Appell Polynomials and Their Zero Attractors

Abstract: A polynomial family $\{p_n(x)\}$ is Appell if it is given by $\frac{e^{xt}}{g(t)} = \sum_{n=0}^\infty p_n(x)t^n$ or, equivalently, $p_n'(x) = p_{n-1}(x)$. If $g(t)$ is an entire function, $g(0)\neq 0$, with at least one zero, the asymptotics of linearly scaled polynomials $\{p_n(nx)\}$ are described by means of finitely zeros of $g$, including those of minimal modulus. As a consequence, we determine the limiting behavior of their zeros as well as their density. The techniques and results extend our earlier work on Euler polynomials.

\section{Introduction}

Let $g(t)$ be an entire function such that $g(0) \neq 0$.

\begin{definition}
The Appell polynomials $\{p_n(x)\}$ associated with generating function $g(t)$ are given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:gen_fct}
\frac{ e^{xt}}{g(t)} = \sum_{n=0}^\infty p_n(x) t^n.
\end{equation}
\end{definition}

Some important examples are: the Taylor polynomials of $e^x$, with $g(t)=1-t$;  the Euler polynomials, with $g(t)=(e^t+1)/2$;
and Bernoulli polynomials, with $g(t)= (e^t-1)/t$;  and their higher order analogues.

The asymptotics and limiting behavior of the zeros of these families have been investigated
by many people; for example, \cite{g-b}, \cite{szego}, and so on.

In this paper, we obtained the asymptotics and the limiting behavior of the zeros
for all Appell families provided the generating function $g(t)$ satisfies one further condition:
that $g$   must have at least one zero.
  We use the ideas in our earlier paper \cite{g-b}; furthermore,
we simultaneously simplify and generalize some of the techniques there.

We found that the asymptotics in the general case are build from the basic example
$g(t)=1-t$ which coincides with the classical work of Szeg\"o on the Taylor polynomials
of the exponential function.  In our paper \cite{g-b}, we found that the asymptotics
for the Euler and Bernoulli polynomials are controlled by certain roots of $g(t)$, the
ones of minimal modulus.  In the general situation, as expected, the minimal modulus
roots of $g(t)$ are needed to describe the asymptotics but there may be finitely many  other roots needed
to determine the asymptotics.
These additional roots are determined through a geometric condition described in the terms of
rotated and scaled versions of the Szeg\"o curve: $ | xe^{1-x}|=1$, $|x|\leq 1$, $x \in {\mathbb C}$
(see Figure \ref{fig:szego_curve}).

We frequently use the following notations.
Let $Z(g)$ denote the set of all zeros of $g$ and let $r_0 < r_1 < r_2 < \dots$ denote
the distinct moduli of these zeros in increasing order.

Recall that if $K_1$ and $K_2$ are two non-empty compact subsets of $\mathbb C$,
then their Hausdorff distance is the larger of $\sup\{ d(x,K_1) : x \in K_2\}$ and
$\sup\{ d(x,K_2) : x \in K_1\}$.

\begin{definition}
For a family $\{ q_n(x) \}$ of polynomials whose degrees are increasing to infinity,
their zero attractor is the limit of their set of zeros $Z(q_n)$ in the {\sl Hausdorff metric} on
the space of all non-empty compact subsets of the complex plane $\mathbb C$.
\end{definition}

In the appendix, we discuss how the zero attractor is found in terms of the
limsup and liminf of the zero sets.

\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[height=3.0in, width=3.0in]{bessel_deg_1000_attractor.pdf}
\caption{Zeros for degree 1000 polynomial, with generating function $g(t)=J_0(t)$ }
\label{fig:bessel_attractor}
\end{figure}

There is related work on the asymptotics and zeros of the Taylor polynomials
for linear combinations of exponentials $\sum c_j e^{\lambda_j x}$ where the
parameters $\lambda_j$ satisfy a geometric constraint \cite{bleher}. The techniques of proof
are very different from our approach.

\section{The Generalized Szeg\"o Approximations}

It is convenient to collect together several results from \cite{g-b} and some
extensions of them concerning the asymptotics of $S_n( x) = \sum_{k=0}^n x^k/k!$.
The domains of where their asymptotics hold are critical in understanding the
behavior for the Appell polynomials.

\begin{proposition}
{\sc (Left-Half Plane)}
\label{prop:4.1}
Let  $1/3<\alpha <1/2$ and $1 \leq j$.
On any compact subset $K$ of $\{w : \Re w <1 \}$, we have
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$\displaystyle
\frac{S_{n-1}(nw)}{e^{nw}}=1-\frac{(we^{1-w})^{n}}
{\sqrt{2\pi n}(1-w)} \left(1+O(n^{1-3\alpha }) \right)$,
\item
$\displaystyle
D_{w}^{j-1}(w^{-n}S_{n-1}(nw))=D_{w}^{j-1}(w^{-n}e^{nz})
-
\frac{(j-1)!}{\sqrt{2\pi n}}\frac{e^{n}}{(1-w)^{j}} \left(1+O(n^{1-3\alpha }) \right)$,
\\
where
the big O constant holds uniformly for $x \in K$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}

The proof of part (a) is in \cite{g-b}. Part (b) follows from an application
of the saddle point method.

The following Proposition is  also from \cite{g-b}:

\begin{proposition}
{\sc (Outside Disk)}
\label{prop:4.2}
Let $S$ be a subset contained in $\left| w\right| >1$ with distance $\delta>0$ from
the unit circle,
and let $\alpha $ be chosen so $1/3<\alpha <1/2$. Then
\begin{equation*}
\frac{S_{n-1}(nw)}{e^{nw}}=\frac{(we^{1-w})^{n}}{\sqrt{2\pi n}(w-1)}
\left(1+O(n^{1-3\alpha }) \right),
\end{equation*}
where the  big $O$ term holds uniformly for $w\in S$.
\end{proposition}

\begin{proposition}
{\sc (Evaluations of Integrals)}
\label{prop:4.3}
If $\epsilon <\left| w\right|$ and  $j\geq 1$, then we have
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$\displaystyle
\frac{1}{2\pi i}\oint_{\left| t\right| =\epsilon }
\left(
\frac{e^{xt}}{t}\right)^{n}  \frac{1}{t-w}  \,dt= -w^{-n}S_{n-1}(wxn)$.
\\
\item
$\displaystyle
\frac{1}{2\pi i}\oint_{\left| t\right| =\epsilon }
\left(\frac{e^{xt}}{t}\right)^{n}\frac{1}{(t-w)^{j}} \,dt=\frac{-1}{(j-1)!}
D_{w}^{j-1}(w^{-n}S_{n-1}(wxn))$,\\
where $D_{w}$ is the differentiation operator $\frac{d}{dw}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
 (a) By expanding ${1}/{(t-z)}$ into an infinite geometric series
and performing a term-by-term integration, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\frac{1}{2\pi i}\oint_{\left| t\right| =
\varepsilon }\left(\frac{e^{xt}}{t}\right)^{n}
\frac{1}{t-z} \,dt
&=&
\frac{-1}{z2\pi i}\oint_{\left| t\right| =\varepsilon }
\left(
\frac{e^{xt}}{t}
\right)^{n}\frac{1}{1-\frac{t}{z}} \, dt
\\
&=&
\frac{-1}{z2\pi i}\oint_{\left| t\right| =\varepsilon }
\left(\frac{e^{xt}}{t}\right)^{n} \,
\left(\sum_{m\geq 0} \left(\frac{t}{z} \right)^{m} \right) \, dt.
\end{eqnarray*}
By the Cauchy integral theorem the terms correspond to $m\geq n$ vanish.
Hence
\begin{eqnarray*}
\frac{1}{2\pi i}\oint_{\left| t\right| =
\varepsilon }\left(\frac{e^{xt}}{t}\right)^{n}
\frac{1}{t-z}\,dt
&=&
\frac{-1}{z}\sum_{n-1\geq m\geq 0}\frac{1}{z^{m}}
\left(\frac{1}{2\pi i} \,
\oint_{\left| t\right| =\varepsilon }e^{xtn}t^{-n+m} \, dt \right)
\\
&=&
\frac{-1}{z}\sum_{n-1\geq m\geq 0}\frac{1}{z^{m}}
\frac{(xn)^{n-m-1}}{
(n-m-1)!}
\\
&=&
\frac{-1}{z}z^{-n+1}\sum_{n-1\geq m\geq 0}\frac{(xnz)^{n-m-1}}{
(n-m-1)!} \\
&=&
-z^{-n}\sum_{n-1\geq j\geq 0}\frac{(xnz)^{j}}{j!}=(-1)z^{-n}
S_{n-1}(zxn).
\end{eqnarray*}
Part (b) follows from differentiating (a) $j-1$ times with respect to
$z$.
\end{proof}

\section{Asymptotics Outside the Disk $D(0;1/r_0)$}

\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:3.1}
Let $K$ be any compact subset in the annulus $A(1/r_0; \infty)$.
We have
\[
\frac{ p_n(nx)}{ (xe)^n/\sqrt{2\pi n}} = \frac{1}{g(1/x)} \left( 1 + O(1/n) \right).
\]
holds uniformly for $x\in K$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
We shall find an asymptotic approximation to $p_{n}(nx)$ in the region
$A(1/r_0; \infty)=\left\{x:\left| x\right| >\frac{1}{r_0} \right\}$. Use the generating relation
equation (\ref{eq:gen_fct}) to get
\begin{equation*}
p_{n}(x)=
\frac{1}{2\pi i}\oint_{\left| t\right| =
\epsilon }\frac{e^{xt}}{g(t)t^{n+1}} \, dt,
\end{equation*}
where $\epsilon <r_0$. Since both sides of the above equation are
entire functions of $x$, by analytic continuation this representation for
$p_{n}(x)$ is valid for all $x\in C$. Hence we can replace $x$ by $nx$ to get
\begin{equation}
p_{n}(nx)=\frac{1}{2\pi i}\oint_{\left| t\right| =\epsilon }
\left(\frac{e^{xt}}{t}\right)^{n} \, \frac{dt}{tg(t)}.  \label{eq:pnnx-1}
\end{equation}
The above expression is valid for $0<\epsilon <r_{0}$ and is the starting
point of the analysis in the sequel.

Let $K$ be an arbitrary compact
subset $\subseteq \{x:\left| x\right| >\frac{1}{r_{0}}\}$ and let $x\in K$.
We can certainly choose $\epsilon $ small enough so that for all $x\in K$,
$\left| \epsilon x\right| <1$. By a change of variables, we get
\begin{equation*}
p_{n}(nx)=\frac{x^{n}}{2\pi i}\oint_{\left| t\right| =\epsilon \left|
x\right| }
\left(\frac{e^{t}}{t}\right)^{n}\frac{dt}{tg(t/x)}.
\end{equation*}
Observe that the zeros of $g(t/x)$ have the form  $ax$  where $a \in Z(g)$.
Moreover, they must lie outside the closed unit disk since $|x|>1/r_0$,
so we can deform the integration path from the circle with
radius $\epsilon \left| x\right| $ to the unit circumference. Thus
\begin{eqnarray*}
p_{n}(nx)
&=&
\frac{x^{n}}{2\pi i}\oint_{\left| t\right| =1}
\left(\frac{e^{t}}{t}\right)^{n}
\frac{dt}{tg(t/x)}\\
&=&
\frac{x^{n}}{2\pi i}\oint_{\left| t\right| =1}
e^{n(t-\ln t)}\frac{dt}{tg(t/x)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
It can be easily seen that $t=1$ is the saddle point of the integral and the
classical saddle point method is applicable here  \cite{copson}. Hence
\begin{equation*}
p_{n}(nx)=\frac{(ex)^{n}}{\sqrt{2\pi n}g(\frac{1}{x})}\left(1+O(\frac{1}{n})\right),
\end{equation*}
where the implied $O$ constant holds uniformly for $x\in K$.
\end{proof}

The last equation can be written as
\begin{equation*}
\frac{p_{n}(nx)}{(ex)^{n}/\sqrt{2\pi n}}=\frac{1}{g(\frac{1}{x})}
\left(1+O(\frac{1}{n}) \right), \quad |x| > 1/r_0.
\end{equation*}

We have the:

\begin{corollary}\label{cor:3.2}
(a) On the complement of the disk $D(0;1/r_0)$,
$\displaystyle \lim_{n\to \infty} \frac{1}{n}
\ln \left| \frac{p_{n}(nx)}{(ex)^{n}/\sqrt{2\pi n}} \right| =0$
where the limit holds uniformly on compact subsets.
\\
(b)
The zero attractor must be contained in the closed disk
$\overline{D}(0; 1/r_0)$.
\end{corollary}

Note that part (b) follows easily from (a) since $g(x)$ never vanishes on the disk $D(0;1/r_0)$.

\section{Asymptotics on the Basic Regions $R_\ell$}

Let $r_0, r_1, \dots$ denote the distinct moduli of the zeros $a$ of the generating function
$g$. Fix an integer $\ell$.
We fix  $\rho>0$ so it is not equal to any zero modulus $\{r_0,r_1,\dots\}$.
For each zero $a\in Z(g)$ with $|a|=r_\ell$,
 we consider the circle $|x|=1/|a|$ and the  disk $D(1/a, \delta_a)$.

