoHu2017}, nonlocal Sasa--Satsuma equation \cite{SoXiZh2017a}, to mention only a few. Solutions of these systems have also been explored by many scholars; see for example,  \cite{AbMu2016,GuPe2018,JiZh2017,KhSa2015,SoXiZh2017a,SoXiZh2017b,Zh2018,XuCh2016}.

One contrast as Ablowitz and Musslimani noticed, e.g.\cite{AbMu2013,AbMu2017}, is that reductions of nonlocal equations amount to nonlocal ordinary differential equations (ODEs), e.g. nonlocal Painlev\'e-type equations. In this paper, we show that alternative ways allow us to avoid such inconvenience. We first classify all Lie point symmetries of the nonlocal NLS equation \eqref{eq:noSc0} and the nonlocal mKdV equation \cite{JiZh2017}
\begin{equation}
u_t(x,t)+u(x,t)u(-x,-t)u_x(x,t)+u_{xxx}(x,t)=0.
\end{equation}
Possible symmetry reductions are then conducted for both equations. We find out that one may reduce an nonlocal differential equation to both nonlocal and local ODEs by choosing the invariant variables in different ways. In other words, we are able to kill all nonlocal terms in the reduced ODEs by choosing the invariant variables in a proper manner. In particular for the nonlocal mKdV equation, all reduced local ODEs are integrable. These results are included in Section \ref{sec:NLS} and Section \ref{sec:mKdV}.  In Section \ref{sec:ddes}, simple transformations are defined to connect nonlocal differential equations with differential-difference equations (DDEs).

\section{The linearized symmetry condition for nonlocal differential equations }
\label{sec:theory}
We first introduce the multi-index notations needed for the symmetry techniques of local differential equations, e.g. \cite{Ol1993}, that will be extended to nonlocal differential equations.

Let $x=(x^1,x^2,\ldots, x^m)\in \mathbb{R}^m$ be the independent variables and let $u=(u^1,u^2,\ldots,u^n)\in \mathbb{R}^n$  be the dependent variables. Note that in many occasions, people also tend to use $(x,t)$ to denote independent variables as the space $x$ and time $t$; this convention will occur in the next sections but for now we are happy without distinguishing one another.  Partial derivatives of $u^{\alpha}$ are written in the multi-index form $u_{\bold{J}}^{\alpha}$ where $\bold{J}=(j_1,j_2,\ldots,j_m)$ with each index $j_i$ a non-negative integer denoting  the number of derivatives with respect to $x^i$. Namely
\begin{equation}
u^{\alpha}_{\bold{J}}=\frac{\partial^{|\bold{J}|} u^{\alpha}}{\partial (x^1)^{j_1}\partial (x^2)^{j_2}\ldots \partial (x^m)^{j_m}},
\end{equation}
where $|J|=j_1+j_2+\cdots +j_m$.  Consider a one-parameter group of Lie point transformations as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:lpt}
\widetilde{x}=\widetilde{x}(\varepsilon;x,u),\quad \widetilde{u}=\widetilde{u}(\varepsilon;x,u),
\end{equation}
subject to $\widetilde{x}|_{\varepsilon=e}=x$, $\widetilde{u}|_{\varepsilon=e}=u$. Here $\varepsilon=e$ is the identity element of the one-parameter group.
Define the total derivative with respect to $x^i$ as
\begin{equation}
D_i=\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}+\sum_{\alpha,J}u_{\bold{J}+\bold{1}_i}^{\alpha}\frac{\partial}{\partial u_{\bold{J}}^{\alpha}},
\end{equation}
where $\bold{1}_i$ is the
$m$-tuple with only one nonzero entry $1$ in the $i$-th place.
The notation $\partial_{x^i}=\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}$ and so forth will also be used.
The corresponding infinitesimal generator is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:inge}
\bold{v}=\xi^i(x,u)\partial_{x^i}+\phi^{\alpha}(x,u)\partial_{u^{\alpha}},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\xi^i=\frac{\operatorname{d}\! \widetilde{x}^i}{\operatorname{d}\!\varepsilon}\Big|_{\varepsilon=e},\quad \phi^{\alpha}=\frac{\operatorname{d}\!\widetilde{u}^{\alpha}}{\operatorname{d}\! \varepsilon}\Big|_{\varepsilon=e}.
\end{equation}
Note that the Einstein summation convention is used here and elsewhere if necessary. The prolonged generator $\operatorname{pr}\bold{v}$ can be written in terms of $u$, $\xi$, $\phi$ and their derivatives:
\begin{equation}
\operatorname{pr}\bold{v}=\bold{v}+\sum_{\alpha,|\bold{J}|\geq1}\phi_{\bold{J}}^{\alpha}(x,[u])\partial_{u_{\bold{J}}^{\alpha}},
\end{equation}
where $[u]$ is shorthand for $u$ and finitely many of its partial derivatives and the coefficients are recursively given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:phire}
\phi^{\alpha}_{\bold{J}+\bold{1}_i}(x,[u])=D_i\phi_{\bold{J}}^{\alpha}(x,[u])-(D_i\xi^j(x,u))u_{\bold{J}+\bold{1}_j}^{\alpha}.
\end{equation}
 It is often more convenient to equivalently write prolonged generators in terms of the so-called characteristics of symmetries $Q^{\alpha}=\phi^{\alpha}-\xi^iu^{\alpha}_{\bold{1}_i}$, that is
\begin{equation}
\operatorname{pr}\bold{v}=\xi^iD_i+\sum_{\alpha,\bold{J}}(D_{\bold{J}}Q^{\alpha}) \partial_{u_{\bold{J}}^{\alpha}}.
\end{equation}
Here we use the shorthand notation $D_{\bold{J}}=D_1^{j_1}D_2^{j_2}\cdots D_m^{j_m}$ for $\bold{J}=(j_1,j_2,\ldots,j_m)$.
The invariance of a system of local  differential equations
\begin{equation
\{F_{k}(x,[u])=0\}_{k=1}^l
\end{equation}
corresponding to the transformations \eqref{eq:lpt} leads to the linearized symmetry condition
\begin{equation}\label{eq:lsc}
\operatorname{pr}\bold{v}(F_{k}(x,[u]))=0,\text{ whenever } \{F_{k}(x,[u])=0\}_{k=1}^l \text{ holds},
\end{equation}
 where $\bold{v}$ is the infinitesimal generator \eqref{eq:inge}.

