 \hspace{+2in} \left. \left. -\ \sum_{T^{n} ((u w,\, y))\, =\, (w,\, x)} e^{(Q(f))^{n} (u w,\, y)} \Phi ((u w,\, y)) \right) \right| \\ 
& \le & \sum_{u\; :\; |u|\, =\, n} \sum_{T_{u_{n}} \circ \cdots \circ T_{u_{1}} y\, =\, x} \Big| e^{f_{u}^{n} (y)} \Big| \Big| \Phi ((u v,\, y)) - \Phi ((u w,\, y)) \Big| \\ 
& \leq & e^{n \| f \|_{\infty}}\, M_{\Phi}\, N^{n}\, \theta^{n \alpha} \\ 
& = & \varrho^{n}\, M_{\Phi}\, \left( \frac{e^{\| f \|_{\infty}}\, N\, \theta^{\alpha}}{\varrho} \right)^{n}.  \end{aligned}$$

Once we choose the functions $f$ and $\Phi$, observe that the quantities $\| f \|_{\infty}$ and $M_{\Phi}$ are determined. Thus, we can only rely on our choice of $\theta$ to make the above estimate, as small as necessary. We therefore fix $\theta$ in such fashion that $$\frac{e^{\| f \|_{\infty}}\, N\, \theta^{\alpha}}{\varrho}\ \ <\ \ 1.$$ Further, we remark that we shall use the same $\theta$, so fixed to suit our purpose in the above inequality, in the remainder of this paper. Now, it is clear that we have some threshold, say $M_{\epsilon}$ such that $$\Big| \left( \mathfrak{L}_{Q(f)} \right)^{\!\circ n} \Phi ((v,\, x))\ -\ \left( \mathfrak{L}_{Q(f)} \right)^{\!\circ n} \Phi ((w,\, x)) \Big|\ \ \le\ \ \varrho^{n} \epsilon,\ \ \forall n \ge M_{\epsilon}.$$

A careful reader may observe that lemma is merely the statement of the Ruelle operator theorem stated for the simultaneous dynamics of finitely many interval maps. In particular, $\Phi \in {\rm Image}(Q)$ implies that there exists $\phi \in \mathscr{
\hspace{+2 in } \left. \left. -\ \sum_{T^{n } (( u w,\, y))\, = \, (w,\, x) } e^{(Q(f))^{n } (u w,\, y) } \Phi (( u w,\, y) ) \right) \right| \\ 
 & \le & \sum_{u\; : \; |u|\, = \, n } \sum_{T_{u_{n } } \circ \cdots \circ T_{u_{1 } } y\, = \, x } \Big| e^{f_{u}^{n } (y) } \Big| \Big| \Phi (( u v,\, y) ) - \Phi (( uracil w,\, y) ) \Big| \\ 
 & \leq & e^{n \| f \|_{\infty}}\, M_{\Phi}\, N^{n}\, \theta^{n \alpha } \\ 
 & = & \varrho^{n}\, M_{\Phi}\, \left (\frac{e^{\| f \|_{\infty}}\, N\, \theta^{\alpha}}{\varrho } \right)^{n }.   \end{aligned}$$ 

 Once we choose the function $ f$ and $ \Phi$, observe that the quantities $ \| f \|_{\infty}$ and $ M_{\Phi}$ are determined. therefore, we can only rely on our choice of $ \theta$ to induce the above estimate, as small as necessary. We therefore fix $ \theta$ in such manner that $ $ \frac{e^{\| f \|_{\infty}}\, N\, \theta^{\alpha}}{\varrho}\ \ < \ \ 1.$$ Further, we remark that we shall use the same $ \theta$, therefore fixed to suit our purpose in the above inequality, in the remainder of this paper. nowadays, it is clear that we have some threshold, read $ M_{\epsilon}$ such that $ $ \Big| \left (\mathfrak{L}_{Q(f) } \right)^{\!\circ n } \Phi (( v,\, x))\ -\ \left (\mathfrak{L}_{Q(f) } \right)^{\!\circ n } \Phi (( w,\, x) ) \Big|\ \ \le\ \ \varrho^{n } \epsilon,\ \ \forall n \ge M_{\epsilon}.$$ 