Now the  tangent line $T_a$ to the circle $|x|=1/|a|$ at the point $1/a$
determines  the half-plane  $H_a$, which contains $0$; that is, $\Re(ax)<1$.
We choose $\epsilon_\ell>0$
 to be less than the distance from the portion of the tangent line $T_a$ that lies
outside the disk $D(1/a;\delta_a)$ to the circle $|x|=1/|a|$ for any $|a| = r_{\ell+1}$;
that is, $\epsilon_\ell < \sqrt{ 1/ r_\ell^2 + \delta_a^2} - 1/r_\ell$.
Finally, we make the requirement  the  disks $D(1/a;\delta_a)$ be mutually disjoint
for all $a \in Z(g)$ with $|a| < \rho$.

\begin{definition}
With these conventions, the region $R_\ell$ is described in terms of the half-planes $H_a$
and disks as
\begin{equation}\label{def:R_ell}
R_\ell =
\bigcap
\left\{
H_a \setminus D(\tfrac{1}{a}; \delta_a) : |a| = r_\ell
\right\}
\setminus    D(   0; \tfrac{1}{r_{\ell+1}} + \epsilon_{\ell+1} )
\end{equation}
\end{definition}

We note that the regions $R_\ell$ are not disjoint; in fact, by construction,
its inner boundary which consists  of
the portion of the circle $|x| = \tfrac{1}{r_{\ell+1}}+ \epsilon$ that lie outside
the disks $D(1/a; \delta_a)$, $|a|=r_{\ell+1}$, actually lies inside the region $R_{\ell+1}$.

It is convenient to introduce a region that contains all of the $R_\ell$'s.

\begin{definition}
Let $R_\rho$ be the domain given as
\begin{equation}
R_\rho
=
\bigcap \left\{
H_a : a \in Z(g), |a|=r_0
\right\}  \setminus
\left[
\bigcup \left\{ D(1/a; \delta_a) : a\in Z(g), |a| < \rho \right\} \cup D(0; 1 / \rho)
\right].
\end{equation}
\end{definition}

Note the order of dependence:  first we can given the cut-off modulus $\rho>0$ for the moduli
of the zeros; next, $\delta_a>0$ for each $a \in Z(g)$ is given and is a function
of $\rho$ [see later section], then finally, $\epsilon_{\ell}$ is
determined relative to each zero moduli $r_\ell$ which is a function of $\delta_a$.

 For any $a \in Z(g)$
with $r_0 \leq |a| < \rho$, let $s_a(t)$ be the singular part of
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{ t g(t)}
\end{equation*}
at its pole $a$. Next we set $g_1(t)$ to be
\begin{equation}\label{eq:def_g_1}
g_1(t) = \frac{1}{ t g(t)}
-
\sum \{ s_a(t) : a \in Z(g), r_0 \leq |a| < \rho\}
\end{equation}
we see that $g_1(t)$ is analytic for $| t| < \rho$.

We develop the asymptotics for $\{ p_n(nx)\}$ on the regions $R_\ell$ where
$r_0 \leq r_\ell  <  \rho$.
Now
we saw already that we can write $p_n(nx)$ as
\[
p_n(nx) =
\frac{1}{2 \pi i} \int_{ |t| = \epsilon} \left( \frac{ e^{xt}}{t} \right)^n g_1(t) \, dt
+
\frac{1}{2 \pi i} \int_{ |t| = \epsilon} \left( \frac{ e^{xt}}{t} \right)^n s(t) \, dt,
\]
where $s(t) = \sum \{ s_a(t) : a \in Z(g), r_0 \leq |a| \leq \rho\}$.

\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:4.1}
With $g_1(t)$ given above in equation \ref{eq:def_g_1}, we have
\[
\frac{1}{2 \pi i}
\int_{ |t| = \epsilon} \left(  \frac{ e^{xt}}{t} \right)^n g_1(t) \,dt
=
\frac{ x^{n-1} e^n}{ \sqrt{ 2 \pi n}} g_1(1/x) \, \left( 1+ O(1/n) \right)
\]
uniformly on compact subsets  of the annulus $A(1/\rho;  \infty)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $x\in K \subset A(1/\rho, \infty)$.
By a change of variables, we write
\[
\frac{1}{2 \pi i}
\int_{ |t| = \epsilon} \left(  \frac{ e^{xt}}{t} \right)^n g_1(t) \,dt
=
\frac{ x^{n-1}}{ 2 \pi i}
\int_{ |t| = \epsilon |x|} \left(  \frac{ e^t}{t} \right)^n g_1(t/x) \, dt.
\]
By construction, $g(t/x)$ is analytic on  a disk of radius greater than 1.  So the contour
in the last integral can be deformed to the unit circle $|x|=1$ without changing its value.
Finally, by an application of the saddle point method we find that
\[
\frac{ x^{n-1}}{ 2 \pi i}
\int_{ |t| = 1} \left(  \frac{ e^t}{t} \right)^n g_1(t/x) \, dt
=
\frac{ x^{n-1} e^n} { \sqrt{ 2 \pi n}} g_1(1/x) \left( 1+ O(\tfrac{1}{n}) \right).
\]
\end{proof}

\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[height=3.0in, width=3.0in]{zero_attractor_2_zeros_general_case.pdf}
\caption{Generic Plot of Polynomial Zeros and Zero Attractor  When $g$ Has Two Roots; Tangent Lines and Circles Displayed }
\end{figure}

To state the next two lemmas, we need to introduce  special polynomials $I_n(z)$
in $z^{-1}$ and
$J(a; z)$ in $z$.

The polynomial $I_n(z)$ comes from expanding the derivative
of $D_{z}^{m-1}(z^{-n}e^{nz})$. Consider
\begin{eqnarray*}
D_{z}^{m-1}(z^{-n}e^{nz})
&=&\sum_{p=0}^{m-1}\binom{m-1}{p}
(D_{z}^{p}z^{-n})(D_{z}^{m-1-p}e^{nz})
\\
&=&
\sum_{p=0}^{m-1}\binom{m-1}{p}(-n)(-n-1)\cdots
(-n-p+1)z^{-n-p}(n^{m-1-p}e^{nz})
\\
&=&
z^{-n}e^{nz}n^{m-1}\sum_{p=0}^{m-1}\binom{m-1}{p}(-n)(-n-1)\cdots
(-n-p+1)(nz)^{-p}
\\
&=&
z^{-n}e^{nz}n^{m-1}\sum_{p=0}^{m-1}(-1)^{p}  p! \binom{m-1}{p}
\binom{n+p-1}{p}  \, (nz)^{-p}
\\
&=&
z^{-n}e^{nz}n^{m-1}I_{m-1}(nz),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $I_{m-1}(z)$ is given in

\begin{definition}\label{def:I}
\begin{equation}
I_{m-1}(z)=\sum_{p=0}^{m-1}(-1)^{p}  p!  \binom{m-1}{p}\binom{n+p-1}{p}
\,  z^{-p}.
\end{equation}
\end{definition}

For $a\in Z(g)$, we define   $J(a;z)$ which are  also polynomials in $z$.
 We write out  the singular part
$s_{a}(t)$ of the function $\frac{1}{tg(t)}$ at its nonzero pole $a$
 by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:s_a}
s_{a}(t):=\sum_{m=1}^{ \beta_a }\frac{b_{a,m}}{(t- a)^{m}},
\end{equation}
where  $\beta_a$ is the order of $a$ as a zero of $g(t)$
so
$b_{a, \beta_a} \neq 0$.

\begin{definition}\label{def:J_a}
For $a\in Z(g)$, let $J(a;z)$ be the polynomial in $z$ given as
\begin{equation}
J(a;z)=\sum_{m=1}^{ \beta_a}
\frac{b_{a,m}}{(m-1)!} \,z^{m-1}  I_{m-1}(a z).
\label{def_J}
\end{equation}
\end{definition}

\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:4.2}
Let $a \in Z(g)$ and let $x \in K$, a compact subset of the half-plane $H_a$, $\Re(ax)<1$.
Then
\[
\frac{1}{2 \pi i}
\int_{ |t| = \epsilon} \left(  \frac{ e^{xt}}{t} \right)^n s_a(t) \,dt
=
- a^{-n} e^{n ax} J(a; nx) +
\frac{ e^n x^{n-1}}{ \sqrt{ 2 \pi n}} s_a(1/x) \left( 1+ O( n^{1-3 \alpha}) \right)
\]
where $s_a(t)$ is the singular part of $1/(tg(t))$ at the zero $a$ of $g(t)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We first write out the integral in terms of the singular part $s_a(t)$
\[
\frac{1}{2 \pi i}
\int_{ |t| = \epsilon} \left(  \frac{ e^{xt}}{t} \right)^n s_a(t) \,dt
=
- \sum_{m=1}^{\beta_a} \frac{ b_{a,m}}{ (m-1)!} D^{m-1}_a
\left( a^{-n} S_{n-1}(n ax) \right)
\]
where the coefficients $b_{a,m}$ are given in equation (\ref{eq:s_a}).
We now study the
asymptotics of the typical term $D_{a}^{m-1}(a^{-n}S_{n-1}(n ax))$.

 We may use  the generalized half-plane Szeg\"o asymptotics with
 $\frac{1}{3}<\alpha <\frac{1}{2}$ because of the restriction that
 $a \in Z(g)$ with $|a|\leq r_\ell$ to obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn
{
D_{a}^{m-1}(a^{-n}S_{n-1}(n ax))
=
x^{n+m-1}D_{ax}^{m-1}((a x)^{-n}S_{n-1}(n ax ))
} \\
&& = \quad
x^{n+m-1}
\left\{
\left.
D_{z}^{m-1}(z^{-n}e^{nz})\right|_{z=ax}
 -
\frac{(m-1)!}{\sqrt{2\pi n}}\frac{e^{n}}{(1-a x)^{m}}
\left(1+O(n^{1-3\alpha })
\right)
\right\}   .
\end{eqnarray*}
Combining these estimates we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn
{
D_{a}^{m-1}( a^{-n}S_{n-1}(n ax))
=
x^{n+m-1}
\{(ax)^{-n}e^{n ax}n^{m-1}I_{m-1}(n ax)
}  \nonumber \\
&&\qquad \quad
- \,
\frac{(m-1)!}{\sqrt{2\pi n}}\frac{e^{n}}{(1-ax)^{m}}
\left(1+O(n^{1-3\alpha }) \right)  \}
\nonumber \\
&&
=a^{-n}e^{n ax}(nx)^{m-1}I_{m-1}(n ax)
-
\frac{(m-1)!}{\sqrt{2\pi n}}
\frac{e^{n}x^{n+m-1}}
{(1- a x)^{m}}
\left(1+O(n^{1-3\alpha }) \right).
\label{dsn-1}
\end{eqnarray}
Hence after summation we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{1}{2\pi i}\oint_{\left| t\right| =\epsilon }
\left(\frac{e^{xt}}{t}\right)^{n}s_{a}(t)\,dt
&=&
-
\sum_{m=1}^{\beta _{a}}\frac{b_{a,m}}{(m-1)!}
D_{ a}^{m-1}( a^{-n}S_{n-1}(n ax))
\nonumber \\
&=&
-
a^{-n}e^{n ax}J(a;nx)+\frac{e^{n}x^{n-1}}{\sqrt{2\pi n}}
s_{a}(\frac{1}{x}) \, \left(1+O(n^{1-3\alpha }) \right). \label{eq:jzij}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{proof}

\begin{corollary} \label{cor:4.3}
For $a \in Z(g)$, $|a| \leq r_\ell$, we have
\[
\frac{1}{2 \pi i}
\int_{ |t| = \epsilon} \left(  \frac{ e^{xt}}{t} \right)^n s_a(t) \,dt
=
- a^{-n} e^{n ax} J(a; nx) +
\frac{ e^n x^{n-1}}{ \sqrt{ 2 \pi n}} s_a(1/x) \left( 1+ O( n^{1-3 \alpha}) \right)
\]
uniformly on the compact subsets of $R_\ell$,
where $s_a(t)$ is the singular part of $1/(tg(t))$ at the zero $a$ of $g(t)$.
\end{corollary}