To extend the above analysis to nonlocal equations of our interest, we define the following reflections for $i=1,2,\ldots,m$,
\begin{equation}
\operatorname{Ref}^i:(x^1,\ldots,x^i,\ldots,x^m)\mapsto (x^1,\ldots,-x^i,\ldots,x^m),
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\operatorname{Ref}^i:f(x^1,\ldots,x^i,\ldots,x^m)\mapsto f(x^1,\ldots,-x^i,\ldots,x^m)
\end{equation}
for a function $f$ defined on proper domains. In particular,
\begin{equation}
\operatorname{Ref}^iu^{\alpha}(x^1,\ldots,x^i,\ldots,x^m)=u^{\alpha}(x^1,\ldots,-x^i,\ldots,x^m),\quad \alpha=1,2,\ldots,n.
\end{equation}
A  system of nonlocal differential equations is then given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:nonlocalde}
\mathcal{A}=
\left\{F_{k}\left(x,[u],[\operatorname{Ref}^iu],[\operatorname{Ref}^i\circ\operatorname{Ref}^ju]_{i< j},\ldots,[u(-x)]\right)=0\right\}_{k=1}^l.
\end{equation}
For simplicity, we will sometimes omit the arguments if they are local variables $x$.
Let us still consider transformations of the form \eqref{eq:lpt} with the infinitesimal generator \eqref{eq:inge}. Now the prolongation formula involving the reflections becomes
\begin{equation}\label{eq:prolong}
\begin{aligned}
\operatorname{pr}_{\operatorname{Ref}}\bold{v}&=\bold{v}+\sum_{\alpha,|\bold{J}|\geq1}\phi_{\bold{J}}^{\alpha}\frac{\partial}{\partial {u_{\bold{J}}^{\alpha}}}\\
&~~~~+\sum_{i,\alpha,|\bold{J}|\geq1}\left(\operatorname{Ref}^i\phi_{\bold{J}}^{\alpha}\right)\frac{\partial}{\partial \left(\operatorname{Ref}^iu_{\bold{J}}^{\alpha}\right)}+\sum_{i< j,\alpha,|\bold{J}|\geq1}\left(\operatorname{Ref}^i\circ \operatorname{Ref}^j\phi_{\bold{J}}^{\alpha}\right)\frac{\partial}{\partial \left(\operatorname{Ref}^i\circ \operatorname{Ref}^ju_{\bold{J}}^{\alpha}\right)}\\
&~~~~+\cdots+\sum_{\alpha,|\bold{J}|\geq1}\phi_{\bold{J}}^{\alpha}\left(-x,[u(-x)]\right)\frac{\partial}{\partial {u_{\bold{J}}^{\alpha}(-x)}},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where the functions $\phi_{\bold{J}}^{\alpha}=\phi_{\bold{J}}^{\alpha}(x,[u])$ are again defined through \eqref{eq:phire}.
Invariance of the nonlocal system \eqref{eq:nonlocalde} with respect to the transformations \eqref{eq:lpt} is equivalent to the linearized symmetry condition that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:lscnonlocal}
\operatorname{pr}_{\operatorname{Ref}}\bold{v} \left(F_{k}\left(x,[u],[\operatorname{Ref}^iu],[\operatorname{Ref}^i\circ\operatorname{Ref}^ju]_{i< j},\ldots,[u(-x)]\right)\right)=0, \text{ whenever  $\mathcal{A}$ holds},
\end{equation}
which is the first order terms about $\varepsilon$ in the Taylor expansions of the nonlocal system \eqref{eq:nonlocalde} evaluated at the new variables $\widetilde{x},\widetilde{u}$ and so forth.

In the next two sections, we will apply this general theory to two integrable nonlocal differential equations, the nonlocal NLS equation and the nonlocal mKdV equation.