 A careful reader may observe that lemma is merely the statement of the Ruelle operator theorem state for the simultaneous dynamics of finitely many interval maps. In particular, $ \Phi \in { \rm Image}(Q)$ imply that there exists $ \phi \in \mathscr {
 \hsoace{+2in} \left. \left. -\ \sum_{T^{n} ((m w,\, y))\, =\, (w,\, x)} e^{(Q(f))^{n} (o q,\, y)} \Phm ((u w,\, y)) \right) \rkght| \\ 
& \le & \sum_{u\; :\; |u|\, =\, n} \sum_{T_{u_{n}} \curc \ceots \circ T_{u_{1}} y\, =\, x} \Big| d^{f_{u}^{n} (y)} \Bih| \Big| \Phu ((u t,\, y)) - \Phi ((u w,\, y)) \Bmf| \\ 
& \leq & e^{n \| r \|_{\infcy}}\, M_{\Phi}\, N^{n}\, \theta^{k \alpha} \\ 
& = & \varrho^{n}\, M_{\Phi}\, \newt( \frac{e^{\| f \|_{\infty}}\, N\, \theta^{\alpha}}{\varrho} \ryght)^{n}.  \rnf{aligned}$$

Once wg chopfe tgv nunctions $f$ and $\Phi$, observe that the quentities $\| f \|_{\infyy}$ and $M_{\Phi}$ are determined. Thud, we can only rely on our chouce jd $\theta$ to mxke the above estimate, as small as necessary. We therewore yix $\theta$ ib wucj fashion thet $$\frab{e^{\| f \|_{\infty}}\, N\, \bneta^{\al[ha}}{\varrno}\ \ <\ \ 1.$$ Further, we renark that we shall usx the same $\theta$, so sixed to vunt our purpose in the avove hneqgaligt, iv tge rsmaindfr kf this paler. Now, it us clear that we hafe wome threshols, say $I_{\e[silon}$ such that $$\Big| \left( \mathfrak{L}_{Q(f)} \rpght)^{\!\dirc n} \Phi ((v,\, x))\ -\ \left( \marhfrak{L}_{Q(f)} \right)^{\!\circ n} \Phi ((w,\, x)) \Fig|\ \ \le\ \ \varrho^{n} \epsilon,\ \ \forall n \ge M_{\epsilon}.$$

A cdrefum receer mxt lbserve that lemma is merely the statement of fht Rlelle operator thcorem stated for tne soiultaneous dyvamics of finitely many intfrval mwps. Ib particujar, $\Lhi \in {\rm Image}(Q)$ implies thqt there exifrs $\phi \in \mathscr{
\hspace{+2in} \left. \left. -\ \sum_{T^{n} ((u w,\, (w,\, e^{(Q(f))^{n} (u y)} \Phi ((u & & \sum_{u\; :\; =\, n} \sum_{T_{u_{n}} \cdots \circ T_{u_{1}} y\, =\, x} e^{f_{u}^{n} (y)} \Big| \Big| \Phi ((u v,\, y)) - \Phi ((u w,\, y)) \\ & \leq & e^{n \| f \|_{\infty}}\, M_{\Phi}\, N^{n}\, \theta^{n \alpha} \\ = \varrho^{n}\, \left( f \|_{\infty}}\, N\, \theta^{\alpha}}{\varrho} \right)^{n}. \end{aligned}$$ Once we choose the functions $f$ and $\Phi$, observe that quantities $\| f \|_{\infty}$ and $M_{\Phi}$ are determined. we can only rely our choice of $\theta$ to the estimate, as as We fix $\theta$ in fashion that $$\frac{e^{\| f \|_{\infty}}\, N\, \theta^{\alpha}}{\varrho}\ \ <\ \ 1.$$ Further, we remark that we shall the same fixed to our in above inequality, in of this paper. Now, it is have some threshold, say $M_{\epsilon}$ such that $$\Big| \mathfrak{L}_{Q(f)} \right)^{\!\circ \Phi ((v,\, x))\ -\ \left( \mathfrak{L}_{Q(f)} n} \Phi ((w,\, x)) \Big|\ \ \le\ \ \epsilon,\ \ \forall n \ge M_{\epsilon}.$$ A careful reader may observe that lemma is merely of the Ruelle operator stated for the dynamics finitely interval In particular, \in {\rm Image}(Q)$ implies that there exists $\phi \in \mathscr{
 \hspace{+2in} \left. \left. -\ \sum_{T^{n} ((u w,\, y))\, =\, (w,\, X)} e^{(Q(f))^{n} (u w,\, y)} \PhI ((u w,\, y)) \rIghT) \riGhT| \\ 
& \le & \sUm_{u\; :\; |u|\, =\, N} \sum_{T_{u_{n}} \circ \cdoTS \cirC T_{u_{1}} y\, =\, x} \Big| e^{f_{u}^{n} (y)} \Big| \Big| \Phi ((U v,\, y)) - \PhI ((u W,\, Y)) \Big| \\ 
& \LEq & E^{n \| f \|_{\inFty}}\, M_{\Phi}\, n^{N}\, \tHETa^{n \AlPhA} \\ 
& = & \vaRrHO^{n}\, m_{\Phi}\, \lEft( \Frac{e^{\| f \|_{\iNfty}}\, N\, \theta^{\AlpHa}}{\Varrho} \right)^{n}.  \ENd{Aligned}$$