\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:4.4}
Let $a \in Z(g)$ and let $x \in K$, where $K$ compact subset of the disk-complement
$A(1/|a|;\infty)$.
Then
\[
\frac{1}{2 \pi i}
\int_{ |t| = \epsilon} \left(  \frac{ e^{xt}}{t} \right)^n s_a(t) \,dt
=
\frac{ e^n x^{n-1}}{ \sqrt{ 2 \pi n}} s_a(1/x) \left( 1+ O( n^{1-3 \alpha}) \right).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We will use the  disk-complement generalized Szeg\"o asymptotics.
For  $z$  in the annulus $A(1+c, \infty)$, for any $c>0$, we have
\begin{equation*}
S_{n-1}(n z)=
- \frac{z^{n}}{2\pi i}
\oint_{\left| \zeta \right| =1}
\frac{
e^{n(\zeta -\ln \zeta )}}{\zeta -z} \, d\zeta
\end{equation*}
By Dividing $z^{n}$ and taking derivatives up to order $m-1$, we get
\begin{eqnarray*}
D_{z}^{m-1}(z^{-n}S_{n-1}(nz))
&=&- \frac{ (m-1)!}{2\pi i}
\oint_{\left| \zeta \right| =1}
\frac{e^{n(\zeta -\ln \zeta )}}{(\zeta -z)^{m}} \, d\zeta
\\
&=&
-\frac{ (m-1)!}{\sqrt{2\pi n}}\frac{e^{n}}{(1-z)^{m}}
\left(1+O(n^{1-3\alpha})\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
In the above, replace $z$ by $ax$ to obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
D_{a }^{m-1}(a^{-n}S_{n-1}(n ax))
&=&
x^{n+m-1}D_{ax}^{m-1}(( a x)^{-n}S_{n-1}(n ax))
\nonumber \\
&=&
- \frac{(m-1)!}{\sqrt{2\pi n}}
\frac{e^{n}x^{n+m-1}}{(1- ax)^{m}}
\left(1+O(n^{1-3\alpha })\right).  \label{dsn-2}
\end{eqnarray}
By summation, we obtain the asymptotics for the original integral:
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{1}{2\pi i}\oint_{\left| t\right| =\epsilon }
\left(\frac{e^{xt}}{t}\right)^{n}s_{a}(t)\,dt
&=&
-
\sum_{m=1}^{\beta_a }\frac{b_{a,m}}{(m-1)!}
D_{a}^{m-1}(a^{-n}S_{n-1}(n x))
\nonumber \\
&=&\frac{e^{n}x^{n-1}}{\sqrt{2\pi n}}  s_{a}(\frac{1}{x})
\left(1+O(n^{1-3\alpha }) \right).
\label{sij}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{proof}

\begin{corollary} \label{cor4.4}
For $a\in Z(g)$ with $ r_{\ell+1} \leq |a| < \rho$, we have
\[
\frac{1}{2 \pi i}
\int_{ |t| = \epsilon} \left(  \frac{ e^{xt}}{t} \right)^n s_a(t) \,dt
=
\frac{ e^n x^{n-1}}{ \sqrt{ 2 \pi n}} s_a(1/x) \left( 1+ O( n^{1-3 \alpha}) \right),
\]
uniformly on the compact subsets of $R_\ell$.
\end{corollary}

The remaining case for the above integration involving $s_a(t)$ on the disk $D(1/a;\delta)$ will
be handled in a later section.

\begin{proposition} \label{4.5}
For $x \in R_\ell$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn
{
\frac{ p_n(nx)}{ (xe)^n/ \sqrt{2 \pi n}}
=
\frac{1}{x} \, \frac{1}{ g_1(1/x)}
-
\sqrt{2 \pi n}
\sum \left\{ J(a;nx) \frac{1}{ \phi(ax)^n} : a \in Z(g), |a| \leq r_\ell \right\}
}\\
&&\qquad\qquad
+
\sum\left\{ \frac{1}{x} s_a\left( \frac{1}{x} \right) : a\in Z(g), |a| < \rho      \right\}       (1+    O(n^{1-3\alpha}))
\end{eqnarray*}
uniformly on the compact subsets of $R_\ell$,
where $\phi(x)= xe^{1-x}$ and $1/3<\alpha<1/2$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Putting the last two corollaries into Equation (\ref{eq:pnnx-1}) and simplifying, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn
{
p_{n}(nx)
=
\frac{x^{n-1}e^{n}}{\sqrt{2\pi n}}g_{1}(\frac{1}{x})\,
\left(1+O(\frac{1}{n})\right)
}
\\
&& \qquad
-
\sum\left\{
a^{-n}e^{n ax}J(a; nx)  : a \in Z(g), |a| < \rho \right\}
\left(1+O(n^{1-3\alpha }) \right).
\end{eqnarray*}
 \end{proof}

\begin{proposition}  \label{prop:4.6}
For $x \in R_\ell$, we have
\[
\frac{ p_n(nx)}{ (xe)^n/ \sqrt{2 \pi n}}
=
\frac{1}{ g(1/x)} -
\sqrt{2 \pi n}
\sum\{ J(a;nx) \frac{1}{ \phi(ax)^n} : a \in Z(g), |a| \leq r_\ell \} + O(n^{1-3\alpha})
\]
uniformly on the compact subsets of $R_\ell$,
where $\phi(x)= xe^{1-x}$ and $1/3<\alpha<1/2$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}

By the definition of $g_1(t)$  (see equation (\ref{eq:def_g_1})),  we see that
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{x} g_1 \left( \frac{1}{x} \right)
=
\frac{1}{g(1/x)}-
\sum
\left\{  \frac{1}{x}  s_{a}(\frac{1}{x})  :
a \in Z(g), |a| < \rho
\right\}.
\label{xg1}
\end{equation}
Insert this into the above. Since the $s_{a}(1/x)$ term cancels,
we have uniformly for $x\in R_{\ell}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn
{
\frac{p_{n}(nx)}{(ex)^{n}/\sqrt{2\pi n}}
=
\frac{1}{g(1/x)}
}
\\
&& \qquad
-\sqrt{2\pi n}
\sum
\left\{ (axe^{1- ax})^{-n}J(a; nx) :  a \in Z(g), |a| < \rho \right\}
+O\left(n^{1-3\alpha }\right).
\nonumber
\label{eq:pnnx-2}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:4.7}
\label{lemma:jzijnx} If $a \in Z(g)$ with $|a| < \rho$ and $ x\in R_{\ell}$,
then
\begin{equation*}
J(a; nx)=\frac{  b_{a,\beta_a}
}
{( \beta_a-1)!}
(nx)^{ \beta_a -1}
\left(\frac{a x-1}{a x}\right)^{\beta_a -1}
(1+o(1)).
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
 Recall that
\begin{equation*}
J(a; nx)=\sum_{m=1}^{\beta_a}
\frac{b_{a,m}I_{m-1}(n a x)}{(m-1)!},
\quad
I_{m-1}(n  a x)=\sum_{p=0}^{m-1}(-1)^{p}
\binom{m-1}{p}\binom{n+p-1}{p} p! \, (n a x)^{-p}.
\end{equation*}
It is easy to see that
\begin{equation*}
\binom{n+p-1}{p}(n a x)^{-p}
=
\frac{( a x)^{-p}}{p!} \left(1+o(1) \right),
\end{equation*}
that is, as $n\rightarrow \infty $
\begin{equation*}
I_{m-1}(n a x)\rightarrow
\sum_{p=0}^{m-1}(-1)^{p}\binom{m-1}{p}
(a x)^{-p}= \left(\frac{ a x-1}{a x} \right)^{m-1}.
\end{equation*}
Hence
\begin{equation}
J(a;nx)
=
\frac{  b_{a,\beta_a}
}
{(\beta_a-1)!}
(nx)^{\beta_a -1}
\left(\frac{a x-1}{ a x}\right)^{\beta_a -1}
(1+o(1)).
\label{esti-j}
\end{equation}
Since the coefficient $b_{a,\beta_a}$ in the definition of the
singular part $s_{a}(t)$ is nonzero,
we find for fixed $x$ that  the precise order of $J(a;nx)$ as a polynomial in $n$ is $n^{ \beta_a-1}$.
\end{proof}

We note the following
\begin{corollary} \label{cor:4.8}
$\displaystyle
\lim_{n\to \infty} \frac{ p_n(nx)}{ (xe)^n/ \sqrt{2 \pi n}} = \frac{1}{g(1/x)}$, $x \in R_\ell
$
provided $| \phi(ax) | >1$ for all $a \in Z(g)$ with $|a| \leq r_\ell$.
\end{corollary}

\begin{corollary} \label{cor:4.9}
$\displaystyle
\lim_{n\to \infty}
\frac{1}{n} \ln \left|  \frac{ p_n(nx)}{ (xe)^n/ \sqrt{2 \pi n}} \right| = - \ln | \phi(a_0 x)|$, for all
$x \in R_\ell$
satisfying  $| \phi(a_0 x) | >1$ for  $a_0\in Z(g)$ and $|\phi_0(ax)| \leq | \phi(ax)| $ for all $a \neq a_0$
such that $|a| \leq r_\ell$.
\end{corollary}

By construction, $R_\ell \subset R_\rho$ for all $\ell$ chosen so $r_\ell < \rho$. Consequently,
we have the asymptotics:

\begin{theorem} \label{thm:4.10}
On $R_\rho$, we have the following uniform asymptotics
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn
{
\frac{p_{n}(nx)}{(ex)^{n}/\sqrt{2\pi n}}
=
\frac{1}{g(1/x)}  \, \left(1+ O(1/n) \right)
}
\\
&& \qquad
-\sqrt{2\pi n}
\sum
\left\{ (axe^{1- ax})^{-n}J(a; nx) :  a \in Z(g), |a| < \rho \right\}
+O\left(n^{1-3\alpha }\right),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $1/2 < \alpha < 1/3$.
\end{theorem}

It remains to develop the asymptotics in the disks $D(1/a;\delta_a)$ and well as determining domination
among $a\in Z(g)$ of $| \phi(ax)|$.

\section{Dominant Zeros and Szeg\"o Curves}

Let $\phi(x)=x e^{1-x}$ which is an entire function that
is conformal on the unit disk.
The standard Szeg\"o curve $\mathcal S$
is the portion of the level
curve $| \phi(x) | =1$ that lies inside the closed unit disk or
equivalently, inside the closed left-hand plane $\Re(x) \leq 1$.
$\mathcal S$ is a closed simple closed convex curve; in fact,
it has the form $t= \pm \sqrt{ e^{2(x-s)}-s^2}$ where
$x=s+it$ and $s \in [ -W(e^{-1}),1]$ and $W$ is the principal
branch of the Lambert $W$-function.

\begin{definition}
Let $a$ be a nonzero complex number.
We call any curve of the form $\frac{1}{a} {\mathcal S}$ a Szeg\"o curve.
\end{definition}

\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[height=3.0in, width=3.0in]{szego_curve.pdf}
\caption{Szeg\"o  Curve: $ | ze^{1-z}|=1$ and $|z| \leq 1$ }
\label{fig:szego_curve}
\end{figure}

\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:5.1}
Let $a, b$ be non-zero distinct complex numbers. Then
the intersection $\frac{1}{a} \mathcal{S} \cap \frac{1}{b} \mathcal{S}$
has at most 2 points.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The intersection of the two curves  $\frac{1}{a} \mathcal{S} \cap \frac{1}{b} \mathcal{S}$
must satisfy $| \phi(ax)| = | \phi(bx)|$. This modulus condition  determines a line; so,
the intersection of the two curves lie on the $\frac{1}{a} \mathcal{S}$ and a line. Since
$\frac{1}{a} \mathcal{S}$ is convex, the intersection contains at most two points.

Write $x = s+it$ and $b-a= \alpha+ i \beta$. Then $ | \phi(ax)| = | \phi(bx)|$ reduces to the line:
\begin{eqnarray*}
| a e^{-ax} | =  | b e^{ -bx}|,\quad
| e^{(b-a) x} | = |b/a|,\quad
| e^{ \Re[ (b-a)x]}| = | b/a|,\\
\Re[ (b-a)x] = \ln |b/a|,\quad
\alpha s - \beta t = \ln |b/a|.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proof}

\begin{definition}
Call $a \in Z(g)$ a dominant zero if either $|a| = r_0$ or
$1/a$ does not lie in the interior of any of Szeg\"o curves $\frac{1}{b} {\mathcal S}$
where $b$ is a minimal modulus zero, $|b|=r_0$.
If $1/a$ lies on one of these Szeg\"o curves, call $a$ an improper dominant zero;
otherwise, $a$ is proper.
\end{definition}

Note: if $a$ is an improper dominant zero, then
there exists a minimal modulus zero $b$ so
the intersection
$\frac{1}{a} {\mathcal S} \cap \frac{1}{b} {\mathcal S}$ consists of
a single point, namely $1/a$.
In \cite{bleher},  the behavior of the zeros of
the Taylor polynomials of $\sum_{j=1}^m c_j e^{\lambda_jz}$
is determined if the numbers $\lambda_j$ satisfy a condition in terms of
a convex $m$-gon.  For the Appell polynomials, the geometric condition
is more subtle.

Let $W$ denote the principal value of the Lambert $W$-function. Since the radius of
the largest circle centered 0 that lies in the interior of the standard Szeg\"o curve
$\mathcal S$ is $W(e^{-1})$, we have the following

\begin{lemma}
If $a'$ is a zero of $g$ such that $| a'| > r_0/ W(e^{-1})$, then $a'$ must be a non-dominant
zero. Hence, there are at most finitely many dominant zeros.
\end{lemma}

\begin{definition}
If $a$ and $b$ are two dominant zeros such that $\frac{1}{b} {\mathcal S} \cap \frac{1}{a} {\mathcal S}$
consists of two points, then the line $| \phi(ax)|= |\phi(bx)|$ determines two half-planes. Let
$E_{a^+,b}$ denote the closed half-plane that contains $1/a$.
\end{definition}

Let
$a_1,a_2, \dots, a_n$ be the dominant zeros of $g$.
Recall that if $f(x)$ is any analytic function on a domain $D$
then its modulus $| f(x)|$ is a subharmonic  function on $D$.
We need two basic properties of subharmonic functions:
 they satisfy the maximum modulus principle; and
 the maximum of two subharmonic functions is still
subharmonic.

\begin{definition}\label{def:phi}
Set
$ \Phi  (x) = \max( | \phi(a_1x)|^{-1}, \cdots, | \phi(a_n x)|^{-1})$
so $\Phi (x)$ is subharmonic on the punctured complex plane.
\end{definition}

We work with  $| \phi(a x)|^{-1}$ rather than $ | \phi(a x)|$ so we may
apply the Maximum Principle since $ |\phi(a x)|$ vanishes at $x=0$.