\section{The nonlocal NLS equation}
\label{sec:NLS}
An integrable nonlocal NLS equation was proposed  by Ablowitz and Musslimani \cite{AbMu2013}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:noSc}
\operatorname{i}q_t(x,t)+q_{xx}(x,t)+2q^2(x,t)q^{\ast}(-x,t)=0,
\end{equation}
where $\ast$ denotes complex conjugate and $q(x,t)$ is a complex-valued function of real variables $x$ and $t$.
They showed that it possesses a Lax pair and infinitely many conservation laws, and is solvable via the inverse scattering transform. We study its continuous symmetries in this section.

\subsection{Lie point symmetries}
As $q(x,t)$ is complex-valued, two alternative approaches may be used to calculate its continuous symmetries. Under the coordinate $(x,t,q(x,t),q^{\ast}(x,t))$,  we consider the following local transformations
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
x&\mapsto x+\varepsilon \xi\left(x,t,q(x,t),q^{\ast}(x,t)\right)+O(\varepsilon^2),\\
t&\mapsto t+\varepsilon \tau\left(x,t,q(x,t),q^{\ast}(x,t)\right)+O(\varepsilon^2),\\
q(x,t)&\mapsto q(x,t)+\varepsilon \phi\left(x,t,q(x,t),q^{\ast}(x,t)\right)+O(\varepsilon^2).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Again, we omit the arguments if they are local variables $(x,t)$. The corresponding infinitesimal generator is
\begin{equation}
\bold{v}=\xi\left(x,t,q,q^{\ast}\right)\partial_x+\tau\left(x,t,q,q^{\ast}\right)\partial_{t}+\phi\left(x,t,q,q^{\ast}\right)\partial_{q}.
\end{equation}

From Section \ref{sec:theory}, see also \cite{Ku1977,Ol1993}, we know that the prolongation formula for an infinitesimal generator $\xi(x,t,u)\partial_x+\tau(x,t,u)\partial_t+\phi(x,t,u)\partial_u$ of local differential equations is
 \begin{equation}\label{eq:sympro}
\xi D_x+\tau D_t+Q\partial_u+(D_x Q)\partial_{u_x}+(D_t Q)\partial_{u_t}+\cdots+\left(D_x^kD_t^lQ\right)\partial_{\left(D_x^kD_t^lu\right)}+\cdots,
\end{equation}
where the characteristic function is $Q=\phi-\xi u_x-\tau u_t$ and $D^k_x$ denotes $k$ times of total derivatives with respect to $x$ and so forth. For the nonlocal NLS equation, we then adopt the following prolongation formula:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:prco}
\begin{aligned}
\operatorname{pr}_{\operatorname{Ref}}\bold{v}&=\bold{v}+\phi^{\ast}\left(-x,t,q(-x,t),q^{\ast}(-x,t)\right)\partial_{q^{\ast}(-x,t)}+\left(D_t\phi-(D_t\xi)q_x-(D_t\tau)q_t\right)\partial_{q_t}\\
&~~~~+\left(D_x^2\phi-(D_x^2\xi)q_x-2(D_x\xi)q_{xx}-(D_x^2\tau)q_t-2(D_x\tau)q_{tx}\right)\partial_{q_{xx}}+\cdots.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $D_x$ and $D_t$ denote total derivatives about $x$ and $t$ respectively.
It is generalised from the prolongation formula \eqref{eq:sympro} for symmetries of local differential equations with real variables, but by adding the conjugate terms and their prolongations.

 A vector field $\bold{v}$ generates a group of symmetries for the nonlocal NLS equation if it satisfies  the following   linearized symmetry condition that
 \begin{equation}\label{eq:lscNLS}
 \operatorname{pr}_{\operatorname{Ref}}\bold{v}\left(\operatorname{i}q_t+q_{xx}+2q^2q^{\ast}(-x,t)\right)=0
 \end{equation}
 holds identically for all solutions of the nonlocal NLS equation \eqref{eq:noSc}. We first expanding the left hand side of \eqref{eq:lscNLS} and obtain that
 \begin{equation}
 \begin{aligned}
 \operatorname{i}\left(D_t\phi-(D_t\xi)q_x-(D_t\tau)q_t\right)+D_x^2\phi&-(D_x^2\xi)q_x-2(D_x\xi)q_{xx}-(D_x^2\tau)q_t-2(D_x\tau)q_{tx}\\
 &+4qq^{\ast}(-x,t)\phi+2q^2\phi^{\ast}\left(-x,t,q(-x,t),q^{\ast}(-x,t)\right)=0
 \end{aligned}
 \end{equation}
 restricted to solutions of the nonlocal NLS equation. We then substitute $q_t=\operatorname{i}\left(q_{xx}+2q^2q^{\ast}(-x,t)\right)$ and $q_t^{\ast}=-\operatorname{i}\left(q_{xx}+2q^2q^{\ast}(-x,t)\right)^{\ast}$ inside, leading to a polynomial for $q_x$, $q_x^{\ast}$, $q_{xx}$, $q_{xx}^{\ast}$ and so forth, which equals to zero identically. It is necessary and sufficient for the coefficients of the polynomial to vanish, amounting to a system of partial differential equations for $\xi$, $\tau$ and $\phi$ as follows:
 \begin{equation}
 \begin{aligned}
& D_x\tau=0,~\xi_q=0,~\xi_{q^{\ast}}=0,~\phi_{q^{\ast}}=0,~\phi_{qq}=0,~\tau_t-2\xi_x=0,~\operatorname{i}\xi_t+\xi_{xx}-2\phi_{xq}=0,\\
&\operatorname{i}\phi_t+\phi_{xx}-2\left(\phi_q-\tau_t\right)q^2q^{\ast}(-x,t)+4qq^{\ast}(-x,t)\phi+2q^2\phi^{\ast}\left(-x,t,q(-x,t),q^{\ast}(-x,t)\right)=0.
 \end{aligned}
 \end{equation}
The general solution of the above system is
\begin{equation}
\xi=-C_1x+\operatorname{i}C_2t+C_4,~\tau=-2C_1t+C_5,~\phi=\left(C_1+\operatorname{i}C_3-\frac{1}{2}C_2x\right)q,
\end{equation}
where $C_1$, $C_2$ and $C_3$ are real-valued while $C_4$ and $C_5$ are complex-valued.
Therefore, the symmetries of the nonlocal NLS equation are generated by the following five infinitesimal generators
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Scsy}
\partial_x,~~\partial_t, ~~\operatorname{i}q\partial_q,~~-x\partial_x-2t\partial_t+q\partial_q, ~~\operatorname{i}t\partial_x-\frac{1}{2}xq\partial_q.
\end{equation}
They can equivalently be cast into evolutionary type respectively as follows
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
&~~~~~~~~~~-q_x\partial_q,~~\operatorname{i}\left(q_{xx}+2q^2q^{\ast}(-x,t)\right)\partial_q,~~\operatorname{i}q\partial_q,\\
&\left(q+xq_x+2\operatorname{i}t\left(q_{xx}+2q^2q^{\ast}(-x,t)\right)\right)\partial_q,~~\left(-\frac{1}{2}xq-\operatorname{i}tq_x\right)\partial_q.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}