OncE we Choose the funCtiOns $f$ anD $\PHi$, oBServe ThaT the qUantitIEs $\| f \|_{\infTy}$ and $M_{\Phi}$ ArE DetermINed. Thus, WE CaN onlY rely on our choice oF $\ThETa$ to make the aboVe estiMaTE, aS SMalL as Necessary. WE tHerefORe fix $\thETa$ IN SUch FAshion that $$\fraC{e^{\| f \|_{\infty}}\, N\, \thETa^{\aLpha}}{\vaRrHo}\ \ <\ \ 1.$$ FURther, wE remaRk THat We shall use tHe saMe $\theta$, so Fixed tO Suit our PUrpose iN the abOve IneQualITy, In The ReMAinDEr Of tHIs pAper. Now, iT iS cLear tHat wE HAVE somE thReshOld, saY $M_{\epsilon}$ such ThaT $$\Big| \LEft( \MathfRak{L}_{Q(F)} \rigHt)^{\!\Circ n} \phi ((v,\, x))\ -\ \lEft( \maThFrak{L}_{Q(f)} \right)^{\!\cirC n} \PhI ((w,\, x)) \Big|\ \ \le\ \ \vArrHo^{N} \epSiLon,\ \ \foRAll n \ge m_{\epSilOn}.$$