We observe that the  level curve $\Phi(x)=1$
 divides the complex plane
 into finitely many connected components just as the original  curve $| \phi(x)|=1$
 divides the complex plane into three connected components.
 We make the:

\begin{definition}\label{def:D0}
Consider the connected components of the complement of the level curve $\Phi(x)=1$.
Let $D_0$ be the closure of the connected component that contains $0$.
Note that if $x\in D_0$ and is $x\neq 0$, then $  \Phi(x)\geq 1$ with
strict inequality when $x$ lies in the interior of $D_0$.
\end{definition}

We assume that  $\rho>0$ is chosen so large that  the closed disk $\overline{D}(0;1/\rho)$
is a subset of the interior of $D_0$.
 Furthermore,
the singularity in $\log | \phi(a x)| - \log | \phi(b x)|$
always cancels so this difference is always a harmonic function
on $\mathbb C$.

Let $a'$ be a non-dominant zero of $g$ such that $|a'| < \rho$.
Then we know that
 $\frac{1}{a'} {\mathcal S}$ is a subset of the
interior of $D_0$ and that the disk $D(0;1/\rho)$ lies
inside of $\frac{1}{a'} {\mathcal S}$.

The following Proposition follows easily from the definition of
$D_0$ and dominant zeros:

\begin{proposition} \label{prop:5.2}
Uniformly on the compact subsets of  $R_\rho \setminus D_0$,  we have
\[
\lim_{n\to\infty} \frac{ p_n(nx)}{ (ex)^n/\sqrt{2\pi n}} = \frac{1}{g(1/x)}
\]
\end{proposition}

To understand the asymptotics inside $D_0$ requires subharmonic
function theory.

By construction, this means that $|\phi( a' x)^{-1} | <1$
for $x \in \partial D_0$, while  $\Phi(x)=1$ for
$x \in \partial D_0$.  Before we can apply the Maximum
Modulus Principle for subharmonic functions, we need to
deal with the common singularity at 0. However, this is easily
dealt  with by multiplying both $\Phi(x)$ and $|\phi^{-1}(x)|$
by $|x|$ which shows that we can remove this singularity
relative to the inequality.

In particular, $\Phi(x)$ is strictly larger than $| \phi^{-1}(x)|$
for all $x \in D_0$, with $x \neq 0$. So there exists a positive
constant, say $\alpha$, so that
\[
 \Phi(x)  >  | \phi(a'x)|^{-1} + \alpha, \quad x \in D_0 \setminus D(0;1/\rho).
\]

We state the above discussion  formally:

\begin{proposition} \label{prop:5.3}
Let $a'$ be a non-dominant zero of $g$.
On the domain $D_0 \setminus D(0;1/\rho)$, we have the order
estimates
\[
| \phi(a'x)|^{-n}
=
O(  ( \Phi(x) - \alpha)^n)
=o (  \Phi (x)^{n}).
\]
\end{proposition}

\begin{definition}\label{def:D_a}
Given a proper dominant zero $a$ of $g$, let
\[
D_a
= \{ x \in D_0 : | \phi(ax)|  \leq | \phi(bx)|,
\textrm{  for all dominant zeros  } b \neq a,  | \phi(ax)| \leq 1 \}.
\]
\end{definition}
Note that the definition of $D_a$ is independent of the choice of $\rho$
sufficiently large. Further, $D_a$ has the alternate description
 in terms of the half-planes $E_{a^+,b}$:
\[
\frac{1}{a} {\rm Interior}({\mathcal S} )
\cap \, \bigcap \{ E_{a^+,b} : b \textrm{  is a proper dominant zero of  } g, b \neq a \}.
\]

It is easy to state formally the basic properties of $D_a$:

\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:5.4}
Let $a$ be a proper dominant zero of $g$. Then $D_a$ is a non-empty
compact connected subset of $D_0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\frac{1}{a}{\mathcal S}$  is a convex curve and the intersection
of half-planes is connected, the set $D_a$ must be a connected
convex set.
\end{proof}

We now restate Proposition \ref{prop:5.3} relative to a domain $D_a$:

\begin{proposition}  \label{prop:5.5}
Let $a'$ be a non-dominant zero of $g$ with $|a| < \rho$. Then $a'$ must lie
in a domain $D_a$ for some proper dominant zero $a$ of $g$. For $x\in D_a \setminus D(0;1/\rho)$,
the following holds uniformly
\[
| \phi(a'x)|^{-n}
=
O(  | \phi(ax) - \alpha|^{-n})
=o (  |\phi (ax)|^{-n}  ).
\]
\end{proposition}

Finally, we now have a refinement of Theorem \ref{thm:4.10} as

\begin{theorem}\label{thm:5.6}
Let $\rho$ be chosen greater than $1/|a|$ where $a$ is any proper dominant zero of $g$. Then
on $R_\rho$, we have the following uniform asymptotics
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn
{
\frac{p_{n}(nx)}{(ex)^{n}/\sqrt{2\pi n}}
=
\frac{1}{g(1/x)} \, \left( 1+O(1/n) \right)
}
\\
&& \qquad
-\sqrt{2\pi n}
\sum
\left\{  \phi(ax)^{-n}J(a; nx) :  a \in Z(g)  \textrm{ and dominant  } \right\}
+O\left(n^{1-3\alpha }\right) + o( \Phi(x)),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $1/3<\alpha<1/2$ and $\Phi(x) = \max\{ | \phi(ax) |^{-1} : a\in Z(g)  \textrm{ and dominant  } \}$.
\end{theorem}

\section{Asymptotics Inside the Disk $D(1/a'; \delta_{a'})$ When $a'$ is a Non-Dominant Zero}

We first state an easy consequence of a previous Proposition.

\begin{proposition} \label{prop:6.1}
Let $a' \in Z(g)$. Then on the disk $D(1/a'; \delta_{a'})$, the normalized polynomials have the asymptotics
\begin{eqnarray*}
\qquad \frac{ p_n(nx)}{ (xe)^n/\sqrt{2 \pi n}}
=
\frac{1}{x} g_1\left( \frac{1}{x} \right) \, \left( 1+ O\left( \frac{1}{n} \right) \right)
+
\sum
\left\{
J(a;nx) \frac{1}{ \phi(ax)^n} : a \in Z(g), |a| \leq |a'|, a \neq a'
\right\}
\\
+
\sum
\left\{
\frac{1}{x} s_a\left( \frac{1}{x} \right) : a \in Z(g), a \neq a', |a| < \rho
\right\}
+
\sigma_{a'}(x), \qquad\qquad&&
\end{eqnarray*}
where
\[
\sigma_{a'}(x) =
 \sum_{m=1}^{ \beta_{a'}} \frac{ b_{a',m}}{ (m-1)!} D^{m-1}_{a'}\left(  (a')^{-n} S_{n-1}(n a'x) \right).
\]
\end{proposition}

\begin{proposition} \label{prop:6.2}
Let $a'$ be a non-dominant zero of $g$ with $|a'| < \rho$.
Then there exists a choice of $\delta_{a'}>0$ such that
\[
\sigma_{a'}(x)=O\left(e^{  6n \delta_{a'} \rho } \right)
\]
where $\rho$ is the cut-off bound for the zeros of $g$.
\end{proposition}

\begin{proof}
To estimate $\sigma_a$, we make use of the elementary estimate:
If $f(z)$ is analytic function of $z$, then for any
$\epsilon >0$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\left| D_{z}^{j-1}f(z)\right|
 \leq \frac{(j-1)!}{\epsilon^{j-1}}
\max_{\left| \zeta -z\right|
=\epsilon }\left| f(\zeta )\right| .
\end{equation*}

By the definition of $\sigma_{a'}(x)$, we find
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left| \sigma_{a'} \right|
&\leq&
 \left| \sum_{m=1}^{\beta_{a'} }
 \frac{b_{a',m}}{(m-1)!}D_{a'}^{m-1}( | a' |^{-n}S_{n-1}(n a' x))\right|
\\
&\leq&
 \sum_{m=1}^{\beta _{a'}}
 \frac{\left| b_{a',m}\right| }{\delta_{a'}^{m-1}}  \,
\,\max_{\left| \zeta -a' \right| =\delta_{a'} }
\left| \zeta^{-n}S_{n-1}( n \zeta  x)\right|
\\
&\leq&
 K_{ \delta_{a'} }\,
  \max_{\left| \zeta -a' \right| =\delta_{a'} }
  (\left| \zeta\right|^{-n}
  S_{n-1}(\left| \zeta x\right| n)   )
\end{eqnarray*}
where $K_{\delta_{a'}}>0$ is a constant that depends on the zero $a'$ and the
radius $\delta_{a'}$.

To go further we observe for $x\in D(\frac{1}{a},\delta_{a'} )$
and $| \zeta - a'| = \delta_{a'}$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left| \zeta x\right| \leq (\left| a' \right| +\delta_{a'} )\left| x\right|
&\leq&
 \left| a' \right| \left| x\right| +\left| x\right| \delta_{a'}
\\
&\leq&
 1+\left| a' \right| \delta_{a'} +\left| x\right| \delta_{a'} =1+\delta_{a'}
(\left| a' \right| +\left| x\right| ).
\end{eqnarray*}
Since  $\left| a' \right| <   \rho$ by assumption,
$\left| \zeta x\right| \leq 1+ 2 \rho \delta_{a'}$.
But  $\left| \zeta \right| \geq \left| a' \right| - \delta_{a'}$ and
$\left| x\right| \geq \frac{1}{\left| a' \right| }-\delta_{a'}$, so we get
\begin{equation*}
\left| \zeta x\right| \geq \left(\left| a' \right| - \delta_{a'} \right)
\,
\left(\frac{1}{\left| a' \right| }-\delta_{a'} \right)
\geq 1-
\delta_{a'}
\left(
\frac{1}{\left| a' \right| }
+
\left| a' \right|
\right)
   \geq 1-2\delta_{a'}  \rho.
\end{equation*}
Collecting these two inequalities, we get
\begin{equation*}
1- 2\delta_{a'} \rho \leq \left| \zeta x\right| \leq
1+   2\delta_{a'}  \rho.
\end{equation*}
Now use that $\left| S_{n-1}(nt)\right| \leq e^{nt}$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\max_{\left| \zeta - a' \right| =\delta_{a'} }
\left| e\zeta x\right|^{-n}S_{n-1}(\left| \zeta x\right| n)
&\leq&
e^{-n}\left| 1-  2\delta_{a'} \rho \right|^{-n}   e^{n(1+ 2\delta_{a'}  \rho)}
\\
&=&
\left| 1- 2\delta_{a'}  \rho\right|^{-n}
e^{  2 n \delta_{a'}  \rho}
\end{eqnarray*}
For $0\leq x\leq {1}/{2}$, ${1}/{(1-x)}\leq e^{2x}$;
if we choose $\delta_{a'} $ such that
$
2\delta_{a'}  \rho \leq {1}/{2},
$
then we have $\left| 1- 2\delta_{a'}  \rho\right|^{-n}
\leq
e^{ 4\delta_{a'} \rho }$. With this choice of $\delta$,
we obtain the desired bound
\begin{equation*}
\max_{\left| \zeta - a' \right| =\delta_{a'} }
(\left| e\zeta x\right|^{-n}S_{n-1}(\left| \zeta x\right| n))
\leq e^{ 4\delta_{a'} \rho}
e^{ 2n \delta_{a'}  \rho }=e^{6n \delta_{a'}  \rho}
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
\section{Zero Attractor and the Density of the Zeros}

In our paper \cite{g-b}, we determined the limit points of the zeros
of the Euler polynomials by means of the asymptotics and the zero
density.  Here, we separate out first the question of find the support
of the zero density measure, which is, of course, the zero attractor.
Then we determine the zero density by applying our general result
in the appendix.

\begin{proposition} \label{prop:7.1}
Let $f_n(x) = \sqrt{2\pi n} \,p_n(nx)/ (xe)^n$. Then the following limits hold uniformly
on compact subsets
of  the indicated domains:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
On the domain $A(1/r_0; \infty)$,
$\displaystyle
\lim_{n\to\infty} \frac{1}{n}  \ln[ f_n(x)]
= 0
$.
\item
On the domain $R_\rho $,
$\displaystyle
\lim_{n\to\infty} \frac{1}{n}  \ln[ f_n(x)]
= 0
$.
\item
On the domain $D_a \cap A(1/\rho;\infty)$ where $a$ is any dominant zero of $g$,
$\displaystyle
\lim_{n\to\infty} \frac{1}{n}  \ln[ f_n(x)]
=  - \ln \phi(ax)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We use the asymptotic expansions for $p_n(nx)$ developed in the previous sections.
For $|x|>1/r_0$, we noted already that the indicated limit must be 0.

We observe that if $a'$ is a nondominant zero of $g$ with $|a'| <\rho$,  then for $\delta_{a'}>0$ sufficiently
small, the disk $D(1/a'; \delta_{a'})$ will lie in the domain $D_a$ for some dominant zero
$a$, then on $D(1/a'; \delta_{a'})$,
$\displaystyle
\lim_{n\to\infty} \frac{1}{n}  \ln[ f_n(x)]
=  - \ln \phi(ax)$.
\end{proof}

To describe the zero attractor requires a closer examination of the boundary of
each domain $D_a$ where $a$ is a proper dominant zero.