Alternatively, we can define $q(x,t)=u(x,t)-\operatorname{i}v(x,t)$ where $u(x,t)$ and $v(x,t)$ are real-valued functions, and use the symmetry prolongation formula for real-valued differential equations to calculate symmetries.
Now the infinitesimal generator is
\begin{equation}
\bold{v}=\xi(x,t,u,v)\partial_x+\tau(x,t,u,v)\partial_t+\phi(x,t,u,v)\partial_u+\eta(x,t,u,v)\partial_v,
\end{equation}
and the equation becomes
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
u_t-v_{xx}-4uvu(-x,t)+2\left(u^2-v^2\right)v(-x,t)=0,\vspace{0.35cm}\\
v_t+u_{xx}+4uvv(-x,t)+2\left(u^2-v^2\right)u(-x,t)=0.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
 The following symmetries are obtained for the system above, using the linearized symmetry condition \eqref{eq:lscnonlocal} again:
\begin{equation}
\partial_x,~~\partial_t,~~-v\partial_u+u\partial_v, ~~-x\partial_x-2t\partial_t+u\partial_u+v\partial_v.
\end{equation}
They correspond to the first four generators of \eqref{eq:Scsy}. The last one obtained above  does not appear here since it will transform the real-valued $x$ to a complex-valued argument since $\xi=\operatorname{i}t$.

\subsection{Symmetry reductions}
Next, we will use the symmetries to conduct possible reductions. Preferable, we choose to use the symmetries \eqref{eq:Scsy} with complex variables. The simplest reduction one would expect is probably traveling-wave solutions, which is difficult here as the invariant $x-at$ becomes $-x-at$ at $(-x,t)$.