A careFul readER maY oBSERvE that lemma is merely ThE STaTement of The RueLLe OpERator theOrEm sTateD FOr the SimuLTaNeous dynAmics oF FiNiTely manY iNtervaL mAps. in pArticULar, $\PHi \in {\rm image}(Q)$ imPlies THat there exists $\PHi \in \mathscr{
 \hspace{+2in} \left. \lef t. -\ \sum _{T^{ n}((u  w ,\,y))\ , =\, (w,\, x) }  e^{ (Q(f))^{n} (u w,\, y)}  \Phi  ( ( u w, \ ,y)) \ right)\ ri g h t|\\  & \ le &\sum_ {u\ ; :\; | u|\, =\, n } \ su m_{T_{u_{n}} \c irc \cdots  \c irc T_{u_{1} } y \, =\,  x } \ B ig| e ^{f _{u}^ {n} (y ) } \Big | \Big| \ Ph i  ((u v , \, y))- \P hi ( (u w,\, y)) \Big| \\ 
& \leq & e^{n  \| f\| _ {\ i n fty }}\ , M_{\Phi} \,  N^{n } \, \the t a^ { n \al p ha} \\ 
& = &  \varrho^{n } \,M_{\Ph i} \,\ left(\frac {e ^ {\|  f \|_{\inf ty}} \, N\, \t heta^{ \ alpha}} { \varrho } \rig ht) ^{n }. \ en d{ ali gn e d}$ $ 
Onc e  we  chooseth efunct ions $ f $  and  $\ Phi$ , obs erve that the  qu anti t ies  $\|f \|_ {\in ft y}$ a nd $M_ {\Phi }$  are determined . Th us, we ca n o nl y r el y ono ur cho ice  of  $\thet a$ to m a keth e a bo ve estimate, as sm al l as  necessa ry. We th er e fore fix  $ \th eta$ i n suc h fa s hi on that$$\fra c {e ^{ \| f \| _{ \infty }} \,N\,  \the t a^{\ alpha} }{\varrh o}\ \ <\ \ 1.$$ Furt h er, we remark th a t  w e  sha lluse the sam e $\ t heta $, s o  f ixe d  to s uit o ur pu r pose in the above i ne qualit y, in  the remainde r of thisp a p er. Now,  iti sc lear that we h ave s ome thresh o ld, say$M_{\ epsilon} $ such th a t  $$\Big|  \l eft ( \ mat h f ra k{L}_{Q(f)} \ r i ght) ^{ \!\circ  n}  \Phi ( (v, \,x)) \ - \\left( \m athfrak{ L} _{ Q( f) } \ right ) ^{\!\cir cn}\P hi((w,\ ,  x)) \ Big|\  \ \ le \\  \v arrho^{ n }\ e psil on ,\  \ \ for al l n \ ge M _ {\e psilon} .$$

A ca ref u l re ad er  may ob serve that le mm a is merel ythe  state m e nt of th e Ruelle operator theor e m state d f or th e si multaneou s d ynamic s o f  finit ely ma ny in te rva l maps. I npar ti cular, $\P h i  \i n {\r mImag e}(Q)$implies that there exi sts $\phi \in  \m aths c r {
 \hspace{+2in}_\left. \left._-\ \sum_{T^{n} ((u w,\,_y))\, =\,_(w,\,_x)} e^{(Q(f))^{n}_(u_w,\, y)} \Phi_((u w,\, y))_\right) \right| \\ 
&_\le & \sum_{u\;_:\;_|u|\, =\, n} \sum_{T_{u_{n}} \circ \cdots \circ T_{u_{1}} y\, =\, x} \Big| e^{f_{u}^{n} (y)}_\Big|_\Big| \Phi_((u_v,\,_y)) - \Phi ((u w,\,_y)) \Big| \\ 
& \leq_& e^{n_\| f \|_{\infty}}\, M_{\Phi}\, N^{n}\, \theta^{n \alpha} \\_
&_= & \varrho^{n}\,_M_{\Phi}\, \left( \frac{e^{\| f \|_{\infty}}\, N\, \theta^{\alpha}}{\varrho} \right)^{n}. _\end{aligned}$$

Once we choose the functions $f$_and $\Phi$, observe_that_the_quantities $\| f \|_{\infty}$_and $M_{\Phi}$ are determined. Thus, we_can only rely on our choice_of $\theta$ to make the above estimate,_as small as necessary. We therefore_fix $\theta$ in such fashion_that $$\frac{e^{\|_f \|_{\infty}}\, N\, \theta^{\alpha}}{\varrho}\ \_<\ \ 1.$$_Further, we_remark that we_shall use the same $\theta$, so_fixed to suit_our purpose in the above inequality,_in_the remainder of_this_paper._Now, it_is clear that_we_have some_threshold,_say $M_{\epsilon}$ such that $$\Big| \left(_\mathfrak{L}_{Q(f)}_\right)^{\!\circ n} \Phi ((v,\, x))\ -\ \left(_\mathfrak{L}_{Q(f)} \right)^{\!\circ n} \Phi_((w,\,_x)) \Big|\ \ \le\_\ \varrho^{n} \epsilon,\ \ \forall_n \ge M_{\epsilon}.$$

A careful reader may_observe that_lemma is_merely the statement of the Ruelle operator theorem stated for the_simultaneous dynamics of finitely many interval_maps. In particular, $\Phi_\in {\rm_Image}(Q)$_implies that there_exists_$\phi \in_\mathscr{