The boundary $\partial D_a$ where $a$ is a proper dominant zero of $g$ has several
natural families: $\partial D_a \cap \partial D_0$ which is an ``outer boundary" and
a polygonal curve consisting of
the  line segments $\partial D_a \cap \partial D_b$ where $b$ is another
dominant zero of $g$. Note that $\partial D_a \cap \partial D_b$ is a subset of $D_0$.
It will be useful to subdivide $\partial D_a \cap  \partial D_0$ into two connected components
denoted by $\partial D_a^{\pm}$  that come
from deleting $\{1/a \}$ from $[\partial D_a \cap \partial D_0]$.

\begin{lemma}
The zero attractor of the Appell polynomials  $\{ p_n(nx)\}$ must lie inside the compact set
\[
\bigcup \left\{
\partial D_a : a \textrm{  is a proper dominant zero of  }  g
\right\}.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, we let $x^*$ let in the infinite exterior of $D_0$. Recall that
$\lim_{n\to\infty} \sqrt{2\pi n} \, p_n(nx)/ (xe)^n = 1/g(1/x)$ uniformly on compact subsets.
If $x_{n_k}$ is a zero of $p_{n_k}(n_k x)$ and $x_{n_k} \to x^*$, then appealing to this limit
we find that the limit must be 0 while the right-hand side is $1/g(1/x^*) \neq 0$.
Secondly, suppose $x^*$ lies in the interior of $D_0$ but not on any boundary set $\partial D_a$,
where $a$ is a dominant zero. By construction, $x$ will lie in the interior of one of the domains
$D_b$, where $b$ is a dominant zero.
Then $\lim_{n\to\infty} | \sqrt{2\pi n} \, p_n(nx)/ (xe)^n |^{1/n} = | \phi(bx)|$
uniformly on compacta in the interior of $D_a$.
By the same reasoning
as before, $x^*$ cannot be a limit of zeros.
\end{proof}

The following Theorem is an immediate consequence of the above lemma
together with the result of Sokal in section \ref{thm:sokal} of the Appendix.

\begin{theorem} \label{thm:7.2}
The zero attractor of the Appell polynomials  $\{ p_n(nx)\}$ is given by
\[
\bigcup \left\{
\partial D_a : a \textrm{  is a proper dominant zero of  }  g
\right\}.
\]
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $a$ be any proper ominant zero of $g$ and
let $x^*\in \partial D_a^{\pm}$. Let $\epsilon>0$ be given.
Then we find that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lim_{n\to\infty} \ln
\left|  \frac{ p_n(nx)}{ (xe)^n / \sqrt{2\pi n}}  \right|
=
\left\{
\begin{array}{rl}
0,  & x\in D(x^*;\epsilon) \setminus D_0,\\
- \ln| \phi(ax)|, & x \in D(x^*;\epsilon) \cap {\rm Int}(D_0)
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray*}
holds uniformly on compact subsets.
Next suppose that $x^*$ is nonzero and  lies on one of the line segments of the
form $\partial D_a \cap \partial D_b$ where $b$ is another proper dominant zero.
Again, we find that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lim_{n\to\infty} \ln
\left|  \frac{ p_n(nx)}{ (xe)^n / \sqrt{2\pi n}}  \right|
=
\left\{
\begin{array}{rl}
- \ln| \phi(ax)|  ,  & x\in D(x^*;\epsilon) \cap {\rm Int}(D_a),\\
- \ln| \phi(bx)|, & x \in D(x^*;\epsilon) \cap {\rm Int}(D_b)
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray*}
which also holds uniformly on compact subsets.
By Sokal's result \cite{sokal} which is described in the appendix, we conclude that $x^*$ is in $\limsup Z(p_n)$
since there can be no harmonic function $v(x)$ on the disk $D(x^*;\epsilon)$ that
satisfies the inequalities
\[
\liminf_{n\to\infty} \ln
\left|  \frac{ p_n(nx)}{ (xe)^n / \sqrt{2\pi n}}  \right| \leq v(x)
\leq
\limsup_{n\to\infty} \ln
\left|  \frac{ p_n(nx)}{ (xe)^n / \sqrt{2\pi n}}  \right|.
\]

On the disks $D(1/a'; \delta_{a'})$ where $a'$ is a non-dominant zero
which must lie inside $D_0$,
the contribution of the dominant zero dominants.

This reasoning handles all but finitely many points: $1/a$ where $a$ is
a dominant zero of $g$. However, since the zero attractor must be
a compact set and points in $D(1/a;\epsilon) \cap [ \partial D_a \cap \partial D_0]$
lie in the zero attractor, we conclude that $1/a$ also lie in the attractor.
\end{proof}

\begin{theorem} \label{thm:7.4}
Let $a$ be a proper dominant zero of $g$.
\\
(a)
The zero density measure on any proper subcurve of $\partial D_a \cap \partial D_0$ is the pull-back of
the normalized Lebesgue measure on the unit circle under the conformal map
$\phi(ax)$.
\\
(b)
Let $b$ be a proper dominant zero of $g$ so $b\neq a$. Then
 the zero density measure on any proper  line segment of $\partial D_a \cap \partial D_b$
 is Lebesgue measure.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
For both parts, we can use the asymptotics given in Theorem \ref{thm:5.6}.

For part (a), let $f_n(x) = \sqrt{2\pi n} g(1/x) p_n( nx)/ (xe)^n$. Let $a$ be a dominant zero of $g$,
and
let $C$ be a proper subcurve of $\partial D_0 \cap \partial D_{a}^{\pm}$.
Then  there exists a neighborhood $U$ of $C$
such that
$U \subset R_\rho \cap  [( {\mathbb C} \setminus D_0 )  \cup D_a]$ so that
the asymptotics in Theorem \ref{thm:5.6} can be written as
\[
\frac{ p_n(nx)}{ (xe)^n/ \sqrt{2\pi n}} =
\frac{1}{g(1/x)}\, \left( 1+O(1/n) \right)
- \sqrt{2 \pi n}\, \frac{ J(a;nx)}{ \phi(ax)^n} + O(n^{1-3\alpha}) + o(\Phi_{1,a}^n (x)),
\]
where $ \Phi_{1,a}(x) = \max\{ 1, | \phi(ax)| \}$.
Hence, by dividing by $g(1/x))$, we find that $f_n(x)$ has the form:
\[
f_n(x)=
1+ a_n(x) \phi(a x)^{-n} + e_n(x), \quad a_n(x) = - g(1/x) J(a;nx),
\]
where
\[
e_n(x)=
\left\{
\begin{array}{rl}
o(1),& \, x \in U \cap ({\mathbb C} \setminus D_0),\\
o( \phi(a x)^{-n}),& \, x\in  U\cap  (D_{a}  \cap R_\rho) .
\end{array} \right.
\]
Since $\phi(a x)$ is conformal in the disk $D(0;1/|a|)$, we may
apply Theorem \ref{thm:density} from the Appendix Section \ref{thm:sokal}
on the density of zeros.

Let $a$ and $b$ be two distinct proper dominant zeros of $g$ such that
$\partial D_a \cap \partial D_b$ is nonempty. On $D_a \cap D_b \cap R_\rho$,
the asymptotics in Theorem \ref{thm:5.6} can be written as
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn
{
\frac{ p_n(nx)}{ (xe)^n/\sqrt{2\pi n}}
=
\frac{1}{g(1/x)} \left( 1+O(1/n) \right) - \sqrt{2 \pi n}
\left(
J(a;nx)\frac{1}{\phi(ax)^n} + J(b;nx)\frac{1}{\phi(bx)^n} \right.
} \\
&&\qquad \left.
+ \sum \{ J(a';nx) \frac{1}{ \phi(a'x)^n} : a' \textrm{ proper dominant zero}, a' \neq a,b\,\}
\right) + O(n^{1-3\alpha}) + o( \Phi(x)^n)
 \\
&&=
\frac{1}{g(1/x)} \left( 1+O(1/n) \right) - \sqrt{2 \pi n}
\left(
J(a;nx)\frac{1}{\phi(ax)^n} + J(b;nx)\frac{1}{\phi(bx)^n}
\right) + O(n^{1-3\alpha}) + o( \Phi_{a,b}^n(x)),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\Psi_{a,b}(x) = \max\{ 1/|\phi(ax)|, 1/ |\phi(bx)|\}$.

Let $L$ be a proper line segment of
the intersection $\partial D_a \cap \partial D_b$.
Let $U$ be a neighborhood of $L$ so both
$|\phi(ax)|<1$ and $ | \phi(bx)|<1$ for $x\in U$.
On the intersection
 $U \cap R_\rho$, we work with a different normalization than before:
 \[
T_n(x) =  - \frac{ \phi(ax)^n}{ \sqrt{2\pi n} (xe)^n J(a;nx)} \, p_n(nx).
 \]
 Note that in this normalization the term that contains $\phi(ax)^{-n}$ becomes the
 constant 1 for $T_n(x)$.
 Of course, this new normalization has exactly the same zeros as $p_n(nx)$
 in $U$ so the zero density is unchanged.
 Then we find that
 \[
 T_n(x)
 = 1 + a_n(x) \psi(x)^n + e_n(x),
 \]
 where
 \[
 \psi(x) = \frac{ \phi(ax)}{ \phi(bx)} =\frac{a}{b}e^{ (b-a) x}, \quad a_n(x) = \frac{ J(b;nx)}{J(a;nx)},
 \]
 and
 \[
 e_n(x)= - \frac{ \phi(ax)^n}{ \sqrt{2\pi n} J(a;nx)} \left(
 O(n^{1-3\alpha}) + o(\Phi_{a,b}^n(x)) \right).
  \]
  On $U$,  we have that $ \phi(ax)^n \Phi_{a,b}^n(x) =  \max\{ 1, | \psi(x)|^n\}$;
  while on $D_a \cap U$, $| \psi(x)|<1$ and on $D_b\cap U$, $|\psi(x)|>1$.
  This allows us to write $e_n(x)$ as
 \[
  e_n(x)=
  \left\{
  \begin{array}{rl}
  o( \psi(x)^n) ,&\, x\in D_a \cap U,\\
  \\
o(1) ,&\, x\in D_b \cap U.
  \end{array} \right.   .
 \]
 By construction,  $\phi(ax)/\phi(bx) = \frac{a}{b}e^{ (b-a) x}$ is a conformal
 map on $U\cap R_\rho$ that maps $L$ onto an arc of the unit circle.
  By Corollary \ref{cor:constant} in the Appendix section \ref{thm:sokal}, the result follows.
\end{proof}

We close with several examples that illustrate the main constructions in the paper.

\begin{example}
{\rm
Let $g(t)$ be an entire function whose minimal modulus zero $a_1=1$ such that all its
other zeros $a$ satisfy $1/|a| < W(e^{-1}) \simeq 0.27846$. Then the zero attractor for the
associated Appell polynomials coincide with the classical Szeg\"o curve in
Figure \ref{fig:szego_curve}.
}
\end{example}

\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[height=3.0in, width=3.0in]{attractor_cosine.pdf}
\caption{Zero Attractor for Taylor polynomials of $\cos(x)$ }
\label{fig:cosine}
\end{figure}

\begin{example}
{\rm
The higher order Euler polynomials $E_n^{(m)}(x)$, where $m \in {\mathbb Z}^+$, have generating
function $g(t) = (e^t+1)^m/2^m$; while the higher order Bernoulli polynomials $B_n^{(m)}(t)$
have generating function $g(t)= (e^t-1)^m / t^m$. Then their zero attractors are independent of $m$
and coincide with a scaled version of the zero attractor for the Taylor polynomials for $\cos(x)$,
see Figure \ref{fig:cosine}.
}
\end{example}

\begin{example}
{\rm
The zero attractor for the Appell polynomials associated with generating function $g(t) =J_0(t)$, where
$J_0(t)$ is the zero-th order Bessel function,
is a scaled version as the zero attractor for the Taylor polynomials for $\cosh(x)$, see Figure \ref{fig:bessel_attractor},
since the minimal modulus zeros of $J_0(t)$, $a=2.404825558$, are the only dominant zeros since
all the zeros of $J_0(t)$ lie on the real axis.
}
\end{example}

\begin{example}
{\rm

 Let $g(t)=(t-1) \, (t^2 +2)$. See Figure \ref{fig:appell_1} for its zero
 attractor and zeros for degree 400.

\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[height=3.0in, width=3.0in]{zeros_only_3_zeros.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[height=3.0in, width=3.0in]{attractor_and_zeros_3_roots.pdf}
\caption{(a) Zeros for degree 400  polynomial with generating function $g(t)=(t-1) \, (t^2 +2)$;
(b) Zero Attractor with polynomial zeros }
\label{fig:appell_1}
\end{figure}
}
\end{example}

\begin{example}
{\rm
Consider the Appell polynomials with generating function
$g(t)= (t-a) (t-b) (t-c)$ with
$a= 1.2 e^{i 3 \pi/16}$, $b= 1.3 e^{i 7 \pi/16}$, and $c=1.5$.
 In this case, all three roots of $g(t)$ are dominant.
See Figures \ref{fig:appell_2} and \ref{fig:appell_3}.