Consider the most general infinitesimal generator
\begin{equation}
a\partial_x+b\partial_t+c\operatorname{i}q\partial_q+d\left(-x\partial_x-2t\partial_t+q\partial_q\right)+e\left(\operatorname{i}t\partial_x-\frac{1}{2}xq\partial_q\right)
\end{equation}
where $a,b,c,d,e$ are arbitrary constants. The invariant variables can be found by solving the characteristic equations
\begin{equation}
\frac{\operatorname{d}\!x}{a-dx+\operatorname{i}et}=\frac{\operatorname{d}\!t}{b-2dt}=\frac{\operatorname{d}\!q}{\operatorname{i}cq+dq-\frac{1}{2}exq},
\end{equation}
and we summarize the results as follows. Note that the equation depends on $q(x,t)$ and $q^{\ast}(-x,t)$ simultaneously, and we must select the constants properly to make the invariants meaningful.
\begin{itemize}
\item If $d=b=0$ (and $a^2 + e^2\neq0$), we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
y&=t,\\
q(x,t)&=\exp\left\{\frac{x(4\operatorname{i}c-ex)}{4(\operatorname{i}et+a)}\right\}p(t).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
When $a=0$ and $e\neq 0$, the reduced equation is
 \begin{equation}
\operatorname{i}e^2p'(t)+\frac{\operatorname{ie^2}}{2t}p(t)+\frac{c^2}{t^2}p(t)+2|p(t)|^2p(t)=0.
 \end{equation}
\item If $d=0$ and $b\neq 0$, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
y&=bx-\frac{1}{2}\operatorname{i}et^2-at,\\
q(x,t)&=\exp\left\{-\frac{ae}{4b^2}t^2-\frac{e}{2b^2}ty+\operatorname{i}\left(\frac{c}{b}t-\frac{e^2}{12b^2}t^3\right)\right\}p(y).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
As $b\neq0$, we must choose $a=e=0$.
 Next we consider the corresponding reductions to nonlocal and local ordinary differential equations separately here and throughout.
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Reduction to a nonlocal ODE.} If we choose $y=x$ and  $q(x,t)=\exp(\operatorname{i}ct)p(y)$, we obtain the nonlocal Painlev\'e-type equation as shown in \cite{AbMu2013}:
\begin{equation}
p''(y)-cp(y)+2p^2(y)p^{\ast}(-y)=0.
\end{equation}
Note that since $p(y)$ is invariant, so is $p(-y)$; namely the nonlocal invariant is
\begin{equation}
p(-y)=\exp(-\operatorname{i}ct)q(-x,t).
\end{equation}
\item {\bf Reduction to a local ODE.}
Alternatively, we may choose the invariants as $y=x^2$ and $q(x,t)=\exp(\operatorname{i}ct)p(y)$. The reduced equation is a local ODE
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pyy}
4yp''(y)=cp(y)-2p'(y)-2|p(y)|^2p(y).
\end{equation}
If we assume $p(y)$ is real, solution of the above equation can be expressed using the Jacobi elliptic function as
\begin{equation}
p(y)=C_2\sqrt{\frac{c}{C_2^2+c-1}}\operatorname{sn}\left(\sqrt{\frac{c}{C_2^2+c-1}}\left(\sqrt{-(c-1)y}+C_1\right),\frac{C_2}{\sqrt{c-1}}\right),
\end{equation}
where $C_1,C_2$ are integration constants. The above equation can actually be written in a simpler form by introducing $y=z^2$ and $\widehat{p}(z)=p(y)$; the resulting equation is
\begin{equation}
\widehat{p}''(z)=c\widehat{p}(z)-2|\widehat{p}(z)|^2\widehat{p}(z).
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\item
 If $d\neq 0$, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
y&=\frac{d^2x-ad+\operatorname{i}e\left(dt-b\right)}{d^2\sqrt{|2dt-b|}},\\
q(x,t)&=\exp\left\{\left(\frac{ae}{4d^2}-\frac{1}{2}\right)\ln|2dt-b|+\frac{e}{2d}y\sqrt{|2dt-b|}\right\}\times \\
&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\exp\left\{-\operatorname{i}\frac{e^2}{4d^2}t+\operatorname{i}\left(\frac{be^3}{8d^3}-\frac{c}{2d}\right)\ln|2dt-b|\right\}p(y).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Now we must set $a=e=0$.
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Reduction to a nonlocal ODE.} Let
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
y&=\frac{x}{\sqrt{|2dt-b|}},\\
q(x,t)&=\exp\left\{-\left(\frac{1}{2}+\frac{\operatorname{i}c}{2d}\right)\ln|2dt-b|\right\}p(y).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The reduced equation is a nonlocal ODE
\begin{equation}
p''(y)=\left(\operatorname{i}d-c\right)p(y)+\operatorname{i}dyp'(y)-2p^2(y)p^{\ast}(-y).
\end{equation}
\item {\bf Reduction to a local ODE.}
If we choose the invariant variables via
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
y&=\frac{x^2}{2dt-b},\\
q(x,t)&=\exp\left\{-\left(\frac{1}{2}+\frac{\operatorname{i}c}{2d}\right)\ln|2dt-b|\right\}p(y),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
the reduced equation is local, i.e.
\begin{equation}
4yp''(y)=(\operatorname{i}d-c)p(y)+(2\operatorname{i}dy-2)p'(y)-2|p(y)|^2p(y).
\end{equation}
Introducing $y=z^2$ and $\widehat{p}(z)=p(y)$ changes the equation to
\begin{equation}
\widehat{p}''(z)=(\operatorname{i}d-c)\widehat{p}(z)+\operatorname{i}d z\widehat{p}(z)-2|\widehat{p}(z)|^2\widehat{p}(z).
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}

\section{The nonlocal mKdV equation}
\label{sec:mKdV}
The nonlocal mKdV equation we consider in this paper is, c.f. \cite{JiZh2017},
\begin{equation}
u_t(x,t)+u(x,t)u(-x,-t)u_x(x,t)+u_{xxx}(x,t)=0.
\end{equation}
Assuming that the infinitesimal generator reads
\begin{equation}
\bold{v}=\xi(x,t,u)\partial_x+\tau(x,t,u)\partial_t+\phi(x,t,u)\partial_u,
\end{equation}
its prolongation $\operatorname{pr}_{\operatorname{Ref}}\bold{v}$ can be obtained using \eqref{eq:prolong}.
From a similar procedure for applying the linearized symmetry condition \eqref{eq:lscnonlocal} to the nonlocal NLS equation above, a straightforward calculation gives the following infinitesimal generators for symmetries of the nonlocal mKdV equation:
\begin{equation}
\partial_x, ~~\partial_t,~~ -x\partial_x-3t\partial_t+u\partial_u.
\end{equation}

We follow the same approach as for the nonlocal NLS equation to search for symmetry reductions. The most general symmetry generator can be denoted by
\begin{equation}
a\partial_x+b\partial_t+c\left(-x\partial_x-3t\partial_t+u\partial_u\right),
\end{equation}
where $a,b,c$ are arbitrary constants. The characteristic equations read
\begin{equation}
\frac{\operatorname{d}\!x}{a-cx}=\frac{\operatorname{d}\!t}{b-3ct}=\frac{\operatorname{d}\!u}{cu}.
\end{equation}
\begin{itemize}
\item When $c=0$, it corresponds to the traveling-wave case.
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Reduction to a nonlocal ODE.} The corresponding invariants are
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
y=bx-at \text{ and } v(y)=u(x,t).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The reduced equation is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:waveKdV}
b^3v'''(y)+bv(y)v(-y)v'(y)-av'(y)=0.
\end{equation}
When $b=0$, we obtain constant solution; when $b\neq 0$, without loss of generality, it can be chosen as $b=1$, namely
\begin{equation}
v'''(y)+v(y)v(-y)v'(y)-av'(y)=0.
\end{equation}
 In principle, it can be integrated once as it admits a symmetry generated by $\partial_y$ but it will involve the inverse of nonlocal functions. We will show some of its special solutions with the assumption $a>0$.
\begin{itemize}
\item Exponential solutions:
\begin{equation}
v(y)=C_1\exp(C_2y) \text{ subject to }  C_1^2+C_2^2=a.
\end{equation}
\item Soliton solutions:
\begin{equation}
v(y)=\pm \frac{2\sqrt{6a}}{\exp(\sqrt{a}y)+\exp(-\sqrt{a}y)}.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\item {\bf Reduction to a local ODE.}
We may alternatively introduce the invariants in another way, namely $y=(bx-at)^2$ and $v(y)=u(x,t)$. Now the reduced equation reads
\begin{equation}
4b^3yv'''(y)+6b^3v''(y)+bv^2(y)v'(y)-av'(y)=0,
\end{equation}
which can be integrated once
\begin{equation}
4b^3yv''(y)+2b^3v'(y)+\frac{b}{3}v^3(y)-av(y)+C_1=0.
\end{equation}
This equation can further be simplified by introducing $y=z^2$ and $\widehat{v}(z)=v(y)$, amounting  to
\begin{equation}
b^3\widehat{v}''(z)+\frac{b}{3}\widehat{v}^3(z)-a\widehat{v}(z)+C_1=0.
\end{equation}
The final equation is solvable by letting $\widehat{v}(z)=w(\widehat{v})$; the general solution is
\begin{equation}
z+C_3=\pm \int_0^{\widehat{v}(z)}\frac{\sqrt{6}b^{3/2}}{\sqrt{-bs^4+6as^2-12C_1s+6C_2b^3}}\operatorname{d}\!s,
\end{equation}
where $C_1,C_2,C_3$ are integration constants.
\end{itemize}

\item If $c\neq 0$, the invariants are
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
y=(cx-a)(3ct-b)^{-1/3} \text{ and } v(y)=(3ct-b)^{1/3}u(x,t).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
 Now we must set $a=b=0$, namely reduction related to the  generator $-x\partial_x-3t\partial_t+u\partial_u$.
The related invariants are $y=t^{-1/3}x$ and $v(y)=t^{1/3}u(x,t)$ and we obtain the reduced equation as a local ODE
\begin{equation}
v'''(y)-v^2(y)v'(y)-\frac{v(y)+yv'(y)}{3}=0.
\end{equation}
It can be integrated once to the second Painlev\'e equation
\begin{equation}
v''(y)=\frac{1}{3}v^3(y)+\frac{1}{3}yv(y)+C.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}

We are now able to conclude that all reduced local ODEs for the nonlocal mKdV equation are integrable, that is analogous to the local situation.

\begin{rem}
 In \cite{AbMu2013}, the authors pointed out that similarity reduction of the nonlocal NLS equation may lead to nonlocal ordinary differential equations. However, as shown by the two illustrative examples, such inconvenience can be overcome by choosing the invariant variables/functions in a proper manner and the reduced ODEs become local.
\end{rem}

\section{A Remark on transformations between nonlocal differential equations and differential-difference equations}
\label{sec:ddes}
In \cite{YaYa2017}, authors introduced variable transformations to connect nonlocal and local integrable equations. For instance, the nonlocal NLS equation becomes a local NLS equation under the transformation
\begin{equation}
x= \operatorname{i}\widehat{x}, ~~t= -\widehat{t},~~q(x,t)=\widehat{q}(\widehat{x},\widehat{t}).
\end{equation}
The nonlocal complex mKdV equation  become the local (classical) complex mKdV equation under the transformation
\begin{equation}
x= \operatorname{i}\widehat{x}, ~~t=-\operatorname{i}\widehat{t},~~u(x,t)=\widehat{u}(\widehat{x},\widehat{t}).
\end{equation}
In this section, we will show the relations between nonlocal differential equations and DDEs through variable transformations.