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[height=3.0in, width=3.0in]{attractor_broken_only.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[height=3.0in, width=3.0in]{boundary_D0.pdf}
\caption{(a) Zero Attractor only, for generating function $g(t)=(t-a) (t-b) (t-c)$,
$a= 1.2 e^{i 3\pi/16}$, $b= 1.3 e^{i 7 \pi/16}$, $c=1.5$;
(b) Boundary of the Domain $D_0$.
 }
\label{fig:appell_2}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[height=3.0in, width=3.0in]{attractor_broken_lines.pdf}
\caption{Zeros for degree 400 polynomial together with the Zero Attractor,
for generating function $g(t)=(t-a) (t-b) (t-c)$,
$a= 1.2 e^{i 3\pi/16}$, $b= 1.3 e^{i 7 \pi/16}$, $c=1.5$ }
\label{fig:appell_3}
\end{figure}
}
\end{example}

These last two examples both illustrate the following general fact.
We assume that the generating function $g(t)$ has exactly
three proper dominant zeros $a$, $b$, and $c$. Then
 the three
lines determined by $| \phi(ax)| = | \phi(bx)|$,
 $| \phi(ax)| = | \phi(cx)|$, and  $| \phi(bx)| = | \phi(cx)|$
 have a common intersection point, a so-called ``triple point."
 This follows by interpreting the lines as the boundary between
 the change of asymptotics of the Appell polynomial family; that is,
 the boundaries of the domains $D_a$, $D_b$, and $D_c$.

Combinatorics (math.CO); Complex Variables (math.CV)


Exponential Order Statistics, the Basel problem and Combinatorial Identities

Abstract: We consider the k-th order statistic from unit exponential distribution and show that it can be represented as a sum of independent exponential random variables. Our proof is simple and different. It readily proves that the standardized exponential spacings also follow unit exponential distribution. An interesting probabilistic proof of the Basel problem is also given. Another advantage of our approach is that by computing the Laplace transform of the k-th order statistic in two different ways, we derive several interesting combinatorial identities. A probabilistic interpretation of these identities and their generalizations are also given.

\section{\@startsection{section}{1}{opt}{.}

\def


Projective center point and Tverberg theorems

Abstract: We present projective versions of the center point theorem and Tverberg's theorem, interpolating between the original and the so-called "dual" center point and Tverberg theorems.Furthermore we give a common generalization of these and many other known (transversal, constraint, dual, and colorful) Tverberg type results in a single theorem, as well as some essentially new results about partitioning measures in projective space.

\section{Introduction}

In this paper we focus on two classical topics in discrete geometry:
the center point theorem from Neumann~\cite{neumann1945} and Rado~\cite{rado1947} (see also Gr\"unbaum~\cite{grun1960}) and Tverberg's theorem~\cite{tver1966}.
Many deep generalizations of these classical results have been made in the last three decades, starting from the topological generalization by \barany, Shlosman, and \szucs~\cite{bss1981}.
A good review on this topic and numerous references are given in \matousek's book~\cite{mat2003}.
After this book was published, new achievements were made by Hell~\cite{hell2007, hell2008}, Engstr\"om~\cite{eng2011} and Engstr\"om--Nor\'en~\cite{engnor2011}, K.~\cite{kar2008dcpt}, and \blagojevic--M.--Ziegler~\cite{bmz2009ct,bmz2011ctv}, establishing ``constrained'', ``dual'', and ``optimal colorful'' Tverberg type theorems.

The discrete center point theorem states the following:
For any finite set $X\subset \mathbb R^d$ there exists a \emph{center point} $c\in\mathbb R^d$ such that any closed half-space $H\ni c$ contains at least $\left\lceil\frac{|X|}{d+1}\right\rceil$ points of $X$.
In K.~\cite{kar2008dcpt} a dual center point theorem and a dual Tverberg theorem for families of hyperplanes were proved.
The dual center point theorem states:
For any family of $n$ hyperplanes in general position in $\mathbb R^d$ there exists a point $c$ such that any ray starting at $c$ intersects at least $\left\lceil\frac{n}{d+1}\right\rceil$ hyperplanes.

Here the use of the adjective ``dual'' is rather descriptive, it does not refer to projective duality.
Thus it is interesting to dualize it once more projectively and compare it with the original center point theorem.

\begin{definition}
\label{defPartitioningRPd}
Any two distinct hyperplanes $H_1$ and $H_2$ partition $\mathbb RP^d$ into two pieces. In this paper, we always consider the pieces as being closed. If $H_1$ and $H_2$ coincide then we consider $H_1=H_2$ as one piece and the whole $\mathbb RP^d$ as the other.
\end{definition}

The projective dual of the ``dual center point theorem'' reads:
Assume that $X$ is a family of $n$ points in $\mathbb RP^d$ and $c\in \mathbb RP^d$ is another point such that the family $X\cup c$ is in general position. Then there exists a hyperplane $W\subseteq \mathbb RP^d$ such that together with any hyperplane $H_1\ni c$ it partitions $\mathbb RP^d$ into two parts each containing at least $\left\lceil\frac{n}{d+1}\right\rceil$ points of~$X$.
From the proof of this theorem we can assure that $W$ does not contain~$c$; however if we omit the general position assumption then the theorem remains true by a compactness argument but $W$ may happen to contain~$c$.

Now we are going to interpolate between the original center point theorem and the latter ``dual to dual'' version (they appear as special cases when $V$ is the hyperplane at infinity or when $V$ is a point):

\begin{theorem}[Projective center point theorem]
\label{projective-cpt}
Suppose that $V\subset \mathbb RP^d$ is a projective subspace of dimension $v$ and $X$ is a finite point set with $|X|=n$. Put
$$
r = \left\lceil\frac{n}{(d-v)(v+1)+1}\right\rceil.
$$
Then there exists a projective subspace $W\subset \mathbb RP^d$ of dimension $d-v-1$ such that any pair of hyperplanes $H_1\supseteq V$ and $H_2\supseteq W$ partitions $\mathbb RP^d$ into two parts each containing at least $r$ points of $X$.

If we require the general position assumption, that no $r$ points of $X$ together with $V$ are contained in a hyperplane, then $W$ may be chosen disjoint from $V$.
\end{theorem}

The ordinary center point theorem~\cite{neumann1945,rado1947} is usually stated for measures, which follows from the discrete version by an approximation argument.
Here is the corresponding version:

\begin{theorem}[Projective center point theorem for measures]
\label{projective-cpt-mes}
Suppose that $V\subset \mathbb RP^d$ is a projective subspace of dimension $v$ and $\mu$ is a probability measure on $\mathbb RP^d$. Then there exists a projective subspace $W\subset \mathbb RP^d$ of dimension $d-v-1$ such that any pair of hyperplanes $H_1\supseteq V$ and $H_2\supseteq W$ partitions $\mathbb RP^d$ into two parts $P_1$ and $P_2$ so that
$$
\mu(P_1), \mu(P_2) \ge \frac{1}{(d-v)(v+1)+1}.
$$
\end{theorem}

\begin{remark}
If $\mu$ is absolutely continuous then the case $W\cap V\neq \emptyset$ is automatically excluded, because $H_1$ and $H_2$ must not coincide in this case.
\end{remark}

The rest of the paper is organized as follows:
We start with the proof of Theorem~\ref{projective-cpt} in Section \ref{cpr-proof-sec}.
In Section \ref{secTverbergInterpolationWithDual} we analogously interpolate between Tverberg's theorem and its dual.
In Section~\ref{trans-sec} we state a very general theorem incorporating almost all that we know about (dual, transversal, constrained, colorful) Tverberg type theorems.
In particular this implies a projective center transversal theorem, which generalizes Theorem \ref{projective-cpt-mes}, see Section \ref{secProjCenterTransversalThm}.
Exchanging quantors can possibly lead to other interesting theorems.
As an instance of this we prove another projective Tverberg theorem and a transversal generalization in Sections \ref{secAnotherProjTver} and \ref{secTranversalGeneralizationOfTverberg}.

\vspace*{3mm}
\noindent {\bf Open problems.}
Some of our theorems need technical assumptions in order to assure that certain topological obstructions do not vanish and such that we are able to prove that. These include the usual prime power assumption in Tverberg type theorems, as well as more specific assumptions in the results of Sections~\ref{secAnotherProjTver} and \ref{secTranversalGeneralizationOfTverberg}. It would be very interesting to know in which cases these assumptions are necessary and in which cases they can be avoided.

Moreover, Sections \ref{secAnotherProjTver} and \ref{secTranversalGeneralizationOfTverberg} already indicate that interesting versions and generalizations of our projective center point and Tverberg theorems might be obtained by exchanging quantors and by including additional subspaces on top of $V$ and $W$.
Is there a reasonable natural generalization incorporating all results of this paper?

\vspace*{3mm}
\noindent {\bf Acknowledgements.}
We thank Karim Adiprasito, Pavle \blagojevic, Moritz Firsching, Peter Landweber, Louis Theran, and G\"{u}nter Ziegler for discussions.

\section{Proof of the projective center point theorem} \label{cpr-proof-sec}

In order to prove Theorem~\ref{projective-cpt} we first dualize it projectively (and interchange $v$ and $d-v-1$):
First note that dual to Definition \ref{defPartitioningRPd}, any two points $x,y\in\RP^d$ partition the space of hyperplanes in $\RP^d$ into two pieces, which are characterized by where a hyperplane intersects the (or a) line $\ell$ through $x$ and $y$, since $\ell$ gets partitioned into two closed parts by $x$ and $y$ as well.

\begin{theorem}
Suppose that $V\subset \mathbb RP^d$ is a projective subspace of dimension $v$ and $\Xi$ is a family of hyperplanes with $|\Xi|=n$. Put
$$
r = \left\lceil\frac{n}{(d-v)(v+1)+1}\right\rceil.
$$
Then there exists a projective subspace $W\subset \mathbb RP^d$ of dimension $d-v-1$ such that the following condition holds: For a pair of points $x\in V$ and $y\in W$ and any line $\ell\supseteq\{x,y\}$ the pair $(x,y)$ partitions the line $\ell$ into two parts and any of these parts intersects at least $r$ members of $\Xi$.
\end{theorem}

The general position assumption now becomes: No $r$ hyperplanes of $\Xi$ have a common point in $V$. In the following proof it will guarantee that $V$ and $W$ have no common point and the line $\ell$ is uniquely determined by the pair of points $x$ and $y$.

Let us go to the homogeneous coordinate space $\mathbb R^{d+1}$ with the corresponding subspace $\widehat V$ of dimension $v+1$ and a family of hyperplanes $\widehat \Xi$ given by homogeneous linear equations $\lambda_i(x)=0$ for $i=1,\ldots, n$. We have to find an appropriate subspace $\widehat W$ of dimension $d-v$.

Consider the formal simplex $\Delta^{n-1}$ with vertices indexed by $\{1, \ldots, n\}$. A point $p\in \Delta^{n-1}$ is an $n$-tuple of nonnegative reals $p=(t_1, \ldots, t_n)$ that sum to 1.
Choose an $\eps>0$ and consider the following quadratic form on $\mathbb R^{d+1}$:
$$
q_{p,\eps}(x) = \sum_{i=1}^n t_i \lambda_i(x)^2 + \eps\langle x,x\rangle,
$$
where $\langle x,x\rangle$ is the standard quadratic form on $\mathbb R^{d+1}$.
We would prefer to put $\eps=0$ but have to consider positive $\eps$ in order to make sure that $q_{p,\eps}(x)$ is positive definite for any $p\in\Delta^{n-1}$.

Let $\widehat W_{p,\eps}\subset\RR^{d+1}$ be the subspace that is orthogonal to $\widehat V$ with respect to the scalar product defined by $q_{p,\eps}(x)$.
Obviously $\widehat W_{p,\eps}$ depends continuously on $p\in \Delta^{n-1}$ and $\eps>0$ and $\widehat W_{p,\eps}$ always has trivial intersection with $\widehat V$. Note that the space of all possible linear subspaces $\widehat W$ of dimension $d-v$ having trivial intersection with $\widehat V$ is a Schubert cell in the Grassmannian $G(d+1, d-v)$, which is homeomorphic to $\RR^D$, $D=(d-v)(v+1)$.
Thus for a fixed $\eps>0$ we get a map $\Delta^{n-1}\to\RR^D$ that sends $p$ to $\widehat W_{p,\eps}$.

Now we invoke the topological center point theorem from K.~\cite{kar2010cpt}, which states that any continuous map from $\Delta^{n-1}$ to a metric space of covering dimension $D$, such as $\RR^D$, has the property that the intersection of the images of all faces of codimension $\left\lceil\frac{n}{D+1}\right\rceil-1$ in $\Delta^{n-1}$ is non-empty.

Thus in our situation we find a subspace $\widehat W_\eps$ with the following property: For any face $F\in \Delta^{n-1}$ of dimension at least $n-r$ (i.e. spanned by $n-r+1$ vertices of $\Delta^{n-1}$) there exists $p_{F,\eps}\in F$ such that $\widehat W_\eps=\widehat W_{p_{F,\eps},\eps}$.

By a compactness argument we can choose a sequence $\eps_m\to +0$ and corresponding points $p_{F,\eps_m}$ such that the respective $\widehat W_{\eps_m}$ converge to some $\widehat W$ in the Grassmannian topology, the points $p_{F,\eps_m}$ tend to some points $p_F$, and so do the quadratic forms $q_{p_{F,\eps_m},\eps_m}\to q_F$.

Consider a pair of lines $\widehat x\subseteq \widehat V$ and $\widehat y\subseteq \widehat W$ (all lines and subspaces in $\mathbb R^{d+1}$ are linear and pass through the origin). Let $\widehat\ell$ be a two-dimensional plane containing them both. The lines $\widehat x$ and $\widehat y$ break $\widehat\ell$ projectively in two closed parts: $P_1$ and $P_2$. We have to show that any of them intersects at least $r$ members of $\widehat \Xi$ nontrivially. Assume the contrary: a subfamily of $n-r+1$ hyperplanes (denote it $F$) intersect $P_1$ only at the origin; this means that every corresponding $\lambda_i$ is nonzero on $\widehat\ell$ and its zero set (minus the origin) is contained in the interior of $P_2$.

Consider now $F$ as a face of $\Delta^{n-1}$ and take its corresponding $p_F$ and $q_F$. The lines $\widehat x$ and $\widehat y$ must be orthogonal with respect to $q_F$ because the relation ``orthogonal'' depends continuously on everything. The quadratic form $q_F$ may be degenerate but it is nonzero on $\widehat\ell$, because all the corresponding hyperplanes intersect $\widehat\ell$ transversally. Consider two cases:

\begin{itemize}
\item Case~1. The lines $\widehat x$ and $\widehat y$ are different. Let them be the $x$ and the $y$ axes and let the interior of $P_2$ be defined by $xy<0$.
Then $q_F|_{\widehat\ell}$ is a convex combination of the forms $(a_ix+b_iy)^2$ with positive $a_i$ and $b_i$, $i\in F$. The corresponding scalar product between $(1,0)$ and $(0,1)$ is therefore $\sum_{i\in F} t_i a_ib_i>0$, which is a contradiction.
\item Case~2. The lines $\widehat x$ and $\widehat y$ coincide.
Since $\widehat x\perp_{q_F}\widehat y$, every $\lambda_i$ whose square comes with a positive coefficient $t_i$ in $q_F$ must be zero on $\widehat x=\widehat y$, and thus the corresponding hyperplane in $\widehat\Xi$ intersects both parts $P_1=\widehat x=\widehat y$ and $P_2=\widehat\ell$ nontrivially.
\end{itemize}

It remains to verify that the general position assumption implies $\widehat V\cap\widehat W = 0$.
Assuming the contrary, there are lines $\widehat x\subseteq\widehat V$ and $\widehat y\subseteq\widehat W$ with $\widehat x=\widehat y$.
For any $(n-r)$-face $F$ of $\Delta^{n-1}$ the above Case~2 implies that at least one hyperplane of $\widehat\Xi$ corresponding to a vertex of $F$ contains $\widehat x=\widehat y$.
Hence at least $r$ hyperplanes of $\widehat\Xi$ contain $\widehat x\subseteq \widehat V$ and this is exactly what we exclude by the general position assumption.
\qed

\section{A projective Tverberg theorem} \label{secTverbergInterpolationWithDual}

Instead of the topological center point theorem from~\cite{kar2010cpt} we could invoke the topological Tverberg theorem from~\cite{bss1981,oza1987,vol1996} (see also~\cite{mat2003}) to obtain the following:

\begin{theorem}
\label{projective-tver}
Suppose that $V\subset \mathbb RP^d$ is a projective subspace of dimension $v$ and $X$ is a finite point set with $|X|=(D+1)(r-1)+1$, where $D=(d-v)(v+1)$ and $r$ is a prime power.

Then there exists a projective subspace $W\subset \mathbb RP^d$ of dimension $d-v-1$ and a partition of $X$ into $r$ subfamilies $X_j$ $(j=1,\ldots,r)$ such that any pair of hyperplanes $H_1\supseteq V$ and $H_2\supseteq W$ partitions $\mathbb RP^d$ into two parts so that each part has nonempty intersection with every $X_j$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{remark}
An additional general position assumption ``no $r$ points of $X$ together with $V$ are contained in a hyperplane'' will again guarantee that $W$ may be chosen disjoint from $V$.
\end{remark}

\begin{remark}
The number of partitions of $X$ into $r$ subfamilies such that there exist a $W$ as in the theorem can be bounded from below as in \vucic--\zivaljevic~\cite{vucziv1993} (if $r$ is a prime) and in Hell~\cite{hell2007} (for $r=p^\ell$) by $\frac{1}{(r-1)!}\left(\frac{r}{\ell+1}\right)^{\ceil{(r-1)(d+1)/2}}$.
\end{remark}

\begin{remark}
There is also a colorful extension as in \blagojevic--M.--Ziegler~\cite{bmz2009ct} (compare with Remark~\ref{remColorfulProjectiveTransversalTverberg}) and ``constraint Tverberg''-extensions as in Hell \cite{hell2008} and Engstr\"om--Nor\'en \cite{engnor2011}.
\end{remark}

\begin{proof}
We start as in Section~\ref{cpr-proof-sec} by dualizing this statement and considering the continuous map from $\Delta^{n-1}$ ($n=(D+1)(r-1)+1$) to subspaces $\widehat W_{p,\eps}$. By the topological Tverberg theorem~\cite{bss1981,oza1987,vol1996} there exist $r$ points $p_1,\ldots, p_r\in \Delta^{n-1}$ with disjoint supports (corresponding to subfamilies $\Xi_j$) such that their corresponding subspaces $\widehat W_{p_j,\eps}$ coincide.

After that we pass to the limit $\eps_m\to 0$ and repeat the same arguments.
The degenerate case $\widehat V\cap \widehat W\neq 0$ is possible only when every $\Xi_j$ has a hyperplane containing the same common line $\widehat x\in \widehat V\cap \widehat W$. So again it is excluded by the general position assumption.
\end{proof}

\section{A transversal projective Tverberg theorem} \label{trans-sec}

Tverberg and \vrecica~\cite{tv1993grthst} conjectured a common generalization of the ham sandwich theorem, the center transversal theorem, and Tverberg's theorem, which they proved in some special cases. Later \zivaljevic~\cite{ziv1999}, \vrecica~\cite{vre2003}, K.~\cite{kar2007ttc}, and \blagojevic--M.--Ziegler~\cite{bmz2011ctv} proved further special cases and colorful extensions.

The following theorem and the subsequent Remark~\ref{remColorfulProjectiveTransversalTverberg} generalize all those results (which accumulate to the case $v=d-1$ below) and Theorem~\ref{projective-tver} (which is the special case $m=1$).

\begin{theorem}
\label{thmTransversalProjectiveTverberg}
Let $d > v\geq 0$, $m\geq 1$, $d>w:=m(d-v)-1$, $D:=(d-v)(d-w)$, and let $p$ be a prime.
Suppose that $p=2$ or $m=1$ or $d-w$ is even. Let $r_1=p^{\alpha_1},\ldots,r_m=p^{\alpha_m}$ be powers of~$p$.

Suppose that $X^1,\ldots,X^m$ are $m$ point sets in $\RP^d$ of size $|X^j| = (D+1)(r_j-1)+1$ and $V\subset\RP^d$ is a projective subspace of dimension~$v$.

Then there exists a projective subspace $W\subset\RP^d$ of dimension $w$ and partitions of each $X^j$ into $r_j$ pieces respectively,
\[
X^j = X_1^j\dotcup\ldots\dotcup X_{r_j}^j,
\]
such that any pair of hyperplanes $H_1\supseteq V$ and $H_2\supseteq W$ partitions $\RP^d$ into two closed parts so that each part has nonempty intersection with every~$X^j_i$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{remark}
It is natural to conjecture the same statement also for all positive integers $r_j$ and without the technical assumption of $p=2$ or $m=1$ or $d-w$ being even.
\end{remark}

\begin{remark}
The assumption that no $r$ points of any $X^i$ together with $V$ are contained in a hyperplane will guarantee that $W$ and $V$ intersect transversally.
\end{remark}

\begin{remark}
\label{remColorfulProjectiveTransversalTverberg}
In the case when all $r_j=p$, Theorem \ref{thmTransversalProjectiveTverberg} has a colorful extension analogously to the colorful Tverberg--\vrecica\ theorem of \cite{bmz2011ctv}:
If for every $j$ we color the point set $X^i$ so that every color appears at most $r_j-1$ times, then the partitions of the sets $X^j$ can be made rainbow colored in the sense that every part $X^j_i$ uses every color at most once.
\end{remark}

\begin{proof}
Let $n_j:=|X^j|=(D+1)(r_j-1)+1$ $(1\leq j\leq m)$.
As above we regard $V$ as a linear $(v+1)$-dimensional subspace of $\RR^{d+1}$, denoted by~$V'$.
Let $\widehat V\subseteq (\RR^{d+1})^*$ be its dual space of dimension $d-v$ (this is the same as going to the projective dual statement of the theorem).
We have to find a certain $(w+1)$-dimensional subspace $W'\subseteq\RR^{d+1}$.
We will instead find its dual space $\widehat W\subseteq (\RR^{d+1})^*$ of dimension $d-w$.

Note that the dimension of $\widehat V$ and $\widehat W$ will sum up to $2d-v-w$.
Let $B$ be the set of all $(2d-v-w)$-dimensional subspaces $U\subseteq (\RR^{d+1})^*$ that contain~$\widehat V$.
Sending $U$ to its quotient $U/\widehat V$ gives us a bijection $B\homeo G(v+1,d-w)$, which we use to topologize~$B$. The Grassmannian here may be considered oriented or not oriented; we defer this choice till the end of the proof.

Let us fix a subspace $U\in B$, $j\in\{1,\ldots,m\}$ and an $\eps>0$.
As in the proof of Theorem \ref{projective-tver}, we want to find $r_j$ quadratic forms $q_{p_i,\eps}$ on $U$ such that $p_1,\ldots,p_{r_j}\in \Delta^{n_j-1}$ have pairwise disjoint supports and such that the orthogonal complement of $\widehat V$ in $U$ with respect to any $q_{p_i,\eps}$ is the same $(d-w)$-subspace of~$U$.
As in the usual configuration space/test map scheme for topological Tverberg-type theorems, see for example \matousek~\cite{mat2003}, the $r_j$-tuples of coefficient vectors $(p_i)_{1\leq i\leq r_j}$ of those quadratic forms are the preimages of the thin diagonal of a test-map
\[
f_{U,j,\eps}: (\Delta^{n_j-1})^{r_j}_{\Delta(2)} \toG{\Sigma_{r_j}} (S_U)^{r_j},
\]
where $S_U$ is the Schubert cell in $G(2d-w-v,d-w)$ that consists of all $(d-w)$-subspaces of $U$ that intersect $\widehat V$ trivially; and $(\Delta^{n_j-1})^{r_j}_{\Delta(2)}$ denotes the $r_j$-fold pairwise deleted product of $\Delta^{n_j-1}$, which is defined as the union of products $F_1\times\ldots\times F_{r_j}$ of pairwise disjoint faces of $\Delta^{n_j-1}$.
The test-map is naturally $\Sigma_{r_j}$-equivariant, where $\Sigma_{r_j}$ denotes the symmetric group on $r_j$ elements.

Elements $\widehat W\in S_U$ can be uniquely written as kernels of linear projections $U\to \widehat V$.
When choosing an inner product on $U$, those projections are in bijection with maps $U/\widehat V\to \widehat V$, which are elements in $(U/\widehat V)^*\otimes \widehat V$.
Thus,
\begin{equation}
\label{eqSchubertCellForU}
S_U\iso (U/\widehat V)^*\otimes \widehat V \homeo \RR^D
\end{equation}
where the first isomorphism is natural in $U\in B$ if the inner products on the $U$'s are consistently the restriction of a fixed inner product on $\RR^{d+1}$.
The maps $f_{U,j,\eps}$ depend continuously on $U\in B$.
Let $\gamma:E(\gamma)\to B$ denote the tautological vector bundle over $B\homeo G(v+1,d-w)$ of rank $d-w$, its fibers being $U/\widehat V$. The union of the Schubert cells $S_U$ forms in a natural way a vector bundle over~$B$ ($S_U$ being the fiber over $U\in B$), which by \eqref{eqSchubertCellForU} is isomorphic to $(\gamma^*)^{\oplus(d-v)}\iso \gamma^{\oplus(d-v)}$.