For the nonlocal NLS equation, we consider the following transformations
\begin{equation}
x= \exp({\widehat{x}}),~~ t=\widehat{t},~~q(x,t)=\widehat{q}(\widehat{x},\widehat{t}),
\end{equation}
where the variable $\widehat{x}$ is imaginary making $x$ imaginary too. Let us drop the  hats (always) and the nonlocal NLS equation becomes a DDE
\begin{equation}
\operatorname{i}q_t+\exp({-2x})\left(q_{xx}-q_x\right)+2q^2q^{\ast}(x+\operatorname{i}\pi,t)=0.
\end{equation}
Let us introduce the following transformations
\begin{equation}
x= \exp({\widehat{x}}),~~ t=\exp({\widehat{t}}),~~u(x,t)=\widehat{u}(\widehat{x},\widehat{t}),
\end{equation}
where the variables $\widehat{x}$ and $\widehat{t}$ are both imaginary. The nonlocal mKdV equation  becomes
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\exp({-t})u_t&+\exp({-x})uu(x+\operatorname{i}\pi,t+\operatorname{i}\pi)u_x+\exp({-3x})\left(u_{xxx}-3u_{xx}+2u_x\right)=0.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Under the transformation $y=\exp(\widehat{y})$, $v(y)=\widehat{v}(\widehat{y})$, the reduced equation \eqref{eq:waveKdV} becomes
\begin{equation}\label{eq:wavelocal}
b^3\exp({-2y})\left(v'''(y)-3v''(y)+2v'(y)\right)+\left(bv(y)v(y+\operatorname{i}\pi)-a\right)v'(y)=0.
\end{equation}
These DDEs can further be rescaled and normalized. For example, taking $y=\operatorname{i}\pi \widehat{y}$ and $v(y)=\widehat{v}(\widehat{y})$,
equation \eqref{eq:wavelocal} becomes
\begin{equation}
b^3\exp(-\operatorname{i}2\pi y)\left(-\frac{1}{\pi^2}v'''(y)+\frac{3\operatorname{i}}{\pi}v''(y)+2v'(y)\right)+\left(bv(y)v(y+1)-a\right)v'(y)=0.
\end{equation}
Similar DDEs were investigated in \cite{QuCaSa1992}, but the variables were real-valued therein. In the same manner, the above DDEs transformed from the nonlocal NLS equation and the nonlocal mKdV equation can also be rescaled, respectively as follows:
\begin{equation}
\operatorname{i}q_t+\exp({-\operatorname{i}2\pi x})\left(-\frac{1}{\pi^2}q_{xx}+\frac{\operatorname{i}}{\pi}q_x\right)+2q^2q^{\ast}(x+1,t)=0.
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\exp({-\operatorname{i}\pi t})u_t&+\exp({-\operatorname{i}\pi x})uu(x+1,t+1)u_x+\exp({-\operatorname{i}3\pi x})\left(-\frac{1}{\pi^2}u_{xxx}+\frac{3\operatorname{i}}{\pi}u_{xx}+2u_x\right)=0.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}

\begin{rem}
The above examples showed that simple transformations allow us to transfer nonlocal equations to DDEs. Apparently, similar transformations can be immediately introduced for other nonlocal differential equations/systems using the same manner.
\end{rem}

\section{Conclusions}
In this paper, symmetry analysis was extended to study nonlocal differential equations. The general theory presented in Section \ref{sec:theory} is applicable to any nonlocal differential equations involving space and/or time reflections. In particular, two integrable nonlocal equations, the nonlocal NLS equation and the nonlocal mKdV equation, served as illustrative examples. All Lie point symmetries of these two nonlocal PDEs were obtained and possible symmetry reductions to nonlocal and local ordinary differential equations were conducted. It is shown that, at least for the two illustrative examples, one can always carefully choose the invariant variables to ensure that all reduced differential equations are local.

At the end, we introduced some local transformations transferring nonlocal differential equations to DDEs; it is potential, hence, to extend the existing theories for DDEs to nonlocal differential equations, for instance, symmetries, conservation laws and integrability of DDEs, c.f. \cite{QuCaSa1992,LeWiYa2010,Pe2017,MiWaXe2011,Ya2006,Ku1985}. We will explore more in this direction in a separate project.

\section*{ Acknowledgements}
This work is partially supported by JSPS Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (No. 16KT0024),  the MEXT `Top Global University Project', and Waseda University Grant for Special Research Projects (Nos. 2019C-179, 2019E-036, 2019R-081).

Mathematical Physics (math-ph); Analysis of PDEs (math.AP); Exactly Solvable and Integrable Systems (nlin.SI)


On the existence of a minimal generating set for $σ$-algebras

Abstract: Does there exist for any $\sigma$-algebra a minimal (with respect to inclusion) generating set? We formulate this problem and answer it in the very special instance of partition generated and standard measurable spaces, the general case remaining open.

\section{Introduction}
Beyond serving as domains of measures, $\sigma$-fields are also interpreted as representing aggregates of information. It is then natural to consider the existence of a smallest ensemble of pieces of information, which generates the same body of knowledge, in the following precise sense;

\begin{definition}
Let $\FF$ be a $\sigma$-algebra (on $\Omega$), $\CC\subset 2^\Omega$.\footnote{Throughout $2^\Omega$ will be used to denote the power set of $\Omega$.} Then $\CC$ is called a, respectively minimal, generating set for $\FF$, if $\sigma(\CC)=\FF$ and, respectively, for all $\DD\subset 2^\Omega$, the conjunction $\DD\subset \CC$ and $\sigma(\DD)=\FF$ implies $\DD=\CC$.
\end{definition}

Our question: Does every $\sigma$-algebra posses a minimal generating set?

\begin{remark}\label{remark:isomprihism}
Since the property of being a (respectively minimal) generating set remains invariant under $\sigma$-isomorphisms (one-to-one and onto mappings between $\sigma$-fields, which preserve countable set operations), so the property of possessing a minimal generating set is invariant under $\sigma$-isomorphisms. Remark also that every Borel isomorphism (i.e. measurable bijection with a measurable inverse) induces a natural $\sigma$-isomorphism.
\end{remark}

\section{Special cases}\label{section:speciaL_cases}
The following notion will prove useful:

\begin{definition}
A collection $\DD$ of subsets of $\Omega$ discerns points $a\ne b$ from $\Omega$, if one can find $A\in \DD$ such that neither $\{a,b\}\subset A$ nor $\{a,b\}\subset \Omega\backslash A$. $\DD$ is separating, if it discerns any two distinct elements of $\Omega$. We also say $D\subset \Omega$ discerns $a\ne b$ from $\Omega$, if $\{D\}$ does so.
\end{definition}

\begin{remark}\label{remark:non_discerning}
The property of not discerning a given pair of points is preserved under the $\sigma$-operation; i.e. if $\DD\subset 2^\Omega$ does not discern $a$ and $b$, then $\sigma(\DD)$ does not discern $a$ and $b$ either (trivial; $\DD\subset \{B\in 2^\Omega:B\text{ does not discern }a\text{ and }b\}$, which is a $\sigma$-field on $\Omega$).
\end{remark}

\begin{proposition}
If a $\sigma$-field $\FF$ on $\Omega$ is either (a) generated by a partition $\PP$ of $\Omega$ or else (b) is standard (i.e.  Borel isomorphic to some (equivalently, Borel subset of a) Polish space), then $\FF$ admits a minimal generating set.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
As regards (a), it is assumed without loss of generality that $\PP$ is the collection of all the singletons of $\Omega$ (from Remark~\ref{remark:isomprihism}).  Then,
if (i) $\PP=\emptyset$, then $\PP$ itself is minimal generating; and if (ii) $\PP$ is non-empty but countable, pick $P\in\PP$, in which case $\PP\backslash \{P\}$ becomes a minimal generating set (from Remark~\ref{remark:non_discerning}, say); whilst, finally, if (iii) $\PP$ is uncountable, then $\PP$ is again itself a minimal generating set (for if $\QQ\subset \PP$, but $\QQ\ne\PP$, then there is a $P\in \PP\backslash \QQ$, while $\sigma(\QQ)$ is included in the $\sigma$-field of all the countable unions of elements of $\QQ$ and their complements, which does not have $P$ for an element, so $\sigma(\QQ)\ne \FF$).

As regards (b), since by the Isomorphism theorem all uncountable standard measurable space are Borel isomorphic, from what we have just shown in (a), and from Remark~\ref{remark:isomprihism}, it remains to verify the claim in the case of $\FF$ being the Borel $\sigma$-field on $\RR$. Furthermore, the latter is certainly Souslin, and hence we know that any separating denumerable family of Borel sets is automatically generating for its Borel $\sigma$-field \cite[p. 32, Theorem 6.8.9]{bogachev}. The idea is thus to take the  ``nice'' denumerable generating family $\{(r,+\infty):r\in \mathbb{Q}\}$, not itself minimal generating, and to ``tweak'' it, so as to make it minimal separating (hence minimal generating).

Specifically, let $\CC:=\{A_r:r\in \mathbb{Q}\backslash \{0\}\}$, where $A_r:=[(r,+\infty)\backslash \mathbb{Q} ]\cup \{r\}$ for $r\in \mathbb{Q}\backslash \{0\}$. Clearly $\CC\subset \mathcal{B}(\RR)$ is denumerable. To show that it is separating, let $a$ and $b$ be any two distinct real numbers, assume $a<b$, without loss of generality. If $b$ is irrational, let $r$ be any non-zero rational number with $a<r<b$. Then $A_r$ discerns between $a$ and $b$, since $a\notin A_r$, but $b\in A_r$. Further, if both $a$ and $b$ are rational, $b$ non-zero, then $b\in A_b$, but $a\notin A_b$; likewise if $a$ is rational and $b=0$, $a\in A_a$, but $0\notin A_a$. Finally, suppose $a$ is irrational and $b$ is rational. Let  $r$ be any non-zero rational number strictly less than $a$. Then $a\in A_r$, but $b\notin A_r$.

Thus $\CC$ is separating and denumerable, hence generating. It is also minimal in doing so, since if $q\in \mathbb{Q}\backslash \{0\}$, then any subset of $\CC\backslash \{A_q\}$ does not discern between $0$ and $q$, and hence cannot generate the Borel $\sigma$-field.
\end{proof}
\section{General case}
The general case remains an open question and indeed the \emph{ad hoc} methods of Section~\ref{section:speciaL_cases} do not really seem to offer any firm guidance as to whether the answer is to the affirmative or the negative. However, the conjecture that a minimal generating set always obtains, seems at least to be motivated by the findings thereof.

\bibliographystyle{plain}