Hence the collection of maps $f_{U,j,\eps}$ $(U\in B)$ forms a $\Sigma_{r_j}$-equivariant bundle map $f_{j,\eps}$ over~$B$,
\[
\xymatrix{
B\times (\Delta^{n_j-1})^{r_j}_{\Delta(2)}\ar[rr]^{f_{j,\eps}} \ar[dr]_{pr_1} && E(\gamma)^{\oplus r_j(d-v)}\supseteq \Delta \ar[dl]^{\gamma^{\oplus r_j(d-v)}}\\
& B &.
}
\]
Here, $\Delta\iso E(\gamma^{\oplus(d-v)})$ denotes the thin diagonal subbundle, and we are interested in the preimages $f_{j,\eps}^{-1}(\Delta)$.
In particular we have to show that
\begin{equation}
\label{eqIntersectionOfPreimagesOfDelta}
f_{1,\eps}^{-1}(\Delta)\cap\ldots\cap f_{m,\eps}^{-1}(\Delta)\neq\emptyset.
\end{equation}
This can be proved exactly as in \cite{kar2007ttc} or \cite{bmz2011ctv} using a parametrized Borsuk--Ulam type theorem.
The only topological assumption that we need is that the mod-$p$-Euler class of $\Delta$, $e(\Delta)=e(\gamma)^{d-v}\in H^D(B;\FF_p)$, satisfies
\begin{equation}
\label{eqEulerClassOfBCondition}
e(\Delta)^{m-1}\neq 0.
\end{equation}
We know that $e(\Delta)^{m-1}=e(\gamma)^{(v+1)-(d-w)}\neq 0$ if $p=2$ and we consider the nonoriented Grassmannian (see Hiller \cite{hil1980}) or if $p>2$, $\dim \gamma = d-w$ is even, and we consider the oriented Grassmannian (see~\cite[Lemma~8]{kar2007ttc}). The same is trivially true if $m=1$, since then $B$ is a single point $\mathrm{pt}$ and the ``Euler class'' is the generator of $H^0(\mathrm{pt}; \FF_p)$. Finally, \eqref{eqEulerClassOfBCondition} is holds true if $p=2$ or $d-w$ is even or $m=1$.

As in the previous proofs, letting $s$ go to zero finishes the proof.
\end{proof}

\section{A projective center transversal theorem} \label{secProjCenterTransversalThm}

As an immediate corollary of Theorem \ref{thmTransversalProjectiveTverberg} we obtain a projective generalization of \dolnikov's \cite{dol1987,dol1992,dol1994} and \zivaljevic's \cite{zivvre1990} center transversal theorem (which is the special case $v=d-1$):

\begin{corollary}[Projective center transversal theorem]
\label{projective-ctt}
Let $d > v\geq 0$, $m\geq 1$, $d>w:=m(d-v)-1$, and $D:=(d-v)(d-w)$.

Suppose that $\mu_1,\ldots,\mu_m$ are $m$ probability measures on $\RP^d$
and $V\subset\RP^d$ is a projective subspace of dimension~$v$.

Then there exists a projective subspace $W\subset\RP^d$ of dimension $w$ such that any pair of hyperplanes $H_1\supseteq V$ and $H_2\supseteq W$ partitions $\RP^d$ into two closed parts $P_1$ and $P_2$ so that for any $j\in\{1,\ldots,m\}$,
\[
\mu_j(P_1), \mu_j(P_2) \geq \frac{1}{D+1}.
\]
\end{corollary}

\begin{proof}
We approximate the measures $\mu_j$ by finite point sets $X^j$ (as in the proof of Tverberg and \vrecica~\cite{tv1993grthst} that their conjecture implies the center transversal theorem).
We apply Theorem \ref{thmTransversalProjectiveTverberg}, avoiding the parity assumption of $d-w$ being even by simply taking $p=2$ and $r_j$ equal to appropriate powers of two. Both parts $P_1$ and $P_2$ will contain at least one point from every $X^j_i$ and thus at least $r_j$ points from every $X^j$. Since $r_j/|X^j| \geq 1/(D+1)$ and $G(d+1,w+1)$ is compact, a limit argument finishes the proof.
\end{proof}

\begin{remark}
The case $m=1$ could be called a projective center point theorem in analogy with Rado's center point theorem \cite{rado1947}, which is the special case $m=1$ and $v=d-1$.
Similarly, the case $m=d$ and $v=w=d-1$ is the ham sandwich theorem; compare with \blagojevic--K.~\cite[Thm. 10]{bk2010} for an actual projective mass partition theorem.
\end{remark}

\section{Another projective Tverberg theorem} \label{secAnotherProjTver}

We could also ask what happens if we allow in Theorem~\ref{projective-tver}, for example, to choose $V$ arbitrarily.
A partial answer is given by the following:

\begin{theorem}
\label{projective-tver2}
Let $0\le v < d$, $r_1$ and $r_2$ be the powers of the same prime $p$, and $X^1$ and $X^2$ be finite point sets with $|X^j|=(D+1)(r_j-1)+1$, where $D=(v+1)(d-v)$.
We further assume that $D$ is even and $\binom{\lfloor\frac{d+1}{2}\rfloor}{\lfloor\frac{v+1}{2}\rfloor}$ is nonzero mod $p$.

Then there exist projective subspaces $V, W\subset \mathbb RP^d$ of dimensions $v$ and $d-v-1$ and partitions of every $X^j$ into $r_j$ pieces
\[
X^j = X_1^j\dotcup\ldots\dotcup X_{r_j}^j,
\]
such that any pair of hyperplanes $H_1\supseteq V$ and $H_2\supseteq W$ partitions $\mathbb RP^d$ into two parts so that each part has nonempty intersection with every $X^j_i$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{remark}
It was already known to Kummer that $\binom{n}{k}$ is nonzero mod $p$ if and only if for all $i\geq 0$ the $i$'th digit of $n$ in the $p$-ary representation is greater or equal to the $i$'th digit of $k$.
\end{remark}

\begin{remark}
As a corollary we obtain a corresponding center point theorem for partitioning two measures under the assumption that $D$ is even. The proof is analogous to the one of Corollary~\ref{projective-ctt}.
\end{remark}

\begin{proof}
We follow the proof of Theorem~\ref{projective-tver} for $X^j$ and describe the set of appropriate $\widehat W_j$ for every $\widehat V$ as a preimage.
We have to find some $\widehat V$ such that $\widehat W_1$ and $\widehat W_2$ are equal. Their difference is an element of $(\mathbb R^{d+1}/\widehat V) \otimes \widehat V$. So (the formal argument is similar to the proof of Theorem~\ref{thmTransversalProjectiveTverberg}, using a parameterized testmap) we observe that the spaces $(\mathbb R^{d+1}/\widehat V) \otimes \widehat V$ form a vector bundle over the Grassmannian $G(d+1, v+1)$ of all possible $V$ and this bundle is isomorphic to $\gamma\otimes \gamma^\perp$, where $\gamma$ is the tautological bundle over the Grassmannian and $\gamma^\perp$ its orthogonal complement bundle.

It remains to check that the Euler class $e(\gamma\otimes\gamma^\perp)\in H^D(G(d+1,v+1);\mathcal F_p)$ is nonzero (the coefficients are $\FF_p$ with possible twist corresponding to the orientation character of $\gamma\otimes\gamma^\perp$).
An open neighborhood (and thus the tangent space) of $G(d+1,v+1)$ at a point $\widehat V$ can be identified with
$$
\widehat V^*\otimes \widehat V^\perp = \Hom (\widehat V, \widehat V^\perp),
$$
because adding such maps to the inclusion $\widehat V\incl\RR^{d+1}$ gives linear maps $\widehat V\to \mathbb R^{d+1}$ with all possible images intersecting $\widehat V^\perp$ trivially.
Thus the images of such maps constitute the Schubert cell neighborhood of $\widehat V$.
Since the identifications are natural and $\gamma^*\iso\gamma$, we have:
$$
\gamma\otimes\gamma^\perp \iso TG(d+1, v+1).
$$
Thus the Euler class $e(\gamma\otimes\gamma^\perp)$ is Poincar\'e dual to the element of $H_0(G(d+1, v+1); \FF_p)$ equal to the Euler characteristic of $G(d+1,v+1)$ mod $p$; the cohomology twist is eliminated because it has to be tensor multiplied by the orientation sheaf of $TG(d+1, v+1)$. The Euler characteristic of the Grassmannian is equal to the value of the $q$-binomial coefficient $\binom{d+1}{v+1}_q$ at $q=-1$. This value can be calculated by the inductive formula:
$$
\binom{n}{k}_{-1} = \binom{n-1}{k-1}_{-1} + (-1)^k \binom{n-1}{k}_{-1},\ \ \ \binom{n}{0}_{-1}=\binom{n}{n}_{-1}=1,
$$
and it finally turns out to be zero if $D$ is odd and equal to
$$
\binom{\lfloor\frac{d+1}{2}\rfloor}{\lfloor\frac{v+1}{2}\rfloor}
$$
if $D$ is even.
\end{proof}

\section{A corresponding ``transversal'' generalization} \label{secTranversalGeneralizationOfTverberg}

In this section we extend Theorem \ref{projective-tver2} under some algebraic assumptions to the case of more than two masses in the same way as Theorem \ref{thmTransversalProjectiveTverberg} extends Theorem \ref{projective-tver}.
The pay-off for establishing this is that the dimension of $V$ and $W$ must increase.

Let $0\leq v,w < d$, $m\geq 1$, $r_j=2^{\alpha_j}$ $(1\leq j\leq m)$, $\widehat v := d-v$, $\widehat w := d-w$, $D:= \widehat v\widehat w$.
Suppose that $X^1,\ldots,X^m$ are $m$ point sets in $\RP^d$ of size $|X^j|=(D+1)(r_j-1)+1$.
We will find a condition under which there exist projective subspaces $V,W\subset\RP^d$ of dimensions $v$ and $w$ and partitions of every $X^j$ into $r_j$ pieces
\[
X^j = X_1^j\dotcup\ldots\dotcup X_{r_j}^j,
\]
such that any pair of hyperplanes $H_1\supseteq V$ and $H_2\supseteq W$ partitions $\RP^d$ into two parts so that each part has nonempty intersection with every $X^j_i$.

Similarly to the above sections, the topological setup for this is the following.
Let $B:=F(\widehat v, \widehat v+\widehat w, d+1)$ be the partial flag manifold of all pairs $(\widehat V, U)$ of linear subspaces of $\RR^{d+1}$ such that $\dim(\widehat V)=\widehat v$, $\dim{U}=\widehat v+\widehat w$, and $\widehat V\subset U$.
Let $\eta$ be the rank $D$ vector bundle over $B$ whose fiber over $(\widehat V,U)$ is $\widehat V\otimes (U/\widehat V)$.
Let $w_i(\eta)\in H^i(B;\FF_2)$ denote its Stiefel--Whitney classes.
The condition we look for is
\begin{equation}
\label{eqWofEta}
w_D(\eta)^{m-1}\neq 0.
\end{equation}

We can put this condition into purely algebraic terms as follows using a particular instance of the splitting principle.
Let $F:=\textnormal{Flag}(\RR^{d+1})=F(1,2,\ldots,d+1)$ be the complete real flag manifold in $\RR^{d+1}$.
There is a canonical projection $p:F\to B$.
Let $\ell_1,\ldots,\ell_{d+1}$ be the tautological line bundles over $F$.
Their first Stiefel--Whitney classes $e_i:=w_1(\ell_i)$ generate the ring $H^*(F;\FF_2)$.
More exactly,
\begin{equation}
\label{eqCohomologyOfFlagManifold}
H^*(F;\FF_2)\ \iso\ \FF_2[e_1,\ldots,e_{d+1}]/\left(\prod (1+e_i) = 1\right).
\end{equation}
The relation means geometrically that the sum $\ell_1\oplus\ldots\oplus\ell_{d+1}$ is trivial and algebraically that all elementary symmetric polynomials in $e_1,\ldots,e_{d+1}$ vanish.
The reader may find the latter fact and other standard facts about vector bundles and their characteristic classes in~\cite{mishch1998}.

Now,
\begin{align*}
w(p^*\eta) &= w\big((\ell_1\oplus\ldots\oplus\ell_{\widehat v})\otimes(\ell_{\widehat v+1}\oplus\ldots\oplus\ell_{\widehat v+\widehat w})\big) \\
&= {\prod_{i,j}}^* w(\ell_i\otimes \ell_j)\ =\ {\prod_{i,j}}^* \big(1+w_1(\ell_i)+w_1(\ell_j)\big),
\end{align*}
where $\prod_{i,j}^*$ denotes that the product runs over all pairs $(i,j)$ with $1\leq i\leq \widehat v$ and $\widehat v+1\leq j\leq\widehat v+\widehat w$.
In particular,
\begin{equation}
\label{eqSWofEta}
w_D(p^*\eta) = {\prod_{i,j}}^* (e_i+e_j).
\end{equation}
Thus $\eqref{eqWofEta}$ is equivalent to $\prod_{i,j}^* (e_i+e_j)^{m-1}\neq 0$ in $H^*(F;\FF_2)$.
This proves:

\begin{theorem}
Let $0\leq v,w < d$, $m\geq 1$, $r_j=2^{\alpha_j}$ $(1\leq j\leq m)$, $D:= (d-v)(d-w)$, such that the product \eqref{eqSWofEta} is non-zero in \eqref{eqCohomologyOfFlagManifold}.

Suppose that $X^1,\ldots,X^m$ are $m$ point sets in $\RP^d$ of size $|X^j|=(D+1)(r_j-1)+1$.

Then there exist projective subspaces $V,W\subset\RP^d$ of dimensions $v$ and $w$ and partitions of every $X^j$ into $r_j$ pieces
\[
X^j = X_1^j\dotcup\ldots\dotcup X_{r_j}^j,
\]
such that any pair of hyperplanes $H_1\supseteq V$ and $H_2\supseteq W$ partitions $\RP^d$ into two parts so that each part has nonempty intersection with every $X^j_i$.
\end{theorem}

Algebraic Topology (math.AT); Combinatorics (math.CO)